Friday, December 30


The biblical story of Adam and Eve in the Book of Genesis within itself contradicts everything Christian’s state, and/or believe to be true, about God.  If He/She were omniscient, He/She would have already known the outcome of creating Adam and Eve, the universe, and the entire human species before creating it– thereby eliminating the need for Earth, animals, plants, humans, etc.  The only necessity would have been Heaven.

He/She would also have known before leaving the Garden of Eden that “Satan,” disguised as a talking snake, would coax Eve into trying a piece of fruit from the forbidden tree.  (Of course, this is assuming that omniscience implies clairvoyance– which, why wouldn’t it?  Doesn’t knowing everything include knowing the past, present, and future?)  Therefore, if God were simultaneously omnipotent, He/She would have gone and killed the snake (“Satan”) so as to eliminate the threat to his beloved creation, which He/She surely would have done if He/She really is omnibenevolent.

Which, why would Satan exist anyway?  If God is omnipotent, He/She could have destroyed Satan when he rose against Him/Her.  Besides that– being omniscient, wouldn’t God have known not to create Satan in the first place?  It would have eliminated the need for such a war later on.  Why would there even be a war?  Why let His angels fight and die for him, when He’s powerful enough to do anything?  Don’t try to say that God didn’t create Lucifer and the angels, either, because aren’t believers the ones who say that God created the entire universe and everything in it?

And if Satan doesn’t exist, then why would Hell exist?  God could certainly destroy it, and if He/She were omnibenevolent, He/She wouldn’t want any of his creations to go to Hell anyway, regardless of anything they had done.  And if God were omnipotent, He/She could have just made each and every creation be inherently good like Him/Her, thereby eliminating the need for Hell, Satan, or a test in the first place.

If God were omniscient, there would be no need for a “plan.”  He/She could simply think about making a plan.  Let’s get in God’s head for a moment.  “If I were to create a planet, some stars, and some creatures called ‘people’… then forbade them to do something… XXX would happen.  Then, a few thousand years later, after several million of them had died in a giant flood intent on wiping out evil, the inbred descendents of the two initial humans (one of which was created from mere dust, the other from the rib of the first) would start an atheistic movement specifically to disprove me, just because I provided no evidence of my existence.  Then, because I spiritually impregnated a virgin girl and bore a son, who later would die for the humans so that all they would have to do to get into Heaven is to believe in Him (and accept Him as their Lord and Savior), all of the atheists, and people who worshipped other false gods rather than me, would inevitably be sent to burn in Hell and then, later on, be thrown into an eternal lake of fire along with Satan and his followers (the Demons).”

But, you see, if God is omnibenevolent and omniscient, He/She would have theoretically just said, “Okay, I won’t put all of those souls through that.  We’ll just stay up here in Heaven.”

Perhaps He/She didn’t know?  (Which, by the way, would discount the entire argument of a God with those coexisting factors.)  Then, being omnibenevolent and omnipotent, He/She would have stopped the snake from talking to Eve.  He/She would’ve stopped people from dying.  Being omnibenevolent alone would keep He/She from sending any soul to an eternal (forever!) “resting place” that consists of fire, torment, pain, and misery.  Being omnipotent, He/She would have stopped Satan from existing.  Being omniscient, He/She would have known not to create Satan in the first place, to destroy him/her before he/she started so many problems, or to just make sure that when He/She created Lucifer that He/She made him/her inherently good as well.

Then again, what is the point of God’s supposed existence?  If He/She knew everything, there would be no point for Him/Her to create anything because He/She would already know every future thought, action, or outcome of their existences, be they alive or not.  He/She would constantly be alone, because, knowing everything, it’d be impossible to form a “new” thought.  Even if different omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent beings existed to keep Him/Her company, there’d be no point because all of them would know what the others were thinking or doing– constantly.

Some would say, “That’s why He gave us free will!  To keep things interesting!”  Firstly, if you really had free will, He/She would always know what every single human, dog, cat, mouse, sheep, etc. were doing or thinking (this I say because you all say that God is omniscient).  But, because He/She lay down a law that needs to be followed but for the eternal fiery punishment, you have to do what He/She says.  If God exists– WE DO NOT HAVE FREE WILL.  And if God were inherently good, He/She wouldn’t have created trillions of souls (possibly more) just to put them through a test so they could each come to a similar or different conclusion that He/She already knew they would each come to.

