Print
Beliefwatch: Blasphemy (Challenge)
by Jerry Adler, Newsweek
Read more about The Blasphemy Challenge here
Reposted from:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16409851/site/newsweek/
'Hi my name is Lindy and I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit and you should too.'
Jan. 8, 2006 issue - With that five-second submission to YouTube, a 24-year-old who uses the name "menotsimple" has either condemned herself to an eternity of punishment in the afterlife or struck a courageous blow against superstition. She's one of more than 400 mostly young people who have joined a campaign by the Web site BlasphemyChallenge.com to stake their souls against the existence of God. That, of course, is the ultimate no-win wager, as the 17th-century French mathematician Blaise Pascal calculated—it can't be settled until you're dead, and if you lose, you go to hell.
The Blasphemy Challenge is a joint project of filmmaker Brian Flemming, director of the antireligion documentary "The God Who Wasn't There," and Brian Sapient, cofounder of the atheist Web site RationalResponders.com. Their intent was to encourage atheists to come forward and put their souls on the line, showing others that you don't have to be afraid of God. The particular form of the challenge was chosen because, by one interpretation, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, a part of the Christian Trinity, is the only sin that can never be forgiven. And once something you've said gets posted on YouTube, as any number of celebrities can attest, you never live it down.
For better or worse, though, hell may not be so easy to get into. Despite the seemingly clear language in Mark 3:28-29 ("all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven"), most theologians are reluctant to pronounce anyone beyond repentance and salvation. Richard Land, a leader of the Southern Baptist Convention, says the passage, read in context, refers to a very narrow and specific definition of blasphemy: maliciously attributing God's miracles to a demon. Merely "denying" the Holy Spirit, by this reading, doesn't qualify. "My response," Land says, "would be to pray for these people: 'forgive them, [for] they know not what they do'."
To which another self-described blasphemer, whose real name is Michael Lawson, replies that he knows exactly what he's doing: he's daring God to send him to hell. "We want to show that we really mean it when we say we don't believe a word in this book," he says. He means the Bible.
God could not be reached for comment.
—Jerry Adler
Reposted from:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16409851/site/newsweek/
'Hi my name is Lindy and I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit and you should too.'
Jan. 8, 2006 issue - With that five-second submission to YouTube, a 24-year-old who uses the name "menotsimple" has either condemned herself to an eternity of punishment in the afterlife or struck a courageous blow against superstition. She's one of more than 400 mostly young people who have joined a campaign by the Web site BlasphemyChallenge.com to stake their souls against the existence of God. That, of course, is the ultimate no-win wager, as the 17th-century French mathematician Blaise Pascal calculated—it can't be settled until you're dead, and if you lose, you go to hell.
The Blasphemy Challenge is a joint project of filmmaker Brian Flemming, director of the antireligion documentary "The God Who Wasn't There," and Brian Sapient, cofounder of the atheist Web site RationalResponders.com. Their intent was to encourage atheists to come forward and put their souls on the line, showing others that you don't have to be afraid of God. The particular form of the challenge was chosen because, by one interpretation, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, a part of the Christian Trinity, is the only sin that can never be forgiven. And once something you've said gets posted on YouTube, as any number of celebrities can attest, you never live it down.
For better or worse, though, hell may not be so easy to get into. Despite the seemingly clear language in Mark 3:28-29 ("all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven"), most theologians are reluctant to pronounce anyone beyond repentance and salvation. Richard Land, a leader of the Southern Baptist Convention, says the passage, read in context, refers to a very narrow and specific definition of blasphemy: maliciously attributing God's miracles to a demon. Merely "denying" the Holy Spirit, by this reading, doesn't qualify. "My response," Land says, "would be to pray for these people: 'forgive them, [for] they know not what they do'."
To which another self-described blasphemer, whose real name is Michael Lawson, replies that he knows exactly what he's doing: he's daring God to send him to hell. "We want to show that we really mean it when we say we don't believe a word in this book," he says. He means the Bible.
