Thursday, December 12, 2013

You Don’t Demand Respect.

Respect. The word is so used up, its real meaning is diminishing. Theists and unfortunately, some atheists have expressed concern about being disrespectful to religion every time it's been criticized. The theists demand that we should respect their religious belief  while some atheists say that we must respect other people’s religious belief.

So before we start, let us go to the basics. What is respect?

They say that respect is a due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others. Simply put, it is a positive feeling of submission and… wait a minute... submission? Yes, submission to a specific action, a conduct that you regard in highest esteem.  You praise it, honor it. That is respect.

Now that you know what is respect, we ask, “When we criticize god belief and religion, are we being disrespectful?” Most theists and some atheists might answer yes.

To question the authority of the divine is considered as disrespectful. Most religions have expressed their deep hatred with doubt and rational inquiry to the point that no one has the right to question the truth and revelations of faith. Now, for some reason, this kind of thinking became so established in our mind that we often think that when we carp religious belief we are automatically disrespectful. Unfortunately, even some atheists have this kind of mind-set.

Is it also possible that religion is hiding behind this so-called “respect?”

As long as the theists shout “respect” atheists are prevented to scrutinize their religious belief, you are prevented to criticize their claims, their holy books, their ethics and their pseudoscience. It also prevents an atheist to speak out and point errors in religious belief.  Worst, it prevents people to act when religion is trying to break the wall of separation of church and state or if the church is trying to influence education, especially science.

And how about these atheists that are shouting for religious respect? Obviously, they don’t know the difference between tolerating and respect. To tolerate religion is to give them the blind eye. They already see the issues, they already see the erroneous claims, but by claiming “peace” what they really do is to turn their heads and ignore just for the sake that they won’t have any enemies.

Respect is not demanded, it is earned. To call for respect to religion, religion must first open itself to scrutiny, then can they earn the “R” word.

Appeal to Authority

I've noticed that in the debate regarding atheists vs. theists, some people seems to be more into anti-atheism quotes that they found on the Internet. You know, the usual "quote-unquote" that a so-called famous person said against atheism, but sad to say it really doesn't address the problem, right? Well OK, a certain scientist, politician, author had said this and said that, but does that really defeated atheism? Has it addressed the issues atheists lay on the table?

Would it be nice to see these guys make an effort to directly address atheism. That would be more informative and entertaining that seeing quotes that doesn't really make any dent in the ship.

Baby Killers

Picture this:

You are a soldier of Samuel's army and God commanded you, "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."  - 1 Samuel 15:3
Now suppose that you entered the Amalek's site and you see a 3 month old baby being held by her dead mother's arm. You aim your spear to her innocent heart but was moved by your conscience and you didn't kill the baby.

You didn't obey the Lord, that is sin since God commanded you to kill even babies. 

Now, is not killing an innocent infant an immoral act because God commanded you to do so?

False science?

The picture above is a good example of personal interpretation.

Looking at this verse in Greek (not in the KJV) it says...

Ὦ Τιμόθεε τὴν παρακαταθήκην φύλαξον ἐκτρεπόμενος τὰς βεβήλους κενοφωνίας καὶ ἀντιθέσεις τῆς ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως

The word used was γνώσεως (gnōseōs) not ἐπιστήμη (epistemē). Episteme is what Ancient Greek use for science which was derived from the word ἐπίσταμαι, "to know". Now, the word science here came from the word Latin (scientia = knowledge), thanks to the Vulgate, but that is not the science as we know since science doesn't mean knowledge (in the Greek sense) but "the pursuit of knowledge."

So does 1 Timothy 6:20 means "science" or "evolution?" If you will know your Bible history correctly, the First Epistle to Timothy was written in CE 62-66. That was the same time a lot of Gnostics gospels were already circulating and the Pauline Christianity was trying to preserve itself against church heresies. So knowledge here means "false teachings" from gnostics "false doctrines" about Christianity, not about "Theory of Evolution" or from science which is about the pursuit of knowledge. 

Friday, September 13, 2013


A Christian troll posted this picture that states this as an atheist’s nightmare. He didn’t really care to explain why… I assume he just like the picture but doesn’t really understand it. 

Anyway, it’s a picture of a nut and a bolt. There is a statement that says, “What comes into your mind when you see this in the very first time?” Then it asks, “Does it has a purpose?” The last statement is asking the viewer to explain his/her observation.

