Weblog
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
-

Currently Reading
The Philosopher's Apprentice: A Novel
By James Morrow
see relatedDone?
Hey all, I'm done with this blog, at least for awhile. I've gotten sick of it. It used to be I'd get some honest debate going on my sites, but those days are long gone.
I've also been dealing with some personal issues that have been more pressing... I was stabbed two weeks ago in a mugging, and I'm recovering from that. It's led me to reevaluate my life, and at the moment I'd rather study evolution, religion, history, politics, etc. for my own edification rather than to make some pithy comments online.
I've enjoyed the journey, grown a bit and learned a lot myself. My thanks to everyone who participated on any of my sites.
Peace, Love, Krisko Disko
Saturday, March 08, 2008
-

Currently Reading
Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy
By Charlie Savage
see relatedBush vetoes anti-torture bill
Sorry for my lack of posts, I recently had some surgery done to my arm, making typing slow and laborious.
According to CNN, Bush recently vetoed a bill that would have banned US torture practices such as waterboarding. The Bush administration is adamant that waterboarding is not torture, but this article I found is quite convincing to the contrary: Warning: not for the faint of heart.Posted here.
So much talk of waterboarding, so much controversy. But what is it really? How bad? I wanted to write the definitive thread on waterboarding, settle the issue. Torture, or not?
To determine the answer, I knew I had to try it. I looked at my two small children. Surely, in the interests of science?.....
But alas, my wife had objections.
Perhaps her?
Sadly, she is proficient in Ju Jitsu, and I am unlikely to waterboard her.
That leaves me.
***
Seriously, I determined to give this a try, see how bad it was: Settle the debate authoritatively. Torture, or not?
I figure I would be a good test subject. I am incredibly fit and training for a 100 mile endurance run. The main thing about such an event is ability to tolerate pain. I am good at this. I am trained.
I also have experience with free-diving from my college days. I once held my breath for 4 minutes and two seconds. Once, while training as a lifeguard I swam laps without breathing until I passed out, so that I could know my limits.
To determine whether waterboarding is an acceptable interrogation technique or torture I must research it an then undergo it myself. Once I have done this, Elucidator Diogenes Tomndeb and all the rest of those liberal scum (no offense intended) must accept my now accept my now expert opinion.
So, here's what I would do. First I would google waterboarding to understand the basic concepts than I would try it on myself. First, self inflicted and then, if necessary, inflicted by my wife.(she has no problem torturing me. We've been married almost 15 years.)
These are the results of my research and experience:
The goal of waterboarding is to simulate drowning without the actual drowning or inhalation into the lungs. In order to accomplish this the subject is forced to lie on an inclined plane with his head lower than his lungs and then water is dumped onto his/her face (always keeping the lungs above the "Water line.") This simulates drowning and causes a panic.
There are some advanced techniques that make this more extreme, but that's the basic concept.
Easy enough to duplicate. I have an inclined weight bench and a watering can. No problem. I lie on this and tilt the watercan to pour water on my mouth and nose. Water goes up my nose causing me to gag and choke and splutter, but after a try or two I'm able to suppress my reflex, relax breathe in shallowly and then expel rapidly (shooting out the water) and maintain my composure. This is not too bad. with my diving experience, you would never break me this way. I can't beleive those AL Zarqawi guys were such pussies.
Back to researching the advanced techniques:
The first of these is wet rag in mouth. I try it. Ok, I can handle this too. It makes it a little bit more difficult to maintain control. I didn't realize it, but the first time around I was selectively breathing through either mouth or nose, to help maintain control. The wet rag eliminates the mouth as an option. You have to really concentrate to maintain control, breathing very shallowly on the inhale and not allowing yourself to exhale until you have a good lungfull with which to expel the water in you nose throat and sinuses. Then, you have to inhale slowly but fast enough to pull in a lungful of air before your nose throat and sinuses fill up. Difficult, but doable with some self-control. I can see where this would get very unpleasant if you lost control, but still, not terrible, not torture, per se in my book. It wasn't as bad as my vasectomy or last root canal, and not nearly so bad as the last OP I read by Liberal.