God could not be reached for comment.
—Jerry Adler
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Monday, January 1, 2007 | PermalinkComments 1 - 47 of 47 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #15589 by Vardu on January 1, 2007 at 1:04 pm
God can never be reached for comment.I tried for years, and as sincerely as a person could be expected to, and not a whisper from the supposedly Almighty.
Considering the fact that I found, so to speak, all my posts returned stamped "Return to Sender", God can't blame me if I conclude that he's moved or doesn't live where he was supposed to live at all.
Other Comments by Vardu
3. Comment #15590 by scottishgeologist on January 1, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Vardu,"...moved or doesnt live where he was supposed to live at all"
good point. It reminds me of that comment that "the invisible and the non-existent look remarkably similar" Anyone know who first said that? Its a good one!
Other Comments by scottishgeologist
4. Comment #15591 by Dylan Dog on January 1, 2007 at 1:15 pm
|deny the holy spirit AND say that the miracles attributed to the Judeo-Christian god were actually done by a demon!Thats a double whammy insurance against spending eternity with a bunch of fundamentalists.
Other Comments by Dylan Dog
5. Comment #15594 by pzmyers on January 1, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Oh, no...it's a strategy to make it impossible to damn myself. I don't believe in demons, either, so I can't attribute the miracles to them. Can I blame them on the human capacity for self-delusion instead, and will that count?I think that all it really means is that it doesn't matter what you say -- a wily theologian will make up a rationalization to skirt the problem. It must be so easy to be unshackled from the bindings of reason...
Other Comments by pzmyers
6. Comment #15595 by Jack Rawlinson on January 1, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Oh, the unmitigated, self-justifying, tortuous twaddle these idiots spout."most theologians are reluctant to pronounce anyone beyond repentance and salvation"
They're reluctant? How sweet of them! How considerate that they would wriggle and squirm to find ways to put a direct statement in a "context" which permits them to claim it means not what it literally says (whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven), but what they would like it to mean.
I think these theological buffoons simply can't handle rational, critical thinking. It's too damned scary for their tender, craven spirits. They're much more comfortable squeezing "truth" out of a collection of words by hunting down ambiguities and alternative interpretations so that the "truth" becomes what they feel it ought to be.
Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson
7. Comment #15597 by Fruktkake on January 1, 2007 at 2:19 pm
"My response," Land says, "would be to pray for these people: 'forgive them, [for] they know not what they do'." Well f*** you too, mr. Theologyman Other Comments by Fruktkake
8. Comment #15598 by Chayanov on January 1, 2007 at 2:23 pm
I don't have a camera for YouTube so I'll take care of it here.I deny the existence of any and all gods, goddesses, spirits, watchful ancestors, mythical heroes, and any other denizens of the supernatural realm. In fact, I deny the existence of the supernatural realm as well.
That should cover it.
Other Comments by Chayanov
9. Comment #15606 by jeff_n on January 1, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Here's a challenge for believers. The following comes from Mark Chapter 16 (New American Bible):17. These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will drive out demons, they will speak new languages.
18. They will pick up serpents (with their hands), and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not harm them. They will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover."
I've seen these people claiming to do most of these things but I've never seen a televangilist drinking a deadly poison under controlled conditions, which ought to be a doddle if what they say is true and they really believe it. So I suggest the "Cyanide Challenge" (especially for those disgusting con men selling "The Rapture").
You could offer them a get-out clause: most serious textual critics are convinced that the last twelve verses of Mark (including these) are not original (i.e. they were added by a scribe at some point in the text's history). However, if our Rapture-merchant admits these verses are part of a textual addition, he automatically admits that the Bible is not the inerrant word of God. Either way you've got him.
(Just kidding - these people annoy the hell out of me but I don't want to kill them!)
