The Antichristian Phenomenon

This summer I have been taking a few classes at the Community College in my hometown, one of which was an online Macroeconomics course. A few of you who have been reading my personal blog as of late have read at least a portion of my recent bind in this class, but I think the general ACP readers will find interest in the full story, accounted in full and in order.

Most of us never really think much of the stories about teachers and professors espousing their religious beliefs and actively discriminating until it happens directly to you. I didn’t think it would happen, or could happen, and especially not in an economics course. Yet, here are the events… (more…)

Welcome! If you're new here, before you open your mail program to fire up a nasty email, you may want to first read our FAQ to avoid being ignored. If you like the content, we hope you will to subscribe to our RSS feed. Stay open minded!
If you don't like the content of this website on the other hand, kindly fuck off.

I have been reading many debates between irreligious and religious people concerning the argument of intelligent design. These debates, from what i have seen, are endless, because neither side has the sufficient arguments in order to finish off the other. And so, these debates go on, but with the religious side always having a moral advantage, because of the incapability of the others to disproof their claims. Before i start explaining further, it should be noted that when i’m referring to “religious” i mean the supporters of the three dominant religions: christianity, islamism and judaism. Since i live in a christian environment, i shall use the word “christianity” as a key-word for all three religions.

So what does this trick consist in ?

I have to admit that this is a very intelligent trick, but it has two edges. By doing this, the christians take the fight directly into the “enemy territory”- that is science. They actually try to turn the tables on non-believers and use science-the all-time arch enemy of religion- in order to prove the existence of the christian god. However, there is also a second perspective to this strategy: by doing this, they admit themselves that their “holy book”- which is supposed to hold absolute truths and offer irrefutable proof of its claims- does not actually do that and is inconsistent. However, few people seem to notice this aspect, and, by and large, the christian offensive is succesfull. By taking the debate to the scientific field, the talks could go one forever, because, as i previously admitted, science, despite the progresses made, is still incomplete and does not offer all the answers we need in tracing our origins (and probably never will). Despite the overwhelming evidence for the scientific theories, they are still not proven in all of their aspects. Thus, this climate creates the perfect ground for christian intelligent design argument.  Of course, their arguments are just speculations, but they are intelligently crafted, thus making them extremely hard to reject. For a few refferences you should check the following http://www.antichristian-phenomenon.com/db0/evidence/ , paying particular attention to Brian’s responses in the comments.  Also, if you want, here is another http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/ifyoucanreadthis.htm .

Unfortunetly, many irreligious fall into the trap of debate on such grounds, and this only makes the situation worse. The christians always come up with arguments (i repeat, even if they are just speculations), thus making them look good, and keeping the possibility of truth in religion, wide open. Worse, some opponents to these claims run out of arguments to support their cause, mainly because of not having a particularly wide knowledge concerning science and biology.

I, myself, admit that i don’t shine in the scientific area, and biology has never been my favorite subject in school. Besides basic knowledge, i can’t really keep up in a scientific debate about biology (astronomy maybe) .

However, their intelligent design argument must not be attacked by discussing biology and the validity of scientific theory. We must take the fight back to their own territory.

Preparing for the counterattack

So what’s wrong with this argument ? Well, in order for it to be succesfull and to make them reach their goal- that is to prove the existence of the christian god- at least two things should be valid:

1. The bible theory about creation must be valid and plausible in the context of the knowledge we posses today
2. Their scientific claims, about intelligent design to be true.

While they have not proven by any means the second point, let’s, for the sake of the argument, admit it possible. After all, as an agnostic, although i reject the claims of every known religion on earth, i accept the possible existence of superior intelligence, and superior beings, that we, as limited beings cannot perceive. So let’s accept the possibility of intelligent design. Does this point towards the christian god ? By all means NO ! Let me give a simple example as to why not:

Let’s suppose a random woman, from the street, goes to a five year old child, whom she never met, and says: “I’m your mother, therefor you must obey me !”. And the child says: “I don’t know you, you’re a fraud and i don’t obey you”. Then, the woman starts giving the child scientific, biological arguments, proving that every child comes from a mother, concluding, as a result, that she is his mother and he should obey her.The christian argument is by no means better than what that woman said, which proves that their intelligent design argument is not only baseless, but also extremely stupid. In order to make it count, they have to prove that the bible creationist theory is without error and is completely valid. Well, let’s take a look at it (just like that woman should prove- via DNA test- that she is the rightful mother of the child).

