I know, it's been a while since I have posted anything. It's been a VERY busy couple months with moving suddenly (the house I was renting had black mold), having hernia surgery for the 3rd time and the holidays. I will say I made it through all of it without thinking I should pray to anyone or anything even once! I would like to take a second though and thank the good doctors and nurses at IMC for their care and professionalism. They were great!
Last Saturday as my son and I were getting ready to go to the archery range and loose some arrows at a few very deserving paper targets, we received a visit from an evangelical whackadoo. I am not sure what faith he was promoting specifically as he didn't identify himself with any organized group. He was an older man and had a young african american boy with him in tow. When I answered the door, he immediately asks me without introducing himself if "I would like to discuss god with him"?
Now, I very rarely turn down a good debate and would normally have invited he and his little buddy in for a spirited debate on religion and the existence of a supreme being. Since I was getting ready to go, (bow in hand) I wasn't really in the mood for a long discussion with him and politely said "No, thanks. I'm not a believer and this would be a waste of your time."
He stood there for less than 2 seconds and started into a tirade regarding creation and evolution. I am not sure why he went there, I didn't mention anything of the sort to him. I politely responded that there isn't a creator and that evolution proves itself, all he would need to do is examine any animal or for that matter human being and he could see evolution in action.
This is when he got weird on me: He looked at me and said "what about blind lizards?" then went on to explain how a blind lizard would die if god didn't give it eyes. I told him that there are plenty of blind animals and other life forms on the planet that do just fine. He insisted that if god didn't give blind animals eyes they would all die. At that point I knew I was dealing with a crackpot and realized that there was going to be no simple end to this conversation so I stood there mute for about three minutes as he rambled on about blind animals and gods link to them. He asked me if that made me think that there could be a god, I simply said no it makes me think you don't know what you are talking about.
He then says "well we have stuff to do" and turned and walked away.
Has anyone else dealt with this before? I have no idea where he was going with the blind lizard argument. If it was to convice me of a creator it didn't work, it only convinced me that he was an idiot that had no idea what he was talking about.
It's good to be back. I will make sure to post more to keep you all entertained.
Showing posts with label atheist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label atheist. Show all posts
Friday, January 4, 2013
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Christian apologist arguing god with an atheist
While surfing the Interwebz I came across this great site for entertainment value only in my eyes. It's The Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. Essentially they are there to make excuses and try to refute ALL other belief structures as wrong and or incorrect. I found a post there between one of the apologetics and an atheist. I am posting it here and will put my responses in BOLD to the conversation below.
This atheist actually believed he knew for a fact that there was no God. I found that position to be interesting and, quite honestly, not possible. Of course you did, you will say anything to get people to believe in your illogical and ill conceived notions of there being a magic man in the sky.
Also, he and I discussed faith a bit towards the end.
Atheist: As to religious arguments I haven't found one that can stand up to the logic of atheism.
Matt: Are you a strong atheist or a weak one? An atheist is an atheist. A theist is a theist. What is the necessity of ranking them other than to prove an illogical argument?
Atheist: Never heard of a weak atheist. EXACTLY!
Matt: I’ll explain. A strong atheist states that there is no God. He knows there is no God. A weak atheist, basically, 'lacks belief' in a god of any sort. So conversely, a strong Christian knows they ARE a sinner and a weak Christian just thinks they "might be."? Stupid if you ask me.
Atheist: Then I am a strong atheist. Don't buy into his crap. Just say "I am an Atheist. No additional definitions needed."
Matt: Then you know there is no God? We all there is NO God, just like we know there isn't an Easter Bunny.
Atheist: As much as knowledge can tell us yes..Maybe it's you who have to catch up on your atheism... Agnostic fits the description pretty well of a weak atheist... Maybe he also needs to catch up logic, reason and intelligent debate.
Matt: That is what I said...which are you?
Atheist: I am a strong. Characteristic human thought, coupled with hope is what religion boils down to, the unexplained tried to be explained...
Matt: So, you know there is no god?
Atheist: Yes.
Matt: How can you know that?
