Thursday, 26 September 2013

it's not that i don't believe in god, it's just that i can't....

when i think of god, i think of it in the grandest of terms that i can possibly think of, which still falls short of what a god should be, because it's fucking *god* for fuck sake and when I say "god" I mean the *actual* being if such a being were to exist and NOT the "god" that is in fact a person's ego pretending to be god by flapping their mouths off about how fucking great their god is!

that is to say that i believe that if there actually is a god, then it *must* live up to the commonly thrown around definitions of a god creature and not some half-hearted piss poor version of "god"...

ie. it is the ultimate being; the creator of everything; it is infinitely powerful; infinitely clever; is infinitely old; is everywhere and nowhere at once... anything short of that and it is NOT god.

the description above is one of a being that would seem to be far beyond the mere understanding and perception of humans so is it not just a little bit arrogant to even acknowledge the mere speculation of the possibility of the existence of god?

before you get all butt hurt, let me explain...

one of the words that is often thrown around to describe god is "infinite" ... if you had a quadrillionth of something that was infinite, you would still have an infinite amount, so to know anything of god, even its mere existence, is to overstate your own place in the universe because the only way you could categorically state that you definitely know that there is a god is if you became god yourself.

And NO. ... your *feelings* that god exists do not count as proof, they are proof to *you* that it exists, they are not proof to me because i don't share your feelings and I am not obligated to share them either, so your feelings are most certainly *not* proof of god's existence to me. Your feelings are your own, so in fact, don't expect me to take those feelings of yours about *anything* as proof of *anything*.

and even if you do co-incidentally and actually know something of god - *somehow* - then how exactly *do* you know? What is your basis of recognition? eg. if you saw an alien, how would you know that it was an actual alien and not just some bizarre creature from Earth that you'd never seen or heard about before? And even if you did have knowledge of god, regardless of whether you can prove it or not, your nano fibre of god-knowledge is so utterly small and insignificant then what is the point of even mentioning it? It's like boasting about having painted a single bolt on the frikking Sydney Harbour Bridge, so fucking what? What about painting the rest of the fucking bridge?

I can only think that the entire point of mentioning god *is* to specifically overstate your importance and place in the universe, that is *why* people believe in god, it gives them a connection to something that *is* infinitely powerful and knowledgeable and old and [blah blah blah, insert all those superlatives]... it makes you bigger and more significant in your universe when you believe in god.

but it's an ego trip and that is all it is ... and i'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that, but that is what it is... For most people, god is in fact, their ego speaking...

* god likes christmas? no, *you* like christmas
* god hates fags? no, *you* hate homosexuals
* god says I should pray? no, *you* are saying that I should pray
* god says to believe in Jesus? no, *you* are telling me to believe in Jesus

and so on and so fucking forth....

and this is why you should keep your belief in god to yourself, because if you do keep your god to yourself, then that says that you are safe and secure in your faith without feeling compelled to tell other people about how fucking great it is in the hopes that they will also be believers and give you positive feedback to your speculation that god exists and is, in fact, great.


People who are not secure about their faith, go on and on about it all the time to provide themselves with reaffirmations about how great god is. However, if *I* believed in god, i would keep it to myself because to allege that I have knowledge of something that is beyond all human comprehension, for me, is to brag that I am *far* better than the next person who doesn't believe in god, or even bragging to the next person who does believe in god that *I* am a *far* "better" believer than they are.

my point is that if god is truly an infinitely old/clever/etc being then how could we possibly possess any knowledge of it at all from our mortal perspective and how could we possibly know that this knowledge was from god in the first place because to have knowledge of god is to have proof of god and if you have proof of god, then it's not very god-like in its proof, seeing how it possesses attributes that can be identified and verified as being godly by mere and lowly mortals.

Yes, what I am saying is that as soon as you mention god, it can no longer possibly be god because *you* have just put a mortal limit on its abilities.....

Boaster: "My god made the universe!"
Realist: "What? just *one* universe? that's not very god-like..."

Sunday, 22 September 2013

"atheist" is a self defeating label...

I think "atheist" is a self defeating label because for my mind, the atheist is supposed to be free of this incessant need to apply a label to themselves that apparently defines them like many other people do. eg. Republicans, democrats, christians, hindus, muslims ford drivers, barbeque sauce lovers, rah rah rah rah... at least with those things, we can point at something and say, at least partially, "Oh that is what an xyz is about!"

But for atheism, there is nothing to point at, you can't point at a non-existent thing and say that that defines you.

So what is it that defines an atheist?

Is it a lack of belief in gods and/or the supernatural?

Ahem... No... that does not answer the question of what defines an *atheist*.

The word "atheist" literally means "without god" from the Greek "atheos" ... a- "without" + theos "god" .. right?

Well, that may be the definition behind *atheism* but that is not what defines the person that is the atheist, how can it?

How can a lack of something define you; the person, the character, the human being that is you??

There is a definite lack of mountain climbing in my life, so does that define who I am? No.

So how can a lack of something or even not participating in particular activities, define a person? It can't..

What defines the character of a person tends to be what that person actually does *have*, not what they *lack*.

So, what defines a person as being an atheist is that they *have* the ability to choose what to believe (in) or not, even if the atheist never makes a choice of what to actually believe, the atheist is free to be an individual and make up their own minds about what is and what is not when it comes to those big questions of god, life, the universe and everything.

A lack of belief does not define an atheist, the ability to make their own *choice* as to what to believe is what defines an atheist. The atheist is free to be their own person *without* having their thoughts supposedly based on some predefined way of thinking.

Morals, religions, gods, miracles, whatever... the atheist is defined by being free to believe whatever they want to make of all that stuff without a predefined explanation for the universe, without being burdened by stories that were told verbally thousands of years ago when we had a very rudimentary understanding of the universe...

Being an atheist is all about being yourself and making your own individual choices about the big questions in life, so why not start right at the beginning with you being an individual and refrain from choosing a label that inherently degrades your status as an individual *because* you have chosen to label yourself with something doesn't define you in the least....

that is to say, why even call yourself an "atheist" in the first place when being an atheist is all about being an individual? By calling yourself an atheist, you will set yourself into somebody else's predefined bucket of labels for people, perhaps even your own.

Wednesday, 17 July 2013

religion won't die if you keep using petty arguments against it...

this could probably use a re-write, but i'm too lazy... mostly written 17/7/2013, mostly...

religion would die a lot quicker if the people rallying against it would stop focusing on all the petty, stupid, bad and just plain silly bullshit that forms the majority of religions, especially christianity.

The followers of religion simply don't give a fuck about all the petty and stupid stuff that forms part of their religion, they don't give a fuck if it's right or if it's wrong, they just want you to believe it and it doesn't matter to them that it is or isn't correct!

So just what makes people think that they can change somebody else's mind about something they love by ragging on the stupid bits of it? And yes people do love their religion, it doesn't matter that it hurts them or keeps them dumb, they *love* their fucking weird-arse stories anyway and I'm no different, I just don't consider the weird arse stories I love to be a fucking religion!

It's like pointing out an insignificant flaw in someone's favourite movie and expecting that they will never watch that movie again because it was *you* that pointed out that flaw... big fucking deal and seriously, just how up-yourself are you to think that *you* can get somebody to stop loving something because of some trivial aspect of it that you've pointed out?

As an example: the Bible and its story of the "Great Flood" ... ahem... So-fucking-what if the world could not possibly recover after Noah's Flood in less than a few thousands years, seeing how nearly all photosynthesis across the entire globe was suspended for a year because the earth was allegedly covered in kilometres of water!

So-f-u-c-k-i-n-g-what!?!?!! Noah and the Ark is a *story*..

That Ark story was totally full of shit but it was a totally full of shit good story. I liked it, it's more than likely that the totally unbelievable story of Noah and his Ark that was what made me realise religion was a piece of shit in the first place.

People just don't give a fuck about your opinion about the things they like/love that some busy-body like yourself thinks is stupid.

Try and tell a Star Wars fan about one single flaw in the Star Wars saga or a dozen flaws in Star Trek to a "Trekkie" or hundreds of flaws to a Doctor Who fan who has watched and noted those very flaws in the dozens of times that that fan has watched all of those episodes, in fact, that particular fan of Doctor Who is probably *where* you got your list of Doctor Who flaws in the first place.

So have I made my point yet? Ragging on what people love is NOT the way to get them to stop loving that thing, in fact, if you rag on something a person likes, then they are just as likely to clutch even harder to that thing and like it even more, just to spite you.

eg. if somebody ragged on Doctor Who, I'd just say "fuck you!!" and then go have a Doctor Who marathon in honour of the dipshit fucktard who just tried to rag on Doctor Who.

Sooooo.. what is the solution?

Instead, the anti-religionist should focus on the minuscule amount of good stuff in religion that the religious don't give a flying fuck about either...

i mean, seriously, how can anybody in the overly selfish Western society seriously claim to be christian?

seriously? come on! really? hmmmm... I seriously doubt it ....

The purpose of following christinsanity is that you get to have eternal life in heaven if you're a "good" person, right?

But what a lot of people conveniently forget is that this Jesus character apparently said that to be a "good" person, you have to actually *do* good deeds without any thought for reward in order to get into heaven...

