Saturday, January 31, 2015

Humor is Subjective



Muhammad Rasheed - [in response to ugly YouTube comments] I thought she was funny, charming, and very insightful (I thought the dig at Perry in the end was unfair though). Humor is subjective; there is no such thing as "universally funny." Even the Top Ten most celebrated comedians only have a percentage of the populace as their fans. It really doesn't mean anything to say you don't think a comedian isn't funny. Other people do.

bestdeathfan - I hate when people like comedians make jokes about how someone is trying to have them sound or do something "black" like the stereotypes of black people talking in Ebonics is false, even when the majority of us know its true. Its in the same vein as black people ignoring the statistics of what their people do as a whole and using that as fuel to their racist america narrative. 

Muhammad Rasheed - The point of a stereotype is that it tries to say all of the people of that group are like that. Like "all white people are incestuous trailer park dwellers with bucked teeth." You can find some people like that, but it doesn't describe them all. That's why stereotypes are wrong.

That Thing That Everybody is Talking About


Chris Rock - Here’s the thing. When we talk about race relations in America or racial progress, it’s all nonsense. There are no race relations. White people were crazy. Now they’re not as crazy. To say that black people have made progress would be to say they deserve what happened to them before.

So, to say Obama is progress is saying that he’s the first black person that is qualified to be president. That’s not black progress. That’s white progress. There’s been black people qualified to be president for hundreds of years. If you saw Tina Turner and Ike having a lovely breakfast over there, would you say their relationship’s improved? Some people would. But a smart person would go, “Oh, he stopped punching her in the face.” It’s not up to her. Ike and Tina Turner’s relationship has nothing to do with Tina Turner. Nothing. It just doesn’t. The question is, you know, my kids are smart, educated, beautiful, polite children. There have been smart, educated, beautiful, polite black children for hundreds of years. The advantage that my children have is that my children are encountering the nicest white people that America has ever produced. Let’s hope America keeps producing nicer white people. 

Interviewer - Where do you think this comes from?

Chris Rock - When I started doing comedy at Catch a Rising Star,16 I used to get there at 7:45 and leave about two in the morning. That’s six hours a night watching comedians for a good six years straight. Just watching, watching, watching. What I learned more than what I wanted to be was what I didn’t want to be and what I didn’t want to say.

Interviewer - For instance?

Chris Rock -  There were just too many clich√© jokes. I never wanted to do that horrible gay voice that everybody does. I didn’t want to be swishing and all that crap. I didn’t want to do impressions of each ethnic group. A lot of comedians are very, very similar. So I’ve always said, “Okay, what if the thing that everybody’s talking about is wrong?”


Muhammad Rasheed - I love Chris Rock.

The thing that "everybody's talking about" is OFTEN wrong.

The dictionary of misinformation is the Manual of Default Normal.

Did you know that they often find soft tissue -- veins, collagen, red blood cells -- inside of dinosaur bone fossils? No? Well, they actually find that shit a LOT. But why isn't that "normal" knowledge? Why is "mosquito trapped in amber" normal instead?

Because misinformation is passed around like fucking currency, assholes have monopolies on thought itself and pass around at their discretion what they feel you NEED to think, and 'intelligent people' will get mad at you if you dare to challenge the misinformed Manual of Default Normal like it's the damn bible in this Information Age.

Friday, January 30, 2015

BOOK REVIEW - Star Wars: Heir to the Empire

Muhammad RasheedStar Wars: Heir to the Empire, volume one of Timothy Zahn’s “Thrawn Trilogy,” was my introduction to the Star Wars expanded universe novels.  I remember being very excited when I saw it advertised in one of those book catalogs mailed out by the “buy 12 for a penny!” book clubs I subscribed to at the time, and I quickly added it to my next order.  It was the only book from the expanded universe I’ve ever read.

Heir to the Empire disappointed me mightily.  Zahn’s contributions to the Star Wars mythos included playing down the powers of the Force, building upon the administrative/mundane aspects of the Jedi Order, finding a way to nullify the Force rendering the Jedi helpless, and ripping off his most interesting character from an older far more interesting work.  In other words, he turned a property I was very fond of into everything I hate in modern fiction.  The villainous Jedi clone Joruus C'baoth character was strikingly similar to Jack Vance’s powerful and insane character Morreion, even down to his physical description, so it was difficult to think it was just a coincidence that these people also found this powerful and insane old character isolated on a distant world as a parallel original invention of Zahn’s.

Anyway, I found the book a chore to get through, and it left me with zero motivation to put myself through a similar torture to read part two. The Jedi are the sole reason I am a fan of the Star Wars franchise to begin with, and for an author to think I’d be excited to see them depowered offended me.  For me, sci-fi only has value if it is being used to turn humans into super humans, so of course Zahn’s approach would leave me flat.  This was back in the early ‘90s during my college days, and even today, mentions of the Star Wars expanded universe will cause me to involuntarily frown from my negative, single experience with it.  Today there are numerous books added to the expanded universe by many other authors, so the chances that there are some out there I would genuinely enjoy are probably pretty good; hopefully Zahn’s contribution wasn’t popular enough to make all other contributors follow his boring lead as a template.  Even still, with Heir to the Empire making such a negative impression upon me at a young age, it will probably take quite a while for me to willingly sacrifice the reading time to give another one a shot.

Oh, and then there's this:


Basically Zahn turned the Star Wars universe into the functional equivelent of the sci-fi arm of the notoriously racially exclusive D&D universe, complete with full White Supremacist regalia. In my opinion that's the soul reason why the mainstream fans took such fierce ownership of Zahn's vision, and insisted the original creator make it canon.  Now that I've discovered that the rest of the Extended Star Wars novels have indeed used his work as the base foundation, I don't want anything to do with it.  

Thursday, January 29, 2015

To Re-Invent a Less Functional Wheel


Tony Steed - I do wish people would realize that their fate and destiny on this world is in their own hands, not some entity. You've got a lot more impact on your own life than you think you do.   When bad things happen, they aren't tests. They're just bad things.

When good things happen, it isn't a blessing, it's the law of averages.  I've been through a lot in my life, and when I was religious, I attributed it to God.  Now I attribute all those good and bad things to the situations I was in, mostly done at my own persistence or resistance.   You are more likely to be helped by those that care for you, and even the random stranger, who APPEARS to be a god send, but really isn't, to help see you through.

Trust more in your own abilities, but don't get big headed. Accept help from others when they offer it legitimately. Realize your future is in your hands alone. You're the ships captain. So go do your thing. Just don't hurt anybody else while doing it.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: "I do wish people would realize that their fate and destiny on this world is in their own hands, not some entity."

According to The Entity, the gift of free will gives all human beings their fate and destiny in this world in their own hands.

Tony Steed - That could be true, but we must define the entity, then prove the entity to exist, once proven to exist, we must prove the entity to not be a highly evolved alien entity. THEN and only then can we decide if said entity belongs to one of the thousands of belief systems on this particular world. But even then I still would not worship it. It's like a deadbeat parent.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: "That could be true, but we must define the entity..."

Not necessary. He defined Himself and was kind enough to reveal the info to us. That will keep us from the awkward position of trying to figure out a truly unique Being we are literally incapable of understanding.

Tony Steed - Also true. But is he really a he or an it? Or a them posing as a he or a she? As a student of the stars, there's one thing I understand. I will never understand everything. But will seek out the things I can, and am capable of understanding. Eventually the "Gods" WILL be us. Who knows maybe it was us or another form of life that caused the creation of this universe. The idea is fascinating to me. Even if the Gods existed, I would never wish to stay in the heavens under their presence. The Multiverse is much more intriguing. I'd want to explore the "Gods" creation for eternity. I'd love to sit in the middle of a black hole and follow it to the "exit". I'd love to "look" at a Quasar with my own eyes. Me personally. I don't think i'd be satisfied with a heavenly afterlife.

Tony Steed - I guess I'd have followed Satan, or Hades, or Prometheus, and Osiris.

