[1044] Reason Seasoning

I haven't talked religion in a long time. I just watched this "Skinny Happy People: Duggar Family Secrets" series though. My brain is kicking off down some heavily compacted trails, but I'd still like to see if there's anything new.

I'm very much in the "religion poison's everything" camp. Whatever you may wish to claim is right or wrong about human behavior, there's a familiar, comforting, and easily digested religious anecdote, adage, or idiom to summarize and excuse away any remote lesson or inclination towards accountability. At bottom, every book, every tradition, every gathering of thousands boils down to "Because God!" The unprovable, ineffable essence of what us boring nerdy types recognize as self-satisfied circular-reasoning and infinite regress. Every single religious tradition terminates the same way.

As such, you take whatever fiendish inclination between thought crime to child molesting to child torture then molesting then murdering, as long as you punctuate it with "God's will," or spin-doctor it into your next trial and lesson, it never actually has to get dealt with. And why should it? It's the same people perpetrating that get attention, power, money, and literally thousands of people crafting their day-to-day excuses to not think for themselves or find their agency. Arguably, beyond the wholesale corruption of critical thinking, the thing I hate most about religious types is the unearned pride and piety bestowed by thirsty empty sheep looking for a strong daddy.

This isn't shaping up to be a blog where I feel moved to qualify anything positive about religious experience, so don't expect this to look "balanced" or "fair" or giving much a shit about your personal story as it pertains to your Jesus. You've been warned.

Anyway, now that I deal with addiction, I get to see new, but precisely the old, patterns manifest in ways I haven't written about yet. It could be notions of "purity" and "submission" that plague the minds of those who literally can't see a paradigm that would allow them to be independent. You're at the mercy of the eldest man who I don't think it would be unfair to say you're addicted to. We're addictive creatures, trying to indulge the positive feelings at all costs. Literally, we will die to feel good, and I don't think this is framed as dangerous as it's registering to me in this moment.

I've heard a lot of, "I just don't want to deal..." from my friends as much as any client. No one wants to deal. They don't want the headache. They don't have the time. Whether they're addicted to their vape or to some desperate conception of their duty or destiny, they don't fundamentally feel situated to deal with the heart of whatever their own issues may be. It becomes very easy to get enmeshed in family issues, client issues, indulgences for their own sake, or a feverish "busy-ness" pointed in no real direction in particular. They want to feel good. Maybe not even "better" than "good" or "good enough."

That's part of the religious impulse, no? You want to feel better about the infinite. You want to matter. You want to think you've created a kind of noble and lasting example in your attempt to start a family or in how hard you've worked to get letters after your name and higher paychecks. You want to pay your respects and keep the traditions of your elders alive. You want to think someone's paying attention and keeping score. It doesn't matter if in your heart of hearts you "don't believe in anything," as one woefully incomplete phrasing tries to caricature it, it matters that it feels better to "believe in something" than your insignificance and lack of connection. Jesus is a thousand times easier to understand emotionally than "quantum" anything.

It just feels so fucking boring and disingenuous after, well I spent years reading/arguing this stuff, but with an adult brain and 15 minutes, some deeply consequential layers of this shit needs to crack. You can be a perfectly good person without anything religious making its way into the conversation or your identity. Your car takes gas, not God's will, and for whatever scientific description you want to use about the combustion engine, the same scientific principles and rules apply to what's going to make you "go" as a healthy connected individual verses an incidentally alive node in a narcissist's cult.

I genuinely wish for the shedding of religious indoctrination to happen as quick as possible. I wish the people who hold it harmless would spend more time in good faith analyzing what they think it's been teaching them. Every form of abuse is justified "because God." Every opportunity to hold someone to account is a move to kick the can all the way to Hell. You reduce yourself to the dog who got in the trash. It's never going to walk up to you, apologize, and begin picking up and putting it back in the can. It's going to live in fear, or oblivious pride, and wait for daddy to decide what comes next.

It's always and of course the religious household where you get the most abuse and allegations. If you build church bells to sound "duh" on the hour every hour, we would still carry ourselves as if noticing a cross on the wall is tantamount to a Safe Space sticker for runaway teens. Where else are you going to find the worst kind of predictable tragedies of human behavior than where there's billions of dollars and adherents fundamentally situated to pretending? They pretend they weren't abused. They pretend to know what it is to be accountable. They pretend to have an identity. They pretend with every single word meant to obscure. It's easier to say "sin" than, "He made an 8 year old suck his dick."

There's so many parallels in my thought right now, it's hard to put it together. People defend the wrong things in the exact same ways with the exact same language. Your abusive partner, Trump, religious pedophile, terrible drug use influence..."He didn't mean...." and you're off to the races of excuses and reinterpretation of words and actions that have about as definitive a meaning as you could ever ask for. Every second you experience a moment of hesitation or confusion about something you haven't studied or don't have the mental faculties to entertain..."It's part of a larger plan." Yes, someone's always Ocean's 11ing things in the background.

People will escape! Then they will still say, "You can still trust God!" As though I should be surprised that an entire lifetime spent being punished for having your own identity could lend itself to any other conclusion. No no, dear traveler, what all of these rich sex and violence addicts were doing with all of their influence and time, never being held to account, that's the "fake God" stuff. The "real God" stuff is do literally everything they've ever said and done that doesn't rise to the level of pedophilia or violence that leaves marks. Nailed it!

I get annoyed when Hussain will say something about sex or relationships that is as purely distilled "purity culture" cult shit as you could stomach. Even if none of his actions reflect that of a controlling husband/ownership dynamic, he can't shake that it just feels "right" that you have your one woman, and anything else is grounds for divorce or disassociating. This, with I guess his tongue sticking straight through his cheek, as he tells me the permissibility of having 4 wives in his culture. You see, you can't "cheat" or be "open," but you can corral four bagged women to be at your beck and call if the money's right. You don't get that stupid convoluted headspace without religion.

Let's get back to "deal with it" as a phrase. We just don't want to deal. We don't want to deal with climate change. We don't want to deal with the fallout of our toxic friends or habits. We don't want to deal with our oppressor be it at work or in abstract attacks from the government. Why deal? It doesn't feel good. No one in our various religious contexts is showing us what effectively dealing means. It's not even really an option because it can't be conceived of. What are you not "dealing with" in your "addiction?"  After a few weeks/months you can pretty much be physically fine if not in dire need to recalibrate your dopamine and serotonin over the next 2 years.

I'm interested in what moves us past this whole "religious debate" that doesn't get to the heart of making excuses and fantasy worlds verses working within our actual power. We talk about "raising consciousness" which I think looks a lot like people showing people things, but without an appreciation for how or why they learn so it doesn't really matter how often it comes up, it never sinks in. You could very easily discuss the assumptions and illusions we're situated in as conscious beings altogether to persistently derail what that next conversation space could look like. I don't need another cult-leader, rich god-guys-is-an-asshole story. Do you? Are you ripe and ready to fall for NXIVM or Scientology if your Jesus or Mohamed wears off?

