Friday, August 20, 2004

Mis-Nagid August '04

Friday, August 20, 2004

Minimizing mindshare

The Home Office in Britain did a survey about the U.K.'s religious beliefs. Interestingly, they found that even though four out of five people expressed a religious affiliation, and 74% of those were Christians, they weren't very religious people. As the headline says, faith plays a minor role in lives of most white Christians (in the U.K.). From the article:

But there are signs religious affiliation made little difference to the lives of its white adherents. When asked what they considered important to their identity, religion was cited by only 17 per cent of white Christians, behind family, work, age, interests, education, nationality, gender, income and social class.

Nearly a quarter of all surveyed said they have no faith. Given how little the other three quarters care about their faith, the former quarter is sure to grow.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Friday, August 20, 2004

Plea for palliation

So, some guy thinks he found the cave of John the Baptist. Never mind if he's right, the responses of the religious are the real story. Check out this guy:

Jim Borton, senior minister of First Christian Church in New Philadelphia, said archaeological discoveries never contradict the Bible.

"There are a lot less atheists than there were 50 years ago because our science is better," Borton said. "It seems to me every time archaeology digs up something else, they find the truth."


Actually, archaeology has flatly contradicted large portions of the Bible. You know, little things like the Flood, Exodus, and Jericho. Oh, and there are more non-believers than ever before.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Friday, August 20, 2004

Obliquing the obvious

"I know one man who was impotent who gave AIDS to his wife and the only thing they did was kiss." --Pat Robertson

Of all the stupid things Pat Robertson has said, that's my favorite. How credulous do you have to be to not realize that the wife of an impotent man might have been screwing around? Or that a HIV-infected man who is impotent before his wife might be gay? Or that the story itself might be totally bogus?

Of course, Pat gives us lots of fodder for competition with that quote. Like this one:

"[The] feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."
--Pat Robertson in the Washington Post, August 23, 1993

Well, he may not know much about women, but he's a real master of science:

"In a similar manner, schizophrenia (split personality) can be a mental disease, but it can also be caused by demon possession."
--Pat Robertson, Answers pg. 116

"Scientists have shown that electrical current is generated by the human brain. According to at least one source I read, this current takes on the transmission qualities of radio signals. This explains, in some measure, why people who are very close often know what each other is thinking without spoken words being exchanged."
--Pat Robertson, Answers pg. 122

And then there's this famous exchange that took place on September 13, 2001, just two days after 9/11:

JERRY FALWELL: And I agree totally with you that the Lord has protected us so wonderfully these 225 years. And since 1812, this is the first time that we've been attacked on our soil and by far the worst results. And I fear, as Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense, said yesterday, that this is only the beginning. And with biological warfare available to these monsters - the Husseins, the Bin Ladens, the Arafats--what we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact--if, in fact--God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.

PAT ROBERTSON: Jerry, that's my feeling. I think we've just seen the antechamber to terror. We haven't even begun to see what they can do to the major population.

JERRY FALWELL: The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this.

PAT ROBERTSON: Well, yes.

JERRY FALWELL: And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way--all of them who have tried to secularize America--I point the finger in their face and say "you helped this happen."

PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government.


But let's not be too harsh! He's not different from Yechezkel:

"Son of man, when the land sinneth against me by trespassing grievously, then will I stretch out mine hand upon it, and will break the staff of the bread thereof, and will send famine upon it, and will cut off man and beast from it."
--Ezekiel 14:13

Preachers have been blaming the evils that befall men on their own "sins" since way before Falwell and Robertson entered the scene. Tanach is chock-full of such offensive pronouncements.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Friday, August 20, 2004

Funny fallacies

Blatantly stolen from:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/feedback/sep02.html

I think I've heard every one these at least 15 times.

1. TRANSCENDENTAL ARGUMENT (1) Creation is true. (2) If Creation is true, then reason must exist. (3) Reason exists. (4) Therefore, Creation is true.

2. COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (1) If I say something must have a cause, it has a cause. (2) I say the universe must have a cause. (3) Therefore, the universe has a cause. (4) Therefore, Creation is true.

3. ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (a) (1) I define God to be X. (2) Since I can conceive of X, X must exist. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

4. ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (b) (1) Creation is true. (2) Since Creation is true, God must be perfect. (3) That which is perfect must exist. (4) Therefore, Creation is true.

5. MODAL ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (1) Creation is true. (2) God, existing, is either necessary or unnecessary. (3) God is not unnecessary, therefore God must be necessary. (4) Therefore, Creation is true.

6. TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (1) Check out that tree. Isn't it pretty? (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

7. ARGUMENT FROM MIRACLES (1) My aunt Helen was most likely to die from cancer. (2) She didn't. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

8. MORAL ARGUMENT (a) (1) Person X, a well-known atheist, was morally inferior to the rest of us. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

9. MORAL ARGUMENT (b) (1) In my younger days I was a cursing, drinking, smoking, gambling, child-molesting, thieving, murdering, bed-wetting bastard. (2) That all changed once I became religious. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

10. ARGUMENT FROM CREATION (1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true, and therefore Creation is true. (2) Evolution can't be true, since I lack the mental capacity to understand it; moreover, to accept its truth would cause me to be uncomfortable (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

11. ARGUMENT FROM FEAR (1) If there is no God then we're all going to die. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

12. ARGUMENT FROM THE BIBLE (1) [arbitrary passage from OT] (2) [arbitrary passage from NT] (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

13. ARGUMENT FROM INTELLIGENCE (1) Look, there's really no point in me trying to explain the whole thing to you stupid atheists -- it's too complicated for you to understand. Creation is true whether you like it or not. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

14. ARGUMENT FROM UNINTELLIGENCE (1) Okay, I don't pretend to be as intelligent as you guys -- you're obviously very well read. But I read the Bible, and nothing you say can convince me that God does not exist. I feel him in my heart, and you can feel him too, if you'll just ask him into your life. "For God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son into the world, that whosoever believes in him shall not perish from the earth" John 3:16. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

15. ARGUMENT FROM BELIEF (1) If Creation is true, then I should believe in Him. (2) I believe in God. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

16. ARGUMENT FROM INTIMIDATION (1) See this bonfire? (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

17. PARENTAL ARGUMENT (1) My mommy and daddy told me that Creation is true. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

18. ARGUMENT FROM NUMBERS (1) Millions and millions of people believe in God. (2) They can't all be wrong, can they? (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

19. ARGUMENT FROM ABSURDITY (1) Maranathra! (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

20. ARGUMENT FROM ECONOMY (1) Creation is true, you bastards! (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

21. BOATWRIGHT'S ARGUMENT (1) Ha ha ha. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

22. DORE'S ARGUMENT (1) I forgot to take my meds. (2) Therefore, I AM CHRIST!! (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

23. ARGUMENT FROM GUITAR MASTERY (1) Eric Clapton is God. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

24. ARGUMENT FROM INTERNET AUTHORITY (1) There is a website that successfully argues for the existence of God. (2) Here is the URL. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

25. ARGUMENT FROM INCOMPREHENSIBILITY (1) Flabble glurk zoom boink blubba snurgleschnortz ping! (2) No one has ever refuted (1). (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

26. ARGUMENT FROM AMERICAN EVANGELISM (1) Telling people that Creation is true makes me filthy rich. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

27. MITCHELL'S ARGUMENT (1) The Christian Creation is true. (2) Therefore, all worldviews which don't assume the Christian God's existence are false and incomprehensible. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

28. ARGUMENT FROM BLINDNESS (a) (1) Atheists are spiritually blind. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

29. ARGUMENT FROM BLINDNESS (b) (1) God is love. (2) Love is blind. (3) Ray Charles is blind. (4) Therefore, Ray Charles is God. (5) Therefore, Creation is true.

