Home

Codex Reorganization and Revision

Over the next few weeks The Humanist Codex will be undergoing significant reorganization and revision. Some articles will be moved or be taken down for maintenance.

For the Codex itself, Apologies, Critiques, and Positions will be split and re-sorted more appropriately, and most of the essays will be updated and revised.

The references will be re-sorted and upgraded into a new index system allowing for easier sorting by tag.

We appreciate your patience during the change.

Reason is the Devil’s greatest whore…
To be a Christian, you must pluck out the eye of Reason
~Martin Luther

 

 

Let’s start with a question.  It’s a simple yes or no question, but it’s a scary one; both frightening and yet breathtakingly simple. I’ve seen every kind of dodge to avoid answering it: it’s inconsequential, it won’t change anything, the premise behind it can never be known so why bother asking, even asking is a deep offence…  but stick with me, because this question immediately and definitively gets to the core of your moral and existential character.

The question is this: If God didn’t exist, would you want to know?

Now think about that honestly for a minute. Don’t worry, it’s not blasphemy, I’m not suggesting He doesn’t exist.  I’m simply asking you to reflect on your own values, both as a person and as a moral agent.  If He didn’t, would you want to know? What would be more important to you, comfort and emotional security, or the truth?

I, for one, would very much like to believe in God.  The world is filled with terrible injustices, and the idea that someday they will all be tallied and accounted for is really quite comforting.  I’m also lonely, in a spiritual sense; there’s nobody quite like me on the planet, and while that uniqueness is wonderful, it’s isolating too.  The existence of God would bring me joy and a sense of companionship.

But those aren’t even the best reasons.  The biggest reason I want to believe is that I really want to know that I’ll see my children, and my parents, when we’ve all passed away.

Oh, I want there to be a God.

So if He brings me comfort and joy, and it’s just my personal belief, maybe the truth of it doesn’t matter.  Indeed, if that was all there was to it, then it seems to me that we should leave all beliefs unbruised.

But when is a personal belief really just personal?

For the most part, you act on your beliefs (in fact, you’re really morally obligated to).  If you think that homosexuality is a sin, you’ll try to steer people from it.  Now that’s not unreasonable, but your beliefs certainly aren’t personal anymore, are they? Your beliefs actually affect a great many people (and the effect is cumulative.  When a gay teen is bullied, beaten, murdered, or shamed into suicide, it’s not the personal belief of one person to blame, but a choir of homophobic rhetoric from ministers, politicians, and good, everyday God-fearing people).

Since your belief in a theistic god (Yahweh, Adonai, Allah, Jehovah, if we were just to stay within within the Abrahamic religions) informs how you interact in the world—how you treat people—it becomes morally imperative that you have some justification for those beliefs.

No one in the KKK thinks that they are racist (after all, it’s not racist if it’s true).  But the world be a better place if they could ignore what they wanted to be true, what was gratifying to believe, and instead just examine their beliefs and how they came by them.  The world would be a better place if those who had used the bible to defend slavery, or practice forced conversion, or burned witches, had all come to their senses sooner.

Now there’s been a great deal of moral progress since the dark ages, but are we done? Are we at the height of it? Every generation has thought itself the apex of morality and progress, the final product of our moral evolution. But they’ve never been right. Ever. So what are the chances that we’ve gotten all the right answers to how we should treat our fellow man? There may be more, quite a lot more, that we need to do, but which we keep outside the realm of honest examination.

Unexamined belief, even with the best of intentions, has led to some of the worst suffering in history. You can say you don’t have to examine your beliefs because you know you’re right,  but that’s the defense of every klansman, slaver, and inquisitor.

“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” –Jesus, Luke 19:27 “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” –Jesus, Matthew 10:34
“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” –Jesus, Luke 19:27 “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” –Jesus, Matthew 10:34

The largest dogmatic organization in the world, the Catholic Church, does in fact examine its own beliefs.  They have changed positions quite a lot in the last 100 years, and they appear on the precipice of a significant shift in tone towards homosexuals, and maybe women too.  But if, 100 years from now, our treatment of homosexuals and of women are looked down upon with the same disgust we now have for slavery, we’re the ones responsible for not holding the church accountable. Every moral advancement has come from people challenging dogmatic beliefs, and has been opposed by those who felt we had reached the apex of morality already. That I can tell, the latter have never been right; there’s always room for improvement.

Truth is the moral bedrock of civilization.  You can’t convict the guilty or set the innocent free—you can not have justice—without truth.  In fact, it’s impossible for anyone unwilling to actively pursue truth (even when it conflicts with their beliefs or things they wish were true) to make any claim to morality. Simply put: if you’re going to believe in a higher power, particularly in a theistic god with specific commandments and injunctions that you’re going to impose in some way on others, you’ve a moral obligation to try to get the right one.

That’s a tall order.

There are several thousand sects of Christianity(1)The World Christian Encyclopedia lists 55,000 denominations of Christianity in 238 countries.  However, while many of these are indeed separate organizations, most do not differentiate belief in any meaningful way.  When including only those with salient differences in belief, the real number is far closer to 3,000. alone.  Most of these (Catholic, Protestant, Lutheran, Prosperity, Mormon, Baptist, Evangelical, etc) are exclusive; they excommunicate the other sects (and since none of these are a majority, it means that if you’re a Christian, you believe that even most Christians are going to hell(2)Christians sanitize this fact. You are either “saved” or “not saved”. If youàre a Christian, but of the wrong denomination, you are no more saved than a Jew, Hindu, or atheist.).  In fact Jews, Muslims, and Mormons can’t agree, even within themselves, which moral teachings can safely be ignored and which can’t, and that’s just the Abrahamic theologies; there are the three billion people who have never heard of Moses, Abraham, or Jesus.

Indeed, nearly every sect of every theistic religion in history has had two things in common: first, they believe that they hold the key to salvation and moral behavior to the exclusion of everyone else. Second, tenants of their faith oppress and marginalize some people, while revering others.

So how do you pick? How do you know who is right?

At this point, giving up and just choosing the one you like best seems as good a plan as any. Indeed, this is what almost everybody does. Despite the claim that religion makes you moral, you actually use your innate morality and judgement to choose a religion that makes sense to you. If that church begins to get a little radical for you, you convert to another faith(3)Indeed most religions don’t actually lead on moral issues. From anti-semitisim, slavery and forced conversion, to the protection of rapists, the burning of witches, and homosexuality, the church leads from behind, and is dragged, kicking and screaming, into more tolerant positions already claimed by civilized societies, and even then only when they are confronted with irrelevancy, obsolescence, and a dearth of parishioners. People use their own moral judgement to pick a religion. It’s much easier to say that it’s impossible to know, or to claim mystical intuition (that you “just know” the truth, that you feel it in your bones) and find a church that will re-enforce your currently held beliefs (and you can go ahead and pick any set of beliefs you want, somewhere out there is a church that agrees with you), than it is to do the unsettling work of consciously examining your beliefs and their consequences.