These crazies, these cultists, these monetarily powerful playing on human weakness fucks think in generational terms. We can't be persuaded to get half a dozen people into an intentional community, but you have millions on the same smug team regularly donating, indoctrinating, infiltrating, and humbly requesting through speakers outside the baseball stadium that you meet them halfway in a discussion about who's more likely to burn for all eternity as though we're not literally on fire already. Blame Canada!

You don't want to deal? You don't want to accept? You don't want to try? You don't want to touch an ounce of the anger you hear from me when I type? You're the piddling middle-ground that doesn't protest when the Nazi sits at your table. You're the $10 donation affirming private air fare for your spew-daddy while your neighbor starves. You're the held-harmless "individual" "who's just trying..." every overtaxed phrase about caring for them and theirs or what it means to be "good." They're not trying. They're not just. "They" aren't real or a person. They're a water molecule without the language of "flood."

We're all part of more waves than we can conceive. You can disappear into it, or you can adopt the buoy's perspective. You can learn how to be weather and impact resistant, bob and weave, act as a warning and help others navigate. It's dangerous to give your checking capacity to anything else. You need to be able to recognize the impulse, what ignorance looks and sounds like, and feel, as deeply and radically as the ideologues do, a sense of purpose and direction. Religious thinking is arsenic sprinkled on food and you say, "Oh! Almonds! Want a bite?" It's where you go to feel good about not taking responsibility. It's where you go to celebrate addictive thinking patterns. It's how you get to Hell. "You," of course, not me, because I don't need your daddy. I don't need him molesting the kids I try to place. I don't need his money. I don't need his excuses or story for my behavior or sense of agency. 

Why the fuck do you?

[900] Power Off

This can be considered an ongoing riff on power.

 

I just got out of a conversation with two good-ole-boys otherwise understood as my neighbors. One, a former trucker, another, some kind of job that requires neon clothing. One, agnostic, man-of-all things with a lot of hillbilly knowledge, and is perfectly okay with treating people as they treat you, but damned if he'll tolerate a trans man going into the same bathroom as his daughter. The other, a Christian, was raised to believe if you're choosing to be gay, he views it like all sins including stealing or murder. He's suspicious of unions and doesn't believe his friend is genuine in his recent talk regarding a union he joined, but is trying to fit in. He does not believe in “white privilege” and knows plenty of poor white people, and disputes systemic racism. We all agreed that there's a lot of divisive talk in the media and that people need to get to know each other.

 

It's a kind of conversation that only takes place when people feel “comfortable” honestly relating their various strains of extremely problematic views immediately tagged with a held-harmless “reasonable” thing to reassure you. It's variations on, “but I have a black friend.” It's familiar, I find it boring, and it's the kind of thing you do just to kind of reassure your neighbors that you don't hate them when you'll need their heavy equipment.

 

To me, it highlights how, almost functionally useless talking can really be. I'm, in theory, diametrically opposed to, at least the Christian, neighbor, and for as cliché or stunted as the other's view on trans issues may be, he's never going to have the opportunity to confront a trans person who may be in the same bathroom as his, adult, daughter. The power, to not lose the theme, comes from listening, sharing honestly, and allowing for the discomfort of ambiguity chase them home to reflect on how you may (I did) pock the conversation deliberately with guilt or introspection-inducing ideas. Don't you know how uncommon it is for the “average” person to really sit down and figure out how to live with each other? Takes a special kind of person, perhaps the numskull Christian across the way, to really wrestle with practicing what he may preach.

 

The Christian neighbor made a point about how people want to belong. This was servicing his argument that democrats were being divisive and wanting to lean on anything, like race, to build a camp to belong to. I think his point is important in understanding how most people feel power. They belabor their family values, their traditions, or their creature comforts. For as much as you might profess to have your “faith,” it comes with a tangible community that is bringing you food when Jesus can't be bothered. I think there's a move to defer to the ambiguous values of the community as a kind a faux humility. In pawning off your good deeds, you're able to eschew the responsibility for your bad ones too.

 

I think a new kind of community can be forced. I think I can build a coalition around, “I'm tired of being poor.” Am I going to moderate the humble-ignant-religious nut as they hopefully discover their gay neighbor isn't choosing to, functionally murder, their soul? No. I'm past that. Don't need the seminar. Deeply and dismissively appreciate how long it will take you to find the truth. In an important sense, attempting to meet you where you are would absolutely destroy where I can and want to go. You don't get your PH.D. teaching kindergarten, but no doctor would dismiss the idea of educating children.

 

Do I consider not needing a god, my basic understanding of people as people worth a degree of understanding it might take work to achieve, and significant amount of reading I've done to conceptualize myself as a small piece of the whole powerful? Well, how am I using it? Neither of my neighbors walked away from that conversation pissed at me, if they even understood 90% of what I said in analogizing or drawing from historical examples. If I can no longer access their tools or a phone call when a new car comes to the area, what would “I and all my book-learnin'” get me? What did I want from that interaction? Simply, to honestly represent myself. I do know a lot, use big words in between saying fuck a lot, and am extremely sympathetic to black people and liberal views. What that looks like in that kind of exchange is almost like practicing an art.

 

They know I don't hate them, nor do I believe they hate me, and I think I could throw a party with as many different kinds of people as I wanted and they'd be safe out here. Does that mean the Christian neighbor would stay for the whole party? Probably not. Does that mean I want to attempt to mediate a bathroom argument while intoxicated between my other neighbor and the trans friend who defriended me for persistently disagreeing with a meme about thought and word policing? Fuuuuck no. Everyone is toothless, dumb, and extremely insecure. I wish you would bear that in mind about most people you talk to. Not me, but like, people. If you're going to be like them, respect what they actually consist of, and don't make a boogy-man and lazy conception that pretends they're dumber and lazier than where you're coming from.

 

Get in the mud. Focus on what's true for you. Years ago, I don't know that I would have had the patience or maturity not to simply make some smart ass comment about “dumb religious fucks” and how little I cared what they thought of me or what they might offer. It's not even that hard or a secret to understand that's not the way to go, unless you're me. You might not be as dramatic, but the same forces are at play in our political discourse. The same fears and discomfort preclude talking at all, let alone about the hard things. Ambivalent power will fill the void and we'll keep eating ourselves out from the inside if you can't find your voice.

 

My voice is moving to a new job. My demonstrated capacity is again disregarded. One day I went to sleep, the next, 6 months later, I woke up and am pursuing a new job. It didn't take 2 years like the last one. I didn't allow myself to get worked up and excessively stressed out. I trusted my voice, honestly relayed where I was at, and can cut ties without resentment. I'm judging the shit out of people dumb enough to let me leave, but that's on them. I'm hoping the example I set and conversations I had are little seeds for other people to use to find a place more representative of what they are worth too. There are so few examples of those willing to remind us what we're worth or what we should be shooting for.

 

No transition, but I've been thinking of a way to talk about a Jordan Peterson video I struggled to watch. Peterson has been severely ill for the last few years. His wife beat cancer. His daughter has had extreme health issues throughout her life as well. Recently, he was in a conversation with Jonathan Pageau. I don't know Pageau, but Peterson enjoys him and considers him a deep thinker with regard to Orthodox Christianity. Peterson, broken, searching, is discussing the “inevitability” of Christ when you chase all the ideas of the greatest good and what it means to be conscious. Peterson is on the verge of tears several times throughout the discussion. Peterson posits, “Does the fact that that's how it should be mean that that's the way that it is? And that's trust, that's a question of trust.” in discussing aiming for the best, and embodying what you believe.