Beating them back to their own grounds

The creationist theory has been discussed countless times, but just for the sake of it, i’ll add one more to that. The christians (again, i must point out that i am also referring to the other two religions) claim that their “holy book” is unique, without error, and holds the absolute truth, that no other book holds.

We will prove that the bible, in many points, copies the ancient summerian and babylonian legends (among whom the jewish people lived), and that with our current knowledge of the universe and of our planet, they are no more than a simple ferry-tale. I will also refute their desperate arguments to make their book seem valid.

An analysis of the seven days of creation

First day

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.  God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. God called the light ‘day,’ and the darkness he called ‘night.’ And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

What light ? Where did this light come from ? Where are the astral objects (stars) that produce this light ? It is clear that the author did not have the slightest idea of where the light actually comes from.

Second day

And God said, “Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water.”  So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so.  God called the expanse ‘”ky.’”And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.”

According to this, the Earth is surrounded by water. This is clearly taken from the old sumerian legends (that appeared aprox. 2000  years before the biblical myths did) according to which this world is surrounded by an infinite ocean of water. Almost all ancient peoples imagined the primordial chaos as a limitless realm of water. The bible is no different. Of course, we have proven that there is no water in space, just perfect vacuum. Again, the “creation” of this day is proven false.

Third day

Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

Again, i ask: where the hell is that cursed sun, to produce that light energy, so that the plants can initiate their photosynthesis without which they are unable to exist? Of course, the christians will say that god can do anything and that he could have made them resist one day without sunlight. But then, why didn’t he leave things like that, so that the plants would never need solar energy ? Or why didn’t he create the sun before the vegetation ? Oh, let my guess “the Lord works in mysterious ways”……aaaa…right…

Forth day

And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

So we finally have some stars. And a moon. But he says that he made them in order to separate day from night. But let’s take a look at the first day. Didn’t he do that already ? God clearly suffers from a serious amnesia. Oh, and the stars were created to assist the inhabitants of a tiny, ignorable planet, in the whole context of the universe. And all these stars, that develop in millions of years, created in one day.It is clear that the author had only an abstract notion of space and stars. He thought they were a couple of hundred tiny things up there, that helped them during the night. Not some celestial bodies, that are billions of light years away from us.

Fifth day

And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky.” So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. [...]

Comment: Nothing interesting here. I’ll give god a break this time.

Sixth day

And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.” [...] Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth,  and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

Of course, from now on, everyone knows the story of Adam and Eve. How Adam named every animal existent on Earth (quite a busy bee- but what about the still undiscovered species ? he forgot some! how will we name them?), how god created Eve from Adam’s ribs etc. However, the interesting thing here is that god said he will create man in his image. The christians claim that their god is perfect. It is obvious to everyone that this world, along with our race, is entirely imperfect. How could god, if perfect, create something imperfect ? They say that it’s man’s fault, because by our sins we became imperfect. But how can something perfect become imperfect ? If we were perfect, than there was no possibility of mistake. So it means we weren’t perfect to begin with. So, again i ask, how can something perfect create something imperfect ? One more bullet in the intelligent design.

Seventh day

By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

“A subject for a great poet would be God’s boredom after the seventh day of creation.”- Fr. Nietzsche

The “one million year day” argument

Of course, with the new discoveries, the christians had to “adjust” their religion and standards a little so they tried to create puerile and comical explanations. Such is the case with the explanation that the biblical “day”, in which god created another element of the universe is not the 24 hour day we commonly refer to, but actually an entire aeon, of millions of years, because god exists outside our solar system, so he had nothing to do with our perception of time. Let us quote the first words, that open the bible, shall we ? “God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.” Well, i agree that they didn’t perceive the day as having 24 hours back then.For them the day began at sunrise, and ended at sunset. Also, the bible says Adam died at the age of 930 years. Yet, he was created in the sixth day. Shouldn’t he be something like 2 million years old at the point of his death ? I rest my case.

