751. Why the Gods Are Not Winning

Comment #36516 by scottishgeologist on May 1, 2007 at 11:54 am

Devolved said: "The only people that could ever go to hell are those that choose it"

Some would argue, Calvinists mainly, what Calvin himself referred to as the "horrible decree" of souble predestination. In other words those that are elect are saved, and those that are damned are damned anyway by Gods will. Salvation is of grace, ie the undeserved favour of God.

Actually, it was a countryman of mine, a long time ago, when Scotland was a Calvinist theocracy, who summed it up:

Holy Willies Prayer - Robert Burns:

O Thou, that in the heavens does dwell,
As it pleases best Thysel',
Sends aen to Heaven an' ten to Hell,
For Thy glory,
And no for onie guid or ill
They've done afore Thee!

Translated into English:

O You that in the Heavens does dwell,
Who, as it pleases best Yourself,
Sends one to Heaven and ten to Hell
All for Your glory,
And not for any good or ill
They have done before You!



I was brought up with this stuff, I studied it and It still screws my brain.

Even preachers like spurgeon couldnt resolve the Predestination / Freewill dichotomy. Spurgeon got round it by referring to them (quite eloquently) as twin tracks that although parallel , meet in eternity.

There has been a battle of theology for centuries between the Arminians who dont accept double predestination and the Calvinists who do.

Both refer to the Bible and can quote chapter and verse to back up their claims.

Of course the atheist claim is that both are wrong. Anihiliationism is the order of the day. Which, interestingly, a lot of churches are moving towards.

752. Pop Tech Lecture

Comment #36454 by scottishgeologist on May 1, 2007 at 7:28 am

Cdat: Love your comment: "my theory that ancient astronauts killed the dinosaurs"

There is something so beautifully von Daniken-esque about that - love it!

Oh yes, worth remembering it was 30 years ago that Von Daniken got owned by the BBC's Horizon....

753. Why the Gods Are Not Winning

Comment #36371 by scottishgeologist on May 1, 2007 at 2:25 am

Further to devolveds comments about David Murrow, I have checked this guy out - seems that if you use macho, militaristic swaggering man-talk, then more men go to church. Great, just great. Lets produce a bunch of gun toting faith heads, just like these islamists, lets fire them up with the language that guys use, that'll really make the world a better place.

Check out this:

http://www.churchformen.com/

if you really want to despair, look at that web site. Dont bother buying an emetic if you feel ill - just look at that stuff.

754. Why the Gods Are Not Winning

Comment #36352 by scottishgeologist on May 1, 2007 at 1:28 am

devolved, Ah yes, book of Judges. Fine piece of prose. Heres an excerpt:

22 Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.

23 And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly.

24 Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing.

25 But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go.

26 Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the mans house where her lord was, till it was light.

27 And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold.

28 And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place.

29 And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.

30 And it was so, that all that saw it said, There was no such deed done nor seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day: consider of it, take advice, and speak your minds.


"Word of God?" Or the words of bronze age savages? Chechclear (go look it up) doesnt come close.

755. Intelligent design to feature in school RE lessons

Comment #36339 by scottishgeologist on May 1, 2007 at 12:47 am

What mayzee says rings a bell. When I was at school, we had one period of RE per week. First thing on a Tuesday morning. Complete and utter pish, so it was. Time that would have been much better spent dealing with Calculus, Chemistry or Physics.

Actually in some respects, it was a bit of light relief - it never taxed the brain. Not one pupil took it remotely seriously.

Of course, at school assembly, there was always the religious component. And music lessons always managed to bring in hymns and stuff like that now and again.

On the other hand, my maths and science teachers were briliant. Inspiring, funny and dedicated. Fond memories of them all. Thanks guys!

756. Why the Gods Are Not Winning

Comment #36333 by scottishgeologist on May 1, 2007 at 12:37 am

There is an interesting point at: "Rather than Amerofaith becoming deeply patriarchal as Longman thinks, it is increasingly feminine. Women church goers greatly outnumber men, who find church too dull"

I dont know about other parts of the UK, but if you look around a lot of the churches in Scotland, they are very heavily biased in the female direction. Possibly this is due to a large % of congregations being aged, so women will dominate anyway. Men just die younger. That simple.

But I have also seen this among younger "trendy" (!!!!) evangie types - women are more likely than men to have bible study groups and so on.

Also, you will also find a heavy bias towards women when you look at New Age groups and stuff like that, they tend to have a feminist edge.

It's almost a if men are not so predisposed towards superstition. That is not meant to be a sexist statement BTW! Just an observation.

I remember talking to one of my wife's friends a few years ago - she was bemoaning the fact that although she went to an evangelical church in the city, the place was hopeless when it came to men. Most of the men who were there were insipid, weak sort of types - or just weirdos. A lot of the young women there (and there were quite a few) were really pretty, intelligent and cute. What a waste.


And of course, they dont want to be "unequally yoked with an unbeliever" So they are severely limited in this respect. Marry a complete tosser (who they KNOW is a tosser) so that they can have a proper "christian " marriage. Or grow old and unloved, bitter spinsters. Never mind, they get their reward in heaven...... Its actually quite sad.

757. Believe in God Spray

Comment #36236 by scottishgeologist on April 30, 2007 at 3:20 pm

Actually, this advert isnt a million miles from certain products - try "Testamints":

http://www.testamints.net/product.html

Hilarious!

758. Convention ends with Satan and immigrants

Comment #36220 by scottishgeologist on April 30, 2007 at 2:22 pm

This "Satan" BS isnt just found amongst fundie republicans. There are a lot of Christian types in this country (the UK) who are just as bad. My wife has several evangie friends who will talk about "being under attack from Satan" and "under assault" when things get bad. I remember hearing about a church that had problems - elder was shagging pastors wife or something - and this was attributed to Satan.

Of course, the ladies of Landover have the right answers:

http://www.fes-net.com/_lob/LOL/sounds/whipSatan.wav

http://www.fes-net.com/_lob/LOL/sounds/skeerd.wav

More at: http://www.landoverbaptist.org/LOL/lol.html

:-)))))

759. Archive Hour: BBC and Religion

Comment #35815 by scottishgeologist on April 29, 2007 at 12:41 am

Lord Reith gets a mention there. Guy was a total bastard, despite (or becasue of?) his so called calvinism. His daughter wrote a book about him - the abuse she suffered was awful

There is an absolutely fascinating article about him here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/Content/displayPrintable.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/09/02/nreith02.xml&site=5&page=0

Note: "son of the manse" Probably abused and infected with the disease himself.

And: "When he was 23, he formed a homosexual attachment to a 16-year-old boy, Charlie Bowser ("very good-looking, with awfully pretty eyes")"

And: "He was equally blinkered about his own menopausal extra-marital dalliances"

Only possible explanation: Religion can screw you up, big time.

760. Two idiots get a forum

Comment #35724 by scottishgeologist on April 28, 2007 at 2:56 pm

Right, this "Comfort " guy - is he in any way related to the late Alex Comfort who wrote "The Joy of Sex" ?

Judging by the antics with the banana, I'd say yes. But given that he is a fundie, words like "sex" and "joy" are probably mutually exclusive, unless of course it is happening with a meth-fuelled rent boy....

761. Sam's Flea!

Comment #35214 by scottishgeologist on April 26, 2007 at 3:22 pm

Epeeist, Definitely go along with your BBC comments. The "Heaven And Earth" show is vile. Almost as vile than Cliff Richard's "Mistletoe and Wine" - which is the absolute pinnacle of vileness and nothing can be worse than it. Its axiomatic, definitely.

Has Dawkins himself not mentioned these programs on television and radio - I am sure this came up quite a lot when the religites were moaning about the Channel 4 "Root of All Evil?"

Sadly, the absolute worst, most grim religious program EVER is no more (I think....) I am of course talking about STV's "Late Call". Only redeeming feature was the music - from Tchaikovsky's 5th Symphony. AS it was only shown in Scotland, the rest of the UK was spared this. It was so bad it was almost worth watching.

Wikipedia even has a short entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Call

The late great, much missed Rikki Fulton did a splendid send up of it, called "Last Call". Priceless so it was.

This one is typical, and very funny:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbAikjaiiHY

762. Sam's Flea!

Comment #35178 by scottishgeologist on April 26, 2007 at 1:38 pm

Rob said:

"One final general comment: It is very noticable that in the majority of atheistic comments on this site, if there is ire and indignation it is always directed squarely at the God that you all claim doesn't exist."