Michael Williams - All deities are just energy. Most people are too stupid to understand and accept it.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “Also true. But is he really a he or an it?”

Neither. Traditionally we use the male pronouns because of the status the male has in a patriarchal language, capitalizing them to differentiate them from the regular pronouns that actually convey “male.” God is One and is above the concept of duality, so the ‘male’ aspect doesn’t apply to Him. It’s just a limitation of the language. Likewise we wouldn’t use “it” because in English ‘it’ designates something that is inferior to humans, and it would definitely not be appropriate.

Tony Steed wrote: “Or a them posing as a he or a she?”

God said He is One and shares His Godhood with no one. He is separate from His creation, and all he has created are His servants.

Tony Steed wrote: “As a student of the stars, there's one thing I understand. I will never understand everything. But will seek out the things I can, and am capable of understanding. Eventually the "Gods" WILL be us. Who knows maybe it was us or another form of life that caused the creation of this universe.”

God knows. And He took the time to explain the matter to us. We can use science to attempt to figure out the numerous “hows,” but God already explained the why.

Tony Steed wrote: “The idea is fascinating to me. Even if the Gods existed, I would never wish to stay in the heavens under their presence. The Multiverse is much more intriguing. I'd want to explore the "Gods" creation for eternity. I'd love to sit in the middle of a black hole and follow it to the "exit". I'd love to "look" at a Quasar with my own eyes. Me personally. I don't think i'd be satisfied with a heavenly afterlife.”

We have no idea of what the afterlife will be like, only weak analogies that can only attempt to give us a tiny peak using concepts that we are already familiar with. From the glimpses of the creatures in scripture that are not limited by the inherent shackles of a life of flesh, they seem to be able to explore the multiverse at will all they wish. The believer will find out what its like on the other side. From here we don’t have enough to speculate on; God doesn’t share the secrets of the unseen with us while we are going through this test.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Williams wrote: "All deities are just energy. Most people are too stupid to understand and accept it."

How can someone with no certain knowledge of spiritual concepts, pull a random idea out of thin air and then claim others are stupid because they don't recognize the fake truth in the random idea he proclaimed?

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: "I guess I'd have followed Satan, or Hades, or Prometheus, and Osiris."

Will you forsake the secrets of the universe that you are so fascinated by? Have a care, Tony.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: "You've got a lot more impact on your own life than you think you do."

That's God's message to mankind. What you do will effect the quality of your existence, both in this life and in the next.

Tony Steed - Thats the thing. Those "Gods" I posted were the ones giving us the secrets of the universe. They were more like teachers, rather than evil. Even Satan could do no harm unless he had God's permission. The others paid for their gift of knowledge, by having the Gods punish them. I think i'm one of those willing to be punished to further mankind. I'd rather worry about the people in front of me, than the reward or penalty of an afterlife. That's one of the reasons I gave up religion. People mattered to me more than the Gods, or their whims. It's funny though. The Gods of the Greeks, and Romans were more open to human thought and the progress of man. As long as you paid them due, they cared not what we did.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: "When bad things happen, they aren't tests. They're just bad things. When good things happen, it isn't a blessing, it's the law of averages."

Both good and bad events are tests. If a bad thing happens to you and you curse God and reject Him and give up on life, then you failed. If good things happen and you consider it all to be your doing in every way and never give God His due, basically worshiping yourself, then you failed.

When bad things happen and you pray for God to strengthen you and patiently persevere through the hardship and work hard to figure out solutions to make it happen, then you win. If you thank God for the good things that befall you and share a portion of the good with those who are less fortunate, then you win.

Tony Steed - I do those now, without thanking or cursing him. I simply don't believe. I am happy for those who have found a need for something more than themselves. For me, the people I help are where my "tests" lay. I'll help a believer as fast as a non believer. I had a woman once who was purchasing some cleaning supplies in either a wal mart or target, I was behind her, and her card was declined. It was only like 15 bucks or so, so I paid for it. To her it may have been something of a test, or some trial, she did kind of panic. I just said i'll pay for it. It was a person in need, She thanked God, and asked him to bless me. I told her I was an Atheist, and said you were in need, no biggie. She thanked me again and left. I don't know what she was thinking after that. But it was just the human thing to do. Her bad situation just happened, probably because of something she neglected. No harm no foul, just a learning thing.

Tony Steed - I do like this discussion though.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “Thats the thing. Those "Gods" I posted were the ones giving us the secrets of the universe.”

In His scripture it was the One God who said that He taught us the use of the pen, and taught us that which we knew not. Over and over He said it was He who gave us what we need, that He always was here to provide for us, and why He commands that we bow down and acknowledge it, and that we have no cause at all for our arrogance. That if He so willed, He could dissolve us into the component atoms he made us of, and create a whole new species to take our place, one that will give Him His due.

Tony Steed wrote: “They were more like teachers, rather than evil.”

God set the matter straight as to what really goes on behind the scenes when it comes to rebellious spirits that sometimes interact with us, and what it truly means, and who promises, and who keeps His promises.

Tony Steed wrote: “Even Satan could do no harm unless he had God's permission. The others paid for their gift of knowledge, by having the Gods punish them.”

It is God that gives us knowledge through inspiration. Punishment, and banishment, comes to those who sin.

Tony Steed wrote: “I think i'm one of those willing to be punished to further mankind. I'd rather worry about the people in front of me, than the reward or penalty of an afterlife.”

This finite mortal life is the dojo training ground to prepare us for the eternal true life on the other side of it. That’s like saying you never want to get a job and become self-sufficient; that you’d rather live in your mom’s basement and go to middle school for the rest of your life. It has the same level of seriousness to it.

Tony Steed wrote: “That's one of the reasons I gave up religion.”

Considering what you confessed you loved and would want to explore, throwing away your religion will prove to be your undoing. I suggest you reconsider.

Tony Steed wrote: “People mattered to me more than the Gods, or their whims.”

The One God is all that matters. It is He that can grant you the Ultimate Quality of Life you didn’t even know you wanted. How you treat people in this life is one of the tools for claiming that Ultimate Life, but there are other major components that come along with it, that you will seriously damage yourself over if you fail to embrace them.

Tony Steed wrote: “It's funny though. The Gods of the Greeks, and Romans were more open to human thought and the progress of man. As long as you paid them due, they cared not what we did.”

The One God has given you the free will to literally do whatever you set your mind to do in this life. He was merciful enough to provide instruction as to the path to take in this life that would secure maximum benefits, but you are free to reject it completely if you wish to; it won’t harm Him in the least if you do. But know that you will seriously shortchange yourself.

Andrew Bell - Lol

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “I do those now, without thanking or cursing him. I simply don't believe.”

That’s where the shortchanging yourself comes in at. You cannot win without God. You wouldn’t be here at all without Him. Why ignore His manual for success to risk a colossal failure by attempting to reinvent the wheel yourself?

Tony Steed wrote: “I am happy for those who have found a need for something more than themselves. For me, the people I help are where my "tests" lay. I'll help a believer as fast as a non believer. I had a woman once who was ....”

Why take the time to go out of your way to help people if it won’t profit you in the long term? If you’re going to play the game, you may as well play to win it. Why just randomly toss around the pieces on the board, and uselessly shuffle the fake money in the tray? That’s a waste of time. A waste of life. You should go ahead and deal yourself in for real and try to win that trophy while you are putting in all that work along the way.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: "I've been through a lot in my life, and when I was religious, I attributed it to God. Now I attribute all those good and bad things to the situations I was in, mostly done at my own persistence or resistance."

It's both.

Muhammad Rasheed - Using our Free Will we make things happen in our personal lives, and the decisions we make have both physical and spiritual consequences. When we praise God much and never give up, striving hard to accomplish difficult tasks while praying for His strengthening, He will move those items that are out of our reach and opens doors for us... give us favor. But when we give up, and take bullshit shortcuts, shoot illegal moves, etc., then we eat the bad of those choices. And sometimes just being on a geologically volatile planet can catch us, wrecking horrendous damage to our lives, but it is our attitude when faced with such adversity that alone determines whether we will be victorious or not at the end of it.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “You are more likely to be helped by those that care for you, and even the random stranger, who APPEARS to be a god send, but really isn't, to help see you through.”