Other myths in Genesis or the bible in general

Man’s creation from earth: According to Babylonian legends, man was created from earth,  and Kingu’s blood.

The stars: In Babylonian myths, Marduk managed the evolution of the Moon and of the Sun, divised the year into 12 parts and “drew”  upon the sky the stars, into Zodiac constellations. Notice any simillarities ?

Satan’s revolt : The christians claim that Satan initiated a revolt against God, in order to bring his reign to an end, and 1/3 of the angels were with him. Following his defeat, Satan was cast down from heaven, along with his rebel angels.

According to Sumerian and Babylonian legends, Tiamat and Apsu gave birth to Anshar and Kishar, who, in turn gave birth to many more gods, including Marduk. They enslaved Tiamat and Apsu. Apsu decided to punish them for this, but he was killed. The ancient gods, displeased with how Tiamat handled this situation, with the lesser gods dominating them, dared her to initiate a revolt. She put Kingu in charge of her armies, but they were defeated by Marduk, who later became the supreme god. Kingu and Tiamat are considered, by the babylonian legends, to be demons. The two of them, along with all of the demons who sided with them, were sent to live in the underworld kingdom of Ereshkigal (the land of the dead aka hell- in christian tradition).

Of course, revolt is present in every story and are inspired by the politics going on in our world, the rebellions, the dethroned leaders etc. Sumer legends and the bible are now different . The only difference is that here Marduk is more in Satan’s than in God’s position, since he was not the primal creator to begin with. Of course, he was the protector of Babylon, so, for political reasons, since Babylon ruled a vast amount of lands, he had to prevail, right ?

Noah and his ark: We all know the story. Almost in every ancient mythology there were floods, droughts and all kinds of “punishments” inflicted by the gods, when there were actually bad years for agriculture, famine, and some rivers or seas flooded their surroundings (natural disasters that happen quite frequently nowadays too). As an example, we have the story of Atrahasis, of ancient Babylon. For some reasons that i am not going to develop, their gods wanted to destroy the human race with a flood. One god- Enki- who had a sympathy for humanity and in particular for a wise man- Atrahasis- wanted to save at least him so he ordered the human to build an ark, take his family and a pair of each specie of animals and stay there until the flood ends.

The tower of Babel: Babylonians used all sorts of people from different races to work on their constructions. Of course, they spoke different languages. So much for the bible explanation that god mixed their languages so they would not finish the tower thus preventing them from reaching the heavens. Oh, by the way, why didn’t he stop our space program than ?

As you can see, the Genesis is irrelevant, false and inspired by the “pagans” that “god” wanted to destroy.

A common-sense question

Seeing the similarities between these theories, and the fact that they were born long before the first words of the bible came to life, why must we regard them as simple myths, but the bible as the words of god ? Why is this Jehowa more special than Tiamat, Apsu, Ishtar, Anu, Enlil, Marduk, Kingu and any other deity invented by man ?

What about the author of Genesis ?

Well, for that age, he was one of the wisest, the elite of his society. He gathered stories and information provided by other peoples and races and drew his own conclusions about what he thought was right regarding the earth and its creation. He was ignorant about the universe and the world around him, but that’s because he didn’t posses the information we do. The old testament is an interesting mix of mythology and history. What makes me angry is that this mythology has been presented as “the words of god, the absolute truth” for so many ages and it still blinds people to this day. It is quite incredible that this creationist theory is regarded as valid, even today.

Conclusion

I have proven in the first part of this article that the christian argument of intelligent design, even if one way or another proven as true, it does not lead us to believe that the christian god is real and that he created the universe and the earth. For that, the book of Genesis needs to provide irrefutable arguments and evidence for it. And, as i had analyzed, the explanations and theories offered there are, for our age, more than childish. Also, i have pointed out its similarities with so many other myths that were spread across the world, long before the book of genesis and the christian god were mentioned.