Atheist: It's a reasonable assumption. If you want a definitive answer. Does any Christian bother to look in the dictionary to what truth actually means? There is no 100% anything. Only close to it. Why oh why did you go there? This will just feed his argument. Honestly, just state the facts, you will NEVER convice this guy of anything.
Matt: Then you cannot KNOW there is no God. Your strong atheism is illogical. No, belief in a magic man in the sky THAT is illogical.
Atheist: Let's look at Christianity. It runs on faith. Faith is not logical. It gives credence to unicorns, goblins and thing s that go bump in the night. Exactly.
Matt: Nope. The subject is your atheism. Please don't try to change the subject. Oh, he doesn't want to defend belief in god, he just wants to attack a non-believer. Typical.
Atheist: The subject can jump where ever.
Matt: Your atheism is illogical. You cannot know there is no God. To do that, you'd have to know All things to know there is no God. And conversely, you would have to know the same to know that there IS. Your argument is illogical as well. Using YOUR logic we must believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy.
Atheist: I will defend, but also place in attack. Try to defend faith
Matt: One subject at a time....You'd have to have seen all evidences to know there is no God. You cannot claim this, therefore, your atheism is illogical. Seriously? that is your argument?
Atheist: You can never see all evidences but that does not mean there is a god.
Matt: Correct.
Atheist: No, that means there is not enough information for a conclusion. So we make assumptions as best we can according to our knowledge...
Matt: But you must concede that your claim to strong atheism (that you know there is no God) is not logical. You gave the definition which is ridiculous on its face therefore your entire premise is not only illogical but moronic.
Atheist: My knowledge of the human brain leads me to believe there is no god...
Matt: Then that means there MIGHT be a God, because you don't know all the evidence. Therefore, you must logically be an agnostic. Why the word play? Because you CANNOT defend the position that there IS a god. Why can't you? Because there isn't. You can't prove there is and so you attack using word games to cover your own ineptitude.
Atheist: And so must you... But you picked a side.
Matt: Then it [your atheism] is not logical, but only assumptions you base your atheism on. Your atheism is untenable.... You must admit that agnosticism is more logically viable. If you admit that, we can discuss my faith. Ahh now it comes out. Your entire argument is to get someone to admit something they don't believe so you can SHOVE your beliefs at them and hope they accept it. Poor strategy my friend, poor strategy.
Atheist: I'm not ignorant to say I don't use faith. But only the usage of faith in a situation that remains provable.
Matt: So, are you agnostic or atheist? which is it?
Atheist: Atheist.
Matt: You've lost the argument. Sorry... It's a one sided argument, of course he lost. He lost before it started since you as the instigator set the rules without letting him know what they were! Just like your magic man in the sky. You change the rules when it suits you.
Atheist: Wrong. What you're doing is a ploy. You bring me over.. but you stay the same. Either you must move over as well or the argument is mute in the first place. One can not keep faith and call his beliefs logical. For a bit I will stray over to the agnostic side. But I am willing to state instances where I believe prove my contention that there is no god. Nice my friend, nice.
Matt: You have been cornered.... It is not logical for you to claim strong atheism. You have not seen all the facts. Therefore, the possibility of God's existence is real. Therefore, you must admit that agnosticism is more logical in this situation. Alright, Let's talk faith. What? You have done nothing but talk in circles. Nothing you have said is logical or in any way pulls anyone toward your argument. You simply cloud the issue to forward your own agenda.
Atheist: Alright faith. you first.
Matt: I believe God exists. I have faith that he exists. Of course you do. How else do you explain unicorns, santa claus, and the easter bunny?
Atheist: Proof.
Matt: I have none. So you admit you are a WEAK Christian? hahaha. Argument lost according to your rules.
Atheist: No proof with faith. So, do you always believe in things that you can not prove? I see where you are going. I doubt he will let it go that way though.
Matt: No... not at all... I have evidences, but they cannot lead to 100% proof or else all could be forced to believe. But, if there is enough evidence, I do believe. Again, you are a Weak Christian!