 

Pageau gets a smug look and says, “It's a question of truth with which ends up manifesting itself in love [] and I think that like the love that you have for the world which is [] clear...anyways, it shows me that you migtht be closer to that trust than you might want to admit to yourself maybe.” as his voice trails off.

 

THIS IS THAT INSIDIOUS POWER SHIT. Fuck that guy. 

 

Peterson says he doesn't know what to do with his thoughts, is the most confused person he's ever met, and says he's working at about 5% of what he considers normal. Peterson is vulnerable, and here come the Christians coming to prey on him.

 

This kind of power I feel is precisely why most things are fucked beyond measure. If you want a convert, go at them at their best and win. Don't hijack their weakness and pair subversive language to their struggle. Are you a pathetic boss who doesn't want to be undermined? Drone about policy and abstract plans until someone like me quits. Are you ashamed or naive about your privilege? Tell all your white friends, where it's safe, and your ideas can congeal as a vote for fascism. Parasitic subversion is the preferred method of the worst ideas and behaviors into popular discourse precisely because when it's uncovered and felt for what it's doing, you might struggle against how it's killing you.

 

The comment section is littered with chirps and prayers and the typical, excruciatingly gross prostrations I can only depict in the image of those crowds falling over when the preacher pretends to be imbuing the congregation with heavenly manna. What's the power they seek? The power of the crowd, the familiar affirmations, and deeply personal shares of their own pain or epiphanous exhaustion that finally brought them to accepting the truth of the metaphysical. Since it's true you should be good, and Jesus is good, Jesus is the truth! – circular reasoning triumphs! Transitive property FTW! It's definitely not assumptions couched in word-salad and trust/love-laden language foisted upon the self-confessed exhausted and confused mind. GO TO HELL!

 

I'm not angry or suspicious when you say you care about someone or enjoy talking to them. I'm extremely skeptical and pessimistic about the move to divorce your agency from your actions towards them. I don't care how many thousands of words you use to “minister” to someone, you will inevitably find yourself drawn in a circle, justifying anything or everything and nothing but because you could and it makes you feel good. You'd rather hide from the ego that nakedly enjoys it. You'd rather shutter your window into yourself and the world and play on the merry-go-round of your reasoning to nowhere. You're not seriously engaged in the world when you can blame Jesus or when you're preying on the weak. You're letting the world burn in service to egos high on their own supply.

 

I seek to destroy with my power. I don't want explosions and death. I want to kill this fluid habit of acting like parasites looking for hosts and validation in everything besides our best ideas or capacity. You want to “intellectualize” religion and call that Christ? You take on all the baggage. The predators are on your team. Is your sacrifice of who you are for what they tell you you are worth it? Jordan Peterson has meant a considerable amount to me, and not for his ability to break and choke down bullshit because a pleasant goatee mirrored his pain and called it love.

[762] Fisti(n)cuffs

I'm about a half hour away from the end of BlackkKlansman, and want to take a moment.

I occupy a weird space. To be sure, unless the person my mother told me she cheated with was mixed or black, and I'm not actually my father's, I'm not actually black. A large proportion of black people in my life have said things like, “You're darker than my dad,” or, “Nah, you ain't white,” or “I'm so confused by your skin,” or “You know you my nigga” alluding to a kind of empathy with “the struggle.” As such, I've always felt a kind of solidarity and awareness that I've certainly occasioned to ignorantly betray. No less, when I go to the symphony, giant white crowds of very comfortable rich people make me uncomfortable in a way “being the only white guy” at a black friend's Thanksgiving does not.

That baseline reality that seems to permeate black culture is precisely what I gravitate towards in storied depictions of that struggle. There's something deeper about the language, the danger, and nature of the consequences in this movie, just like there's brilliant dialogue and entire worlds to chew on in a show like Dear White People. You can't shy away from things and exist as a “real” black person in this country. People are out to kill you for dumb-ass reasons and you are disproportionately affected by racist policies and a history where you're considered inhuman.

It's that deep hatred that can't be escaped. It's the pride and perpetual insistence of a damning and degrading narrative. As a purely intellectual question, I'm baffled at how anyone could be so sure and so loud about anything, let alone that degree of hatred of someone because of the color of their skin or how they dressed or talked. As a person who's been at the receiving end of someone's sheer irrational hatred and ignorant pride, perhaps that's the kind of desperate and low place real people connect with across differences.

I understand hate. I understand how much work it takes to fuel flames for people or a world that disappoints you at every turn. I understand the stress and headaches. I understand that there will never be enough words or screaming matches to account for how full a heaving chest feels when you want to obliterate the oppressive force, and yet that force never leaves. I've said I've wanted to kill things or certain people. I felt relieved the day Scalia died, naively enough. There is an immense waterfall of hatred spewing from as many corners as you choose to look.

Here's an example. I recently picked up a washer/dryer combo from Coatsville, IN. The guy was nice, a kind of outdoors man's man. We shoved that thing on the hood of my car, I went to pull out the steal of $100 to give to him. He hands $40 back and says he's a Christian, he's just happy to see it gone, and that “I don't mean to sound faggy, but do you mind letting me know you got back home safe?”

What do you call that? Complicated, to say the least. Is this the kind of Bill Maher “house nigga” comment, but for gays? Do I think this guy's disposition would have changed wildly if I got out of my car with a lisp and said I worked in something he considered perverse as opposed to child welfare? He literally gave me a discount on what was already a steal. He put out to a stranger that he cared that I got back safe. Do we call it a deep abiding hatred for gays, or a confused cultural aversion to something he doesn't understand? Do we react by ridiculing and sanctioning?

I understand hate, but I've never been proud of when it hits. I don't brag about the relationships in my life that have managed to end terribly. I don't routinely work in to conversation how insane my mom is, how shitty the conversations with ex-friends have went, or persistently espouse some level of violence towards all of the people in power I legitimately think are trying to kill me each day. For me, these are incidental feelings of being mashed up with people we barely ever understand or are given an opportunity to work productively with. But then it seems it's one thing to understand your own capacity for hatred, and another entirely to forgive it. And god forbid you practice apologetics.

One thing I persistently worry about is that “impulsive” decision to break something that feels fragile. I want to get it over with. I hate the anticipation of betrayal. I hate the idea of putting yourself out there and believing in something while someone else was just waiting for their opportunity to flip. Hatred pragmatically addresses that too. It preemptively blames people before they get the chance. You get to emote all over the place and proudly profess cathartic rage for all the “others” and “idiots.” This is about as close as I can figure in describing the thinnest of lines between hate and fear.

Fortunately enough, I've spent enough time writing that I don't walk around like a ball of rage anymore. I still pretty fluidly claim to hate things, but not in an obsessive and deeply painful way. All the tragedies of conversation I've neatly packed into blogs or examples. All the dreams stalled or things stolen occupy intricate webs of justification and pithy perspective. My fragile sentimentality is reserved for brief lucidity during infrequent intoxication.

