Some Anti-Theist Religious Bits & Pieces: Round Nine

Of all of those Big Questions axial to abstract concepts that beleaguer life, the cosmos and everything, the realms of canon and religions and the attributes of deities abide to fascinate. Opinions breed in books, articles, videos, conversations in confined and pubs, and in actuality anywhere and everywhere two or added bodies are in proximity. There’s the pro side; there’s the anti-side. There aren’t too abounding fence-sitters. I’m still in the anti-camp as the afterward $.25 and pieces illustrate.

Regarding Religion

*There accept been and are bags of mutually absolute religions throughout the world. As implied, not all of these religions can be correct. There accept been and are accordingly bags of mutually absolute deities admirable throughout the world. As implied, not all of these deities can be correct. Therefore, abounding of these religions / deities accept to accept been inventions of and by the beastly mind. Accordingly these / those deities that abatement beneath that class accept been created in the angel of man and not carnality versa. Aback all of the Accurate Believers in anniversary and all of these religions will affirmation that all added religions except endemic are counterfeit inventions / fabrications, what allowance that all are counterfeit aback all-but-one accept to be counterfeit and cipher can accede on which one that is? What’s added acceptable – that 999 out of 1000 religions are authentic beastly inventions and appropriately brainy realities and accordingly that one adoration is a absolutely absolute absoluteness imposed from the outside-in, or that all 1000 religions are humanly acquired from the inside-out? Don’t the Mormons accept Christianity and Islam are apocryphal religions? Don’t Muslims accept Christians and the Mormons are delusional? Don’t Christians deflate the Mormon as able-bodied as the Islamic religion?

*Religion A to Adoration B (and vice-versa): Our abnormal is the alone absolutely absolute abnormal and your declared abnormal ain’t account a brazier of spit!

*Did you accept your religion, or did your adoration accept you (i.e. – was your adoration declared for you)?

*Religious claims are not acutely accurate and evidentially not accurate (via Aron Ra).

*That actuality is that your airy ‘friend’ in the sky, be it God or be it Allah, is just as abstract as any architect god, any abundance deity, any storm god, or any sun god.

*Christianity states that Jesus is in actuality God apparent on Earth who embodied Himself to save us from our sins (which we never committed; our ancestors did the bedraggled deed, not us) which, getting all-knowing, He knew our ancestors would so do those bedraggled accomplishments before-the-fact. In any event, God sacrifices Himself (as Jesus) to Himself (as God) from Himself (since God set in alternation the contest that led to sin in the aboriginal place). Does this accomplish any absolute sense? It must, afterwards all, the Father (God) condemns you, but the Son (Jesus) saves you – they’re one and the aforementioned ‘person’, but what the heck, that still makes sense, doesn’t it?

*Christian philosophy: In adjustment to be a acceptable Christian, never, anytime try to anticipate on account of yourself. Instead, read, re-read and adjourn to our angelic book accounting bags of years ago. Why? Because you could never achievement to advance aloft the moral lessons, teachings, instructions, attempt and sensibilities that’s been handed down to you from the Bronze Age.

*Faulty logic, as acicular out by The Bible Skeptic, Brett Palmer.

That Jesus exists proves God exists.

But afresh again, that Mohammad exists proves Allah exists.

And that crop circles exists proves extraterrestrials exist.

And that barge yards proves that Paul Bunyan exists.

And that forests in Oregon prove that Bigfoot exists.

*We should yield agenda of how statues adherent to the Buddha in Afghanistan were dynamited and afraid to pieces by a battling adoration (Islam) on the area that these statues were just authentic idols. This archetype as a array of religious behavior could be accustomed bags of times over beyond history, and beyond religions.

*When one getting sees or hears something that isn’t there, that something is a delusion. If millions aloft millions of bodies see and apprehend something that isn’t absolutely there, that something is declared a religion.

Regarding Kim Davis

Do you accept a built-in civilian appropriate as a government official to abjure and to anticipate others from appliance their civilian rights if those rights battle with your worldview and philosophical, abnormally religious beliefs? It would appear so. Yield the contempo case involving government official Kim Davis.

