Dawkins’ argument against the existence of Me

February 8, 2008

Yes, I’ve been busy, so busy in fact that I’ve not had time to “god blog” (and for those of you thinking “hey, I thought You had infinite capacity!”, my answer to you is “I do infinite capacity, I’m just making up an excuse – I do that sometimes”).

Now, on to the latest doomed attempt by the non-believers to logic Me out of existence. Barney87 posted the argument popularized by that pesky Richard “Prove it to me” Dawkins:

1) Complex entities can come into existence in three ways: either by design, evolution or chance.

2) God is a complex entity.

3) God cannot have been designed.

4) God cannot have evolved.

5) Therefore, God must have come into existence by chance.

6) The probability of a being spontaneously coming into existence with the remarkable properties of God (omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence) is extremely slight.

7) Therefore, God’s existence is extremely improbable.

Improbable, Mr R Dawkins, but not impossible. That’s no winning argument – in fact it’s a blatant admission that I might exist. And I blog too, but just because it is seems highly improbable that I blog, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, yet here you are reading this post, written effortlessly (and without spellchecker turned on) by the Creator Myself.

So since Mr Dawkins is practically admitting I exist (I accept his apology), let’s state here a more graceful and infallible argument that proves My wonderful existence, quoted from the blaspheming John Allen Paulos’ new book “Irreligion“:

  1. Something – the diversity of lifeforms, the beauty of the outdoors, the stars, the fine structure constants – is much to complex (or too perfect) to have come about randomly or by sheer accident.
  2. This something must have been the handiwork of some creator (yours truly).
  3. Therefore God (er, Me), exists.

It doesn’t get much simpler or obviously correct than this. Matter settled…next!


Atheists…in Churches???

July 28, 2007

We need more folks like “Jerry” who has taken issue with a so-called “Friendly Atheist” who had the sheer audacity to accept an invitation by Pastor Randy Frazee to speak at the Willow Creek Community Church about his…wait for it…his non-beliefs!

Jerry rants:

“Well, isn’t that nice! Instead of gathering a group of seekers and telling them about the Gospel, they gathered some seekers and told them about atheism.

Yes, he actually TOLD seekers about atheism!!! Jerry rants on…

“The reply comments at this blog are quite telling.”

Oh indeed they are…comments like this

“I thought you were very articulate, and I greatly appreciated your courage to go to a church and share your beliefs with everyone.”

Or this:

“I was there last night and really appreciated your prespective on church and Christians. We learned a lot.”

We learned a lot??? How dare they, eh, Jerry! What is the world coming to?

And what about this?

“I think if people didn’t have doubts and struggle with their faith they would have to be brain dead”

Offense!

But the really caustic comment, the one that Jerry is so righteously concerned about, is this comment left by a lady called “Lee”:

“Funny, the challenge statement Randy made about knowing what you believe and why you believe it is the same one that led me down the path to atheism. The preacher at the church I attended at that time had made the same challenge to the congegation in our church and I took him up on it… and here I am today… an atheist. “

This is what Jerry is warning you about! Back to Jerry’s post, where he assures us he gets the point :

“Listen, I get the point, but isn’t this just a little (or a lot) absurd? Is it necessary to hear from an atheist what he does and doesn’t like about church and Christians? Are we then supposed to change to please him and other atheists in the (vain) hope that they might suddenly, because we are more friendly, have better window dressings, or less emphasis on actually believing in something, start worshiping God? Am I the only one who sees something seriously wrong with this? Isn’t this just ‘atheism evangelism’?”

I mean, really??!! The very notion of hearing someone’s point of view that may be different to your own and to discuss ideas and perspectives that differ to yours are nothing short of contemptible. In a House of God, no less???? Keep fighting the Good Fight, Jerry!!


Blame God (er, Me), Not Global Warming

July 28, 2007

Blame God (er, Me), Not Global Warming. That’s what Harry (a) Gaylord says, and he is of course 100% correct.

“If you’ve been paying attention to the weather news lately, there has been severe flooding in many parts of the world, including here in the U.S. In some areas, rainfall records are being broken. From Texas to the UK, Sudan, Nepal, and China, these floods are destroying property, infrastructure, and lives. “

Well, you might have heard this news if you’ve just been paying attention to “the news”, not just the weather news, but whatever…get to the point…

“So why are all of these crazy weather patterns taking place? Could it be because of the much-publicized global warming? Is the flooding because of people cutting down too many trees and creating too many roads for the expansion of civilization? Or is it that all of this is God’s way of sending a message to us?”

