Correction: The Carvaka

According to carvaka every object is made of 4 things not 5. They reject the presence of akasha or ether because it can't be precieved as they believe in only one kind of epistmology i.e. preception. on Ancient non-believers

Thanks for the correction and heads up @ Gagan Nagra.

Is morality objective or subjective?

Last week, I saw a post in Facebook courtesy of Mr. Reynaldo Awa in which he address the issue regarding objective morality. He started the post by defining “subjective” in which he said, “A concept only becomes subjective IF and ONLY IF that concept is a matter of personal preference, just like beauty, or fashion, or taste in food, or what-have-yous.” Based on his own definition, this is how he presented the meaning of subjective morality.

Facebook Time!

Hayz, the limitation of having no Internet connection, but still modern technology has its advantages. So today, I will be discussing some posted comments from some of my recent posts – minus the typical Christian bickering of course. I find these comment posts quite interesting that I just like to share a few words about ‘em hehehe!

1. A certain Clarence Rustia Baluca was saying that if natural selection dictates that evolution happens because traits that are favorable are passed on and those that are disadvantageous are eliminated then why through evolution did the hermit crab lose the ability to grow a shell?

Now, remember that evolution is not a sort of an easy “fix-up.” That means, unlike what Clarence Rustia Bacula thinks, evolution (through natural selection) doesn’t “dictates” what traits to go and what traits to stay. It’s a gradual process, a hit and miss, trial and error progression – now why do hermit crabs don’t have its own shell? Why do cave fishes still have useless eyes? Why some birds doesn’t fly? Why reptile loses its gills? – Because evolution is not perfect and it is exposed in the imperfections that record a history of descent and the development takes step by step. In the hermit crab issue, the hermit crab is more likely related to the coconut crab – I’ve noticed the “almost the same” structure.

Anyways, unlike the coconut crab, the exoskeleton of the hermit crab doesn’t harden – then why are there still hermit crabs? Because these critters found something to compensate on what they lack – getting the shells from univalves mollusks – the same reason why primates discovered the use of tools. VIOLA! The species survived and did not became extinct (sad to say that the trilobites didn’t have the same luck). The imperfection of some animals is a good indication why evolution is true compare to the “design argument.”

Oh by the way… Reptiles loses its gills because gills are not quite effective without water.

2. According to John Lloyd Cordova Declarador, the New Testament is connected to history – it’s an evidence that God exists through Jesus Christ deeds and miracles.

Uh… really?

Now, here’s some contemporary historians that were living in the said time when Jesus was said to be preaching his “gospel.”

Philo-Judaeus, Justin of Tiberius, Arrian, Lucius Seneca, Dion Pruseus, Pliny the Elder, Pater Calus, Suetonius, Juvenal, Theon of Smyran, Martial, Phlegon, Persius, Pompon Mela, Plutarch, Quintus Curtius, Lucian, Apollonius, Pausanias, Valerius Flaccus, Quintilian, Forus Lucius, Lucanus, Phaedrus, Epictetus, Damis, Silius Italicus, Alulus Geuius, Statius, Ptolemy, Columella, Diochry Sostom, Hermogones, Lysias, Valerius Maxiimus, Cornelius, Titus Livius, Cluvius Rufus, Publius Petronius … who else?

Anyway, let me ask Mr. John Lloyd Cordova Declarador

Can you name me just one historian, other than the Bible that recorder this event as written in Matthew 27:51-53?

And lo the curtain of the temple is rent in two from above to the bottom, and the earth quaked, and the rocks are rent and the tombs were opened. And many bodies of the °reposing~ saints were roused and, coming out of the tombs after His rousing, they entered into the holy city and are disclosed to many…

Oh come on! The dead are walking in the streets of Jerusalem and the historians are silent?

I’m not really interested on Jesus coming out of his grave after 3 days, I’m interested on this episode of The Walking Dead. Here, according to Matthew, the dead came out of their grave and walked to Jerusalem (holy city) which on that time were occupied by Romans, yet no Roman historian or any writing in that matter (Yep, Romans were so good in writing their history) have chronicled the said strange event.

And what other miracles did Jesus preformed that entered the journals of Roman historians living in his times huh?

Can you give me at least 2 or 3 examples?

Remember, “Extra-ordinary claim requires extra-ordinary evidence.”

3. Bobby Cruz’s rant is very funny. It just gives me the idea that most Christians cannot even comprehend their own holy book or their god. According to this guy, God entered a medium… WHAT? The ALL POWERFULL, CREATOR OF THE UNIVERESE entered a medium? Hindi kaya sumabog yung Medium na yun? Biruin mo, pinasok ng diyos ang katawan nya. If Bobby here reads the Bible, he will noticed that God didn’t possessed anyone nor did he entered the body of a Medium. It is only those declared as evil spirits has the capacity to do so. In the Bible story of the Ark of the Covenant for example, God doesn’t even allow a mere touch on something that he was supposed to be inside – just a small touch will kill you and now he wants me to believe that a mere medium will be the vessel of the God of Israel? Besides, it is very clear that God hates mediums.

4. So do atheists like me hates the Bible?

No, I treat the Bible like how I treat other so-called “sacred scriptures:” a collection of myths, primitive ideas, legends and tall-tales that god-believers believe.

What is there to hate?

Until next time.

John the Atheist

Facts vs. Religious Conviction

I’ve noticed that most god-believers seems to be allergic with scientific and historical facts, especially if these facts will collide with their religious belief. Wow! And they will claim that their religious belief is factual and scientific? Anyways, here are 2 examples:
1. The belief that the human body is the most advance machine… What? Machine? The New Oxford  American Dictionary define a machine as an apparatus using or applying mechanical power and having several parts, each with a definite function and together performing a particular task. Ok so a body is like a machine – so what’s the task of a male nipple? Or the appendix?
Most advance machine? Advance in what? The human body’s life span is 80 to 90 years. It deteriorates and it doesn’t even have the capacity to regenerate.  Reptiles and crustaceans can regenerate a lost tail or limbs, but alas “the most advance machine” can’t even regenerate a lost thumb. The human skeletal system cannot withstand pressure, unlike ants which can carry things that are 10X bigger and 10X heavier. To top it all, our bones loses its calcium as time moves on. Our visions and hearing is limited – unlike some birds and mammals.

So, again… advance in what?

2. A coin found in Jerusalem proves Samson exist. What? Just because a coin have a print of a guy fighting a lion proves Samson? Ok… so a large Greek urn that have a picture of a guy fighting a lion, or a three-headed dog prove Hercules exists. Good grief!

There are more examples, but the thing is that when we talk about religion, it’s really not about facts and evidences – it’s about the conviction to make the myth as true as possible, even to the point that a believer must do away all logical and rational explanation.

Unicorn?

When you find a unicorn in the Bible, most Bible apologists will say that it was because of wrong translation. 

So, you think you're better in Hebrew compare to all of King James 72 scholars? Anyway, the issue is if there’s a unicorn mentioned in the Bible and thank goodness for the King James Version, there are.

Albert Einstein on the Judeo/Christian God and the Bible

So, you guys think that Einstein believed your Christian/Bible deity when he said that “science without religion is blind” huh?

Better read this…

A Blind Argument

So here we go again, another claim of a “perfect human design.” Today’s topic will be a little bit easier to grasp because we’ll be dealing only one human body part – the eye. 

Losing Faith?

The Bible defined faith as “evidence of things not seen…” yet why is it that most Christians today are so fucked up with evidence to the point that they have to invent one out of the blue? Hello? Belief in a Jewish Sky Daddy is a faith – it doesn’t require evidence.

Now, that you guys are not contented with your own cop-out, you need to drag Albert Einstein, Charles Darwin, Stephen Hawking, and who knows who in the scientific community to join your cracked belief. Why? Is your faith not enough so you need to lie for Jesus? 

The Funny Thing about Theist’s Anatomy

Nah, I’m not going to talk about their “missing brains.” This is rather a different story.

Shrouded Evidence

Baby Killer?

One of those stories in the so-called Holy “Good Book” I really abhor is about this so-called “All-Good, merciful and just” God ordering his chosen people to mercilessly slaughter the innocent Amalekites—men, women, and children. Christian apologists have done a lot trying to fix the damage – all the excuses they could burble to justify their god’s action on this one… uh, OK if you’re not familiar with the verse: 

Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.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.- I Samuel 15:2-3

Faith?

The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold. - Psalm 18:2

Me: Uhhh... so why with the bullet-proof cab and so many armed body guards?

Good people do evil things because of religion.

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg

Cops and Bibles

The Case of the Missing God

                         

                         "Not enough evidence, God! Not enough evidence!" – Bertrand Russel

Where is God? If he exists, why can’t I see him?

Since long ago, people have been asking this question and there have been so many answers and excuses. Normally, most believers will say that a person can’t see God because our capabilities are limited – Now how can the finite see the infinite anyway? As one “God Defender” have said it, “The problem of knowing God is complicated because the very nature of God means that He is invisible and not material. That is why no one has yet confined God to a "test tube.” Any "God" which we could touch and see and photograph would not be the God we are seeking. Then how can we understand God?”

Now here’s the problem, and it’s more about empirical understanding.

Lying for Christ: Charles Darwin renounced evolution on his deathbed.

It is typical for Christians to make false reports and fabricated lies, especially on issues regarding people renouncing something on their death bed. It gives them some kind of “superiority” telling people that an infidel accepted Christ as Lord and Savior before leaving this world. 

Here’s a good example.

Charles Darwin renounced evolution on his deathbed.

They say that before Darwin died on April 19, 1882, he was holding a Bible and he renounced the theory of evolution accepted Jesus.

The story came from a certain Lady Hope who told a gathering at the educational establishment founded by the Christian evangelist Dwight Lyman Moody at Northfield, Massachusetts that she had visited Darwin on his deathbed and that he had expressed regret over evolution and had accepted Christ.According to her story, she visited Darwin on his deathbed and saw him reading the Epistle to the Hebrews. He asked for the local Sunday school to sing in a summerhouse on the grounds, and had confessed: "How I wish I had not expressed my theory of evolution as I have done." He went on, she said, to say that he would like her to gather a congregation since he "would like to speak to them of Christ Jesus and His salvation, being in a state where he was eagerly savouring the heavenly anticipation of bliss."

Dwight Moody encouraged Lady Hope to publish the story in the Boston Watchman Examiner. The story spread, and the claims were republished as late as October 1955 in the Reformation Review and in the Monthly Record of the Free Church of Scotland in February 1957. 

However, Darwin's daughter Henrietta, who was with him during his last days, said Lady Hope never visited during any of Darwin's illnesses, that Darwin probably never saw her at any time, and that he never recanted any of his scientific views. "I was present at his deathbed," Henrietta wrote in the Christian for February 23, 1922. "Lady Hope was not present during his last illness, or any illness. I believe he never even saw her, but in any case she had no influence over him in any department of thought or belief. He never recanted any of his scientific views, either then or earlier. We think the story of his conversion was fabricated in the U.S.A. . . . The whole story has no foundation whatever."("Charles Darwin's Death-Bed: Story of Conversion Denied," The Christian, February 23, 1922, p. 12.)

Lying for Christ?

Probably. 

Design, or Chance – are there no other options?

Obviously you already heard about the “Watch Challenge,” right? No, it’s not the William Paley argument. It’s also known as argument from improbability. Ok… it goes something like this: If you put some watch parts in a box and shake it, will it produce a watch? As a witless Christian would probably think – the argument is a dead end for atheism. You see, if a simple watch cannot be created by chance, what more a complex human or the universe itself. Therefore, there is a great designer AKA God!

The watch argument (argument from improbability) states that complex things could not have come about by chance.

That is true!

Respect?

I've notice that a lot of people demand that we MUST RESPECT their religious views. Respect... such a big word. Do they really know the meaning of the word "respect?"

Now, is there such a thing called “mutual respect” between a God believer and a “godless” person?

Personally, I find some Christians (Catholic or Protestant) friendly. I have theists’ friends, but that’s it. We prefer to talk about politics or trivial stuffs. Even so, we never talk about religious beliefs.

Now, try opening the Bible and read Psalms 14:1. How about reading Psalm 53: 1-6, Romans 1: 18-32 and Romans 3: 10-18. It that what you call "mutual respect?"

Ah, so as an atheist it is OK for me to respect the idea that I will be burning in hell because I don't believe that Jesus is the Son of God. I am destitute of reason or of the common powers of understanding because I don't believe God exists, or I am corrupt, wicked and vile, right?

In Islam for example, atheists are known as Kafir. The word Kafir is derived from the Arabic term Kafara which means to "to cover up or hide something." So a kafir is a person who covers up and hides the truth. For those who believe in Islam, the word Kafir is the worst word in the human language. A Kafir, or disbeliever, will be punished for eternity in the fire of hell. 

Try reading the following in the Qur’an so you will know how  these Muslims really look at atheists: 40:35, 83:34, 25:77, 47:4, 6:25, 86:15, 6:111, 23:97, 37:18 and 8:12. Furthermore, take note: A Muslim is not the friend of a kafir - 3:28. Believers should not take kafir as friends in preference to other believers. Those who do this will have none of Allah's protection and will only have themselves as guards. Allah warns you to fear Him for all will return to Him. 

So, when they say “ respect”, does that mean I cannot even criticize their ideas. That I should just shut my trap and let these God believers proselytize their faith, their archaic philosophy, their twisted science, their wanton disregard to the other person’s ideas? 

Respect huh?

Let There Be Light

There are two things a Christian will do to prove his holy book: Disregard the findings of science or re-interpret the scriptures to fit scientific data. Here’s a good example of how some God-believers will do everything to make his Bible scientific… and what does Thermodynamics got to do with it?

In the beginning...

In the beginning, humans created god into his image and likeness.

The Case of the Missing Brain

I’m quite surprised that this “argument” still persist – Nah, not because it’s a good argument, but because only a dullard will use this argument (no offense). Yet still, they use it. Maybe because most atheists will just ignore this as “dumb” and some Christians think that it is being ignored because no atheists can debunk it… really huh? Gwarrk!! Damn, I think I just vomited on my shirt.

Anyway, let me just point out why this argument is mostly used by those Happy Meals short of fries.

Natural Bang

Ignorance is not an argument and misinformation is never a rebuttal, yet sadly a lot of theists and science denier have been using these to boost their rumpus against rationality. Hmmm… is this what they mean when they say “Faith begins when reason end?”

Take this as an example. 

Most Christians I encountered in Facebook still cannot comprehend a naturalistic explanation of how the universe existed – uhhh… it is impossible for the universe to appear without the act of my God.

Really huh?

All About Theory, Atoms, and Big Bang

Typical Christian Ignorance...

Theory/ Scientific theory

So, it’s always been said here and in other groups about the difference between a theory and a scientific theory – is it that impossible to learn huh?

Ok! Ok… here we go again!

To Believe or Not To Believe

I often wonder why Christian preach their belief with atheists like me. In the first place, preaching is only effective to people with the same wavelength (same religious belief, same world-view). Now, here’s an example courtesy of a certain Joerelson Jonem Ng.

According to his bluster, an atheist choose to become an atheist – so, did I choose to be an atheist?  Well… it depends on how you will look at it. Between blind faith and rationality, yes I choose the later. Belief in a god depends primarily of accepting dogmas, doctrines and ignorance – stuffed with guilt and fear. On the other hand, rationality works on inquisitive mind and critical thoughts. 

Ang kamangmangan ay hindi isang argumento laban sa ateismo.

Ignorance is not an argument, and what good example is this rant from a certain Vivencio Baribar Jr. Ok… it’s not worth it but, I find it funny. So, since this was written in Tagalog. Oh well…

Dahil daw naniniwala ang mga atheista na sa unggoy (?) nag-mula ang tao, pag-namatay daw eh ilalagay daw ang katawan sa puno o kahoy at doon mabubulok.

Ayon pala kay Mr. Baribar Jr. ang unggoy pag namamatay eh sa puno nakalagay. Hindi nahuhulog ang unggoy sa puno pag namamatay? Ewan ko sa kanya, pero sa totoo lang eh nakakatawa ito kung iisipin. Ayon pa kay Mr. Baribar Jr. ang paniniwala daw ng mga atheista eh ang tao ay mula sa unggoy kaya ang isang unggoy (na kadulad daw ng mga atheista) ay namatay, saan din daw ba ito babalik?

On Doubt and Reasoning

As I visit  a local bookshop here in Manila, I stumbled on one of Joyce Mayer (that popular Christian author and TV Evangelist) books. I think it's called "Battlefields of the Mind." It's a devotional book intended for the Christian audience, but what sparked my interests was that chapter on doubt and disbelief.

Easy Life?

I guess some Christians doesn't understand their own Bible.

The movie is dead.

So, you really want me to give you what I think about the movie God Is Not Dead, Ok… It was a boring show. No, not because I’m an atheist, but because I am a movie buff.

Not that I always encounter believers asking me to watch the show and then expecting some God-given miracle to happen – transforming me instantly in becoming a Christian after watching it, but I have my share of ding-a-lings.

Anyway…

The show is a typical Christian propaganda: Good Christian, bad atheist – that’s it.

Josh Wheaton, an evangelical college student, enrolls in a philosophy class taught by Professor Jeffrey Radisson, an atheist, who demands his students sign a declaration that "God is dead" to pass.

WHAT?

Why was this “professor” not been reported to the Dean’s office? We’re not talking about grades here. Is there any university that allow this? Anything can happen in a movie.

So, Josh is the only student who refuses to sign. I guess every student in that school doesn’t have a student hand book except for Josh. That made the atheist professor furious so he took his “Debate me” card and challenged Josh to a debate with him but agrees to let the class members decide the winner. Obviously, we all know the topic of the debate.

In both Round 1 and Round 2 of the debate, the atheist win – giving the Christian all the drama in the scene. You know, the all-time favorite “persecuted Christian” bullshit. Yet, on the 3rd round – because God is good… the Christian win and he even converted the atheist professor to accept Jesus as Lord and Savior before dying in an accident – END OF STORY.

Ok, you guys wants details?

In Round 1, Josh cites the Big Bang as evidence that God created the universe according to Genesis (“Let there be light”). The atheist professor didn’t made any rebuttal. He just stated Stephen Hawking, taunting the Christian if he is smarter than Hawkings – WHAT!!!! And he is a philosophy professor? Wow!

In Round 2, Josh refers to Hawking’s comment that philosophy is dead, adding that perhaps their philosophy class shouldn’t exist. Again, the philosophy professor never made a rebuttal. So much for being a straw-man.

So in Round 3, Josh asked the professor "Why do you hate God?" After Josh repeats the question twice more, Radisson explodes in rage, confirming he hates God for his mother's death that left him alone despite his prayers. Josh then casually asks Radisson how he can hate someone that does not exist. In the end, some dork stand up and said, "God's not dead." Almost the entire class follows and Radisson leaves the room in defeat.

You may asked, “Where’s the fucking argument?” You may also noticed that the “atheist” is not even an atheist, but someone who just hated God.

Now for the question: “Will this movie convert me into a believer?”

The movie focus more on the issue of hating god. I don’t hate god, I don’t believe it exists. So, naturally, this film didn’t really gave me an option whether to believe or not to believe. The movie also didn’t gave me any rebuttal. It only tries to give me the God is Good card. To analyze it further, the movie is intended for the Christian audience, not for atheists. It’s a “feel good” Christian movie to boost “Christian” confidence. Also, the movie reinforced the false idea that there are “No atheists in foxholes” so I guess this will inspire Christians to pray that atheists like me should contract cancer or undergo some other misfortune in order to become a Christian.

So, as an atheist what can I say about the movie?
Well, not only God is dead, but the movie is as dead as a cold corpse.