Obviously, the picture is trying to convey a message… uh, something like “everything that exists has a purpose.” Well, that’s because Theists (especially Christians) believed that God made man to do a certain purpose. I don’t know. I’m not really in the mood in opening my 21 sets of different Bible today… but, the purpose they say (as I remember my Born-Again Christian time) is to glorify God. Hmm… a perfect being created beings with a mere purpose of glorifying Him. Weird huh?

Anyway, going back to the picture.

Does that picture did a good job in expressing the thought?

Do the nut and bolt have a purpose? Sure it does. It was designed that way. It’s man-made for crying out loud!
You don’t get a nut and a bolt in Nature. Steel is not formed into the shape of a nut and bolt. It was designed. It was fabricated. So if I saw that picture in the very first time the first thing that will come into my mind (other that sex) is the nut and bolt is man-made. It was designed with a purpose.

Now let us make a picture with a more accurate message.
The picture (below) is one of Jupiter’s moon Thebe. Now, let us ask the Theist troll (if he has the guts to answer real no nonsense questions…Hmmmm… I guess not) anyway, going back. Let us ask ourselves, what is the purpose of Thebe for mankind?

Remember, there is no grand cosmic purpose. When you were born here on Earth, it’s all blank pages. We create our own purpose in life. You create your own journey and you are accountable on your own direction. As the Cheshire Cat has said to Alice, "Well then, it doesn't really matter which path you take."

Until next time.

Sunday, July 14, 2013

Characteristics of Atheists

These are the six characteristics of atheists according to the UTC study about disbelief.

Intellectual Atheist/Agnostic (IAA)

The first and most frequently discussed type is what could be termed The Intellectual Atheist/Agnostic or IAA. IAA typology includes individuals who proactively seek to educate themselves through intellectual association, and proactively acquire knowledge on various topics relating to ontology (the search for Truth) and non-belief. They enjoy dialectic enterprises such as healthy democratic debate and discussions, and are intrinsically motivated to do so. These individuals are typically versed in a variety of writings on belief and non-belief and are prone to cite these authors in discussions.

IAAs associate with fellow intellectuals regardless of the other’s ontological position as long as the IAA associate is versed and educated on various issues of science, philosophy, “rational” theology, and common socio-political religious dialog. They may enjoy discussing the epistemological positions related to the existence or non-existence of a deity. Besides using textual sources such as intellectual books, IAAs may utilize technology such as the Internet to read popular blogs, view YouTube videos, and listen to podcasts that fall in line with their particular interests. Facebook and other online social networking sites can be considered a medium for learning or discussion. However, not only is the IAA typically engaged in electronic forms of intellectualism but they oftentimes belong to groups that meet face to face offline such as various skeptic, rationalist and freethinking groups for similar mentally stimulating discussions and interaction. The modus operandi for the Intellectual Atheist/Agnostic is the externalization of epistemologically oriented social stimulation.

Activist (AAA)

The next typology relates to being socially active. These individuals are termed the Activist Atheist/Agnostic. Individuals in the AAA typology are not content with the placidity of simply holding a non-belief position; they seek to be both vocal and proactive regarding current issues in the atheist and/or agnostic socio-political sphere. This sphere can include such egalitarian issues, but is not limited to: concerns of humanism, feminism, Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgendered (LGBT) issues, social or political concerns, human rights themes, environmental concerns, animal rights, and controversies such as the separation of church and state. Their activism can be as minimal as the education of friends or others, to much larger manifestations of social activities such as boycotting products, promoting legal action, or marching public demonstration to raise awareness. Activist Atheists/Agnostics are commonly naturalistic or humanistic minded individuals, but are not limited to these types of ethical concerns. It is not uncommon for AAA individuals to ally themselves with other movements in support of social awareness. The Activist Atheist/Agnostic’s are not idle; they effectuate their interests and beliefs.

Seeker-Agnostic (SA)

The third typological characteristic is the Seeker-Agnostic. Seeker-Agnostic typology consists of individuals attuned to the metaphysical possibilities precluding metaphysical existence, or at least recognizes the philosophical difficulties and complexities in making personal affirmations regarding ideological beliefs. They may call themselves agnostic or agnostic-atheist, as the SA simply cannot be sure of the existence of God or the divine. They keep an open mind in relation to the debate between the religious, spiritual, and antitheist elements within society. 

