This is a photo of Akkadian hieroglyphs depicting none other than the Genesis account of the snake deceiving Eve to eat the apple. Genesis was a plagiarism from more ancient mythology (the Akkadian/Babylonian myths. Much like the Epic of Gilgamesh)
Is One Crazier Than The Other?
I have been thinking about the intellectual, philosophical, and plain bickering going on between Atheists and Theists. Atheists call Theists defending their beliefs insane and Theists call Atheists insane for not realizing the “truth” of God. My personal opinion is that believing in a supernatural being that created the world in 6 days, who led 600,000 people out of Egypt, who always watches over us, and not a shred of physical proof is a bit irrational to say the least. But, that is my opinion. Anyway I came up with a parallel that I think will intrigue you.
Take for example a group, many of you are aware of, the Scientologists . Here is what they believe:
Scientologists ACTUALLY believe the evil alien ruler Xenu killed a lot of aliens (Thetans) from around the universe by bringing them to earth & blowing them up inside volcanoes. They believe the souls of these aliens (these souls are “Body Thetans”) have attached themselves to us & cause many of our mental & physical ills. Members who know about Xenu will attempt to deny it or pretend like it doesn’t matter. They are required to sign a contract binding them to silence on the matter. Lower level members don’t know about Xenu & accordingly deny everything because they honestly don’t know.
To rid ourselves of “Body Thetans” & also “engrams” (past negative experiences stored in our unconscious mind) so that we can become “clear”, we have to go through “auditing” with a member of the “church” who uses an “e-meter” to measure our “reactive mind”…… & we have to pay lots & lots of money for “auditing” (purchased in 12.5-hour blocks, costing anywhere from $750 for introductory sessions to between $8,000 & $9,000 for advanced sessions) & to take courses on Scientology to advance to higher “levels” in the “church”. The “church” has also taken a very hostile stance towards psychiatry & psychiatric drugs irrespective of the fact that some people require medication to remain adequately functional in everyday life. They deny the reality of chemical imbalance & profound mental disturbance & accordingly do NOTHING to effectively stabilize the dangerously unstable. The “church” has been known to withhold prescription pharmaceuticals from member (with deadly results).
Perhaps you’ll enjoy this video.
This sounds insane right, wrong! A Catholic, a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, or a Buddhist would point to this and say that anyone who honestly believes in this is a complete nut. All these religions have their equal amount of lethal dogmas. However, to someone who doesn’t believe in any of it, it all sounds equally insane.
Just thought I would give you something to think about. Although, I am quite curious as to why one religion is more insane than another one.
“Supernatural” is a Bad Excuse for Having no Evidence
Certainly found this to be thought provoking. Excellent ideas!
I don’t understand the distinction between the natural and the supernatural: if a God does exist in some plane beyond us, surely God considers Itself to be natural; if science were to discover a reliable way to get information from the minds of people that have passed to the other side (i.e. died) the concept of a ghost would quickly be considered a natural concept. So, “supernatural” does not describe an event, it is an excuse. “Supernatural” is the buzz word for when you want to protect an idea from scrutiny, investigation and exploration.
Take a religious claim, like the idea that Jesus rose from the dead. In an earlier post I argued that history can only tell us what most likely happened, and it cannot tell us with high levels of confidence what did happen. The historical method, at best, can give a list of options in descending order of…
View original post 398 more words
God’s Will and Human Freedom
I am sure that most of you, weather you be Atheists of Theists have heard a whole lot about God’s Will. This is thrown out like verbal diarrhea every time that someone dies or a natural disaster occurs. I have often questioned why people are so quick to say that a kid that gets caught in the crossfire of a gang shooting received a “gift” and that it was God’s Will that she get shot and killed in a park. How is that a gift? What proof is there that she is in a better place? Who are you to make such claims? It may sound nice and comforting at the time, but it is not all that it is cracked up to be. As the title of this post implies, I am going to be talking about God’s will and our own freedom. Does God’s Will take away our freedom?
To start let us look at the Frankfurt Cases. This is a thought experiment that involves two cases that are identical, except for one part.
Case 1
There are two men: Smith and Jones. Smith is pointing a gun at Jones and is deciding whether or not to shoot him. There is also an evil demon that COULD control the outcome. In this case Jones decides not to shoot Jones, however the evil demon forces Smith to pull the trigger and kill Jones.
Case 2
There are two men: Smith and Jones. Smith is pointing a gun at Jones and is deciding whether or not to shoot him. There is also an evil demon that COULD control the outcome. In this case Smith decides to shoot Jones with his own free will, and the evil demon does nothing.
Take a good look at these cases. What do you notice? First off, they are identical except for one part, which is where the evil demon comes in. The other thing is that the outcome was the same, but the method of getting to that outcome was different. If it was Smith’s choice to shoot Jones or if the evil demon commanded him to, the result was the exact same. So, my question is, if “God’s Will be done” then the end result will always be the same. So are we really free to make our own decision? If we are, what is the point of making them if it is just going to achieve God’s Will in the end?