Other Comments by jeff_n
10. Comment #15607 by Macho Nachos on January 1, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Chayanov: But you didn't deny the Holy Spirit! I'm sure that if you let your statement stand as is, a theologian would come along and tell you that the Holy Spirit isn't supernatural, or a God. It's clearly an extranatural entity, so you haven't denied it properly. Other Comments by Macho Nachos
11. Comment #15611 by GoodbyeGodNZ on January 1, 2007 at 3:16 pm
I haven't got a Webcam here in my cage, just my trusty laptop with broadband so I'll state it here.There is no God, ghosts, fairies or any other sorts of supernatural creepy things.
Anyone who says there is subscribes to Theodrivel and is simply stupid!
Other Comments by GoodbyeGodNZ
12. Comment #15614 by scottishgeologist on January 1, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Blasphemy challenge? Eh? Right! gloves off time! Lets see - we are told that the 3 presons of the trinity are one and the same, so if you blaspheme one you are blaspheming all presumably - (a sort of 3 Muskateers kind of thing...) Well how about this little flash gem:http://www.ebaumsworld.com/flash/swearingjesus.html
Turn the volume up and laugh. Pendejo!!!
Other Comments by scottishgeologist
13. Comment #15616 by Joadist on January 1, 2007 at 3:56 pm
I do not like God. I do not want to be anywhere near him. I demand to go to Hell in order to avoid God.However, if God sends me to Hell, he would be rewarding me for blasphemy.
I fear I am condemned to Heaven. But to look on the bright side, I will have all eternity to torment God.
Other Comments by Joadist
14. Comment #15617 by Pilot22A on January 1, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Before I denied the Holy Ghost, I checked under my bed, didn't find he/it there.(Must be a he or it since men not women think up crap like a Holy Ghost.) Didn't find any other monsters either.So, besides denying the Holy Ghost, I also challenge Jesus, God, Allah and all the rest of the gods to take a nice juicy lick off of my butt.
Hmmm, I'm still here.
What kind of an inane impotent god needs to scare me with the idea of offending a Holy Ghost?
Other Comments by Pilot22A
15. Comment #15619 by Jared on January 1, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Since the other thread got old before I managed to put this together, I'll post a link to my own blasphemy challenge:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgZC86Y92VU
I did this according to the guidelines I came up with through the course of reading the other thread. Enjoy :)
Other Comments by Jared
16. Comment #15624 by Jack Rawlinson on January 1, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Alright. Enough of this mealy-mouthed so-called blasphemy. Let's nail this once and for all.I deny the existence of all gods, all divinities and all their associated holy trappings, including but not limited to the so-called holy spirit. They are all ridiculous; they are all lies. However, if any of the reported "miracles" ascribed to god actually happened, they were definitely done by demons. Furthermore, Jesus was just a man and a pretty humourless, arrogant, sexless, po-faced one at that; Mohammed was a goddamned peasant imbecile and his Koran is quite plainly the ravings of a hallucinating mental case; Buddha was a fat, deluded poseur and the entire pantheon of Hindu gods make the denizens of Olympus look as plausible as evolution.
Also, Yahweh smells of wee.
Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson
17. Comment #15625 by DavidJMH on January 1, 2007 at 5:11 pm
Ladies and Gentlemen,Are we not ever so brave; unfortunately it sounds like the empty and false bravado of children trying to find their place in the world. The only time when this kind of declaration has any meaning is when one is taking one's last gasp. Until then, we are all leaving the door open to recant, as of course children do when faced with retribution.
Other Comments by DavidJMH
18. Comment #15627 by Jack Rawlinson on January 1, 2007 at 5:17 pm
David: the point is that we are responding to being told that certain types of blasphemy cannot be recanted: they damn us irretrievably. There is nothing brave about what we are doing at all, because we don't believe this. What we are doing is trying to show people like you that we really, really, no-honest-we're-not-kidding, mean it when we say we disbelieve. Because if we didn't, we wouldn't do this. Part of us would fear damnation. But because we really, really don't believe in this puerile, savage nonsense, it takes no courage at all to deny it. It takes no more courage than it would take you to deny the existence of fairies. Do you see? Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson
19. Comment #15631 by scooternyc on January 1, 2007 at 5:56 pm
Jack Rawlinson - shout out from another New York Non-Believer! Battery Park City to be exact! I gave myself to jesus, that bastard gave me the crabs and never called!