Of course, if we are to believe in the existence of God, we must ask ourselves how He/She came to be.  We all acknowledge that something cannot come from nothing.  God had to learn “everything” from something, right?  God had to be taught how to be good from something, right?  Or is He/She the only thing that has ever existed and will exist indefinitely?  What a miserable existence for God!  How old is He/She now, anyway?  At the very least, a few thousand years old.  We, as mere humans, can barely conceive one hundred years in our feeble minds.  Can you imagine a divine mind with constant existence?  If He/She were intelligent, knowing everything there ever could be a possibility of knowing, and having no point in company or creations or anything, and never being able to just be finished?  Able to die?

If by some small miniscule chance that He/She exists, I pity God!  At least we all have something to look forward to!  At least we can have regret, at least we can constantly evolve and change!  At least we can strive to become great and live a meaningful life before our existence is cut short!  Can God do that?  He/She has no need to strive for anything!  No need to have a meaningful life/existence, because who would see it?  Who would marvel at it?  Us?  We will eventually be extinct, and even if there is an afterlife– do you think we will be any different than we are now?  I cannot imagine myself being a servant to anyone or anything– especially not for eternity, in an afterlife in which it is impossible for me to die.  Impossible to change.

Remember that change is the only constant.  If there is no end, then what is the point of living?  We must embrace the nothingness that consists of our inevitable deaths.  If we don’t, we have nothing to live for now.  What, you want to live for God?  God already knows everything about you.  What you did yesterday, what you will do tomorrow…what you’re thinking right now.  So why would He/She care?  If God exists, He/She already knows the outcome.  So what is the point?

I loved Albus Dumbledore’s line at the end of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2.  “Do not pity the dead, Harry.  Pity the living.”  I thought it was ingenious.  However, why would anyone pity us for having life?  For existing?!  It makes absolutely no sense.  I do pity the dead, because their existence is over.  They will not come back, and the great philosophers, musicians, scientists, and artists of the past are not here to see the new, and to see their work studied in great universities around the world.  Quite frankly, though, I’m glad we don’t live forever.  Can you imagine how boring it would be to live forever?  Nothing changing, nothing evolving, and knowing that there is no end?  It would be horrible!  Knowing there is an inevitable end gives us a reason to strive to be the best we can possibly be now.  We aren’t living for the afterlife– we are living for life.  Make it count!  This is your only time to live!  So live!  Live!  LIVE!


Tuesday, December 13

Have You Read the Bible?

For the record, I haven't read the entire Bible.  I haven't read most of it.  But I bet I've read passages that you've skipped over!  Your pastor has read these passages, skimmed them, whatever– and figured out the "message", taught it to you, and expected you not to actually read it because, really– how many people actually read the entire Bible from cover to cover, right?  He's not expecting you to find flaws.  He's expecting you to listen to him, and maybe read Genesis, Exodus, and Leviticus, and maybe the Proverbs and Psalms (which, by the way, I've read a lot of).

So, anyway, I came across a quotation of a Bible verse on my favorite foundation's website yesterday (The Freedom From Religion Foundation) that more than somewhat disturbed me.  [And yeah, I know you're probably sitting there thinking, "Damn!  Why does she make everything sound so complicated?!"  Apologies, that's just me drawing everything out.]