Next up is saran wrap. The idea is that you wrap saran wrap around the mouth in several layers, and poke a hole in the mouth area, and then waterboard away. I didn't reall see how this was an improvement on the rag technique, and so far I would categorize waterboarding as simply unpleasant rather than torture, but I've come this far so I might as well go on.
Now, those of you who know me will know that I am both enamored of my own toughness and prone to hyperbole. The former, I feel that I am justifiably proud of. The latter may be a truth in many cases, but this is the simple fact:
It took me ten minutes to recover my senses once I tried this. I was shuddering in a corner, convinced I narrowly escaped killing myself.
Here's what happened:
The water fills the hole in the saran wrap so that there is either water or vaccum in your mouth. The water pours into your sinuses and throat. You struggle to expel water periodically by building enough pressure in your lungs. With the saran wrap though each time I expelled water, I was able to draw in less air. Finally the lungs can no longer expel water and you begin to draw it up into your respiratory tract.
It seems that there is a point that is hardwired in us. When we draw water into our respiratory tract to this point we are no longer in control. All hell breaks loose. Instinct tells us we are dying.
I have never been more panicked in my whole life. Once your lungs are empty and collapsed and they start to draw fluid it is simply all over. You [b]know[b] you are dead and it's too late. Involuntary and total panic.
There is absolutely nothing you can do about it. It would be like telling you not to blink while I stuck a hot needle in your eye.
At the time my lungs emptied and I began to draw water, I would have sold my children to escape. There was no choice, or chance, and willpower was not involved.
I never felt anything like it, and this was self-inflicted with a watering can, where I was in total control and never in any danger.
And I understood.
Waterboarding gets you to the point where you draw water up your respiratory tract triggering the drowning reflex. Once that happens, it's all over. No question.
Some may go easy without a rag, some may need a rag, some may need saran wrap.
Once you are there it's all over.
I didn't allow anybody else to try it on me. Inconceivable. I know I only got the barest taste of what it's about since I was in control, and not restrained and controlling the flow of water.
But there's no chance. No chance at all.
So, is it torture?
I'll put it this way. If I had the choice of being waterboarded by a third party or having my fingers smashed one at a time by a sledgehammer, I'd take the fingers, no question.
It's horrible, terrible, inhuman torture. I can hardly imagine worse. I'd prefer permanent damage and disability to experiencing it again. I'd give up anything, say anything, do anything.
The Spanish Inquisition knew this. It was one of their favorite methods.
It's torture. No question. Terrible terrible torture. To experience it and understand it and then do it to another human being is to leave the realm of sanity and humanity forever. No question in my mind.
I think it's extremely obvoius that waterboarding is torture, and Bush is lowering us down to a nation that legalizes the practices that we were once outraged about at Abu Ghraib. This is sick and disturbing. And people wonder why the world hates America.
Friday, February 15, 2008
-

Currently Reading
Gospel Parallels, NRSV Edition: A Comparison of the Synoptic Gospels (Bible Students)
By Burton H. Throckmorton
see relatedThe Birth of Jesus
This is just noting a few of the most notable issues I've found with the Jesus birth accounts, which is by no means exhaustive, but merely the ones I noted during my study of the Bible at the beginning of the decline of my faith. While these have been well documented by many scholars, I came about these by reading nothing but the Bible about five years ago, which I then looked to outside sources to corroborate.
Only two of the four gospels, Matthew and Luke, deem Jesus' birth to be a noteworthy event. John tells us only of the Incarnation - that the Logos "became flesh" - while Mark doesn't say anything about Jesus until his baptism at around 30 years old. Certainly Mark knows nothing of the Annunciation or the Virgin Birth. In fact, Mark's account seems to indicate there was no angelic announcement of Jesus' birth and godliness, since in 3:30-31, Jesus' family declare him to be "out of his mind" upon declaring himself the Son of Man.
