The Bible I am working with is a New Living Translation "Live" Bible, geared toward teenagers and other people with no critical thinking skills. It is therefore interspersed with bizarre additions, such as little articles proclaiming the goodness and glory of God, crappy amateur photography with ambiguous names that are completely irrelevant to anything, and chunks of pages left blank and dubbed "creative space", as if having a little 2 by 3 square to doodle in is going to inspire great masterpieces or spiritual revelations. (Maybe it's for writing "Jesus loves me" surrounded by little hearts. I'm not going to pretend to fathom their minds.)
What I find most interesting about this, though, is their painful attempts to tie in the sordid, sickening stories of the Old Testament into the lovey-dovey stuff of the New Testament. For instance, there a little article titled "Jesus Sighting" in Deuteronomy, which discusses the story in which Jesus says that the most important commandment is to love God and have no other God before him:
"Here, God commands us to love him above all else. Jesus' answer gives us a glimpse into who he really is - no some score-keeping, rule-obsessed* deity ready to whack your hand with a ruler when you misbehave. Rather, Jesus shows us that behind all of these seemingly nit-picky laws in Deuteronomy is a loving God" (Baker et. al 183).
This saccharine little line runs completely opposite to the past seven chapters of Deuteronomy. Exactly adjacent to it is this:
Deuteronomy 7:2 - "When the Lord your God hands these nations [of Canaan] over to you and you conquer them, you must completely destroy them. Make no treaties with them and show them no mercy."
Did you even read this thing!? You're going to go on about a loving, ineffable, infallible God, directly across from a section in which he instructs the Israelites to pillage and burn and kill indiscriminately. Commit genocide, effectively. Are you paying attention at all?! Sure, it's great that Jesus is the picture of Aristotelian morality, but you're going to proclaim that on the same page where the Israelites kill thousands of people?! Are you awake in there? How did your copy editors not see this?
___
*Leviticus 10 - Nahab and Abihu, Aaron's sons, use the wrong kind of incense fire on the Tabernacle, and are summarily barbecued.
Numbers 15 - A man was gathering wood on the Sabbath, and so the community brings him before the Tabernacle and asks God what to do with him. God tells them to stone him to death. So they do.
Nope, not nit-picky at all! Ahahahaahah!
Showing posts with label blasphemy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blasphemy. Show all posts
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Bible Study: WHAT.
Numbers 16. Yahweh kills 14,950 people. Fourteen thousand, seven hundred he kills by plague, and two hundred fifty he kills by burning them alive. The only reason he doesn't kill all the Israelites is because Moses and Aaron do some timely groveling, and some magic stuff with incense.
I...I don't even...I just...
I...I don't even...I just...
Monday, December 17, 2012
Bible Study: Lord of Threats
Leviticus 26:14-46
Yahweh starts chapter twenty-six by saying how he looks favorably upon the Israelites and doesn't despise them and will help them in battle and bless them and all that jazz. I was impressed upon reading this, because normally Yahweh just talks about how he hates everyone.
One paragraph later, and he graphically details for seven paragraphs the punishment he'll rain down on them if they ever spite him. There's the Yahweh we know and love!
If the Israelites ever disobey him, Yahweh will cause:
-wasting diseases and burning fevers "that will cause your eyes to fail and your life to ebb away."
-enemies to eat your crops
-you to be ruled by those you hate
-you to run even when no one is chasing you
-your land to yield no crops or fruit
-wild animals to eat your children and livestock
-armies to attack you
-(more) plagues
-the destruction of your food supply "so that ten women will only need one oven to bake bread for their families."
-you to eat the flesh of your own sons and daughters.
-your lifeless bodies to be placed on top of your lifeless idols
-you to become scattered through all nations
-paranoia
-your children to be punished for your crimes as well! How sweet. I guess this is assuming your children weren't all eaten by wild animals or yourself?