Seeker-Agnostics recognize the limitation of human knowledge and experience. They actively search for and respond to knowledge and evidence, either supporting or disconfirming truth claims. They also understand, or at least recognize, the qualitative complexities of experiences in the formation of personal meaning. Seeker- Agnostics do not hold a firm ideological position but always search for the scientifically wondrous, and experientially profound confirmation of life’s meaning. They may be intrinsically motivated to explore and seek understanding in the world around them. The diversity of others is accepted for the SA and co-existence with the “others” is not only possible, but also welcomed. Their worldly outlook may be mediated by science; however, they recognize current scientific limitations and embrace scientific uncertainty. They are comfortable with this uncertainty and even enjoy discussing it. Some Intellectual Atheist/Agnostics or Anti-Theists may accuse the Seeker-Agnostic of avoiding responsibility or commitment to a more solid affirmation of atheism. In other cases, outsiders may see it as an ontological transitional state from religion or spirituality to atheism. 

In some cases, Seeker-Agnostics may generally miss being a believer either from the social benefits or the emotional connection they have with others such as friends or family. At times, their intellectual disagreement with their former theology causes some cognitive dissonance and it is possible they may continue to identity as a religious or spiritual individual. However, taking those exceptions into account, the majority of Seeker-Agnostics should in no way be considered “confused.” For the Seeker-Agnostic, uncertainty is embraced. 


The fourth typology, and one of the more assertive in their view, we termed the Anti-Theist. While the Anti-Theists may be considered atheist or in some cases labeled as “new atheists,” the Anti-Theist is diametrically opposed to religious ideology. As such, the assertive Anti-Theist both proactively and aggressively asserts their views towards others when appropriate, seeking to educate the theists in the passé nature of belief and theology. In other words, antitheists view religion as ignorance and see any individual or institution associated with it as backward and socially detrimental. The Anti-Theist has a clear and – in their view, superior – understanding of the limitations and danger of religions. They view the logical fallacies of religion as an outdated worldview that is not only detrimental to social cohesion and peace, but also to technological advancement and civilized evolution as a whole. They are compelled to share their view and want to educate others into their ideological position and attempt to do so when and where the opportunity arises. Some Anti-Theist individuals feel compelled to work against the institution of religion in its various forms including social, political, and ideological, while others may assert their view with religious persons on an individual basis. The Anti-Theist believes that the obvious fallacies in religion and belief should be aggressively addressed in some form or another. Based on personalities, some Anti-Theists may be more assertive than others; but outsiders and friends know very clearly where they stand in relation to an Anti-theist. Their worldview is typically not a mystery. The Anti-Theist’s reaction to a religious devotee is often based on social and psychological maturity.


The fifth typology is termed the Non-Theist. While not many individuals identified themselves as this type, they did have experiences with others who self-classified as being non-theists. For the Non-Theists, the alignment of oneself with religion, or conversely an epistemological position against religion, can appear quite unconventional from their perspective. However, a few terms may best capture the sentiments of the Non-Theist. One is apathetic, while another may be disinterested. The Non-Theist is non-active in terms of involving themselves in social or intellectual pursuits having to do with religion or anti-religion. A Non-Theist simply does not concern him or herself with religion. Religion plays no role or issue in one’s consciousness or worldview; nor does a Non- Theist have concern for the atheist or agnostic movement. No part of their life addresses or considers transcendent ontology. They are not interested in any type of secularist agenda and simply do not care. Simply put, Non-Theist’s are apathetic non-believers. They simply do not believe, and in the same right, their absence of faith means the absence of anything religion in any form from their mental space.

Ritual Atheist/Agnostic (RAA)

The sixth and final type was one of the most interesting and unexpected. This exploration termed this type The Ritual Atheist/Agnostic or RAA. The RAA holds no belief in God or the divine, or they tend to believe it is unlikely that there is an afterlife with God or the divine. They are open about their lack of belief and may educate themselves on the various aspects of belief by others. One of the defining characteristics regarding Ritual Atheists/Agnostics is that they may find utility in the teachings of some religious traditions. They see these as more or less philosophical teachings of how to live life and achieve happiness than a path to transcendental liberation. Ritual Atheist/Agnostics find utility in tradition and ritual. For example, these individuals may participate in specific rituals, ceremonies, musical opportunities, meditation, yoga classes, or holiday traditions. Such participation may be related to an ethnic identity (e.g. Jewish) or the perceived utility of such practices in making the individual a better person. 

