An Evening interrupted

Last night, I was cuddling up on the couch with my wife to enjoy some prime time T.V. ( She is a huge NCIS fan). Just as the show was getting started, someone knocks on the door. Wouldn't you know it? It was the Missionaries! It seems some busy body (either my parents or hers) "sent them to check on us" I am guessing it was her father as he is the same guy that keeps telling every ward we move into where we live and all our contact information.

Being polite we let them come in, of course we kept the conversation away from anything to do with religion as much as possible. I really didn't feel like getting into a debate with two 19 year old kids that know NOTHING other than what they are taught at the MTC. I knew that conversation would have been completely fruitless and at best they would have left baffled, more than likely they would have left with "strengthened testimonies" since they would have survived an "encounter with an apostate".

We really tried hard to simply let them know that we are fine, have no issues and don't need any assistance from the Church, the missionaries and don't want to be 'fellow shipped back into the church'. They of course asked the obligatory questions about us: were we members, how long etc. they also asked if my son was baptized etc. I explained to them that No he wasn't baptized, blessed or ordained to any kind of priesthood calling (he's 12). the reasons for this are simple, I refuse to force my kid into mandatory membership in a church I not only disbelieve but vehemently oppose. I want him to make his own educated decisions when he is OLD enough to make that decision for himself. I then got the laugh of the evening -- They ASKED him how he felt about God. -- Let me paint this picture for you: he is in the kitchen playing a game on my laptop and the missionaries ask him "How do you feel about God?". Without missing a beat, my son shouts over his shoulder "God? Don't believe in fantasies" then goes back to his game. The shocked look on the missionaries faces was priceless, if I had a camera I would have taken a picture and posted it here. Their only response to him was "WHAA? but look at the computer you are sitting in front of." --  I know I was confused by this response too.

They then turned to me and asked me the same question. I looked at them straight faced and simply said, " Really, let's not go there. You don't want to start that debate right now." My wife started laughing and told the missionaries "He has made bishops question their faith, don't go there with him." the missionaries just sat there for a minute or so not saying anything. After a few seconds of dead silence one missionary looked at the clock on the living room wall and said " We better get going, curfew is almost up for us." They then stood up, shook hands with me and left.

It took a damn hour for them to leave, not that I was offended by their arrival, just annoyed. The bonus was, I have a DVR so my wife didn't have to miss her show. Well that and my son got to shock a missionary. Not a totally wasted evening, just an evening interrupted.

I do wonder though, how will they report this encounter to their mission president? Will it be, "former members, need no help" or will they tell the story of the encounter?

Sometime this year, my wife and I are going to request our names be removed from the membership roles. When that happens, I am expecting many more visits from missionaries, bishops etc.

When I do, I will let ya'll read that too.

Scientific Proof of God??

While browsing the internet I came upon a site that purports to prove God exists SCIENTIFICALLY! This of course intrigues me as I have never in my life met anyone that could definitively prove that God exists via science. I read their article and am going to respond to it here. You can read the article here if you want to see that I didn't take anything there out of context. My responses to the article will be italicized for easy differentiation.

Before we can discuss the existence of scientific proof of God, we need to identify what we mean by proof. Also, to know what type of evidence supporting the existence of God would be considered by science, we also need to know which definition of science applies.

Interesting isn't it? Before we can even begin, we have to define what "is" is. Since there is ONLY one definition of science I am already skeptical of the entire article. 

The definition of science has changed within the last century from an overall search for truth to a more limited scope of natural explanations of natural processes. Using the current narrow scope definition, there is not any scientific proof of God. The truth or untruth of this statement is not based upon evidence or lack of evidence, but by definition alone. Even though there is extensive, solid evidence for God’ s existence, none of that evidence would be admissible in the science court of law using the current definition.

Interesting! Let's see if I have this correct. Science says there is NO GOD, in order to make your argument you are now going to throw out the accepted scientific definition and decide to go with the definition (right or wrong) that best suits your argument. Not sure how credible your argument is going to be, but I am willing to see where you take this.

Consequently, to know what evidence really supports the existence of God, we need to base our statements on the old classic definition of science to eliminate the disqualification of the evidence. The kind of evidence we need to consider is the same type that would be admissible in a court of law.