But if doing the right thing were easy, everybody would do it.  Failure to think about these things is simply the abdication of our greatest responsibility and our greatest faculty, that which allows us to make our way through the world and make good decisions: reason.

Most theistic religions approve of reasoning when it comes to supporting their faith, reasoning out what the faith of Abraham or Job can tell us, but strongly discourage reasoning when it comes to questioning the faith or the logic of it’s tenants.  They make it an a priori issue which impedes reflective thought: by definition, faith is belief in the absence of reason.  As soon as you have a reason to believe something, it’s no longer faith, it’s knowledge.  Faith cannot exist in the presence of reason; they are mutually exclusive.  Indeed, Christians have go so far as to make knowledge quite literally “the forbidden fruit”, the acquisition of which constitutes original sin(4)Bertrand Russel famously pointed out that there isn’t a single word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence).  The result: questioning your faith is a sin, and supplanting doubt with mystical certainty a virtue.

This is a recipe for disaster.

The the faith approach takes a heavy dose of denial to overcome one obvious fault: it’s phenomenally arrogant. Whatever your faith, most people alive today, with faith no less strong than your own, believe (and nearly all throughout history have believed) that you’re wrong. No matter how strong your faith, you cannot commit it to reality by a force of will.  If you could, then the right religions would be the most extreme ones; I doubt anyone reading this can claim faith stronger or more certain than that of say, the People’s Temple of Jim Jones, ISIS, Heaven’s Gate, or the 9/11 hijackers.

“Kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man”
–Moses, Numbers 31:17-18

The strength of your belief has no bearing on whether those beliefs are true.  And no matter how strong your faith, how devout your practice, how righteous your conviction, mystical certainty as exercised throughout the ages, from human sacrifices to the burning of witches, has always been a bad tool for making moral judgments.

Indeed, mystical certainty is perhaps the worst tool for decision making ever.

For the entirety of man’s 200,000-year history, in every civilization, in every tribe, we’ve invented gods which are said to intervene in our daily affairs.  I say “invented”, because even the most devout Catholic and the most hardened atheist have one thing in common—they believe that over 99.9% of these gods, which man has believed in, put his faith in, murdered and died for, from Anunnaki and Kukulcan, to Osiris and Poseidon, must be invented–fairy tales—man made myths. The theist is actually an atheist regarding nearly all of it, only a tiny point of contention between the two: the theist withholds from the list of conjured deities a single god, or set of gods, which he or she believes is quite obviously real (and that, surprisingly enough, he or she has identified the correct one).

If the Catholic can understand why he doesn’t believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet, then that he can understand why the atheist doesn’t think Jesus was either.

Knowing in your heart that you’ve identified the correct theistic belief is intoxicating in its appeal to your ego.  After all, if you found the correct religion when the vast majority of humans ever to have lived missed it, one of three things must be true:

  1. You are smarter than (or more spiritually in tune, or in some other way superior to) most other people .
  2. You’re favored by God, in His grace such that he had you born in a country where the right religion is accessible, at a time it’s accessible, and steered you to it, and has empowered you to explain to others, on his behalf, how best to live their lives.
  3. You got the right one by dumb luck (which, if true, makes heaven and hell nothing more than a divine lottery game, and would appear to invalidate any point to theism—it’s all a crap shoot).

That kind of appeal to ego, conscious or not, is inextricable from theistic religion, and is a strong disincentive towards honestly examining the validity of your beliefs.

It’s been my experience that when I want something to be true, I have to double check any evidence, since I tend to give far less weight to counter evidence, and extra weight to confirming evidence (I don’t mean to, and it’s taken years of reflection to see that I am as guilty of this as anyone, but I am.  I bias my judgements).  The appeal to ego, the comfort of companionship, the escape from a near constant fear of death, the reassurance of a just world, even if I can’t understand it right now—these are among the most powerful influences a human being can experience.

These factors make genuinely questioning your faith one of the hardest, yet most most courageous things you can do.  It’s not easy, it’s not fun, but it is an act of humility and integrity, an attempt to make yourself a better moral agent.

Of the thousands of gods, hundreds of thousands of sects of worship, only one of two things can be true: Either one of them is right, or they’re all wrong.

If there were no God, would you want to know?

Given that we compulsively make gods, that so many in history have been false, given the inability of any religion to make accurate claims about the natural world, given the overwhelming moral failures these theistic beliefs throughout history, and given the dynamic nature of these beliefs, inability to form any lasting consensus around them (today’s Catholic would have been heretical just 200 years ago) all suggest one thing:

We made it all up.

We’re wired to make it up.  We’ve done it since before we could write.

There are unanswered questions, to be sure.  But inventing a fake answer, while more satisfying, is worse than admitting we don’t know.

It is cruel and heartless not to realize that this is one of the hardest questions one can struggle with.  But the only moral answer to the question “If there wasn’t a God, would you want to know” must be that you have to know.  If there’s no God, moral inquiry can’t even truly begin until we know—there has never been a more divisive force than belief in God.

"We keep on being told that religion, whatever its imperfections, at least instills morality. On every side there is conclusive evidence that the contrary is the case." --Christopher Hitchens
“We keep on being told that religion, whatever its imperfections, at least instills morality. On every side there is conclusive evidence that the contrary is the case.”

Let us, for a moment, forget all of the suffering caused by those who believed they had a personal connection with, or understood the wishes of, God.  So we’ll ignore the long and disgusting history of the use of the Bible, Torah and Koran as a means to further the practice of slavery and warrants for genocide.  Drop, too, acts of terrorism and slaughter between Protestants and Catholics, Shia and Suni, Muslim and Christian, Israelis and Palestinians, and so on.  We’ll ignore the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the burning of heretics and witches, and the Catholic Church’s official policy of anti-Semitism towards Jews and its direct contribution to the Holocaust.  Let’s drop homophobia and misogynisim.  We’ll forgive superstitions like circumcision(5)Circumcision is a medieval and brutal practice. It is mutilation, practiced without consent of the child, which, while having spurious medical justification, inarguably removes the most sensitive and pleasurable part of the penis. Its practice would certainly be illegal if it didn’t have religious warrant. and genital mutilation.  The hypocrisy of the Catholic church (lining their churches with stained glass, gilding Vatican toilet handles in gold, remolding Bishops’ homes for tens of millions, and acquiring million dollar estates—including the church’s gorgeous $30 million Madison Avenue mansion) can all safely be ignored.  Let’s ignore the institutionalized and active covering up the rape(6)I’m sorry, but I must insist we not sanitize this and call it abuse. It was rape. That the church won’t call it by its proper name, and instead tries to mitigate their crimes by manipulating the language and referring to rape simply as “abuse,” marginalizes their victims, and should tell you everything you need to know about their contrition in these matters of (in some cases hundreds) of young boys (and girls, too)(7)Some people seem to think that the new pope is addressing this, but I see little evidence of it. My home town’s own Cardinal Bernard Law, a man I was quite familiar with in my youth, fled Boston ahead of a warrant, and now lives a lavish life in the Vatican, from where, thanks to the wisdom of the Holy See, he is both immune to consequence and cannot be extradited. Indeed, the church continues to defy all efforts to shed light on the depth of the problem, and to shelter the perpetrators on the grounds that protecting the institution is more important than justice, another untenable moral position for which they will one day have to apologize, though not till long after their victims are buried..  The forced conversion of people to Christianity and Islam, Rwandan Christian ministers inciting genocide, American ministers contributing to legislation making homosexuality a capital crime, the hypocritical offering of indulgences—trading money for divinity…

Let’s ignore it all, pretend it didn’t happen.  They’re not the real crime when it comes to theistic religion.