I just love how Christians (the ones who actually believe in God (more on that later)) talk about their "holy" book.  (DUN-DUN-DUN) The Bible.  "It's the word of God!"  Okay, first of all, the book was written by dudes, not a supernatural deity.  And these "children of God," "Christians," et cetera just preach and preach about the "word of God"– but have they actually read the book they call holy?  I know, I know– YES!  They have read it!  That being said and acknowledged– WTF IS WRONG WITH THEM?!  Apologies for coming across so strongly, but, really people– think about it.  Do you actively read?  'Cause I do.  I question as much as I can, and when I read this passage from the Book of Numbers, I was absolutely appalled.
In case you don't know what happens before the aforementioned passage, Numbers 25:16-18 says,
"Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 'Harass the Midianites, and attack them; for they harassed you with their schemes by which they seduced you in the matter of Peor and in the matter of Cozbi, the daughter of a leader of Midian, their sister, who was killed in the day of the plague because of Peor,'"
and 31:1-3 says,
"And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 'Take vengeance on the Midianites for the children of Israel. Afterward you shall be gathered to your people.' So Moses spoke to the people, saying, 'Arm some of yourselves for war, and let them go against the Midianites to take vengeance for the Lord on Midian.'"
Basically, Omnipotent God, who could've just stricken the Midianites dead with a wave of His hand if He was really that pissed at them (assuming He has hands), ordered Moses and the Israelites to go and fight them.  In essence they kill all the men, all the male children, and all the women who were not virgins.  He allowed the Israelites to keep the virgin women and female children to themselves– 32 of which were saved especially for the priest, Eleazar.  Don't believe me?  Read this.
"The Division of the Prey [King James] Booty [New American Standard] Spoils [New International Version]
"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Take the sum of the prey that was taken, both of man and of beast, thou, and Eleazar the priest, and the chief fathers of the congregation: And divide the prey into two parts; between them that took the war upon them, who went out to battle, and between all the congregation: And levy a tribute unto the Lord of the men of war which went out to battle: one soul of five hundred, both of the persons, and of the beeves [cattle], and of the asses [donkeys], and of the sheep: Take it of their half, and five it unto Eleazar the priest, for an heave offering of the Lord. And of the children of Israel's half, thou shalt take one portion of fifty, of the persons, of the beeves, of the asses, and of the flocks, of all manner of beasts, and give them unto the Levites, which keep the charge of the tabernacle of the Lord.
"And Moses and Eleazar the priest did as the Lord commanded Moses. And the booty, being the rest of the prey which the men of war had caught, was [675,000] sheep. And [72,000] beeves. And [61,000] asses. And [32,000] persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him. And the half, which was the portion of them that went out to war, was in number [337, 500] sheep. And the Lord's tribute of the sheep was [675]. And he beeves were [36,000]; of which the Lord's tribute was [61]. And the persons were sixteen thousand; of which the Lord's tribute was thirty and two persons. And Moses gave the tribute, which was the Lord's heave offering, unto Eleazar the priest, as the Lord commanded Moses."  –Numbers 31:25-41, King James Version [Amplified Version]

Everyone I have ever spoken to about Jesus, God, or the Bible, claims that sex outside marriage is a sin.  They also say (with the exception of members of the LDS church) that polygamy is a sin.  (Mormons do not practice polygamy anymore because they believe in following the laws of the land on which they dwell.  Joseph Smith and Brigham Young both had multiple wives; polygamy was not a sin in the very beginning, until it was outlawed in the United States.)  Being that polygamy and any sex outside outside of marriage is a crime against God, why is it that these warriors were each given virgins as a tribute for their glory?  It's not like they could just have sex with all of them without sinning, unless they married each of them.  Which, according to all these priests, preachers, pastors, et cetera, is a sin because they couldn't have multiple wives, right?

And if anyone tries to say I edited this or fabricated it, please– get out your own Bible.  Read the passage.  32 virgins given to the priest as a tribute for the war.  And I don't know if anyone has realized this, but in the Old Testament, God was very controlling.  He was always telling the people what to do.  They were executed for worshiping other gods.  And the thing that pisses ME off the most is that everyone talks about how God sent us to earth so we could "find our way back to him through free will."  And if anyone wanted to stay behind instead of fighting, they would be executed.
The biggest problem I have with religion is that it makes good people feel like they are bad.  "People are all sinners."  "God is all good."  "Sin makes us dirty inside."  It kills people's self esteem, and makes perfectly normal people feel unnatural, evil, wrong.  How is that fair?  Unless you believe in reincarnation, we have only one life to live.  Why live it feeling like we're bad?  The second biggest problem I have is that it turns women into property.  Genesis 3:13-16:
"'What is this you have done?' The woman said, 'The serpent deceived me, and I ate.' So the Lord God said to the serpent: 'Because you have done this, You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than ever beast of the field; On your belly you shall go, And you shall eat dust All the days of your life. And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel.' To the woman He said: 'I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you."
And despite what I said before about Preachers denouncing polygamy, a man could have as many wives as he wished, "Then Lamech took for himself two wives: the name of one was Adah, and the name of the second was Zillah." –Genesis 4:9.  And in Genesis 16:2, Sarah (formerly Sarai) tells Abraham (Abram, who was 86) to go to her maid Hagar so that Sarah could "obtain children" through Hagar, who later begot a son by Abraham named Ishmael, and began to hate Sarah.  In Genesis 19:8, Lot offered his two virgin daughters to be gang raped by the men of Sodom rather than two visitors, whom he has taken into his shelter.
"'See now, I have two daughters who have not known a man; please, let me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you wish; only do nothing to these men, since this is the reason they have come under the shadow of my roof.'"