Granted, he does finish up this diatribe with a little addendum that even while viciously torturing his people, he will not utterly reject or despise them because of that old covenant thing. Of course, I imagine his people might not find that ridiculously comforting while their eyes are falling out and they're starving to death.
Yahweh starts chapter twenty-six by saying how he looks favorably upon the Israelites and doesn't despise them and will help them in battle and bless them and all that jazz. I was impressed upon reading this, because normally Yahweh just talks about how he hates everyone.
One paragraph later, and he graphically details for seven paragraphs the punishment he'll rain down on them if they ever spite him. There's the Yahweh we know and love!
If the Israelites ever disobey him, Yahweh will cause:
-wasting diseases and burning fevers "that will cause your eyes to fail and your life to ebb away."
-enemies to eat your crops
-you to be ruled by those you hate
-you to run even when no one is chasing you
-your land to yield no crops or fruit
-wild animals to eat your children and livestock
-armies to attack you
-(more) plagues
-the destruction of your food supply "so that ten women will only need one oven to bake bread for their families."
-you to eat the flesh of your own sons and daughters.
-your lifeless bodies to be placed on top of your lifeless idols
-you to become scattered through all nations
-paranoia
-your children to be punished for your crimes as well! How sweet. I guess this is assuming your children weren't all eaten by wild animals or yourself?
Granted, he does finish up this diatribe with a little addendum that even while viciously torturing his people, he will not utterly reject or despise them because of that old covenant thing. Of course, I imagine his people might not find that ridiculously comforting while their eyes are falling out and they're starving to death.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Bible Study: The Eleventh and Twelfth Commandments
Fun fact: Did you know that in the Bible, the Ten Commandments are never explicitly stated? When Yahweh talks to Moses on Sinai in the desert, he doesn't give him ten discrete commands. He actually gives him a significantly longer list of laws, and the orders we recognize as the Ten Commandments are just mixed in there, with no special prefix. Therefore, it is apparent that when the Ten Commandments list was being created, someone just went through Exodus and decided that they liked these certain laws better than the other ones, completely disregarding the fact that Yahweh presented them all in equal importance.
We call this cherry-picking, kids.
Anyway, I've decided we need to right this historical wrong. Humans shouldn't just be picking what parts of the Word of God they like and which they don't! I propose we add an additional two commandments to the Ten, taken exactly from Scripture Itself. They are:
11. Thou shalt not eat yeast.
Yahweh hates yeast. I'm keeping a running tally, and so far we have about ten instances in which he expressly forbids the use of yeast, punishable by death. Therefore, we should all keep him happy by only eating pita bread.
12. Thou shalt not boil a baby goat in it's mother's milk.
Apparently this was a real problem in its day. It may seem a little archaic, but it's not like there aren't already archaic things in the Ten Commandments. For instance, keeping holy the Sabbath, or not coveting wives (wives are not possessions!), or keeping only one god. What, are you calling Hindus archaic? Way to go. That's so xenophobic.
I now thoroughly expect these to be posted wherever the Ten (now Twelve) Commandments are listed. You know, in churches, in public schools, in courthouses, in municipal buildings... You know.
Of course, if we're going to start taking the Bible literally, we're also going to have to stone everyone to death and start sacrificing animals.
We call this cherry-picking, kids.
Anyway, I've decided we need to right this historical wrong. Humans shouldn't just be picking what parts of the Word of God they like and which they don't! I propose we add an additional two commandments to the Ten, taken exactly from Scripture Itself. They are:
11. Thou shalt not eat yeast.
Yahweh hates yeast. I'm keeping a running tally, and so far we have about ten instances in which he expressly forbids the use of yeast, punishable by death. Therefore, we should all keep him happy by only eating pita bread.
12. Thou shalt not boil a baby goat in it's mother's milk.
Apparently this was a real problem in its day. It may seem a little archaic, but it's not like there aren't already archaic things in the Ten Commandments. For instance, keeping holy the Sabbath, or not coveting wives (wives are not possessions!), or keeping only one god. What, are you calling Hindus archaic? Way to go. That's so xenophobic.