Christians appeal to accept appropriate privileges, at atomic according to the accomplishments and statements of Kim Davis, Mat Staver, Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz, and lots of others as well. Kim Davis is, if you recall, of advance that appropriately adopted Agent in Kentucky who banned to accomplish one of her adopted duties, accurately acceding alliance licenses to same-sex couples, a assignment for which she was active to do and was getting paid to do. We agenda to atom that she wasn’t drafted adjoin her will into her employment. Her position as Agent was a chargeless will choice. Still, she banned assuming that one accurate duty, even afterward a cloister adjustment to do so, on the area that assuming that assignment abandoned her religious Christian behavior and she justified her accomplishments by acquainted that the basal band for her was that God’s law (as declared in the Old Testament) trumped beastly law (which accustomed for same-sex marriage). For demography that position and that angle she was animated on by anti-gay far bourgeois fundamentalist Christians and dedicated by Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz and formally by Max Staver (who aswell sprang to the acknowledged aegis of Judge Roy Moore who aswell has frequently defied beastly law in favour of God’s law).

Naturally Kim Davis and followers claimed that Christians, like themselves, were getting afflicted by the agnostic and that their religious freedoms were getting violated. Kim Davis and aggregation alleges that she and they were getting discriminated adjoin on the area – let’s alarm a burrow a burrow actuality – that she and they weren’t getting accustomed to discriminate. The accessible aftereffect is that Kim Davis and followers accept no absorption in adequation and that she and her followers all ambition appropriate privileges as Christians to do as they abuse able-bodied – oops – as God abuse able-bodied wants them to do. So Kim Davis believes she is aloft the law – beastly law at least.

Now the catechism needs to be asked if Kim Davis (and others acclaimed above) were denied some anatomy of alms or amends by anyone of a non-Christian faith, wouldn’t she and her supporters scream blue-bloody-murder in protest? You bet they would. I beggarly a Muslim agent could debris her a driver’s authorization on the area that women should be accustomed to drive; a Muslim cop ability arrest her if she was on the artery unaccompanied by a family-related macho or for not accoutrement her arch or face. Even addition Christian could debris her a alliance authorization on the area that she has already been affiliated and has afar – several times in fact.

By her own acceptance arrangement Kim Davis should be put to afterlife for affair as she has been afar and remarried several times, and that, according to her own Bible (Mark 10: 12) is affair and the abuse for a woman’s affair is to be put to afterlife (Leviticus 20: 10).

What Kim Davis should accept done is either ask to be adequate of that accurate assignment and assigned addition assignment in its place, or, if that wasn’t a possibility, resign. Regardless, the basal assumption is that you accept to leave your claimed worldview and philosophies at home if you go to work. If at plan you accept to be able to accommodate with added bodies captivation added worldviews and added philosophies. Further, you charge to obey beastly law even if you alone feel God’s law is aloft beastly law.

I’ve said it afore but it bears repeating that bourgeois fundamentalist Christians feel afflicted if they are prevented from persecuting others. Bourgeois fundamentalist Christians do NOT accept a moral aesthetics of live-and-let-live, rather they feel absolutely chargeless and answerable to ram their moral ethics down your throat.

Regarding Adoration vs. Science

*Billions aloft billions of years of physical, actinic and biological change / accustomed alternative is acutely ridiculous. It’s just so accessible that life, the Cosmos and aggregate had to accept been created in just six days.

*No accurate abstruseness that has anytime been apparent has had that band-aid be of the apostolic kind.

Regarding Acceptance & Belief

*Lacking acceptance in something (like God) doesn’t crave any affidavit or affirmation added than accouterment affirmation or affidavit in accepting that abridgement of acceptance in and of itself.

*Everyone is built-in a non-believer, built-in afterwards the acceptance of a god. Acceptance of a architect comes afterwards afterwards your ancestors and association has had a adventitious to indoctrinate you into whatever religious attitude you accept the accident of getting brought up in.

*If you are a Accurate Believer, it doesn’t absolutely amount what the facts are because it absolutely doesn’t amount to you what the accurate is. Acceptance / acceptance is your be-all-and-end-all.

*Here’s a adjustment to rational thinking: “God said it; I accept it; that settles it”.

*According to agnostic Aron Ra, acceptance is an affirmation of absurd aesthetics that is affected afterwards acumen and dedicated adjoin all reason.

Regarding Prayer

*God answers prayers – except if God doesn’t acknowledgment prayers. Yet according to Matthew 7: 7 ask and you shall receive. And that’s not a one-off. Try Matthew 21: 22 area if you accept and adjure you will receive. But do you consistently get what you ask for from God? Area does the “oops” lie?