Besides Genesis, there are several other passages that disregard women.  1 Corinthians 11:3, 5-7,
"But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.... But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man."
1 Corinthians 14:34,
"Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. (35) And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church."
Deuteronomy 25:5-6 says,
"'If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband's brother shall go in to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her. And it shall be that the firstborn son which she bears will succeed to the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel.'"
The woman had no choice in this matter.  Say she actually did love her husband.  She had to marry and produce a son (no matter how many daughters it took to actually bear a son) with her dead husband's brother.  Further in Deuteronomy, (25:11), it says,
"'If two men fight together, and the wife of one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of the one attacking him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall not pity her.'"
1 Timothy, 2:8-14,
"I desire therefore that the men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting; in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression."
Sorry for the lengthy quotations.  If you want more, consult your trusty Bible.  God must really be a man, though.  If He weren't a man, then explain why He's always on their side!  He hates women!  But you know what I will never understand?  Some of you are, no doubt, thinking, "Well, that was in the old days!  There are new ways to interpret it!"  The Bible was not written just for the old days.  It was intended to go through the times the same way.  Priests/Preachers will say things like, "We don't do things that strictly."  Or, "We know that men wrote the Bible, and we do not believe that God wanted to be so harsh towards women."  Or, "We don't practice that today."  Really?  They preach that the Bible is "God's Word" and that it is 100% true, but when confronted, "Oh, no, not that part!"  They are too selective.  No one will ever know which parts of the Bible "should" be read or "shouldn't" be read, because a) there is no God, b) you can't invent a time machine and ask those idiots who wrote it.

I suppose God hates me and I'm going to Hell.  Sometimes I think to myself, "What if there is a God?  What if there is a 'Satan' around, making you question everything?  What if God wants you to question things and then find him anyway?"  But I'm not going to believe in something just because I'm scared Well, you know what?  Even if there is a God, I'd rather be in Hell than anywhere near someone who thinks I am unworthy because I'm a woman.  Eve lived thousands of years ago.  I'm supposed to be punished for one dumbass's mistake?  No way, José.
As always, please tell me how you feel about all of this.  I love opposing opinions!  Although I'd love to hear from someone who agrees with me (:  Thank you, good-day, and good-riddance!

*Where unspecified, quotes are from the New King James Version of the Bible.*

Honor, Tennessee, & Hypocracy

Guess what?  Chicken butt!

Just kidding.  Something is up, though.  Rather, it was up.  Just a few weeks ago, a huge controversy regarding a cross sitting on top of a water tower in Whiteville, Tennessee (love the name of this town!) stemmed from almost an entire year of warning letters letting Mayor James Bellar know that legal action would be taken if the unlawful symbol was not removed.

Dan Barker, co-president of the FFRF (Freedom From Religion Foundation) made the comment that the cross, “offends many residents.  Many of them think the cross symbol is an offensive symbol—that it’s an insult to humanity.”  Off the record, I do agree with those few residents.  And, note the fact that it existing there violates the First Amendment.

But, apparently, the mayor doesn’t believe Barker.  James Bellar: “We don’t have people of that belief here and if we do they’re not going to cause that kind of ruckus for the rest of the town.”  The mayor admitted that the FFRF had been writing since December of 2010, and he told Fox News Radio that FFRF’s “cause in life [is] to ride up and down the highway and find small towns that maybe have a religious symbol somewhere on public property.  I have to admit—checking their website, they’re batting 100 percent on this stuff.”

The Foundation sent 3 letters of complaint to the town of Whiteville, and after they were ignored, hired Alvin Harris, a lawyer from Nashville, TN, who then sent a letter to the Mayor, demanding that the cross be moved or removed within 30 days.  The FFRF threatened to sue if nothing changed.
Originally, on October 3rd, Bellar said that he would move the cross, but later decided to allow the Alliance Defense Fund to “explore other options.”  He later told a reporter for WBBJ-TV in Jackson, TN, Daniel Wilkerson, that he had changed his mind and would fight FFRF in court.  October 17th, he said, “Somebody has to stand up to these atheist sons of bitches, and you can quote me on that.”
Hold up.  Isn’t this guy a Christian?  Isn’t that the whole point of leaving the cross there in the first place?  And yet, he is being, in my opinion, extremely hypocritical by giving atheists such a cruel nickname.