The level of proof is different in a criminal court than a civil court. In a civil court the prosecution only needs to prove that the preponderance of evidence tips the scales in their direction. Alternatively, in a criminal court a higher level of proof is required. The prosecutor needs to provide evidence that proves the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

What types of evidence are admissible in courtrooms? These include direct evidence such as fingerprints, DNA, or eyewitness accounts. Also, circumstantial evidence is normally admissible unless it is abnormally weak. Although circumstantial evidence is indirect, it can be powerful evidence to prove guilt or innocence.

I see, so in order to prove that God exists, we are now going from SCIENTIFIC proof which is what the author purported to be proving to now LEGAL proof. The kind of evidence/proof that would be acceptable in a CIVIL court, since Criminal courts would require ACTUAL proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The author is going with the weakest possible standard of evidence here. Typical creationist mantra, we will PRETEND to use proof and science when in REALITY we will simply use smoke and mirrors and lots of verbiage to prove NOTHING.

Scientific Proof of God – The Evidence

First, the non-existence of God cannot be proven. One cannot prove a universal negative. Alternatively, the existence of God is provable.

 Let me get this straight. Since I cannot prove the non-existence of God, God must therefore exist? Using this logic, I must also accept that The Flying Spaghetti Monster, all the Greek Gods, Mesopotamian Gods, Egyptian Gods, Allah, Aliens, The Loch Ness Monster, The Kraken, Giant Ship Killing Squids, Vampires, Werewolves and the Borg MUST all exist? The argument itself is ridiculous, you cannot simply say "since you can't prove it doesn't exist, it must." and call that an intelligent argument. 

Since everything listed above must now be considered a universal truth, then I think the people of planet earth have some serious issues to work through. Which supreme being should you be following since they all exist? And, if they all exist shouldn't we all be worshiping all of them just to be safe? I can see that now, human sacrifice on Monday and dancing and praying to Allah on Thursday with Tuesdays being set aside to burial rituals and the weekends for talking with our Alien brethren. 

The concept, design, and intricate details of our world necessitate an intelligent designer.

All I have to say here is: "Big Bang" anyone? This isn't proof, it's the same silly religious argument that I hear every time I discuss this with someone that is going to argue the existence of God. 

Both direct and indirect evidence for God’s existence are well known and well documented. Nothing in history is better known or better documented than the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We even use the year of His birth as the basis for our calendar. He perfectly matched the over 100 unique Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament regarding His birth, life, death, and resurrection. The laws of probability cannot give us a reasonable explanation for either the Messianic predictions or the resurrection, let alone both by the same person.

Jesus’ miracles were witnessed by many and were documented redundantly for additional corroboration. He was seen by at least 500 people after His resurrection. He was seen ascending into heaven. His transfiguration was seen by Peter, James, and John. His wisdom in dealing with many circumstances was astounding. He never promoted Himself or His miracles. C. S. Lewis stated that He couldn’t have just been a good teacher. He was either a liar, lunatic, or Lord. He didn’t even come close to meeting the profile of a liar or lunatic, so He had to be God.

First, the ONLY documentation of Jesus Christ is the Bible. Since the Bible cannot be considered a credible source of information - see the Council of Nicaea - and Constantine's efforts to make himself the image of Jesus Christ. (Constantine commissioned ALL the images currently of Christ and they are all Constantine). The calendar argument doesn't hold water as again that goes to Constantine and his efforts to deify himself. The predictions in the Old and New Testaments cannot be considered credible as there is NO definitive proof as to when the specific prophesies were written or included in the canonized scripture. The miracles referred to again cannot be proven to have occurred as there is NO collaborative proof outside of the Bible itself. If there were proof, it would have been not only constantly referred to but one of the biggest discoveries of this century. Also, the story of Jesus Christ is strikingly similar to the story of Osiris of Egyptian mythos as well as the stories of Hercules and many other Greek and Roman mythologies, not to mention Mohamed. C.S. Lewis had it right, IF Jesus did exist he was a lunatic. 

Jesus Christ also supported the truth of the Old Testament and quoted it many times. Consequently, with Jesus Christ, we have an eyewitness to the truth of the Old Testament. This gives credibility to the creation account and God’s interaction with man. The entire Old Testament account is about how God is trying to have a relationship with man while man is separating himself from God by sin. It tells how God is long-suffering and merciful and ultimately how God sent His Son to die for our sins so God could ultimately have a relationship with us. 

Now we have completely gotten away from any kind of SCIENTIFIC PROOFS. Since the Bible itself was not canonized till well after the alleged time of Jesus Christ, any quotes where Jesus referred to the Old Testament cannot be regarded with credibility as all accounts of Jesus Christ are written by people OTHER than Christ himself. Also, since all interaction with God took the form of burning bushes etc. How much of what is written can be taken seriously? To do so would be to also take the work of fiction known as the Book of Mormon as literal truth, when anyone that has looked into it knows that Joseph Smith tried to SELL that scripture as FICTION with HIMSELF as the author. Given that information how credible is a book written 1000+ years ago that is a COMPILATION and incomplete at that, that has NO credible scientific or archeological backing?

God’s interaction with man in the Old Testament was often and powerful. Some of the main interactions included Adam, Cain, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, the Israelites, the prophets, and the kings. In addition to Jesus’ testimony to the truth of the Old Testament, ancient manuscripts, archaeology, and internal consistency also testify to its truth. Consequently, much direct evidence including eyewitness accounts and indirect evidence corroborate the existence of God and the truth of the Bible.

Interesting isn't it? Still referring to the Bible as the "Scientific proof" of the existence of God. Using the testimony of an individual whose existence is debatable would be like arguing that Darth Vader exists because there are written accounts of his existence. Wait! Scientology is doing almost exactly that! Does that mean that L.Ron Hubbard is as credible as any Old Testament Prophet? Not in my book, but using the logic above he would have to be. Ancient Manuscripts? So if the writing is OLD it must be accurate? If that argument is to be used, then we MUST accept everything written that predates 1ad. as accurate and correct. If we did this, we would all be worshiping hundreds of Gods and sacrificing our friends and neighbors on a regular basis. The archaeology argument only works if all you are looking at is that a city listed in the Bible exists. Of course it would, who would write about cities and places and try to be credible to the PEOPLE of their TIME using made up places? 

Eye witnesses and indirect accounts? Seriously? That cannot even be justified with a legitimate response outside of then stating that using that logic, we must then assume that all Alien encounters reported are factual and people the world over are being kidnapped by little green men and getting anal probed. We must also then accept that Vampires and Werewolves live among us and are plotting to one day rule the world as there are tons of indirect evidence to support this. 

It is obvious to me that the author of the quoted article above cannot and will never be able to PROVE scientifically or otherwise of the existence of God let alone their own intelligence. Correct me if I am wrong, I don't see that the author has proven anything other than their undying illogical belief in something that they cannot and refuse to prove empirically.  

 

 

 

 

Where were the Prophets and Popes?

We have tsunamis hitting Japan, earthquakes destroying entire island nations, entire marinas in California wrecked, wars and civil unrest breaking out all over the Middle East, and economic collapse world wide. In all of this, there has not been ONE prediction or warning of impending doom coming from the "One True Prophet of God" (Mormon Prophet) or "Gods Mouthpiece on Earth" (the Pope)..

Interesting that the two fellas that claim to talk to God on a regular basis weren't aware in the LEAST that any of these issues above along with myriad others were about to happen. No warnings, no admonitions to change our ways (see prophets of the bible) NOTHING..

Anyone notice any kind of pattern here? It seems that the 'Prophets' of today just don't seem to either get the message from God or just don't care to share it. Either way, why follow a callous uncaring leader who communicates with a callous uncaring God?

If you have good reason why I should, PLEASE feel free to tell me. At this point, I just don't see it.

Counting my 'many blessings'

A comment on another blog got me thinking about this and it has festered for a few days so I have had to put my own thoughts out there.

Primarily in the LDS inc. culture there is this propensity to 'count your blessings' - there are even hymns you sing in church telling you to do so. Of course when a member is talking about 'counting blessings' they are taking everything good or remotely positive and attributing it to either God's favor on them or their own faith/righteousness. This is because the culture of LDS inc. for TBM's is that you must publicly declare to all members how 'blessed' by the lord you are for being such a good TBM. If you don't believe me ask any TBM to tell you about their faith and the church. The first thing they will do is tell you how 'blessed they are' to be members, the next thing is they will tell you that Joe Smith (Creator of the great fiction (BOM)) is a 'true prophet of god' . after that they will go into a bunch of mindless drivell about any number of subjects, it will all sound very sincere and they will tell you to read the BOM and pray about it and that you too will see the truth and know that LDS inc. is the 'one true church'. If you use logic and reason, you will see through all that, I could go on in great detail, but I digress. This post was about counting blessings wasn't it?

Here are my blessings attributed to God etc.:

1) My job. Without the lord in my life, I am POSITIVE I wouldn't have the job I have held for nearly a decade. All the hard work and effort I put are all thanks to the 'man upstairs'.