From the bible itself (and please, read the whole chapters before saying that they are out of context, I fucking did)

Luke 18:22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

Matthew 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go [and] sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come [and] follow me.

Mark 10:21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

Are christians willing to sell off all their stuff and then give up all that cash they've just made after selling all their shiny things (probably for way less than they bought them) and give that money to the poor?

Well?? and please, don't lie, it's not very fucking christ-like...

This is exactly why I don't follow christianity as it would be a lie for me to think that I was getting into heaven unless I willingly sold my things and gave that cash to poor people in need and then willingly chose to live in near poverty.....

fuck that!! I'm not giving away all my stuff just so some strangers can eat, I like my stuff too much to go and do something like that.

I seriously doubt that there are christians who would give away all their stuff and then give that money to the needy. It's just not practical to give away all your money, but that is exactly what that Jesus guy said to do, so if you aren't doing that, then you can fuck-off with this fantasy of getting into a christian heaven because you aren't getting past those pearly gates.

Oh what's that? You *do* give away some money to the needy? *some*?? ... No... that's not how it works.. there are still needy people in this world in spite of you giving a little bit away, so as it stands, good little christian person, you have NOT given away *enough* of your possessions to be calling yourself christian because there are still needy people.

Seems to me that most christians are getting a free ride on the backs of other christians who actually *are* doing Christ-like things, who actually *are* donating significant amounts of money to the needy. No, that's not how it works either. *YOU* *yourself* have to do good deeds, not lay claim to the good deeds of other christians just because you deem yourself to be a christian as well.

How much is enough then? 10% ... Half? How much then? hmmm... well? If the richest ten percent of christians (about 100 million people) gave up 10% of their income, people in need across the world would be a thing of the past...

So in summary, the true way to destroy religion is to berate religious folk for not actually following what their precious religion supposedly taught them to do.

ie. Jesus said to love everyone, so anyone claiming to be christian that shows even one iota of bigotry or intolerance or hatred towards anyone at all, is not a christian. People opposing religion should focus on the greatest hypocritical aspect of religion: The fact that little to no-one is actually following it and those who are actually following it are unlikely to be in your face arguing with you about the trivial and alleged aspects of their religion so pretty much *Every* argument against religion is already won unless, of course, you like to argue about stupid stories that somebody made up thousands of years ago?

Friday, 12 July 2013

atheism... around and around in circles....

too often i see non-believers pointing out the stupidity of religion, especially christianity, what with its biblically tall stories of talking donkeys, global floods, humanity descending from only two people, dudes walking on water, raising the dead etc etc etc....

i find this disappointing, because so fucking what if christianity is full of improbable tales? What difference does it make if christianity is an utter joke? Telling christians their religion is stupid is no different to telling someone that "Star Trek: The Next Generation" is stupid. So what if it is? As long as the person gets good things out of it, then so what?

the point of the bible is not in the particulars of its stupid stories anyway, those details describing the stupidity of christianity are irrelevant; the point of the bible and indeed, the point of *christianity* and the point of being a frikking christian in the first place is that everyone is to love one another, without exception.

The whole thing was summed up in the two commandments of Jesus, not the fucking TEN commandments. I know TEN sounds far more frikking impressive than TWO but the two commandments cover the TEN because the second commandment can be regarded as a generic guiding sort of commandment.

That is to say if you apply the "Love thy neighbour as you would have them love you." commandment to the TEN commandments you get things like, "don't steal... if you don't want people to steal from you", "don't lie... if you don't want to be lied to" and so on, "don't covet someone's stuff... if you don't want them to covet your stuff" etc etc etc...

So instead of berating christians for believing in something that has stupid stories as part of its overall "philosophy", berate them for *not* actually following the point of what those fucking stories in this bible of theirs were allegedly supposed to teach them!

Show me one person who actually does love everyone.

Go on. Here is a list of things to help you decide what excludes you from loving *everyone*.

** If you own a gun with the intention of defending yourself, then you do not love everyone because you are willing to *shoot* and possibly *kill* a person in order to defend yourself. That's not loving everyone therefore you are not a christian.

** If you support war; the death penalty; assassinations; torture; They aren't examples of loving everyone therefore you are not christian.

** If you are racist, bigoted, misogynistic, rude, mean, bullish, cruel, then you can hardly claim to love everyone and therefore you are not christian.

** If someone rapes your child and you hit that person, then you do not love that rapist. You do not love *everyone* and therefore you are NOT christian.

** If someone slaughters your whole family, would you hate them or love them for it?

See what I mean? How can anybody love every single person in this world without exception?

And *yes*, this is what Jesus taught. The prime example of this was when he was being tortured and was then crucified. He was supposedly the son of god and if we allow for the story told as told by the narrative of the bible to be true, he gave proof of this by performing all those charitable miracles like healing the sick, feeding the poor etc; In other words: Jesus could have stopped his torment at any time but he chose to NOT fight back because to fight back would involve hurting someone and hurting someone, anyone at all, is NOT loving everyone.

That is the point of christianity. Do no harm and love everyone, no matter what the fuck they do to you or the people you love, even if they try to kill you or the people you love.

"Forgive them father, for they know not what they do" ... that is what somebody purporting to be christian should say whenever they are being persecuted or hurt or killed.

Them's the rules. What's that? You don't like them? Then stop fucking pretending to be a christian.

It's that fucking simple.

The first three hundred years of christianity is littered with stories of martyrs who were actually following Jesus' teachings. There are stories of people with gouged out eyes, deliberately amputated hands, stonings, burnings at the stake, crucifixions etc etc etc. Look up the "Age Of Martyrs" if you want more details, I won't bore you with historical fact.

But no-one follows the rules as set down by Jesus these days because he set the bar so fucking high that the vast majority of present day christians don't even realise that they are nowhere near to adhering to the point of JC's alleged teachings ...

The point here is that christians don't care about the fucking bullshit stories in their bible because they don't even care to follow the fucking "love everyone" point/commandment of their precious christianity either - and I don't have a problem with that, everyone has the right to defend themselves, but christians are openly contradicting their Messiah and that is a fucking lie and if you walk around telling lies, then you are a piece of shit lying cunt.

Sorry, but that's what you are, don't want to be regarded as a liar? then either throw away this christianity that you aren't actually following anyway or shut that flap-trap of yours that keeps bragging that you are christian or - heaven forbid! - you actually start following Jesus' teachings to the letter.

It's that fucking simple.

They are the *only* three options christians and yes, I don't give a flying fuck if you call yourself christian and don't brag or even mention anything about it, that's fine by me.

So my message to atheists is to tell christians to stop being such liars by telling them to stop this bullshit farce of pretending to be christian because the vast majority of christians are not anywhere near the ballpark of actually following their precious Messiah, not by a long shot and if atheists can't do this, then these religious and anti-religious "crusades" they find themselves in will drag on for centuries.

Mark my words, the only reason christianity isn't dead already is because atheists are being too tolerant of christians and their inherent inability to follow their own precious religion.

Friday, 1 March 2013

the atheist mistake.....

i don't regard myself as being an atheist, even if that is what I actually am because for my mind atheism is a mere affectation, it is merely a useless label that means nothing to me and couldn't possibly convey what sort of person I am to others, so I wouldn't call myself an atheist because it would feel like I was speaking bullshit.

Which is no different to anybody else to be honest, because people tell me they are American, Australian, New Zealander, Ford driver, Holden driver, chocolate lover, a tea drinker, a coffee drinker, vegan, meat lover, christian or atheist or whatever other banner it is that they fly before themselves that makes them feel like they belong to their particular group and be proud of belonging to that group but no single banner can tell me what sort of person you are, how can it?

But if people want to fly their banners, then that's fine with me for all these groups *except* for atheism because I see atheism as the neutral position so to fly the atheist flag before oneself is to fly an empty banner devoid of any meaning whatsoever.

For me, the mistake in atheism is touting that you are an atheist in the first place, because for my mind, the atheist represents the "clean-slate", the pristine human being that is free to act as an individual in all regards.

In other words, the atheist is free to be an independent and individual observer to all points of view *including* atheism itself even though it doesn't really have a point of view, so to see a lot of people openly declaring that they are individuals is somewhat redundant to my way of thinking.

We all consider ourselves to be "me" from our own point of view, right? So to me, atheism is a label given to declare that you are yourself, that you are your own "me", which is a somewhat redundant label when thought of in that particular context, I mean, you don't go around telling people that you are indeed yourself, that you are indeed your own "me", do you? Imagine that conversation?

"Hi, I'm me!"
"Hi there! I am *also* me!"
"Please to meet you, me!"

But perhaps that is just me and the culture I was raised in because where I live in Australia, religion is generally something that people keep to themselves, which in my personal case may be because I end up correcting people in my life about their own religion when they talk to me about it so they tend not to tell me their (incorrect) ideas about their religion in the first place to save themselves the hassle of being told how they have their religion wrong.

What I am saying is that it has never been necessary to flaunt my lack of belief in gods and such because where I live, in spite of there being a christian majority, there has never really been a need to counter the religious bullshit that can crop up at times that would require that I drop into "atheist-mode" in order to put religion in its place.

