Sabbathh School 28/01/12 - Wishing ain't gonna make it so

So my parents were playing last week's audio Sabbath School lesson last Friday. It could not be avoided - I had to stick around and listen as well. The title for the lesson was "The God of Grace and Judgment", and it had so many things wrong with it I simply could not pass it up. They did creation/evolution two weeks ago, but they said the same old doo-doo they always say about it. I've covered that before, and I don't want to sound like a broken record criticising the same crap over and over again.

Anyway, the lesson began with an illustration which went thus:

A soldier stood next to an old man about to be executed. He was guilty of being the “wrong” race and religion, nothing more. As the soldier raised his gun, his victim said, “Do you know that there is a God in heaven who sees all this, and who will one day judge you for your actions?”

The soldier then shot the old man dead.

This is, in many ways, a prime example of a secular society. Not a secular government (a government that does not promote one religion over another), but a secular society, one in which there is no higher standard than the rules of the society itself. It’s a society with no sense of transcendence, no sense of a higher authority, no sense of God or of a moral standard greater than anything human. It’s a society where humans take the place of God, a society where the only judgment one faces is the judgment of one’s peers or of one’s own conscience (whatever’s left of it, anyway).

According to the Bible, however, the old man was right: there is a God in heaven, and He knows all things and He, indeed, will bring everything into judgment.

I don't know about you, but I was personally offended when I heard this. I do not see how a person shooting another person who said there is a god is in any way illustrative of a secular society. What if the shooter was serving his own - wait, that is the crux of my argument against this idiotic, piece of crap illustration, I'll get to it later. Let me pick on this first:

It’s a society with no sense of transcendence, no sense of a higher authority, no sense of God or of a moral standard greater than anything human. It’s a society where humans take the place of God, a society where the only judgment one faces is the judgment of one’s peers or of one’s own conscience (whatever’s left of it, anyway).

Well, I suppose anyone who's read this blog before should know where I stand on this - no, there is no transcendence, no higher authority and no god! There is no evidence for any such thing, and sincerely wishing for them will not make them true. That "humans take the place of god" line is a meaningless cheapshot, and the fact is that the only judgement we can ever face is that which society hands down upon us.

I understand why one would wish for more. Some may find it impossible to face each day without the assurance that the injustices of this world are ultimately going to be repaid in kind. Human beings can’t see everything, and not every wrong done is going to be revealed and punished, and it’s tempting to want to believe there is some entity that exists outside the timeflow that notices everything and will mete out the punishment mortals were unable to. But no matter how hard one may wish for it, no matter how hard one may clap their hands, there facts of this reality will still remain. Instead of throwing your hands up in the air and running to the insubstantial comfort of imaginary entities, why not resolve to stand with your fellow human beings and resolve to work together to root out the injustices and bring the collective judgement of society down upon them. If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem, standing in the way of the progression towards a more just society.

The sort of “only God can judge” mentality fostered by the mindset shown in the above excerpt (note: I am not saying that that is what is directly espoused in the excerpt, only that it is a natural progression of it, one which is followed all too many times) has some directly harmful consequences too. Deep Thoughts catalogues numerous cases every week of sexual abuse by so-called holy men: pastors, youth leaders and the like. Nearly always, the most damning thing about these cases is the reaction of the churches these criminal excuses for human beings led. Instead of co-operating with authorities, condemning the offenders’ behaviour or even simply apologising to the victims, they most often choose to maintain total silence, sometimes even expressing their outright support for the offender and wilfully hindering the authorities. And this isn’t just the already very well-known and widely publicised Catholic clergy scandals and subsequent coverups I’m talking about: most of the cases Mojoey covers are mainline protestant denominations(including Seventh-Day Adventists. Read the comments section of that link). But it’s all good, hey? God is going to judge them, so what does it matter if they escape Earthly retribution?

Now comes my real sticking point over this particular illustration. The author gives the story of the old man being shot for being “the wrong race and wrong religion” as an example of a secular society. Question: in which secular society has this ever happened? Each and every time in history people have been killed for being the “wrong race and wrong religion” it has been at the hands of another group of religious people who themselves believed they were doing the bidding of their god. More particularly, the most prominent example of this which has happened during the time since firearms were invented is most obviously the Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis. Even if it was not the example the writer wished to put forward, the Holocaust no doubt sprang to the fore of most peoples’ minds due to the widely spread misconception people seem to have that the Nazis’ philosophies were atheistic. And yet, as most skeptics and anyone who has properly studied the history of Nazi Germany will tell you, the Nazis and Hitler himself were, if not directly religiously motivated, made use of religious propaganda and the churches to stir up hatred for the Jews, the Roma and other “undesirable” minorities.

The fact that the Sabbath School Study Guide’s writer, Cliff Goldstein is himself Jewish only serves to exacerbate the scale of this example’s error. It sounds to me very unlikely that Goldstein was unaware of the facts of what happened during the Holocaust, or of the obvious link to it people would draw regardless of whether or not he was directly referring to it. Whichever way one cuts it, this example is, consciously or unconsciously, slanderously dishonest.

The second issue I have a problem with comes in the study section for Thursday. In this section, we see this being said:

Looking around at the world, we shouldn’t have a problem understanding the idea of judgment and condemnation. One doesn’t have to be a believing Christian to realize that something is radically wrong with humanity. Who can’t see what a royal mess, even disaster, we’ve made of things? Maybe we cry so hard at birth because, instinctively, we know what’s coming. “I cried when I was born and every day shows why,” a poet wrote. Who can’t relate? Who hasn’t himself or herself been the victim of just how greedy, selfish, and mean people can be? Or who hasn’t at some point been the greedy, selfish, and mean one?