Many times the Ritual Atheist/Agnostic may be misidentified as spiritual but not religious, but they are quick to point out that they are atheist or agnostic in relation to their own ontological view. For other Ritual Atheist/Agnostics, it may be simply that they hold respect for profound symbolism inherent within religious rituals, beliefs, and ceremonies. The Ritual Atheist/Agnostic individual perceives ceremonies and rituals as producing personal meaning within life. This meaning can be an artistic or cultural appreciation of human systems of meaning while knowing there is no higher reality other than the observable reality of the mundane world. In some cases, these individuals may identify strongly with religious traditions as a matter of cultural identity and even take an active participation in religious rituals. While RAA may celebrate their association with ritualistic organizations or call themselves cultural practitioners of a faith-based practice, they are open and honest about their ontological position and do not hide their lack of belief in the metaphysical or divine. Ritual Atheist /Agnostics may identify ritualistically or symbolically with Judaism, Paganism, Buddhism, or Laveyan Satanism to name some examples.

Sunday, May 26, 2013

Is it a burden?

I'm just thinking, why it seems some theists are afraid of the "burden of proof?" If you are really sure that your God exists, then why throw the burden to the atheist's side of the camp? If God exists then it would be a very easy job for a believer to defend its existence. You don't need to be afraid of the burden. In fact it won't even be a burden for you to prove the existence of God, right?

But for some unknown reason, I see that some theists are avoiding to shoulder the burden of proof? Why? Are they in doubt of their own God's existence? Are they having trouble defending the validity of their faith? Do they unconsciously becoming skeptical of their position to the point that they have stopped believing that they can easily defend their God belief?

Saturday, May 25, 2013

The Atheist's Cake

Have you ever baked a cake? It is a very fun activity. All you need to do is to separate the dry ingredients to the wet ones…flour, sugar, baking powder in one bowl while eggs, vanilla, chocolate (if you're making chocolate cake) and milk in the other one. Then you just mix them gently and put everything in a pan. Place it in the oven and VOILA!

Now, beginners start with cupcakes or a sponge cake and others, the most experience can bake a Devil’s Food or a Black Forest.

Wait… what does baking has to do with atheism?

Eggs or four cups of flour are part of a cake, but that doesn't mean that eggs and flour are cakes. You get the picture?

Most misinformed people (especially disgruntled Christians) blame atheism in the issues concerning communism, evolution (???) and Nazism (???) as if it is the atheist’s fault. Now that’s where this cake analogy comes in. You see, atheism is not a worldview or a philosophy by itself. It’s just one of the er… ingredients. Just like the eggs and flour, atheism doesn't make the whole philosophy. Also, even if we use the same ingredients in a cake, you won't guarantee the outcome if we added other ingredients. It may taste good or bad, depending on what other things that you put while making the cake. If you put honey or peanut butter in a Black Forest, it will not taste like a Black Forest. In other philosophies, for example, nihilism, it contains not only atheism but other things like the rejection of all moral principle. Now that is not atheism. An atheist who still believe in moral principles is different from an atheist who has no moral principles. 

So that’s it. An atheist can be an Objectivist, nihilist, secular humanist, a communist , a moral Objectivist, a relativist or even a Jew it doesn't matter. What matters are the atheist’s arguments against the existence of a god or gods. 

Now, enjoy your cake.

We want you to be an atheist?

Saturday, May 11, 2013

Welcome to my new journey...

I would like to announce to everyone that my interest on atheism was again rekindled. Ok, the truth...medyo nanamlay na ako sa atheism...and maybe obvious na ang reason so I don't need to tell that story.

Yesterday, I attend a class reunion and to my surprise, may classmate pala akong atheist. I asked him kung member sya ng any atheist/agnostic society. He told me that there is no need for that. I asked him why, and his answers made me think. Yun ang nag bring back ng fire sa akin. 

Atheism is not a club nor a group nor a society. It's what happens when a person starts to re-think every religious doctrines that he learned when he was growing up. Sa madaling salita, it is you. No one can imposed any kind of "atheism" to you. No one can tell you "how to be a right or a real atheist." 

My classmate is an atheist PERIOD. There is no need na as an atheist he must be a so and so. No reason to be this and that.

It made me re-think my atheism. Medyo napahiya ako sa sarili ko. I don't need to run a society to change people to become an atheist like me. There is no need to proselytize atheism. It is a natural result when people start to think. You don't need to force it in other people's head.

You can share your experience or ideas but that's it. You are just showing an option.

I would like to thank my classmate. He again showed me the right road to re-start my journey as an atheist in Manila.