A simple and polite "oh just fuck off with that Jesus bullshit!" (yes, that is being polite) is usually sufficient to shut down anybody blabbering on about their Jesus and besides that, in general terms, regular christians in Australia usually do something about the more extremist christians anyway. Like when some dumbarse christians shoot their mouths off over here, it is often the moderate christians telling the extremist christians to sit down and shut the fuck up.

This is something I rarely see elsewhere. From what I have seen online in the USA, it is the atheists that feel compelled enough to tell extremist christians to pull their heads in, the christians in the USA generally avoid speaking out against other christians, now matter how fucked up their fellow "christians" behave, at least in my experience it has been a rare occasion to see a USA christian tell another USA christian to shut the fuck up and stop being a fool.

At any rate the consequence of my rarely needing to "debunk" religion has meant that I have rarely needed to use the anti-religion view point to support my views. Instead, I support my anti-religious views by using a person's own *religion* without getting within cooee of using the atheist/scientific viewpoint at all.

For instance: if some christian were to go on about how evolution is just a theory, then I would say "so fucking what? what the fuck does evolution have to do with christians being good people?" ...

After all, being a good person is the entire point of Jesus' teachings so *whatever* it is that christians bullshit about, if it is *anything* beyond a discussion of how to be a good person, then their argument can and should be summarily dismissed because what they are bullshitting about is irrelevant to the teachings of Jesus so it is *nothing* to do with christianity and means nothing to furthering any argument for christianity.

So for my mind, atheists are going about debunking religion the wrong way in that they do not need to put across their own atheist viewpoint to win a religious argument at all, they don't even need to focus on all the bullshit bad things that religion touts either.

For example: believers don't give a flying fuck about how we would be all inbred if we descended from just two people (Adam and Eve), if anything, they make up some bigger bullshit story to account for this so it is utterly pointless to take the scientific point of view (which the adamant believer refuses to understand anyway) and explain why a diverse genetic sampling is required to make a healthy population of humans. Nor do believers give a fuck that marriage isn't solely defined as being between a man and a woman (eg. King Solomon had how many wives?) nor do believers care that slavery (eg. it is okay to beat your servants as long as they don't die within three days of that beating) and rape are condoned (eg. if you rape a girl, you are obligated to marry her) in the bible...

all believers care about is what they know, and to be brutally honest, when it comes to christianity, believers know little to nothing about their religion nor its origins. All of these little rituals they do (eg. going to church, communion, prayer etc etc) and these holidays that are supposedly celebrated because of Jesus are frivolous and unnecessary and are nothing to do with the actual christian message as taught by Jesus.

In fact pretty much anything that is identified as "christian" these days can be regarded as frivolous and/or an out-right admission that the believer does not comprehend their religion which is by far the easiest way to commit idolatry and break their precious first commandment. Ironic that the people who shout the loudest that they are following Christ's teachings are the ones that are some of the people that are the furthest away from actually following those teachings of Jesus.. Although the irony has worn off for me and it is now the expected behaviour from christians to be utterly oblivious to their pissing all over their precious religion.

An example of frivolous christian bullshit: putting the "Christ" back in Christmas makes me roll my eyes because Christmas is a ritual usurped from the pagan celebration of the winter solstice by the Romans in order to encourage people to be christian three hundred years after the death of Jesus. Giving and receiving gifts once a fracking year to and from people you already know was not the point of Jesus' teachings about loving thy neighbour, you are supposed to give to people who are in *need*, getting an iPod or giving the latest Sony Playstation hardly counts as something you *need* ... Seems to me that people think that they are good christians merely because they do this gift giving thing once a year and that justifies them calling themselves christian for the rest of the year... nope! that is NOT how it works, dickhead. I even get the impression that some people even go to church once in a blue moon and that somehow makes them a good person without actually fucking doing anything for those in need.


Fact is: if you are christian and you are doing good things for those in need, then that is *all* you need to do to be a good christian. Going to church is pointless because Jesus said to not be seen in public offering your praise to him so that others can see that you are a offering praise (that's called "showing off", by the way); catholic communion is another pointless ritual to make it seem like you have taken a vow to your Messiah; even merely saying that you believe in Jesus as a person is a pointless exercise in actual terms of following JC's teachings; nearly everything a christian can bullshit about can be summarily dismissed as nothing to do with JC's teachings of loving thy neighbour aka giving to those in need.

That is the complete extent of what you actually need to know about christianity, so why is that so FUCKING HARD for 2.2 Billion christians to do???

Jesus taught that you are to give to the needy if you want to get to heaven - that is all that is needed to be "christian" and this is the mistake that atheists make, they concentrate on debunking the frivolous rubbish that the believer touts when that frivolous rubbish should be summarily dismissed as nothing to do with what Jesus Christ taught seeing how JC's teachings are the fucking point of christianity....

Do you want proof that Jesus exists and that people actually follow their god? Have a look at how many people live in or near to poverty and you will find that near three billion people are living in poverty, there is your proof that Jesus does not exist, because if Jesus existed, christians would be falling over themselves to make sure that there was no poverty anywhere in the world.

For my mind, as long as there is poverty in this world, Jesus is a myth. In fact, Jesus is a disgusting lie that people follow in lieu of their actually doing something about all the needy people in the world.

Believing in Jesus, for the most part, is how people tell themselves that they are good people because they don't have the courage to acknowledge that they are good people of their own accord, but this label that they throw on themselves means nothing, so we get christians who are abusive and disgusting and hateful who will claim black and blue that they are a follower of Jesus when plain and simply to the eye of anyone with even half an eye open, they are clearly NOT following JC's teachings. It's a guilt trip that people can whip out when they feel guilty about not actually helping the needy.

"Hey I believe in Jesus, so why the fuck should I help the needy, Jesus will be back soon to fix EVERYTHING, real soon, in about five minutes.... just wait ... "

ahem ... NO!

but "Jesus died for my sins" .. ahem... no he did not, the manner in which he died was an *example* of how *christians* are supposed to live their lives and that example he taught was that no matter how much people mistreat you, you will *still* be forgiving of them and that you will NOT raise a hand or even a single thought of violence towards those people that would hurt you.

"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do..."

That is where atheists make their mistake, Jesus will not do squat for this world because Jesus taught his *followers* to fix the world and its problems, so Jesus will *never* magically (re)appear to set things right because fixing the world is what he commanded his followers to do by giving to the needy and that is all there is to christianity, to make arguments beyond that simple concept is to demonstrate your inability to understand the simplicity of what christianity was supposed to fucking be about, which is something that believers need to be taught. ie. either start following the teachings of Jesus Christ or fuck off with this utterly bullshit set of elaborate lies that the christian tells the world because they think they are getting into heaven for merely calling themselves "christian".

If Jesus really does exist, then it is his own followers that are going to hell for pretending to be something that they are not. The atheist should take advantage of the christian inability to follow their own set of rules in disassembling religion and not bother with the petty bullshit that the religious don't give a fuck about either.

Friday, 21 December 2012

what does the year have to do with christ being the lord?

every now and then, some idiotic christian spouts off that because the current year is based on the alleged birth date of their precious Jesus Christ that that somehow means that Jesus is "real"..


Being correct about Jesus being "real", is irrelevant, even if you *are* correct, because aside from this being idolatry, but... what the fuck does the frikking year have to do with anything?

The year we use is an arbitrary numbering system that could have been based on anything, so how does the numbering of our years got anything to do with being a good christian? That *is* the point of being christian; that you be a kind and generous and loving individual, you know that, right?

That is all there is to christianity so if you need the constant environmental stimulation in seeing that it is the "year of our lord" as some sort of reminder that you are supposed to a good christian, then your motivations for being christian are driven by selfishness because all *you* are interested in is seeing things that are christian and since *you* see christian things, that somehow makes *you* a believer, and that somehow makes *you* a good person and that somehow means that *you* get to live with god in heaven for all eternity when *you* die.....

#fail at being Christ-like much, or is it just a hobby?

but even if the year being based around Christ is supposedly some beacon in our history that proves that Christ is lord or some shite, then it should be pointed out that Christ was pretty much a nobody for the first three hundred years after his death... and that the Anno Domini calendar wasn't devised until 525AD and wasn't adopted by anybody until 532AD and was not widely used by many people until 800AD or so ... and some countries didn't adopt it until about 1400AD!

the Ancient Romans used the founding of Rome as the reference point for the year, which in our current scheme of years, was 753BC

the calendar we use today is based on ten month Roman calendar which then evolved into the twelve month calendar that was introduced by Julius Caesar at about 45BC and was slightly amended later on by Augustus in 4AD, this calendar was used up until 1582AD when Pope Gregory slightly changed it again..

but the point here is that we have had many calendars over the millennia and we didn't start using the Anno Domini calendar until 532AD - so when some smart arse goes on about how the year being based on the "fact" that Jesus was born is proof of Jesus, then they can be told something along the lines of: if Jesus was so special, then why did it take over five hundred years to start using his birth year as the current year?

ps. the monk who "calculated" Jesus' birth year, got it wrong, 2012AD should actually be 2016AD, by the way

Saturday, 6 October 2012

the burden of proof is upon the believer to actually believe...

when it comes to the existence of god, the burden of proof shouldn't be one of establishing whether that supernatural entity exists or not, because honestly, that will never be proven or disproven so it is an endless pointless argument...