30. ARGUMENT FROM FALLIBILITY (1) Human reasoning is inherently flawed. (2) Therefore, there is no reasonable way to challenge a proposition. (3) I propose that Creation is true. (4) Therefore, Creation is true.

31. ARGUMENT FROM SMUGNESS (1) Creation is true. (2) I don't give a crap whether you believe it or not; I have better things to do than to try to convince you morons. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

32. ARGUMENT FROM META-SMUGNESS (1) [obscenity deleted] (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

33. ARGUMENT FROM MANIFESTATIONS (1) If you turn your head sideways and squint a little, you can see an image of a bearded face in that tortilla. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

34. SLATHER'S ARGUMENT (1) My toaster is God. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

35. ARGUMENT FROM INCOMPLETE DEVASTATION (1) A plane crashed killing 143 passengers and crew. (2) But one child survived with only third-degree burns. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

36. ARGUMENT FROM POSSIBLE WORLDS (1) If things had been different, then things would be different. (2) That would be bad. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

37. ARGUMENT FROM SHEER WILL (1) I DO believe in God! I DO believe in God! I do I do I do I DO believe in God! (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

38. ARGUMENT FROM NONBELIEF (1) The majority of the world's population are nonbelievers in Christianity. (2) This is just what Satan intended. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

39. ARGUMENT FROM POST-DEATH EXPERIENCE (1) Person X died an atheist. (2) He now realizes his mistake. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

40. ARGUMENT FROM EMOTIONAL BLACKMAIL (1) God loves you. (2) How could you be so heartless to not believe in him? (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

41. ARGUMENT FROM INCOHERENT BABBLE (1) See that person spazzing on the church floor babbling incoherently? (2) That's how infinite wisdom reveals itself. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

42. OPRAH'S ARGUMENT (a) (1) The human spirit exists. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

43. OPRAH'S ARGUMENT (b) (1) Check out this video segment. (2) Now how can anyone watch that and NOT believe in God? (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

44. CALVINISTIC ARGUMENT (1) If Creation is true, then he will let me watch you be tortured forever. (2) I rather like that idea. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

45. ARGUMENT FROM CROCKERY (1) Pots don't go around giving orders to the potter. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

46. ARGUMENT FROM MASS PRODUCTION (1) Barbie dolls were created. (2) If Barbie dolls were created, then so were trees. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

47. ARGUMENT FROM PAROCHIALISM (1) God is everywhere. (2) We haven't been everywhere to prove he's not there. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

48. ARGUMENT FROM UPPERCASE ASSERTION (1) CREATION IS TRUE! GET USED TO IT! (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

49. ARGUMENT FROM INFINITE REGRESS (1) Ask atheists what caused the Big Bang. (2) Regardless of their answer, ask how they know this. (3) Continue process until the atheist admits he doesn't know the answer to one of your questions. (4) You win! (5) Therefore, Creation is true.

50. ARGUMENT FROM INCREDULITY (1) How could God NOT exist, you bozo? (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

51. ARGUMENT FROM HISTORY (1) The Bible is true. (2) Therefore, the Bible is historical fact. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

52. ARGUMENT FROM RESURRECTION (1) Proof of God's existence will be available when you rise bodily from your grave. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

53. ARGUMENT FROM BIOGENESIS (1) Where did Adam come from, dummy? (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

54. ARGUMENT FROM STEADFAST FAITH (1) A lot of really cool people believed in God their entire lives. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

55. ARGUMENT FROM LONELINESS (1) Christians say that Jesus is their best friend. (2) I'm lonely, and I want a best friend. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

56. ARGUMENT FROM ARGUMENTATION (1) Creation is true. (2) [atheist's counterargument] (3) Yes he does. (4) [atheist's counterargument] (5) Yes he does! (6) [atheist's counterargument] (7) YES HE DOES!!! (8) [atheist gives up and goes home] (9) Therefore, Creation is true.

57. ARGUMENT FROM CREATIVE INTERPRETATION (1) God is: (a) The feeling you have when you look at a newborn baby. (b) The love of a mother for her child. (c) That little still voice in your heart. (d) Humankind's potential to overcome their difficulties. (e) How I feel when I look at a sunset. (f) The taste of ice cream on a hot day. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

58. ARGUMENT FROM INSECURITY (1) We have gone to absolutely berserk lengths to establish that atheists are laughable morons. (1.5) Actually, we did so in the hopes of curing our own insecurities about theism -- but there's no chance in hell we'll ever admit that. (2) Therefore, atheists are laughable morons. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

59. ARGUMENT FROM SUPERIORITY (1) If God does not exist, then I am an inferior being, since I am not "special" in a cosmic sense. (2) But I am superior. Because I am a Christian. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

60. ARGUMENT FROM PERFECTION (1) If there are absolute moral standards, then Creation is true. (2) Atheists say that there are no absolute moral standards. (3) But that's because they don't want to admit to being sinners. (4) Therefore, there are absolute moral standards. (5) Therefore, Creation is true.

61. ARGUMENT FROM HUMAN NECESSITY (1) Atheists say that they don't need God. (2) Which just goes to show that they need God. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

62. ARGUMENT FROM HIDDEN LOGIC (a) (1) Intellectually, I know that the existence of God is impossible, or vastly improbable. (2) But I must put on the appearance of being cool and intellectual in front of my Christian apologist peers. (3) Therefore, I must pretend that (1) is false. (4) Therefore, Creation is true.

63. ARGUMENT FROM INDULGENCE (1) Atheists like to think that they can control their emotional desires. (2) But they're atheists, so they can't. (3) Therefore, atheists feel the need to indulge in whatever they feel like without worrying about committing sin. (4) This just goes to show how they need God in their lives. (5) Therefore, Creation is true.

64. ARGUMENT FROM HATE (1) Some atheists hate Christians and Christianity. (2) That's why they don't believe in God. (3) Pathetic, aren't they? (4) Therefore, Creation is true.

65. ARGUMENT FROM QUENTIN SMITH (1) Quentin Smith says that God does not exist. (2) But God does exist. (3) Therefore, Quentin Smith cannot be accepted as an expert on the matter, because he is wrong. (4) Therefore, Creation is true.

66. ARGUMENT FROM EVIL SPIRITS (1) I've just had contact with evil spirits. (2) Therefore, Creation is true.

67. ARGUMENT FROM HIDDEN LOGIC (b) (1) Atheists say that God doesn't exist. (2) But they only say that because they want to look cool and intellectual in front of their peers. (3) They don't fool me! (4) Therefore, Creation is true.

68. ARGUMENT FROM HOVIND'S CHALLENGE (1) Kent Hovind offers $250,000 (which may or may not exist) to anyone who can demonstrate evolution (defined as a natural, acausal origin of the universe) to a reasonable doubt (meaning with 100% certainty, allowing for no other possibilities whatsoever) in front of a neutral committee (handpicked by Hovind himself) and according to certain criteria (carefully worded so as to rule out any possibility whatsoever of the challenge ever being met). (2) No atheist has ever met this challenge. (3)Therefore, Creation is true.

69. ARGUMENT FROM INSANITY (1) No sane person could have thought up Christianity (2) Therefore, it must be true (3) Therefore, Creation is true

70 ARGUMENT FROM EXHAUSTION (abridged) (1) Do you agree with the utterly trivial proposition X? (2) Atheist: of course. (3) How about the slightly modified proposition X'? (4) Atheist: Um, no, not really. (5) Good. Since we agree, how about Y? Is that true? (6) Atheist: No! And I didn't agree with X'! (7) With the truths of these clearly established, surely you agree that Z is true as well? (8) Atheist: No. So far I have only agreed with X! Where is this going, anyway? (9) I'm glad we all agree..... .... (37) So now we have used propositions X, X', Y, Y', Z, Z', P, P', Q and Q' to arrive at the obviously valid point R. Agreed? (38) Atheist: Like I said, so far I've only agreed with X. Where is this going? .... (81) So we now conclude from this that propositions L'', L''' and J'' are true. Agreed? (82) I HAVEN'T AGREED WITH ANYTHING YOU'VE SAID SINCE X! WHERE IS THIS GOING!? .... (177) ...and it follows that proposition HRV, SHQ'' and BTU' are all obviously valid. Agreed? (178) [Atheist either faints from overwork or leaves in disgust] (179) Therefore, Creation is true.

71. MR. GOODSALT'S ARGUMENT (ARGUMENT FROM GENERAL INQUIRY) (1) Question for atheist population: [apparently random question] (2) Your answer is wrong. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

72. PEACOCK ARGUMENT FROM ORIGINALITY (1) I have written the following to demonstrate the existence of God. (2) [insert entire text of a William Lane Craig article] (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

73. PEACOCK ARGUMENT FROM LIMITED VOCABULARY (1) You use lots of big words. (2) Therefore, I cannot possibly be expected to understand your refutation of my position. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

74. PEACOCK ARGUMENT FROM SELECTIVE MEMORY (1) [Christian asks "stumper" question] (2) [Atheist answers question] (3) [A lapse of time] (4) [Christian repeats question] (5) [Atheist repeats answer] (6) [A lapse of time] (7) [Christian repeats question] (8) [Atheist repeats answer] (9) [A lapse of time] (10) Atheist, you never answered my question. (11) Therefore, Creation is true.

75. ARGUMENT FROM HISTORICAL CORRELATION (1) This historical event was recorded. (2) The Bible mentions this event. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

76. THE CLASSICAL CIRCULAR ARGUMENT (1) We know that Creation is true because the Bible tells us so. (2) We know that the Bible is true because it is the word of God (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

77. ARGUMENT FROM SELECTIVE CELEBRITY QUOTATION (1) [insert famous persons name] is a well known Atheist. (2) [insert famous persons name] made a comment about God. (3) Therefore, Creation is true.

78. ARGUMENT FROM IRRELEVANT TRIVIA (1) The Bible was written over a period of 1500 years. (2) Many people from varied backgrounds wrote the Bible. (3) Lots of copies of the Bible have been sold (4) Therefore, Creation is true.


[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Friday, August 20, 2004

Operation: Behold, you're God

Jews for Jesus have a new campaign. Their most recent conversion drive will take place in Washington DC. It's called "Operation: Behold Your God"

From the
Washington Post article:

"It's offensive because Judaism is a long-established faith. Nobody wants to be annoyed by people challenging it," said Ronald Halber, executive director of the Jewish Community Council of Greater Washington.

Why does being "long-established" make it more legitimate? It's still only a faith, and is thus no more supportable than any other faith.

Katz said he feels that Jewish leaders are not allowing members of their own community to engage in an honest discussion about the claims of Jesus.

Don't feel bad, Katz. They don't engage in honest discussion about the claims of the Torah or Hashem, either.

Over the years, he said, he has been spit on and hit by Jews who wanted him to stop his evangelistic campaigns. "Tolerance has become one of America's top cultural values," he said.

Sure, but tolerance isn't one of religion's values.

"In that sense, I think it's a shame that there are people who seek to oppress views and oppose open discussion.... If something can stand up to an honest investigation, let it stand. If it falls, let it fall."

If only religions really let if fall when it fails an honest investigation.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Friday, August 20, 2004

Thursday, August 19, 2004

Budding Buddhist befuddled

In the course of my studies, I've read many intriguing things about Buddhism that piqued my interest. For example:

"Change only takes place through action. Frankly speaking, not through prayer or meditation, but through action. "
--Dalai Lama, at the closing ceremony of the third Parliament of World Religions, December 1999

Carl Sagan mentioned it in his book, The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark:

"In theological discussions with religious leaders, I often ask what their response would be if a central tenet of their faith were disproved by science. When I put this question to the current, 14th, Dalai Lama, he unhesitatingly replied as no conservative or fundamentalist religious leaders do: in such a case, he said, Tibetan Buddhism would have to change.