Mayor Bellar told Fox, “They [the FFRF] are terrorists as far as I’m concerned.  They are alleging that some Whiteville resident feels very, very intimidated by this cross!”  A little later on, the mayor decided not to spend the money on fighting the FFRF in court (probably because he knew that he would lose), he spent around-about $4000—four thousand dollars—to rent a crane and cut one of the arms off of the cross.

A guy named Matt commented on one of my online sources’ articles and said, “So this mayor would rather mutilate the preeminent Christian symbol (isn’t that blasphemy?) rather than comply with the Constitution’s required separation of church and state. Wow.”  Correct, Matt!  This Christian mayor mutilated one of the Christian religion’s most beloved symbols, just to prove a point.

Bellar wrote to Alvin Harris (the FFRF’s hired Nashville attorney) and said that this “sad chapter” could “best be described as terroristic, cowardly, and shameful.”  Barker responded by saying that, “He’s [Bellar] the one who is against diversity, against religious freedom, and yet because we complain, and point out the fact that he’s breaking the law, he calls us the terrorist?”

My whole take on this is that Whiteville is being ridiculous.  (With the exception of the people who stood up to the Christians.  Right on!)  Why are they going to call law-enforcers terrorists?
Why do Christians and/or other religions worship the cross?  I’ve never understood that.  I’m guilty of it myself, of course.  I have a cross necklace.  Back when Silly Bandz were in style, I had one shaped like a cross.  But once I started thinking about it, I realized that it really doesn’t make any sense.

According to Christians, Jesus died on the cross for “our” sins.  If a large man with a gun was trying to kill my best friend, and I jumped in front of her and took the bullet, I doubt that after my funeral she’d get a tattoo of a gun on her person.  I doubt she’d have a necklace or other form of jewelry made with a gun on it.  I doubt she’d have a large wooden gun placed atop her house in my “honor”.

So, people, please comment and tell me what you think!  And, if you have another reason for why Christians worship and adorn themselves with a cross, please let me know.  I’d love to try to find a way to refute it (:

Vol. 28 No. 8 October 2011 edition of Freethought Today

God, Satan, & Job

First, let me just make clear the fact that I have not read the "Holy" Bible. I have read various passages, yes, but not the entire thing. Nor have I read the Book of Job. However, I have recently read an article with a very thorough summary of the book called "Theodicies in the Book of Job" by Adam J. Smargon. To clarify, in case you do not know the story of Job, here it is.
Basically, to my understanding, Satan asks God to test Job's loyalty after hearing God brag endlessly about Job's faith. God says yes, so long as Job's life is spared with this "test". Then, Job loses everything he has, but doesn't curse his "Heavenly Father". Following this, Job is smote head to toe with boils by Satan. Job's friends and even his wife tell him basically to screw God because He obviously doesn't care about Job. Job tells them off. One of his friends asks him if he did something wrong, but Job hasn't done anything to deserve punishment. Someone else mentions that God may be "disciplining" Job to prevent possible future sins. Later on, because Job kept having faith in God, God basically curses Job's friends and wife and shows Job off to all the angels. And.... SCENE!

This personally sounds like a huge action movie or something. But why the hell was God even conversing with Satan in the first place?

Smargon brought up some great questions:

"Why is God not there for Job when he loses everything?" Yeah, God- where were you? Oh, right. You were in Hell with Satan, laughing your ass off because you proved Satan wrong.

"Does God get some strange, masochistically perverse pleasure in torturing Job?" Sure sounds like it to me. But then again, I'm no preacher- so how would I know?

"Why would He test and stretch Job's condition solely on a dare from Satan?" This is the best question. God supposedly knows everything, right? So shouldn't He know that He would prove Satan wrong, and just tell him that, instead of trying to prove it? Why try to prove it, anyway? If He knows everything, He should know not to care what anyone else thinks- especially the best representation of pure evil in the universe. What the crap, God? If You love everybody, why would You do this to Job?
I also made some other notes after reading this article. If God is all good, and Satan is completely bad, don't they hate each other? Oh, but they couldn't though, could they- because God is good.  Even though Satan tries to hurt God's "children", God doesn't hate Satan.  And I'm pretty sure that Satan would hate God for the whole planning-to-destroy-him thing in the Book of Revelations.  But then again, it is a scientific fact that opposites attract.  Would this be the same for "supreme beings" though?

Like I said, the summaries of Job that I've read make the whole thing sound more like an action movie or some sort of elaborate science/religious-fiction novel.  "Divine being consorts with the Devil to test His most 'beloved' subject."
Makes total sense, right?  NOT!

Ohh, guys– please check out this site (: