Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Follow On to Previous Post

Starting with a silly quote from Ingersoll ("A believer is a bird in a cage. A freethinker is an eagle parting the clouds with tireless wing." - actually freethinkers limit their thought process far more severely than theists), she now pretends to prove that God doesn't exist, admitting that it does not prove that at the end of her article. She claims to pray that theists will leave her alone, but it didn't work, so prayer is false and there is no God.

The author also provides reasons that "blind believers" are psychotic, with a list of what believers believe:
These comments are so generic and typical that they apply to basically any blind believer, with the emphasis on blind.
"Your time will come!" This remark could be taken two ways: The friendly interpretation is that someone is wishing me luck. The hateful interpretation is that I am being condemned to judgment by a monstrous god person.

"Eternity is a long time to be wrong!" All freethinkers have heard this retort, which is a more refined version of "You're going to hell!" This comment is psychotic, in that these blind believers believe there is a "loving" and "forgiving" god person who will hideously punish anyone who dares to question "his" existence. Obviously, we reject such an ugly concept, so this threat doesn't scare us. Also, what if YOU'RE wrong? You have condemned millions of people to hell in your thoughts and words, not to mention that, if you're a Christian, you believe the Jews are guilty of killing God! These are pretty heinous accusations, so you had better be sure that you're not wrong. Blind belief is not a win-win situation. Indeed, it is intellectually dishonest and harmful.

"When you die, you will meet your Maker and fall down on your knees before Jesus and ask His forgiveness." Ditto with the above. Why would the "omnipotent" Jesus and "His Father" be so threatened by our unbelief? Did "He/They" not provide us with intelligence? Yet, "He" wishes us to spit on "His" gift and not use it? This asinine comment also means that the hundreds of millions of Buddhists and others who don't believe in the Jewish godman are diabolical and will be severely punished. Those who subscribe to such bigotry are already living in hell.

"Have you read the Bible cover to cover?" Actually, I have, and the hypocrite who asks such a question obviously hasn't, because the Bible is full of dreadful stories about genocide, murder, adultery, incest, deceit, greed, arrogance, megalomania, sexual perversion, and all sorts of despicable behavior. On second thought, perhaps the people who ask such a question HAVE read the Bible, as we are sure it creates dementia.

"Who made you so angry?" This comment one is full of implications, and I could answer in a variety of ways. One favorite response is "Who made you so dumb?" But I could focus on the "made" part and say, "Well, God made me, so he must have made me angry." I could also point out that the question itself is extremely angry, and that those who see anger everywhere are themselves seething with anger but are repressing it and are thus not mentally balanced. Human beings SHOULD be angry, because their situation is atrocious. If there were such a god person directing everything, they should be very angry at "him," because this world is a mess and every day abominable things are happening to millions of people. Of course, the standard stupid response to this is that "God gave us free will." (See A Question of Free Will.)

"I'll pray for you!" This comment sounds like an alien language to freethinkers. It comes out something like this: "BZZZPPFFFFTTT." When interpreted, it becomes clear that the person who is making such a comment feels quite smug and superior in that he/she has chosen the RIGHT god, compared to whatever it is you do with your consciousness, such that he/she now has a direct pipeline, whereas you do not, and he/she will put in a good word for you, you lowlife scum. Since the concept of "God" is completely arbitrary, we could respond that we will pray to the Cosmic Mickey Mouse that our well-wishers become intelligent. Naturally, we are not talking about loved ones who make this heartfelt prayer comment in times of true trauma. We are addressing the condescending offer presented by missionaries and proselytizing fanatics who have never even met us but who feel they know we are sinners who need prayer to their "Father in heaven." Theirs is a rather unctuous and smarmy mentality.

Now, just in case you think I'm being a bit harsh in pronouncing these statements and sentiments psychotic, I offer up the following email--you decide. Do you truly want to live in a world dominated by this kind of mentality?

"Alas, your vile vulgarness comes out. It's obvious you and your mind belong to Satan. The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. You are a very sad excuse of a human being. You babble about things you know nothing about. The Jews aren't Christkillers. Whoever told you that. Jesus died for all of us, so we all are Christkillers.... Whether or not you like it, or admit it, you were created by God, you will be judged by God, and you will be punished by God. You can play all the games you want to until that day of judgement, but it's coming."

3 comments:

Robert Coble said...

Quoting:

"Have you read the Bible cover to cover?" Actually, I have, and the hypocrite who asks such a question obviously hasn't, because the Bible is full of dreadful stories about genocide, murder, adultery, incest, deceit, greed, arrogance, megalomania, sexual perversion, and all sorts of despicable behavior. On second thought, perhaps the people who ask such a question HAVE read the Bible, as we are sure it creates dementia.

Connecting the bold parts, we have an explanation to the question:

"Have you read the Bible cover to cover?"

And the answer, (juxtaposing the components of the reply):

Actually, I have, as we are sure it creates dementia.

Proof positive, I would deduce.

"We are Legion."

Steven Satak said...

I think people of her sort tend to slip into the royal 'we' as a sort of defense mechanism. As though by saying it they can conjure the appearance of social consensus.

As 'we' implies there is a group that agrees with her, and since she can never be called up on to provide a list of those agreeable people, she considers that as adding emphasis to whatever she chooses to write. It doesn't have to have any objective truth about it. It just has to be 'what we all agree on'.

Talk about dementia...

More and more, I think the internet is the ideal place for people of her sort. It is a place where, in all of existence, what "is" is what you make "is". Of course, that fantasy ends the minute she closes her browser... but not in her own mind.

You can't deal with them using reason. The best method I have found is to give them what they want - leave them in their echo chambers and otherwise ignore them.

Rikalonius said...

Steven Said:
I think people of her sort tend to slip into the royal 'we' as a sort of defense mechanism. As though by saying it they can conjure the appearance of social consensus.

This is exactly right. The more I read these people, here on Stan's blog or for myself, or listen to my various philosophical materialist family members (who don't even know that is what they are) the more I realize how desperate people like this are for acceptance.

They project the crutch of dependency on theists when it is they that are always seeking approval for their rebel without a clue attitudes.