The real crime?

“It is no credit to the orthodox that they do not now believe all the absurdities that were believed 150 years ago. The gradual emasculation of the Christian doctrine has been effected in spite of the most vigorous resistance, and solely as the result of the onslaughts of freethinkers” –Bertrand Russell
“It is no credit to the orthodox that they do not now believe all the absurdities that were believed 150 years ago. The gradual emasculation of the Christian doctrine has been effected in spite of the most vigorous resistance, and solely as the result of the onslaughts of freethinkers” –Bertrand Russell

All theistic religions must, and do, oppose human progress; they attack the process of, and the people who engage in, reasoning.

The power of reason is the most powerful tool we as a species possess, it is the sole source of our success on this planet.  Religion not only does not allow for this success, but actively opposes it.

While religion has been forced back, forced to cede the point that perhaps burning people at the stake for unfavorable weather or crop failure, getting confessions of heretical behavior by forcing rats to burrow into a person’s stomach, and murdering those who engage in open inquiry, aren’t good ideas, it continues its unrelenting opposition both to progress, and to the fruits of that progress (from open heart surgery, to sterilization and antibiotics, to vaccines—all opposed in the name of God).  And despite the universal–I mean complete and total–failure rate of theistic books as guides to the natural world, people still rely on them, both for answers to the natural universe and for moral guidance.  Anyone can easily name five or ten biblical accounts of the world which science has utterly shattered, but I’ve yet to hear a single, just one, account of the natural world where science and the bible have disagreed, and the bible was right.

For two hundred thousand years we had only the smallest of technological advancements (the discovery of fire, agriculture, and basic engineering).  If you survived the first five years of life, you were most likely to die of an abscess of the teeth (when was the last time you worried a tooth was going to kill you?).  The average life expectancy was 32 years old.

That all started to change about 300 years ago.  With the refinement of the scientific method, our understanding of the natural world and our ability to modify it to suit our needs, predict future events, and protect ourselves from disease and extreme conditions, blossomed.  We more than doubled life expectancy, while simultaneously making life easier, longer, more productive, and safer than it’s ever been, curing disease and cutting the infant mortality rate more than a hundred fold.  In that short 300 years we’ve accomplished more in than in the 10,000 years before that, and today’s high school student knows more about history, medicine, physics, gravity, biology, chemistry, the atom, the galaxy, and the nature of space and time itself, than the smartest man alive 200 years ago knew about any of those subjects.

This progress didn’t come from priests, but from people who challenged dogmatic thinking, and was opposed, often violently, by religion.  The discovery that disease in a medieval castle came from throwing human waste into the moat, the sole source of drinking water, flew in the face of those who claimed it was the wrath of an angry God (and who claimed to have the cure, often in the form of a few Hail Marys and some donation to God almighty, which the church would happily accept in his name).

And while secularism has made it harder for religions to impose death on those who challenge them, churches still fiercely oppose progress to the suffering of millions, if not billions, of people: Global Warming is real and its man-made, but like virtually every other scientific discovery in human history, these facts have been deliberately opposed by many theists (most of whom of whom won’t trouble themselves to try to understand how we know this), impeding our response to what may well be one of the greatest challenges mankind has ever faced.  They challenge evolution as “Just a theory”(8)You have to be willfully ignorant of science to not know that a “Theory,” like the theory of gravity, is stronger than a “law”, and considered the highest form of knowledge.  That this level of ignorance exists is a direct result of assaults on science by theists opposed to its findings.), and waste public time and money trying to force a dark age methodology of natural inquiry into classrooms, to roll back progress and square their texts with reality.  We know for a fact that condoms are the best protection against AIDS, overpopulation, and poverty(9)Contraception is one of the most underrated scientific accomplishments of all time. By decoupling procreation from sex, women can wait until they are emotionally and financially ready before having a child, and can limit the size of that family. It is the most powerful tool we have in combating poverty and famine. The Catholic Church, a wasteland of failed moral policy behind it, equivocates on this point, saying it’s okay to prevent births by using math, but not by using chemistry or physics, once again claiming special knowledge of God’s wishes, but this simple tool is barred by the Catholic Church in favor of “abstinence only” programs, conclusively proven to increase transmission of disease and poverty, highlights a staggering hypocrisy: the Catholic Church, which, to be blunt, can’t seem to restrain its own priests—men with vows of celibacy and committed to the service of god—from raping little boys in their parishes, but expects that a married man with AIDS will never have sex with his wife.  There are people, men of power, hoping for war in the middle east, so that biblical prophecy can be fulfilled, and the end times (which have been just around the corner for the last 2,000 years or so) can commence.  And Matthew 6:34, which commands that you “Take no thought for the morrow,” has been used to defend ignoring environmental concerns of any kind (if Jesus is coming back tomorrow, what does it matter?); children need education, workers need retirement programs, and diseases need to be arrested; “Take no thought for the morrow” is inherently immoral when taken to nearly any degree (and while he may disagree, I hope that the pope himself can see that I’m not kidding when I say that I don’t feel safer with nuclear launch codes in the hands of anyone who believes any of this).

Theism is our first attempt at understanding the world, but as astrology gave way to astronomy and alchemy to chemistry, religion must give way to science.  Under no set of circumstances is faith a substitute for reason.

I was raised Protestant (loosely), but was always agnostic (which is a mild form of atheism—agnostics don’t practice theistic beliefs or religious teachings)—so I held firm to a just afterlife, even if 2,000-year-old tales of Jesus did not impress me.  But I’d always had doubts, and after years of thought and debate, reached the conclusion that it was wish thinking.  The truth is that nobody knows what happens when you die, nobody.  If there is something, I suspect it’s nothing we’re even capable of comprehending; imagine the difference between how the ant views the world and a human.  If there’s an afterlife it’s likely to be whole orders of magnitude more different than that… I can’t fathom my concerns about justice would remain intact.