There are discrepancies in the genealogies of the gospels, which I'll merely link to and move on.
Luke 2 tells us that Jesus was born in Nazareth, while Matthew 2 tells us that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, and moved to Nazareth after his return from Egypt.
Then there's the issue of the Roman census talked about in Luke 2. It indicates that Joseph was an inhabitant of Nazareth, yet for some reason was compelled to travel to the "city of David called Bethlehem, because he was descended from the house and family of David." The genealogies given to us by Luke list dozens of generations between David and Joseph. It's doubtful that Joseph would even know his genealogy going back this far, let alone which part of his genealogy to trace back (I, personally, would have no idea whether to follow my family line back to Ireland, England, Sweden, Finland, Norway or Northwest America). Furthermore, why on earth would he be required to return to the land of his ancestors anyways, when a census would likely require him to register himself in the town he lives in. This would be a ridiculous way to conduct a census.
Just a few things to mull over.
Peace, Love, Krisko Disko
Thursday, February 14, 2008
-

Currently Reading
The Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics)
see relatedIslam - Religion of Peace?
We've all heard Bush and Blair declare Islam to be a "religion of peace" whenever they discuss terrorism, and how terrorists go against the central tenets of the Muslim faith. But is this true? Not since the 17th century has Christianity inspired violence in the same way that Islam does today. Of course, much is to be said about the culture terrorists are raised in, with terribly violent regimes in the Middle East nations that are predominantly Muslim. But what of all the "homegrown" terrorists? The answer lies in the Qur'an, the holy book of Islam. Now, to dispel the inevitable cried of "racist" and "bigot" that one invariably gets for questioning a culture aside from the one they were raised in, I by no means believe that all Muslims are violent or terrorists. My qualm is with the book itself, not with any adherents of the faith (except, of course, those that ARE violent).
The Qur'an (or Koran, as many of you know it as) has many passages about peace, the ones toted about by those propagating the "Islam as peace" mantra.
"There is no good in much of their secret conferences save (in) him who enjoineth almsgiving and kindness and peace-making among the people." Surah 4:114
And of course, there's the ever famous quote of tolerance of other religions:
"There is no compulsion in religion." Surah 2:256
But many people do not know the Qur'an's doctrine of abrogation, whereby all later verses replace earlier verses:"None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?" Surah 2: 106
"When We substitute one revelation for another, and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages), they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not." Surah 16:101
Unfortunately, most of the peaceful verses were from Mohammed's early teachings in his hometown of Mecca. These tend to be replaced by his later, more violent teachings in Medina, when Mohammed led an army and no longer had to remain under the radar. The Qur'an is not written in chronological order, as the Bible (basically) is. Instead, it is arranged by the length of the book, and thus the later teachings are not at the end. The last teaching is accepted as Book 9, often known as the Book of the Sword. Some of the teachings found within Book 9:
“Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of believers” Surah 9:14
“O ye who believe! Fight the Unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him” Surah 9:123
"Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them" Surah 9:73
These later passages (and many others) are the ones generally used to justify Jihad. Those that propagate the belief that Islam is a religion of peace generally don't know about the replacement of Allah's word.
Please let me know if there's anything else you'd like to hear about Islam or the Qur'an, or if is even a topic of interest.
Peace, Love, Krisko Disko
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
-

Currently Reading
The New Concise History of the Crusades (Critical Issues in History)
By Thomas F. Madden
see relatedUnderstanding Religious Delusion
If you don't feel like reading a long post, there's a video link at the bottom with the same information. Either one is good.
Let's imagine that I tell you the following story:- There is a man who lives at the North Pole.
- He lives there with his wife and a bunch of elves.
- During the year, he and the elves build toys.
- Then, on Christmas Eve, he loads up a sack with all the toys.
- He puts the sack in his sleigh.
- He hitches up eight (or possibly nine) flying reindeer.
- He then flies from house to house, landing on the rooftops of each one.
- He gets out with his sack and climbs down the chimney.
- He leaves toys for the children of the household.
- He climbs back up the chimney, gets back in his sleigh, and flies to the next house.
- He does this all around the world in one night.
- Then he flies back to the North Pole to repeat the cycle next year.
But let's say that I am an adult, and I am your friend, and I reveal to you that I believe that this story is true. I believe it with all my heart. And I try to talk about it with you and convert you to believe it as I do.
What would you think of me? You would think that I am delusional, and rightly so.
Why do you think that I am delusional? It is because you know that Santa is imaginary. The story is a total fairy tale. No matter how much I talk to you about Santa, you are not going to believe that Santa is real. Flying reindeer, for example, are make-believe. The dictionary defines delusion as, "A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence." That definition fits perfectly.
Since you are my friend, you might try to help me realize that my belief in Santa is a delusion. The way that you would try to do that is by asking me some questions. For example, you might say to me:
- "But how can the sleigh carry enough toys for everyone in the world?" I say to you that the sleigh is magical. It has the ability to do this intrinsically.
- "How does Santa get into houses and apartments that don't have chimneys?" I say that Santa can make chimneys appear, as shown to all of us in the movie The Santa Clause.
- "How does Santa get down the chimney if there's a fire in the fireplace?" I say that Santa has a special flame-resistant suit, and it cleans itself too.
- "Why doesn't the security system detect Santa?" Santa is invisible to security systems.
- "How can Santa travel fast enough to visit every child in one night?" Santa is timeless.
- "How can Santa know whether every child has been bad or good?" Santa is omniscient.
- "Why are the toys distributed so unevenly? Why does Santa deliver more toys to rich kids, even if they are bad, than he ever gives to poor kids?" There is no way for us to understand the mysteries of Santa because we are mere mortals, but Santa has his reasons. For example, perhaps poor children would be unable to handle a flood of expensive electronic toys. How would they afford the batteries? So Santa spares them this burden.
Why didn't my answers satisfy you? Why do you still know that I am delusional? It is because my answers have done nothing but confirm your assessment. My answers are ridiculous. In order to answer your questions, I invented, completely out of thin air, a magical sleigh, a magical self-cleaning suit, magical chimneys, "timelessness" and magical invisibility. You don't believe my answers because you know that I am making this stuff up. The invalidating evidence is voluminous.
Now let me show you another example...
Another Example
Imagine that I tell you the following story:
- I was in my room one night.
- Suddenly, my room became exceedingly bright.
- Next thing I know there is an angel in my room.
- He tells me an amazing story.
- He says that there is a set of ancient golden plates buried in the side of a hill in New York.
- On them are the books of a lost race of Jewish people who inhabited North America.
- These plates bear inscriptions in the foreign language of these people.
- Eventually the angel leads me to the plates and lets me take them home.
- Even though the plates are in a foreign language, the angel helps me to decipher and translate them.
- Then the plates are taken up into heaven, never to be seen again.
- I have the book that I translated from the plates. It tells of amazing things -- an entire civilization of Jewish people living here in the United States 2,000 years ago.
- And the resurrected Jesus came and visited these people!
- I also showed the golden plates to a number of real people who are my eye witnesses, and I have their signed attestations that they did, in fact, see and touch the plates before the plates were taken up into heaven.
You would ask some obvious questions. For example, at the very simplest level, you might ask, "Where are the ruins and artifacts from this Jewish civilization in America?" The book transcribed from the plates talks about millions of Jewish people doing all kinds of things in America. They have horses and oxen and chariots and armor and large cities. What happened to all of this? I answer simply: it is all out there, but we have not found it yet. "Not one city? Not one chariot wheel? Not one helmet?" you ask. No, we haven't found a single bit of evidence, but it is out there somewhere. You ask me dozens of questions like this, and I have answers for them all.
Most people would assume that I am delusional if I told them this story. They would assume that there were no plates and no angel, and that I had written the book myself. Most people would ignore the attestations -- having people attest to it means nothing, really. I could have paid the attesters off, or I could have fabricated them. Most people would reject my story without question.
What's interesting is that there are millions of people who actually do believe this story of the angel and the plates and the book and the Jewish people living in North America 2,000 years ago. Those millions of people are members of the Mormon Church, headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah. The person who told this incredible story was a man named Joseph Smith, and he lived in the United States in the early 1800s. He told his story, and recorded what he "translated from the plates", in the Book of Mormon.
If you meet a Mormon and ask them about this story, they can spend hours talking to you about it. They can answer every question you have. Yet the 5.99 billion of us who are not Mormons can see with total clarity that the Mormons are delusional. It is as simple as that. You and I both know with 100% certainty that the Mormon story is no different from the story of Santa. And we are correct in our assessment. The invalidating evidence is voluminous.
Another example
Imagine that I tell you this story:
- A man was sitting in a cave minding his own business.
- A very bright flash of light appeared.
- A voice spoke out one word: "Read!" The man felt like he was being squeezed to death. This happened several times.
- Then the man asked, "What should I read?"
- The voice said, "Read in the name of your Lord who created humans from a clinging [zygote]. Read for your Lord is the most generous. He taught people by the pen what they didn't know before."
- The man ran home to his wife.
- While running home, he saw the huge face of an angel in the sky. The angel told the man that he was to be the messenger of God. The angel also identified himself as Gabriel.
- At home that night, the angel appeared to the man in his dreams.
- Gabriel appeared to the man over and over again. Sometimes it was in dreams, sometimes during the day as "revelations in his heart," sometimes preceded by a painful ringing in his ears (and then the verses would flow from Gabriel right out of the man), and sometimes Gabriel would appear in the flesh and speak. Scribes wrote down everything the man said.
- Then, one night about 11 years after the first encounter with Gabriel, Gabriel appeared to the man with a magical horse. The man got on the horse, and the horse took him to Jerusalem. Then the winged horse took the man up to the seven layers of heaven. The man was able to actually see heaven and meet and talk with people there. Then Gabriel brought the man back to earth.
- The man proved that he had actually been to Jerusalem on the winged horse by accurately answering questions about buildings and landmarks there.
- The man continued receiving the revelations from Gabriel for
23 years, and then they stopped. All of the revelations were recorded
by the scribes in a book which we still have today.
[Source: "Understanding Islam" by Yahiya Emerick, Alpha press, 2002]
But you need to be careful. This story is the foundation of the Muslim religion, practiced by more than a billion people around the world. The man is named Mohammed, and the book is the Koran (also spelled Qur'an or Qur'aan). This is the sacred story of the Koran's creation and the revelation of Allah to mankind.
Despite the fact that a billion Muslims profess some level of belief in this story, people outside the Muslim faith consider the story to be imaginary. No one believes this story because this story is a fairy tale. They consider the Koran to be a book written by a man and nothing more. A winged horse that flew to heaven? That is imaginary -- as imaginary as flying reindeer.
If you are a Christian, please take a moment right now to look back at the Mormon and Muslim stories. Why is it so easy for you to look at these stories and see that they are imaginary fairy tales? How do you know, with complete certainty, that Mormons and Muslims are delusional? You know these things for the same reason you know that Santa is imaginary. There is no evidence for any of it. The stories involve magical things like angels and winged horses, hallucinations, dreams. Horses cannot fly -- we all know that. And even if they could, where would the horse fly to? The vacuum of space? Or is the horse somehow "dematerialized" and then "rematerialized" in heaven? If so, those processes are made up too. Every bit of it is imaginary. We all know that.
An unbiased observer can see how imaginary these three stories are. In addition, Muslims can see that Mormons are delusional, Mormons can see that Muslims are delusional, and Christians can see that both Mormons and Muslims are delusional.
One final example
Now let me tell you one final story:
- God inseminated a virgin named Mary, in order to bring his son incarnate into our world.
- Mary and her fiancé, Joseph, had to travel to Bethlehem to register for the census. There Mary gave birth to the Son of God.
- God put a star in the sky to guide people to the baby.
- In a dream God told Joseph to take his family to Egypt. Then God stood by and watched as Herod killed thousands and thousands of babies in Israel in an attempt to kill Jesus.
- As a man, God's son claimed that he was God incarnate: "I am the way, the truth and the life," he said.
- This man performed many miracles. He healed lots of sick people. He turned water into wine. These miracles prove that he is God.
- But he was eventually given the death sentence and killed by crucifixion.
- His body was placed in a tomb.
- But three days later, the tomb was empty.
- And the man, alive once again but still with his wounds (so anyone who doubted could see them and touch them), appeared to many people in many places.
- Then he ascended into heaven and now sits at the right hand of God the father almighty, never to be seen again.
- Today you can have a personal relationship with the Lord Jesus. You can pray to this man and he will answer your prayers. He will cure your diseases, rescue you from emergencies, help you make important business and family decisions, comfort you in times of worry and grief, etc.
- This man will also give you eternal life, and if you are good he has a place for you in heaven after you die.
- The reason we know all this is because, after the man died, four people named Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote accounts of the man's life. Their written attestations are proof of the veracity of this story.
Here is the thing that I would like to help you understand: The four billion people who are not Christians look at the Christian story in exactly the same way that you look at the Santa story, the Mormon story and the Muslim story. In other words, there are four billion people who stand outside of the Christian bubble, and they can see reality clearly. The fact is, the Christian story is completely imaginary.
How do the four billion non-Christians know, with complete certainty, that the Christian story is imaginary? Because the Christian story is just like the Santa story, the Mormon story and the Muslim story. There is the magical insemination, the magical star, the magical dreams, the magical miracles, the magical resurrection, the magical ascension and so on. People outside the Christian faith look at the Christian story and note these facts:
- The miracles are supposed to "prove" that Jesus is God, but, predictably, these miracles left behind no tangible evidence for us to examine and scientifically verify today. They all involved faith healings and magic tricks - see this proof.
- Jesus is resurrected, but, predictably, he does not appear to anyone today - see this proof.
- Jesus ascended into heaven and answers our prayers, but, predictably, when we pray to him nothing happens. We can statistically analyse prayer and find that prayers are never answered - see this proof.
- The book where Matthew, Mark, Luke and John make their attestations does exist, but, predictably, it is chock full of problems and contradictions - see this proof.
- And so on.
Now, look at what is happening inside your mind at this moment. I am using solid, verifiable evidence to show you that the Christian story is imaginary. Your rational mind can see the evidence. Four billion non-Christians would be happy to confirm for you that the Christian story is imaginary. However, if you are a practicing Christian, you can probably feel your "religious mind" overriding both your rational mind and your common sense as we speak. Why? Why were you able to use your common sense to so easily reject the Santa story, the Mormon story and the Muslim story, but when it comes to the Christian story, which is just as imaginary, you are not?
Try, just for a moment, to look at Christianity with the same amount of healthy skepticism that you used when approaching the stories of Santa, Joseph Smith and Mohammed. Use your common sense to ask some very simple questions of yourself:
- Is there any physical evidence that Jesus existed? - No. He left no trace. His body "ascended into heaven." He wrote nothing down. None of his "miracles" left any permanent evidence. There is, literally, nothing.
- Is there any reason to believe that Jesus actually performed these miracles, or that he rose from the dead, or that he ascended into heaven? - There is no more of a reason to believe this than there is to believe that Joseph Smith found the golden plates hidden in New York, or that Mohammed rode on a magical winged horse to heaven. Probably less of a reason, given that the record of Jesus' life is 2,000 years old, while that of Joseph Smith is less than 200 years old.