I now thoroughly expect these to be posted wherever the Ten (now Twelve) Commandments are listed. You know, in churches, in public schools, in courthouses, in municipal buildings... You know.
Of course, if we're going to start taking the Bible literally, we're also going to have to stone everyone to death and start sacrificing animals.
Monday, July 16, 2012
Bible Study: Bacon
So, lately I've been reading the Bible. I won't bore you with the details of why precisely I'm reading the Bible, but let it suffice to say it's not because I think it's fascinating literature. Well, it's certainly fascinating, sort of in the same way that Twilight is fascinating, or a horrible train wreck is fascinating, but what I'm saying is, the "Good Book" is possibly the worst misnomer since the history of nomenclature.
Anyway, I've bludgeoned my way through Genesis and Exodus, and now I'm partway through Leviticus, which is a book that mostly contains chapters and chapters of outdated laws that repeat themselves a lot. For instance, I discovered that Yahweh really hates yeast. And animals. And people. But mostly yeast. I've also learned that in ancient Mesopotamia, you can get excommunicated from the Israelite community for touching a dead animal, which makes me wonder how they sacrificed all the animals they spent 6 chapters detailing precisely how to kill in order to make Yahweh happy.
I could really go on all day about all the things I've found in Leviticus, but the reason I'm writing this today is that I have specifically one very exciting thing I wanted to share with you. One very special law that was repeated 3 times as of chapter 7, is that you are not allowed to eat the fat of an animal. If you do, you will be excommunicated from the community. (You can get excommunicated for a lot of things, by the way). This means, as I immediately realized, that eating bacon is akin to blasphemy.
Catch that? Bacon is blasphemy. BACON IS BLASPHEMY. Every time you eat bacon, YOU ARE COMMITTING A DEADLY SIN.
So, basically...bacon's better than ever now, am I right?
Anyway, I've bludgeoned my way through Genesis and Exodus, and now I'm partway through Leviticus, which is a book that mostly contains chapters and chapters of outdated laws that repeat themselves a lot. For instance, I discovered that Yahweh really hates yeast. And animals. And people. But mostly yeast. I've also learned that in ancient Mesopotamia, you can get excommunicated from the Israelite community for touching a dead animal, which makes me wonder how they sacrificed all the animals they spent 6 chapters detailing precisely how to kill in order to make Yahweh happy.
I could really go on all day about all the things I've found in Leviticus, but the reason I'm writing this today is that I have specifically one very exciting thing I wanted to share with you. One very special law that was repeated 3 times as of chapter 7, is that you are not allowed to eat the fat of an animal. If you do, you will be excommunicated from the community. (You can get excommunicated for a lot of things, by the way). This means, as I immediately realized, that eating bacon is akin to blasphemy.
Catch that? Bacon is blasphemy. BACON IS BLASPHEMY. Every time you eat bacon, YOU ARE COMMITTING A DEADLY SIN.
So, basically...bacon's better than ever now, am I right?
 |
| Mmm... Tasty, atheroschlerosis-causing blasphemy. |
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Live Blogging Bones Episode "Prisoner in the Pipes"
This post will probably be interesting to no one but me, unless you watch the crime drama Bones. This is about an episode that came out four months ago, and was also written four months ago...But I have nothing else to post right now, so here you go.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Guys. I am in distress. Bones, which used to be a favorite show of mine, is becoming crummy in its later seasons. I know, this is the usual trend, but this is awful. Just awful.
Daisy isn't respecting Sweet's boundaries both professionally and in their relationship. (I have never really like Daisy, though, so it isn't so distressing that she's being an idiot).
