Tuesday, July 29, 2014

A typical Filipino "Apologetics." (The Book of Job and the Problem of Suffering and Evil)

I was surprised to find this comment post on my Goggle+. Kinda annoying little runt, but hey, at least we now have a new topic to talk about.


Einstein vs. The Teacher

It is a physics class where Albert Einstein corrects the teacher about God. The teacher argues, if there is evil, then God created evil because he created everything. Therefore, according to the laws of physics if God exists, he is evil, but Einstein says, Is there cold? Of course, says the teacher


Saturday, July 26, 2014

The Atheist Professor

The Flood - Global or Regional?

I noticed that some Christians are trying to "sanitized" their Bible and I think the best example is the flood story.

According to these Christians, the flood is just a regional event and not a catastrophe of global proportion... Regional? Well, now... It seems some Christians (who are called "regionalists" ) are now in agreement with skeptics huh?

Frankly, I find this tactic a joke.


Heavenly Knowledge from a Dead God.

Let’s face it, sometimes fundamentalist Christians can be quite dishonest  and this is not an accusation. I’m just stating a fact.

Knowledge kills ignorance and superstition. That’s a fact, and the Christian God only survives because of these pillars. To topple the pillar of ignorance and superstition is to topple God. Ignorance and superstition hold God in his altar in heaven. Ignorance and superstition bind our mind to think. You have to stop thinking in order to worship God. But why?

The answer is faith.

Faith expands when reason is chained.

Faith in Jesus, theological insights, and spiritual gifts are to substitute knowledge, disputation, and philosophy as the basis for truth. In effect, faith is to replace proof, hope is to replace work, and trust is to replace evidence. People have to rely on forces and supernatural beings beyond their control rather than their own talents and abilities. That’s the game plan. A person who knows his own talent cannot be subjugated by kings and priests. Religion is the only way to do it.

Notice the following Biblical verses:
1 COR. 3:18-19 "Let no one deceive himself. If any one among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is folly with God”

COL. 2:8 RSV "See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ"

2 TIM. 2:16-17 "Avoid such godless chatter, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness, and their talk will eat its way like gangrene"

1 TIM. 6:20 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called...."

2 TIM. 2:14 RSV "Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers"

ROM. 14:1 RSV "As for the man who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not for disputes over opinions"

The sample Bible verses just show how terrified the Bible god and his Christ on science, inquiries and philosophy.

Now, it is important to any sensible society that truth is discovered through the interchange of ideas in an open forum. Knowledge is power so to speak and any advancing civilization knows that. Yet, Christians are repeatedly cautioned to avoid  other points of view and shun the exchange of ideas through dialogue. They are told to run away from non-biblical ideas because the latter are not only wrong and will lead believers astray, but it possessed by those with less than honorable motives. Christian beliefs are not to be open to questions and doubts. The question is why. Is God afraid to face facts? Is there a truth in the issue of “The God of the Gaps” where God is being pushed further away when new discoveries are found?

The truth of the matter is that faith will not withstand intellectual scrutiny. Fundamentalism and fanaticism have been always opposed to progress and the advancement of human knowledge in particular. As Robert Ingersoll has once said, "When religion becomes scientific, it ceases to be religion and becomes science. Religion is not intellectual--it is emotional. It does not appeal to the reason. The founder of a religion has always said, 'Let him that hath ears to hear, hear!' No founder has said: 'Let him that hath brains to think, think!". Ambrose Bierce probably encapsulated the concept as well as anyone when he defined faith as "belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel."

The Christians accuse non-believers of “worldly knowledge”. Knowledge that supposes to be foolishness to God. Hmmmmwell let see what kind of knowledge this God has to offer.

• Some fowls are four-footed (Lev. 11:20-21);
• Some creeping insects have four legs. (Lev. 11:22-23);
• Hares chew the cud (Lev. 11:6);
• Conies chew the cud (Lev. 11:5);
• Camels don't divide the hoof (Lev. 11:4);
• The earth was formed out of and by means of water (2 Peter 3:5 RSV);
• The earth rest on pillars (1 Sam. 2:8);
• The earth won't be moved (1Chron. 16:30);
• A hare does not divide the hoof (Deut. 14:7);
• The rainbow is not as old as rain and sunshine (Gen. 9:13);
• A mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds and grows into the greatest of all shrubs (Matt. 13:31-32 RSV);
• Turtles have voices (Song of Sol. 2:12);
• The earth has ends or edges (Job 37:3);
• The earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1);
• Some 4-legged animals fly (Lev. 11:21);
• The world's language didn't evolve but appeared suddenly (Gen. 11:6-9);
• A fetus can understand speech (Luke 1:44).
• That salt loses its saltiness

The Bible also says that the following mythical creatures exist
cockatrices (Jer. 8:17, Isa. 11:8 59:5),
unicorns (Deut. 33:17, Psalms 22:21. 29:6, Job 39:9-10),
satyrs (Isa. 34:14, 13:21)
fiery serpents (Num. 21:6),
flying serpents (Isa. 14:29, 30:6).