Perhaps it’s a good thing.  I have to kiss my children extra, connect with them emotionally, tell my wife I love her, and be courteous to people on the street—this is my only shot, I had better make it count.

I have no issue with theism, save in the cases where it emboldens reckless and irrational behavior, turns suffering into virtue, denies science and progress, enables rape, murder, and torture, all in the name metaphysical dogma which we all agree must be and has historically been dead wrong at least 99% of the time.

That theism still enjoys such popularity in the face of all of this is actually quite breathtaking.

But not only is there no evidence for theistic claims, not only have they had a staggering failure rate, but they are in fact immoral, commanding us to use clearly fallible faith over our far superior faculties of reason.  As weapons of mass destruction get smaller and easier to make, we get closer and closer to death on a massive scale at the hands of people with only one defense for their actions: faith.

Reasoning is frowned upon in theism because faith cannot withstand the scrutiny of reason.  Nearly all theistic “proofs” for God (or gods) are reducible to two central arguments—the God of the Gaps argument, and a Prime Mover argument.  These arguments are actually two sides of the same coin, they beget each other (Prime Mover is actually a disguised Gaps argument, and Gaps relies on the same fallacious premises as Prime Mover).  The destruction of the Gaps argument is actually quite easy—it’s literally the most employed argument in the history of human discourse, and it’s never been right.  Ever.  Not once.  With the fall of Gaps, 90% of arguments (including Prime Mover) for the existence of any god of any kind are irrecoverable.  Most theists, in order to prove god, rely on deistic arguments (you can’t prove that Jesus was the son of God because, well, something had to start the universe rolling)—a proper understanding of the difference between Theistic and Deistic arguments renders a second lethal blow to Gaps and Mover (at least where theism is concerned) and to the vast majority of the remaining arguments.  What’s left is a reliance on faith (which can’t be employed in a rational discussion) or syllogistic fallacies (like insisting that failure to prove God does not exist means that He does).

Rather than restrict people to a linear argument as one might find in an essay or book, this codex allows you to browse and explore arguments at your leisure and in an order that makes sense to you.  I hope that you can find something useful to you in these pages.

The Humanist Codex

Footnotes   [ + ]

1. The World Christian Encyclopedia lists 55,000 denominations of Christianity in 238 countries.  However, while many of these are indeed separate organizations, most do not differentiate belief in any meaningful way.  When including only those with salient differences in belief, the real number is far closer to 3,000.
2. Christians sanitize this fact. You are either “saved” or “not saved”. If youàre a Christian, but of the wrong denomination, you are no more saved than a Jew, Hindu, or atheist.
3. Indeed most religions don’t actually lead on moral issues. From anti-semitisim, slavery and forced conversion, to the protection of rapists, the burning of witches, and homosexuality, the church leads from behind, and is dragged, kicking and screaming, into more tolerant positions already claimed by civilized societies, and even then only when they are confronted with irrelevancy, obsolescence, and a dearth of parishioners
4. Bertrand Russel famously pointed out that there isn’t a single word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence
5. Circumcision is a medieval and brutal practice. It is mutilation, practiced without consent of the child, which, while having spurious medical justification, inarguably removes the most sensitive and pleasurable part of the penis. Its practice would certainly be illegal if it didn’t have religious warrant.
6. I’m sorry, but I must insist we not sanitize this and call it abuse. It was rape. That the church won’t call it by its proper name, and instead tries to mitigate their crimes by manipulating the language and referring to rape simply as “abuse,” marginalizes their victims, and should tell you everything you need to know about their contrition in these matters
7. Some people seem to think that the new pope is addressing this, but I see little evidence of it. My home town’s own Cardinal Bernard Law, a man I was quite familiar with in my youth, fled Boston ahead of a warrant, and now lives a lavish life in the Vatican, from where, thanks to the wisdom of the Holy See, he is both immune to consequence and cannot be extradited. Indeed, the church continues to defy all efforts to shed light on the depth of the problem, and to shelter the perpetrators on the grounds that protecting the institution is more important than justice, another untenable moral position for which they will one day have to apologize, though not till long after their victims are buried.
8. You have to be willfully ignorant of science to not know that a “Theory,” like the theory of gravity, is stronger than a “law”, and considered the highest form of knowledge.  That this level of ignorance exists is a direct result of assaults on science by theists opposed to its findings.
9. Contraception is one of the most underrated scientific accomplishments of all time. By decoupling procreation from sex, women can wait until they are emotionally and financially ready before having a child, and can limit the size of that family. It is the most powerful tool we have in combating poverty and famine. The Catholic Church, a wasteland of failed moral policy behind it, equivocates on this point, saying it’s okay to prevent births by using math, but not by using chemistry or physics, once again claiming special knowledge of God’s wishes

720
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
177 Comment threads
543 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
4 Comment authors
The Humanist CodexGilbert Stewart LayEdwin Deady Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

What the atheist chooses to ignore is that science confirms the universe follows physical laws. And those physical laws tell us that everything is in a state of degradation not improvement. The application of these laws points to a beginning for which the atheist have no answer. Can you look at a model of the solar system and say it just appeared? No someone made the model, yet people can look at the real solar system and say it has always just been there. The bible went against the common medical knowledge of the ancient Egyptians. In the law given to Moses, we find the roots of modern hygienic practices used today. The Egyptians use dung and various other contaminated things in their medicinal concoctions. Where did these strange counter ideas, found in the bible, come from? A person can provide all the necessary needs for a seed to grow but can they force it to grow? What about those seeds that will lay dormant for 7-15 years are then germinate? How does the atheist explain these phenomenon? Can rational thought explain how the Methuselah gene in the Monarch butterfly came to be, the gene that is only activated in the last generation before their migration back to Mexico? How is it that being several generations removed from the butterflies that migrated north these monarchs are able to migrate to… Read more »

Nelson Clark
Commenter
Member

Joe roever: you have so little to say yet you use so many words to say it! Troll troll troll away gently down the stream.

Larry Ayer
Commenter
Member

You can’t find god, but you can THINK you’ve found him.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

The problem with an evolutionary explanation of the butterfly ends with the mouth parts .however, it begins with the chicken and the egg conundrum. In this case it must also deal with two completely different body forms and if that isn’t enough, there is a complete change in internal biological systems. Evolution is based on random mutations resulting in a favorable outcome. Since we have no way of knowing which came first, let’s us say for this discussion it was some caterpillar type organism. Now we run into the first of many problems with the evolutionary explanation. The caterpillar of butterflies has no reproductive system. So there is no possible way for even reproducing another caterpillar type organism. If we start with an adult flying organism, why is there a need for the caterpillar? The whole process of converting from caterpillar to adult butterfly indicates forethought and purpose. There is an end result that requires specific steps to complete. Miss anyone of these steps and the animal dies. First the chrysalis. The caterpillar forms the chrysalis. Now what? It has a nice place to hangout but it hasn’t mated. It doesn’t eat again so it dies. Next, some random mutation causes one of the caterpillars to dissolve. If the next step isn’t in place the caterpillar dies. The following step is probably the most elaborate. The entire caterpillar is dissolved… Read more »

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Humanist Codex, what life form was created in these angiogenesis experiments? References please.