You know, all sorts of people, from friends to strangers, Christians, Muslims, so-called “agnostics” and less strident atheists ask me all the time why I’m so vocal in opposing religion. Simply put, it’s attitudes as expressed in this excerpt, and various overtones laid throughout the lesson. The vibe you get from reading it is one of defeatism, of ultimate unfaith in one’s fellow human beings, the feeling that society is in a downward spiral from which it can never pull up. Well, first of all, this view of humanity is factually wrong. Humanity is now as it has ever been: capable of both good and evil. The decay envisioned by many religious conservatives is in equal parts imagined and the consequence of greater connectivity and communication. News travels fast nowadays, and shocking news is by far the most popular and therefore we tend to hear more about it. We think murder, rape, violence and sundry other crimes are increasing in frequency because the frequency of which we hear about them is increasing. And yet, per head, there are fewer people dying violently today than in previous eras.

The media’s sensationalism is causing the rise in alarmism,...yet I welcome it. I welcome that we get to hear about the crimes which were so studiously hidden and never spoken about in ages past. I welcome it, because it brings them to the light, gives us reason to be outraged by them. I welcome it because it enables us to see our enemy, so that we can work to defeat it and to change our circumstances.

And yet, that excerpt tells us that we cannot change them. It forces on us a spirit of defeatism and complacency, for if only God can change us, what reason do we have to even try? Why should we work for global peace and unity if some magic man in the sky is going to wiggle his fingers and do it for us? That is my greatest gripe with religion, that it breeds malignant mistrust in those it infects, and that it turns them into the biggest stumbling block to ever changing the situation we find ourselves in. I’m not saying that once religion dies the path will be clear, no. Other sources of herd-mentality intolerance and alarmism will remain, as well as humanity's own capacity for both good and evil, which we probably will never be able to fully banish. But the mountain in our path will have been worn down and we will be able to glimpse the brighter future that lies ahead of us.

Happy new year!

Alright, I know I'm over a week behind the curve, but I have a good excuse, which I will choose to keep to myself. Be still and know that I am Joe.

I had a very eventful last week of 2011 - I attended a youth camp in Durban, South Africa organised by the Botswana Union of the Seventh Day Adventist church. I was initially reticent about the prospect of going when Mother first asked me about it, but I later figured "fuck it, it's Durban, why the hell not?" In the end asides from all the Jesus-ness, the horrible rooms we were staying in and the all-veg diet, it really wasn't so bad. I got to see the sea for the first time, managed to buy a few books I've been yearning for while there and generally got to relax, unwind and refresh.

As for the content of the camp...well, it was your usual revival seminar fare. There were daily sermons and prayer sessions, as well as a few workshops scattered here and there. The workshop I chose to attend was "Destined for excellence", which was chock-full of meaningless slogans, catchy mnemonics and sweet, inspirational nothings. In other words, it was just like every other motivational routine in existence, only with a lot more biblical references and perhaps more uniquely, quotes from Ellen White's works, "Spirit of Prophesy". The workshop presenter was as cute as a button, though, so not all was lost.

There was one young preacher there about whom I found myself thinking that phrase so many of us freethinkers have heard applied to us at some time or other: "what a waste". He was one of the most eloquent and entertaining speakers I have heard in a long time. His anecdotes and analogies in particular, which dealt with things almost everyone in the audience could relate with, were absolutely priceless, and had me chuckling regardless of whether I agreed with his point or not. I found myself thinking about how far the cause of freethought and even science literacy would advance if we had just one speaker like him here in Africa and an organised platform for him to use. And it got me thinking even further: if it were not for his religious upbringing, would he have turned out to be such a good speaker? For a lot of us - many, perhaps even most (myself included), our first and sometimes only experience of speaking in front of a crowd was in church. Adventists in particular will relate - holding Sabbath School, preaching on children's day - these were a big part of our growing up. The same goes for music - it is no mere coincidence that many of the most successful secular musicians of our day testify to having started singing in church.

Now, I'm not about to say religion is all good and wonderful and we should all appreciate it because it gives kids such confidence and nurtures their skills, I am simply acknowledging this fact - this is one of the few things a lot of us have to thank outr religious upbringing for. But, like with all of religion's positive points, there is a better way. The area of discovering and nurturing talent in these areas is one where I believe schools should take a major role. Right from the beginning of Primary education, children should be given opportunities to speak, sing or play instruments in public, in front of a supportive audience. School recitals and talent shows should take the place of church worship programs. The cultivation of talents in an environment where the mind is also learning about the world around it is the best possible environment for producing brilliant, well-informed speakers and artists.

Phew! Good to get that off my chest. Anyway, I survived the whole thing without having a stupid outburst over something blindingly inaccurate or obviously unconscionable that was said (of which there were many), mainly thanks to the patient ear of my one theist friend to whom I am able to talk freely about my worldview regardless of whether we agree - yes, you, buddy. You know yourself. Being able to air my views is a therapeutic experience, without which I would long have snapped. I saw the new year in while in a que for snacks and a terrible looking fruit salad at the so-called "banquet" on the last night of the camp, followed soon afterward by a desultory fireworks show at which I am surprised no one was killed.

So, that's it. That's my recounting of the final week of my 2011. Now, we look to the future. This year, I am refraining from publishing my resolutions thanks to the disaster I made of them last year. Only I know what they are, which will save me some embarrassment. All I can tell you is tat they are a lot more specific, realistiic and within my control than last year's were, so hopefully I will prevail. I'll only tell you what they were if and when I succeed.

Thanks to you all for reading this long ramble, and I wish you all an awesome 2012. I leave you with the awesome music I was listening to all throught the week before last - most particularly I want to highlight Technical Death Metal band Obscura's album Omnivium.

Everyone's Favorite Christian Metalcore Band, from their latest album Dead Throne:



 

French Deathgrind band Benighted, from their album Asylum Cave





And last but not least, some Obscura. Every single track from this album was a masterpiece. I can credit this band as the one that got me to love the sound of the guitar.

Sabbath School 05/11/11 - I'm no masochist

The natives were fasting yesterday, then went on to have an all-night prayer to sprinkle some Jesus Magic on an upcoming crusade they're holding over the next two weeks (not that kind of crusade. They don't do those anymore - it's just a two week long preach fest, though one has to question the taste of calling them after such a violent era). Needless to say, I participated in neither - I had three full, healthy meals and went on to double-break the Sabbath by splitting a takeout with a buddy, then went home, watched the new Pirates movie (which was terrible) and had a good night's sleep.

The whole affair - the fasting and sleep deprivation, as well as the greater blanket issue of asceticism, smacks of masochism. Dictionary.com defines masochism thusly:

mas·och·ism

   [mas-uh-kiz-uhm, maz-]

noun

2. gratification gained from pain, deprivation, degradation, etc.,inflicted or imposed on oneself, either as a result of one'sown actions or the actions of others, especially thetendency to seek this form of gratification.

I do believe strongly religious people gain some gratification from their pain, just as much as the more fanatical auto-flagellants do, the difference being that religiously motivated masochists have developed a rationale behind their actions. Those who fast tell me that it gets them closer to god, that they can feel a stronger connection being forged and that their prayers are being heard. Of course, I'd argue that it's more likely the lack of food affecting their brain, but that's just me. Among Adventists (at least locally, anyway) such self-denialist streaks run even deeper than the occasional fast. Especially around older folks, you get the feeling that simply having any sort of fun is wrong. Last Sunday, I was at a friend's birthday party, and the amount of supplication that went on just dazzled me. Before anything had begun, there were pleas for god to forgive everyone in advance for any sins they may commit and a blessing for everyone to enjoy themselves, "but not too much" in case they sinned, then after it all, another prayer for god to forgive everyone's sins, both those they committed "knowingly" and "unknowingly". Frankly, this brings images of an abusive relationship, where one partner is so afraid of angering the abusive partner that they are constantly begging for forgiveness and limiting their activities in order to avoid arousing their ire.

All this is simply another way religion poisons peoples' minds, limiting their view of the world and their enjoyment of life.

**

If this piece seemed a little disjointed, forgive me. I actually watched considerably more than the Pirates movie last night.

Sabbath School 29/10/11 - Fiction

In our local Adventist churches, there is always a story told for the children before the main sermon every Sabbath. Usually, these take the form of morality tales that reinforce simple values like kindness and honesty, or retell Bible stories in the form of modern allegories. Occasionally, though, you'll get the miracle stories. Many are innocent enough - "answered prayers" wierd coincidences that are attributed to God and such, but sometimes there'll be truly fantastical ones, which tend for some reason to always be the ones set in rural Africa. The one we ahd last week was one of the former type. It was about a couple of kids who were lost in the bush when they came across a lion. One of them remembers that their mother had told them that they should sing if ever they're cornered by a lion, so they start singing one of the well known hymns and the lion leaves them be. A short while later, some villagers who'd been looking for them arrive at the scene. They remark that they'd been led there when they heard a multitude of voices singing, the implication being that angels had joined the kids and scared the lion away.

"Well, it's just a story," some might say. What's wrong with that? Well, I have no problem with stories. I do have a problem, however, when they're being peddled to children in order to reinforce superstition. We can almost be certain that no such event has ever happened, but a child has no way of knowing that. To a child, everything you tell them is true. Every word is laden with vivid fact and they find it hard to tell what is true, what is allegory and what is pure imagination. Fairy tales also deliver to kids the same type of feeling, one of wonder at things which are not 100% true. Unlike fairytales, however, stories told in a religious setting are reinforced and never revealed outright to be simply imagination conveying a message. In the same breath, children are also told similarly fantastic stories from the Bible, which they are told are 100% infallible truth. Such stories wind up being a tool for crushing minds to better take in religious indoctrination - the child grows up with a stunted ability to tell the difference between fact and fiction, ripe for inculcating with all sorts of superstition, stories of miracles and the like.

Tomorrow, I will talk about the admissibility of stories as evidence, with particular attention paid to miracle stories.

***

Avenged Sevenfold - Fiction

The death-knell for institutionalised homophobia in Zimbabwe?

In a recent interview with the BBC, Morgan Tsvangirai, Prime Minister of Zimbabwe expressed his wish to see gay rights protected in the a new constitution, a message completely different from views he expressed a year ago, when he supported President Robert Mugabe's sentiment that gays were "worse than pigs and dogs". There has been some speculation as to the reasons for this dramatic change of heart, with some saying it is to "appease his Western masters" and similar allegations. Without a doubt the incumbent is going to try to use this to sway people's vote come the next election, but at least its a step in the right direction. Hopefully, if he's really serious about this and doesn't go changing his mind later down the line and the memory of the suffering of previous years will be enough to override peoples' prejudices, we may see the basic right to love legally protected in Zimbabwe come the next election.

Still, the very fact that taking this liberal stance may jeopardise Tsvangirai's position in the upcoming elections is unacceptable. I've heard it expressed by people that the reason Mugabe has retained power for so long is that God placed him there because of his strong homophobic stance, so that legislation protecting gay rights could not be passed in Zimbabwe. So what this means basically is that God, in all his mercy would rather see thousands brutally assaulted and killed and millions more suffering under the yoke of oppression than allow gays the rights to live their lives in peace and without fear of legally backed hatred. Not only is that morally reprehensible, it is despicable, and no loving god would ever do such a thing.

But of course, God is simply people's projection of such people's own psyche, possessing their prejudices, and such moral paradoxes are the simple proof of this fact. If people could look beyond such dogma, superstition and close-mindedness and base their morality on a common respect and compassion for their fellow man the world would be a much sweeter place for all.

Why I Am an Atheist

Got round to penning my story in response to PZ Myers' call to submit our reasons for being atheists. A more detailed account is still in the works. I haven't blogged much about my brush - oh, hell it was a goddamn scrub-down - with von Danikenism and it occurs to me that I should. Consider a series examining the Ancient Astronaut hypothesis in the works.

---

Growing up in Zimbabwe presented many challenges. Calling anyone "middle class" was a joke - you were either filthy rich, struggled to make ends meet or were so poor words could not begin to describe it. My family was part of that second group - we lived comfortably, but only just. I'm an ex-fourth generation Seventh-day Adventist, which, considering that Adventism has been in Zimbabwe for about four generations is really something. One thing I can truly thank my parents for is that they never compromised on my education. My brothers and I always went to private school, even if it meant we had to cut back on a few luxuries to do so. I was also always very inquisitive, very much a nerd and had a deep love for science that my mother encouraged. I read a lot of books, particularly about physics, astronomy and dinosaurs so questions were inevitable. I was an introspective child, though, so I tended to keep those questions to myself and try to figure things out on my own.

At twelve I was baptised into the church. I think this was the turning point at which I began to come to terms with reality, because it forced me to examine what I believed and why I believed it, where previously I could just drift along and pretend there was no conflict between my faith and my aspirations to be a scientist. It wasn't an easy journey, but less than eight months later, I came to the conclusion that God as envisioned by any Earthly religion does not exist. I still thought a higher being of some kind was possible, and so became somewhat of an agnostic.

The biggest problem I had at this stage of my life was that I had nothing concrete to fill the gap my faith left behind. One practical upshot of my country and my family's financial state was that I had no access to the solid facts I needed - I had no access to the internet and what little I did know came from the now too vague books I could access from the kids' section of the library. I was growing ever more hungry for knowledge, and would gobble up any little morsel I could get, regardless of quality. In time, this led me to a brush with pseudoscience no better than the faith I had recently forsaken.

Rifling through some old books at my grandmother's house, I found a bunch by a certain fellow called Erich von Daniken. They had the words "stars" and "space" in them , so reading was a no-brainer. What I read had me instantly hooked. Soon, I was proclaiming to all my friends how aliens had visited us in ages past and imparted us with intelligence. I was rattling off every single piece of "evidence" E vD presented - the Piri Reis map, the Ica stones, the Nasca lines, Puma Punku - with the utmost confidence that I'd finally found the truth. E vD did an excellent job of pretending to have that which I had been looking for all along - good, solid facts. His book "Miracles of the Gods" also fit in with the pseudo-mystical approach I had taken, and this led into a brief but retrospectively embarrassing flirtation with the Law of Attraction.

It was this phase, in which I wholeheartedly accepted such nonsense as is contained in "The Secret" and "What the Bleep Do We Know" that led to me taking another deep look at my beliefs. I noticed that all my "positive thinking" and meditating on the things I desired was getting me nowhere, and I started really thinking about how this actually worked. I realised that all this talk of "qantum-this" and "quantum-that" was simply a different term for the magic I used to believe in when I was still Christian. It did not take long for the rest of my belief in the supernatural to disappear, and eventually any concession of the possibility of the existence of a deity went down the drain as well.

I remember the first time I ever referred to myself as an atheist. I had just moved to a new school in Botswana. We were in a class Guidance and Counselling session and the counsellor asked me what religion I belonged to. Right there and then, I realised - much as I had once reviled those who were so "close-minded" as to outright deny the existence of a god, I had become one of them. With newfound conviction in my voice, I proudly answered, "I'm atheist." This was early in 2009, and I was 16, going on 17.

Perhaps not very oddly enough, I still lent some credence to Erich von Daniken's hypotheses. I would think to myself, "Okay, maybe he got the metaphysics wrong, but some of his facts must be right." I was also very critical of vocal atheists, even once writing a letter bashing Richard Dawkins over his hope that creating a cross between a human and chimp would end religion to the South African edition of Popular Mechanics. The Internet changed both these things, however. The Skeptic's Dictionary in particular demolished von Daniken's hypotheses, while reading of all the abuses to freedom that religion continues to perpetrate underscored the importance of activism to me.

I take a pragmatic view of the circuitous route I took to becoming rational: if it weren't for it I wouldn't be who I am today. I wouldn't have experienced first hand how harmful and limiting believing in lies can be, and wouldn't be so passionate about eliminating them. It's not my lack of belief in gods that I count as my most important trait, though. I value being a rationalist because I choose to think, a skeptic because I choose to question, a humanist because I have compassion for my fellow man and have an unbridled love for the cosmos that drives me to achieve my dream of becoming an astrophysicist. It is from this dream that I draw the deepest meaning for my life: that of discovery, and questing to understand the universe we live in.

Jabu M

Botswana

Breaking Out, Breaking Down

So, I've got my internet back, and after a few solid weeks of leaching from the great blood vessel of knowledge I think it's time I seeded from the contents of my rich and beautiful mind. But first, let me catch you up on what's been going on in my life.

About a month ago I had a bit of a crisis because of which I came pretty damn close to coming out of the closet. Ours is a really small church, so it's impossible to hide behind other members - everyone is expected to pull their weight, be a part of running things and occasionally show their face up front. I've done so before without much of a problem, but things were different then. I was quite depressed at the time - things hadn't been going well in my life, I was hard at work self tutoring for my frickin A Levels and I didn't want to add to the stress by having to deal with the fallout of refusing to do it and possibly having to come out, so I sucked it up and did it, and managed to fake a smile while I was at it. Things had changed a month ago. I was feeling much better with myself, I'd been too late to register for exams this November and so will be writing next June, so a whole load of stress had been lifted off my shoulders. So when my mother told me I was supposed to be preaching the next Saturday I was just kind of like, "bleh". I really wasn't under any pressure and didn't care much.

It was the Friday before the big day that I started to freak out. I realised just how little I gave a damn, how I seriously couldn't be bothered to even pull something random out of my ass like I usually did when in this situation, and realised the implications of it. I was going to have to come out, tell everyone just why I couldn't stand up and defecate out of my mouth anymore. Looking for some assistance and support, I turned to the group Ex-Adventists and Seventh-day Atheists on Atheist Nexus. The conversation is on the comment wall. So thanks to advice from Dustin Williams (creator of the group and author of the great blog dwnomad) I decided to pull some stock sermon from the internet on a subject of basic morality and give that. I settled on this sermon, emphasising on how even the godless are moral folk and cutting out that downright libellous second paragraph. I'd then proceed to out myself that evening while everyone was having cake.

Well, things didn't quite go as planned. I discovered the next morning that I had been rescheduled - one of the church elders was taking that day and I would be preaching the next week. This kind of robbed me of my momentum. I decided not to do it that day and deliberate whether I would go for it sometime during the week. Other doubts began to crop up in my head - how would my parents react to my being atheist? Would they take away my allowance and computer privileges? Would I be forced to attend until the day I left home? My parents are pretty hard to read sometimes. At times I think they might be accepting and treat me like an adult. Then they say or do something that convinces me never, ever to say a thing. In the end I decided not to do it, but just do the sermon which was really about something every moral person ought to agree with. I ended up not having to give the sermon anyway - a visiting pastor was around and took over that week's activities.

Other than that, my life's been peachy. We just moved to a new neighbourhood and will probably be switching churches as well since our old one is now almost 30 minutes' dive away. The church we'll probably be moving to is much bigger than our old one, so I can blend in and keep a low profile. I promise I'll be a lot more active on the blogging front - I came to an epiphany a short while ago. Being an undercover atheist does have its advantages. Listening to all the kookoo things the religious people around me say gives me great ammo for my blog and allows me a glimpse into the psyche of the religious mind. So at the very least you can expect a weekly "Sabbath School" post about something I heard at church, as well as a few miscellaneous random things that kind of pop into my head. I'm also working on a series of essays detailing my journey to godlessness so that I can have a handy resource to point anyone wondering how I got where I am today and who wants to understand the reasoning behind the decisions I've made. I think they'll come invaluable when I finally do come out.

Also, metal!

Sabbath School 24/09/11 - An alternative interpretation of Matthew 24:24

As I was entering church this past Saturday (late as usual), someone was reading Matthew 24:24. I was immediately struck by a new interpretation of it I haven't heard before, and I'm wondering if any serious theologian/pastor has shat it out before. Matthew 24:24 reads:

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

And this got me thinking: the false prophets aren't literally prophets. The signs and wonders are things we're already taking for granted every day: the healing of diseases, increased longevity, technology. I mean, we all know the cause of disease is demonic - the only force outside of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ that can cast out demons is the master of those demonic powers themselves. Only the devil can extend the life of a human being beyond the three score years and ten our Heavenly Father hath allotted us, and the only thing outside of prayer that can allow instantaneous communication? Surely you agree with me - it has to be demonic. Those pictures you see on the television? Demons. You are inviting demonic forces into your house the moment you turn on that infernal device.

The coup de grace of the demonic deception is yet to come (for what prophet of doom worth his salt doesn't make up his own predictions?), in the form of a cure for cancer, HIV and all other of ailments God has poured out as a curse upon the sinners, satanic agents and homos (especially the homos) of this world, brought forth by the ritual demonic sacrifice of unborn children known as embryonic stem cell research and, worst of all (cue dramatic organ music), evolution.

The point of all of this will be to divert the sight of the world from the Lord and get them trusting in their own devices and their new god science. Undoubtedly, science is the greatest force driving skepticism and atheism today and has been driven from its very foundation by a diabolical agenda. You have been warned: do not partake of the forbidden fruits of science, lest you be deceived and pulled into its web as well.

And that also means my favourite reason for rejecting claims of gods, holy books and the supernatural - that science has done just fine without them and gone a long way towards disproving them - is all part of the satanic ploy...

---

P.S. - My official Back to Blogging post is coming later today or possibly tomorrow.

What do Al Qaeda and William Lane Craig have in common?

The same justification for religiously sanctioned evil actions.

Over the weekend I read WLC's post justifying the genocide of the Canaanites recorded in the Old Testament. He says:

Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.

And

So whom does God wrong in commanding the destruction of the Canaanites? Not the Canaanite adults, for they were corrupt and deserving of judgement. Not the children, for they inherit eternal life.

Then the death of Osama bin Laden prompted me to read a little of his history, and I read this on Wikipedia:

It was after this bombing that al-Qaeda was reported to have developed its justification for the killing of innocent people. According to a fatwa issued by Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, the killing of someone standing near the enemy is justified because any innocent bystander will find their proper reward in death, going to Jannah (Paradise) if they were good Muslims and to Jahannam (hell) if they were bad or non-believers.^[81] The fatwa was issued to al-Qaeda members but not the general public.

Sounds nigh-on identical, doesn't it? In his article, Craig also attempts to differentiate his philosophy from that of the Jihadists. Frankly, I don't see how the supposed reason for the genocide (maintaining purity) and that of the Jihadis differ. Aren't they also "protecting" their religion from contamination and apostacy? And I don't buy the whole "our god loves everyone" schtick. The god depicted in the Old Testament is definitely partisan, favoring his worshippers over everyone else. The whole love angle came far later with Christianity, which interjected it from pagan sources.

Heidevolk - Ostara

Today's little ditty comes from Dutch folk metal band Heidevolk...

From their album Uit Oude Grond.

Lyrics (Dutch):

In het veld gehuld, in mist en kou
Schijnt een glinstering, in de dauw
Als de hemel kleurt van zwart naart blauw
Ostara
In het oosten waar de nacht begon
Ontwaakt het licht der morgenzon
Haar ochtend zegent onze bron
Ostara

In de vroegte, als de dag begint
En de zon het sterrenveld verblindt
Als de lente winter overwint
Ostara
Bij de dageraad, door ans aanschouwd
Baant zonlicht zich een pad von goud
Door de kille nevels in het woud
Ostara

Nacht en dag bereiken evenwicht
Langverwachte terugkeer van het licht
Als de zon herrijst en kou verdwijnt
En het levenslicht het land beschijnt
Voel de warmte in de morgenstond
Weelderig groen ontspruit uit koude grond
Als het Saksisch volk de zon begroet
Op de heuvels badend in haar gloed

Lyrics (English):

in the field covered, in fog and cold
shines a sparkle, in the dew
when heaven colors from black to blue
Ostara (spring)
in the east where the night began
wakes the light of morningsun
her morning blesses our well
Ostara

early in the morning, when the day begins
and when the sun blinds the starfield
when spring conquers winter
Ostara
at dawn, seen by us
opens sunlight a path of gold
through the chilly fog in the woods
Ostara

night and day reaches balance
long expected return of the light
when the sun returns and cold vanishes
and the light of life shines on the soil
feel the warmth in the morning
abundant green shoots from cold soil
when the Saxon people greets the sun
on the hills bathing in her glow

As many may know, according to the sources the fictional Jewish Zombie's death occured around the time of the Jewish Passover. Now, all know the Catholic church's method of converting the pagan cultures consisted of a mixture of brute-force coercion and cultural assimilation, so the chronological equivalent they found to their Zombie Master's death and resurrection was the Spring fertility celebration, Ostara - Ēostre in the Anglo-Saxon dialect. And thus Easter was born.

So, always remember...

Nacht en dag bereiken evenwicht,

night and day reaches balance

...is the real reason for the Easter season.

Sabbath School 12/03/11 - Satan Takes the Pulpit

Last Friday evening I was blindsided, tricked, coerced, fucking ninja'd into presenting on the next day's Sabbath School. It was Family Life Day and my parents are the directors of the church's family life department, so our family was taking the day. As I said, there was no warning, just an announcement around five-thirty that evening. You would not believe how little I cared for that shit. I just sat there doing nothing, almost swearing that this is where it would go down, this is where the gauntlet would be thrown, the buck would stop, the hammer would fall and I would finally come out and tell them just what I believed, whether they liked it or not. But I ended up reasonig "hell, what will it hurt me to pick up some random book and recite some rote piece of bullcrap at the congregation." The rote piece of bullcrap was from Ellen G. White's The Adventist Home.

I picked "Children in the Home" as my topic, reading from Section XI. It basically codifies the Adventist child rearing philosophy. There is a lot in there I can agree with, including the importance of children helping around the home and things like that, but there is a lot I cannot. There is a very strong emphasis on gender roles, for example, but it is an old book, written when such views were universal. Unfortunately, though, a lot of Adventists (most especially here in Africa) still follow its words as law. The importance of "raising children in the Lord" is also heavily emphasised.

So I ended up doing it, and making it quite convincing, too, adding a few interjections of my own. I have discovered that it's quite easy to lie to a bunch of people whose opinion you don't give a flying donkey's ass about. The crunch came when we were expected to fast on that day, but I had breakfast anyway and managed to sneak in a couple of Bar Ones I stretched to satisfy me the whole afternoon.

***

P.S. Please check out the entries for the Astronomican Winter Contest! My fiction entry is somewhere in there. I'm not at liberty to reveal which one's mine yet. Try guess which it is!

What's So Funny Indeed - Part 2

Two days ago, I wrote about this article in a blog post titled "What's So Funny Indeed", in which I talked about the importace of evidence. The author of the article chose to close with a statement I feel deserves to be adressed. The statement went thus:

There is a common thread to these stories, it seems to me; and others like them. That thread is that the acknowledgment of the God of heaven is considered so sensible that disbelief, doubt, and infidelity are contrasted as practically comical.

It should therefore not surprise anyone that disbelief is labeled by the psalmist as foolish. What is not funny, however, is that foolishness, almost by definition, is quite misleading; and when we choose to engage in it (as regards disbelief in God)--as is our God-given right--we are misled into ironically believing, of all things, that this is actually a sign of intelligent reasoning.

If it weren’t for the immediate consequences of disobedience and the eternal consequences of disbelief, it would all perhaps be funny.

I get this banality a lot from Christian friends and occassional correspondences on the 'net, typically with a quote of Proverbs 14:12:

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

As I interpret it, I think this argument posits that human reasoning is imperfect, therefore it cannot be used to obtain a clear picture of reality, the supernatural and so on. But, I'll ask, if not rationality, then what? Are we supposed to take it all on faith?

Most Christians, when I ask them say that I am required to take what they say by faith. The argument that we are simply supposed to take the bible's teachings by faith is fraught with much peril, though. It teakes for granted that Christianity is the only religion and that the person to whom it is being made is Christian. Well, Christianity is only one among many religions, and each of them requires the same of its adherents: faith. There is not a single argument in favour of Christianity that does not apply to or has not found use in any of the other religions in the world, particularly the major religions which virtually have armies of people all working towards making their religion more palatable to others.

When I point out the similarity of Christianity with other religions, people tend try to persuade me to return to the religion I was born into. Return to the truth you were raised in, they say. This seems like a very good argument to most, who tend to have no knowledge of any other religion or viewpoint, having been sheltered and nursed exclusively within the faith. These people tend to overlook anther thing: if this argument ought to work with me, won't it work for and similarly apply to members of other religions? How, then, if we are to remain with the belief we were raised in, do they expect to woo others to their own religion? Once again, this is an argument that, if valid, applies equally to all religions.

Our reason may not be perfect, but in the face of all these conflicting religions spouting the same claims it's the best thing we've got. I see no real worth in this argument, save perhaps as something the faithful tell each other to comfort themselves.

What's So Funny Indeed

Just read this blog article on the Adventist Today site, home of a "progressive Adventist" publication, talking about some funny stuff in the Bible. The author states that his favorite "funny" Bible stories is the story of Job. I quite agree with him. The story of Job is quite hilarious:

And we agree on which part's the funniest:

After questioning God's decisions, Job is asked by God where he was while God conducted His Creative activities. It was as if God was saying, "You've got a lot of nerve, young man, questioning my wisdom and sovereignty. Do you know who you're talking to? But, tell you what...I'll answer your questions, if you will answer mine." You gotta love a God like that, don't you?

He kills Job's kids, destroys his possessions and gives him herpes all over and still has the fortitude to waggle his finger at Job. Yeah, really great guy, this God dude.

But there's another point to be had here:

Another favorite of course would have to be the story of Elijah actually taunting and teasing the prophets of Baal and their god(s). This taunting was hilarious; remember... "maybe your god is sleeping"? How funny is that?! Elijah was totally confident that the prophets of Baal were praying to... absolutely nobody, and that he, on the other hand, was praying to the true and living God--who would reward his cockiness, no less. I mean, he wanted water everywhere. He was actually "showing off" (as my mother would say); and then God Himself showed off, rewarding Elijah's faith while simultaneously shaming the heathens. What a sense of humor!

So in this story, Elijah was an atheist - an a-baal-ist - and challenged the prophets of Baal with providing evidence for the presence of their god. So, if this fellow asked for evidence from the prophets of Baal, is it unreasonable for us atheists who do not believe not only in Baal but all other gods, Yahweh/Jehovah included, to ask for evidence of them?

It's also a valid question to wonder why Yahweh used to perform such signs and wonders as this but no longer does. Thousands of miracles are written about in the bible and each is depicted as flamboyant and unambiguously a supernatural act. Why is it that such displays no longer occur? Why is it that the "miracles" of today are either unverifiable or can just as easily (and more credibly) be explained as placebo effects or natural occurrences that are not well understood, or even simply as chance occurrences that when viewed through the blinkers of faith seem miraculous?

The gauntlet has been thrown down on many occasions, not least of which is James Randi's Million Dollar Challenge, which covers any supernatural occurrence. No one has yet produced conclusive proof and successfully claimed the prize. Whenever people place their health "in the hands of God", it tends to end badly and most Christians submit themselves to proper medical treatment. Is this a sign that they are not fully convinced of their god's healing powers?

We could organise a challenge like this. We could have, maybe, two cancer patients in the early stages of illness, one receiving medical treatment and the other the fervent prayers of his family, friends, church community, hell, even the whole world and see who gets better. But such a challenge would be unethical in much the same way as those who deny their children medical treatment behave unethically. And their track record is evidence enough to dispel any supernatural notions.

Sabbath School 26/02/11 - It's the Devil's Work Part II

I know, I'm posting this a little late, but I had to make some finishing touches on my entry to the fiction competition I'm participating in before the deadline, then when I got round to writing this I had to keep pausing to play some death metal in order to bleed off some of the rage caused by watching the videos I talk about here. This last blessed Sabbath's lesson was one I simply could not pass up the opportunity to comment on. The title was "Self Esteem", and the lesson touched briefly on the issue of origins. Frankly, I wasn't much surprised by the treatment the issue was given, but thought it worthy of mention.

The lesson itself presents the usual strawman of evolution we see from religious sources, using such charming terms as "pure chance", "cosmic accident" and "we just happened to come into existence". Note that it does not even attempt to adress any questions of evidence: all the counterarguments are emoti0nal, mostly focussed on how we eviutionists live purposeless lives and that believing the magic man blew on a pile of mud to make us gives us soooo much more self esteem. The series of lessons is centered on emotions anyway, so I won't hold that against them. It's the validity of the arguments that I have a problem with. (I'll address that later)

The exegeses of the lesson given on the Church's two main media conduits was, however, nothing short of delirious. There are two main programs that go over the lesson every week, one on each of the two major Adventist satellite channels, 3ABN and the Hope Channel, called Amazing Facts Central Study Hour and Hope Sabbath School respectively. I'll start with Central Study Hour.





Origins is addressed only on one day - sunday - one seventh of the total lesson. When Doug Bachelor attacked it, it ended up becoming a rant that took up almost half the lesson time (From the 16:38 mark to38.30). And damn me to the void if there's anyone more adept at building a strawman than Pastor Doug. He began by giving a beautiful, flowery picture of what life as a creation of God is like, so much so that I almost found myself wishing I was one of them (no, I lie. But it sure must have worked on the faithful). Then he proceeded to build up his combustible, very well ventilated man of straw, douse it in petrol and set it alight.

I'm really not swayed by the extreme contrast presented by Pastor Doug. In fact, I can give an even better one supporting and evolutionary perspectie. Here goes:

"One paradigm says that you are the product of an epic and grand story stretching back billions of years and are intricately connected to your surroundings and the universe as a whole. You know, someone asked me, "are we really products of the Universe?" And I said hell yes! He said, "How do you know," and I said we are made of exactly the same elements as the rest of the universe and in the exact same proportions. I think that's rock solid proof. Our body chemistry isn't based on, say bismuth. We're exactly the same, and we share this similarity with all the life forms we know here on Earth. Look at that paradigm, that would give us a sense of wonder and humility and an almost spiritual connection with all that exists. (see )

"Compare that with the other paradigm that says that some invisible magic man made us from dirt and that our first ancestors damned both themselves and all their descendants to a life of misery and death by eating a fruit given to them by a talking snake. It says that we are all sinners from birth and our lives have no purpose but to atone and suffer for that sin, and when you die, depending on if you accepted this far fetched (and I'm being nice here), unverifiable story you will either spend eternity glorifying and praising the magic man who put you in that situation, or if you didn't you will be cast into a lake of burning sulphur to die a horribly painful and final death (the Adventist doctrine on hell)."

There's more to be said about emotional arguments against naturalism and evolution, and I shall adress it later. Pastor Doug then went on to state that belief in evolution correlates with suicide, stating that the high suicide rates observed in adolescents is due to questions regarding origins. I don't think that's entirely correct. It's true, higher suicide rates are observed among those without religious affiliation, but I doubt very much that it's because of evolution. I'm more for the theory that higher suicide and depression rates are the result of a lack of a social support group as is present in religious congregations (pretty much the only thing we secularists need to learn from them). A whole hunch of arguments not really worth rehashing followed, including his own personal story, the argument from design, conflating Nazism and eugenics with evolution, invoking a scientific conspiracy (*facepalm*) and a modified argument from morality (if we are animals, we should act like animals).

There are a couple of other points I do find worth mentioning, though. One is Pastor Doug's assertion that a lot of smart people can be wrong about something. They once were, a few centuries ago, when they worked exclusively from a divine assumption. When they realised that the facts did not support their assumptions they changed their tactics, finding facts to draw assumptions from, instead of trying to find facts to fit with their conclusions. For example, the Old Earth theory was formulated by religious geologists who originally had the intention of finding evidence for a recent, global flood. When they did not fnd that evidence they changed their conclusions to ones that were supported by the facts. (reference)

The second point I found highly ironic. I don't remember the point he was making (and I'm too lazy to hunt for it in the video), but he said something about how prisoners who are so used to a life of crime often relapse after they have been released. I found this to be quite synonymous wiith what happens all too often with religion. A person has taken their first tentative steps towards freedom from religion, but because they are so used to religious life, be it because of vigorous indoctrination and brainwashing, sudden loss of the social framework or simple fondness of tradition they end up falling back into the pit they were trying to crawl out of.

(http://media.forestlakechurch.org/content/media/2011q102-26-self-esteem - the Hope Sabbath School video)

Next, I'll talk about Hope Sabbath School. Not much was covered here that wasn't already spoken about in CSH - social Darwinism, lack of accountability etc, plus a few Creo favorites: a perversion of my previous point about presuppositions i.e. that evolution works upon the presupposition that there is no God, that evolution requires faith to believe and that we cannot create life from non-life/we do not observe this happening today therefore it cannot have happened in the past.

But Derek Morris (who is such a great singer) and his audience didn't dilly around, virtually stating right out that they would ignore evidence for evolution in favor of what the bible says. Morris gave an anectote about a buddy of his who said something to the tune of, "I have some unanswered questions but I choose to believe what the bible says." That wasn't all, though. He went on to say that if God gave us all the answers we wouldn't understand them, and that Jesus will tell us all about it when he comes. This perpetuation of ignorance is why religion still survives. First of all, I will say that evolution does not rely on faith but on evidence, like any other science. There will always be uncertainties, but they are not simply left as is but actively researched into and ironed out. That's how science in general works, and if you are going to reject evolution, you might as well reject the rest of it as well. Second, I want to ask, if we must simply accept things on faith without giving mind to evidence, what's to stop me from going to any of the other religions that exist? What's to stop me from simply adopting a pantheistic religiosity that gives equal credence to all religions? According to all indicators, Christianity is simply another religion thought up and written by men and with the same shortcomings as all other religions. Therefore, I say there must be some more objective way of determining these things, and empiricism is that way.

Then came the actual Sabbath School on Saturday morning. In contrast to the "pros" the section was given just the time it deserves, but the reactions were no less extreme, if a little less informed. I heard such genius gems as: "God spoke. Monkeys don't speak. Therefore we did not come from monkeys", "have you ever seen a monkey loving another like itself?" (this question could be answered "yes", though I can't find any links supporting it), "my bible is my professor", "who has been redeemed by a monkey/ a scholar?", "If evolution is continuous, why have we stopped evolving?" and so on ad infinitum. Then came the very crux of the whole anti-evolution movement. The teacher simply didn't hold back, stating out-and-out that "Darwin was a servant of the Devil!".

Overall, this lesson was handled in a manner typical of that always used by Adventists: make emotional arguments backed by the bible or prophesy and ignore all evidence. Of course, they do have their creation "science" disinfo programs, like the Celebration of Creation series on the Hope channel, and I've caught a number of documentaries on 3ABN spouting the "Australopithecus was fully ape" claim and they also sometimes play Robert Gentry's long debunked videos. In reality, they are really vanity affairs simply affirming what the Big Guns say - it is the main church body itself that has the last word. When you see pastors telling biology professors how to do their job, you know they've strayed from fact and truth.

As I have stated before, emotional arguments hold no water in the light of evidence. The gist of this whole lesson was "creationism makes me feel good, therefore I will believe in it". Well, geocentricism may have felt good in the 16th century, but that still did not make it correct. Evolution is a matter of science and says nothing about self worth, self esteem and stuff like that. You may take what you like from it, but don't say it forced it on you. I don't think these fellows realise that as much as they deny the fact that we each make our own purpose in life, they are themselves making their own purpose by accepting their religion. One would think that if Christianity was the one true religion and Christian creationism the one true doctrine, then members of other religions would be suffering the same "insecurities" and "low self esteem" we atheistic evilutionists do. But they don't (and we don't), therefore it is easy to deduce that all religons have the same merits. Once again, it boils down to a social support structure.

As my earlier monologue demonstrated, it's all a matter of perspective. But I will still say that if there is any self esteem destroying belief system, it is Christianity. One of its core tenets is that we are all dirty, worthless sinners because of the actions of a distant ancestor we've never met and all deserve to suffer and die. And boy am I glad I stopped believing in that a long time ago.

***

This post from Pharyngula very aptly describes my experience regarding Adventists and Evolution. All baseless assertions and no science.