The Christian God and its adherents seem fearful of inquiry, fearful of freedom, fearful of knowledge – indeed, fearful of anything except its own repetitious propaganda. Yet reading the Bible give us a hopelessly ignorant God rather than an omniscient character. Sickness for example, does not result from sin being punish. Even the most righteous person can feel ill. Nor does cure come from prayers (See: James 5:13-15). Today, diseases are known to be caused by virus, bacteria and fungi and it is a common knowledge that these diseases can be cured by antibiotics, chemotherapy and surgery. Even the Roman Catholic Pope knows it, that’s why he goes to a hospital whenever he feels ill. 

Quite the opposite from the Judeo-Christian sacred book, the ancient Chinese have already catalogued different herbal plants to be used for different illness, however reading the Bible, one cannot even find a good medicine against tooth ache. Ancient civilizations have already thought about medicine, yet we find that the Bible god is too unaware of these matters.

Just read Mark 5:8 and 9:25. Jesus still believes that mental illnesses are the result of demon possession. Talk about an omniscient God, huh? It was highly documented that the Egyptians and ancient Peruvians have already been performing cranial surgery even before Jesus walks on Earth. In the year 1800’s people believed that smallpox was a punishment from God. They even oppose the creation of a vaccine against smallpox. Yet today science has eradicated smallpox from the face of this planet. An act never accomplished by God. If God’s heavenly knowledge hasn't accomplished anything, then what good is it for? 

Today “Acts of God” are now called “natural disaster”. We now can predict such phenomena like earthquakes and hurricane with remarkable accuracy. A feat never achieved by these so-called prophets of God.

The Bible believed that the Earth was in the center of the Universe, Naturally, Earth was God’s footstool. Yet because of Copernicus and Galileo, Earth could no longer be envisioned as the center of the Universe and in December 28, 1991, 3 days after Jesus’ birthday, The Vatican officially admitted that God, the Church and the Bible have been wrong and Galileo was right! With physics and astronomy, human has conquered the moon and have send robot space probes to other planets and even outside our own galaxy. Medicine and biology have eradicated some diseases that were present at Jesus time. We can now cure leprosy without relying to magic, miracles and useless prayers. What does theology make in the advancement of humankind?

Even God’s kingdom in heaven was kicked out. Up there is no heaven beyond the heavens. Our embrace of the vastness of the Cosmos have removed God from the sky and in our human consciousness. God became a vanished image, unlike the days when the Bible speaks of his power and wrath.

Charles Darwin’s discovery showed us that there is no ultimate destiny. That man is just the same as other animals on this planet. It seems  God is nothing more but a superlative image of man created by humans. There is nothing special about him. Freud and Jung exposed the neurotic element of religion and that God is nothing more but a fantasized fatherly figure. The destruction of God was total and complete. Today the so-called miracles of the Bible were no more, No more talking snakes, no more people turning into pillars of salt, the Red Sea will never open up to let the Hebrew cross a dry land, no more water changing into wine and no more Lazarus to resurrect. The God of the Christians, the Bible god, who was the source of their value, the definer of their sense of right or wrong, the creator of their universe, the eternal king of the kingdom they have dream was simply no more.

Now all we have are noisy Christian Fundies: souls that still cling from the remnants of this mythology. They are the devotees that will reject everything just to defend their departed deity. They refuse neither to listen nor to enter debates. With great vehemence, they will deny the knowledge that caused their god to perish.

This is what kind of knowledge Christians has to offer, the so-called “heavenly knowledge” that have done nothing so far; a knowledge that is wasted from the endless discussion to prove something without proof. Knowledge that was built from assumptions and assurances, that hides from scrutiny and inquiry. What’s amusing is Christians still insists on calling this “knowledge." 

I choose a better knowledge, one that was founded from deep scrutiny and scientific inquiry. I choose the knowledge of this world, the knowledge that is empirical and reachable. The knowledge that I choose has better and tangible results: This “worldly” knowledge that exterminated god.


Issue: CSUN Scientist Fired After Soft Tissue Found On Dinosaur Fossil

There was this news about a Creationist scientist being thrown out of the school. Well, according to the Christiannews.net a certain Mark Armitage was thrown out of California State University for "discovering" soft tissue on a Triceratops fossil. Three cheers to Creationism eh?

Not so fast there bub. 

Armitage's discovery was then published in Acta Histochemica [volume 115, Issue 6, July 2013, Pages 603–608], a scientific journal. 