For my mind, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so you need to have god-like evidence in order to prove that a god is just that, ie. a *god*. Meaning to say that should such a creature exist in any capacity whatsoever, then according to the popular definitions of god being all powerful, everywhere and nowhere at once, knows everything, lives forever, infinitely clever etc etc, then god is such an infinitely complex being that even if you did have actual evidence you wouldn't know what it represented, because to claim any knowledge of what this infinitely complex being called "god" is or what it is about or what it wants, is to insult that god... well, it would be, if your existence wasn't so insignificant to it, that is.

I imagine god and our perception of such a thing as being like this: imagine a one dimensional universe; in a one dimensional universe there is only that one single point in that universe: there is no up and down, no left or right, there is no such thing as length, height and width. That single point could only be aware of its own existence, it is beyond the definition of a single dimension universe for there to be anything other than that single point. However, from our human point of view above the lower two dimensions in our three dimensional universe, we know that single points in space can be joined to make two dimensional representations, and we also know what two dimensional objects can be joined to make three dimensional objects.

In a single dimension universe, that single point of view could only ever hope that there was a dimension above it, it could never have proof of such a thing, because if it did have proof of there being a dimension beyond its own, it would require another single point in its universe to be a part of its single point universe in order to prove that there was something, *anything*, beyond its existence, but to do so, it would need to "transform" its single dimension universe, into at least a two dimensional universe.

So the only way that single point in its single dimension universe would be able to have "proof" of a higher dimension and remain in its current dimension, is if it made it all up, it could only be pretending that there was something more to its existence, regardless of whether it actually turned out to be completely right in its assertions!

So in regards to god, if you could prove that god exists, for me that would mean that doing so would defy the very definition of god because how could an infinitely complex being even be perceived by mortally bound humans from our lower point of view?? We can't perceive god because we are like that single point in space, we only know of our single point in space, we can't conceive of anything beyond that single point, because there is simply nothing in our perception that could represent anything outside our single point universe except for our *imagination*.

The reality of this point of view, is that the true blasphemy to god, is that humans had the audacity to dream up the concept of god in the first place. For my mind, the only reason humans invented god was because of human arrogance in their attempts to become more like god themselves, and to be like god, even in the smallest of degrees, is idolatry, at least according to the bible's first commandment.

"Love thy god before all others" especially applies to those who are pretending to be god themselves, because if you claim to be a follower of Jesus, but then you don't follow what he allegedly taught, then you are making up your own Jesus. You have your own personal Jesus in your brain; you are probably mistaking this Jesus of yours for your ego.

Soooo... seeing how this god creature can never be proven or disproven by us mere mortals without practically becoming gods ourselves, the burden of proof should shift to be one of the believer demonstrating that this fantastically enlightened being called "god" actually exists by the believer actually following what it taught.

Seriously, Jesus says in the bible, in three gospels, that if you want to go to heaven then the only way is to sell all your stuff and give the money you make to the needy.

*The*only*way* ... don't skip over that bit.

If christians want me to believe that this god of theirs exists and if they truly expect that they are going to get into heaven, then they can damn well show that they are serious about their religion by actually taking what their messiah taught seriously because it is more than apparent to me that the biggest hurdle for any christian, is to actually be christian...

I mean, look at all the people telling others to follow Jesus when they aren't even following what he taught, people who do that, are merely saying that they are following Jesus, they aren't actually *doing* what he taught and if they aren't *doing* what the biblical Jesus taught, then that right there is a person who is pretending to be Jesus/god and in actual fact, seeing how this Jesus of theirs is actually their own ego, they are actually asking that you should follow *them* and believe in everything that *they* believe in. (and christians have the gall to say that atheists are pretending to be god?)

The object of getting everyone to merely say that they just believe, is that if *everyone* is merely just following Jesus by merely just saying that they are, then there will no reason for those pretend-to-be christians to feel guilt for not actually following their messiah's teachings. something like: "Hey, if no-one else is doing what Jesus commanded, why should I bother as well? and seeing how everyone is still saying that they follow Jesus, I will too, just so I can seem to fit in and be part of the group so as to not be excluded and not be persecuted for not believing..." ...

I look at atheists and christians, and the only difference between the two of them is that the atheist isn't pretending to be something that they are not. The atheist is boldly declaring that they aren't following Jesus, unlike the christian, who doesn't have the perspicacity to realise or the balls to own up to the fact that they aren't actually following what JC allegedly taught either.

Essentially, any christian objection to atheism is one of "how dare you not pretend to follow Jesus like I am pretending to follow him!!" .. the christian is jealous of the atheist ability to not be a bullshit artist and that the atheist has the ability to do good deeds because it is the right thing to do. Doing good deeds, regardless of your beliefs, was in fact the point of the Jesus' parable, The Good Samaritan. If you do good deeds without claiming that you are christian, then you are already one up in JC's good books, if you say you a christian, but then do nothing to backup that claim by doing good deeds, you are most certainly not in JC's good books.

Don't believe me? read the gospels of Mark, Luke and Matthew, any claims to the contrary that are supposedly from the bible, are very much likely to be things that Jesus didn't say, and if Jesus didn't say them, then what the fuck are you calling yourself christian for if you aren't listening to your precious messiah? Are you a "Saint" Paulian? or an Old Testamentarian? or do you follow what *J*e*s*u*s* taught?

the outspoken and annoying christian feels a need to spread their empty faith because it *is* empty, they are not following what the central figure of their religion even teaches, they feel the need for other people to provide the burden of proof because they are not comfortable with their just believing in Jesus, it isn't enough for them, they need to have others "just believe in Jesus" as well, so the mere existence of outspoken atheists is an affront to their empty declarations of their "just believe in Jesus" faith because the atheist represents the truth to them and the truth of christianity, especially in "western" nations, is that christians are not following their messiah either... Putting the burden of proof onto others is the christian saying "well, you aren't helping the needy either!!" to which the non-believer position should be.. "while that may be true, unlike you, I don't follow a supernatural being that commanded that if I want to get into heaven, then I will help the needy, to my own detriment, if need be"

Open declarations of atheism are announcements that are akin to saying "why should I follow what you are only *pretending* to be following, why the fuck should I pretend to follow your religion as well?? there is no way I am following your religion just to make you feel better about you *not* following what your precious messiah taught"

The christian burden of proof is shoved into the faces of christians by atheists by the atheist brazenly walking around declaring that they can be actual people without pretending to be a follower of Jesus. The atheist does not need to pretend to believe in something that they don't even follow. This is an insult to the Christ-ego of the pretend-to-be-a-believers.

How can the atheist NOT pretend to be a christian? how can they NOT go around merely declaring that they are good people? It doesn't take much to pretend that you are a good person, so HOW can the atheist not pretend to be better than everyone else, it is blasphemy!

If everyone in a particular society walked around pretending to be followers of Christ, then there would be no guilt associated with not actually following what this Christ guy was trying to teach those who would allege to be one of his followers.

seriously, show me a christian person that can truly claim that they have given most of their money to the needy; could claim that they aren't hateful; that they aren't judgemental; that they are meek and that they don't brag that they are a believer; that they would sooner die or let their family die than bring hurt upon someone else; that they help out people regardless of beliefs and creeds....

these are the things Jesus taught that you must do in order to follow him and get into heaven, the burden of proof is completely upon the believer to actually get in there and show everyone that they are doing as Jesus commanded... and even then, it is against the teachings of Jesus to be showing off that you are actually following his teachings by doing good deeds in front of others for the purpose of showing off that you are doing good deeds!!! Anything else that conflicts with the stuff i listed above that is supposedly from the bible, was more than likely not said by their precious Jesus in the first place..

remember, half the New Testament is supposedly written by some self appointed apostle that, at least up until the moment in the story where Jesus was crucified, was rounding up Jesus' followers and executing them! "Saint" Paul was trying to eliminate Jesus... think about that one.... nearly everything I have had a problem with from the New Testament is a "Saint" Paulism.

Proof to the non-believer that there is no such a thing as Jesus, should be the fact that the two billion people supposedly claiming to follow Jesus, haven't spread their wealth out across the planet and made sure that every needy person on earth was no longer in need, you know, as their Lord and Saviour *commanded*... Commandments are generally not considered to be an optional thing that you can do, or even get away with doing a mere few times, giving to the needy would seem to be a compulsory precursor for heavenly entry to the christian.

I *facepalm* at the USA richest-nation-in-the-world christians and their claims that the USA is a christian nation; the USA has twice as many people in poverty as Australia has people, how is that possible in an alleged "christian" nation?

The burden of proof, at least for christians to prove that their is a Jesus and therefore a *god*, is to eliminate poverty world wide.

Until then, all of christianity is to be called into question as to what the fuck have that lot been doing for the last two millennia?