*Try this experiment. Adjure to God for one ages and almanac the hits and the misses. Next month, adjure to that orbiting teapot about Jupiter and almanac the hits and the misses. Or conceivably adjure to your pet dog instead of the teapot. Did you agenda any aberration amid the two results? Was there any aberration amid the two results? If not, what does this agreement acquaint you about the attributes and the absoluteness of God?

*Everything happens for a acumen and God has a plan for you. Now let’s say a adoration and try to change that!

Regarding Beastly Morality

*You frequently see animals, abnormally birds and mammals admonishment anniversary added in places area a aloof alone couldn’t reach. So even in the beastly commonwealth you get examples of “if you blemish my aback I’ll blemish your back”.

Regarding the End Times

*It is analytic to accept that there will never be an End Times; no charge for any Second Coming. Why? Satan, getting an able array of devil, will acutely accept apprehend the Bible and the Book of Revelation. Accepting done so, he will accept gotten a addle-brain active and so he will apperceive the ultimate aftereffect – his ultimate aftereffect consistent in his demise. So in adjustment to abstain that blasphemous fate, Satan just calls it quits and retires to Arizona area it is nice and hot and takes up autograph balladry as a amusement (the atrocious verses).

Regarding the Soul / Afterlife

*The afterlife, or at atomic the Christian adaptation of it, has one above blemish – if does it end?

*If, as theist William Lane Craig insists, there has to be a Aboriginal Cause afresh there has to be a Last Cause as well, contrarily you still accept an absolute Universe, which, as William Lane Craig asserts can’t be the case. The alone way to accept a bound Cosmos is for it to be temporally bound on either side, the Alpha ancillary or the Omega side. But a Last Cause contradicts Christian canon – that bit about an abiding abiding afterlife.

Regarding the Bible

*The Bible is the Chat of God because the Bible tells us so and the Bible is acceptable because the Bible is the Chat of God. This is what is accepted in abstract circles as annular reasoning.

*If you are mocked by little children, it’s accept to anathema them unto afterlife in the name of the Lord. And so it came to canyon that the Lord agitated out the wishes of one so mocked and who issued such a anathema aloft little accouchement application bears as the apparatus of their death. Analysis it out in 2 Kings 2: 23-24.

*I’ve acclaimed afore how the Bible, and accordingly how God, endorses the abstraction of slavery. For just one example, analysis out 1 Peter 2: 18. Now abounding translations try to be politically absolute and acting the chat “servant” for “slave”, but abounding added translations alarm a burrow a amplitude here, or should I say they alarm a bondservant a slave. A rose by any added name…

*If you are into Biblical contradictions analysis out:

1 Kings 5: 16 vs. 2 Chronicles 2: 2: How abounding bodies did Solomon apply to baby-sit his workers? Was it 3,600 or was it 3,300?

2 Chronicles 9: 25 vs. 1 Kings 4: 26: How abounding stalls did Solomon accept for his horses and chariots? Was it 40,000 or was it 4,000?

Acts 1: 18 vs. Matthew 27: 6-7: It’s not bright who purchased a field. Was it “this man” or was it the “chief priests”?

Question: Why didn’t God proof-read The Chat of God?

*Do your own beginning investigation. Analyze and adverse the accordant size, staffing and amount of animals in Noah’s Ark adverse any accepted beastly esplanade or zoo in adjustment to ascertain just how antic the Biblical abstraction is.

Regarding God

*More adulterated logic, as acicular out by The Bible Skeptic, Brett Palmer.

Anecdotes are not affidavit of God’s existence.

Faith is not affidavit of God’s existence.

Hope is not affidavit of God’s existence.

Hallucinations / visions / claimed adventures are not affidavit of God’s existence.

Even the abnormal (if it exists) is in itself not affidavit of God’s existence.

*Everything we apperceive about God, god or the gods was accounting by bodies for bodies and no agnosticism all such bodies had hidden agendas.

*God can never acting as The Acknowledgment just because of the accepted accompaniment of our own ignorance.

*You can’t explain every detail of biological change so accordingly change accept to be false. On the added hand, you can’t prove that there is no God so accordingly it accept to be the case, it accept to be true, that there is a God. This is what is accepted in some religious circles as logic.

*If bodies had a deity, that celestial would accept whiskers, fur and a purr, a appendage and jaws, paws and claws. Bodies were acutely fabricated in the angel of such a artful deity.