The best thing here is that he published it in a scientific journal, so that experts can verify it. The same issue (about the soft tissue) was also discovered in a fossilized bone of a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Most Creationists conclude that such discovery is a proof that dinosaurs are only 4,000 years old, but the research, headed by Mary Schweitzer, a molecular paleontologist at North Carolina State University suggest otherwise. It can be explained by iron in the dinosaur’s body, which they say preserved the tissue before it could decay. 

In the case of Armitage and his religion, I will just let the Court receive the evidence and decide based on the merit on what to do with the dispute over his leaving his employment.

[See the NEWS HERE.]

Atheist TV Promo - Launching July 29 at 7 pm Eastern


Promo video for Atheist TV launching on July 29, 2014 at 7 pm Eastern. Watch live on your regular television via Roku, or if you don't have a Roku, online or on your mobile device at http://www.atheists.tv

Monday, July 21, 2014

Meet Lawrence Krauss


Today in Atheist Anaylsis, you're going to meet Prof. Lawrence Krauss - Physicist and Active Atheist. Get to know Lawrence as we discuss his love of science, atheism and anything you want to know.

Log in - NOW.

Thursday, July 17, 2014

A Jealous God?


Exodus 34:14
Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.
Jealousy is an emotion, and the word typically refers to the negative thoughts and feelings of insecurity, fear, and anxiety over an anticipated loss of something of great personal value, particularly in reference to a human connection. (Wikipedia)

An all-powerful being still feels " insecurity, fear, and anxiety?" 
Weird god huh?

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Coming out of the closet

What's wrong guys????
Panahon na para lumantad at magpakatotoo!!!

Ewan ko ba? Marami pa rin mga non-believers ang natataklot sa salitang "atheist". What's the matter? Some guys like to label themselves as non-theist (di ba atheist din yan?) Others prefer the name "Freethinker". Any name can do, wag lang "atheist"....."Oh no!!! Not that word".

What's wrong with being an atheist? What's wrong in not believing what these "believers" believe and worshipped? Guys sa totoo lang, we have an advantage. WE THINK MORE!
So why be ashamed of being rational? Don't you like it when we are suppose to be more rational than most Filipinos who still cling to superstitions? We're more advance. We're not chained with ignorance and baseless fear anymore.

We are not into self-denial my friends. How can you deny something that does not exist? We don't deny, but we question... It's as simple as that.

Is atheism a joke?
Atheism is not a joke my friends. Atheism is just fighting for the rights in question, especially on these gullible times (even road stains are being worshipped these days.) Believing in blue elephants, faith healers, magic rod that becomes a snake, parting seas, man who can walk on water and dead people rising,  Now that's a joke.

Who's the fool now?

"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good."
- Psalm 14:1


Really huh? Well, that is what most Christians believe. But is there any sense of truth to the accusation? Are believers never been corrupt and vile. History disagrees. 

I have always challenged believers to tell me a war made in the name of atheism. Not communism my Christian friends, it's a different struggle. When I say about atheism, I mean a war that was done in the name of being a non-theists.

According to some Christians, the Bible is the only effective answer to immorality, wickedness and violence of this modern age. But reading the said book, gives you a different scenario.

Just read how God allows genocide and mass murder. Even children are not spared. Also, sexism, intolerance, and bigotry are littered on some of its pages.

The Bible is not a moralist dreambook!

Many of its stories are permeated with obscenities, degeneracy and immorality. Some fester profanity and rewards corruption. [SEE: http://www.evilbible.com/]

So what do we expect with its adherents?

Well, bloodshed has been a major factor for the spread of Christianity. Here in the Philippines is a good example of how Christianity propagates, not by peaceful means. Too many people died and suffered. Until now, allot of Christian missionaries is destroying other people's culture and heritage. Too bad...

How about their moral conduct? Well, as a special case to mention is that of Ex-Mayor Sanchez of Calauan. A very religious man, but still manage to rape a girl and kill her and her boyfriend.

How about the pastors and ministers and priests of God? Hmmmm...well let's see...


  • Jim Bakker is now in prison for mismanagement of church funds.
  • Oral Roberts, who emotionally blackmailed his viewers to send him millions of dollars in order to prevent the Lord's calling him up to heaven.
  • PTL - The God's Network fell into bankruptcy in June 1987 because of the Bakker's financial problems.
  • The alleged involvement of the Swaggart ministries with the South African terrorist group REMAMO.
  • Who can forget "Little Jimmy" Swaggarts "Jerk-off and Cry" liaison with Debra Murphree.
  • A study released that a quarter of clergy have engaged in sexual misconduct.
  • It was estimated that about 3,000 Roman Catholic priests are pedophilia. One convicted priest molested a child just before giving mass!!!
  • On 1985, Fr. Gilbert Gauthe of Luisiana, USA, admitted molesting 37 boys and 1 girl.