Even I asked, if it's a really central tenet, like (I searched for an example) reincarnation?

Even then, he answered. However, he added with a twinkle, its going to be hard to disprove reincarnation."

My extremely minimal contact with Buddhist ideas made me wish I knew more about Buddhism. However, I never really looked into it.

From
Wikipedia:

"While Buddhism does not deny the existence of supernatural beings (indeed, many are discussed in Buddhist scripture), it does not ascribe power for creation, salvation or judgement to them. Like humans, they are regarded as having the power to affect worldly events, and so some Buddhist schools associate with them via ritual."

Close, but no cigar.

And check out
this picture. I'm not going to bow to a statue.

Unless Wikipedia is misrepresenting Buddhism, it's not progressive enough for my taste. The supernatural does not exist. Any philosophy that includes it must by necessity be wrong.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Thursday, August 19, 2004

Wednesday, August 18, 2004

Cantering celestial

Have a laugh or two at the Invisible Pink Unicorn. I've worn the T-shirt to frum gatherings just for thrill of it.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Wednesday, August 18, 2004

Tuesday, August 17, 2004

Cavernous chasm of "could"

On the Bermuda trigangle, there has been a natural skepticism toward it because of the absence of any reasonable explanation for why any particular part of the sea should be more dangerous than any other part, other than weather related differences which are well understood.

Wrong. There is positive evidence that it has not had any more occurances than expected. There's zero reason to draw 3 lines around that stretch of sea; nothing other than communal reinforcement of a myth by the uncritical.

The recent discovery of giant freak waves that can smash an oil supertanker or pluck a low flying plane out of the sky should at least open our minds to the possibility that some geographic areas may be more prone to such waves. Like many myths, this one could have a kernel of truth to it.

There's a difference between could and is. It's the same difference that exists between the skeptic and the sucker. Until there's evidence that there is a difference, there's no reason to think there is one. "Could" can apply to any expanse of ocean; your "argument" works for any patch of water and does not support the Bermuda Triangle.

There is nothing wrong with a little speculation as long as you don't bet more on the idea than you can afford to lose.

Except you're betting on something that has already been shown to be lacking. It's like buying last week's losing lottery ticket. Whether or not you can afford to lose the dollar misses the point entirely.

I am more afraid that I will miss a good idea because I lacked the imagination to consider the possibility than I am of being wrong about a speculative idea.

That's nice, but the idea is no longer speculative. It already failed.

The theory of general relativity didn't have any proof either when it was first proposed by Einstein. It was just an interesting thought that had some logical appeal.

What the heck are you talking about? It explained well-known peculiarities in Mercury's orbit and resolved several contradictions in then-current physics. Further tests were done, but it wasn't just "an interesting thought."

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Tuesday, August 17, 2004

One reason I'm anonymous

The article. The followup.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Tuesday, August 17, 2004

Gentler than God

Are you nicer than Yahweh? Take the quiz and find out!

Bizzarely, the point of the quiz is to say that Christians nowadays are too nice and too eager to avoid offense.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Tuesday, August 17, 2004

Outraged outcasts

Check out this article.

"Fischer and his group have pledged to help some 400 boys ages 13 to 21 who have been banished or excommunicated from the FLDS for such "sins" as talking to girls or watching movies."

I've seen many boys kicked out of yeshiva for the same "sins."

"'Colors and design of dress are dictated,' he said. 'Hairstyles are dictated. All are to wear long underwear from wrist to ankles, even in extreme heat.'"

Sounds like any chasidish yeshiva, boy's or girl's.