Atheist: So you must be agnostic in that sense as well.
Matt: No... because I make choices. Though it is possible for my faith to be proven wrong, I still rest on the evidences and draw logical conclusions. Faith in a magic man in the sky is illogical. Therefore your faith is illogical and your arguments are silly and worthless.
Atheist: Evidence....
Matt: Yes.... And that evidence would be what?
Atheist: Then you disregard one of the most fundamental rules of the game...
Matt: Which is?
Atheist: "Where ever knowledge is incomplete, there is a place for "faith;" but where ever knowledge and "faith" conflict, it is "faith" which must be modified or abandoned." Exactly.
Matt: Or the understanding must be reevaluated.... 'Facts' have been found to be wrong before. Very true, the Earth is indeed a sphere.
Atheist: Facts are not Truths. They are reasonable assumptions. I will get a dictionary definition for that one...
Matt: That's fine. So what about it? What kind of evidence would be sufficient for you to conclude there is a god? Oh, I don't know. Meeting God would be a good start.
Atheist: Fact - Reality or actuality as distinguished to from conjecture or fantasy; Something known by observation or experience to be true or real.
Matt: That's good.... Now... what would constitute evidence for God's existence? Meeting God. Hearing a chorus of angels etc.
Atheist: An instance of superiority... Something humans could not do.. OR not be able to explained through phenomena but event then... You mean like a giant hand coming out of the sky.
Matt: That's good... now... what would constitute evidence for God's existence? Gods hand coming out of the heavens for the world to see.
Atheist: A universal movement. A stoppage of the planet. Nothing earthly. nice.
Matt: If that were to happen, would you conclude there was a god? Couldn't it be explained in other ways? No. I would not conclude there was a god till I met him or her.
Atheist: I would of course doubt it at first. I would look for an explanation... And for something like that I would probably find no reasonable explanation..
Matt: If you had could not find one, what would you conclude? Would you conclude that there is a god? or that you simply don't have all the facts?
Atheist: You never have all of the facts... Reasonable assumptions, remember?
Matt: Then you could not safely conclude it was the hand of God, could you?
Atheist: Nope. that would be the only explanation that I could think of that would have the three means, opportunity. (forget motive) [I did not understand him here...]
Matt: Then you couldn't know anything for sure, right? That is, if you don't have all the facts, all of them.
Atheist: Haven't we already agreed you can never have all the facts?
Matt: What you are telling me is that you have no real way of proving or disproving God. So then, doesn't it come down to faith based upon evidence? I have evidence.... You can't have evidence. Of course you will claim something silly like weather, trees or people. Maybe even resort to the BuyBull but we all know that is smoke and mirrors.
Atheist: I have to go. Friends just arrived. Can we finish this later?
Matt: If you want....
I'm not sure how it went with this atheist. But I hope some seeds were planted.
They weren't I am sure he left irritated and frustrated with your complete lack of logic and intelligent debate. Talking in circles NEVER got anyone anywhere. Enjoy spinning your wheels Matt.
I will be following up with more posts and hopefully I will get the opportunity to debate with this fellow soon......
This atheist actually believed he knew for a fact that there was no God. I found that position to be interesting and, quite honestly, not possible. Of course you did, you will say anything to get people to believe in your illogical and ill conceived notions of there being a magic man in the sky.
Also, he and I discussed faith a bit towards the end.
Atheist: As to religious arguments I haven't found one that can stand up to the logic of atheism.
Matt: Are you a strong atheist or a weak one? An atheist is an atheist. A theist is a theist. What is the necessity of ranking them other than to prove an illogical argument?
Atheist: Never heard of a weak atheist. EXACTLY!
Matt: I’ll explain. A strong atheist states that there is no God. He knows there is no God. A weak atheist, basically, 'lacks belief' in a god of any sort. So conversely, a strong Christian knows they ARE a sinner and a weak Christian just thinks they "might be."? Stupid if you ask me.
Atheist: Then I am a strong atheist. Don't buy into his crap. Just say "I am an Atheist. No additional definitions needed."