:) LOL!
God is watching! Giv'em a good show!
Cheers!
Other Comments by scooternyc
20. Comment #15632 by scooternyc on January 1, 2007 at 6:00 pm
Oh, and I denounce the holy spirit and all its Bill O'Rielly - Laura Ingraham - Dennis Prager - Michael Medved - Hugh Hewitt - followers! Other Comments by scooternyc
21. Comment #15633 by scooternyc on January 1, 2007 at 6:05 pm
Jesus is watching, look busy! Where's all the jesus jokes!
A little boy wants a bike for christmas, his mother tells him to write to god.
He sits down and writes, "Dear god, if I'm good for one week", upon reading this he realizes that a week is too long.
"Dear god, if I'm good for 1 day", upon reading this he knows that this is too tough, as well.
He goes out to the back yard, grabs the statue of Mary in the garden, wraps it in a blanket, throws it in the back of his closet and writes to god once more.
"Dear god, if you ever want to see your mother again..."
Other Comments by scooternyc
22. Comment #15635 by Jack Rawlinson on January 1, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Hey Scooter! You're in Battery Park City? I'm in Williamsburg. We should have a beer! Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson
23. Comment #15637 by Nikki on January 1, 2007 at 6:35 pm
17. Comment #15625 by DavidJMH on January 1, 2007 at 5:11 pm"The only time when this kind of declaration has any meaning is when one is taking one's last gasp."
Well David, I was at my fathers death bed when he was indeed taking his last gasp. He was brought up in a catholic home and afterwards, was an non-believer, or atheist as you would no doubt prefer, the rest of his life. Some of his (still) catholic family turned up at his bedside in the hospital and kept suggesting to him, (he was still fairly aware but couldn't talk), that they call a priest. The rest of the family (guessing his feelings on this) suggested to him to blink once for 'yes' and twice for 'no' just to be sure of his last wishes. We even grudgingly (due to his state) did this twice. The second time, the answer in his eyes was more definate than the first. He died in peace!
Oh and David, I am already true to God, my God, the one true God, The Flying Spaghetti Monster.
I denounce the holy spirit!!!
Other Comments by Nikki
24. Comment #15638 by Nikki on January 1, 2007 at 6:37 pm
21. Comment #15633 by scooternyc on January 1, 2007 at 6:05 pm"He goes out to the back yard, grabs the statue of Mary in the garden, wraps it in a blanket, throws it in the back of his closet and writes to god once more.
"Dear god, if you ever want to see your mother again..."
Hahahahahaha
Other Comments by Nikki
25. Comment #15639 by scooternyc on January 1, 2007 at 6:41 pm
Jack - not a beer drinker, but I could grab a cup o'joe at a starbucks or one of the over 2,798 coffee outlets in the city! I've never seen so many coffee outlets prior to moving here in 2004(Nov 2004 to be exact)! YIKES! Other Comments by scooternyc
26. Comment #15646 by a-teapot-ist on January 1, 2007 at 8:08 pm
lmao . . . blackmailing an omniscient deity XD Well, one works with the example provided, eh what? And considerin' what are called "acts of god", this guy must still be in his terrible twos. As for myself, the holy spirit ain't nothin' but a shared opium dream between the early church "fathers", put on paper to give their taskmaster Guilt that much more a schitzo persona. Want a true blasphemy? Cheesewhiz on a biscuit! Now that's a southern North American curse!Other Comments by a-teapot-ist
27. Comment #15652 by Phil on January 1, 2007 at 10:04 pm
scottishgeologist said:good point. It reminds me of that comment that "the invisible and the non-existent look remarkably similar" Anyone know who first said that?