Marshall Schoenke
Commenter
Member

You,are God….. Been doing it longer than a book was written… The book reflects God….. What you been doing and what you did….. What works and what doesn’t, how to lead and how to fail, a lot of it is allegorical but it all happened and this is how it is explained by a priestly class hiding something for the GOOD of man…. Muhammed wasn’t a prophet he was but a plain Warner to both Jews and Christians of the Middle East…. Warning them against the leaders of both sects Jews and Christians… The only prophecy in the Koran is about Jesus coming back to complete his work of destroying death…. All three books prove reincarnation….. Only the leaders truly know if everyone believed in themselves and reincarnation it would destroy their power control over the slaves.. Think about that

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Humanist Codex, thanks for the articles. While they are interesting, until there is a fully functioning cell the conclusions are over stated and speculative. There is a wide gap from making a sugar molecule and a complex RNA molecule functioning to perform a specific task.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Humanist Codex, any thoughts on the butterfly problem?

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Thanks, I hope all is well with you and yours..

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Did you kill my last comment to David Parr before or after he had an opportunity to read?

Marshall Schoenke
Commenter
Member

Reincarnation answers all these questions ….. And many sets of your rules for the world were made up by man and he doesn’t even know where he came from….. You have the ability to regress those memories…. Just like a butterfly imagine that! Rebirth because science says it isn’t so……. Find yourself before you think you found the rules to this house

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Post it yesterday afternoon (Saturday)

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Ok I appreciate you checking even though you probably have better things to do. Have a great week.

Artie Medley
Commenter
Member

False. For everything you just said the Atheist has no answer for, you provide only one answer…and yet it is an answer that has no merit. It is made up…a proverbial crutch. I can explain how the solar system formed. I can explain how a caterpillar becomes a butterfly. And while I’m on the subject of butterflies, metamorphoses are literally the transformation from one thing into another…that’s science.
What the believer chooses to ignore is that possibility and plausibility play key roles in skepticism. They’re not allowed to be skeptical, which really sucks.
Is there a Creator? Maybe, but I doubt it.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Artie Medley, I too can explain the process of metamorphosis. What I said is you.can’t get from the caterpillar to the butterfly using evolution.

Jim Roberts
Commenter
Member

Me thinks Warren drank of the poisoned kool aid. Don is correct. what he said doesn’t make sense.

Don Chesnut
Commenter
Member

That makes no sense.

Warren Kincaid
Commenter
Member

The only reason that science could develop in the modern sense is because the previous religious views of Christianity changed. Because God created something real and measurable, “science” could be trusted to give real and measurable answers. The birth of modern science doesn’t stand opposed to biblical Christianity, it exists because of it.

Warren Kincaid
Commenter
Member

You are close. Science isn’t simply a result of the natural universe as God created it. It is “created man’s” trust and freedom within it to explore with confidence. In other words… God doesn’t lie. What He created… He created. Not just the material, but the power (and systems) behind the material. This includes how we relate to our reality as well (metaphysical). We are not separate from our world looking at it through science…. we are part of it at the same time.

Delbert Blanton
Commenter
Member

God is bullshit. But, I like my paid Easter and Christmas Holidays so keep your atheist propaganda to yourself. If you need to be around each other (just like Believers) and reinforce your atheism then do it quietly.. Yes, I am an atheist, too; but, like I said, I like those paid Bible Holidays. If you keep spreading your arrogant (I’m not arrogant like the idiot Christopher Hitchens who was “on a mission” to let everyone know that God is Dead) atheism to everyone else, I’m not with you. Let the idiots believe their bullshit. Jesus got me two paid weeks off work this past year. Oh, and it doesn’t bother me at all that the Christians take care of the poor and homeless in their many Missions in inner-cities throughout America. If they “wise-up” and realize that their Bible is bullshit, they might stop doing that.

Delbert Blanton
Commenter
Member

No, the charity and goodwill organization that you mentioned are International. not USA local. In other words, money to Doctors Without Boarders and UNICEF would do nothing for the homeless in the inner-cities of the USA. Such homeless are taken care of Christians, only. You obviously don’t live in the States. But, you do admit that paid-for Bible Holidays are good. So, some good does come from a Lie. Very interesting. As far as George Bush, fuck the bastard. But, you seem as stubborn in your Empiricism as he is in his bullshit religion. As for Islam, it is bullshit, too. Yet it provides a serious societal structure which helps not hurts such countries where Islam predominates. In other words, if the bullshit Christianity and Islam and Judaism religions were eliminated, just like erased, over night, a lot more bad would be done by eliminating these lies than good. This is difficult for some people to see. I know what you mean by the Christian Zionist. Yes, it is likely that crazy Trump will be their puppet and use nukes in the ME, maybe on Iran. Nevertheless, the lies of religion are not completely worthless, even though they are lies. In the USA, I have nothing bad to say about the “passive” Christians who take care of the poor and give me paid holidays. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1540852989/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1482198979&sr=1-1&keywords=delbert+blanton

Joe Davis
Commenter
Member

No I have read plenty. All the reading in the world will not enlighten you or make your mind find the answer you are searching for. It starts with your spirit. Your mind will never just Get it like a light bulb going off. Your spirit is restless though for it is not content. It challenges the believer which illustrates this. My mind works like yours though am I understand. Without proof all is questionable. However I had an experience. If there is no God than in your dark room you have nothing to fear but to ask him to reveal himself to you. You loose nothing.

Joe Davis
Commenter
Member

If you do not believe in God than go move on. If you keep bring up than it evident from ones behavior that it’s not a dead issue to you. Which means you are not sure.

Dan Mathews
Commenter
Member

You have not read enough!

Delbert Blanton
Commenter
Member

I agree 100 percent. I am an atheist, but I never mention the subject, God or No God. I only do if someone starts preaching to me. These Public Atheist seem to need to reinforce their non-belief over-and-over, like they aren’t true atheist.

Joe Davis
Commenter
Member

Please do not let religious extremist, people who use religion as a political tool compromise the desire for your spirit to know God. For our spirit to have comprehension of the larger spirit God has nothing truly to do with our life style choices or belonging to any fraternity. Physics has yet to crack the riddle of the soul but what separates us from any other species is mental contiousness. Many people over the ages recognize another contiousness which is spiritual. Our mental minds have a problem because it is beyond it but many can feel it and I do not mean emotionally. If you find yourself relaxed and reach out to this spiritual energy through prayer only then can it find you. To feed the mind in understanding I use the gospels. Do not let the dogma of the ignorant stray you from your path. Note science is not the enemy of your spirit path it is just what we can explain what we are physically in. It’s the best our minds can put togeather and should be appreciated. Do not let the black hearts of man destroy your path. Take care.