Matt: Then you know there is no God? We all there is NO God, just like we know there isn't an Easter Bunny.
Atheist: As much as knowledge can tell us yes..Maybe it's you who have to catch up on your atheism... Agnostic fits the description pretty well of a weak atheist... Maybe he also needs to catch up logic, reason and intelligent debate.
Matt: That is what I said...which are you?
Atheist: I am a strong. Characteristic human thought, coupled with hope is what religion boils down to, the unexplained tried to be explained...
Matt: So, you know there is no god?
Atheist: Yes.
Matt: How can you know that?
Atheist: It's a reasonable assumption. If you want a definitive answer. Does any Christian bother to look in the dictionary to what truth actually means? There is no 100% anything. Only close to it. Why oh why did you go there? This will just feed his argument. Honestly, just state the facts, you will NEVER convice this guy of anything.
Matt: Then you cannot KNOW there is no God. Your strong atheism is illogical. No, belief in a magic man in the sky THAT is illogical.
Atheist: Let's look at Christianity. It runs on faith. Faith is not logical. It gives credence to unicorns, goblins and thing s that go bump in the night. Exactly.
Matt: Nope. The subject is your atheism. Please don't try to change the subject. Oh, he doesn't want to defend belief in god, he just wants to attack a non-believer. Typical.
Atheist: The subject can jump where ever.
Matt: Your atheism is illogical. You cannot know there is no God. To do that, you'd have to know All things to know there is no God. And conversely, you would have to know the same to know that there IS. Your argument is illogical as well. Using YOUR logic we must believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy.
Atheist: I will defend, but also place in attack. Try to defend faith
Matt: One subject at a time....You'd have to have seen all evidences to know there is no God. You cannot claim this, therefore, your atheism is illogical. Seriously? that is your argument?
Atheist: You can never see all evidences but that does not mean there is a god.
Matt: Correct.
Atheist: No, that means there is not enough information for a conclusion. So we make assumptions as best we can according to our knowledge...
Matt: But you must concede that your claim to strong atheism (that you know there is no God) is not logical. You gave the definition which is ridiculous on its face therefore your entire premise is not only illogical but moronic.
Atheist: My knowledge of the human brain leads me to believe there is no god...
Matt: Then that means there MIGHT be a God, because you don't know all the evidence. Therefore, you must logically be an agnostic. Why the word play? Because you CANNOT defend the position that there IS a god. Why can't you? Because there isn't. You can't prove there is and so you attack using word games to cover your own ineptitude.
Atheist: And so must you... But you picked a side.
Matt: Then it [your atheism] is not logical, but only assumptions you base your atheism on. Your atheism is untenable.... You must admit that agnosticism is more logically viable. If you admit that, we can discuss my faith. Ahh now it comes out. Your entire argument is to get someone to admit something they don't believe so you can SHOVE your beliefs at them and hope they accept it. Poor strategy my friend, poor strategy.
Atheist: I'm not ignorant to say I don't use faith. But only the usage of faith in a situation that remains provable.
Matt: So, are you agnostic or atheist? which is it?
Atheist: Atheist.
Matt: You've lost the argument. Sorry... It's a one sided argument, of course he lost. He lost before it started since you as the instigator set the rules without letting him know what they were! Just like your magic man in the sky. You change the rules when it suits you.
Atheist: Wrong. What you're doing is a ploy. You bring me over.. but you stay the same. Either you must move over as well or the argument is mute in the first place. One can not keep faith and call his beliefs logical. For a bit I will stray over to the agnostic side. But I am willing to state instances where I believe prove my contention that there is no god. Nice my friend, nice.
Matt: You have been cornered.... It is not logical for you to claim strong atheism. You have not seen all the facts. Therefore, the possibility of God's existence is real. Therefore, you must admit that agnosticism is more logical in this situation. Alright, Let's talk faith. What? You have done nothing but talk in circles. Nothing you have said is logical or in any way pulls anyone toward your argument. You simply cloud the issue to forward your own agenda.
Atheist: Alright faith. you first.