Tuesday, 11 September 2012

no point claiming what you have no right to claim (religiorant)

you have to laugh at people who defend their christianity without ever actually being an actual christian themselves, I mean, there are christians who worry that christianity will disappear if non-believers get their way... and they worry about such trivial things like the "War on Christmas?" ... ahem ... seriously, guys, Christmas was created by the Romans a few hundred years after JC supposedly died to make it easier for the pagans to assimilate christianity, so it wasn't actually part of Christianity in the first place.

... but ...

the strange thing about people and their objections that christianity might die off, is that there is *already* no such thing as christianity, at least not how the Jesus Christ character from the bible taught it, at least, not in the "Western" world.

Most of the other Jesus characters that alleged christians boast about believing in, seem to be only vaguely based on the bible-Jesus, because for the most part, most of the christians that I am aware of have made up their own Jesus, right there in their heads because how else would this Jesus of theirs just happen to share all the same likes and dislikes that they do if they didn't invent him themselves?

"If god didn't exist, it would be necessary to invent him..."--[Voltaire]

Yes, I am saying that some people believe in god for the very purpose of justifying their bigotry.

Like those religious people who are against homosexuality because god says its "wrong".. well, even *if* it is wrong, what do other people's relationships have to do with you? And furthermore, even *if* it is against the will of god, then this will be sorted out by god itself, at some later time so the fact is that believers are only being busy-bodies by telling others that they are sinning, at least in my experience. Either that, or they don't really believe that their god will actually punish the sinners at some point in the future so they (have to) do it instead.. you know, just in case god doesn't get the chance.

Believers should keep their judgements to themselves because I don't ever recall the Jesus from the bible being hateful towards any particular sort of person, in fact, didn't this Jesus guy say something about forgiving them? so, ahem, if christians are to follow his example, they shouldn't be judging others, they should be compassionate and understanding and helpful towards others, so just how can they be hateful towards anybody simply because they don't like particular types of people when it goes right against the fundamentals of what their Jesus taught?

And no, you don't get to be a bastard to someone and then say that you love them or that Jesus loves them or whatever other godly orientated excuse you can come up with to justify your hatred because if you were truly following this Jesus guy, you wouldn't have hated people so much that you would need to vocalise or write about your hatred in the first place... Personal hatred I can understand, ie. when you know the person, *personally*, but to hate a whole "type" of person, without knowing any of them... what was that judge not lest thee be judged yourself thing?

Remember the Good Samaritan? ... the point is that Jesus didn't care *what* people believed in, he cared that you help people in need when you can. A lot of "good" christians seem to have forgotten the Good Samaritan parable....

A lot of christians also seem to forget that their values are *christian* religious values, I don't follow your religion, your religion only applies to *YOU*, if you want to impose your religious values upon me then you are saying that your religion is *the* religion.

For this, I would need proof that your religion is the religion because as far as I am concerned, you aren't even following your own religion anyway, so either show to me how you honour this JC guy's teachings or stop pretending to follow him because even if your religion is the religion, then "so what?" - you aren't following it properly, so why should I follow it improperly as well?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Oh .. and if you do actually show me how you honour the teachings of Jesus, then you have actually failed at showing me how you honour the teachings of your Messiah ...

Matthew 6:1 Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.

... or the more easily understood ... "you aren't getting into heaven if you show off that you do good deeds"...

and one could further imply from the above bible verse that merely saying that you are christian and not doing good deeds is far worse. And merely just saying that you are a christian, would seem to be the vast majority of christians that I know about.

I mean seriously, if all two billion christians gave a measly ten dollars a year to a central charity that could give to the poor, then worldwide poverty could be dealt a savage blow but clearly poverty hasn't been eliminated which says to me that christians are not doing their sacred duty so how do they expect to get into this heaven of theirs when they didn't try very hard at actually earning entry to said place of eternal peace?

If I were christian, I wouldn't be expecting Jesus to be coming back any time soon, considering that christians knowingly allow people in need to continue to be in need and yet, the biggest concern among christians these days is how Christ is being taken out of Christmas?

How about putting the Christ back into Christianity? That would be far more useful, because you can't merely just be a christian - you have to actually *do* something for those who aren't as well off as you are... that's my understanding of christianity and that is exactly why I don't call myself christian. I would be lying to myself if I were to call myself "christian", it would be like wearing a cheap suit from K-Mart with an "Armani" label tacked on to make it look like I was da 'shiz.

Don't get me wrong, that cheap suit looks good enough to me anyway, so in spite of christians not actually being christian, for the most part, most of them are decent enough people anyway, but the fact is that they are pretending to be christian while there are still needy people in this world, so these feeble excuses people tell themselves as to why they do nothing are just going to piss this Jesus off, if he is in fact real.

Like this bullshit of you just need to believe in Jesus because he died on the cross ... that's fucking offensive ... what a crock of utter shite?!?!!?

The whole point of dying on the cross was to show people how far Jesus expected his followers to go to avoid hurting people! It says so in the very same bible that christians salivate over all the time, so if you missed that bit... read Matthew Chapter 16, the whole fucking chapter, this time.

ie. if you don't understand what you are reading in the bible, you don't get to fucking make up your own interpretation!! Go find several priests and get second, third and fourth opinions.

.... and all of those Jesus-miracles? could it be that they were just to show that Jesus could save himself from persecution if he so chose to do so?

Going as far as Jesus did to avoid hurting anybody who was trying to kill him, set a standard that is way too high for followers of christianity to follow.

JC taught a whole bunch of shit that set the bar so fracking high that no one could claim that they are truly christian, not really.

For starters: JC taught that if you want to follow him and get into heaven, then you need to sell your stuff and give that money to the needy, so what is it with all the christians in their fancy suits with their shiny jewellery with all their little techno gadgets and their fuel guzzling cars and their houses etc etc - what hypocrites!?!

If you are a christian and you can afford the luxuries of life, then don't kid yourself, you know damn well that if you were truly christian you would have given that money to the needy instead of spending it on yourself.

So if you are to claim that you are christian while there are still needy people in this world, you have absolutely no right whatsoever to be proudly stating that you are christian and the reason for this is simple: while there are needy people in the world, that means that there are christians that are not doing their bit to get into heaven.

There are two billion christians, how can there still be poverty anywhere in the world if giving to the needy (aka "love thy neighbour") was being taken seriously?

To boldly and proudly claim that you are christian while you are walking around with more wealth in your pocket than some people have seen in their entire lives is utterly removed from what the christian messiah was trying to teach..

Being greedy is not the meaning of this love thy neighbour thing that Jesus taught. Being selfish is not what Jesus meant when he said go and spread the word, the word was "be nice to everyone, and help those in need" - not annoy the fuck out of people by getting them to "follow Jesus" just by saying that they follow Jesus - you are supposed to spread "the word" by your actions of kindness to others who are in need - if you are not doing that - then you are not christian - plain and simple.

in fact, to even make the claim that you are christian to someone who doesn't know whether you deserve to be called christian or not, sees that you have already failed at actually being christian, because being christian is supposed to be something that you should earn via your actions with your good deeds and goodwill to all people yadda yadda yadda

Being christian can not ever be something that you merely claim and then expect to be taken seriously... *ever*

I mean, I can claim that I am an astronaut, but that doesn't make it so, so if I make the astronomical claim to some stranger that i am an astronaut when I haven't actually done anything that allows me to make that claim, then i should expect to be treated as a bullshit artist until i *can* back up this claim by actually going to space, or at the very least, be actively involved in training to be an astronaut, because if I don't, it also means that *everything* else I say, about anything at all, should *also* be treated with suspicion.

Keeping that astronaut analogy in mind, anyone merely claiming that they are christian is instantly treated with the trepidation that they deserve for making such a spurious claim, because you've not proven yourself as being able to make such a bold claim. Not to me you haven't.

It's like being in court, I may or may not be an outstanding member of society, but if I lie to the judge and I get busted in that lie, then the judge is going to assume that everything I say from that point on is a lie, at the very least, every thing I say is to be taken with a grain of salt. ie. I have told one lie, so the precedent is set, I can't be trusted to be honest, so the judge will expect more lies from me because I have shown that I can not be trusted because I have already told one lie..

And christianity, is one massive lie, especially in the "western" world. There are so many "things" that are tagged as being "christian" these days that are nothing to do with what Jesus actually taught, so much so, that for me, anyone claiming to be "christian" is a matter of .... "meh! .. so what? do you want a gold star or something?"

the word "christian" pretty much means nothing to me now, it's irrevocably tainted. So you are better off keeping your christianity to yourself because this "christianity" tag is just a heads up to the fact that you are more than likely NOT actually following what Jesus taught, ergo, if you tell me that you are christian when I didn't ask you if you were, then I am inclined to think that you are a liar.

The ironic thing here is that if people would show that they deserved to be called a christian, then they would not need to even tell me that they are christian because I probably would have figured it out already in the first place, all by myself, as it's pretty easy to spot people who are as generous as this Jesus Christ character I keep hearing about. In fact, someone who was even half as nice as this Jesus story-book character would stick out like a sore thumb in our self-centred society.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

What's even more ridiculous is that by the christian "rules", these claims of being christian that believers tend to make is not something to be taken lightly, it is their *eternal* souls that they are talking about, they get *one* chance to get it right, so to claim that you are "like Jesus" by saying that you are christian without backing up those claims, is rather unwise, because if indeed this whole Jesus Christ thing does turn out to be true, then the most fucked people on judgement day are going to be the people who merely claimed that they were christian when they did nothing whatsoever to justify making those claims.