Another thing that I question is how a person would know what God’s Will is. I really don’t have a concrete answer for how one would definitively know what God’s Will is, but I can speculate as to why it would be appealing to chalk up the bad things in life it “it was God’s Will”.
The same sort of thing happens (in someone’s mind) when there is a conspiracy about something like 9/11. Sometimes when something horrible happens it scares people, which is normal. However, being humans it is in our nature to want an explanation of why something happened. In the case of conspiracy theories Jodi Dean says,
I think that the same thing happens in the minds of Theists when a natural disaster, like Hurricane Katrina, occurs. It is much more comforting to think that there is a plan in place. People don’t like to think that bad things can just happen, they would rather be optimistic about some plan that would take them to a better place (heaven supposedly, but I’ll save that for another post). Michael Martin said it best in his book Atheism: A Philosophical Justification –
If pessimism is justified by the evidence, then we must be pessimistic. If we are optimistic when pessimism is justified, we are irrational.
If you are a Theist or an Atheist, please leave your comments and opinions, I would love to know more about the topic from all perspectives. Bear in mind, however, I will research what you say if I think that you haven’t done your research.
Was Jesus “The One”?
One thing that has perplexed me is how Jesus came to be regarded as the one true God. When I was young I just accepted that as fact because I did not possess the intellectual capabilities to question things I was told by people who were supposed to lead me. Now I am a student of ancient history and after some research I found out that Jesus was not the only person during the first century to be claiming they were the Messiah. In the words of Michael Shermer “There was a plague of Messiahs.” This only raised more questions: why don’t we know about any of these other people? How did Jesus rise to the top of the charts? Did Jesus appeal to ancient people more than these other prophets? What if Jesus was the wrong choice? I have a few more questions, but I’ll leave it with the ones I already have. I have some thoughts about these questions but the reason that I throw them out to the public is I really want to hear what others think about it because I could be wrong.
Lets look at the first question (we’ll call (1)): I don’t think we know about these other prophets because they were prophets to a dead religion, or just didn’t have as many followers. I think that the fact that these people must not have had as many followers answers (2). Let us not forget that Jesus was a Jew, and Judaism is not only an ancient religion, but one that has survived and became a predominant religion today. To answer (3) I think we would have to look at the popularity of the Jewish religion during the first century. Then we would have to see how many Jews recognized Jesus as the son of God. I think in this case there was a small following of Jesus, however his message of love and kindness appealed to people more. George Carlin said that someone’s popularity skyrockets after they die, and I think this is true. The thing that happened with Jesus is not what he did, but what his followers did. They were essentially transcontinental Jehovah’s Witnesses. For example, the Romans who were putting Jesus to death (a few of them) were influenced by Jesus’ teachings and converted. A little way down the road (during the Middle Ages) more specifically, the 1300s when Spanish and Portuguese missionaries went to Japan to try and convert the Japanese. The Middle Eastern Jews and Christians also passed on their beliefs down the Silk Roads (which if anyone is interested in learning about the spread of ideas should read all they can. The Silk Roads are extremely important and interesting) to India, China, and Korea. Hopefully you are still following me, it looks like I got off topic a little, but in a good way I think 🙂 Moving on to (4) which I think is the most difficult question to answer. What if Jesus was the wrong choice? It sounds a little ridiculous, but I think it is important. Lets look at a prophet who was known for: preaching to his followers, healing the sick, walking through walls/buildings, being tried and crucified by the Roman court, resurrected where his followers saw him again. Sound like Jesus? Well it’s not, these are all things attributed to Apollonius of Tyana. This is probably the first you have heard of this man, but don’t be surprised not many people have. To be honest, knowing how many people were claiming to be the Messiah fills me with doubt about the choice of Jesus as the one true messiah.
Please leave your comments, concerns, questions, anything you want to say really 🙂
Hell Houses
I want to step away from Philosophical debates and the sort for a second and talk about something that I think is truly a detriment to modern society. As the title of this post indicates the subject of my post is about these places called Hell Houses.
Now these places depict graphic scenes of what they consider sins. They depict the torment in hell that the sinful suffer. Some of you may be asking yourselves what makes these places different from other horror productions or stage performances? To be honest there is a gigantic difference between these places and haunted houses and that difference is, what I call, the depiction of reality. They depict what they believe is reality to scare people into agreeing with your religious beliefs. In my opinion these people who put these shows on are emotional and spiritual terrorists. For any other movie, stage show, or haunted house they will make sure that people know that the scenes depicted are not real. There is one more factor that hasn’t been considered (speaking of theater and stage), is age restrictions. The people putting on these Hell Houses do not hold strict age restrictions. For a child younger than 10 the experiences shown of stage, that these people say will happen to you if you sin, will give them nightmares and will have an extremely adverse effect on their minds. The official stance of these people is that they would rather scar a child for life with their spiritual terrorism than have that child grow up different from them (example: gay, lesbian, bisexual, atheist or a different religion, etc.) This is my opinion, but these types of tactics or extremely wrong, crude, and frightening. What I find most frightening is not the actual show, but how the people who throw them present it. The views they represent are quite extreme, and any extremism is dangerous. I think that the purpose of these shows are ironic, they throw these shows so as to make sure that the youthful do not come out damaged, however these shows are more damaging than anything else. I know I said that I would stray from philosophy but I think that a thought experiment is in order:
Let us imagine that a gay or lesbian Christian teenager is attending one of these events. The extreme anti-gay/lesbian views portrayed will psychologically damage and already psychologically frail teen. Being a teenager is extremely difficult in and of itself. I know know, I was a teenager once. Being a gay/lesbian teen is even harder WITHOUT bigotry, and I fear that the added bigotry these small minded people will be too much for some gay/lesbian teens to handle. Imagine that indeed these shows were just what it took to push a gay/lesbian teen over the edge and they committed suicide. Take a moment to let that last statement sink in. We are talking about a human being choosing to end their own life because of the views that someone else has tried to force feed this teen. I wonder what these Hell House people would say to that. Would they be happy? Would they regret what they have done? I don’t know what would happen, but I hope that they realize what they are doing before it gets that far.