How do you contend with hate? Is it embodied in the all-encompassing abstractions of identity politics and storied victim-histories? Is it individual instances of poor judgment more or less spurned on by a deep abiding racial or sexual hatred? Is it the general lashing against all that makes you afraid and that's hard to understand? A call for peaceful protest or truth and reconciliation isn't to deny these forces or their consequences. Asking for the conversation and the acknowledgment of pain is not an encroachment on freedom or rights. The effort in life should be towards mellowing of that hate impulse. The dialogue should be calling it out for what it is. And people who are actually filled with hate need to be reminded as often as they can that that's what they're full of. That's the face of their “Christian love” or “purity of intention.”

Stay cool, my brothas. We're already dead. Some of us just know that a little more than others. And everybody's terrified.

[243] Bcuz It's Ez

It’s been too long. Check It

“God.”

When I hear people say this word, I literally have no idea where they are coming from. No, I don’t feel like I’ve been forsaken or am somehow “spiritually bankrupt.” I’m not inexplicably stricken deaf when they utter the sound. I’m simply flooded with the torrent of meanings that have ever been associated with the word. My mind flashes to every incoherent story or scary justification I’ve ever heard. If I’m a person who seeks even a meager understanding of things, it’s words and concepts like “god” that lead to nothing.

And that’s why I’m an atheist. I hesitate to even say atheist because of the weird instance in our language that allows for a word to exist denoting an absence. I’m also an asantaist, afairyist, etc. More importantly I think it’s important to talk about what you are over what you aren’t. Who cares what you don’t believe in? You’re hardly going to act in the name of it, justify your actions by it, or ever think a harmful or helpful thought as a result of it because the “it” in question isn’t even there.

I shy away from the entitlement people try to claim from words like “rationalist,” “bright,” “intellectual,” “humanist,” “free thinker,” “gnostic,” “agnostic,” etc. These seem to be incomplete and can be used as something to hide behind when you don’t understand something. Or, it makes another point of “us vs. them.” It’s as if somehow they’ve reached the end of their understanding and now this semi-arbitrary title suits them until they can’t help but think again.

I’m human. Even if you and I don’t know every detail of what that entails, you can at least draw a stick figure. I represent something. I’m made of things. I have intentions and act upon the world. All of my power or knowledge to do something comes from simply being human. Everything about the world, or at least “my world,” is contained in my consciousness at any given moment I choose to recognize it. At times, it seems like this concept is harder for people to understand than any abstract notion of a god.

The simple idea is that there are rules. It’s a game. If I don’t feed myself and wipe my ass, I’ll die smelling of shit. If I want to achieve a different end, I’ll play by the rules. It’s at this point a religious person might say something like, “I have rules too, and if I don’t follow them, I won’t get into heaven.” There is a simple, ever so simple, reason why this isn’t a counterpoint. I didn’t make the rules I have to follow. You, or someone before you, did. In the realm of pragmatic objectivity, nothing you think matters. You still get to die if you don’t eat, you still get to smell if you don’t wipe. Every story about before our existence and after our death is made up.

But people are so insecure. How could I live with myself if I thought I was so insignificant? Here’s a thought. Try it. See how long you really go thinking you’re nothing but shit and that the people you care about don’t matter. See what happens when you think you’re actions have no consequences. I’ll literally put money on that not lasting a day. I don’t feel comfortable with excuses. You either do something or you don’t, and while there are a million ways to describe it, few of those ways actually speak to what happened or didn’t. Distinguishing what makes stories relevant is of the highest importance to me.

I speak of patterns. When I question someone’s beliefs, I hear the patterns. In fact, peoples’ response patterns are so prevalent, you will see them throughout history, in every “rage” thread whining about how illogical Christians are being, and you can even predict what someone will say if you know even a modest amount about their background. I think it is patterns that destroy the world. When we get into habits that “feel right” or that we’re used to and just carry on until something bad happens ever wondering why and how it did.

I think belief in god is a bad pattern.

I don’t need, nor want, nor justify for someone else an external excuse to do something. I cannot deny what harm comes from disassociating yourself from your responsibilities or decisions. Do you feel the urge to defend yourself? From what? Are you special and different? Does your conception of an Almighty Force trump literally everything that came before you? I doubt it. You’re not even in the above video :P.

I am humbled by humanity. I get to be reminded every day how little I understand or know. On the other side of the coin, the things I’ve worked at, the consequences I enable, tend to go as expected. I get to slowly shape the world, piece by piece, into one I find more agreeable. I get to think about death in a way that makes me appreciate life more than fear what happens when it’s present. Most importantly, I get to remain internally and externally consistent. If I woke up tomorrow with just a hate filled rant about gay people, or thought oil was our ticket to saving the planet, or volcano ghosts where going to take over Los Angeles, hopefully, you’d be confused as fuck.

We let kids believe in things that aren’t there because we empathize. We understand the need for companionship and how crappy it can be to feel alone. We understand being afraid of questions and the unknown. My refusal to treat people like kids puts me in the “most distrusted” group in America? My insistence on developing a consistent language for our shared human experience is the worst thing you can conceive a person doing?

Eh, it’s not like you have a choice or anything so I’ll just keep doing my thing and I guess you’ll just keep doing yours.

[77] Christians Are Rational (Not Mine)

I stumbled across the article which will hopefully emphasize why I do not wholeheartedly agree that everyone within the Christian faith is simply deluded or in need of an emotional crutch. What I thought was important about this article though was its use of examples to back up its ideals. The reason it is a problem when we talk about rationality and evidence is that it remains in a biblical context. After reading this I want people to realize that I am not saying they can't find good reasons and "proof" within their faith that makes sense to them. What I want people to realize is that every example, every stitch of evidence, is from the bible and therefore cannot (overtly) be considered scientifically or historically to be the truth or credible outside of the religious context.

Christianity is Rational
by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

What do people mean by the statement, “That’s just your interpretation”? Many mean: “You have your view of what the passage means and I have mine. Who’s to say mine’s wrong and yours is right? We should not condemn each other’s views. We should allow each other to hold different views.”

We live in a “pluralistic” society. “Pluralism” simply means that various differing, even conflicting, views are permitted to coexist. This attitude is quite prevalent in today’s world. television talk shows constantly stress that there are no absolutes. Truth is subjective and relative to many people. They insist that there are very few, if any, definites—very little black and white, but a lot of gray.

The matter is muddled further by the fact that on any religious or moral question, there are knowledgeable, sincere authorities on both sides of the issue. The general posture of the American mindset is that since truth is so elusive, no one should be judgmental of anyone else; no one should be so arrogant or dogmatic as to insist that a certain viewpoint is the only right viewpoint.

Without even examining God’s Word, we ought to be able to see that this attitude, and this position, is self-contradictory and unacceptable. Why? Because those who espouse it insist that they are correct. They are dogmatic in their insistence that no one should be dogmatic. They hold as absolute and certain truth the fact that there are no absolute truths. Therefore, they have to deny their viewpoint in order to hold their viewpoint!

Only in religion do people take the foolish position that truth is elusive and unattainable. Only in the task of interpreting the Bible do people take the position that truth is relative, always changing, and something of which we can never be sure. We human beings often “reason” in religion in a way that differs from the way we reason in other facets of our lives—like driving our car or picking up our mail.