How would you know that the goodly stranger isn’t a God send in people’s lives? How could you possibly know whether that was so or not?

Tony Steed wrote: “Trust more in your own abilities, but don't get big headed.”

God said to use the abilities He gave you to do your best in this life and follow the path so that you may prosper, making sure to thank Him and be among those who are grateful.

Tony Steed wrote: “Accept help from others when they offer it legitimately.”

And how would they know that?

Tony Steed wrote: “Realize your future is in your hands alone.”

That’s what Free Will means. No one is controlling you. The pagans believed their idols were holding them back.

Michael Williams - "No certain knowledge of spiritual concepts?" That's a mighty big assumption on your part. Do you claim to have 'certain knowledge'? I've studied more about religion than most people would even consider. I devour religious texts like a fat kid at a cookie stand. I am practicing Odinist, though I've grown to hate the terms assigned to practitioners of various faiths, and have been for roughly 10 years. I meditate everyday for about an hour, some days 2-3. And I hate to break it to you, but the concept of God(s) being energy is anything but random. Ever hear of metaphysics? Do some reading. And I love that term you used, "Fake Truth". That's perfect for what most religious organizations have rammed down the throats of the masses for centuries. It's been so firmly lodged in there, in fact, that it's choked the common sense from the 'devout' and blinded them with illusions. Tony posted originally on the notion of man having more power than they realize and this concept is completely lost in the Abrahamic faiths. Without the Will of man God as "He" is know would not exist. It has been through the Will's of various men throughout the ages to put the mythologies of the various faiths to paper to propagate their existence throughout the world.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Williams wrote: “MRasheed wrote: "No certain knowledge of spiritual concepts?" "That's a mighty big assumption on your part. Do you claim to have 'certain knowledge'?”

Of course. The revealed scripture of the One God is my certain knowledge, and it is exactly what it claims to be.  Without doubt.

Michael Williams wrote: “I've studied more about religion than most people would even consider. I devour religious texts like a fat kid at a cookie stand.”

Michael you’re 28 years old.

Michael Williams wrote: “I am practicing Odinist…”

That’s called paganism.

Michael Williams wrote: “…though I've grown to hate the terms assigned to practitioners of various faiths, and have been for roughly 10 years. I meditate everyday for about an hour, some days 2-3.”

To do what?

Michael Williams wrote: “And I hate to break it to you…”

lol

Michael Williams wrote: “…but the concept of God(s) being energy is anything but random. Ever hear of metaphysics?”

Energy, metaphysics, matter, and any other aspect of this reality have nothing to do with God. As he said He is the Supreme Creator that is apart from His creation, and there is nothing like unto Him. You can read all the science book that have ever been writ, and not once come close to what God is.

Michael Williams wrote: “Do some reading. And I love that term you used, "Fake Truth". That's perfect for what most religious organizations have rammed down the throats of the masses for centuries.”

No, God’s truth is the only truth. Fake truth is paganism, and any nonsense pseudo-science that pretends it understands the nature of God.

Michael Williams wrote: “It's been so firmly lodged in there…”

If that were true then the falsehood of paganism would not exist.

Michael Williams wrote: “…in fact, that it's choked the common sense from the 'devout' and blinded them with illusions.”
Common sense would be to realize that the Being that created the very concept of mathematics from scratch, and hung a universe upon it like a jacket onto a coat hanger, would be so far removed from mere “energy” (a concept created specifically for this reality) it would cause you to never fix your mouth to say such foolishness.

Michael Williams wrote: “Tony posted originally on the notion of man having more power than they realize and this concept is completely lost in the Abrahamic faiths.”

That’s 100% untrue, and an interesting statement from one who claimed to study the religions. Free Will is the gift from God that means you have the liberty to do whatever you want to in this life… anything at all… and you will only be held accountable once this is all over. If a believer does not act within his Free Will, it is a limitation he put only upon himself.

Michael Williams wrote: “Without the Will of man God as "He" is know would not exist.”

Only the narrow pagan mind thinks that way.

Michael Williams wrote: “It has been through the Will's of various men throughout the ages to put the mythologies of the various faiths to paper to propagate their existence throughout the world.”

Meanwhile, God told mankind who He was from the beginning, but waves upon waves of the narrow pagan-minded came along and tried to force the Supreme Creator into small boxes that they could more easily understand, like bearded men-imagery, multi-armed fiends, and even “energy.”

Michael Williams - Scripture? Really? That's your certainty? A book of Mythology? Wow. A strong feeling would have been a better answer. You're so deluded by Dogma that there is little point in arguing with you, but I'm feeling feisty, so why not. Oh, and I guess I'll go with the formatting you're so fond, since you seem incapable of stringing cohesive thoughts together without breaking them up, though I'm going to be a little less academic in my wording.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Williams wrote: “Scripture? Really? That's your certainty? A book of Mythology? Wow. A strong feeling would have been a better answer.”

And that’s the difference between us. You think your 28 year old feelings trump the Word of God.

Michael Williams wrote: “You're so deluded by Dogma that there is little point in arguing with you…”

I’m deluded but your feelings have you meditating to odin?

Michael Williams wrote: “…but I'm feeling feisty, so why not. Oh, and I guess I'll go with the formatting you're so fond…”

You’ll owe me $0.25 ever time you do it, too.

Michael Williams wrote: “…since you seem incapable of stringing cohesive thoughts together without breaking them up, though I'm going to be a little less academic in my wording.”

Do you, pagan. Throw down your rod. Let’s see what you have.

Michael Williams - Having an unwillingness to even entertain the notions brought on by Science mires you further in Dogma and prevents you from grasping the full breadth of what "God" actually is. God goes way beyond what any Bible or Preacher says and if more Christians would pull their heads out of the sand, they would see a far larger and more splendid word than conceived by the Church.

I get that you might extrapolate that the Abrahamic faiths are all about the Will of man, but that's a modern concept put forth by the free thinkers within the church. Doctrine's main focus is the Will of God and the Will man is an after thought.

Michael Williams - But you're completely indoctrinated. A "lost cause", so to speak. And I'm sad for you, truly. Ah well, better luck next life, am I right?

Michael Williams - Be wary of Dogma, for it makes sheep of men.

Michael Williams - And your damn right my 28 year old feelings trump the "Word of God". It's a book. Compiled by an awful man, who pulled things from it, interjected his own ideas, to levy it as a means of control of the people he ruled. Feeling is the essence of what God should be. If you don't feel it, if you need the "Word of God" for your faith to be justified, then you've missed the point entirely.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Williams wrote: “Having an unwillingness to even entertain the notions brought on by Science…”

Actually I love science. But that’s not what we are talking about here. Science is the effort to reverse engineer how God created the universe so we can figure it all out. God Himself isn’t science, nor is He a part of this creation. Trying to force Him to be is a sign of the narrow-minded.

Michael Williams wrote: “…mires you further in Dogma and prevents you from grasping the full breadth of what "God" actually is.”

You will never know the full breadth of what God actually is. You don’t have that ability. None of us do. God is truly unique, and nothing we have is equipped to understand Him, all we can do is study the briefest glimpses He revealed of Himself.

Michael Williams wrote: “God goes way beyond what any Bible or Preacher says…”

Of course He does. That’s why He’s God. He goes way beyond any measuring instrument mere men can ever devise.

Michael Williams wrote: “…and if more Christians would pull their heads out of the sand, they would see a far larger and more splendid word than conceived by the Church.”

Unfortunately, modern Pauline Christianity is a form of paganism by way of their worship of the messenger that God anointed to preach His Word.

Michael Williams wrote: “I get that you might extrapolate that the Abrahamic faiths are all about the Will of man…”

The Abrahamic Faiths were gifts by God to mankind… His messengers’ systematized wisdom and instruction of what God revealed to us.

Michael Williams wrote: “…but that's a modern concept put forth by the free thinkers within the church. Doctrine's main focus is the Will of God and the Will man is an after thought.”

You’re projecting.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Williams wrote: “But you're completely indoctrinated.”

lol I chose my religion for myself.

Michael Williams wrote: “A "lost cause", so to speak. And I'm sad for you, truly. Ah well, better luck next life, am I right?”

Being lost to the cause of paganism is a win for me, chief.

Michael Williams wrote: “Be wary of Dogma, for it makes sheep of men.”

The sheep I most often encounter are the ones who discard their barely understood family religion for a false sense of intelligence by embracing atheism because “everyone’s doing it” who lack a cohesive argument of their own as to why they chose that path. More often than not it’s because sheep are too lazy to do what their Lord commanded of them, so they find it easier just to proclaim they don’t believe in it.

Michael Williams wrote: “And your damn right my 28 year old feelings trump the "Word of God".”

You’ll think differently when those same feelings have you dangling over the Pit.

Michael Williams wrote: “It's a book. Compiled by an awful man, who pulled things from it, interjected his own ideas, to levy it as a means of control of the people he ruled. Feeling is the essence of what God should be. If you don't feel it, if you need the "Word of God" for your faith to be justified, then you've missed the point entirely.”

lol smh

So is this the extent of your argument, Michael?

Michael Williams wrote: “Yes, I'm 28. What does that have to do with anything? Are you asserting that because of my age I couldn't possibly have any idea what I'm talking about?”

Absolutely. For example, the post above that one was the most idiotic thing I’ve ever read on Facebook.

Michael Williams - So sad. So very, very sad. Though I would like to point out the use of the phrase "Family Religion". My ancestry hails from Northern Europe. Odin is in my blood and embrace that. The Christian lies made my spirit I'll and I sought a deeper truth and found my way to the teachings of the Aesir and Vanir. A faith far older than any of the Abrahamic texts. Granted my beliefs are far from literal and very much a sibling to my scientific beliefs. 

And the fact that you have nothing but "smh" to say in regard to my views on your so called "Word of God" speaks volumes.  Dogma, dogma, everywhere but no sense to be found.  But, regardless of your archaic authoritarian views I still wish nothing but peace and love for you. For everyone, really. An end to suffering from the binds of illusion. Sig Ansuz. Sig Wunjo. Sowilo, hailj√†!

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Williams wrote: “So sad. So very, very sad. Though I would like to point out the use of the phrase "Family Religion". My ancestry hails from Northern Europe. Odin is in my blood and embrace that.”

Is Dr. Seuss also in your “blood?” Or Sesame Street?  That’s on the same level of seriousness. 

Michael Williams wrote: “The Christian lies made my spirit I'll and I sought a deeper truth and found my way to the teachings of the Aesir and Vanir.”

Any lies within Christianity are a light dusting on top of the truth of God’s Word. There is no truth at all within paganism. 

Michael Williams wrote: “A faith far older than any of the Abrahamic texts.”

The texts themselves are relatively new, but the message they contain are far older, and go back to the First Family of mankind as they describe. Paganism came after the true message and represents a taint to tempt the foolish and narrow-minded.

Michael Williams wrote: “Granted my beliefs are far from literal and very much a sibling to my scientific beliefs.”

1.) Paganism has nothing to do with science in anyway.

2.) Your “scientific beliefs” is very telling. 

Michael Williams wrote: “And the fact that you have nothing but "smh" to say in regard to my views on your so called "Word of God" speaks volumes.”

Well, what can I say to someone who believes their 28 year old little feelings are more important than the civilizing ideals of humankind that we built entire societies around? Your feelings will cause you to date rape some poor girl, to run in fear from an unarmed black man who is just going to the store, to not feel like getting up and taking care of a household chore because of laziness, etc. Your feelings don’t mean anything and barely have value even to you. 

Michael Williams wrote: “Dogma, dogma, everywhere but no sense to be found.”

You wouldn’t know ‘sense’ if it had only one eye and rode in on a goat-drawn war cart. 

Michael Williams wrote: “But, regardless of your archaic authoritarian views…”

A minute ago you were bragging about how old your worthless paganistic views were, but now you’re taking a dig at my archaic views? I think you managed to outrun your own flimsy version of ‘sense.’ 

Michael Williams wrote: “I still wish nothing but peace and love for you.”

I guess that explains why your first post was a passive-aggressive insult. That’s what I expected “peace & love” would look like from a pagan. You may keep them.

Michael Williams - So, it's silly of me to follow the teachings of my ancestry, but perfectly okay for you to go a faith cause it's your 'family religion'. Your lack of respect for heritage is staggering.

I will admit that there are some truths within the Bible. The teachings of the Christ figure, about love and treating others as you would treat yourself, that stuff is solid Gold. But there are quite a few bits that are just awful and anyone who accepts them as part of 'Gods Truth' is just as awful. Like...let's see....1 Timothy 2:12, 1 Samuel 15:3, Exodus 22:18, Psalm 137:9, or the entire book of Leviticus, to name a few. Besides that the so called 'truth' was so convoluted by the men who compiled it that it can barely be assessed as a coherent mythology, much less any great Truth. I mean come one, there are about 18 YEARS of Jesus' life that are missing from the book. You'd think they'd want to include those, seeing as he seems to be the central character in the piece, but maybe I'm just knit-picking. 

As far as the age of my faith, that's where the science comes in. The 'first family' is a myth and if you think otherwise then your intelligence really is in question. The concepts of my faith are older than the word paganism and purer than the control mechanisms instilled by yours. 

And my faith and science go very strongly together, but then again I'm going to guess that you assume I look at some dusty old tome and that's where all my beliefs come from, like you, so it'd be much too difficult for you to grasp the concept of a the cultivation of a harmonious scientific spirituality. But, of wait, that teetering back in that whole metaphysics realm and that must make your head hurt something awful.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Williams wrote: “So, it's silly of me to follow the teachings of my ancestry, but perfectly okay for you to go a faith cause it's your 'family religion'.”

I accept the message of the Abrahamic Religions because I believe them to be true, and they stand up to intellectual scrutiny

Michael Williams wrote: “Your lack of respect for heritage is staggering.”

Heritage is worthless if it fails to uphold the values of God’s truth. Paganism is beyond worthless. 

Michael Williams wrote: “I will admit that there are some truths within the Bible.”

I will admit there are no truths within paganism. 

Michael Williams wrote: “The teachings of the Christ figure, about love and treating others as you would treat yourself, that stuff is solid Gold. But there are quite a few bits that are just awful and anyone who accepts them as part of 'Gods Truth' is just as awful. Like...let's see....1 Timothy 2:12, 1 Samuel 15:3, Exodus 22:18, Psalm 137:9, or the entire book of Leviticus, to name a few. Besides that the so called 'truth' was so convoluted by the men who compiled it that it can barely be assessed as a coherent mythology, much less any great Truth.”

Sacred scripture is worth studying so you will understand it in stages throughout your lifetime. That’s how it was designed… multi-layered. But I wouldn’t expect a 28 year old within our 30 second sound bite/instant oatmeal society to understand that right now. 

Michael Williams wrote: “I mean come one, there are about 18 YEARS of Jesus' life that are missing from the book. You'd think they'd want to include those, seeing as he seems to be the central character in the piece, but maybe I'm just knit-picking.”

The job of scripture is to explain the message, so if the minute details of the prophets’ lives are omitted, it means they were not relevant to the point. Common sense. 

Michael Williams wrote: “As far as the age of my faith, that's where the science comes in. The 'first family' is a myth…”

Based on what? Science traces our DNA to the original unknown man and woman they came from, with all humans on earth holding the portions of those same genes spread throughout us all.

Michael Williams wrote: “..and if you think otherwise then your intelligence really is in question. The concepts of my faith are older than the word paganism…”

Making an argument that something is older than the English language is a strawman. 

Michael Williams wrote: “…and purer than the control mechanisms instilled by yours.”

Avoiding wrong and doing good so that we can avoid punishment and receive reward was there from the very beginning. 

Michael Williams wrote: “And my faith and science go very strongly together…”

Your version of “science” is only faith.

Michael Williams wrote: “…but then again I'm going to guess that you assume I look at some dusty old tome and that's where all my beliefs come from…”

At this point I’m actually questioning the strength of your literacy skills. Once again you are criticizing the age of my faith, while in the same post celebrating the age of your own. Do you even hear yourself when you rant? 

Michael Williams wrote: “…like you, so it'd be much too difficult for you to grasp the concept of a the cultivation of a harmonious scientific spirituality.”

Like the 10th century Islamic society in old Baghdad? Lol smh 

Michael Williams wrote: “But, of wait, that teetering back in that whole metaphysics realm and that must make your head hurt something awful.”

You’re the one who can’t express the concept of God without forcing him into a bearded anthropomorphic form that your little infant mind can grasp.

Atheist Social Media Terrorism


Tony Steed[shared meme]



Muhammad Rasheed - John 15

“I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. 2 Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. 3 Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you. 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me. 5 I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. 7 If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you."

Muhammad Rasheed - It's metaphor. smh

Tony Steed - Problem is some, most fundamentalists take the bible, the Torah, Koran, etc as facts and some act on it. You can make any of those texts say good or bad. That's like going against the teachings of Zeus, or Ananki, people still believe in them and take their works seriously.

Muhammad Rasheed - The problem is that some people who are determined to vilify religion lack the ability to discern between people who are acting on the bible/Qur'an, versus those who aren't but just say they are Christian or Muslim. This is because they really don't know the bible or Qur'an themselves but just enjoy the rush of slandering people out of their ignorance.

The meme above is trying to claim that Jesus said he wanted the people to burn other people to death, but a casual peek at the context of the quote revealed it said something different. The person who made it was either stupid as hell, or deliberately deceitful, knowing that the average Facebooker, like you, wouldn't bother to look up the verse because he was so eager to continue to vilify mainstream religion.

Muhammad Rasheed - So... you are saying that the problem lies in "fundamentalists" taking the text "as fact," yet here we have an anti-religionist deliberately misrepresenting the texts to stir up hatred against the religion.

And that's the team YOU support, huh?

Tony Steed - Yeah I am saying fundamentalists take the text as fact. The average Christian treats it for what it is parable. That person is anti-religion, I concede that. But nowhere in that chapter of John is the point made in the picture nullified. I don't take teams. I post relevance. I'm personally against religion as fact, religion as comfort yes have at it. But when Religion tries to influence politics we got issues. Fundamentalists try to influence that.. we got issues.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: "But nowhere in that chapter of John is the point made in the picture nullified"

Then imagine their confusion when they notice that they aren't made out of wood and sprouting leaves. For someone that is too stupid to tell the difference between a command, and a metaphor to meditate upon – with enough power to influence political policy – what would change if religion were removed from the table? Will stupid people magically not misinterpret law, policy & procedure now that they are free to not misinterpret sacred scripture? How would that work exactly?

Tony Steed - If religion were removed from the table. Stupid people would still exist, as would murderers and racists, and terrorists, adulterers, etc. They exist now, they just use religion as their excuse then pray for forgiveness. With religion off the equation 500 years ago. We'd probably be on other worlds right now, arguing over resources. But no one killing in the name of some deity. People would have to think and really come up with ways to hate someone not like them. They'd have to actually use science to determine whether the fetus is alive or not, or whether being gay is genetic or not. Whether women should be treated as lesser, and forced into wearing and acting in certain ways. There are far more pluses to losing religion than keeping it. Morality is not a religious thing it's a human thing.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “If religion were removed from the table. Stupid people would still exist, as would murderers and racists, and terrorists, adulterers, etc. They exist now, they just use religion as their excuse then pray for forgiveness.”

What would keep them from replacing that excuse for another excuse?

Tony Steed wrote: “With religion off the equation 500 years ago. We'd probably be on other worlds right now, arguing over resources.”

You admitted above that the average believer doesn’t misinterpret the text and “act on” the misinterpretations, only the stupid ones do that – the stupid ones that have the political power to prevent us all from exploring these other worlds you are talking about. So if we remove religion, what would prevent these same stupid people from continuing to hold us back over something else they think?

Tony Steed wrote: “But no one killing in the name of some deity.”

In the name of which deity were the millions of people killed during the two World Wars? What about the millions and millions of people slaughtered under the atheist communist regimes of Mao, Stalin and Lenin?

Tony Steed wrote: “People would have to think and really come up with ways to hate someone not like them.”

Like saying black people are only ¾ of a human being? The eugenics movement? The black people have low IQs movement? What deity’s name were those concepts created under?

Tony Steed wrote: “They'd have to actually use science to determine whether the fetus is alive or not, or whether being gay is genetic or not.”

Are you saying the fetus is not alive and you can prove this through compiled scientific data?

Tony Steed wrote: “Whether women should be treated as lesser, and forced into wearing and acting in certain ways.”

You’re saying that it is because of religion that women are treated as less than men, not because men are assholes? Religion did it? lol

Tony Steed wrote: “There are far more pluses to losing religion than keeping it.”

Sure if you don’t know anything about it but only think you do. There’s all kinds of things that I don’t know anything about that I could ignorantly believe we can do without because I don’t I know any better.

Tony Steed wrote: “Morality is not a religious thing it's a human thing.”

Meanwhile everything we know about morality/ethics came directly from religious philosophy. Every bit of it.

Tony Steed - 1) There will always be excuses for people to use. But violence would indeed be reduced. 2) Religious politics is one of the problems of our time, along with term limits. people vote religion when they vote in politics along with finance. But people who vote tend to vote for the same guys who share their religion instead of the best interests of the community.

Tony Steed - 3) i LOVE when people bring up Mao and Stalin, and Lenin, or whatever atheist boogeyman they can think of. But it's always those three, and sometimes Hitler, even though he was a Catholic. Those dictators you mention didn't kill because they were atheist, they killed because they were douchebags. Atheism doesn't promote murdering millions of people. They killed because they had a belief that they could run the world better than a government of the people and for the people, and whatever biases they had towards certain groups. Read this to understand more. The use of those three is old, Religion needs some new Atheist boogeymen. Try Degrasse tyson or Bill Maher maybe?

Tony Steed
- A Great Myth about Atheism: Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot = Atheism = Atrocity

Tony Steed - The Eugenics movement was horrible, especially since a lot of it happened in North Carolina. The myth about blacks has it's roots in religion.  Some reflections on eugenics and religion

Tony Steed - A fetus is a fetus it is not a person according to the bible. It is LESS than a human being until it takes it's first breath. A fetus according to current scientific data is not viable outside of the womb and therefore not a living entity. We can grow organic body parts that move as if they were grown in a human being. They aren't viable without assistance. Until a fetus reaches a certain point in development then yes it's not a technical living entity. A recently fertilized egg is not alive either it's potential. God is Pro-Abortion...

Tony Steed - Numbers 5:21-28 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse of the oath--"may the LORD cause your people to curse and denounce you when he causes your thigh to waste away and your abdomen to swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells and your thigh wastes away. " " 'Then the woman is to say, "Amen. So be it." 23 " 'The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall have the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water will enter her and cause bitter suffering. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the LORD and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has defiled herself and been unfaithful to her husband, then when she is made to drink the water that brings a curse, it will go into her and cause bitter suffering; her abdomen will swell and her thigh waste away, and she will become accursed among her people. 28 If, however, the woman has not defiled herself and is free from impurity, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children. Book of Numbers...

Tony Steed - Numbers 3:15-16English Standard Version (ESV)

15 “List the sons of Levi, by fathers' houses and by clans; every male from a month old and upward you shall list.” 16 So Moses listed them according to the word of the Lord, as he was commanded.

Tony Steed - Leviticus 27:6 for a person between one month and five years, set the value of a male at five shekels of silver and that of a female at three shekels of silver;  Leviticus 27:6

Tony Steed - About women Here ya go As in all the churches of the holy ones, women should keep silent in the churches, for they are not allowed to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. But if they want to learn anything, they should ask their husbands at home. For it is improper for a woman to speak in the church. (1 Corinthians 14:33-35

You wives will submit to your husbands as you do to the Lord. For a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of his body, the church; he gave his life to be her Savior. As the church submits to Christ, so you wives must submit to your husbands in everything. (Ephesians 5:22-24 NLT)

Likewise, you wives should be subordinate to your husbands so that, even if some disobey the word, they may be won over without a word by their wives' conduct when they observe your reverent and chaste behavior. (1 Peter 3:1-2

Give no woman power over you to trample upon your dignity. (Sirach 9:2

Wives, be subordinate to your husbands, as is proper in the Lord. (Colossians 3:18

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (I Corinthians 11:3)


"For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man." (I Corinthians 11:8-9)

"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy 2:11-14) Numbers 31: 14-18 Moses was angry with the officers of the army—the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds—who returned from the battle. 15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the LORD in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the LORD’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.


Tony Steed - The one about women was a bit too easy. As a former Christian Reading the bible is what made me an Atheist

Brian Wenger - Knowledge bombs be droppin'.

Tony Steed - Not everything about morality came from the bible. There were moral people FAR before there was religious doctrine. Every single religious person is agnostic towards another religion where they have their own beliefs of morals. There are countries and cultures who've NEVER heard of Jesus or Mohammed, and live just fine. Humans develop morals so that we don't be douchebags to each other not the gods we create.

Tony Steed - @Brian Wenger… Lol, one of the benefits of having spent much of my life as a Christian and having read the book, and having read the Koran when I "rebelled" and became a 5 percenter was gaining knowledge of various religions. Then it led to studying the torah, the koran more, the book of mormom, vedic teachings, and the lore of Buddha, and hare khrisna's. As an Atheist I need to know what i'm talking about.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “1) There will always be excuses for people to use. But violence would indeed be reduced.”

No, it would not. People kill each other because they want to, not because religion forces them to. They may use a bible verse or two, or my personal favorite simply invent a story about the past biblical figures, and use these to justify their wrong that they wanted to do anyway, but it is illogical to say that the system is making them do wrong that they otherwise would not commit.

Tony Steed wrote: “2) Religious politics is one of the problems of our time…”

Define “religious politics.” Just because someone who subscribes to a particular religion makes a political stance, it does not mean that stance is automatically endorsed by the tenets of their faith, no matter how much they may wish to interpret it as such. Those who have that opinion about politics are ‘sheep’ in their own right and believe it for no other reason than because the like-minded believe it.

Tony Steed wrote: “…along with term limits. people vote religion when they vote in politics along with finance. But people who vote tend to vote for the same guys who share their religion instead of the best interests of the community.”

Everybody votes for their own interests, for the issues that mean the most to them, whether we’re talking religion or not.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “3) i LOVE when people bring up Mao and Stalin, and Lenin, or whatever atheist boogeyman they can think of.”

You: “With religion off the equation 500 years ago. We'd probably be on other worlds right now, arguing over resources. But no one killing in the name of some deity.”

Me: “In the name of which deity were the millions of people killed during the two World Wars? What about the millions and millions of people slaughtered under the atheist communist regimes of Mao, Stalin and Lenin?”

You said that if there were no religions that no one would have been killed “in the name of some deity.” I asked what deity’s name were the hundreds of millions killed under the great communist regimes of the 20th century. The answer of course is “None.” In other words – since you seem confused on this point – that without religion human beings would kill each other anyway despite your obviously false claims to the contrary.

Tony Steed wrote: “But it's always those three…”

You know why it’s always those three? Because more people died under their modern-progressive Godless regimes than all the “religious wars” combined. Can you see why that would be relevant?

Tony Steed wrote: “Those dictators you mention didn't kill because they were atheist…”

So? That’s wasn’t why I mentioned them. Try to stay on topic. To recap: You said that if there was no religion 500 years ago, no one would be killed in the name of some deity. Meanwhile these three guys who didn’t believe in the deity slaughtered hundreds and hundreds of millions of people in the modern, post-Marxian era.

Tony Steed wrote: “…they killed because they were douchebags.”

So let me get this straight: human beings without religion can be douchebags who commit great wrong upon other humans just because they feel like it. Thank you for making my point for me.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “The Eugenics movement was horrible, especially since a lot of it happened in North Carolina.”

lol Oh, is THAT why it is horrible? smh lol

Tony Steed wrote: “The myth about blacks has it's roots in religion.”

The myth about blacks has its roots in attempts to justify wrong doing to others with alternate and fraudulent interpretations of the text. Originally Ham was cursed because he preferred slave-like behavior (squatting on the land of others instead of taking ownership of what his father had bequeathed to him), and only centuries later did the text change to saying all of his descendants would be coursed for more ambiguous reasons. In other words, the religion originally was black & white and clear about a non-racism based issue, and only raw politics changed it to racism and the people in power tried to force it into the religion itself.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “god-is-pro-abortion...”

This website you quoted regarding the ‘abortion in the bible’ claims was the worst one you posted. That guy is ignorant as hell on all points, and possesses zero understanding and insight on even the most basic level of scripture in a clumsy attempt to shoehorn it into his ideology (interesting was all of the folk saying “thanks for this!” in the comments, proving that raw stupidity is actually a bottomless pit.) The part where he says the bible claims that children under a month old “are not even worth anything” even though it says clearly that they are worth 5 shekels. In modern Israel, their version of the shekel is worth only $0.27, but in biblical times it was worth significantly more and was used as a bartering material, not a minted coin, and could be silver, bronze or gold.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “A fetus is a fetus it is not a person according to the bible.”

Considering how much wealth is generated from these aborted unborn baby tissues and fluids that the unscrupulous medical industry doesn’t have to pay for (in fact, they actually get the suppliers to pay THEM to take that highly-valuable raw material from them), only the MOST ignorant people actually think this is a religious topic.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “Numbers 5:21-28 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse of the oath…”

This is not an abortion ritual. The point of it is to conflict the woman who had been accused of adultery but denies it. It’s letting her know that a curse will be on her if she is lying. The ‘heaviness’ of the ritual is supposed to weigh upon her, and if her conscious is still potent, she will eventually confess her sins.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed posted: “Numbers 3:15-16"

Tell me this: Why would they list younger children in the census when the Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) was so high in those days? Hm?

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “Not everything about morality came from the bible.”

All morality came from religion. It didn’t pop into the world by itself, but was specifically birthed from religious philosophy.

Tony Steed wrote: “There were moral people FAR before there was religious doctrine.”

There has ALWAYS been religious doctrine among us. It defines our humanity, and is what civilized us in the first place.

Tony Steed wrote: “Every single religious person is agnostic towards another religion where they have their own beliefs of morals. There are countries and cultures who've NEVER heard of Jesus or Mohammed, and live just fine.”

That’s a strawman. Those two weren’t the only messengers of God. If you truly studied the religions you claimed to study then you would know that, unless atheists mean something different when they say the word “study.”

Tony Steed wrote: “Humans develop morals so that we don't be douchebags to each other…”

So without religion, we wouldn’t have morals, and we thus wouldn’t have anything to check our douchebaggery? Interesting…

Tony Steed wrote: “@Brian Wenger… Lol, one of the benefits of having spent much of my life as a Christian and having read the book…”

I’m skeptical of you having bothered to read it.

Tony Steed wrote: “…and having read the Koran when I ‘rebelled…’"

And there’s no way you read THAT. Not a single one of your posts have given away a hint that you have.

Tony Steed wrote: “As an Atheist I need to know what i'm talking about”

So when does that part start kicking in?

Rejecting Concepts Based On a Version of Them That You Made Up


Tony Steed[shared meme] SO agreed..


Bill Jonke - That's why Atheism is moving right into my mindset. And why do we need bodies anyway if we're only going to be floating around as spirits? I don't get that!

Muhammad Rasheed - So because you don't "get it," Bill, it means it should be done away with?

Is that the mindset you are seriously advocating?

Bill Jonke - I'm the product of a project engineer. Logic is starting (after 60 years, for crying out loud) to sink in. Now Deism makes more sense, but correct me if I'm wrong, which I probably am, but I'm not sure eternal life fits into that picture.

Muhammad Rasheed - I’m not a project engineer, Bill, but objectively speaking it seems obvious to me why we would need bodies first if we are later going to be floating around as spirits. According to the tenets of the religions we:

1. live in our bodies for a finite time period

2. our deeds during that time period are recorded

3. we are judged according to those deeds

4. the ruling of the judgment determines our quality of life in our spirit forms

It seems like these would be fundamental points to contemplate during any serious effort to understand why we would have bodies if we were just going to float around as spirits anyway. I really don’t think the whole system should be thrown away if someone -- who didn’t care to think about it much at all because of their bias against the material -- didn’t “get it.”

Maybe you aren't saying that all religion should be abolished, but that stands out as weird to me based on the general theme of Tony's Timeline.

Bill Jonke - Maybe I should put it another way: In my 60 years, as precise as religion seems to be, we as humans, and all forms of life, as well as inanimate objects, are entropic. I'm not sure that any God could take on all of this, even if he/she or it really tried! I also need a reason why this whole entropic circus was put together in the first place, and to date, there is none, excepting maybe we're the result of a freak chemical reaction. I'm still an Agnostic, not a full blown Atheist, YET.

Muhammad Rasheed - Bill Jonke wrote: "I'm not sure that any God could take on all of this, even if he/she or it really tried!"

You're doing it again. In these past 60 years you've never come across the term "omnipotent" at all? Why would your limited-by-design understanding of the behind-the-scenes aspects of life be relevant at all? That exclamation mark, and what it's supposed to represent, kills me. lol

Bill Jonke wrote: "I also need a reason why this whole entropic circus was put together in the first place, and to date, there is none..."

So when you completely dismiss the source materials which have this info within them, and then turn right around and say stuff like that, it becomes impossible to take those kinds of opinions seriously, Bill.

Bill Jonke - I've been "indoctrinated in the term "omnipotent," but it still sounds like a flimsy excuse for keeping a false set of morals-God is always watching you drivel. When I use the word entropic, I'm expressing the fact that "perfect" does not, and will never, exist, God or no God. Religion tends to bleep over that fact and take responsiiblity away from people, and since every action has an equal and opposite reaction, that's when the prosyletizing, preaching and hypercritical thinking start rearing their ugly heads, therefore, the word "entropy, including conflict and ignorance and sometimes leading to violence on a horrifically broad scale." If you're referring to the Bible as a source of materials, it was written, rewritten, reinterpreted, misinterpreted over and over again and has turned into a big whopping piece of fiction being used for people to hear what they want to hear when they want to hear it, by humans!

Muhammad Rasheed - Bill Jonke wrote: “I've been ‘indoctrinated in the term ‘omnipotent,’ but it still sounds like a flimsy excuse for keeping a false set of morals-God is always watching you drivel.”

“Omnipotent” means all-powerful. “Omniscient” is the one you are describing.

Bill Jonke wrote: “When I use the word entropic, I'm expressing the fact that "perfect" does not, and will never, exist, God or no God.”

Everything you know, or can know, was invented for you within the confines of this universe and its laws. The Perfect Being that created this stuff (built upon the frame work of mathematics that He also created) exists outside of those laws. Without being aware of those kinds of concepts in place, how can you make such definitive pronouncements? Based on what?

Bill Jonke wrote: “Religion tends to bleep over that fact…”

It’s only a “fact” within a very narrow philosophical mindset that actually doesn’t match up at all inside of religious philosophy, Bill.

Bill Jonke wrote: “…and take responsiiblity away from people…”

Here’s another one. I have been gifted with the Free Will to do whatever I want to do in this life, and as a believer, recognize that I absolutely will be judged and held accountable for every deed I decided to do during my mortal lifetime. That is Abrahamic Religion 101 and is literally the exact opposite of “taking responsibility away from me.” The Ultimate Reward or the Ultimate Punishment are mine to choose based on what actions I want to perform in this life, so please explain to me what version of religion you are supposed to be rebelling against here, because it is quite alien to me as a student of Judaism, Christianity, and Al-Islam.

Bill Jonke wrote: “…and since every action has an equal and opposite reaction, that's when the prosyletizing, preaching and hypercritical thinking start rearing their ugly heads, therefore, the word 'entropy, including conflict and ignorance and sometimes leading to violence on a horrifically broad scale.' If you're referring to the Bible as a source of materials, it was written, rewritten, reinterpreted, misinterpreted over and over again and has turned into a big whopping piece of fiction being used for people to hear what they want to hear when they want to hear it, by humans!”

So far in this thread your knowledge of what may or may not be in the bible is suspect and cannot be taken seriously. I suggest you take the time to actually learn what the religions are all about for real, instead of continuing to pass around this weird, inbred version of what atheists believe religion is, seemingly based on some dream the first one had or whatever, and build your personal disbeliever argument around that.

Muhammad Rasheed - Ann Druyan wrote: "By definition an immortal creator is a cruel god…”

Where did you get that definition from? Where is that written?

Ann Druyan wrote: "…because he, never having to face the fear of death, creates innumerable creatures who do.”

It actually doesn’t work that way in the Abrahamic organized religions. At all. You’re missing a MAJOR component of those religions that you are either stupidly ignorant of, or you are deliberately ignoring in favor of making this stupid point. The fear of death is an illusion to those who believe, because the earthly mortal life is but a test. We are “spirit beings having a human experience.” The believer in the Eternal Creator is well aware of this concept, that the death of your finite earthly shell is merely a freeing of your true immortal self. As long as the believer does as God instructed in His message, death is by no means a cruelty.

Ann Druyan wrote: "Why should he do that? If he's omniscient he could be kinder and create immortals, secure from the danger of death.”

That’s exactly what He did do. Your true self is immortal and lives on after this mortal shell. In other words, death is an illusion. It isn't lost on me this typical demonstration of the fact that many members of the agnostic/atheist community simply invent out of thin air what they believe the religions are about -- which is quite at odds with actual religious philosophy -- and then build these crazy arguments against this Bizarro version of the faith. It's genuinely weird to me, and I think a potent symptom of a narrow-mind.

Ann Druyan wrote: "He sets about creating a universe in which at least many parts of it and perhaps the universe as a whole, dies... It's a little bit like the rich imposing poverty on the poor and then asking to be loved because of it."

It’s actually nothing like that. A more accurate analogy is it’s a little like the rich bestowing upon the poor all the tools, and an instruction manual, on how to also be rich that the poor are 100% free to use or not use as they so desire.

Tony Steed - My knowledge of major religions is pretty deep, especially since I spent nearly 3 decades being a Baptist, and jumping into Islam for a short time, a couple years. But I also tend to research ALL religions, because as a recent Atheist,(2008), I've come to know that religion is based on disbelief in the other religions about it. All religions are agnostic/atheistic against another religion. Every religion claims to have the truth, but none to date have been able to back up any of their truths with facts.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: "Every religion claims to have the truth, but none to date have been able to back up any of their truths with facts."

That's what everybody says when they lack any and all insight and understanding into what religion is about.

Tony Steed - Fact is right now our concept of anything like the soul, which is theorized, and tested so far with an Illegal experiment on head transfers, between a monkey. Is that it resides in the head, and everything that makes us us, is embedded within the neurons. Religious folk can only use their texts and beliefs to say where they came from, and where they intend, or believe they are going. Fact is I don't know where I came from, I don't know what I did before I was born, or where I was "chillin" at. I don't have a clue as to what happens after we die either. But I think that particular problem will be solved in the next couple decades. That will definitely change the way religions are taken. But none of us can say for sure, what's what. Even us Atheists. That still doesn't mean Gods deserve our worship, just because people think we are here to be "tested". I think that's a silly notion myself. tested for what? Recorded for what? Yes my thinking may be limited to fleshly things, but I see no evidence to support the religious theory of testing anywhere in the books, EXCEPT in Vedic teachings, and some mormon stuff, since they basically say when we die will be going to war against evil for God. An evil that God himself/herself created.

Tony Steed - I'm pretty sure I know what religions are about, having been involved with a few of them. Even Now I study Wicca, and Hare Khrishna,

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “Fact is right now our concept of anything like the soul, which is theorized, and tested so far with an Illegal experiment on head transfers, between a monkey. Is that it resides in the head, and everything that makes us us, is embedded within the neurons.”

Any scientific experimentation that has come close to touching on what “soul” can be is built from Dr. Rick Strassman’s experiments.

Tony Steed wrote: “Religious folk can only use their texts and beliefs to say where they came from, and where they intend, or believe they are going.”

Yeah?

Tony Steed wrote: “Fact is I don't know where I came from, I don't know what I did before I was born, or where I was "chillin" at. I don't have a clue as to what happens after we die either. But I think that particular problem will be solved in the next couple decades. That will definitely change the way religions are taken.”

How would that be? Remember religions said that the universe was created from one particular point in the distant past, and at first, the atheist scientists doubted it, until the expanding universe evidence proved the universe did come into being from one particular point in the distant past. Notice that it didn’t change the way religions are taken.

Tony Steed wrote: “But none of us can say for sure, what's what.”

*shrug* None of us can say for sure where we came from because scriptures are not definitive regarding that info. We can’t know for sure about what the future holds for us because our actions and decisions yet to come will determine that.

Tony Steed wrote: “Even us Atheists.”

You know that there were/are/will be believing scientists, right? Who told you that atheists have some kind of monopoly on knowledge? That was certainly not demonstrated in this thread.

Tony Steed wrote: “That still doesn't mean Gods deserve our worship, just because people think we are here to be ‘tested.’”

God deserves to be worshiped because He is God. By definition.

Tony Steed wrote: “I think that's a silly notion myself.”

It doesn’t matter.

Tony Steed wrote: “tested for what?”

To prove yourself worthy of paradise, Tony. The Ultimate Reward.

Tony Steed wrote: “Recorded for what?”

For evidence for or against you on the Day of Judgment.

Tony Steed wrote: “Yes my thinking may be limited to fleshly things…”

This will be your undoing. I suggest you repent and change your thinking.

Tony Steed wrote: “…but I see no evidence to support the religious theory of testing anywhere in the books…”

Then you have not studied the books as you claimed.

Tony Steed wrote: “…EXCEPT in Vedic teachings, and some mormon stuff, since they basically say when we die will be going to war against evil for God. An evil that God himself/herself created.”

Evil is an act… one that we perform. It’s not a separate alien force swirling around like in a Disney movie.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: "I'm pretty sure I know what religions are about..."

Then you should try harder to demonstrate it.

Tony Steed wrote: “…having been involved with a few of them. Even Now I study Wicca, and Hare Khrishna,”

Slow down. Try to get a handle on Christianity first before you start confusing yourself with equally poor understandings of more exotic flavors.

“I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times.” ~Bruce Lee

Muhammad Rasheed - Throw down your rod.

Tony Steed - I have. The issue when discussing religion is that eventually it turns into a circular firing squad with everyone looking for position. So we discuss and argue for pretty much nothing. The testing is a silly notion because life in and of itself is a test of you versus the natural world, and your relation to it, and the people around you.

Tony Steed - I remember back when I was a Christian, my friend Cory asked me how did I know If God spoke to me, I could never answer that. I'd say stuff like well I feel that he does, and he says certain things, I also thought when my mom passed away it was my fault for fornicating outside of marriage, and it was a punishment to my family. When My granny died, I was the last to see her, thought it was my fault for not praying hard enough.. I thought it was a test of my faith to believe in Gods plan and will for my folks.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “I have.”

*raised eyebrow*

Tony Steed wrote: “The issue when discussing religion is that eventually it turns into a circular firing squad with everyone looking for position. So we discuss and argue for pretty much nothing.”

You either have an argument or you don’t. Your theories as to whether religious discussions are valuable or not is not an interesting topic.

Tony Steed wrote: “The testing is a silly notion because life in and of itself is a test of you versus the natural world, and your relation to it, and the people around you.”

This world as a test to determine the quality of your afterlife is only a silly notion if you choose not to believe in the afterlife. For those who believe, it is a silly notion not to believe in the test.

Tony Steed wrote: “I remember back when I was a Christian, my friend Cory asked me how did I know If God spoke to me, I could never answer that. I'd say stuff like well I feel that he does, and he says certain things…”

What did the bible say about it? Did you ever try to find the answer in the source texts? The fact that you even shared that means you did not. Why? Did you somehow think that the holy spirit was going to download the info into you? Why would you think that when Christianity says you are to study to show your own self approved? Did you simply make up your own version of Christianity as you went along instead of actually taking the time to learn exactly what your Lord required of you? Don’t bother to answer; these are all rhetorical. All of your religious posts I’ve read have demonstrated that you never stopped behaving in this way, which is why I’m dismissive of your claims of having “studied” these religions. We both know you have not, Tony. This thread of yours, above all others, has revealed that like other atheists, you are also full of much passionate rhetoric, but very little actual study into these concepts you reject. Please recognize that in the End, as you dangle over the Pit, you will have nothing but your own arrogance to blame.

Tony Steed wrote: “I also thought when my mom passed away it was my fault for fornicating outside of marriage and it was a punishment to my family.”

Can you quote the specific biblical verse[s] that led you to think that?

Tony Steed wrote: “When My granny died, I was the last to see her, thought it was my fault for not praying hard enough.. I thought it was a test of my faith to believe in Gods plan and will for my folks.”

Can you show where in Christian doctrine that these beliefs came from? If so, then I will understand why you abandoned your faith for the road of the unrepentant hellbound. If not, it will only confirm my opinions of your version of religious "scholarship." You may consider this a test.

Tony Steed - It doesn't matter What I post, your eyebrows will be raised and my topics dismissed. Your doubt in what I know is already self confirmed, so it makes sense to me, to just leave it at that. Theirs deaths didn't lead me away from religion however if that's what you're thinking. The Bible, led me away from it. But I bid you Good day. I do hope to continue discussions in the future on other things including religion, but this particular one is fini. For me at least. I still enjoy your art.

Muhammad Rasheed - Tony Steed wrote: “Everything we know of punishments and rewards, come from Dante.”

Nope. It comes from scripture, and outdates Dante far into prehistory. Today it is reflected in modern scripture, like the Qur’an, but the available evidence reveals that the concept came from ancient scriptures of the distant past that have not survived to the present day except in mentions from later copied sources.

Tony Steed wrote: “…the deadly sins are nowhere in the Bible.”

The “seven deadly sins” aren’t actual tenets of the Christian faith anyway, they are just theologian philosophy concepts.

Tony Steed wrote: “No sin is greater than another.”

Sure there are sins greater than other sins. Why wouldn’t there be? There is even one truly grave sin that God refuses to forgive no matter what.

Tony Steed wrote: “But I don't acknowledge biblical sins to even exist.”

It doesn’t matter.

Tony Steed wrote: “Yes even Atheists who don't study religious texts, and culture can speak from ignorance, because they are passionate.”

There is no one more ignorant than the one who rejects the One who made him.

Tony Steed wrote: “It's no excuse for them to argue without being able to back up a point with documentation, and sources. I despise those angry atheists also.”

Tell me what your source is for believing that “Everything we know of punishments and rewards, come from Dante.”

Tony Steed wrote: “There's no need to get angry and attack a person if the facts lie with you. So no, Atheists don't have all the knowledge in the world. But the intelligent ones seek it out.”

Then why don’t they believe?