[For more information on "black collar crimes": http://www.delucalaw.com/edit000.htm

So? Is Psalm 14:1 is just another smoke screen on the true nature of believers? Will they be honest enough to expose and incriminate themselves?

Problems will never be solved by the same ideas that created it

Until Next time,
Astalabye-bye!

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

I still find humanism a little unpleasant...


Frankly lang po. After watching the debate in iChill about humanism vs. theism in the issue of morality, I find humanism a little unpleasant, especially in the part of how I will treat the killing of animals. I also don't think that "man is the measure of all things." It's the same as that of religion where they say man is the centerpiece of God's creation. Too humancentrict.  I'm still not ready to embrace this philosophy.


Sorry na lang po sa mga kaibigan kong humanists.

Monday, July 14, 2014

Devotion, Deception

It is not that strange to see children being... well... trained (?) to become future devotee of a certain patron saint. Now here's a good example.

That is a replica of the Black Nazarene... you know... The one that they have in Quiapo, Manila. Ok... They also have a smaller version for kids. Yep, children are also devotee of the said idol. I asked these kids why they are doing this. The answer just shocked me.

These children are taught that if they do this... Processions, parading the statue on the street... their wishes will come true. As if God will grant their wishes, ala Alladin's Ginie. Really huh? One child told me that he's doing this so he could see his parents again. Another kid said that God will make his family rich. Money, wealth, family... their wishes ill be granted.

Its quite sad that instead of teaching these children to become resourceful and productive, they are being taught that a magical Big Daddy is out there in heaven to grant their wishes.

What the...













Friday, July 11, 2014

Quote for the Day...

"Carl Sagan would debate people on all manner of issues, and I don't have the time or the energy or the interest in doing so. As an educator, I'd rather just get people thinking straight in the first place, so I don't have to then debate them later on." - Neil deGrasse Tyson



 

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

Morality Requires God...or does it?

"Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right." - Isaac Asimov

"Morality requires God" – this is the basic assumption of all believers, the fundamental of their social theory.

Philosophers do not usually use this argument, but most Christian apologists used it. According to Ravi Zacharias, "moral law requires a moral lawgiver." (Can Men Live without God? Word Publishing, 1994 pp. 182-184). Only God can provide the meaning of morality and the foundation of moral absolutes.

The view that God created the moral laws is called "Divine Command Theory of Ethics". This is sometimes referred to as voluntarism. According to this theory, what makes an action right is that God willed it to be right. God invents moral rules as a matter of his constrained and freewill (So God also have a freewill).

So nothing is right or wrong unless God makes it so.

"So what's the problem with that?"

Wellit makes morality arbitrary.

"Arbitrary?"

Euthyphro’s Dilemma
In the dialogue Euthyphro, Socrates responded Euthyphro’s claims that morality is dependent upon the will of the gods.

Good actions are good because the gods love them.
The gods love good actions because they’re good.

"Good actions are good because God says so."
Then whatever the gods decree to be right is thereby "right", then morality becomes arbitrary.
As Gottfried Wilhemn Leibniz (1646-1716) have said,  if things are neither right nor wrong independently of God’s will, then God cannot choose one thing over another because it is right. Thus, if he chooses one thing over another, his choice must be arbitrary and a being whose decision is arbitrary is not a being worthy of worship. The being ceased to be a god.

"But God is always good."
Well, if we will say that "goodness" is an attribute of God, then we will never understand what makes something good "good". If we say that goodness is good because God is all-good, it will not make any sense. The definition becomes circular.

"But what if God is using a certain standard?"
Then we will have an independent source of what is right or wrong. If there is such an independent source, the source will be greater than the gods, because God obeys it.

"Without God, everything is permitted."
History has demonstrated to us that being a believer changes nothing. From the ancient to the modern times, God fearing and God believing people did war and bloodshed, murders and genocides. From Moses to Joshua, Caligula, Hitler, Bin Laden – all of them believe is a certain god-concept.
So? What's the difference between a  believer and a non-believer? There is no evidence to support a claim that believers are more morally upright than non-theists.

Might does not make right.
"Can the fear of God motivates moral obligation?"
The threat of divine punishment cannot impose moral obligation. If you're going to do good because you want to get those goodies in heaven (like this so-called everlasting life) then you are motivated by self-interest not because of the love of God or because of goodness sake.

"If God commands what is good, which then is considered good?"Religion is too relative to be a good source of absolute morality. We will be facing moral relativism.
It's morality based on what  religion dictates. The terror attack of September 11 may be aberrant to Christians, but they are considered saints in fundamentalist Islam. Another example, when the biblical God ordered, "Thou shall not kill" but allow his chosen people to slaughter innocent women and children. It makes this God, no better than Hitler, Stalin and Pol-Pot.