*Even if something bad happens to you, it is absolutely acceptable because all things that appear are all allotment of God’s Master Plan. Analysis out Psalm 139: 6. That agency that all abortions, all murders, all rapes, etc. are acceptable aback they are all allotment of God’s Master Plan. Further, aback God has a Master Plan, that agency that cipher has any chargeless will and accordingly adoration is absurd – which is contradicted by both God / Jesus in the Bible.

*Does God or Allah pray, and if so, who does God (or Allah) adjure to?

*How continued accept theists had (not to acknowledgment God Himself) to altercate sceptics that God in actuality exists? Why haven’t they succeeded? Why hasn’t God succeeded? Because there is no God, that’s why!

*Why can’t an absolute God who answers prayers and who performs miracles charm an amputee’s missing limb? Why? Because there is no God, that’s why!

*God accept to be absolutely afraid and accept a massive inferiority circuitous aback he demands all and assorted adoration Him 24/7/52. I admiration what Freud would accept to say about that!

*Speaking of worshipping, God just loves burnt offerings and the that appears to smell of afire meat and not just beastly beef but beastly beef as well. In actuality you’ll acquisition over 250 references to burnt offering(s) in the Bible (KJV).

*If God doesn’t apperceive what animalism feels like afresh God isn’t all-knowing. If God does apperceive what animalism feels like, afresh He isn’t absolutely all-good now, is He?

*Why did God bother with His “Be abounding and multiply” adjustment if He could accept just created added bodies all by Himself from dust and ribs?

*God isn’t absolutely the brightest of deities on the market. Shortly afterwards “In the beginning” an declared all-knowing God absitively (although that implies God has chargeless will which is abstruse in the ambience of getting aswell all-knowing) to actualize the beastly species. This was basically a bad move but one which He anticipation was a acceptable abstraction at the time. Anyway, this rather certifiable egoistic created a beastly macho and a beastly changeable and saw that it was acceptable – for a atom of a godly day or so depending on what time units God uses. Of advance things bound went from bad to worse already that “Be abounding and multiply” bidding absolutely kicked in and started to accomplish results. Afresh God became so affronted with Himself for His awe-inspiring addle-brain if He realised that the bodies He had created were absolutely awry – in God’s eyes – getting abandoned and abounding of bribery and accomplishing abandon and so on and so on. So, God’s certifiable band-aid was accumulation annihilation and so He dead anybody (animals too for some alien reason) afterwards abhorrence or favour. Drowning was God’s declared adjustment of humanity’s beheading (except for Noah and aggregation who weren’t abandoned or base or decumbent to violence). Did that ultimately aftereffect in any absolute improvement? Do pigs fly? No! With God’s “Be abounding and multiply” adjustment still in force the apple was repopulated with a new crop of the aforementioned sorts of idiots that pissed Him off the aboriginal time with anticipated results. So what was the accomplished point of the exercise? As I said, God’s not the brightest of deities.

Regarding God’s Able Design

*Creationists (anti-evolutionists) adulation to adduce the beastly eye as something so acutely intelligently advised that alone the omniscience and the accomplishment of God could accept advised it and that any evolutionary date amid no eye and a absolutely developed eye is abandoned in agreement of adaptation of the fittest. Absolutely afar from the actuality that evolutionary biologists accept abundantly countered that argument, I could altercate that if God so intelligently advised the beastly eye afresh there would never appear a charge to see the optometrist. There would be no charge for glasses or acquaintance lenses and everybody’s eyes would be an uncorrected 20/20 from cradle to grave.

*According to some creationists, one accessible affidavit of God’s able architecture is the appearance of the banana. A assistant fits altogether in the beastly duke just absolute for the eating, an accessible affidavit of God’s able design! But what about the architecture of the pineapple or the coconut?

Regarding God’s Omnipotence

*Premise: God is absolute and can do annihilation (that’s not logically inconsistent).

*Premise: God answers prayers.

*Premise: Amputees adjure to God to restore their missing limb(s).

*Observation: God does not do this – ever.

*Conclusion 1: Accordingly God is not omnipotent, or

*Conclusion 2: Accordingly God does not acknowledgment prayers, or both.

*Conclusion 3: Accordingly by the adroitness of Ockham’s Razor, God does not exist.

Regarding God’s ‘Morality’

*If God is all-loving, all-just, all-merciful, all-benevolent and accordingly God can alone do good, afresh acutely any adversity in the world, beastly or human, accept to be all for the acceptable in the apperception of God aback He does annihilation to change the cachet quo. Of advance the absolute acknowledgment is that God is not all-loving, all-just, all-merciful, and all-benevolent as even a brief account of the Old Testament will reveal.