John Wayne
Commenter
Member

The Greatest TOOL within the Game of DIVIDE and CONTROL of the Slaves, Religion.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Two things the atheist cannot get around regarding the Bible. The Bible has the best solution to all human conflict and personal interaction. The found in Biblical principles are always the best for the individual and the society at.large. For example both sides of the minimum wage are addressed in the Bible. The Bible says employers should pay a fair wage and the.employee should put in a days work for his.wages. To violate either of these principles is a violation of the Commandment “Thou shall.not steal “. The second thing an atheist cannot get around is the accuracy of Biblical prophecies. Besides giving us a representation of the progression of world empires and an accurate description of what happened after Alexander the great died, Daniel the prophet tells us the exact day Jesus Christ would ride into Jerusalem prior to his crucifixion. These prophecies were translated into Greek 300 years before Christ was born. Justin the martyr, in his work the FIRST APOLOGY, goes into some detail about how GOD as revealed in the bible is the only god in world religions that has told us what he was going to do and then reach down into human history and make what was predicted actually happen. I will leave the atheists with a challenge. Take a polygraph that asks if you believe in GOD. You will find that no matter… Read more »

John Wayne
Commenter
Member

Psalms 137.9, “Happy shall he be, that Taketh and Dasheth the little ones against the stones.”

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Typical. Take things out of context.

Billy Hyland
Commenter
Member

Fictional things taken out of context are still fictional.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

John Wayne, you might want to go back to literature class. They might be able to help you recognize a hyperbole when you read one. If you presented the whole passage everyone should be able to understand the last verse in Psalms 137 is referring the complete destruction of the wicked Babylonians.

Your attempt to misrepresent the Bible to make a point against the Bible ‘s teaching would be funny if it weren’t so sad.

Romans 1: 18 – 32 has good insight into this discussion. This section tells about the mind of a person who rejects the knowledge of GOD and a warning for those who reject GOD.

Many people quote John 3 : 16 but my dad taught me verse 17 is just as important. “For GOD did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the through him.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Billy Hyland, let me know how my challenge works out for you. Your mind may reject the knowledge of GOD but your soul knows the truth.

Billy Hyland
Commenter
Member

Joe Roever I sort of see where you think the existence of god is debateable though the fact there is no proof after thousands of years would seem to argue against it. However the bible being a mix of stolen history and whatever a lot of different people chose to put in it makes it just manipulated propoganda with a heavy confirmation bias. It provides no proof and even what it thinks is proof is simply faith. Faith without proof is simply just wishful thinking.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Billy Hyland, I am not sure where you learned the Bible is stolen history. The Bible has three main themes, GOD created everything, mankind rebelled against God’s authority, and GOD has given us a way to restore our relationship with Him.

The Bible tells us how GOD.chose Abraham to reveal the plan of salvation through Jesus Christ. The history in the Bible is the record of GOD interacting with his chosen people. Why were they chosen some might ask? The Bible says they were chosen so the world could see the blessings of GOD on those who follow Him.

The record in the Bible shows how GOD blessed the Jews when they were obedient and brought judgment when they were not.

God’s salvation plan is prophecied in the 3rd chapter of the Bible and the entire Old Testament contains prophecies that come to pass in Jesus Christ. All of the Old Testament prophecies were translated to Greek 300 years before the birth of Jesus Christ including the one that gives the exact day Jesus Christ would ride into Jerusalem prior to his crucifixion.

Truth is a powerful thing. It remains true even if no one believes it.

Nelson Clark
Commenter
Member

Some folks are just not ready to be atheists and that’s okay so long as it doesn’t affect my right not to believe in their dogma and keep it out of government!

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

If we don’t use biblical principles as a basis for our laws, whose values do you recommend we adopt?

Nelson Clark
Commenter
Member

The constitution!

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Nelson Clark, here are a couple of things you didn’t learn in civics class. Our constitution reflects biblical principles. The three branches of government reflect GOD himself. GOD is the law giver, He is the king, and He is the judge of all things. The you have the pursuit of happiness. You should examine Blackstone’s commentary on British law from which this legal term originated. Basically it says as a created being we can only find true happiness when doing the will of our creator and we should have the freedom to follow his will first our life. Just to name a couple of Biblical principles.

Nelson Clark
Commenter
Member

Here’s something you seem to have over looked, and that is a clear separation of church and state as dictated in the constitution!

Nelson Clark
Commenter
Member

How is God a law writer, where is the original text written in it’s hand?? As for all the holy texts, they were written by human hands in an effort to subjugate and oppress the weak minded.

Vanessa N Taco
Commenter
Member

Joe

Angel Molina
Commenter
Member

Thank you atheistic, agnostic, science for developing the weapons of mass destruction that threaten all life on this planet with extinction !

Ronald Scott Colson
Commenter
Member

Nonsensical statement! Los Alamos scientists who developed the atomic bomb had their own chapel so that they wouldn’t have to leave the facility to worship their imaginary friend in the sky!

Angel Molina
Commenter
Member

Nonsensical statement on your part, because the majority of scientists who deal with questions of origins and worship science as their God or religion are atheistic or agnostic !

J Michael Powell
Commenter
Member

Angel Molina good thing there has never ben in human history religious conflict and war with the total ecxtermination of the non believers of a dogma being the goal. And even sometimes attained./S

Angel Molina
Commenter
Member

J Michael Powell, the problem with you nonbelievers is that you observe something that is true and draw a wrong conclusion from it, yes religion has been the source of much evil, violence, and war, but God and his word in the Bible is always above that, in fact you will be surprise to know that the greatest critic of religion in general and Christianity in particular is the Holy Bible, just read the new testament and you will find out, in other words, the Bible beat all critics of religion and Christianity by 2,000 years, so this is hardly a new revelation by any means. True religion and Christianity have nxotc failed, they simply have not been tried yet. God himself will see to it that they will be tried with awesome success in the near future !

Marty Brink
Commenter
Member

Angel Molina Instead of pretending you are right and everyone else in the world is wrong,why don’t you just spend a few hours reading about Evolution. Watch this video ” What Darwin Never Knew” You can find it on google. it explains how the evolutionary process works. Then you will know the truth and you can forget your faith and bible.

Angel Molina
Commenter
Member

Marty Brink, I don’t need to pretend I’m right, because I know I’m right. I have proven it to myself. I also don’t need to read up on evolution, because I have already done that and found it to be nothing but a fairy tale for adults with no evidence, maybe you are the one sir who should stop pretending you are right or will it take God himself to wake you up of your dull drums !

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

With all the.science available and starting with an existing bacteria cell, has any scientist been able to change a plasmid DNA to a chromosomal DNA structure necessary for the evolutionary hypothesis to work?

