13 July 2007
When God chose the Israelites to be a priestly nation why didn't
he tell any other nation about that choice? Seriously, I really
want to know. If he had done so things would be an awful lot
more straight-forward wouldn't they? What use are priests who
are listened to only by other priests? Indeed priests who feel
defiled by talking to anybody who isn't also a priest.
You are following a tribal myth which was invented by Hebrews
to make out that whatever the Hebrew people had done was righteous
and good. What people have ever claimed that their god wasn't
on their side?
You have been taken over by a virus of the mind which was originally
designed to salve the conscience of genocidal warriors belonging
to a foreign tribe.
No tribe other than the Hebrews accepted the Hebrew god and
the Israelites did a piss-poor job of smiting the unbelievers,
just managing to eradicate a few local rival tribes who killed,
laid siege, enslaved, sacrificed animals and circumcised their
boys in the name of another god. At no time did the Israelites
ever make a significant impact on the world or create a great
and holy empire.
What does righteousness mean? Read the Bible with an open mind
for once and see what is really there. Righteous behaviour seems
to mean observing the ten commandments, half of which involve
pandering to the whims of the right jealous god. No secular society
would ever regard the ten commandments as the last word in morality.
What has tying yourself up in taboos one day in seven got to
do with being good? Nothing.
What is covetousness and why is it a sin? Is it wrong because
it is an act of jealousy? So God can be jealous of the attentions
offered to other gods, which don't exist, but envying what another
Jew has is a sin. Where is the logic or consistency in that?
Is sinning only something gods should be able to do?
This God of yours seems to be a monster. If the leader of any
country with oil behaved like your god does George W Bush would
be planning to invade. Kill everybody! Every living thing, every
animal, every man, woman, child and innocent foetus. Then say
sorry. Won't do it again. Next time will be with fire. He's a
bloody psychopath! If God was the leader of a country he would
be indicted for war crimes, murder, arson, genocide, incitement
to murder, incitement to genocide and crimes against humanity.
Not forgetting Holy Spiritual rape of course. If he was your
daughter's husband you would be hiring a hitman and no jury would
convict you.
How can you love a monster who would kill millions and promises
to do it again?
How can you call Lot a righteous man? If you knew a man who
offered his daughters up to be raped by a mob would you call
him a righteous man? "I was drunk, both nights" wouldn't
count as a defence against a charge of incest even in Alabama.
Neither would "God told me to kill my son! Don't blame me,
he told me to do it."
Genesis is a myth that the people who made it up didn't expect
anybody to believe literally. Literalism is an abdication of
thought.
Genesis does not make any sense whatsoever about astronomy.
99.99999999999999999999999999999999999% or more of the universe
is dismissed in a single sub-clause. This is not just wrong it
is an insult to the intelligence of everybody on the planet as
well as the universe. Not a single person has ever studied geology,
astronomy or biology in China or India and come to the conclusion
that the only way to make sense of it all is to have special
creation, a young Earth and a global flood by a jealous Jewish
god - but where can they find the theory to explain all that?
Creation science barely exists outside America. You could probably
fit the rest of the world's biblical literalists into a single
church and still have room for a breeding pair of vegetarian
Tyrannosaurus Rex.
American science is being crippled by this biblical literalism
your nation is becoming a laughing stock. That is the biggest
tragedy of modern times: the start of the American Dark Age.
You are turning your back on the enlightenment and are following
the Islamic world in a retreat into superstitious barbarism.
The existence of the universe might be explicable by the existence
of a creator god (as one candidate theory) but the universe does
not testify clearly to the existence of a jealous Jewish queer-hating,
shellfish and pork despising god who is squeamish about menstruation
despite inventing it. Jesus is Lord - look there's a rainbow
- that proves it doesn't work on anybody with the intellectual
agility of a free-thinking nine year old. There is a universe,
it was either created or it came into being some other way. I
am not aware of anybody ever deciding that Jesus was the son
of God by studying science. There is simply no way to get from
scientific investigation to knowing the fine biographical details
of the creator, you have to either settle for not knowing (the
scientifically correct approach) or you choose to believe somebody's
mythology on its own merits. You can't find evidence for Jesus
or Moses by looking down a microscope or digging in the sand.
They left no convincing evidence of their existence let alone
their story.