For example, when we go to the doctor because we are not feeling well, we communicate to him our symptoms and expect him to understand us. We expect him to gather all the relevant evidence (the verbal information we give, as well as the signs our bodies manifest) and then properly interpret that evidence to draw the right conclusions concerning our ailment and proper treatment. He then writes out a prescription that we take to the pharmacist and, once again, we expect the pharmacist to interpret properly the doctor’s instructions. We take the prescription home and read the label, fully expecting to understand the directions. The fact that doctors and pharmacists can make mistakes by drawing unwarranted conclusions about our condition does not change the fact that if they gather sufficient evidence and reason properly about the information, they can know the truth about our situation.

Every single day that we live, we interpret thousands of messages accurately. We read the newspaper, fully expecting to understand what we are reading. We read novels with the same expectation. We watch the news on television. We go to the mailbox, get our mail, and browse through it, fully expecting to interpret properly the messages being conveyed. The fact that misunderstanding sometimes occurs does not negate the fact that more information can be examined in order to draw the right conclusions and arrive at correct interpretations.

We go through this process constantly—every waking hour of the day, day in and day out, year after year. We give ourselves credit for having the ability to operate sensibly and communicate with one another intelligibly. Yet we turn right around and imply that the God of heaven, the One Who created our minds and our thinking capacity, the One Who is infinitely wiser and more capable than humans, is incapable of making His will known to humanity in a clear and understandable fashion! When we come to the Bible, we suddenly do an about-face and insist that we can’t be sure what God’s will is, we can’t be dogmatic on doctrine, and we must allow differing opinions on what is spiritually right or wrong!

Many people who claim to embrace Christianity ridicule and denounce logic, debate, argumentation, and emphasis upon being rational and reasonable. The practical effect of such propaganda is the upsurge of subjectivity, emotions, and personal taste as authoritative standards in religious practice. The Bible as the comprehensible and unchanging source of religious authority is thereby supplanted, and the Satanic severance of human culture from the God of heaven is complete.

The term “logic” refers to nothing more than correct reasoning. A person is logical when he/she reasons correctly. Being “illogical” amounts to engaging in incorrect reasoning. Does the Bible reflect affinity with the laws of thought and logic? Did Jesus, Paul, and other inspired speakers and writers argue their cases, prove their positions, and engage in rational, reasonable discourse? Please consider the following scripture references.

Jesus demonstrated incredible proclivity for rationality in His sharp, potent, penetrating use of logic and sound argumentation. His first recorded responsible activity consisted of a logical dialogue between Himself (at the age of twelve) and the Jewish theologians. Everyone was amazed at His understanding and answers (Luke 2:46-47). On the occasion of His baptism, He reasoned with John in order to convince John to go ahead and immerse Him (Matthew 3:13-15). He advanced a logical reason to justify the action!

Immediately after this incident, Jesus faced Satan in the desert. Satan posed three arguments, urging Christ to act on the basis of the erroneous reasoning that Satan set forth. Notice carefully the sequence of the disputation between the two, with special attention to Christ’s superior (i.e., accurate) use of logic to defeat His opponent.

MATTHEW 4:1-11 (NKJV)
Argument #1:

Satan: “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”

Jesus: “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God’ ” (Deuteronomy 8:3). Christ offered authoritative Scripture as evidence to contradict Satan’s conclusion. In other words, satisfying the legitimate need of hunger never must take precedence over the need to obey God and tend to spiritual needs first.

Argument #2:

Satan: “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down.” This time, Satan offered Scripture (Psalm 91:11-12) as evidence to justify his proposal.

Jesus: “It is written again, ‘You shall not tempt the Lord your God’ ” (Deuteronomy 6:16). Jesus countered with additional Scripture that demonstrated Satan’s misapplication of Psalm 91 to the situation at hand. In other words, Psalm 91, though intended to convey the care and concern that God manifests for the faithful, was not intended to apply to deliberately placing oneself in peril in order to force God to come to one’s rescue. God will take care of me, yes. But if I purposely walk in front of an oncoming car just to see if God will miraculously prevent my being struck—I’ll be struck! In the context of Deuteronomy 6:16, God was referring to the kind of testing/tempting that the Israelites did when they murmured, grumbled, and challenged Moses to produce water—as if God were unable or unwilling. For Jesus to have complied with Satan’s challenge would have placed Jesus in the same condition as the weak, unbelieving Israelites who “strove with” (chided, tempted) God (cf. Exodus 17:2). The only logical response to such a challenge was the one that Jesus, in fact, mustered: “Do not tempt God! Do not put Him to the test since such indicates your own lack of faith!”

Argument #3

Satan: “All these things I will give you if You will fall down and worship me.”

Jesus: “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord Your God, and Him only You shall serve.’ ” Jesus, for the third time, marshaled scriptural proof to show the falsity of Satan’s position, while reaffirming the Truth. In other words, based upon Deuteronomy 6:13, it would be sinful to worship Satan or anyone else except God. He alone is worthy of worship.

This marvelous demonstration of Christ’s mastery of debate and logical disputation is not an isolated instance. Jesus employed logic and reason throughout His earthly sojourn. He consistently responded to His contemporaries with piercing, devastating logic. He continually was besieged with questions and verbal tests to which He consistently displayed rational, reasoned response (Luke 11:53-54). Consider these few examples:

1. The exchange with the Pharisees over eating grain (Matthew 12:1-9).

2. The dialogue with the chief priests and elders over authority (Matthew 21:23-27).

3. The interaction with the Pharisees over taxes (Matthew 22:15-22).

4. The response to the Sadduccees concerning marriage and the resurrection (Matthew 22:23-33).

5. The argument posed to the Pharisees over the identity of the Messiah (Matthew 22:41-46).

6. The demonstrations of healing on the Sabbath (Mark 3:1-6; Luke 13:14-16; 14:1-6).

7. The response to the lawyers concerning the source of His miraculous power (Luke 11:14-26).

8. The answer concerning fasting (Luke 5:33-39).

9. The handling of Simon’s disgruntled view of the sinful woman (Luke 7:36-50).

10. The exchange with the Pharisees concerning His triumphal entry (Luke 19:39-40).

11. The comments upon the occasion of His arrest (Luke 22:47-53).

Jesus was so sensible and rational in His discourse that when hard-hearted Jews declared Him to be mad or demon-possessed, others countered: “These are not the words of one who has a demon” (John 10:21). Indeed, Jesus consistently provided evidence, even empirical evidence, to substantiate His claims (John 10:24-26,36-38). How could anyone possibly question the fact of Jesus’ consistent use of logic and correct reasoning? He was, and is, the Master Logician Who created the human mind to function rationally! His inspired disciples followed His example.

The apostle Paul was a master of logical argumentation in both oral and written proclamation. Shortly after his conversion, he entered upon a life-long career of debate and rational discourse. Examine carefully the terms that the Holy Spirit selected to describe Saul’s verbal activities:

“confounded” and “proving” (Acts 9:22)

“reasoned” (Acts 17:2)

“explaining and demonstrating” (Acts 17:3)

“reasoned” (Acts 17:17)

“reasoned” and “persuaded” (Acts 18:4)

“reasoning and persuading” (Acts 19:8)

“explained and testified” and “persuading” (Acts 28:23).