"Is there a universal moral standard?"
Philosophers such as Plato, Confucius, Kant, John Stuart Mills, John Rawls, George Edward Moore, Ayn Rand and Paul Kurtz have demonstrated the possibility to have a universal morality without a Divine Lawgiver.

For them, these universal moral standards are independent of opinions and church or religious dogmas. The Golden Rule is the best example.

Morality is deeply rooted in the "common moral decencies". They are essential to the survival of any human community, handed down through generations, as a basic rule of social intercourse. They are the following:
1. personal integrity
2. trustworthiness
3. benevolence
4. fairness

We also have the ethical excellences – the one an individual should develop.
1. autonomy
2. intelligence
3. self-discipline
4. self-respect
5. creativity
6. high motivation
7. affirmative attitude
8. joyful living
9. good health
10. exuberance

Morality is an objective, they are not authored nor opinions. We can simply set its standard into two:
a.) Any action that purposely benefits the human organism or society is morally good and right.
b.) Any action that purposely harms the human organism or society is morally bad or wrong.
And we don’t need an arbitrary Law Giver to explain to us this simple standard.

Until next time,
Ta-ta!

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

My long-overdue apostasy (Article from the Rappler)


" A godless man is not necessarily an evil man. He can endeavor to serve others with empathy and kindness as much as a person who subscribes to a religious doctrine can. He has the capacity to love and hate just as much as the next person does."


Growing up in a Christian home, I was taught to pray. And so I did: before bed, meals, exams and bus rides.I prayed so much I’m sure to have prayed for world peace at some point.

I carried this habit into my adolescence, growing into a passionate believer of my faith throughout high school. I’m pretty sure I was a big pain in the ass at the time.

I took every opportunity I could get to convert others to my faith. Fully convinced that I was 'saved,' I persistently badgered friends to accept Jesus as their ‘Saviour.’ I gave unsolicited guidance as a 'believer'; presumptuously doling out Bible verses as if they were freshly-baked cookies. I imagine people wouldn't mind having a freshly-baked cookie when shoved under their noses, but the same can’t be said for bible verses, can it?



The Unholy Bible and the Institution of Slavery

"The doors of heaven and hell are adjacent and identical" - Nikos Kazantzakis "The Last Temptation of Christ"

It is a fact that the Christian Holy (?) Bible promotes slavery. A book that is believed to be inspired by a just God...promotes one of the most hateful relationship known to free humans.

Slavery is an institution based on a relationship of dominance and submission, whereby one person owns another and can exact from that person labor or other services. The Holy Bible refers to slaves as a personal property that could be purchased & beaten. In one of Jesus’ parables, he approved beating servants severely, instead of preaching of its abolition (The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” - Luke 12:47-48 NLT).

Christian supporters of slavery argued that the New Testament clearly did not forbid slavery, and did not deem it a sin and today, modern Christian apologetics try to soften it by claiming that a more accurate translation would be as a servant or hired workers rather then slaves despite that the Bible states that one should not regret the gift, for slaves were only half as expensive as hired workers (It shall not seem hard unto thee, when thou sendest him away free from thee; for he hath been worth a double hired servant to thee, in serving thee six years: and the LORD thy God shall bless thee in all that thou doest. – Deuteronomy 15:18 King James Version)

Clearly, according to the Bible, the spirit of the Lord has little to do with liberty. The well-known reverend, Alexander Campbell contended: “there is not one verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many regulating it. It is not then, we conclude, immoral.” Only during the Age of Enlightenment in the 18th century the spread of the ideas of Jean Jacques Rousseau and others, and the increase of democratic sentiment led to a growing attack on the slave trade and slavery in general.

Isn’t it odd to think that faulty humans at least tried to abolish slavery compared to an all-knowing, all-good God?

Just read the following verses:

Deuteronomy 15:17, English Standard Version

Lev. 25:44-46, English Standard Version

Exodus 21:20-21

Exodus 21:2-6

Deut. 15:12

Deut. 28:68

Eph. 6:5-7

1 Tim. 6:1

Col. 3:22

Titus 2:9

1 Peter 2:18,21, NIRV

And then read these following quotations from some so-called men of God and other famous people:

“[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God… it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation… it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts.” Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America. 1,2

“There is not one verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many regulating it. It is not then, we conclude, immoral.” Rev. Alexander Campbell

“The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example.” Rev. R. Furman, D.D., Baptist, of South Carolina

“The hope of civilization itself hangs on the defeat of Negro suffrage.” A statement by a prominent 19th-century southern Presbyterian pastor, cited by Rev. Jack Rogers, moderator of the Presbyterian Church (USA).