You absolutely do need faith to believe in the god of Abraham,
you don't need faith to believe in "The Great Architect" or
other deistic entity which was so commonly believed in by so
many great scientists in the eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries. There may be a plausible case for a god, there is
no convincing case for God apart from the Bible, which is only
ever convincing to those who choose to be convinced by it.
I will not discuss evolution with any Christian who does not
demonstrate an understanding of evolution. It is simply a total
waste of my time. If you wish to discuss evolution you will have
to demonstrate that you understand what it is and how it works.
So far I have seen no evidence of any such understanding in anything
you have written and indeed you seem to share the deliberate
wilful misunderstanding common to many Christians. Is this down
to genuine, casual or tactical ignorance?
Atheism doesn't have any dogma or creed. Atheists disagree about
all sorts of things. We don't share common heroes or ways of
analysing the world. I have come across some very nice atheists
and some total jerks who have nothing in common with my beliefs.
Some atheists have extremely strict moral codes, some are scarier
than religious puritans. Most atheists have no interest whatsoever
in convereting anybody or wasting another minute discussing a
subject they regard as futile and stupid.
Instead of inventing ways to prove false what you know to be
true why not come up with some examples which are not biased?
There are dogs in England. I know, I have seen them. How about
proving there are no dragons in England? That is a much fairer
comparison. But then dragons are meant to be quite big, aren't
they? It would be possible to be fairly sure that were no dragons
in England based on the assumption that anything that big has
to make itself known from time to time. It isn't invisible. But
of course God is invisible and he apparently lives in heaven
where we can't go while we are alive as well as also in some
unclear hand-waving way he's also everywhere and he only appears
to those who believe he exists. That's handy isn't it? Proving
the non-existence of something that is hiding everywhere and
nowhere is to all intents and purposes impossible. Anybody who
claims to know for absolute certain that God doesn't exist is
no scientist, that is a faith position. It isn't my position.
That isn't any kind of admission of weakness, there is great
strenth in doubt. I am not certain that God does not exist in
the same sense that I am not certain that Elvis is dead.
Why is death there to begin with is actually a reasonably good
question to ask. First off could there ever not be death? Once
you have living things which are complicated self-repairing mechanisms
it is inherent in that state that there is the possibility of
damage which is too severe to repair. Nobody has to invent or
allow death, it requires magical intervention to create immortality.
Mortality is the default, just like it is with human-made devices,
if you build a car you don't have to invent a supernatural Death
of Cars to allow the car to cease to be a car. If the car gets
damaged severely it will cease to be a car. With living things
which reproduce death becomes a good survival strategy, for the
genes, as it is the genes which do the surviving. Death of individuals
is explicable in just the same way as dust is explicable. Most
household dust is comprised of dead human skin cells. Programmed
cell death is part of the survival strategy of the genes of the
individual, death of the individual is also part of the gene's
survival strategy. Life kills. The longer an individual lives
the more damaged they become. Sex and death is a great way around
this which keeps the genes alive far better than trying to repair
a body using repair instructions which themselves are also being
damaged. If you don't understand evolution this may not make
any sense to you, that is your problem, there are plenty of good
books out there that explain it, try reading one written by somebody
who actually wants you to understand the theories rather than
happily dismiss them.
The majority of people who believe in evolution don't understand
it. Almost everybody who doesn't believe in evolution doesn't
understand it. However almost everybody who does understand evolution
does believe it. You really can't say the same for any religion.
There are plenty of atheists who could hold their own in theological
discussions but few choose to. No Creation Scientist could ever
get a job in a university outside of the bible-belt for the same
reason European universities don't have chairs of astrology.
Haven't I mentioned that I don't think the Bible was dictated
by God? Why are you still quoting it at me as if I should be
impressed? I am not. It is a big book of Hebrew nonsense, I am
not a Hebrew and I don't respond to nonsense. The Bible says
I am a fool, so what? The Koran says you are wrong and will be
punished by God.
I do not deny God because I want to break his rules. I don't
believe in God for exactly the same reason I don't believe in
the Tooth Fairy: I know the story was made up, I know why it
was made up, I know why it is passed on and I know a much better
explanation for the thing the story tries to explain. End of
story. I am not a wicked sinner, I haven't had a fight since
I was 14, I don't steal, I don't lie, I don't cheat on my wife
and I have taken far fewer drugs than your Christian President
did. This slur that people don't want to believe in the god they
really know is real in order to carry on sinning is simply absurd
and lame.