Marshall Schoenke
Commenter
Member

Good stuff but it starts out with a lie saying science has done all this and not religion….. Well you are out of your mind because there have been thousands of great scientists that have come from every religion around and have made absolutely awesome progress and advancement for sciences. Many drugs have been discovered by scientists that went out to religions and their medicine men to get the formulas only to turn around and say they invented them thru science and not the religious way of STEM….. The priests were the medicine men, healers and the officials say long before science and Copernicus made their awesome incredible theories that are still not proven but we must follow their guess!
So yes in the beginning , we have truth to be an atheist you have to be self aggrandizing …..
,like saying science has done more than religion , (that’s self aggrandizing)comes from a little brat who only thinks fairy tales of religion and no full realization for its basis of family and traditions or how it has civilized many children to learn in a non hostile environment …..so they learn from the ancients of religion and the new science they all came up with..Oh yea there are radicals but science to has its dark radicals too so let’s not swing with out being ready…..

Everett Christ Christenson
Commenter
Member

I agree. The Islamic faith in particular during the middle ages. It’s egocentric to say people of faith made no contribution to science. Those of the metaphysical naturalist pursuation build a false dicotomy between faith and science. This does not minimize that horrific things have been done in the name of faith, or religion. In this regard I totally agree with them.

G Michael Cochran
Commenter
Member

What is correct to say is that people of faith (and different ones) have done science (and in many cases, good science). It is also plausible to posit that the tenets and writings of religion have done little or nothing to contribute directly to the the advance of science.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Consider the laws given to Moses. Many are contrary to the medicinal thoughts of the day and are consistent with modern medical procedures on cleanliness and hygiene.

Everett Christ Christenson
Commenter
Member

Atheism is a faith system. Metaphysical naturalism.

Ross Buck
Commenter
Member

No. atheism is not a faith. Atheism is the question on whether or not you can demonstrate the existence of God.

The refusal or inability to provide that evidence and still assert the existence of God is faith.

Everett Christ Christenson
Commenter
Member

It has all the components of faith. In fact it is impossible to live on this earth without faith. You respond to me because you beleive that I will understand you and perhaps respond to you.

Mike McBride
Commenter
Member

Wrong. He responded to you based on demonstrated evidence (your initial post and your participation in this thread) that you were likely to understand and respond to him. Faith is to believe something WITHOUT evidence. Atheism is not faith. It’s the rejection of a claim based on the claim’s LACK of evidence. “Atheism is faith” comes from the same place as “I didn’t evolve from no monkey” and “How can there be global warming if it’s 20 degrees in Texas today?” You’re changing the definition of something that either makes you uncomfortable or that you don’t understand and basing your critique of it on that faulty definition.

Luis H. Ramos
Commenter
Member

Everett Christ Christenson your argument is absurd, you don’t need to be an atheist to see it. It’s impossible to live without oxygen or water or food or shelter, but you can live without faith of any kind. Transfer for a moment the conversation from God to Unicorns. You can’t prove that they don’t exist, so how can not believing in unicorns be construed as faith?

Everett Christ Christenson
Commenter
Member

Mike McBride, then he believed he would somehow benefit from reading the post. Even in metaphysical naturalism, those who practice such believe that their research will somehow benefit either themselves or others. I speak not of the content of the faith, but faith as a principle. It is impossible to live on this earth without faith in something.

Everett Christ Christenson
Commenter
Member

Luis H. Ramos, you believe water or food will satisfy hunger, or if you need air breathe? Faith is pinnacle to our existence on this earth. Or how about the need for friendship? If I’m with such and such a person, or if I talk to such and such a person, it makes me feel better. And so we believe such will happen and we seek for it.

John Termaten
Commenter
Member

Everett Christ Christenson I have not faith that water exist, I have knowledge it does, the same for air, To have faith is believing without evidence. Therefore, I do not believe there is a god, and so I have no faith that he does exist.

Everett Christ Christenson
Commenter
Member

John Termaten, a note of clarification. I am not trying to get into a pissing contest with my atheist cohabitators. I find this type of discussion helpful. It helps me think of things I normally would not. How do you know that water exists? It seems a nonsensical question, but really, how do you know that water exists? Or for that matter, how do you know that I exist?

Bob Hardcastle
Commenter
Member

Yes. I believe in science, not mythology!

Donald Cole
Commenter
Member

Wrong! “A” is an prefix meaning “not”. Atheist simply means not theist. Faith is not required to be not or non theist.

Everett Christ Christenson
Commenter
Member

Donald Cole, I don’t understand what you mean. If you’re saying that atheists don’t have faith, my response is that all have faith. The content of faith differs, but all have faith.

Marty Brink
Commenter
Member

Everett Christ Christenson Get some help!

Everett Christ Christenson
Commenter
Member

Marty Brink, I need all the help I can get. Thanks for your concern.

Chris Morales
Commenter
Member

Can’t believe I’m not in this pic. Hitch bummed that smoke from me

Daniel Wyatt
Commenter
Member

it isn’t possible to prove God does not exist. There are 7 billion lives on the planet and tell everyone their personal experiences dont matter. This page is sick, arrogant and clueless.

John Termaten
Commenter
Member

Why are you here? Or is only your believe that is important. I will never call your believes sick, arrogant, and clueless. Why would I. If I would do that, then all I have created is a form of I’m right you are wrong.

Donald Cole
Commenter
Member

The burden of proof lies with those making the claim god exists. You can neither prove or disprove a negative. Logic 101.

George W. Serbia
Commenter
Member

Donald Cole Especially when their claims come with so many strings attached. First they come at you with the “god loves you line”, then once they hook you, comes the endless lists of “thou shalt”s and “thou shalt not”s. Which is when religion reveals what it really is, a man-made construct whose purpose is the same as every other. The quest for power, money and control

Marty Brink
Commenter
Member

Daniel Wyatt, To some degree, you are right. On the other hand, it isn’t possible to prove that god is real either. NO ONE since the begining of time has ever been able to prove that a creator ever existed. Science has proven that Evolution is real. Why do people like you continue to discredit evolution and science. All it takes to realize the truth is to Google evolution and do some reading. watch this video. ” What Darwin Never Knew” You can find it on google. This video will explain how the evolutionary process works. Evolution is no longer a theory. it’s real. I am not exactly sure of what you mean when you say peoples personal experiences. Imagination does not count in the real world. The only thing that matters is the truth,not faith. Faith is delusional.

David Padilla
Commenter
Member

Jesus is the truth he ated i am the truth.

David Padilla
Commenter
Member

Stop using science for you foolish view. Science has a basic foundation on god not antigod. In the very hebrew letters you fond god and jesus. In the beginning there is a beginning

David Padilla
Commenter
Member

There is a us constitution that gives us the right to what we can say. I have no problem with the issue of god you have the problem. Proof of god israel city oof jerusalem and jesus

Michael Branscum
Commenter
Member

That was very well written and absolutely selfless. Whoever wrote the post, nice work. I’ll check out the codex.