“The doom of Ham has been branded on the form and features of his African descendants. The hand of fate has united his color and destiny. Man cannot separate what God hath joined.” – United States Senator James Henry Hammond.

The quotation by Jefferson Davis, listed above, reflected the beliefs of many Americans in the 19th century. Slavery was seen as having been “sanctioned in the Bible.” They argued that biblical passages recognized, controlled, and regulated the practice.

The Bible permitted owners to beat their slaves severely, even to the point of killing them. However, as long as the slave lingered longer than 24 hours before dying of the abuse, the owner was not regarded as having committed a crime, because — after all — the slave was his property.

You won’t find any law in the Ten Commandments that prohibits slavery. There are no prophets of God that condemned it. The twelve Apostles are silent about its abolition.

Jesus could have condemned the practice. He might have done so. But there is no record of Jesus having said anything negative about the institution.

Paul had every opportunity to write in one of his Epistles that human slavery — the owning of one person as a piece of property by another – is profoundly evil. His letter to Philemon would have been an ideal opportunity to vilify slavery, but he wrote not one word of criticism.

Eventually, the abolitionists gained sufficient power to eradicate slavery in most areas of the world by the end of the 19th century. Slavery was eventually recognized as an extreme evil. But this paradigm shift in understanding came at a cost. Christians wondered why the Bible was so supportive of such an immoral practice. They questioned whether the Bible was entirely reliable. Perhaps there were other practices that it accepted as normal, which were profoundly evil — like genocide, torturing prisoners, raping female prisoners of war, executing religious minorities, burning some hookers alive, etc. The innocent faith that Christians had in “the Good Book” was lost — never to be fully regained.

Thanks to secular laws, we have today, we now abolished slavery. On 10 December 1948, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 4 states:
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

I just wonder, why such law can’t be found in a book said to be inspired by a just God.

Ah, heaven...

Ah, heaven... the reward of the faithful. All mythology uses the heaven-concept like a bone to a dog. If we try to look very closely, the promise of heaven offers an escape to all of man's challenges of life. No more hunger, sickness, tiredness. Just sit in a fluffy cloud and strum your harp. Just look at the Elyssian Fields of the Greek myth. Even in the old Filipinos, the soul will enjoy endless festivities and cock-fighting in heaven.

That's the reason why believers do not want to leave its belief... Who would like to leave the promise of heaven? But does the Judeo-Christian heaven worth the rewards?

Heaven is supposed to be the abode of God - the believer's master. Here the Big Boss entertains himself with endless songs rendered by his...er...servants. Obviously, this heaven concept was made by a slave culture mentality. Now, according to the Bible, God nags there all day

Psalms 7:11 God is a righteous judge, a God who expresses his wrath every day.
The place offers no freedom (Mark 8:15, Matthew 16:19) and was never a peaceful place (Matt.11:12, Rev.12:7) In fact it's not a perfect place. If it's perfect as we made to believe, then why did Lucifer and some angels rebelled?

Mr. Ingersoll has summarized all there is to it in heaven, when he said,
"I want no heaven for which I must give my reason; no happiness inexchange for my liberty and no immortality that demands the surrender of myindividuality."
My sentiments exactly!

Clashes in Genesis


“In many cultures, it is customary to answer that God created the universe out of nothing. But this is mere temporizing. If we wish courageously to pursue the question, we must of course, ask next where God comes from.” - Carl Sagan (Cosmos p. 212)

Most Christians criticized the theory of evolution for being merely a theory, but not known to many, Christians can't even agree on what "creation process" they will believe in.


Different types of Christian Creation Process.

Q: Do All Christians agrees on the creative process?

Not all Christians believe in a single creative process. Interestingly, Evangelicals, Fundamentalist and Liberal Christians don’t agree with one another with respect to the original creative process.

The creative processes on Genesis are the following:
a.) Progressive Creation (Day-Age Theory)
b.) Gap Theory (Ruin-Reconstruction Theory)
c.) Theistic Evolution


Q: What is Progressive Creation?
Progressive Creation, AKA Old Earth creationism.

Progressive Creationists present God as doing many more creative miracles. That is, God creates the world in numerous progressive steps. That is why this belief is called "Progressive Creation" or "Process Creation." More commonly, some advocates of an old Earth, in an attempt to harmonize mainstream science with biblical literalism, hold that the six days referred to are not ordinary 24-hour days, but rather much longer periods (of thousands or millions of years); the Genesis account is then interpreted as an account of a progressive creation, or sometimes a summary of life's evolutionary history. This view is often called "Day-Age Creationism".