Thus, it is clear that the christian god is no more than a tribal myth, a man-made legend. Trying to prove through science and biology the existence of god, in the context of Genesis, is more than comical and has nothing to do with common sense and logic, only with pipe dreams created by the ones who try to hold on to ancient and dying beliefs.

Creative Commons License - Credit: Svadilfari

Religious ideals about sexuality permeate our society to this very day. In the western society it is Christianity which has set our current norms. It may be apparent that things are different on the eastern and African front, where the Islamic religion prevails, but I’ll remain culturally local and only try to shake our own foundations. Normality as we know it is culturally founded on our Christian history, which is a clear invitation to critical inspection. To what extent has Christian doctrine influenced our ideas and perceptions regarding sexuality. Should we accept these, or is it time for a new paradigm?

I think I should start off with sexual education early at school. This is where everybody should come into contact with sexuality for the first time. Unfortunately, sex education is not compulsory in all schools, or even present at all in some countries. This is a shame because I think everybody should be taught some basics about sex and contraception. The worst case scenario is seen in the US, where so-called “abstinence-only sex education” prevails. To me that sounds a lot like a “bookless book club”. The whole idea is a farce and filled with propaganda against contraception. It is this kind of anti-knowledge that frustrates me the most. This is important stuff that shouldn’t be brushed behind the curtain, like it’s something to be ashamed of. Bring out the condoms and dildos already!

And while we’re still talking about teenagers, it’s time we remove the taboo of masturbation. Anyone who says he or she doesn’t do it is a liar, especially if they are in their teenage years. So what has made this topic indiscussable? People are evolutionary wired to like sex, so what is so damn wrong with simulating it? This has close ties with the taboo on pornography, the helping hand for masturbation. The social stigma on this genre is counterproductive in teaching the new generation about sex. Your teachers at school will not be giving examples in sexual education as portrayed in Monty Python’s Meaning of life, but I see absolutely no problem in displaying a pornographic film as part of this education. It’s only the activity that has produced everyone.

The abstinence-only generation is a generation that is geared towards pre-marital chastity simply because they know no different. It’s fine that somebody would choose for this for whatever reasons, but I simply detest the demonisation of sex before - what I perceive as - the empty gesture of marriage. Chastity has made it into the list of virtues, while lust has made it into the list of sins. What’s wrong with liking things that feel good, and what’s so good about not acting upon them? Excepting personal preference, I am truly in the dark about this. In this modern day and age, where we can prevent babies from spawning after having a lovely time with somebody you like, should it matter whether you’re married or not? I can understand the complications of getting a baby if you haven’t settled down with somebody because you are just fooling and experimenting around, but those scenarios are easily preventable nowadays.

So, on to marriage itself! As you’ve noticed, I don’t understand what all the fuss is about. It’s a strange ritual, but I’ll not get into the technicalities of it. The fact remains that marriage is in many countries still a privilege, not a right, for heterosexual couples. I think it is quite fine that a religious institution has rules as to who can marry who, but a government should wake up to the twentyfirst century and realise that there are gay couples out there. There is absolutely no reason to reserve an official, recognised bonding to two people if and only if they are of different sex. There is no such thing as the “traditional family” of a husband, wife and kids. Historically, this kind of family is quite young. Marriage in historical terms was usually a man, a wife (usually arranged by parents) and then some additional lovers for the man: a polygyny. This is the kind of thing you would find in, oh let’s see, the Old Testament. Take that, you bible-pushing asshats! The modern marriage is a fresh concoction, a new paradigm that shifts from securing family wealth to romantic love male-female monogamy. And I’m not only for breaking the opposite sex restriction, I’m also in favour of the two people restriction. Why is it not allowed for more people to join in marriage? If there is a group of censenting adults who wish to share life together, why are they restricted from doing so? What is the sin of polyamory?

There is none, and it is time to break these taboos. We must reconsider the foundations of society in a new, rational perspective. We must be wary not to accept anything just because it is historically or culturally “simply so”. It is time to critically examine every direct and indirect restriction that pesters modern day life and depraves us or our fellow human beings of freedoms they may not have even imagined of having. We must open these closed doors to knowledge and true freedom.