Geoff Willcher
Commenter
Member

This is a load of bs. There is no Truth. There are well supported descriptions of reality or not.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

There is no truth is a self contradictory statement. If we assume the statement is correct, then it would be true making it an incorrect statement.

Dan Carelli
Commenter
Member

An Atheist, Vegan, and Cross-fitter walk into a bar…..

Harold Sumption
Commenter
Member

Sit down, have a beer, laugh, joke…

Tremayne Brown
Commenter
Member

Where does the human consciousness come from, in the mind if the an atheist?

Michael Branscum
Commenter
Member

I have a strange feeling this thread will stay silent. Bahaha. People defending faith have baffled me for years. Decades actually.

Tremayne Brown
Commenter
Member

I don’t have to defend anything that I choose to believe to you, Michael Branscum, nor do you have to, to me. I’m not the typical “brimstone hurler” that you probably get off on belittling, I just asked a question.
I wanted a point of view, and got one.

Ross Buck
Commenter
Member

I don’t think there is a standard answer for atheists about the problem of consciousness. An atheist could be a substance monist or substance dualist.

A naturalist would probably explain consciousness as arising or emerging from brain states.

That is an interesting and thought provoking question Tremayne Brown.

Harold Sumption
Commenter
Member

Consciousness is the functioning of the brain, nothing more. There is no consciousness seperate from the organism.

Tremayne Brown
Commenter
Member

I did find your answer satisfactory. I wasn’t looking for a debate, I genuinely wanted to hear what you thought, and you gave it to me.

Carr McClain
Commenter
Member

Enjoyed your essay. But you illustrate yourself how difficult it is to stick by the principles you outline. After pointing out tje existence of “thousands of gods”, and the difficulty this poses for theists who want to make a reasoned argument for a particular one, you write : “Global Warming is real and its man-made, but like virtually every other scientific discovery in human history, these facts have been deliberately opposed by many theists (most of whom of whom won’t trouble themselves to try to understand how we know this), impeding our response to what may well be one of the greatest challenges mankind has ever faced…” There are currently a number of scientific models for predicting global temperatures over the next decades. Some (such as the prediction in Al Gore’s movie that New York would be under water by now) have already been proven wrong. Belief in different models would suggest support for different public policies. Which model do you believe in, and why? What policies are compatible with “reason” in this case? What — or who — am I still permitted to be skeptical of regarding what the climate will look like in, say, 50 years? Whose predictions regarding the climate 50 years from now must I consider authoritative, and whose must I dismiss today? On what evidence? When does skepticism about which climate “model”, and its accompanying… Read more »

Alexander Smyles
Commenter
Member

If you believe and preach fine but to bully others with govt laws!

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Alexander Smyles, I challenge you to name one biblical principle that is not the best for both the individual and society at large. I will grant there are biblical principles that restrict behavior some people may choose to do. However, those behaviors are detrimental to themselves and others.

Jason Carper
Commenter
Member

Joe Roever i choose Leviticus thats says i may sell.my daughter into sex slavery. You should really read the bible it is bs and very sick

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Humanist Codex, what was God’s judgment of the Amalalekites about?

When we consider this we must consider it from God’s perspective. First the Amalekites had been worshiping false gods for at least as long as the Israelites were in Egypt, over 400 years. Second, as part of the false god worship, the Amalekites conducted child sacrifice by burning them alive. Third, the Amalekites attacked the Israelites from behind where the very old and very young would have been as the Israelites were on their wilderness journey.

If I understand correctly the Amalekites and the Amorites are the same people group. The bible tells us, in Genesis 15:14, the sin of the Amorites is not full hinting of future judgment. So my question is not why did God judge the Amalekites, my question is why did he allow them to kill their children in fires of molek for over 400 years before taking action? The answer to this question is simple it is the same reason he agreed to spare Sodom and Gomorrah for the sake of any righteous men living in those cities. When none were found except Lot, Lot was removed from Sodom before it was destroyed.

This also makes me wonder when his judgment will come for all the babies America kills while they are in their mother’s womb.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Jason Carpet, specific verses are helpful if you want an explanation.

Alexander Smyles
Commenter
Member

I can’t, that is why religion is important. I have a relationship with God. So do you, but I will de damned if I bullied you with the government to force you to worship God the same way I do.

Alexander Smyles
Commenter
Member

If you believe and preach fine but to bully others with govt laws?!

Thom Schultz
Commenter
Member

Regarding the op, Does “standing on the shoulders of others” mean anything to y’all?

Thom Schultz
Commenter
Member

My reference was to the claim that science has done so much in 300 years as opposed to religion/philosophy for 10,000 years. If not for the work of people like Plato, Aristotle, Philo, Augustine, Aquinas, William of Occam, Bacon, Copernicus, Descartes, Leibniz and other giants of religion/philosophy, there would be no modern science.
Standing on the shoulders and taking false credit.

David Parr
Commenter
Member

The existence or non-existence of God cannot be proven by anyone on this planet. Both positions require faith but as we all know faith does not make truth.

Kyle Flett
Commenter
Member

To believe with certainty that there is no God or gods would require faith. however, the notion that there does not appear to be or have been any God or gods is for many, myself included, an evidenced based position

Carr McClain
Commenter
Member

One cannot — and need not — prove a negative. To be a skeptic, or an “atheist”, you don’t need to have an affirmative argument that there can’t be a god. You just have to argue that as of Jaunary, 2017, the evidence for any god roughly matches the evidence for unicorns.

David Parr
Commenter
Member

Carr McClain … Your post proves your faith in your belief which is just your choice.

David Parr
Commenter
Member

Kyle Flett … gobledygook double talk

Jon Mccoy
Commenter
Member

Haha ^^^

David Parr
Commenter
Member

Athiest Codex … semantics isn’t justification … are you saying you’re an atheist because you can’t prove whether or not God exist so it’s likely that he/she/it doesn’t?

Marty Brink
Commenter
Member

David Parr Watch this video, ” What Darwin Never Knew”. The video was produced by Nova Science PBS. Seriously,watch it. You will have all your doubts answered.

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

David Parr, Atheist Codec is correct the atheist position is not a faith based idea. It is a willful act of defiance and rejection of the knowledge of GOD.

Ric Groenendal
Commenter
Member

If people want to worship something real, alive and breathing….I give you Mother Earth. Now stop raping and pillaging her.

Dean Durham
Commenter
Member

Right on!

Joe Roever
Commenter
Member

Romans 1:25, “They exchanged the truth about GOD for a lie and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator.

Ric Groenendal
Commenter
Member

Stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. Religious trolls are the worst. You may feel entitled..I just consider you a moron…for believing in fairy tales…religion is a man-made product used as a method of control. I see the bible as a ghastly, morbid novel, nothing more.