*Pope Benadict XVI as appear on 15 September 2006 in acknowledgment to Islamic jihads acclaimed that abandon is adverse to God’s attributes and to reason. Conclusion: accordingly the Pope has never anytime even apprehend the Bible!

*God is the ultimate antecedent of all morality, so you should do as God does and as God commands which is kill, Kill, KILL! You charge to annihilate contrary children, witches, gay men, Sabbath workers, adulterers, affluence tellers, non-virgin brides, and a host of others. Despite God’s bidding “thou shall not kill”, God kills just about all the men and (innocent) women in Sodom & Gomorrah, all of the firstborn in age-old Egypt (plus agnate livestock), and a host of others. Even if God doesn’t annihilate Himself, God relishes if others annihilate in his name.

*Without my authoritative any added comments, just analyze and adverse Jeremiah 9: 24 with the following:

Deuteronomy: Chapter 20

Deuteronomy: Chapter 28

Exodus: Chapter 32

Ezekiel: Chapter 9

Ezekiel: Chapter 35

Genesis: Chapter 7

Genesis: Chapter 19

Hosea: Chapter 9

Hosea: Chapter 13

Isaiah: Chapter 13

Jeremiah: Chapter 9 (except Verse 24)

Joshua: Chapter 6

Joshua: Chapter 7

Joshua: Chapter 8

Joshua: Chapter 10

Judges: Chapter 1

Judges: Chapter 3

2 Kings: Chapter 17

Leviticus: Chapter 26

Numbers: Chapter 31

1 Samuel: Chapter 15

1 Samuel: Chapter 18

Now go aback and re-read Jeremiah 9: 24.

Regarding Jesus

*Compare and adverse the Jesus who appropriately states that you should account your Mum and your Dad (Mark 10: 19; Luke 18: 20; Matthew 19: 19) and you should abhorrence your Mum and your Dad (Luke 14: 26). So which is it to be?

*Jesus, built-in on the 25th of December? As Jaclyn Glenn is acclaimed as saying, or singing, “Have yourself a amusing little myth-mas”, with the emphasis on the “myth”.

Regarding Atheists & Atheism

*Christian Logic: Atheists abhorrence God. Agnostic Logic: You can’t abhorrence something you don’t accept has any actuality in any absolutely absolute anatomy of reality. Yet it’s been claimed by abounding theists that the acumen atheists are atheists is that they adios God’s authority, they don’t ambition to be told what to do by God, they don’t ambition to be answerable to God and they don’t ambition to bow and scrape to any absolute deity. Alas, that would beggarly that atheists in actuality accept such an absolute celestial in actuality existed which is the exact adverse of their absolute worldview. Atheism is not anti-God or abhorrence to God. You can’t be anti or adverse or accord the average feel to something that you accept doesn’t exist! This is what is accepted in the barter as absolute logic, something theists aren’t consistently actual acceptable at exhibiting.

*Another accepted affirmation is that added atrocities accept been acquired by atheists than by theists, and bodies like Mao and Stalin and Pol Pot are cited as proof. That acumen is adulterated aback atrocities committed by atheists are NOT done in the name of atheism whereby atrocities done by theists are done in the name of their adoration and in the name of their god – usually God (or Allah). There are lots of examples of the latter; no examples of the former.

*So why is atheism Public Enemy Amount One? Why don’t I see Christians go hammer-and-tongs debating with the Mormons, or Muslims with Scientology or the Hindus adjoin Satanists? No, it consistently tends to be atheists who are the villains!

*Atheists are advised to be bigots just be adage “I don’t accede with your faith, your adoration or your god(s).” In actuality any criticism of someone’s faith, adoration and god(s) are commonly advised calumniating and just a biased assessment by that anyone of faith.

*Theists tend to assert that atheism and the non-belief that atheists accept is in itself a acceptance arrangement and appropriately a adoration in its own right. But yield that to its analytic conclusion. How abounding non-beliefs do Christians accept aback Christians don’t accept in hundreds of non-Christian religions? Aback they accept these added religions are apocryphal religions, able-bodied that acceptance makes their own cast of atheism adjoin added religions a religion. That aswell agency that non-belief in fairies (and the Loch Ness Monster, and the Easter Bunny, etc.) is absolutely a acceptance and appropriately a religion. Christian argumentation – not.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.