2)My family. The lord has given my my wife and son who I am positive I wouldn't have in my life if the lord hadn't put them there. It is a forgone conclusion that I NEVER would have met my wife had the lord not decided to have us BOTH work at the same job and be physically attracted to each other.

3)My Dog. You guessed it the lord delivered the dog to me. If the lord hadn't put the dog in my living room, he wouldn't be there.

4)My successful recovery from recent surgery. The lord healed me, not modern medicine, not any amount of rest. it was prayer and faith that healed me, it had absolutely NOTHING to do with the surgeon or medical staff at the hospital that fixed my issue, it was the lord.

5)My great driving record. I haven't had so much as a parking ticket in 10+ years. That is all thanks to the lord above. He keeps me safe, keeps my foot light on the gas pedal and keeps me driving like a responsible, intelligent person that LOVES low insurance premiums.

6)NFL and NBA. You got it. GOD is responsible for professional sports! Without GOD there would be no sports and no Sunday fall enjoyment for me. I wouldn't be a skin's or jazz fan if it wasn't for the lord.

7)The internet. This had nothing to do with all the pioneers of technology out there experimenting and trying new things. This had nothing to do with anyone mortal. The lord created the internet to make it easier to spread his word to everyone. God is the most searched term on the internet right? Oh, wait that title goes to porn. Sorry god you don't get that one.

I am sure there are many more blessings that we can all attribute to god. I could probably write a 50,000 word post on all the blessings that god has given me. Anyone else have any other blessings that I missed. I mean I am sure that there are many of you that have lots of things to thank the lord above for right?

Let's list em out!

Boyd K. Packer Proves GOD DOESN'T EXIST!

In a recent address made at the L.D.S Church General Conference, Boyd K. Packer made some interesting statements. The gist of his address was admonishing the members of the L.D.S Church for using pornography or being gay. (IE. Being HUMAN!)
I am going to dissect his address one statement/paragraph at a time and add my responses to what are Mr. Packer's own words.

“There are those today who not only tolerate but advocate voting to change laws that would legalize immorality, as if a vote would somehow alter the designs of God’s laws and nature,” --Last I checked, it wasn't up to you, me or the Government to either criminalize or decriminalize who I sleep with or what I look at or choose to read. From the civics courses I took in school our fair country was founded on the principle that all individuals are afforded the inalienable RIGHT to the pursuit of happiness. This means that ALL people have EVERY right to be WHO THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY WANT TO BE. 

“A law against nature would be impossible to enforce. Do you think a vote to repeal the law of gravity would do any good?” --WE aren't talking about The Law of Gravity. WE are talking about SEXUAL PREFERENCE. Why would anyone want to legislate that? Next, the Church will be telling everyone that "You as a good little TBM must only be attracted to someone of the opposite sex that has the same hair color as YOU". Really? That is just stupid. Boyd, you will have to do better than that.

Some argue that “they were pre-set and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and unnatural,” he said. “Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone? Remember he is our father.” -- I am not going to even go there. I am NOT a scientist so I can't say either way if it is genetic (although science seems to believe so). Boyd you asked the question, being that you are a "witness" to the 'savior' you tell me! Why would a god do that? If I were god, I would certainly NOT create a situation where a creation of MINE were flawed, then BLAME THEM for the FLAW that I a PERFECT being created.

“We cannot change; we will not change,” the senior apostle declared. “We quickly lose our way when we disobey the laws of God. If we do not protect and foster the family, civilization and our liberties must needs perish.” --Really? What happened to blacks holding the priesthood? What about the teachings that when Native American Children joined the church they turned white? What about polygamy? What about WOW (word of wisdom)? You didn't even have that till Joe Smith's wife got pissed about mopping up tobacco juice after Joe's meetings with HIS APOSTLES. Seems to me that the church changes its stance whenever and however it is most politically expedient to get what the church wants, which when boiled down is more little revenue generators, paying their 10% and building more temples all over the globe. 

So a few gay couples getting married are going to tear down civilization as we know it? Wow, god must NOT have thought that one out before he ALLOWED homosexuality to happen huh? What liberties will we lose by the existence of homosexuals? Name one, I can't.

From what I have seen, the good ole' boys below seem to be doing ok even with those horrible homo's running round wanting to get married and all. Thanks Boyd for proving that with your rhetoric god/heavenly father does NOT exist. If he did, I am SURE he would come down here, kick you in the jimmy and tell you, "you are a bigot and an IDIOT".