These terms all connote rational, logical activity! Paul’s magnificent defense of the resurrection was couched, by inspiration, in logical thought forms. Identified in formal logic as a series of hypothetical propositions (“If...then...”), Paul carefully brings the reader to the irresistible conclusion that “Christ is risen from the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:12-20).

How typical of Spirit-inspired writers! When Paul charged Titus with seeing to the appointment of qualified bishops on the island of Crete, he noted that elders must “be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and to convict those who contradict” (Titus 1:9). Elders must be debaters who can refute false teachers! No wonder that, when Festus accused Paul of being crazy, Paul coolly countered: “I am not mad, most noble Festus; but speak the words of truth and reason” (Acts 26:25). Paul was answering the charge of insanity by arguing that his words were sensible, logical, and reasonable! Compare the same word in its verb form (sophroneo), used to refer to the demoniac after the expulsion of the demons, rendered “in his right mind” (Mark 5:15).

Luke engaged in the same sort of rational enterprise. He wrote both his gospel and Acts that Theophilus and subsequent readers might “know the certainty” (Luke 1:4), and to identify “proofs” (Acts 1:3) for the purpose of convincing. These terms connote rational activity! Apollos, likewise, employed logic and reasonable discourse. Study the terms that are used to describe his verbal activity—“vigorously refuted” and “showing from the Scriptures” (Acts 18:28). Peter followed the same logical approach to his religious work. On the momentous occasion of the establishment of the church of Christ in Acts 2, Peter advanced four lines of argumentation, meticulously based upon scriptural evidence, in order to drive at the conclusion: “Therefore...” (Acts 2:36).

The reader is urged to pause and read the following passages: Proverbs 14:15; Isaiah 1:18; Acts 17:11; Philippians 1:17; 1 Thessalonians 5:21; 2 Timothy 2:15,25; 1 Peter 3:15; 1 John 4:1; Jude 3. These passages demand rational, logical, cognitive activity! They, in fact, make absolutely no sense if attention to logic is unimportant to God or unnecessary!

We must not succumb to the humanistic hurricane that is assaulting our country. With this destructive storm have come the winds and waves of existentialism and pentecostalism. These violent and damaging forces have seeped into the church of our Lord. We must awaken out of our slumber and do all that we can to salvage and save all who will manifest receptivity to the reasonable truths of our God. Now, more than ever before in recent history, we must remain unwavering in our proclamation of “words of truth and reason” (Acts 26:25). We must understand that living the Christian life means living a rational life.

[64] I Promise This One's Funny

Category: Religion and Philosophy

    So I was in the midst of a heretical stint when I decided to organize my thoughts. First on my adventure was a collection of videos entitled "Why do people laugh at creationists." The link can be found Here where all the complicated answers from the scientifically trained are expounded upon. I found this particularly awesome because it included some characters I've wasted frustration towards in the past who've become more than apt in their guilt trip and disaster scenario conversion videos which do wonders when you appeal to the uneducated.

    Next, I got my doses of Pat Condell and Penn and Teller who in their stark and defiant manners elaborated the ridiculousness of a potential Mormon(when right clicking to spell check de-capitalized Mormon is it any coincidence that my only other choice was moron?) president and the failing nature of, which I recently learned to be a Christian institution, Alcoholics Anonymous. All I can feel the more and more I watch these things is a sense of shame for how childish and primordial people act. That smile, that arrogant I'm going to pat you on the head smile, is so loaded with childhood innocence that just doesn't look right when it's on a 50 year old pastor.  Perfect example would be Kent Hovid who was a centerpiece in the clips used to tear through the creationist crap in the link above.

    I also stumbled upon, this "Skeptical Christian" webpage where some obvious fence sitter tries to portray this level head, but still demonstrate how one can rationalize their faith. A passage in a review of Breaking the Spell that struck me was this:

"There is no reason for Christians to worry about theories which naturalistically explain the tendency for people to be religious. There are several reasons for this, not least of which is the fact that providing explanations of the origin of beliefs are not grounds for dismissing the belief. To make such a dismissal would be to commit the genetic fallacy. The rationality of any given belief must be analyzed on its own merits."

    Don't stir in your seats just yet Christian brethren, no matter how much they tell us why holding on to explanations helpful to cavemen are no longer helpful, we are still allowed to call it true if we want. Our book, our rules. What a reassuring and very telling side of the "logic" that goes into being impartial and understanding the significance of evidence.  If anyone reads my stuff and thinks me "informed" or "persuasive" I pass along any credit to the authors and activists. Ah, but don't let me shed any less light on the Christian folk themselves who do more damage in their own struggle attempting to twist language, than I could ever hope to do in a blog.

    Let's take a moment to slow things down and catch our breath. Does your religion ever degrade you? No, I don't mean that your pastor calls you a pussy. I mean, does it ever call you nothing, sinner, not worthy of the grace of god, unable to make decisions, and simply a flailing fish struggling for air? If so, how the hell do you build such a sense of self-esteem and self worth? This is one of the many things that will never cease to confuse me. I have a friend who constantly reminds me that "the devil," the you-know-who of super-demon-beast-super-powers, can make you think such terrible things that you might want to kill yourself.  Now my own speculation about where my friend's mind has been in the past aside, I ask what idea has lead to more people killing themselves than any other? If you guessed the love of god your mostly right.  Of course other social, sociological, and mental factors play into it, but when you're about to meet your maker, who in their right mind wouldn't want to die as soon as possible? Especially in the case of Islamic martyrdom where you get to bring your family along to meet your 70 sum new wives.
   
    I keep harping on it and nobody seems to agree with me. YOU make YOUR decisions. That's it. Penn and Teller keep reaffirming why they are in the league of my heroes for explaining this fact so clearly and bluntly every time they bring up religion. When is it going to sink in and why hasn't it gotten there so far? Does that old friend fear come back when you think to yourself "holy shit, I actually do have the choice when it comes to killing myself, or being happy, or even thinking about both while feeding ketchup to the dog!" A little too much freedom? I have a solution, bring real logic and truth to your life, the decisions will get smaller, simpler, and get you farther than "god did it, the devil "while technically unable to physically manifest himself and make you do something" is "portraying negative thoughts that disable me from having the life that only god can provide" and "will be kept at bay with my unshakeable, unquestionable FAITH, power word, that the poor disenfranchised "rest" will only have to dream about, but don't worry I'll still pray for them when I forget about praying for my own life's problems because I can't pray for too long, I have to get up early in the morning to go pretend like I'm still part of the real world."

    That last bit was a tip of the hat to this, I'll call her little girl, who left me this at the end of our facebook chat ensuing after a barrage of "you just don't get it, I'm here to help" type messages from her.

"yeah well i aint got time for this shit okay you said you didnt want to talk me me so shut the fuck up okay all of your morals are screwed up i tried to help you but you dont listen so guess what burn in hell bitch and ur all wrong about everything youve said and you know what i give up on you"

Always refreshing to see the teachings of Christ flow through the words of his disciples.