"From the time children are born, they are brainwashed, he said. Home schooling leaves out world and American history, and most sciences are outlawed."

Yeshivas censor Jewish history and evolution is outlawed.

"Children are taught that God ordained blacks to be slaves ..."

They're from Cham, and the Torah says that they are to be slaves. That's what I was told in yeshiva, anyway.

"...and Jews were meant to be punished for killing Christ."

The goyim are meant to be punished for turning down the Torah.

"Law enforcement also is part of the problem. Police in the border towns often take orders from Jeffs, and through local justice courts have prosecuted and levied huge fines on boys charged with such 'crimes' as indecent exposure for rolling up their sleeves."

In Meah Shearim they throw stones at women for that.

"Getting thrown out of the church meant no one, not even his family, was allowed to talk to him."

How is that different than sitting shiva for a child that leaves the cult?

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Tuesday, August 17, 2004

Backward belief

I was at a sheva brochos last night, where a reasonably intelligent girl told me that the Bermuda Triangle exists as a real phenomenon. I told her she was wrong, and she countered that Rashi said so (as if that's a valid argument). I told her Rashi was wrong. She got flustered and said, "You think you know more science than Rashi?" I said, "Yes, I even know more than Newton and Aristotle. Such is the privilege of living after them. Science is cumulative, and I live later." She said, "Not true, before Noach, they had very advanced technology, but it got wiped out." I dropped it.

"[...] to argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead."
--Robert Ingersoll, Ingersoll's Works, Vol. 1, p.127

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Tuesday, August 17, 2004

Libelous label

What I meant being a skeptic is, that I was questioning if what I was taught is true or not. Is there a god or not did he give the torah at har sinei or not. Till I was not absolutely sure one way or another I wasn't going to do anything that is against the torah.

That's backwards. Until you are sure that it did happen, why bother with all the rituals? Do you do Catholic rituals, just in case they are right? By your reversed logic, you have to practice every single religion, winnowing them down by disproof one by one.

To me not being a skeptic in god means that you are absolutely sure with your believes. You certainly portray it that way, now I am convinced as well that you are firm with your believes.

That is not what it means to be a skeptic. True, a skeptic can be very confident in a belief (e.g. there are no psychics, astrology is bs, etc.), but that's not what makes a person a skeptic. Please reread these
two posts and these two wikipedia entries.

If you are right and skeptic doesn't mean that, ok so let's call what I meant barararahfgfhfh but to make it easier to understand will use the word skeptic ok? Or give me any other word that I could use. you knew what i meant. right?

The word is: sucker. Why would you throw your life away on something that is contrary to all evidence, just in case it's right? If I told you that you have to give me $20 every morning, or your heart will stop beating, would you give it to me? You know that's it's contrary to evidence, but you'd pay me just because I might not be lying?

The claims of Judaism are totally contrary to the evidence. If you choose to follow them, I'll say, "Pay up, sucker."

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Tuesday, August 17, 2004

Different divinations

Wahoo!! Break out the tarot cards and Ouiji boards!! Where do I sign up??!!----NOT!!!

Ouiji boards? This is Judaism; we call it Urim V'Tumim.

Just one of ours in a
very long list of worthless divination beliefs.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Tuesday, August 17, 2004

Lonely among lunatics

I swear Doc, I'm the only sane one. It's the rest of them that are all nuts!

When you're stuck in a cult, that's not far from the truth.

This past shabbos, I was at an affair. Someone gave a speech lauding pashas re'ay's orders to kill everyone in a city that adopts different religious practices. He criticized "liberals" for thinking they know better than the Torah about morality, and that it was totally moral to murder men, women and children over religious differences, so long as you're following orders from above. I had to resist throwing my food at the ayatolla, but everyone else was smiling and nodding.

So, yes, very often, I'm the only sane person in the room.

[mis-nagid_AT_hush_DOT_com]

posted by Mis-nagid @ Tuesday, August 17, 2004