Supposedly you want to promote something, a new ideology, and you want people to follow it for you to become powerfull. What do you tell them ? You camouflage this quest for personal good into something “universally good”. You make sure people don’t find out the real aspects and don’t get a glimpse of the complete picture, you offer them only fragments of what you wish to promote, like when doing a comercial for a movie and showing only scenes with a lot of action or explosions, when the overall movie is so bad that you fall asleep after just five minutes of it. You rely on mass ignorance in order to promote it. Ignorance leads to blind following, the second weapon.

However, ignorance and blind following  alone are not enough. There would still be a lot of people who would find it totally unnecessary to adhere to what you’re promoting, or would simply feel that your ideals are not good enough for them. That’s when you introduce the number one weapon of all- FEAR.

In the case of religion, fear is most perversely used than in any other domain. If an oppressive government threatens you with the police, you still have a few options open to escape and you know for sure what you are dealing with. But in the case of heaven and hell you don’t know what you are facing. To believe in these two concepts means to adhere to the first step of being hopelessly enslaved, from the mental point of view.

To believe with strength that a god who is supposed to be good and tolerant will, however, send you to eternal punishment for not following him is something that will make your existence miserable. Each time you do something considered by the bible as “sinful” you will start having remorse, you will start regreting, you will start feeling the need to “confess” your sins to the Lord.

This is where the church (aka consultant and mediator in divine problems) comes along. You will go to the church, you will kneel before the priest, you will drink a drop of wine from a little spoon, you will kiss the cross, and you will stand in the middle of the church, head down, eyes closed, feeling of humility greatly impregnated in your mind, and you will beg the Lord, your God for forgivness.

In other words, you will adhere to a masqeurade, 2000 years old. There is something quite incredible when you see an educated, intelligent person, kissing the cross, kneeling before a wodden figure and talking to himself. As strange as it may be, the majority of  globe adheres to such ritual, no matter if it is called Christianity, Islamism, or whatever other religion.

Still, why would people, even intelligent ones sometimes, rather believe some words written about 3000 years ago about a god creating the whole world in seven days, the light before the sun, the plants before the sun, and other such absurd things, rather than studying and, at least, partially accepting more elaborate theories, such as Darwin’s ? While i don’t consider the scientific theories as holding the absolute truth and I admit they are incomplete, they are still more plausible than any creationist theory existent. So why do people would rather believe them? There is only one answer: Fear of hell!

Since christianity is usually taught at a young age, the image of eternal suffering impregnates very well within the mind of a child and has a very high chance of remaining there for the rest of one’s life. Christian teachings are centered on the concept of hell and eternal punishment. I can remember when i was 2nd grade and attending religion in school (which was, and still is today, compulsory), I can remember how the teacher always spoke and threatened us with how we’ll be tormented forever if we fail to follow and do the biddings of Christ. When she quoted the bible, she always gave examples such as the story of Lasarus, or various other quotations from Christ, speaking about eternal punishment. I can remember we were all quite scared when hearing such things. No one had the courage to even ask a question about Christ’s doctrine. I also remember seeing a priest in church talking about punishment in hell. He was a very good speaker and the crowd was very impressed and shaken by his words. I also attended various services in church, such as wedding, baptisings and funerals, and i can say (at least that’s how it is in orthodoxy) that there isn’t a single such ritual that doesn’t contain at least one refference to hell, punishment, and what will happen to the non-believers. Also, try reading the gosspel of Matthew and count the number of times Jesus repeats the words “weeping and gnashing of teeth”- as a refference to hell.

Indeed, the prospect of eternal punishment must be repeated as many times as possible, because without it no one would care about Jesus and christianity. It is the very foundation of this belief. That’s why people find it easier to question any scientific theory, but not the “holy book”. Because Darwin, for example, did not threaten with eternal punishment those who questioned his theory.

Christianity does, and even asking questions about it will send you to hell. Which brings us to the second tool of religion- ignorance.
Only blind following is acceptable in the eyes of god. Studying, asking questions, searching for answer is heresy, and is punishable by eternity in hell. We will find out that many of those who call themselves “christians”, believe in Jesus and even go to the church, did not read one word from the bible which is supposed to be the book that holds the ideology which represents them.

The words “believe, don’t search” are quite often used by these people when talking about religion, words also taught in churches and during religion classes. These three words represent the most disgusting example of ignorance. And it is this kind of ignorance that kept the church on such an important position these 2000 years.

There was a period in the middle ages when you risked being burned on the stake even for holding a bible in your house. The same period when, in church, the priests held the divine service in latin, a language known in those times by a few priviliged who had the chance to an education- that is the agents of the church. Blind following is the key through which the church became the most profitable bussiness in human history. That’s why theologists want the rest of the people to remain totally ignorant. Why read the bible? As long as you believe in god you’ll go to heaven anyway. Just do what we tell you to and you’ll be fine. Almost all the people i know (myself included), after reading the bible rejected faith as complete nonsense. With the new information we posses, there are clearly a lot more chances to become an atheist after reading the bible, than become a christian. That’s why blind following and ignorance, along with fear, are vital to keep religion, and the Church Inc. going.

However, i do believe that their numbers are decreasing with every passing year and it is becoming very hard to keep people ignorant. Fear still remains the most efficient tool that keeps them going in this struggle for survival. However, like all religions, the abrahamic ones will fade with time. It is inevitable.

So, what is the actual Holy Trinity? God, Son and Holy Ghost ? No way ! Fear sits where god’s throne is supposed to be. Blind following was sent to us to help us avoid the punishment that fear is preaching. This is the true Son. And instead of the Holy Ghost we have Ignorance. I can hear it preaching to us every now and then. Whispering words such as “believe, don’t search”.

Friedrich Nietzsche wrote in his “Thus spoke Zarathustra” that “God is dead! And we have killed him!”. While I admire very much Nietzsche’s philosophy, I think we should dig even further into this matter. We never put a finger on God, our hands are clean! God committed suicide ! He’s dead, by his hand!

I won’t bother with the Old Testament, when he was just a tribal god, similar to so many others, and “inspired” by the other gods “who didn’t exist”. Let the Jews worry about that. I’m talking about when he was “promoted” to a universal god, for all human beings. Suddenly he changed his old ways and decided to use other methods. He appeared to us in the form of a bastard son and made his new rules heard. Now the whole human race became his “chosen ones” and bloodshed , mass exterminations and crushing the infidels were no longer required. Suddenly he spoke of love, peace and tolerance between people.

Jesus (as he is portrayed in the Bible) appears as a peaceful, passive being, devoid of any pride or ego. He asks us to love our neighbour, to love our fellow humans how we love ourselves and to grant permanent forgiveness to those who hate, hurt or do us wrong, no matter how much wrong. We always have to forgive and never resist when we are attacked, insulted or beaten.
Also, the rules about chastity are even more tightened. Now, not only sex before marriage or cheating on your partner is sinful, but even looking at someone of the opposite sex and secretly desiring him/her will be treated as a deadly sin. The same will be said about verbally insulting someone and calling them “fools”. This is God’s new ideology that we must follow in order to achieve eternal happiness. This ideology brought by Jesus is more than just an ideology. This is what God represents. This is God.

But then we see how God inflicts wounds on himself when, just chapters after he told us not to call people “fools” he does so himself. He goes even further when he attacks the merchants selling things in the temples. His passivity and friendly attitude suddenly changes, and doing so he put another nail in his own coffin. If Jesus was the wisest man alive, why didn’t he use his infinite wisdom in order to peacefully convince the limited minded merchants to leave the temple ?
Tolerance is abandoned again when he calls those who do not listen to his teachings “vipers and vermin “. Where has “love thy neighbour” gone? Surely no one speaks this way to his neighbour when he loves him, right ? Even when he does something wrong. But Jesus seals his fate, as God, when he calls for eternal punishment in hell for the infidels, who do not follow him. Rightful and goodhearted actions are deemed nothing without faith in Christ. Without this faith, we all go to hell. This is the moment God renders his ideology obsolete. This is when God committed suicide. He is the one who asks for unlimited forgiveness, but he is also the one that offers unlimited punishment for limited sins done during a pathetic lifetime of few years that don’t even matter in the whole context of history.
It is obvious that God cannot follow his own rules. His words are contradicted either by other words or by his actions. If one who does not follow these rules deserves eternal death and God himself cannot follow them, he sentences himself to death: He commits suicide. We are innocent. As such, his ideology is rendered pointless and useless to us.

But even after his suicide, God still has followers. They call themselves “Christians”. but what is a Christian ? Nietzsche wrote in “The Antichrist” that the only Christian in human history died on the cross. Again, I go even further and say there was never such thing as Christian, since no one ever followed the rules required by the suicidal god to achieve this title. If we go on the streets and ask 1000 people the question “what is a Christian and what does it take to be one?”, it is guaranteed that we will get exactly 1000 definitions. The truth is that after God committed suicide, the people performed an autopsy on him and dissected him, each taking a part, the one that suits him/her best. We will find out that some don’t consider sex before marriage or sexual lust a sin at all. When we bring to them the lines quoted above, they either say that they are not important or they are just a figure of speech. To some, who consider themselves fundamentalists, they don’t find anything wrong in rejecting atheists and people who don’t believe what they believe. Or, why don’t we try hitting one of these Christians in the face. Will they be real Christians and turn the other cheek, while, perhaps trying to talk to us rationally, or will they do like a “mere human” would and hit back?

Also, who actually believes in this shallow, senseless emotion called “love for everybody”? Do you really think someone actually experiences this “love” for everyone in the world ? No! Some of them might have the guts to say something like this. But they are just words. They couldn’t care less if 2 blocks away there was a car accident and some people died. But what about loving Christ more than your wife/girlfriend/mother/father etcetera? Does anyone even think of Christ when they are with someone they love? Christian teachings are very incompatible with human personality, that’s why no one can follow them. Like I said, the only thing Christians can do is take God apart and reassemble him in the way they choose.

Let’s face it, for every “Christian” there is a Jesus who fits their own interests and interpretation. There are orthodox Christians, catholic Christians, protestant Christians, Jehova’s Witness Christians, and another million kinds of Christians, but no actual Christian. There never has been.

I know everyone embeds xkcd all the time but I just couldn’t resist doing it this time

Religion and family have had a close link throughout the history of humanity. The Catholic Church played a key role in the development of the family during their roughly 1000 year period in which the Vatican was the chief influence in European political and social aspects. Although it was mainly a union for economic purposes during the majority of human history, the Vatican strongly supported the family as a social unit, and to the present still is one of the main supporters of traditional family values. (more…)

This is in response to all of the chatter going on recently related to PZ Myers, that kid who took a Catholic cracker, and general hostility by the atheist community towards Christians. Here’s my opinion.

And it’s a difficult one to figure out. What good is being skeptical and intelligent if we stay silent because we don’t want to offend someone? But will our speaking out help anyone if it is hostile to the point that it drives religious people who are doubting their religion away?

As someone who recently wrote on how damaging hostility can be to someone who is new to a (especially outcast) idealogy or lifestyle, I can certainly attest who how a Christian would feel in a similar case.

Imagine a Christian in a similar position to mine, only worse! They’ve been lied to their entire lives, they are starting to realize, slowly but surely, what a scam religion is…they are seeing how hypocritical it all is and starting to venture, afraid, into the world of atheism. Poking around in blogs. Lurking around some forums. Reading about atheist activity and groups. All the while, looking over their shoulder and terrified, wondering if they might go to hell for doubting God, what their families will think, what their loved ones and friends will think, whether or not they are still moral, what’s wrong with them, do they need help…it can be terrifying.

And then they see some things that only reaffirm their fear: atheists committing acts that, to them, are atrocities, atheists being shockingly rude and cruel to them and other Christians, etc. It will do nothing but drive them back to the “safety” of their religion, unless they really have had their eyes opened and know that the actions of others do not change what is true and what is not true (like I did).

But then…on the other hand, being silent hasn’t exactly helped atheists throughout history. If anything, it has made us weak and easy to prosecute and weed out. Silence will kill us. If we do not speak out, if we are not active, if we do not loudly declare our defiance, we will be quickly forgotten. We must always be considered, by politicians and by the general populace. We must show ourselves as an example that we are Americans and we are not religious, and (not but) we are good people–we are the better people because we choose to act as good people through personal choice and not through fear and indoctrination.