[60] The Gates Of Hell

The Gates of Hell

D'Souza just can't get over himself can he? In a closing remark with his debate with Dan Dennett, D'Souza states that its god respecting your denial of him and allowing you to enter hell. Ummm can no one see where this is slightly skewed reasoning? Aside from this being based from completely subjective Christian logic, when has anyone made a choice to not believe in something and then be punished accordingly by rules which can't be agreed upon? When you made up your mind that Santa didn't exist, did your parents slap you around a bit because keeping the dream will make you behave a little better around the holidays?

Dinesh speaks to those who want a sermon. It can be loud, it can drift from here and there, take in parts of this and that, dosn't actually have to be coherent but by golly he said it with such passion and went to school for this stuff, how could he be wrong? Over and over and over, hell one more over and over he comes to the table with "We have NATURAL LAWS and five senses that restrict our information, restrict our understanding." IN THE NEXT SENTENCE he says, a belief in god (a being outside of nature) is the MOST PLAUSIBLE and, according to Occam's Razor, most likely considered correct for its simplicity. Hold on one second there Dinesh 'ol boy I think you just shot yourself in the head and then thought to yourself, thank god I remembered to load this thing.

I like to keep the arguments for god removed from critism of the bible or a specific religion. As if it wasn't shaky enough ground to try and argue for a being you openly admit can't be percieved, you then try and drag those shattered remains of an arguement over magnificent claims about human life and the world. This is why I suggest to anyone who sincerely wants to put their effort into refuting a Christian to first, give up, and second attack the bible. No, don't set it on fire or throw it away, quote its passages, question the "context" that people try to throw at you, falsify its claims.

"Christianity" as I've said in the past has taken on so much more weight than mere belief in a book and the necessity of good and bad, for most educated people of the world. What used to be a shield for becoming frustrated or depressed about our situation has taken on the will to find any topic it can, lay an egg in it, and then have it reburst onto the scene like Alien. Easy example, non-believing Einstein who could've stood to re-word some things more carefully is quoted over and over and over by Dinesh in a mere charicature of the true meaning of his theories. Don't try to downplay Christianity because it is literally these things:

How people relate to their closest friends.
What people call love.
Where they find mental peace and understanding.
How they can find truth amidst their sometimes perfectly chaotic existances.
Moral
Purpose

The list goes on for however many interpretations that exist. Whether people want to say, no Christianity is X and god is Y, I think this is a lie when how they convey their faith comes across to me. For whatever reason people can't, or sincerely don't want, to disassociate the choice of viewing things that way, from the idea that they are divinely mandated.

Christianity aside, Dinesh goes for atheism. For the umpteeth time atheism is the LACK of belief, not something you can do an action in the name of, another thing Dinesh so ignorantly says you can do, over and over and over again. I've read Neitzshe and understand evolution and its not my "extreme Darwinism" and feindish lack of belief that would motivate publically unacceptable behavior. To keep hearing these things tied together is becoming more than annoying. No one has, nor ever will, wave the invisible flag of the Fairies after conquering a land that was mandated to them by the head invisible fairy.

I know that people are capable of keeping the bible in whatever context they want in their own minds. I keep hearing "read the bible for yourself" as the advice to my critisms. "keep things in context." My short answer to this is, read the other holy books, learn of the other religions, keep them in context, then tell me every single reason why you don't believe in them. When your list is compiled put "reasons why I don't believe you" and resubmit it to yourself. My frustration comes from people who try to disassociate themselves from the real world and tie all their problems into dogmatic belief. All I'm trying to say is that we're not so different, you and I, and if we could have a conversation where god remained in the realms outside of perception, you'd see why our same questions, confusions, and hardships are what really need to be focued on, and by throwing your arms in the air and proclaiming god, the only thing your "helping" is yourself.

[107] Blame It On The Rain

Monday, July 14, 2008 at 8:38am

I was writing a nice and to the point "initial thought" piece on the many videos and articles I've read tonight, but one click makes it all go away when you’re stupid and write online. Because I am determined to put something out and don't really care if things are disjointed at this point, here's take two.

What usually strikes me when I'm watching a documentary or interview is that one key phrase or comment that completely paints the person their true color. Some of those lines tonight have included, "We need to vote our conscience," "country's Christian foundation," "don't murder your baby," and "Jesus for president." Immediately I'm concerned with the voting from out conscience because you would hope people would vote on issues or policies that coincide with their best interests. When Bush has a "Jesus feeling" about helping the poor, but his policies are going to empower the rich, its pretty stupid to say your gonna vote because you feel you agree with his feelings.

Moving on to the country's alleged Christian foundation I can't help but feel a pain about how little people research before they make comments into microphones. I don't expect everyone to read everything about the founding fathers. I do expect them to at least check their source for where they got that comment. You didn't hear things like that until the agenda to distort facts was taken up. When your using a new cliche, take the ten seconds to google where it came from.

"Don't murder your baby," the woman activist cries in front of the abortion clinic. The people here and now who are starving and desolate don't matter. Your socio-economic and health issues don't matter. Her ignorance of the anatomy regarding fetuses doesn't matter. As long as she can remain happy as a clam with her poster and loudspeaker, all is right with the world.

Now while we all want Jesus for president, we still realize he's stuck in an everlasting battle with the devil, Zeus, and Amon-Ra and can't bother with us. These new age hippies with their drums and ranting about how much more needs to be done regardless of political party are useless. You'd think with a room full of hyped up drum bangers you might march into the world and do more than rally. Every hour that goes by filling the air with how much you love Jesus is another hour the people you want to help are dying. Good job, fuckheads.

A note on church incentives. This is an idea that really kills me. It isn't enough to come for the salvation of Jesus, obviously, because churches keep going to great lengths to entice people to come. One in particular had the grand prize of an $800 automatic weapon give-away. Who were they targeting no less? Teenagers! Nothing says I love Jesus like automatic weapons. Then you have those churches centered around some type of sporting even like rodeo or wrestling. Yaaaa, all those kids are there to see Juggernaut Judas get torn apart by the Baptist Batista, not to save their immortal souls.

This all speaks to another comment that is actually true and worthy of remembering. "Religion is big business" with some congregations pulling in as much as 700 million in like a year. Maybe you have "good"(ha) reason for going to church, but don't forget for a second that it ain't exactly the welfare checks and strong spirits that keep those pastors and priests motivated.

A recurring pattern in people who discuss what they don't like about how others are practicing their faith keeps popping up. Some old lady will start of "I fully believe in miracles....but those loonies slapping each other in the head to cure cancer are just wrong." Perhaps you'll get some moderately religious person on camera who can say "I believe in the power and mercy of the Lord.....I'm so sad my son just got hit by a train." How can people say that faith doesn't hurt anybody? This is the point when someone's beliefs about miracles or god keep them complacent about what happens in their lives. Why is it wrong to explain to the woman who believes in miracles that that kind of thinking is the same as that which drives those loonies to get smacked in the head? When grieving mothers just "give it up to god" do you think they are as well apt to learn from why it happened? Do you think they are focusing on how to change something so that it doesn't happen again? Something tells me the deceased usually just get the honor of being mentioned at prayer before family dinners.