- You mean to tell me that I am supposed to believe this story of Jesus, and there is no proof or evidence to go by beyond a few attestations in the New Testament of a Bible that is provably meaningless? - Yes, you are supposed to believe it. You are supposed to take it on "faith."
Therefore, the question I would ask you to consider right now is simple: Why is it that human beings can detect fairy tales with complete certainty when those fairy tales come from other faiths, but they cannot detect the fairy tales that underpin their own faith? Why do they believe their chosen fairy tale with unrelenting passion and reject the others as nonsense? For example:
- Christians know that
when the Egyptians built gigantic pyramids and mummified the bodies of
their pharaohs, that it was a total waste of time -- otherwise
Christians would build pyramids.
- Christians know that when the Aztecs carved the
heart out of a virgin and ate it, that it accomplished nothing --
otherwise Christians would kill virgins.
- Christians know that when Muslims face Mecca to pray, that it is pointless -- otherwise Christians would face Mecca when they pray.
- Christians know that when Jews keep meat and dairy products separate, that they are wasting their time -- otherwise the cheeseburger would not be an American obsession.
A simple experiment
If you are a Christian who believes in the power of prayer, here is a very simple experiment that will show you something very interesting about your faith.
Take a coin out of your pocket. Now pray sincerely to Ra:
- Dear Ra, almighty sun god, I am
going to flip this ordinary coin 50 times, and I am asking you to cause
it to land heads-side-up all 50 times. In Ra's name I pray, Amen.
What does this mean? Most people would look at this data and conclude that Ra is imaginary. We prayed to Ra, and Ra did nothing. We can prove that Ra is imaginary (at least in the sense of prayer-answering ability) by using statistical analysis. If we flip the coin thousands of times, praying to Ra each time, we will find that the coin lands heads or tails in exact correlation with the normal laws of probability. Ra has absolutely no effect on the coin no matter how much we pray. Even if we find a thousand of Ra's most faithful believers and ask them to do the praying/flipping, the results will be the same. Therefore, as rational people, we conclude that Ra is imaginary. We look at Ra in the same way that we look at Leprechauns, Mermaids, Santa and so on. We know that people who believe in Ra are delusional.
Now I want you to try the experiment again, but this time I want you to pray to Jesus Christ instead of Ra. Pray sincerely to Jesus like this:
- Dear Jesus, I know that you
exist and I know that you hear and answer prayers as you promise in the
Bible. I am going to flip this ordinary coin 50 times, and I am asking
you to cause it to land heads-side-up all 50 times. In Jesus' name I
pray, Amen.
If we flip the coin thousands of times, praying to Jesus each time, we will find that the coin lands heads or tails in exact correlation with the normal laws of probability. It is not like there are two laws of probability -- one for Christians who pray and the other for non-Christians. There is only one law of probability because prayers have zero effect. Jesus has no effect on our planet no matter how much we pray. We can prove that conclusively using statitical analysis.
If you believe in God, watch what is happening inside your mind right now. The data is absolutely identical in both experiments. With Ra you looked at the data rationally and concluded that Ra is imaginary. But with Jesus... something else will happen. In your mind, you are already coming up with a thousand rationalizations to explain why Jesus did not answer your prayers:
- It is not his will
- He doesn't have time
- I didn't pray the right way
- I am not worthy
- I do not have enough faith
- I cannot test the Lord like this
- It is not part of Jesus' plan for me
- And on and on and on...
You are an expert at creating rationalizations for Jesus. The reason you are an expert is because Jesus does not answer any of your prayers. The reason why Jesus does not answer any of your prayers is because Jesus and God are imaginary.
Courtesy of God Is Imaginary. The identical post, in video format, below:
My next post, which hopefully will be done within a week, should be on Islam as a "religion of peace." The Christians who read this should be excited for the break. I'll also probably do one on the upcoming election, that is unless I hear that people are already sick of the subject.
Peace, Love, Krisko Disko
- browse entries:
- older »