I don't think the Bible was written by genius madmen. I don't
think they were geniuses. I have read the thing, some of it is
absolute drivel. The central character isn't believable in any
sense of the word. It is full of filth and violence and thoroughly
reprehensible behaviour. Many of the people in it are total shits
doing dishonest things which would make Greek heroes blush. I
struggle to recall a single major character who behaves reasonably.
If God has a message for me he should know where I live and
what it would take to make me take him seriously. Anybody can
pretend to have talked with a god. I do not hand over the keys
to my brain to anybody who asks for them and if you think that
is a fault then we will just have to agree to differ. I am not
credulous, I don't willingly accept bullshit and then feel myself
a hero for doing so.
The Bible is not consistent. It really is not. Genesis contains
no mention of Satan or an afterlife. That's is pretty inconsistent
with Revelations. If it had meant Satan in the form of a snake
why didn't it say that? If that is what it meant why did God
punish snakes for the crime of, well, being impersonated by Satan?
Either the Bible is inconsistent or God is a shit who acts like
a spoilt child. If God is everywhere at once how can he have
been in another part of the Garden when the great mythic fruit
theft took place? If you think the Bible is consistent please
give me a thorough and complete description of what happened
to Jesus from the moment of his death to the end of the day on
which he was seen alive again, an account which uses and harmonizes
all the Gospel accounts of the whereabouts of all characters
involved. Even the Public Defender from Pig's Knuckle Arkansas
could expose huge and telling inconsistencies in those supposed
witness statements.
It has never been my contention that the Bible is all false
and nothing in it is true. That would be an absurd position to
take. My position is that the Bible is a series of old manuscripts
detailing Hebrew mythology, written by men, possibly written
by men who genuinely believed they were writing the word of God.
As there are no gods and therefore gods cannot speak to men the
Bible is not divinely inspired, nothing is.
If God wants me to believe him let him make himself known to
me. If he is speaking to me he has a very warped sense of fair
play because I have never heard anything. I have listened. What
I haven't done is sucked sounds out of the silence by an act
of will and then prayed to forget the details about how the "dialogue" began.
Have you ever heard the phrase "it is written"? We
don't give much credence these days to things simply because
they have been written down by people who have mastered that
rare talent. We no longer give things special credence because
they are on the internet or in newspapers either. In ancient
times writing was honoured more because scribes saw to it that
their talents were appreciated and properly rewarded: basically
they enjoyed being fed and bed in return for writing. Your attitude
to the Bible belongs in another world, a world in which only
a handful of privileged men (and of course no women) could write.
You need the Bible to be true, you have faith so it is true.
The evidence must show it to be true because it is the basis
of your faith and your faith is what makes you superior to other
people. Your entire life happiness strategy is based upon believing
in the Bible totally and thereby validating your life and making
you feel important. There is no point debating with you as you
have not made any efforts to understand my position.
You say God is using you to get my attention, what evidence
have you got for that? I need some proof. You can prove to me
that you are in contact with God quite easily by performing a miracle,
ask your god to reveal to you the location of the next fatal
global scale "Act of God", just the name of the nearest
city to the next natural disaster that will kill enough people
to make
it onto CNN: volcanoes, earthquakes, or tsunamis, not weather
related disasters which are relatively easy to predict by mortals.
If that is too showy or he doesn't do indiscriminate killing
these days then ask for the gift of tongues and telephone me.
God will know my home number and my mobile.
Before you tell me that God doesn't work this way please explain
how he does work and how you know. If a burning bush is good
enough for Moses and tombs vomiting zombies is OK for Jerusalem
on Good Friday (according to one unreliable unimpeachable witness)
why fob me off with you and your underwhelming persuasive talents?
I have one last question for you, please answer as honestly
as you can: how long would you last in the real hell of another
god before you admitted you were wrong?
If you won't give that question the careful, well thought out
and honest answer it deserves there is no point in me publishing
your reply. The question does make sense, you can imagine it
and you can answer truthfully. If you choose to duck answering
you will have demonstrated that you have no intention of debating,
merely of witnessing to me and so you can go forth and multiply.
But don't worry, I won't wish to send you to eternal torment,
I am not as sick as your blessedly imaginary god.
--
Martin Willett
http://mwillett.org/ |