Something very similar to this was said by Anthony Flew in his parable of the gardener:
"Just how does what you call an invisible, intangible, eternally elusive gardener differ from an imaginary gardener or even from no gardener at all?"
The full text can be found here:
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/flew_falsification.html
Other Comments by Phil
28. Comment #15656 by IANVS on January 1, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Chayanov,Not even Quentin??? You blasphemer you!!!
http://www.godamongdirectors.com/imgs/qtgun.gif
http://www.feld.com/blog/archives/000251.html
Other Comments by IANVS
29. Comment #15667 by Blue State Mike on January 1, 2007 at 11:19 pm
My idea of Hell is to spend eternity with a bunch of fundamentalist Christians; so wherever they're going to be, book me a room in the other place, thank you very much.Other Comments by Blue State Mike
30. Comment #15671 by Peter Hearty on January 1, 2007 at 11:58 pm
The "unforgivable sin" passage can be used in arguments with religious people. The misogynistic, homophobic, authoritarian aspects of Christianity are often based on a selective approach to reading the bible. We've all seen how some Christians quote particular passages of Leviticus for example, while ignoring the hundreds of other proscriptions in that same book.This reflects a tendency for the relgious to justify their own prejudices by blaming them on their God (the "I don't have any problem with homosexuals, but God says it's wrong" attitude).
I've suggested to several Christians who profess this type of belief that they had better be pretty certain they are right. For if they really are blaming their God for their own intolerance then this could well be what the passage in Mark is referring to when he talks about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
The almost universally hostile reaction that this provokes suggests that it touches a nerve.
Other Comments by Peter Hearty
31. Comment #15673 by Ohnhai on January 2, 2007 at 12:08 am
This is to let you all know that the holy-siprit (no- not butterscotch schnapps , the other one) Is noting but a no good, mono-brow carrot humping excuse of a demented, dribbling lover of socks who couldn't tie his own spiritual chakras even if he could locate them with his puss covered, webbed appendages that are sorely misidentified as hands.Or would be if he existed at all, which he don't so I guess all that is attributed to him must have been done by other non-existent 'supernatural' concepts such as demons.
No wait they don't exist either, Damn guess we only have ourselves and our ego centric stupidity to blame for all the shit we do to ourselves.
Yours truly,
Stephen Rushbrook (aka OHNHAI)
PS: I wonder how many of these comments are getting flagged as 'Offensive' by the goddites among us?
Other Comments by Ohnhai
32. Comment #15685 by daveadams on January 2, 2007 at 3:47 am
Be as rude and obnoxious as you all like. None of it will make your arguments an ounce better. The people you wish would convert are hardly going to be impressed by your crudely-covered rhetoric (or is this just to have a laugh with your mates?). The comments are offensive not because they criticize Christianity, but because they prefer to use mocking rather than argument.Daring something you don't believe exists to punish you? If he doesn't exist, you people have nothing to worry about, so there's no point in daring.
You don't believe a word in the bible? You don't mean that - because to suggest that there is not a word of truth in it (historically at least) is as improbable as it is historically false.
Other Comments by daveadams
33. Comment #15699 by Mel Z on January 2, 2007 at 6:03 am
wait a second now, if i'm stuck going to heaven anyways, then whats the point in "spreading the word" for these religious nuts? cant they just smile to themselves and not ask for everybody elses money? Other Comments by Mel Z
34. Comment #15703 by Nikki on January 2, 2007 at 6:37 am
32. Comment #15685 by daveadams"The comments are offensive not because they criticize Christianity, but because they prefer to use mocking rather than argument."
Argument? What argument? Perhaps, you mean the presentation of self delusional dreams to others, with an expectation they share them with you?
Dream on Dave.
Other Comments by Nikki
35. Comment #15706 by daveadams on January 2, 2007 at 6:59 am
By "argument" I mean the reliance on the ideas themselves rather than the mockery and crudeness encouraged by this Blasphemy Challenge.So, anything said by an atheist is "argument", and anything by a religious person "dreams"? Dimiss all the works of C.S. Lewis, Hans Kung, Karl Barth and J.R.R. Tolkein (to name but a few) as "dreams" if you wish, but in one broad sweep you're wiping away a great deal of great work and argument.
Other Comments by daveadams
36. Comment #15725 by rabidchihauhau on January 2, 2007 at 9:38 am
David has not grown up; he refers to everyone here as 'children' and no doubt includes himself as a 'child' of 'god'.David - we've all grown up. What you've been reading is not blasphemy, its people's attempt at humor - some of it good, some of it bad, MOST of it poking fun at the method.
You obviously don't get it. So, in short sentences and with words of one syllable:
You can NOT (what's a one syllable word for blaspheme?) blaspheme against some thing that does not exist. Get it?
No god - no blasphemy.
The entire exercise was created to upset people like you who take insults hurled at non-entities seriously. Watch out - I'm going to offer you some alternatives:
the easter bunny does not exist
santa claus is a myth
the tooth fairy is really your mother
While you sit there and WORRY about whether you've followed all of the instructions in the proper order, (presuming you're reading the proper instruction manual) hoping to get your ticket into cloud cuckoo land, fearful that maybe you forgot some little thing that's going to consign you to an eternity of suffering, the rest of us here have been enjoying the presents we got for gift-giving day, pocketed the quarters we found under our pillows, transformed the rabbit into a marketing icon and have moved on to maturity.
Other Comments by rabidchihauhau
37. Comment #15734 by DavidJMH on January 2, 2007 at 11:03 am
Ladies and Gentlemen,Well done those who rose to the bait. However, it is a pity you were unable to recognize irony when you see it. All the posts were so predictable and infantile, it seemed a little devil's advocating might produce a better discussion, rather than plain declarations to the already converted. Evidently, I was wrong.
Other Comments by DavidJMH
38. Comment #15741 by jeepyjay on January 2, 2007 at 12:03 pm
If you want to do some blaspheming that is no joke, how about taking on Mohammed or Allah? Just a few cartoons last year caused a whole lot of trouble. Other Comments by jeepyjay
39. Comment #15743 by macronencer on January 2, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Personally, I'm a little fed up with people missing the point of this thing. The point is to stand up and be counted, and show the world how many people genuinely lack a belief in god(s). That's all - simple as that. Quibbles over biblical meaning are entirely irrelevant, and nobody taking the challenge really believes they are going to hell anyway. Despite the comments about not wanting to share the afterlife with fundamentalists (funny though they are), nobody would seriously wish to go to hell: not if they really believed it existed, with all its eternal torture.Plenty of video submissions seem to be from people who have never really been religious, but the ones that mean the most are from those who were raised in a religious environment, and for whom it does take genuine courage to speak up: courage born not of fear of the Almighty, but of fear of peer pressure and community disapproval. To these people in particular, I raise my hat.
Other Comments by macronencer
40. Comment #15761 by poppythinks on January 2, 2007 at 3:59 pm
hi macronencerdon't get fed up so early on, there's a long way to go yet.........
it's never going to be simple when you are blaspheming against such convoluted ideas.
and we are all coming from different places...
the point of all this is to let all our voices be heard, and this topic made me laugh more than any other so far.
let's have some fun with it, because its one of the best ways to affect change, and that is what we all want innit?.....
Other Comments by poppythinks
41. Comment #15764 by Jack Rawlinson on January 2, 2007 at 5:35 pm
jeepyjay: you'll see I did a bit against Mohammed and Islam higher up. I actually think it might be worth making a point of blaspheming Islam, since muslims have been responsible for some of the most grotesquely inhumane and violent reactions to blasphemy in recent years. Christians just tend to think you're damned to hell; muslims have lately had a tendency to take "God's law" into their own hands (think Rushdie, Theo van Gogh etc...)It's very revealing that these five-times-a-day arse-wavers who never tire of reminding us that "God is great" seem to think he's not quite so great that he can handle retribution against infidels by himself. :-)
Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson
42. Comment #15790 by Kimpatsu on January 3, 2007 at 2:04 am
Adler also makes the mistake, when mentioning Pascal's wager, that if the Muslims are right all the Xians are going to Hell as well. And if the Jews are right, then all the Muslims AND all the Xians are going to Hell. And if the followers of Baal are right...Looks like us atheists are going to have plenty of company around the eternal campfire...