Matt: I believe God exists. I have faith that he exists. Of course you do. How else do you explain unicorns, santa claus, and the easter bunny?
Atheist: Proof.
Matt: I have none. So you admit you are a WEAK Christian? hahaha. Argument lost according to your rules.
Atheist: No proof with faith. So, do you always believe in things that you can not prove? I see where you are going. I doubt he will let it go that way though.
Matt: No... not at all... I have evidences, but they cannot lead to 100% proof or else all could be forced to believe. But, if there is enough evidence, I do believe. Again, you are a Weak Christian!
Atheist: So you must be agnostic in that sense as well.
Matt: No... because I make choices. Though it is possible for my faith to be proven wrong, I still rest on the evidences and draw logical conclusions. Faith in a magic man in the sky is illogical. Therefore your faith is illogical and your arguments are silly and worthless.
Atheist: Evidence....
Matt: Yes.... And that evidence would be what?
Atheist: Then you disregard one of the most fundamental rules of the game...
Matt: Which is?
Atheist: "Where ever knowledge is incomplete, there is a place for "faith;" but where ever knowledge and "faith" conflict, it is "faith" which must be modified or abandoned." Exactly.
Matt: Or the understanding must be reevaluated.... 'Facts' have been found to be wrong before. Very true, the Earth is indeed a sphere.
Atheist: Facts are not Truths. They are reasonable assumptions. I will get a dictionary definition for that one...
Matt: That's fine. So what about it? What kind of evidence would be sufficient for you to conclude there is a god? Oh, I don't know. Meeting God would be a good start.
Atheist: Fact - Reality or actuality as distinguished to from conjecture or fantasy; Something known by observation or experience to be true or real.
Matt: That's good.... Now... what would constitute evidence for God's existence? Meeting God. Hearing a chorus of angels etc.
Atheist: An instance of superiority... Something humans could not do.. OR not be able to explained through phenomena but event then... You mean like a giant hand coming out of the sky.
Matt: That's good... now... what would constitute evidence for God's existence? Gods hand coming out of the heavens for the world to see.
Atheist: A universal movement. A stoppage of the planet. Nothing earthly. nice.
Matt: If that were to happen, would you conclude there was a god? Couldn't it be explained in other ways? No. I would not conclude there was a god till I met him or her.
Atheist: I would of course doubt it at first. I would look for an explanation... And for something like that I would probably find no reasonable explanation..
Matt: If you had could not find one, what would you conclude? Would you conclude that there is a god? or that you simply don't have all the facts?
Atheist: You never have all of the facts... Reasonable assumptions, remember?
Matt: Then you could not safely conclude it was the hand of God, could you?
Atheist: Nope. that would be the only explanation that I could think of that would have the three means, opportunity. (forget motive) [I did not understand him here...]
Matt: Then you couldn't know anything for sure, right? That is, if you don't have all the facts, all of them.
Atheist: Haven't we already agreed you can never have all the facts?
Matt: What you are telling me is that you have no real way of proving or disproving God. So then, doesn't it come down to faith based upon evidence? I have evidence.... You can't have evidence. Of course you will claim something silly like weather, trees or people. Maybe even resort to the BuyBull but we all know that is smoke and mirrors.
Atheist: I have to go. Friends just arrived. Can we finish this later?
Matt: If you want....
I'm not sure how it went with this atheist. But I hope some seeds were planted.
They weren't I am sure he left irritated and frustrated with your complete lack of logic and intelligent debate. Talking in circles NEVER got anyone anywhere. Enjoy spinning your wheels Matt.
I will be following up with more posts and hopefully I will get the opportunity to debate with this fellow soon......
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Mormonism Not a Cult?
This is what passes for 'proof' that Mormonism isn't a cult in Austrailia:
I am going to quote pieces and then post my responses. My responses will be italisized.
THE Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) is not a cult but a recognised religion with more than 14 million members.
Incorrect! The church 'claims' 14 million members. More than 60% of that number are inactive or no longer attending Mormons. For example, there are large numbers of 'members' that are listed on the church roles, but haven't attended or 'paid tithes' in generations. They for whatever reason are either intimidated (job, family etc.) into staying 'members' or just haven't felt the need to actually have themselves removed from the roles of membership. ALSO, the Church claims ALL people babtized posthumously as 'members'. Not a real accurate accounting there.
It is not "an 18th century religious scam" but the result of the answer from God to a sincere prayer.
Again Incorrect! Joseph Smith was CONVICTED of "glass looking" (looking for buried treasure in the ground through a 'glass') when no treasure was ever found, he would claim that it "slipped away". The folks he scammed were quite justifiably irritated. Incidentally, the same 'glass' he used to look for buried treasure is the same 'glass' he used to 'translate' the BOM. Yes, folks the Urum and Thumum! Also, the BOM was first published as FICTION and when Joseph Smith FAILED to sell it "by Joseph Smith" he concocted the "religion" of Mormonism to 'sell his book'.
The church did not forbid African Americans from joining, although for a time African Americans were not able to receive the priesthood.
Partially true. The churh did not forbid African Americans from joining, it did however, forbid them from holding the priesthood or leadership roles in the church until the 1970's when the church was pressured by the US Govt. to change it's policies or LOSE it's Non-Profit status. African Americans were ONLY allowed to hold the priesthood for economic reasons INSIDE the church, NOT because God "felt that they were ready" etc. but so that the church could continue to draw MILLIONS in profits from it's followers and PAY nothing in taxes etc.
Matter of fact, in the first edition of the Journals of Discourses, then president Brigham Young stated that: "No Negroe shall ever hold the priesthood in Gods restored kingdom". Really brother Brigham? Really? Hmm. Guess God changed his mind, he does need that $$ afterall.
Isn't it great how this passes for 'proof' that mormonism isn't a cult?
Let's list some definitions of a cult and see if the LDS Church isn't one? The checklist I am using can be found here:
The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
Check!
Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
Check! Try questioning the Church with a member and see what happens.
Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
Ever go to Sacrament meeting? Ever have to do your "volunteer work"? How about the 'sessions' in the Temple? .... CHECK!
The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).
Let's see... WOW, General Conference (earrings prophesy) Every meeting you attend as a Mormon? CHECK!
The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
Know what? I don't even have to say anything here. If you know anything about the Church, this one sticks out like a sore thumb! CHECK!
The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
Just read the post above again and see if you don't see it for yourself?
The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
Joseph Smith, Brigham Young? Ummm. CHECK!
The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
Mountain Meadows Massacre anyone? Bishops interviews? Fast offerings? CHECK!
The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt iin order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.
If you were ever Mormon you know this one ALL TOO WELL. The entire life of a 'member' is built on guilt and peer pressure. As a Mormon, you do EVERYTHING possible to appear the way you are told to, to the members and your Bishop.
Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
If you are a member, leave the church and tell your family you are doing so and see what happens. You will find yourself ostrasized and left out. I KNOW I have done this and many other former mormons have done this.
The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
Missionaries? Every Sunday you hear about how "every member is a missionary" and consistently you are told to go out and find new members to bring into the church.
The group is preoccupied with making money.
This one is obvious. Just try NOT paying your tithing and see what happens with the Bishop. You will LOSE your Temple Rights and of course be called into the Bishop's office to discuss YOUR personal financial situation with someone that just wants your 10%. My own sister in law was told to pay her tithing EVEN though that would cause her to get BEHIND on her mortgage. The church would rather it's members were homeless than lose 10% from one member!
Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
Oh, it's all 'volunteer' work but you will be expected to spend the bulk of your free time NOT with your family but doing 'work' for the church!
Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
This is true, UNLESS you are out proselyting for new members, then it is acceptable.
The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.
Again, try leaving and see what happens. I have known people that when they left the church, lost their jobs, their homes and in several cases their spouses and children to the CHURCH.
By my count, it SURE looks like the Mormon Church qualifies as a cult! If you can disprove this, please feel free to. IF you agree with me, feel free to repost this EVERYWHERE. (A little credit would be nice though).