Apathetically claiming you are christian is far worse than being a non-believer who did just as much to help the needy as some pretend-christians did, but at least the non-believers didn't prance around telling everyone that they were better than everyone else because they believed in Jesus when others did not believe. What's the fucking point of believing in Jesus if you don't do what your Messiah has commanded you to do?

In fact, given the sheer volume of people claiming to be christian when they are not even close to being Christ like, the wisest course of action, is to not claim you are christian, at all, even if you *are* a christian, as you wouldn't want to be lumped in with the un-Christ-like christian mob, accidentally, should the end of the world or something like that happen.

The way I see it is that you are better off by not making the claim that you are christian because then you are not taking it upon yourself to make the assumption that you are "worthy" of being saved... because, ahem, according to the bible, only Jesus gets to say whether you are worthy or not. So if you self appoint yourself as a christian, then one could speculate that you are saying that you are already bound for heaven. That assumption is idolatrous because you are not god, you are not Jesus, you are pretending to do the job of your god by self-appointing yourself as a christian.

By not making the assumption that you are christian, you are not trying to declare yourself as being worthy, so you are not pretending to be Jesus Christ.

So if this Jesus thing is true and you haven't made the assumption that you are saved, then you are better off because you have not assumed the job of Jesus and declared yourself worthy.

So without making the bold statement that you are saved and are therefore heading towards a christian heaven, then your life is to be judged on what you did, and not some affectation that you wore as some sort of way to affirm that you are "chosen" or "saved" or that indeed, you are better than anybody else because you believe in some arbitrary story book character from thousands of years ago.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

The details of christianity are irrelevant, so to troll through the bible looking for its hidden meaning is an insult to the real Christianity as that Christ guy intended, because the crux of Jesus Christ's teachings is that you are to be good to others, especially to those that are in need, that is what is important. That message isn't hidden, it's there in plain fucking site, if you can't get the whole be-nice-to-everyone-and-that-means-everyone-including-the-gays-blacks-jews-hispanics-atheists-blah-blah-blah, then you are a failure at being christian.

Claiming that you are christian, doesn't make you a good person, in fact, claiming that you are christian when you do not follow the teachings of Jesus is outright blasphemy and in JC's eyes, it makes you a *bad* person.

If you are claiming that you are christian and yet you do not follow the teachings of Jesus from the bible, then you are making up your own version of Jesus, and if you have made up your own Jesus, then that is most definitely a false Jesus, and worshipping false gods (even if you just happen to call that god "Jesus" too) is idolatry, it breaks the first commandment of "love thy god before all others", and the first commandment still applies to any god that you have made up... in fact, it applies especially to gods that you personally make up and breaking that first commandment is one way to certainly make sure that you are going to this hell that the non-believers are so commonly condemned to.

And, by the way, damning people to hell is judging others as being unworthy, which is more idolatry, because to claim with authority that somebody is going to hell, is to claim that you are Jesus Christ himself because according to the bible story, only Jesus gets to say that people are to be sent to hell.

So even if the christian is *right* about a person going to hell, they *still* have no right to pretend to be the messiah by having the arrogant gall to even think that they have the right to sit upon the judgement throne of their precious *god*, let alone go around shouting to the world about who they think is unworthy of eternal peace.

So, if there really is a hell, I would expect it to be full of self-appointed christians who made the boldly arrogant assumption that they were going to heaven when they did nothing whatsoever to deserve to be going to heaven.

Oh, and just because you were born into a christian family or you were told that you were christian, it doesn't make it so either, you still need to earn your christian stripes, *before* you can wear them.

Saturday, 30 June 2012

the dangers of atheism

The Dangers of Atheism

And by "dangers", I am not referring to religious types that would bully the atheist for having the gall to not only be a non-believer, but to also make that fact that they are indeed an atheist known to the world; instead I am referring to the inherent need for people to identify with a particular "genre" of what sort of people they think they are and "atheism" is very much in danger of becoming fractured in much the same way that religions tend to fracture.

Meaning to say that at some stage, all of this atheism banner-waving will end up seeing multiple people who supposedly fly that same atheist banner butting heads with each other over some issue, which in turn would make splinter groups, then we would have multiple groups of atheism when indeed "atheism" should not be a defining factor to what sort of person you are anyway.

For me, the way I see atheism is that there is no point in identifying as an atheist in the first place, because "atheism" is supposed to be the complete lack of religion and belief in supernatural - and that's it.

It's like taking the number zero and adding some stuff to it and then thinking that zero is now somehow larger than zero, but you still *call* it "zero"... no, any previous values of zero that are now larger, are now *not* zero... You just can NOT have a large value of zero, this does not make sense.

So I do not feel compelled to identify myself as a non-believer, not really, I tend to reveal my "non-believerism" at moments when it is relevant to where I am and what I am doing and what is going on around me - it is not something that I need to carry around as a banner before me, but if I do, it is merely to annoy the religious, which I know is childish, but enjoyable nonetheless, which in turn partly allows me to tolerate the religious and their bullshit...

the danger of flying your banner is that others who also fly that same banner will flock to your banner and vice-versa, which is the whole point of flying a banner in the first place, so people with the same line of thinking can group together. The danger here is that others will not share in all things that you believe in and this creates an environment where belligerent attitudes can flourish.

ie. just because someone is an atheist, it doesn't mean they understand science, it doesn't mean that they are vegan, or that they vote a particular way, etc etc -- point being is that just because two atheists may agree on being atheists, it doesn't mean that somewhere down the line, the two atheists will continue to get along once the common thread that brought them together is over.

As an example, I often tolerate atheist idiocy because the argument that they are in sees that the opposing side is even *more* ridiculous than the atheist argument and I also find it reprehensible to chastise atheists when the fact of the matter is that the christians do NOT chastise their extremists so I do not feel compelled to get into arguments with atheists because we have a common cause to fight against, ie. religion. But as time goes on, that battle is more than likely to die away as more and more people give away their religion, meaning there will be more atheists or at least, less religious people to butt heads with.

Meaning to say that if atheists rally around the banner of atheism, eventually there will be a philosophical split over some issue. For example, some atheists have tried to insult me for not being of the position that there is most definitely *no* god. That argument is just as arrogant as saying that there most definitely *is* a god. Neither position is verifiable, so I take no position on the matter of god other than to entertain myself with the possibilities of there being such a creature as god or not.

The point is that this person suggested rather strongly that I should make the affirmation that I was an atheist on *his* terms. As far as I am concerned, taking a position where no logical evidence is involved, is a religion, it requires faith. That rather angry person was a fanatical atheist. He has made his religion *atheism* because he is willing to summarily dismiss all the supporting evidence (or lack thereof) and that is exactly what religious fuckwits do. He emphatically denied the existence of god and in fact, went out of his way to do so as well. He clearly would not tolerate my presence unless I would make the same spurious affirmation as him. If that's what atheism is about, then atheism is not for me because I do not accept anything anybody says if they can not back it up, I don't even care if they are right and there really is no god, you can't prove it, so you most definitely don't get to be an arrogant cunt about it, no matter what side of the fence you sit upon.

This same thing has happened with christianity, it split into factions, which split into factions, which split etc etc and as documented throughout history, these christians that are supposed to be on the same page as their Jesus messiah dude, hate each other so much that they have been killing each other for centuries and yet they are supposedly all christians?? If christians can't even follow this message of love everyone from their precious Jesus, then christianity is not for me, either.

same thing happens today with Islam, a major component of the violence in middle east countries involves the dispute between the Sunni and Shi'ite factions of Islam, and they kill each other over that difference, and yet, they both, allegedly, follow a religion of peace?

If atheists start clutching to their atheist banners too tightly, the same thing is bound to happen, it is human nature to defend what you perceive as being yours.

Did you see that episode of South Park, where the atheists of the future split into factions that were at war with each other over some trivial aspect?

What I am saying is this: go to your atheism meetings and groups and atheism forums and make it known that there are atheists out there as often as you like, but just remember that atheism is about being an individual, to group yourselves into new convenient groupings after society has finally started to dump the convenient groupings of religion is just to start the whole "religion" process all over again.

"We are all individuals"--[Brian]

Friday, 18 May 2012

atheism has no argument to make against the joke that is religion...

atheism has no argument to make against christianity...