Although there is little widespread agreement among Progressive Creationists, they generally believe the following:

  • The "Big Bang" is interpreted as God's way of producing stars and galaxies through billions-of-years of natural processes.
  • The Earth and universe are billions of years old.
  • The days of Creation were overlapping periods of millions and billions of years.
  • Death and bloodshed have existed from the very beginning of Creation and were not the result of Adam's sin.
  • Man was created after the vast majority of earth's history of life and death had already taken place.
  • The flood of Noah was local, not global, and it had little effect on the Earth's geology, which represents billions of years of history.

It is obvious then that Progressive Creationism is a belief which opposes both atheistic evolutionism and historic Christianity's understanding of biblical creationism. The teachings of Progressive Creationism are not new or original, but only recently have the views of Progressive Creationism received unprecedented wide and favorable publicity through Christian radio, television and magazines. Because Progressive Creationists often present their views as being based on a literal interpretation of the Bible, they have been invited to speak at numerous prominent evangelical churches, schools and ministries.

Another concern for many Christians is the Progressive Creationist belief that the "days" of creation in Genesis 1 can be legitimately understood as long, undefined periods of time.

Q: What is the Gap Theory?
According to the Gap Theory, Genesis 1:1 describes the creation of the heavens and the earth, but then there is a "gap" of millions or billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2:
Genesis 1:1: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
Genesis 1:2: "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

There are different variations of the Gap Theory, but there seems to be a common belief that there was a "pre-Adamite" race of people who lived on earth during this "gap," long before Adam and Eve were created.
In addition, there were many other forms of life on earth during this "gap," such as dinosaurs and other creatures and plants which have been found in the fossil record. The basic idea is that the fossil record and many of the geological changes which have taken place on the earth are remnants from this "gap" between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. Since many scientists tell us that it would have taken millions of years for the fossil evidence and the geological evidence to have been formed, the Gap Theory seems to provide Christians with a way to fit these "geologic ages" into the Bible while still believing in the six literal days of Creation and while denying the theory of evolution.

The basic Gap Theory goes on to say that there was a cataclysm of some kind which killed all life on earth and which left the earth "without form and void" and completely covered with water, and this water is "the deep" over which the Spirit of God hovered in Genesis 1:2. Therefore, the Gap Theory says that the "six days of Creation" in Genesis are not actually six days of Creation, but rather they are six days of re-creation after the cataclysm which destroyed the earth between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. For this reason, this theory is sometimes referred to as the Ruin and Reconstruction Theory. People who believe this theory tend to speculate that the "great cataclysm" which ruined the earth between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 was caused in some way by the devil being cast down out of heaven.

Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847), a notable Scottish theologian and first moderator of the Free Church of Scotland, was perhaps the man most responsible for the gap theory. (W.W. Fields, Unformed and Unfilled (Collinsville, IL: Burgeners Enterprises, 1976), p. 40.)

The idea can be traced back to the rather obscure writings of the Dutchman Episcopius (1583-1643), and was first recorded from one of Chalmers' lectures in 1814. Rev. William Buckland, a geologist, did much to popularize the idea.

Although Chalmers' writings give very little information about the gap theory, many of the details are obtained from other writers such as the 19th century geologist Hugh Miller, who quoted from Chalmers' lectures on the subject.

This ruin-reconstruction view is held by many who use Bible study aids such as the Scofield Reference Bible, Dake's Annotated Reference Bible, and The Newberry Reference Bible.
The most notably influential 19th century writer to popularize this view was G.H. Pember, in his book Earth's Earliest Ages, first published in 1884. Numerous editions of this work were published, with the 15th edition appearing in 1942.

The 20th century writer who published the most academic defense of the gap theory was the renowned Canadian anthropologist, Arthur C. Custance. Custance produced Without Form and Void (1970), which many consider the ablest defense of the Gap Theory ever put into print.

The basic reason for developing and promoting the gap theory can be seen from the following very telling quotes:
Scofield Study Bible: Relegate fossils to the primitive creation, and no conflict of science with the Genesis cosmogony remains.
Dake's Annotated Reference Bible: When men finally agree on the age of the earth, then place the many years (over the historical 6,000) between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, there will be no conflict between the Book of Genesis and science.

The above quotes are typical of the many compromise positions -- accepting so-called "science" and its long ages for the earth, and incorporating this into Scripture.

J.D. Thomas, former chairman of the Bible Department at Abilene Christian University, has stated that “no man can prove that it is not true, at least in part” (1961, p. 54). The popular Scofield Reference Bible was first published in 1909; by 1917, it contained a reference to the Gap Theory in the footnotes accompanying Genesis 1. In more recent editions, references to the theory may be found as a footnote to Isaiah 45. John Clayton has accepted major portions of the Gap Theory, but has added to and deleted from the theory to produce what has come to be known as the Modified Gap Theory (see Clayton, 1976, pp. 147-148; Thompson, 1977, pp. 192-194; McIver, 1988, 8[3]:1-23; Jackson and Thompson, 1992, pp. 114-130).

Arguments Presented in Support of the Gap Theory
Advocates of the Gap Theory base their beliefs on several arguments, a summary of which is given here; comments and refutation follow.

Gap theorists suggest that the word bara (used in Genesis 1:1, 21, 27) must mean “to create” (i.e.: ex nihilo creation), while the word asah cannot mean “to create,” but rather means “to make.” Therefore, the original creation was “created”; the creation of the six days was “made” (i.e., “made over”).
Gap theorists suggest that the Hebrew verb hayetha (translated “was” in Genesis 1:2) should be rendered “became” or “had become”—a translation required in order to suggest a change of state from the original perfect creation of the chaotic conditions implied in verse 2.

Gap theorists believe that the “without form and void” of Genesis 1:2 (tohu wabohu) can refer only to something once in a state of repair, but now ruined. Pember accepted these words as expressing “an outpouring of the wrath of God.” Gap theorists believe that the cataclysm that occurred was on the Earth, and was the direct result of Satan’s rebellion against God. The cataclysm, of course, is absolutely essential to the Gap Theory. Isaiah 14:12-15 and Ezekiel 28:11-17 are used as proof-texts to bolster the theory.

Gap theorists believe that Isaiah 45:18 (“God created the earth not in vain”—tohu; same word translated “without form” in Genesis 1:2) indicates that the Earth was not tohu at the initial creation. Therefore, they suggest, Genesis 1:2 can refer only to a judgment brought upon the Earth by God.
Gap theorists generally believe that there was a pre-Adamic creation of both non-human and human forms—a position adopted to account for the fossils present in the geologic strata.

C.I. Scofield, editor, The Scofield Study Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1945). (Originally published as The Scofield Reference Bible, this edition is unaltered from the original of 1909.)F.H. Dake, Dake's Annotated Reference Bible, (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, Inc., 1961), p. 51.

Q: What is Theistic Evolution?
Theistic evolution is the proposition that God is in charge of the biological process called evolution. God directs and guides the unfolding of life forms over millions of years. Theistic evolution contends that there is no conflict between science and the Biblical book of Genesis. Theistic evolution believes that new species of animals develop from existing species over a very long interval of time, in response to the guidance, supervision, and intervention of a deity.

Famous theistic evolutionists included Asa Gray, Darwin's correspondent, and Henry Drummond, whose Ascent of Man was a popular apologetic work of the 1890s. Among modern proponents of theistic evolution are theologian John Haught and astronomer Howard J Van Till.

Tuesday, July 1, 2014

I'm just wondering...



I wonder...

If a "friend" post his belief on Facebook that says,
1.) Gay people are sinners and they should die.
2.) Western women are whores
3.) Those who don't believe that God exists are low-life scum that should be ridiculed in public.
4.) Gay people should be shot on sight.
5.) That atheism is a mental disease and atheists are insane.
6.) That women are just a man's property. They don't have rights.

Uhhh... Should I just ignore it and let them believe what they want so I won't be an asshole? Is this what they mean of "tolerance?"

Hayz! Remember: Ignoring issues does not make them go away.

Alarming indeed!


Before I begin to dismantle this typical Christian rambling, let me first give you folks a simple lesson on human physiology. Below is a picture of the human heart (puso) and its main function is to pump blood.


Now, the second is a picture of a human brain. You use this to think. Issues about "belief" reside in the brain, and not the heart. Got it?



Now that we cleared the issue, let's start...


So it's not God's fault if we don't believe. Ok... How can a non-existing idea can have any faults. The problem here is that people like you Mr. Saldi doesn't do a good job of convincing people like me that your god exists. Do your apology right, give convincing arguments. Hayz!!!

Now, you see, why I did a short review of human physiology? 

Put this in your head... The human heart doesn't think, it pumps. Now, close hearted? Maybe you mean close-minded (Geezzz!)? There is a saying they you don't open your mind too much because your brain might fall off. Anyway, again, let me remind you that the problem we're having here is that you guys don't give any good evidence (or even a reason) why we should believe your claim, and mind you, it's not even an issue of "to see is to believe." That's too shallow.

So, you want me to believe in your god because it feels good? Are you suggesting a placebo? Are you suggesting I take sugar pills? My gulay! If you just want me to believe in your god because it will make me feel good, then I will just start believing that Batman will save the day. Bahala na si Batman! I don't think feeling good is enough as evidence. 

WHAT CONSTITUTE A GOOD EVIDENCE?
Accuracy, precision, sufficiency, representativeness, authority and clarity of expression.

To be believable, is not about feeling good. Evidence is not about emotions. No! To be believable is to produce good evidence and sound explanation.

Ok?
Now go to sleep!