And why do Christians deserve special rights not to be offended? Across the decades they have burned us alive, they have torn away our “God-given” rights, they have screamed for us to get out of “their” country, they have forced their religion down our throats and refused to respect us. Should we give them anything better than they gave us? Is our right to free speech worth any less than theirs? No. If anything, it is worth more because we aren’t insane, but that’s beside the point because regardless, everyone has the same rights to free speech.

So in the end, I think its very important to be loud and proud, and exercise our rights as humans to speak freely. We have every right to “desecrate” their symbols and criticize their leaders, just as they have every right to do the same to us.

The trick is to be respectful. Make fun of their words, their beliefs, their symbols, their leaders, but be careful if you make fun of them. Hold your arms open for doubters and show genuine kindness and honesty, not hatred. Was PZ Meyers justified in his desecration of a “sacred” little cracker? Yea, he was. It’s just a fucking cracker, and he was making a point, which is his right. He wasn’t personally attacking anyone, it was just as ridiculous that anyone got angry over him or the cracker incident as it was that Muslims got angry over the comics. People are deserving of respect, not beliefs. Maybe somewhere, somehow, a Christian is seeing that. And maybe there’s another who was starting to see the light of atheism, but is so easily swayed that such an incident changed their mind.

Either way, respect towards others is necessary. Respect towards symbols of an abusive, racist, sexist, hateful, insane idealogy is not.

It is done, your holy saviour is defeated once more, and even the ultimate might of your omnipresent and omnibenevolent imaginary sky daddy was not enough to stop this truly evil deed.

Where is he Christian?! I ain’t seeing jack shit.

But we all know that nothing is going to happen and you know it as well. It is why you think you need to act and show your outrage. Your god cannot defend himself because he does not exist, so by this act going unpunished the seed of doubt it further planted within you.

I’ve been away for a long time, all the while with db0 demanding I start posting again.

Well, I have read Waldheri’s confession, and figured it’s time I confess my own.

Forgive me father, for I have sinned. I haven’t been to confession for 11 years. The last time I was still in Catholic school and the friar told me I’d get a beating if I didn’t come up with a good confession. I was quite dishonest because of that, I made up a bunch of sins to avoid the beating. Sorry for lying in your face. Also I forgot to mention that I had taken a leak in the friar’s holy water. What’s his status by the way? I haven’t heard of him for ages, but I suspect he’s training the CIA in special interrogation techniques for use in Guantanamo.

Forgive me father, for I have sinned. When I left that Catholic school I also stopped reading your holy book. Mostly because I finally had the free choice on which books to read, without getting threatened with a wooden ruler. But when you write the sequel can you put some orcs and elves in it? Some tough ass wizards as well perhaps. Wouldn’t it be much cooler if Jesus had a magic wand and shouted “You shall not pass” at those bloody green-skinned Romans?

Forgive me father, for I have sinned. I broke an oath. When your servants arrived in my ancient fatherland, they made my ancestors swear never to serve their ancient gods any longer. Of course the oath was made with a torch near their home and a blade near their neck, but that’s inconsequential. I apparently forgot that these oaths sworn to you count for many future generations as well. I have reverted to honouring my own kind, but I can see now how wrong I am.

Forgive me father, for I have sinned. When my biology teachers mentioned Darwin to me, the whole thing made sense. When I saw the proof to myself through the practice of science, I became even more stubborn in these false beliefs. At the time, I didn’t know yet all this “evidence” was just an attempt to frame your son. It must have been great for Jesus to ride on the backs of dinosaurs. Was it a T-Rex?

Forgive me father, for I have sinned. As a 12 year old boy I began exploring my own body and have done things so vile in the privacy of my bedroom that you must have grown blind just from watching me play with socks. Obviously I hadn’t learned the message of wholesome sing-a-longs such as this one. Out of repentance for my sins, I dedicate that song to you.

I’m supposed to say a bunch of Hail Mary’s now, right?