Okay, well I'm done. If I ever get the motivation to provide all those links again or start my series, you'll be the first to know. The bulk of my comments were going to be about the first two pages from atheistmedia.blogspot.com if you cared to look around. In particular It is probably best you just watch everything and think for yourself anyway.

2 comments

Cara Zimmerman (Chicago, IL) wroteat 7:40pm on July 15th, 2008 Nick, when Christians "give it to God" and don't do anything about it, yeah that's stupid. But not everyone is like that. When we say "I'm just going to give it all to God", it's not us saying that we're not going to try to do anything about it on our own. What we're saying is, we realize that everything is ultimately in God's control. I was actually talking to one of my friends about this. He was saying something along the lines of "If God will provide, then why do I need to try to get a good paying job?" That's just stupid thinking right there. God does not CONTROL what we do. We have our own free will and our own mind to think. We don't expect God to just make a million bucks magically appear because he is "providing" for us. We have do DO something, not just sit around waiting on God. But we do know that yes, God will provide for us when we are in need. Report - Delete

Nick P. wroteat 8:21pm on July 15th, 2008 This line of thinking still doesn't make any sense. What's the point of attributing anything to to a god if you already understand it takes your own action and effort to fix things. If god helped people in need I can point to a few disasters in the last ten years. Also, again I have to ask what the point of prayer is if people aren't looking to have god take control and arrange the universe to play to their selfish desires.

[36] Microscope Effect

Do you know why I hate to argue? I'll tell you. When I argue I go after people's convictions by using facts about the known world and instances throughout world and personal history of basic human tendency and interaction. When people fight back they pull a maneuver called "pulling the God card." Whenever I ask a question that can't instantly be refuted by the bible God's name gets thrown into the rebuttal. They try to project my question onto their faith. Tempers may flare and random "what if's" get thrown into the equation and by the time we reach any sort of end, any intellectual stance that could've been taken has been obliterated. This again, only tells me you're not secure in your answer and therefore can't be secure in your faith. I keep saying it over and over.

I do not care in the slightest what you believe in. Your faith is justified by the same reasons mine is. I will never try to disprove your God or your beliefs as they are just as valid and significant as mine.

Unfortunately, people believe that having faith in their opinion allows that opinion more truth than it holds. Example. George Bush is the greatest thing to happen to the country. You can believe this with all the not-so-justified faith in the world. That doesn't mean it isn't a dumbass opinion.

The difference in beliefs is what you know about them. Give me a room of Christians and lets see how many of them think pagans were anything but sexual heathens, if they knew what a pagan was at all. Try to make someone believe the bible isn't infallible when it's the "inspired word of a God" that for whatever reason he allowed to get polluted by people who copied the text incorrectly and added things to back their ideals. Bring up the names Dionysus and Osyrus who laid claim to stories of a virgin birth, resurrection, miracles, and ascending to heaven long before the name Jesus was uttered. You are allowed the knowledge of evidence supported history to understand people just as quickly as you can assert something was divine. Is your version of God and a plan going to be justified denying the world of information?

Its important to know how our version of Christianity came to be. Its one thing to believe in the "original" inspired word of God. I can't argue against it, you can't factually argue any more for it. Unfortunately we do not have this original text. It is lost in the seas of time and may or may not be found. Since people love to pretend they know so many things about God I want to ask those people a question.

If the bible is the infallible inspired word of God and its meant to help guide people down the road to salvation why didn't God take any steps in the preservation of such important text?

A guess. He didn't inspire it. He didn't want to be associated with the Inquisition, Crusades, and Holocaust. He actually understands people cannot literally comprehend infinite love, infinite time, and infinite understanding and forgiveness by simply hearing and reading about them.

Again, INTERPRETATION: the mental representation of the meaning or significance of something. If that isn't simple enough then summed up….Your version of ANYTHING. For an interpretation to be right or wrong it can only be assumed. Taking historical evidence to back up the claim is smart, but it does not take away from the nature of interpretation. I find it coincidental that some passages of the bible, if not many, I can twist and "interpret" to fit in with my ideology without even having to think too hard about them. Anyone wonder why? Humans by nature will look at anything and automatically try to make it make sense to themselves. When your raised your entire life, being "taught" how to think and react, of course when you read something your going to "interpret it correctly" by the standards of the people who taught you how to look at it.

Here's the dangerous part. When you deny any doubt you feel about a passage you read. When you blame being thoughtful on the devil. I want to lay out a concept for you. Humans are not born inherently evil. Discuss.

Any "evil" is justified when the responsibility is projected onto something else. When people also don't recognize that it was actually them feeling actual love and performing actual good deeds they start to kill their self esteem and self worth. YOU. God's greatest creation doesn't want to think or believe your capable of good deeds without a greater motivation. Adam and Eve are a perfect example of this projected responsibility. They fuck up and now its your fault. When such a story comes from the "infallible learning device" no wonder its easy to believe your this evil incarnate that needs to be saved from the ever present and inevitable death. No one asks why God allowed a devil serpent into the garden in the first place.

Blanket statement: Everyone has gut feelings. Here's the thing. There is a difference, a discernible difference, in having gut instinctual feelings and being emotional.

I follow my gut instinct. I don't justify it by anything other than my actions. You can believe it is wrong or misguided and that will never allow me the liberty to change it. I can try to believe it is wrong or misguided and that will never allow me the liberty to change it. This is why I consider myself significant. This is why I think any expression of love is significant. I can't come to conclusions about myself until I get over my initial emotions about myself and what I'm presented with. When you get automatically defensive or angry whenever the subject of religion comes up, you may as well not speak.

 It is perhaps a safe assumption that your reaction with "the truth" is not your expression of actual truth.

Blanket statement: People are entertained by the wrong, different, new, and taboo.

Any "good" person who laughs at someone getting hurt after falling down is the basic example of the claim. Of course, not everyone will agree with your position to laugh. Difference of opinion though does not discount the significance of the other peoples' perceptions. Let's take it a step further. People who get controlled by such character traits. With my view, people aren't inherently evil. No baby is born looking to kill someone or itself. Religion, particularly Christianity, provides a scapegoat. And it works both ways for people who want to think themselves selfish or self righteous. You can kill or be martyred in the name of God, and when someone is killed the killer was corrupted by the devil or it was God's plan. When you feel responsible for your hatred and actions you essentially guilt trip yourself into reform. The case doesn't always have to be that extreme. Staying in a bad "Christian" relationship for example…..ya never mind not even gonna start……..Side note. Mental disorders, which today is too broad a category to associate blame, are the exception to such an idea.

Another unfortunate: I think when you allow yourself to become exhausted by thinking about and hoping for that which you can't understand, perceive, and ultimately embrace it becomes a catalyst for sending you into a place of self destruction. Because once the promising potential is polluted, who can blame you?

Broken record effect: Taking it down and bringing it real personal. My gut feeling will always tell me more than what I put in these blogs. My gut feeling tells me that finding and making real connections with real people is the utmost important. My gut feeling cannot deny love and logic and the belief that they can coincide to be the most pure and telling of the nature from the God within. Acknowledging the immanent moment. If you can't use the God given brain to find real truth behind the reasons you say and think the things you do, to me, you lose, or at least hamper, your ability to perceive what "God" is telling you.