Booth asks Brennan (Bones) to compromise about having her baby in a hospital. Brennan makes the perfectly rational decision to have a home birth, as she is a low-risk pregnancy and the environment is more sterile. However, because Booth refuses to concede on his desire for a hospital birth, she decides to compromise on something that I think is intellectually troubling and ethically questionable. Instead of agreeing to have the baby in a hospital, like Booth wants, Bones instead compromises on something else. She agrees to have their daughter baptized. Bones is an atheist, by the way, and Booth is Catholic. While I could see conceding to do this in the name of familial harmony, Bones proceeds to explain that "mythology is an excellent way to make sense of the world."
AGHHHH. While I am pleased that she acknowledged that his faith is mythology, look at what she's saying. Mythology is not an excellent way to make sense of the world. It is inherently false and oftentimes screwed up. Rationalism is a perfectly functional and, well, reasonable way to make sense of the world. Accepting the world as it is instead of convincing yourself that it is things that it is not, is an excellent way to make sense of the world. Instead of denying reality, rationalism states that one should embrace it and not comfort oneself with falsehoods.
Furthermore, I am trying to interpret - Is Bones saying she's going to let her daughter grow up Catholic? Bones should know better than most people, as an anthropologist, that when one is indoctrinated into belief systems in impressionable childhood years, one generally retains those belief systems for one's entire life. Surely Bones, as an atheist, values reality? So why is she willing to let her daughter grow up in an oppressively patriarchal belief system that is based on an inherently false premise? Furthermore, even if the child does escape her societal brainwashing, there is a distinct possibility for emotional trauma, clashes with her father, or at the very least a period of existential angst (which isn't much fun, really). Bones is an intelligent woman, and though she may be removed from the workings of human minds, she can surely figure out the above?
Booth is overprotective and it is irritating. Bones is an extremely independent woman, and he's ruining this. He's making any excuse to protect her from going out into the field. Cut it out. Cut it out right now. How many times does Bones have to prove that she's extremely capable before you stop shielding her?
What? The victim was dissolved in acetic acid? ...That's vinegar. Wait, googling. ...Okay, so vinegar is dilute acetic acid. And apparently concentrated acetic acid is corrosive...Really, though, how long is it going to take to dissolve someone in an acid with a pH of ~5? The stomach is around pH 2, and even a vat of hydrochloric acid is going to take a few hours at least to get someone down to a size necessary to shove down a drain. In a prison, where is someone going to find the time to dissolve someone in this manner? I feel that someone will notice this guy dissolving in a vat in the kitchen. This seems highly improbable.
Good job, Bones. You managed to start a full-on prison riot. Nice going.
What. I hate everything. I - This is the worst thing. Ever. I hate everything.
Bones is having her baby in a barn. After being turned away from the inn. Because there wasn't enough room. AH. What the hell is with the blatant Jesus symbolism?! And the only other person present is her boyfriend, who is not medically trained. Neither of them are medically trained. And Bones' big concern was that having a baby in the hospital was not sanitary. A BARN IS NOT BETTER THAN A HOSPITAL. THERE WAS A HOSPITAL 10! MINUTES! DOWN! THE! ROAD! AHGH! This is the stupidest metaphor ever. And believe me, Bones is not a virgin. Are they trying to make her into some kind of Mary figure? This. is. idiotic.
O HOLY CATS THEY NAMED HER DAUGHTER CHRISTINE. CHRISTINE. CAN YOU GET ANY MORE BLOODY BLATANT!? CAN YOU GET MORE BLATANT OR OBVIOUS?! WHY NOT JUST NAME HER JESUSINA FOR HELL'S SAKE AND GET IT OVER WITH!
"Why can't you just admit there's a mystery to life, Bones?" Shut up, Booth. Why can't you just admit that life can be explained by physical and chemical processes, Booth? Do you need to take an introductory level biology course or something? For hell's sake! You're foisting all this theology on Bones. It makes me think the writers never intended for Bones to be a rational character at all, but merely a Straw Vulcan. "Oh, the lonely, hyperrationalist atheist meets a religious man and realizes that magic and God and voodoo are all real and special and a vital part of a happy life and/or a healthy diet. Because obviously it's impossible to be a good, happy person without an imaginary best friend or invisible sky fairy that watches everything you do."
What. The. Hell.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Guys. I am in distress. Bones, which used to be a favorite show of mine, is becoming crummy in its later seasons. I know, this is the usual trend, but this is awful. Just awful.
Daisy isn't respecting Sweet's boundaries both professionally and in their relationship. (I have never really like Daisy, though, so it isn't so distressing that she's being an idiot).
Booth asks Brennan (Bones) to compromise about having her baby in a hospital. Brennan makes the perfectly rational decision to have a home birth, as she is a low-risk pregnancy and the environment is more sterile. However, because Booth refuses to concede on his desire for a hospital birth, she decides to compromise on something that I think is intellectually troubling and ethically questionable. Instead of agreeing to have the baby in a hospital, like Booth wants, Bones instead compromises on something else. She agrees to have their daughter baptized. Bones is an atheist, by the way, and Booth is Catholic. While I could see conceding to do this in the name of familial harmony, Bones proceeds to explain that "mythology is an excellent way to make sense of the world."
AGHHHH. While I am pleased that she acknowledged that his faith is mythology, look at what she's saying. Mythology is not an excellent way to make sense of the world. It is inherently false and oftentimes screwed up. Rationalism is a perfectly functional and, well, reasonable way to make sense of the world. Accepting the world as it is instead of convincing yourself that it is things that it is not, is an excellent way to make sense of the world. Instead of denying reality, rationalism states that one should embrace it and not comfort oneself with falsehoods.
Furthermore, I am trying to interpret - Is Bones saying she's going to let her daughter grow up Catholic? Bones should know better than most people, as an anthropologist, that when one is indoctrinated into belief systems in impressionable childhood years, one generally retains those belief systems for one's entire life. Surely Bones, as an atheist, values reality? So why is she willing to let her daughter grow up in an oppressively patriarchal belief system that is based on an inherently false premise? Furthermore, even if the child does escape her societal brainwashing, there is a distinct possibility for emotional trauma, clashes with her father, or at the very least a period of existential angst (which isn't much fun, really). Bones is an intelligent woman, and though she may be removed from the workings of human minds, she can surely figure out the above?
Booth is overprotective and it is irritating. Bones is an extremely independent woman, and he's ruining this. He's making any excuse to protect her from going out into the field. Cut it out. Cut it out right now. How many times does Bones have to prove that she's extremely capable before you stop shielding her?
What? The victim was dissolved in acetic acid? ...That's vinegar. Wait, googling. ...Okay, so vinegar is dilute acetic acid. And apparently concentrated acetic acid is corrosive...Really, though, how long is it going to take to dissolve someone in an acid with a pH of ~5? The stomach is around pH 2, and even a vat of hydrochloric acid is going to take a few hours at least to get someone down to a size necessary to shove down a drain. In a prison, where is someone going to find the time to dissolve someone in this manner? I feel that someone will notice this guy dissolving in a vat in the kitchen. This seems highly improbable.
Good job, Bones. You managed to start a full-on prison riot. Nice going.
What. I hate everything. I - This is the worst thing. Ever. I hate everything.
Bones is having her baby in a barn. After being turned away from the inn. Because there wasn't enough room. AH. What the hell is with the blatant Jesus symbolism?! And the only other person present is her boyfriend, who is not medically trained. Neither of them are medically trained. And Bones' big concern was that having a baby in the hospital was not sanitary. A BARN IS NOT BETTER THAN A HOSPITAL. THERE WAS A HOSPITAL 10! MINUTES! DOWN! THE! ROAD! AHGH! This is the stupidest metaphor ever. And believe me, Bones is not a virgin. Are they trying to make her into some kind of Mary figure? This. is. idiotic.
O HOLY CATS THEY NAMED HER DAUGHTER CHRISTINE. CHRISTINE. CAN YOU GET ANY MORE BLOODY BLATANT!? CAN YOU GET MORE BLATANT OR OBVIOUS?! WHY NOT JUST NAME HER JESUSINA FOR HELL'S SAKE AND GET IT OVER WITH!
"Why can't you just admit there's a mystery to life, Bones?" Shut up, Booth. Why can't you just admit that life can be explained by physical and chemical processes, Booth? Do you need to take an introductory level biology course or something? For hell's sake! You're foisting all this theology on Bones. It makes me think the writers never intended for Bones to be a rational character at all, but merely a Straw Vulcan. "Oh, the lonely, hyperrationalist atheist meets a religious man and realizes that magic and God and voodoo are all real and special and a vital part of a happy life and/or a healthy diet. Because obviously it's impossible to be a good, happy person without an imaginary best friend or invisible sky fairy that watches everything you do."
What. The. Hell.
Friday, June 8, 2012
God v. Cthulhu
I made a chart that compares God to Cthulhu, and my analysis concludes that they are quite similar.
Cthulhu:
-big scary octopus
-impregnates his daughter with himself
-eats people
God:
-big scary amorphous thing
-impregnates a random virgin with himself
-people eat him
Both:
-super powerful
-has creepy followers
-capable of destroying the world
-is reincarnated as himself
-speaks cryptically
-likes fish
Of course, if I were going to make this into a contest, which I am because I like arbitrary contests where I'm the judge, then I'd have to say Cthulhu wins because he's a giant f***ing octopus and God's just this amorphous bearded guy in the sky. Because, seriously, think about it. Octopi always win.
Cthulhu:
-big scary octopus
-impregnates his daughter with himself
-eats people
God:
-big scary amorphous thing
-impregnates a random virgin with himself
-people eat him
Both:
-super powerful
-has creepy followers
-capable of destroying the world
-is reincarnated as himself
-speaks cryptically
-likes fish
Of course, if I were going to make this into a contest, which I am because I like arbitrary contests where I'm the judge, then I'd have to say Cthulhu wins because he's a giant f***ing octopus and God's just this amorphous bearded guy in the sky. Because, seriously, think about it. Octopi always win.
Sunday, April 8, 2012
Easter
Ah, Easter. I love holidays, even if they were made to celebrate men rising from the dead to become flying zombies, and before that pagan fertility festivals or whatnot. Who doesn't love to spend time with family, eat tasty brunch, and enjoy the crisp spring weather?
(I mean, sure, it all comes with the price of being stuck in a cramped white building for an hour, listening to mediocre songs and delusional babblings, but, hey! Brunch! Looking on the bright side, right?)
This year, instead of traditional hot cross buns, we had Easter breakfast pizza and fruit salad, which really was a fine trade off, in my opinion. Also, oodles of chocolate poured into our house over night, so I should be contentedly munching on goodies for weeks to come. All in all, Easter is superb.
I must admit - something interesting. During the sermon today, the pastor was discussing Mary Magdalene and stated that she and the Mary from the Mary and Martha story were the same person. My biblical studies had suggested that they were disparate people. I suppose it could be different in the Gnostic bible, and I am well aware that the Bible is hardly the most authoritative historical source, but I must admit - I'm always a bit thrown when I am better versed in the Bible than a Christian. It's like, whoa. Isn't this your book? It's not my book - I'm a heretic, for hell's sake. Shouldn't you know this thing better than I do?
(Then and again... Reading the Bible... Rarely a good option for anyone wanting to stay faithful. There's some pretty crazy stuff in there.)
Anyway, enough talking. I hope you're all having a fabulous Easter. If you don't celebrate Easter, then have a happy Sunday and get out and enjoy the springtime. Go for a walk. Eat chocolate. Frolic through the sparse and slightly browned flowers. Enjoy yourself!
Saturday, April 7, 2012
Status Bashing!
It's time for a super special new installment of ... Stupid Status Snarking! Basically, this is a game where I pretend to be a total jerk for my your amusement!
"4 year old - I love you mommy!! 10 year old - OK mom!! 16 year old - My mom is so annoying!! 18 year old - I'm leaving this house...... 25 year old - Mom you were right! ...... 30 year old - I wanna go to my mom's house! 50 years old - I don't wanna lose my mom.... :'( 70 years old - I would give up anything in this world to have my mom with me right now!! <3 <3 xoxo Put this as your status if you appreciate your mom.....A girl ignored it and 365 days later her mom passed away!"
Oh, my granny goodness! A girl ignored it and exactly one year later her mother died?! What a terrible girl, not demonstrating her appreciation for her maternal figure through the passing on of saccharine tripe! It must be the curse of the poorly written, sickeningly trite chain status! If you don't pass on this over-punctuated message, YOUR MOTHER WILL DIE. Better pass it along then! Better to annoy the crap out of all your friends than to risk vague, anecdotal threats from bored Facebook denizens. Thanks.
I also appreciate how it goes from silly stereotypes of pre-adults to fairly dark stuff about not wanting their mom to die and leave them all alone in this dark, cruel world. Someone's having existential pangs...
Let's see, what's next on the list of stupid things people put on Facebook?
"There is no proof that God exists, but there's no proof that he doesn't either."
Sometimes I get fed up with people on my news feed and delete them, but I always feel bad about deleting people for ideological reasons. I mean, I find this silly probability-ignoring agnosticism to be irritating, but I hate to be that jerk that deletes people just because they don't agree with them.
So, instead, I just lambaste them on my blog, which they'll probably never look at anyway. Win-win!
*rubs hands together* So, do you think that just because you can't prove that something doesn't exist, you should pretend it does? It's one of the flaws of logic that you cannot disprove anything intangible objectively. Anything is technically possible. But just because it's possible, does that mean that we should pretend it is real? You can't prove that unicorns, fairies, or mermaids don't exist. Do you believe in unicorns just because you can't say definitively that they don't exist? Are you agnostic about unicorns?
If so, that's silly. Unicorns don't exist. There is no reason to assume that unicorns exist, because there is no credible evidence for unicorns. Even though there is a teensy tiny little infinitesimal chance that unicorns exist, the probability of such an event is so small that it is useless to regard it as anything significant. Otherwise, you would have to regard all other events as equally possible, and that would be wildly inhibiting. What if two possibilities are contradictory? What then? Which is right? The way to determine that, would be, of course, by looking for evidence supporting one possibility over another, which is what rational people do anyway.
Oh, and comment of the day: "Faith is believing in something common sense says not to."
You'd think that statement would be a wake-up call. "Hm, faith is contrary to common sense. MAYBE I SHOULD RETHINK THIS."
You know how they say that common sense isn't actually that common?
...yup.
"4 year old - I love you mommy!! 10 year old - OK mom!! 16 year old - My mom is so annoying!! 18 year old - I'm leaving this house...... 25 year old - Mom you were right! ...... 30 year old - I wanna go to my mom's house! 50 years old - I don't wanna lose my mom.... :'( 70 years old - I would give up anything in this world to have my mom with me right now!! <3 <3 xoxo Put this as your status if you appreciate your mom.....A girl ignored it and 365 days later her mom passed away!"
Oh, my granny goodness! A girl ignored it and exactly one year later her mother died?! What a terrible girl, not demonstrating her appreciation for her maternal figure through the passing on of saccharine tripe! It must be the curse of the poorly written, sickeningly trite chain status! If you don't pass on this over-punctuated message, YOUR MOTHER WILL DIE. Better pass it along then! Better to annoy the crap out of all your friends than to risk vague, anecdotal threats from bored Facebook denizens. Thanks.
I also appreciate how it goes from silly stereotypes of pre-adults to fairly dark stuff about not wanting their mom to die and leave them all alone in this dark, cruel world. Someone's having existential pangs...
Let's see, what's next on the list of stupid things people put on Facebook?
"There is no proof that God exists, but there's no proof that he doesn't either."
Sometimes I get fed up with people on my news feed and delete them, but I always feel bad about deleting people for ideological reasons. I mean, I find this silly probability-ignoring agnosticism to be irritating, but I hate to be that jerk that deletes people just because they don't agree with them.
So, instead, I just lambaste them on my blog, which they'll probably never look at anyway. Win-win!
*rubs hands together* So, do you think that just because you can't prove that something doesn't exist, you should pretend it does? It's one of the flaws of logic that you cannot disprove anything intangible objectively. Anything is technically possible. But just because it's possible, does that mean that we should pretend it is real? You can't prove that unicorns, fairies, or mermaids don't exist. Do you believe in unicorns just because you can't say definitively that they don't exist? Are you agnostic about unicorns?
If so, that's silly. Unicorns don't exist. There is no reason to assume that unicorns exist, because there is no credible evidence for unicorns. Even though there is a teensy tiny little infinitesimal chance that unicorns exist, the probability of such an event is so small that it is useless to regard it as anything significant. Otherwise, you would have to regard all other events as equally possible, and that would be wildly inhibiting. What if two possibilities are contradictory? What then? Which is right? The way to determine that, would be, of course, by looking for evidence supporting one possibility over another, which is what rational people do anyway.
Oh, and comment of the day: "Faith is believing in something common sense says not to."
You'd think that statement would be a wake-up call. "Hm, faith is contrary to common sense. MAYBE I SHOULD RETHINK THIS."
You know how they say that common sense isn't actually that common?
...yup.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Remember Crazy Rapture Guy?
Does anyone remember Harold Camping, the crazy cracker radio host who was broadcasting that the world was going to end last May 21st? And who, when the world spectacularly did not end, moved his prediction to October 21st?
With less flash and bang, the world also failed to end in October as well. I guess Harold has been holding out hope for a glorious apocalypse, because only now has he issued an apology. A kind of weak and feeble one at that, really, for a guy who exploited a bunch of gullible people, and took their donations and life savings for whatever use of his own.
I find it interesting that he only now noticed the Bible verse where it says "No man will know the day of His coming", when surely he had piles of Christians firing it at him for the entire time he was proclaiming his bull feces.
I also find it interesting that he's happy that people are out "appreciating the Bible" or what not because of him, as a significant portion of atheists cite "reading the Bible" as their reason for apostasy. (The runner up was "thinking about it.") Ever read the Old Testament? Sordid stuff. Even the New Testament isn't all daisies and sunshine - there is quite a bit of hell fire, damnation, and Orwellian-style brainwashing. Really, the last thing Mr. Camping should be hoping for is more people reading the Bible. Chances are, some of them will be intellectually honest and reach a logical conclusion about the universe and probably about Mr. Camping himself.
Then and again, apocalypse pronouncers have never been known to be the brightest daisy in the compost heap. You know, considering how they have all been wrong.
With less flash and bang, the world also failed to end in October as well. I guess Harold has been holding out hope for a glorious apocalypse, because only now has he issued an apology. A kind of weak and feeble one at that, really, for a guy who exploited a bunch of gullible people, and took their donations and life savings for whatever use of his own.
I find it interesting that he only now noticed the Bible verse where it says "No man will know the day of His coming", when surely he had piles of Christians firing it at him for the entire time he was proclaiming his bull feces.
I also find it interesting that he's happy that people are out "appreciating the Bible" or what not because of him, as a significant portion of atheists cite "reading the Bible" as their reason for apostasy. (The runner up was "thinking about it.") Ever read the Old Testament? Sordid stuff. Even the New Testament isn't all daisies and sunshine - there is quite a bit of hell fire, damnation, and Orwellian-style brainwashing. Really, the last thing Mr. Camping should be hoping for is more people reading the Bible. Chances are, some of them will be intellectually honest and reach a logical conclusion about the universe and probably about Mr. Camping himself.
Then and again, apocalypse pronouncers have never been known to be the brightest daisy in the compost heap. You know, considering how they have all been wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)