In conclusion, I do not think that these are bad people, but I do think they are doing something bad. This reminds me of a quote from Steven Weinberg, “Religion is and insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.”
Take a look at what they are doing here
Augustine and His Confessions
I enjoy looking at a variety of views on both theism and atheism. One argument that has intrigued me is the problem of evil which goes something like this:
Premise 1.) If God exists, then there would be no evil (immoral actions) in the world.
Premise 2.) There is (are) evil (immoral actions) in the world.
Conclusion: God does not exist.
This is a strong argument in favor of Atheism, however many would try to attack the first premise which we shall call (1). I have been thinking about how to defend (1) and have come up with a few things.
A.) Many claim god to be omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. However, if this were true then clearly such a powerful being would not allow evil to exist. If a theist were to claim that evil does exist AND God exists, then they would be going against the idea that god is all powerful, all knowing, and all good.
B.) Another claim against the problem of evil is that god created free beings that can make their own moral choices. This may be the case, but from a biblical account when god created the world he said that all things were good, therefore not evil; leaving evil to be unexplained. The existence of free beings would also contradict God’s will. For example if I were to break my leg, upon asking a theist why this happened they would reply “it was God’s will”. That leads to the following argument:
I.) If we are free beings, then God would not impose his will on us, so as to control us.
II.) God imposes his will on us.
III.) Therefore, we are controlled beings.
Conclusion: We are not free beings.
If God was controlling us, surely it follows that we would act in moral ways at all times, but we don’t.
C.) Evil is merely the absence of good. How can this be the case if everything God made was good? If we are not free beings, but controlled by a being that is only good there would not be the capacity to lack good.
These seem to be the best arguments I could think of at the time. I know there are many more arguments out there for and against the problem of evil, so please post them and I will do my best to address these issues!
A Philosophical View
I enjoy looking at a variety of views on both theism and atheism. One argument that has intrigued me is the problem of evil which goes something like this:
Premise 1.) If God exists, then there would be no evil (immoral actions) in the world.
Premise 2.) There is (are) evil (immoral actions) in the world.
Conclusion: God does not exist.
This is a strong argument in favor of Atheism, however many would try to attack the first premise which we shall call (1). I have been thinking about how to defend (1) and have come up with a few things.
A.) Many claim god to be omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. However, if this were true then clearly such a powerful being would not allow evil to exist. If a theist were to claim that evil does exist AND God exists, then they would be going against the idea that god is all powerful, all knowing, and all good.
B.) Another claim against the problem of evil is that god created free beings that can make their own moral choices. This may be the case, but from a biblical account when god created the world he said that all things were good, therefore not evil; leaving evil to be unexplained. The existence of free beings would also contradict God’s will. For example if I were to break my leg, upon asking a theist why this happened they would reply “it was God’s will”. That leads to the following argument:
I.) If we are free beings, then God would not impose his will on us, so as to control us.
II.) God imposes his will on us.
III.) Therefore, we are controlled beings.
Conclusion: We are not free beings.
If God was controlling us, surely it follows that we would act in moral ways at all times, but we don’t.
C.) Evil is merely the absence of good. How can this be the case if everything God made was good? If we are not free beings, but controlled by a being that is only good there would not be the capacity to lack good.
These seem to be the best arguments I could think of at the time. I know there are many more arguments out there for and against the problem of evil, so please post them and I will do my best to address these issues!
Atheism
Many people are inclined to think that atheists are somehow bad human being, immoral, and full of irrational doubt. However, I don’t find this to be true. I am an atheist, a magician, a student, and many other things. Upon first meeting me I doubt that you would have any indication as to my personal beliefs or lack thereof. The point is that I am a human being just like anyone else on this majestic blue spec in the suburb of the Milky Way. I am not here to tell religious people that their beliefs are good for nothing, wrong, silly, or anything like that. I am however, trying to foster some sort of debate about the topic of religion, morality, and the existence of god in whatever form you may believe him (or her or them) to take. I am generally interested in this topic and I will be posting things by many authors and posing questions to whoever wants to take it on and try to answer it. I really hope that this is a positive and overall beneficial discussion!
Reasonable Disbelief 