...because Christianity died a very long time ago...

this is very simple to see, if you take notice...

anything at all that you have heard from the bible (old testament or new) that somehow justifies hatred or is somehow bigoted - then no matter what - Jesus' two commandments outrank those notions found elsewhere in the bible ... ie. (1) love thy god and (2) love thy neighbour

if you do not follow those two commandments at all times then you can stop pretending that you are christian and from what I can tell, 99% of christians are *pretending* to be christian, regardless of whether they realise that fact or not, they are still pretending to follow Jesus.

given this, atheism does not need to make an argument for itself, the argument that atheists and atheism finds itself in, is already won because the christians have already defaulted in their arguments, seeing how little to nobody AT ALL is actually following what Jesus said to do ...

ie. the most Jesus-like person I can think of from actual history ... is Gandhi ... and he was a Hindu ..

what does that say about christianity?

to me it says that there are no christians, so exactly what is it that atheists are fighting against? they are fighting against people who are PRETENDING to be christian ....

and *yes* there are some christian groups that do great humanitarian work (eg. the Sisters of Mercy and the hospital they founded for those in need) but it seems to me that the majority of christians sit back and let that minority do all the work of being christian and as representatives of christianity, the rest of the christians do not need to do a thing for those in need, they assume that just the mere fact of being christian is somehow enough to get into heaven.

this is not a war that the atheist should even bother to fight, as it should be easily won without firing off a single shot ... so just what is it that atheists are rallying against? they are rallying against the stupid and frivolous bits of religion whereas they should be berating religionists for NOT following their religion properly!

it seems to me that the atheist v religionist "war" is just a great big pissing match and the only way to win, is to not be involved.

Monday, 5 March 2012

Friedrich Nietzsche quotes

was bored tonight so i read some web site that has some Nietzsche quotes and there are some things that he has said that are in common usage today... not saying he said them first but ... anyway my fave Friedrich Nietzsche quotes from that site (link at the bottom)

Friedrich Nietzsche quotes

And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh.

Anyone who has declared someone else to be an idiot, a bad apple, is annoyed when it turns out in the end that he isn't.

Arrogance on the part of the meritorious is even more offensive to us than the arrogance of those without merit: for merit itself is offensive.

Do whatever you will, but first be such as are able to will.

Faith: not wanting to know what is true.

For the woman, the man is a means: the end is always the child.

God is a thought who makes crooked all that is straight.

I cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised all the time.

I would believe only in a God that knows how to Dance.

In Christianity neither morality nor religion come into contact with reality at any point.

In heaven, all the interesting people are missing.

In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.

Is man one of God's blunders? Or is God one of man's blunders?

It is good to express a thing twice right at the outset and so to give it a right foot and also a left one. Truth can surely stand on one leg, but with two it will be able to walk and get around.

It is impossible to suffer without making someone pay for it; every complaint already contains revenge.

It is the most sensual men who need to flee women and torment their bodies.

Love is blind; friendship closes its eyes.

Love is not consolation. It is light.

Mystical explanations are thought to be deep; the truth is that they are not even shallow.

No one lies so boldly as the man who is indignant.

One has to pay dearly for immortality; one has to die several times while one is still alive.

One may sometimes tell a lie, but the grimace that accompanies it tells the truth.

One must still have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star.

One often contradicts an opinion when what is uncongenial is really the tone in which it was conveyed.

One ought to hold on to one's heart; for if one lets it go, one soon loses control of the head too.

One should die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly.

Perhaps I know why it is man alone who laughs: He alone suffers so deeply that he had to invent laughter.

Shared joys make a friend, not shared sufferings.

Sleeping is no mean art: for its sake one must stay awake all day.

Success has always been a great liar.

Talking much about oneself can also be a means to conceal oneself.

That which does not kill us makes us stronger.

The "kingdom of Heaven" is a condition of the heart - not something that comes "upon the earth" or "after death."

The abdomen is the reason why man does not readily take himself to be a god.

The aphorism in which I am the first master among Germans, are the forms of "eternity"; my ambition is to say in ten sentences what everyone else says in a book - what everyone else does not say in a book.

The best author will be the one who is ashamed to become a writer.

The Christian resolution to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad.

The demand to be loved is the greatest of all arrogant presumptions.

The desire to annoy no one, to harm no one, can equally well be the sign of a just as of an anxious disposition.

The doer alone learneth.

The future influences the present just as much as the past.

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.

The irrationality of a thing is no argument against its existence, rather a condition of it.

The lie is a condition of life.

The most common lie is that which one lies to himself; lying to others is relatively an exception.

The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.

The true man wants two things: danger and play. For that reason he wants woman, as the most dangerous plaything.

The word "Christianity" is already a misunderstanding - in reality there has been only one Christian, and he died on the Cross.

There are horrible people who, instead of solving a problem, tangle it up and make it harder to solve for anyone who wants to deal with it. Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.

There are no eternal facts, as there are no absolute truths.

There are no facts, only interpretations.

There are people who want to make men's lives more difficult for no other reason than the chance it provides them afterwards to offer their prescription for alleviating life; their Christianity, for instance.

There cannot be a God because if there were one, I could not believe that I was not He.

There is always some madness in love. But there is also always some reason in madness.

There is not enough love and goodness in the world to permit giving any of it away to imaginary beings.

There is not enough religion in the world even to destroy religion.

This is what is hardest: to close the open hand because one loves.

Those who cannot understand how to put their thoughts on ice should not enter into the heat of debate.

Thoughts are the shadows of our feelings - always darker, emptier and simpler.

Today I love myself as I love my god: who could charge me with a sin today? I know only sins against my god; but who knows my god?

Two great European narcotics, alcohol and Christianity.

Undeserved praise causes more pangs of conscience later than undeserved blame, but probably only for this reason, that our power of judgment are more completely exposed by being over praised than by being unjustly underestimated.

We hear only those questions for which we are in a position to find answers.

We love life, not because we are used to living but because we are used to loving.

We often refuse to accept an idea merely because the tone of voice in which it has been expressed is unsympathetic to us.

We should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh.

What doesn't kill us makes us stronger.

Whatever is done for love always occurs beyond good and evil.

Whoever battles with monsters had better see that it does not turn him into a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Whoever despises himself nonetheless respects himself as one who despises.

Whoever feels predestined to see and not to believe will find all believers too noisy and pushy: he guards against them.

Wit is the epitaph of an emotion.

Without music, life would be a mistake.

Words are but symbols for the relations of things to one another and to us; nowhere do they touch upon absolute truth.

You must have chaos within you to give birth to a dancing star.

Sunday, 22 January 2012

was anybody ever following what Jesus said to do? (religiorant)

when one says that they follow Christ but then they don't follow what he taught, one makes up their own version of Jesus, do they not?

isn't making up your own god the very definition of idolatry?

In essence, any "christian" who does not follow the second commandment of "love thy neighbour" and yet still claims to "follow Jesus" also breaks the first commandment because they have made up their own, personal Jesus...

This is a false Jesus.

It might be close to the biblical Jesus, but if you are not following what he said to do, then your Jesus is a false Jesus.

the whole non-violence thing Jesus went through by dying on the cross, was not to give some sort of get-out-of-hell-free card to those who simply believed in Christ, what Jesus was trying to teach was that dying up on the cross was the extreme that he wanted *everyone* to go to in order to avoid enacting violence upon others. The whole purpose of the miracles was to show that he was powerful and that he *could* have done something to stop people from trying to kill him, but he chose not to defend himself by breaking the cycle of violence and he let himself be killed...

when you look at christianity that way, it would seem that little to nobody is actually following anything that this superhero Jesus guy taught anyway..

So was anybody, *ever* following what Jesus taught?

I mean, the majority of people will at least try to stick up for themselves when they are persecuted. So does it not make sense that anybody who was actually following Jesus' teachings, would find themselves "naturally selected" out of existence anyway?

that I feel, is the key to unravelling christianity, once and for all, point out that no-one is actually following it anyway.

It would seem to be a waste of time to be harping over petty things like the physics of Noah's flood or how we'd all be inbred if we were initially spawned from a mere two people and how christians conveniently ignore all of those things that are supposedly abominations in the Old Testament, except those abominations that suit their particular flavour of bigotry, of course...

If you truly want to put an end to christianity, you'll point out to the user that it has already ended because no-one is actually following what this fabled Jesus guy of theirs actually taught.

Jesus taught things like giving away all your money to the no-good free loaders, that is what christians are supposed to do if they want to get into heaven, it was only Jesus' lazy arse followers who ever said that you can get away with just believing, Jesus said you had to actually *do* something nice for the needy to get into heaven...

Saturday, 14 January 2012

"why doesn't god help the needy?" is a flawed argument (atheiorant)

i find the whole "why doesn't god help the hungry" argument to be a flawed argument on the part of the atheist, especially when dealing with Jesus fans because Jesus actually taught that it was his followers that are supposed to help those in need.

Jesus never taught that he would fix things by coming down and/or fix things from remote - according to the story, this Jesus Christ god person is not *ever* going to come down and help the needy, or anybody else for that matter, because it is up to followers of Christ to get in there and do just that - and helping the needy is, after all, what the christians need to do to get into heaven..

Timmy Tebow and his John 3:16 verse may seem to imply that you merely just need to believe, but the other three gospels say that you have to actually *do* something. ie. the other three gospels say that you get into heaven by giving your money to those who need it

think of how that Good Samaritan helped the guy he saw laying on the side of the road, it was a situation of opportunity, the Samaritan saw the guy in need, so he helped him out, no-one else did, but given the good nature of the helpful Samaritan, I would assume that he thought that he was the first person to come along and see the guy laying at the side of the road.

Now we've all known since the 80s, thanks to TV, that people are starving all across the world, so given that the knowledge of people in need is so widespread - why haven't the christians done what their Jesus commanded them to do?