We all need to fight to expose this cult for what it is. A family ruining, money sucking group of fakes and frauds stealing from hard working people the world over. Expose them for what they are!
If you are considering joining them, DON'T do it. Stay away, you will be happier in the long run.
I am going to quote pieces and then post my responses. My responses will be italisized.
THE Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) is not a cult but a recognised religion with more than 14 million members.
Incorrect! The church 'claims' 14 million members. More than 60% of that number are inactive or no longer attending Mormons. For example, there are large numbers of 'members' that are listed on the church roles, but haven't attended or 'paid tithes' in generations. They for whatever reason are either intimidated (job, family etc.) into staying 'members' or just haven't felt the need to actually have themselves removed from the roles of membership. ALSO, the Church claims ALL people babtized posthumously as 'members'. Not a real accurate accounting there.
It is not "an 18th century religious scam" but the result of the answer from God to a sincere prayer.
Again Incorrect! Joseph Smith was CONVICTED of "glass looking" (looking for buried treasure in the ground through a 'glass') when no treasure was ever found, he would claim that it "slipped away". The folks he scammed were quite justifiably irritated. Incidentally, the same 'glass' he used to look for buried treasure is the same 'glass' he used to 'translate' the BOM. Yes, folks the Urum and Thumum! Also, the BOM was first published as FICTION and when Joseph Smith FAILED to sell it "by Joseph Smith" he concocted the "religion" of Mormonism to 'sell his book'.
The church did not forbid African Americans from joining, although for a time African Americans were not able to receive the priesthood.
Partially true. The churh did not forbid African Americans from joining, it did however, forbid them from holding the priesthood or leadership roles in the church until the 1970's when the church was pressured by the US Govt. to change it's policies or LOSE it's Non-Profit status. African Americans were ONLY allowed to hold the priesthood for economic reasons INSIDE the church, NOT because God "felt that they were ready" etc. but so that the church could continue to draw MILLIONS in profits from it's followers and PAY nothing in taxes etc.
Matter of fact, in the first edition of the Journals of Discourses, then president Brigham Young stated that: "No Negroe shall ever hold the priesthood in Gods restored kingdom". Really brother Brigham? Really? Hmm. Guess God changed his mind, he does need that $$ afterall.
Isn't it great how this passes for 'proof' that mormonism isn't a cult?
Let's list some definitions of a cult and see if the LDS Church isn't one? The checklist I am using can be found here:
The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
Check!
Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
Check! Try questioning the Church with a member and see what happens.
Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
Ever go to Sacrament meeting? Ever have to do your "volunteer work"? How about the 'sessions' in the Temple? .... CHECK!
The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).
Let's see... WOW, General Conference (earrings prophesy) Every meeting you attend as a Mormon? CHECK!
The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
Know what? I don't even have to say anything here. If you know anything about the Church, this one sticks out like a sore thumb! CHECK!
The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
Just read the post above again and see if you don't see it for yourself?
The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
Joseph Smith, Brigham Young? Ummm. CHECK!
The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
Mountain Meadows Massacre anyone? Bishops interviews? Fast offerings? CHECK!
The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt iin order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.
If you were ever Mormon you know this one ALL TOO WELL. The entire life of a 'member' is built on guilt and peer pressure. As a Mormon, you do EVERYTHING possible to appear the way you are told to, to the members and your Bishop.
Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
If you are a member, leave the church and tell your family you are doing so and see what happens. You will find yourself ostrasized and left out. I KNOW I have done this and many other former mormons have done this.
The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
Missionaries? Every Sunday you hear about how "every member is a missionary" and consistently you are told to go out and find new members to bring into the church.
The group is preoccupied with making money.
This one is obvious. Just try NOT paying your tithing and see what happens with the Bishop. You will LOSE your Temple Rights and of course be called into the Bishop's office to discuss YOUR personal financial situation with someone that just wants your 10%. My own sister in law was told to pay her tithing EVEN though that would cause her to get BEHIND on her mortgage. The church would rather it's members were homeless than lose 10% from one member!
Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
Oh, it's all 'volunteer' work but you will be expected to spend the bulk of your free time NOT with your family but doing 'work' for the church!
Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
This is true, UNLESS you are out proselyting for new members, then it is acceptable.
The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.
Again, try leaving and see what happens. I have known people that when they left the church, lost their jobs, their homes and in several cases their spouses and children to the CHURCH.
By my count, it SURE looks like the Mormon Church qualifies as a cult! If you can disprove this, please feel free to. IF you agree with me, feel free to repost this EVERYWHERE. (A little credit would be nice though).
We all need to fight to expose this cult for what it is. A family ruining, money sucking group of fakes and frauds stealing from hard working people the world over. Expose them for what they are!
If you are considering joining them, DON'T do it. Stay away, you will be happier in the long run.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Ten Commandments for Atheists
While reading the news this morning I came across this story from USA Today. I thought it was great so I am reposting it here. You can read the original story here:
(RNS) In his new book, "God, No!" atheist magician Penn Jillette tells how he was challenged by conservative radio host Glenn Beck to come up with an atheist's version of The Ten Commandments.
By Sang Tan, AP
"I wanted to see how many of the ideas that many people think are handed down from (G)od really make sense to someone who says, 'I don't know.'"
Here's his list:
1. The highest ideals are human intelligence, creativity and love. Respect these above all.
2. Do not put things or even ideas above other human beings. (Let's scream at each other about Kindle versus iPad, solar versus nuclear, Republican versus Libertarian, Garth Brooks versus Sun Ra— but when your house is on fire, I'll be there to help.)
3. Say what you mean, even when talking to yourself. (What used to be an oath to (G)od is now quite simply respecting yourself.)
4. Put aside some time to rest and think. (If you're religious, that might be the Sabbath; if you're a Vegas magician, that'll be the day with the lowest grosses.)
5. Be there for your family. Love your parents, your partner, and your children. (Love is deeper than honor, and parents matter, but so do spouse and children.)
6. Respect and protect all human life. (Many believe that "Thou shalt not kill" only refers to people in the same tribe. I say it's all human life.)
7. Keep your promises. (If you can't be sexually exclusive to your spouse, don't make that deal.)
8. Don't steal. (This includes magic tricks and jokes — you know who you are!)
9. Don't lie. (You know, unless you're doing magic tricks and it's part of your job. Does that make it OK for politicians, too?)
10. Don't waste too much time wishing, hoping, and being envious; it'll make you bugnutty.
(RNS) In his new book, "God, No!" atheist magician Penn Jillette tells how he was challenged by conservative radio host Glenn Beck to come up with an atheist's version of The Ten Commandments.
By Sang Tan, AP
"I wanted to see how many of the ideas that many people think are handed down from (G)od really make sense to someone who says, 'I don't know.'"
Here's his list:
1. The highest ideals are human intelligence, creativity and love. Respect these above all.
2. Do not put things or even ideas above other human beings. (Let's scream at each other about Kindle versus iPad, solar versus nuclear, Republican versus Libertarian, Garth Brooks versus Sun Ra— but when your house is on fire, I'll be there to help.)
3. Say what you mean, even when talking to yourself. (What used to be an oath to (G)od is now quite simply respecting yourself.)
4. Put aside some time to rest and think. (If you're religious, that might be the Sabbath; if you're a Vegas magician, that'll be the day with the lowest grosses.)
5. Be there for your family. Love your parents, your partner, and your children. (Love is deeper than honor, and parents matter, but so do spouse and children.)
6. Respect and protect all human life. (Many believe that "Thou shalt not kill" only refers to people in the same tribe. I say it's all human life.)
7. Keep your promises. (If you can't be sexually exclusive to your spouse, don't make that deal.)
8. Don't steal. (This includes magic tricks and jokes — you know who you are!)
9. Don't lie. (You know, unless you're doing magic tricks and it's part of your job. Does that make it OK for politicians, too?)
10. Don't waste too much time wishing, hoping, and being envious; it'll make you bugnutty.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)