Other Comments by Kimpatsu
43. Comment #15797 by Homo economicus on January 3, 2007 at 3:51 am
If we do not believe in God why go to such trouble to be angry against a non-existent entity?If our aim is to win by reason and rational probing there may be more effective ways.
I can tolerate delusional people, not respect their ideas that stem from the delusion. But if their actions are going to cause harm then society as a whole must step in. Fact must win over faith.
Other Comments by Homo economicus
44. Comment #15934 by macronencer on January 3, 2007 at 10:47 pm
r.e. Comment #15797 by Homo economicusIf we do not believe in God why go to such trouble to be angry against a non-existent entity?
Of course nobody can really be angry with someone or something they don't believe exists. Whatever anger there is in this instance is probably directed, as explained by the Lynchburg students to RD during the Q&A session last year, towards parents, teachers, and anyone in authority guilty of perpetuating a state of fear and ignorance in the minds of children.
Other Comments by macronencer
45. Comment #16788 by masterbuilder on January 8, 2007 at 7:22 pm
You seem pretty much being among yourselfs (as atheists and blasphemers) in this Forum. I was reading some of the comments. Why is there so much emotion against a being, that is not existing (in your own eyes)? You are making fools of yourselfs! Sorry, but this is far from a "clear-thinking oasis". I really feel much compassion wiht you all. I am a believer and let's reason: If you are right and there is no God, then it is not a problem for me. I had a very good life, with peace of mind and loving people around me. If I am right, and there is a God (and you really can know after you're dead), then you are in trouble. Have a great rest of your life!Other Comments by masterbuilder
46. Comment #16902 by macronencer on January 9, 2007 at 2:29 pm
masterbuilder - have you actually watched the Blasphemy Challenge videos? There's almost no anger there at all. It's not about anger, as I've said several times on this forum. It's about standing up and being counted, that's all - which is also why those who nitpick about the bible verses and their definition of blasphemy are wasting their time.I am glad you are living a good life, I'm very happy for you. But you realise you just trotted out Pascal's Wager? That will be refuted in seconds here. :)
Other Comments by macronencer
47. Comment #56331 by godlessinfidel on July 15, 2007 at 5:16 am
...and I'm the one to refute it! First of all, since the brain stops functioning at death (duh!), it is impossible to know anything after death, including whether or not there is a God.Second, since all postulated, mutually-exclusive religions have an equal probability of being the "one true religion", and there are an infinite number of mutually-exclusive religions that could possibly be postulated, the probability of any chosen religion being "the right one" is 1 over infinity, which is approximately zero.
Pascal used the metaphor of a coin toss: Heads, all three Christian Gods exist, and so does the Christian Goddess (Mary), and so do all the demigods (Saints and Angels). Tails, none of them do. A better metaphor would have been a ball toss. Each religion, whether it has been practiced in the past, is practiced today, will be practiced in the future, or never will be practiced until the end of humanity, is represented by a single atom, and you only win if the atom for your religion lies on a line with two reference atoms after the toss.
Other Comments by godlessinfidel
Over 1.5 million copies sold
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
1. Comment #15587 by Jez on January 1, 2007 at 12:51 pm
I'm going to hell anyway seeing as I'm an atheist;doesn't matter if I should live a life so holy that if I did believe I would be a saint.
Just to get this proper blaspheme hurdle out of the way; the holy spirit is a crock of shit. (Nearly *'d one of the letters but thought I should do it properly.)
Now that I am properly consigned (as though I wasn't already) to the fiery and non existant pits of hell, I look forward to meeting you one day Lindy. :)
Other Comments by Jez