Aha…now we’re getting to the Truth of the matter!

“Personally, I’m not one who holds to the global warming doctrine.”

That’s right, because global warming is a doctrine.

The Gaylord goes on…

“People can be as hysterical as they want to try to get everyone believing that we’re destroying the Earth with too much carbon dioxide or whatever, but the Bible clearly says in Revelation that God himself will be responsible for Earth’s destruction after the Antichrist’s rise to power.

…I can understand that in some instances people may lay too much concrete and not plant enough trees to absorb the water, thereby opening themselves up to the possibility of destruction.”

You can? What’s wrong with you. You’re on thin ice, I tell thee…

“However, I think the idea that God is punishing people for their sins may not be out of line.”

Ah, that’s more like it…go on…

“With all the atrocities China has committed in recent years selling their unsafe products, forcing abortions on women, and persecuting Christians, it’s no surprise that they are the hardest hit of all the areas that have flooded. “

That’s right! The Heathens are to blame, for they are the Misbehaved, the Non-Believers, actively seeking to destroy Christianity. Therefore they are the ones who deserve a good old fashioned flooding, destroying their miserable sinning lives!

And China is just but one example. But, Gaylord* is not a mindless idiot. He’s a thinker! Look –

“I haven’t quite figured out why Great Britain or Texas are suffering, so I’ll have to keep investigating to find out, I guess. The sad part about these judgments is that I don’t think these people will learn anything from their punishments.”

Gaylord, think no more! I can tell you precisely why I’ve been wrecking places like the UK, Texas and Katrina – and it’s got nothing to do with so-called “weather” (pfff), it’s because the residents have not been praying enough! The UK is a largely secular state and doomed to Hell. Texans are known for enjoying their BBQs more than abstinence and Katrina, well Katrina residents couldn’t afford those really fancy churches I love, so that’s their punishment.

Now stop blogging, and start praying!

* Frankly, your surname is verging on the blasphemous – Harry…consider a surname change or you might very find your own kitchen under a rather large volume of nasty toxic sewage water I’ve been saving for the Nepalese. As you know, I work in mysterious ways…


Sacred Beliefs Are Just That

July 28, 2007

Non-theists are perplexed when Believers take offense to ideas that challenge the Believers’ beliefs. This quote from Douglas Noël Adams (DNA) encapsulates the rationale for the offense:

‘Here is an idea or a notion that you’re not allowed to say anything bad about; you’re just not. Why not? – because you’re not!’

He’s right of course. You can argue about anything else that you like (within reason), but you can’t argue about the existence Me.

But the question we shall explore here, is Why Not? Well, because you’re not! OK, but Why Not?

Well, answering the question beyond “Why Not” leads to a slippery slope for My Believers. As an example, if a Believer starts accepting the notion that it’s OK to discuss the rationale of My very existence, this only opens their mind to other ideas, and that can only lead to trouble. And as I have revealed to you previously, the idea of opening your mind to a rational discussion about My existence based on reason is an abhorrent idea, as it breaches the sacredness of your beliefs.

Let Me explain. Religion is a closed system. It is a closed system in the sense it must be protected from outside “intellectual” interference (read: Devilish thoughts). This protection is provided to you, by Me, through the notion that certain beliefs are simply sacred. The belief you have in Me is one of those sacred beliefs. And if this belief is sacred, it means that it may not be meddled with, questioned nor discussed at the dinner table (or anywhere else for that matter). The sacredness of your belief in Me therefore remains sacred. And if it remains sacred, it remains protected from outside “intellectual” interference. And the Truth of the matter is that without the sacred nature of your belief in Me the whole house of cards begins to collapse (or so the Heathens believe).

And so take heed of Mr Adam’s answer, as it is self-evidently correct and is the only possible answer you can provide to a Heathen without opening up a nasty can of worms that will eventually eat you up and burn you for all eternity.


God is Not Violent (well, just a little bit, sometimes).

July 28, 2007

Atheists often attack the “evil mumbo-jumbo” believed by My followers. And it’s time to put a stop to it, I Tell Thee!

The fact is, My sheep, you are not doing nearly enough to argue your case! However, there are some of you that are trying (in some cases, very trying). For example, let’s take Derek Whose Mind Is Twisted’s latest post as a splendid example of how you can argue against the idea that I’m a Bad Dude.

Derek starts:

“A lot of people today call Christianity violent. In this poll, most people think that Christianity is violent in practice. I still have no idea why people consider Christianity to be violent.”

To counter this fallacy, he quotes from Deuteronomy 13 Deu 13:1-5 (a chapter from My #1 Bestseller, available at all Good bookstores now), which Derek accurately summarizes:

“Think about it though. If a false prophet comes into Israel and turns many people away from God, therefore subjecting them to eternal torture in hell, wouldn’t it be better if that person were dead, rather than all the Israelites subject to the same fate?”

OK, I’ve thought about it…Of course it would be! How could anyone doubt this? Anyone (especially a false prophet) that turns my True Believers away from Me is better off dead. That means all the atheists too (let’s face it, you can’t get more false prophecies from anyone else). Apart from the fact that all my False Prophets are equally “wrong” or equally “right” depending on which side of which fence you happen to be sitting on, where’s the debate here?

And then reassuringly, Derek’s twisted mind reminds all you miserable sinners:

“A point to make is that no matter what God does, people will always refuse Him (until God destroys the earth, that is).”

So, at the end of the day, it’s all going to be OK. And then this mortal with My-Given genius concludes:

“That’s another reason God can kill people: We deserve it. Actually, we deserve worse, and this all results in supporting Christianity. Odd how an atheistic accusation will do that.”

I just don’t see how the Heathen can make a case against this piercing logic.

Update 7-28-07 – Derek has now changed his post without notifying his readers that he has done so. He also removed the trackback. See comments below.


Catholic missionaries invade Second Life

July 28, 2007

 It turns outs that Catholic missionaries really do believe in the Second Life.

“Catholic missionaries have always trekked to dangerous parts of the Earth to spread the word of God — now they are being encouraged to go into the virtual realm of Second Life to save virtual souls.”

There are plenty of potential converts in the Second Life, with around 8 million residents (mostly infidels just waiting to get mopped up by the zealots). This acts as a reminder to all you non-believers –  just because you might have escaped This Life it doesn’t mean that you can escape Me and my flock, as a Jesuit “academic”,Antonio Spadaro points out:

“While the virtual world might be a refuge for some people seeking to flee the real one, it is also full of people seeking something more from life, including, possibly, religious enlightenment, he said. 

Go Forth and Virtualize!

Via Innocent Bystanders.


The commandments are good rules to live by

July 27, 2007

I bid you Good (but not very “new”) news, My Loyal Believers!!

It has been confirmed that a Ten Commandments monument placed outside City Hall in Fargo, N.D., will remain on the lawn thanks to thousands of the Pious residents who said, “Enough is enough,” when the City Commission recently voted to move it.

To cut a long story short, the local community forced the City Commission to reverse its decision to remove it from the front of the City Hall. Warren Ackley, a businessman who led the petition drive (and who is now guaranteed a place by My side when his time is over in Fargo) explains:

“Common sense in the heartland prevailed…It’s a pretty innocent marker. The commandments are good rules to live by.”

The commandments are good rules to live by. No truer words spoken, Mr Ackley! But there is the small problem regarding which of My 10-14 Various Commandments are in and which are out according to different religions, and therefore how “correct” the monument is, as the following table from Wikipedia illustrates:

10 Commandments

And then there is the insolence of the Heathens. They might agree in principle with the Commandments that have been enshrined into the Law of most civilized countries (e.g. “Thou shalt not steal”, “Thou shalt not murder”, etc.) but these ghastly atheists would obviously object to having the”rules” that Mr Ackley reminds us are good rules to live by, but have no relevance to the non-believers. The non-believers believe that the religiously grounded Commandments should not be shoved down their insolent throats (e.g. “Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy” and “Thou shalt have no other gods before me”). But who cares what they think, since they simply don’t accept My Commandment numero uno – “I am the Lord thy God”. Everything else follows from there – they just don’t get it!

In utter desperation, the best the non-theists can do is to propose a second monument is laid beside the first – the Freethinkers’ Satanic monument would state,

“The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”

This Blasphemous quote is from the 1796 treaty between the United States and Tripoli, a document that is well known to be an utter fraud.