Seems to me that christians don't actually want to get into heaven?

this is why the argument about god not helping the needy is flawed, it was never up to god to make things good, it was up to the believers in god to spread their wealth around until everyone stopped being in need, so there's your proof that the Jesus from the bible doesn't exist, there's your proof that god is dead and that we've killed it because no-one is following Jesus, they are merely saying that they are "christians" because if richest 1% of the two billion or so christians actually gave a mere 10% of their earnings to the needy - i can't see how needy people could still exist in such vast numbers if christians were actually following their Messiah.

who the fuck is Tom Tebow? (religiorant)

DENVER (CBS Denver) — Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow is not the only one who thinks God helps him on the football field.

According to a national telephone survey conducted by Poll Position, 43 percent of people believe that “divine intervention” is responsible for his success compared to 42 percent of people surveyed who think that God has nothing to do with Tebow winning.

-- from Poll Finds 43 Percent Of People Believe God Helps Tebow Win

i am certain that 43% is not reflective of the true extent of this problem in the USA as i suspect that people would not say "yes, god helps Tebow" if they were fans of some other football team or didn't like football at all, so i expect that this *facepalm* attitude to faith to be much more prevalent - perhaps even as many as 99% of US christians have their religion so wrong that according to their rule book, there is no way they are going to this heaven of theirs..

christians don't carry on like this in Australia anywhere near as much as the USA - idiot christians getting their religion wrong seem to be few and far between over here and the religious majority usually deal with them anyway - in my experience, a non-believer rarely needs to be the one to tell fundamentalist christian idiots to "pull their head in" over here

the problem i have with prayer is that people are praying for trivial things that they want to get... seriously? .. a football game? finding your keys? not missing the bus? .. come on people, such trivialities? ... i always thought that prayer was supposed to be reserved for being thankful for very personal stuff like you and your family's health and/or for the food in front of you - maybe it's me that is the idiot?

maybe Tebow is praying that he is grateful that his leg didn't fall off? i could accept that, but regardless, he does this prayer bullcrap in front of thousands of people, this is blatantly showing off that you are a believer to win the favour of the masses - to add insult to injury, this Jesus guy even taught that you should *not* do exactly what this Tebow clown is doing in Mathew 6:5, the specific purpose of which was to teach that you should not show off that you are a believer as it makes others like/love/respect/trust you for doing some trivial thing that means nothing.

Wednesday, 11 January 2012

Response to "What's wrong with American Christianity" ....


indeed - this is a very serious problem as it would seem that vast majority of US christians are defying the teachings of their own Messiah - and defying those teachings with pride

merely declaring yourself christian, doesn't make a person a christian, at all ... but a lot of christians seem to think they are christian simply because they believe in Jesus, and by proxy, believing in Jesus makes them think they are a good person ... now they probably are good people in general, but being a christian, means that you are supposed to do good things to be a good person - so just saying that you are christian is much like saying that you are smart because you like Einstein

so believing in Jesus requires that you actually take actions to help your fellow humans - and not merely give the impression that you are a good person because you believe in some dude called Jesus

in fact, declaring that you are christian is *bragging* that you are christian ... look at Matthew 6:1 ... it says the christian should not do good deeds such that other people will see them do those good deeds or something like that, ie. So if you shouldn't be bragging that you are good person even when you actually *are* doing good deeds, the logical extension of that is that you most certainly should *not* declare that you are a good person when you are *not* doing good deeds at all

the author of Matthew 6 seemed to be concerned that people were doing good things and then bragging about it - however, nearly every American christian I have seen, has *skipped* the whole doing good things and gone straight to bragging that they are good people - it is one thing to brag about being a good person when you are a good person, but to brag that you are a good person, when you are not and/or indifferent to other people's needs .. well ... that's a lie

christians need to be aware that three of the gospels state that you need to give to the needy to get into heaven ... I find no other bible verse that declares what you need to actually do to get into heaven, and just saying you believe, is not doing anything whatsoever - so if your basis for getting into heaven is John 3:16, then you do not understand your bible - because if you are not giving to the needy then you do *not* believe in what Jesus taught, you are in fact lying that you are christian because the way i see it is that any one declaring they are christian is declaring "hey! If you need money, come to me and I will give it to you, no questions asked" - but is anyone actually declaring that if someone walks up to them and asks for them for money that they will actually give that money away simply by stating that they are christian?

I do not regard myself as being christian simply because I will not give away money to every stranger that wanders up to me and asks for it - I am under no obligation to help those people in need (even though i still do at times) - however, people claiming to be christian *ARE* obligated to help the needy, ALL the time - "love thy neighbour" is a commandment, it is not an optional thing that you do for your family and/or friends and/or whenever you feel like - if you see someone in need, then if you are christian, you should be helping them - remember the good Samaritan? in fact, there are so many needy people in the world that christians should not even have *time* to declare they are christian let alone brag about it at length as they should be elsewhere doing as their Messiah commanded

it disgusts me that US christians claim that the USA is a christian nation, because if the USA was truly a christian society, any homeless person should be able stand on the streets of a big city like New York and hold up a sign that says "I am homeless and need money", in a true christian country that person should be a millionaire by lunch time of the first day of begging in the street, but is that what happens?

no, this is not what happens in the richest country in the world - unless, of course, ALL 250 million people claiming to be christians in the USA are living in poverty then they have a reason to not help the needy because they are needy themselves - on the other hand, it would seem to me that at least 90% of christians in the USA are not living in poverty - so why haven't those hundred million or so christians at least gotten rid of poverty in their own country?

here is your proof that there is no such thing as Jesus, because given this clear evidence that people are not willing to actually help those in need and actually follow what their Jesus taught, then it is fair to say that almost every christian claiming to be a christian in the USA, is in fact worshipping a *false* Jesus - a false Jesus that does not care about whether you give to the needy or not; so there's your proof that the Jesus from the bible does not exist, the fact that even one person in this world lives in poverty is all the proof that I need to declare that the Jesus from the bible does not exist, and that all the Jesus references today that people make, are towards the false Jesus that they merely *want* to believe in

anyone worshipping a false Jesus and yet claims to follow the Jesus from the bible is committing idolatry because they are worshipping a Jesus that *they* made up, because the only Jesus Christ that would let a person get away with their blatant pretending to be christian, is the Jesus Christ that is their very own ego .. and christians have the gall to imply that atheists worship themselves?!?!. .. HA!! ... ahem ... no ... it's the other way around

I also find it laughable when some christian is shown just how grossly they are not following the commandments of Jesus and they turn around and try to shift the focus of the conversation elsewhere and point at other groups and say "Oh you don't pick on those people for not being christian!!" -- really -- is that their excuse? Jews don't follow Jesus, Atheists don't follow Jesus, Muslims don't follow Jesus (he was a prophet of theirs, but not a significant one compared to Muhammad), etc etc etc .. only christians follow Jesus so only christians are obligated to follow the commandments of Jesus Christ - any attempt to shift the focus to another group of non-christian people is a declaration that is similar to "yes I admit that I am not a christian but those Jews/Muslims/Atheists aren't christian either, so why are you picking on me for not being christian?!?!?" *facepalm*

It seems very clear to me, that for the most part, christians believe in Jesus because of christmas, easter, giving presents, miracles, bumper stickers, having in god we trust on money, teaching creationism in schools, saying a pledge to god everyday, crosses, churches, chaplains in schools, stained glass windows etc etc etc -- all of these things prop up the beliefs of the christian but none of these things are anything to do with being like Jesus wanted his followers to be like; these things are nothing to do with his actual teachings because they *are* things - a thing is not supposed to help you have your beliefs - if you need a thing to prop up your beliefs then you are sharing your love of god between that thing and your god - and some people even love those things exclusively with no regard for what their god wanted from them at all

this was what i believe the first commandment was trying to prevent - it is not merely about not worshipping Satan or Ba'al or Thor or Krishna, the first commandment was also trying to stop people from making up their own version of Jesus and worshipping that perfect idea of the perfect Jesus that lets you get away with whatever the fuck you want - in other words - US christians *need* to hold onto *things* to make their faith more real, which is the very opposite of what faith is supposed to be about - because when you focus on the things that you merely think your religion is about, you can end up not following what your religion is actually supposed to be about in the first place

this explains why all of these things that aren't really anything to do with christianity are so furiously defended by christians, they defend them because they are the *only* things that make their religion real to them because they are not following the teachings of their Jesus, so to compensate, they make up things to focus on.. this also explains why christians tend to worry about what everyone else believes in, because they think that if they can get everyone to use these things to prop up christianity like they do, then no christians at all will feel bad about not actually following the teachings of Jesus, because no-one else is ...

it's obvious isn't it? Jesus said to love everyone, but that is clearly too hard for people, so they just focus on *things* because things are easy, and more importantly, things can be verified as being *real* ...

"oh I believe in Jesus, look! I've got a Fish Bumper sticker and everything!!!" .....

bzzzz #Fail

the religious should not read these blogs, they *will* be offended

these are my rantings about religion - i speak fluent sarcasm - know this when you are reading and it will save you some heartache.