Actually, I think you'll find that a lot of the ire and indignation is fired in the direction of those who preach the delusion. Its the Haggards, Phelps, televangelists and child abusers and all the other apologists who will catch most flak.

And if the bible itself gets a torrent of abuse, then well, yes it must be aimed at the prophets et al who wrote it. If Moses thought he was writing "God's" word then he was deluded also. Actually, some of that stuff in Ezekial, Daniel and Revelation reads like it was written by someone on LSD - psilocybin toadstools maybe?

Can just imagine these guys, out in the desert, chilling out after a good bit of smiting, raping and genocide, munching away on the 'shrooms then laying down some heavy stuff, man, with the quill and parchment... They are all depicted in art as looking like 60's hippies anyway.

763. Shout your doubt out loud, my fellow unbelievers

Comment #35171 by scottishgeologist on April 26, 2007 at 1:25 pm

Weefree

I am just going to stick with this one point. In your response to my comments about the multitude of sects, denominations etc you said:

"Emm….slight flaw in the argument. It would depend on human beings being perfect"

Perfection is irrelevant - all that is needed is for sound and sensible working of the available evidence and then coming up with a workable theory. The evidence I am referring to is Scripture, the theory is a coherent theology derived from it. Shouldnt be a big deal.

Right lets look at the classic Calvinism/Arminianism debate. Both these theologies have been derived from the same Scripture by very learned men - Calvin and Wesley stand out in this respect. In terms of the quality of their assesment and interpretation of Scripture, it would probably be hard to find finer examples.

Yet the two theologies are very different. Salvation based totally on Grace (Calvinism) is very different from a salvation based on a measure of human "works" input (Arminianism). Most churches are one or the other in approach.

So why these two very different "theories?" Could it be that the material that they are derived from is perhaps NOT as uniequivocal as some theists would like to make out. The Bible is full of contradictions and downright confusing passages.

Just one not insignificant example: Mark 16:9 -20. The AV treats these as canonical. However the NIV states: "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20" So are these verse part of the Bible or not? Since people have been killed handling snakes because of this, then it would be good to know. If Bible publishers cant make up their minds about this sort of thing, what hope is there for Joe Public?


The Johannine Comma (1 John 5:7) is another example of this sort of confusion. In fact, on the Free Church web site message board several years ago, one of your ministers, David Meredith referred to it as a "Roman Gloss" This was in response to I think it was the contributor "Nicholas" - I am sure you are familiar with these names.


That , sir, is why there are so many sects and denominations. Imperfect people have very little to do with it. Imperfect source material ie the Bible is much more likely.

764. The God disunion: there is a place for faith in science, insists Winston

Comment #35113 by scottishgeologist on April 26, 2007 at 8:45 am

Lord Winston is a Jew, right? So presumably this means (as far as the Christians are concerned) that he is going to burn in hell for eternity.

You didnt manage to get a chance to warn him about this horrible fate which awaits him , did you weefree?

Just wondering what Winstons take on this sort of Christian doctrine might be.

Another separate point that is worth thinking about is that he has been heavily involved in fertiity and reproduction science. If he IS a faith head, then it begs the question "why"? After all, isnt "prayer" supposed to do the trick. Besides if a couple is infertile then God must have made them that way. So is successful fertility treatment a bit like telling God "sorry pal, you got it wrong, science wins this time"

Or maybe infertility is Gods way of "testing" couples and all that BS....

Sorry, loads of questions, all at tangents.

There is actually a much simpler answer: In the natural world, there will always be degrees of fertility (just like degrees of health, strength, ability etc) - and some of these are going to be easier to fix than others. No need for gods, no need for talking to the sky, no need for superstition. Just a bit of knowledge, acquired through scientific research. Its actually that simple.

I still dont know how he manages to square superstition with reason.

765. Darwin nearly failed to evolve in print

Comment #35108 by scottishgeologist on April 26, 2007 at 8:18 am

The Murray publishing business makes interesting reading - another Enlightenment enterprise by the looks of it.

Short wikipedia article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Murray_(publisher)

Interesting that Charles Lyell also features - Lyell of course being a major influence on the young Charles Darwin.

That must have been a fascinating time to have been around - all these scientific discoveries in a rapidly evolving industrial age, the ghastly horrors of the medieval period slipping away.

Horrors of superstition still with us however...

766. Darwin nearly failed to evolve in print

Comment #35016 by scottishgeologist on April 26, 2007 at 1:11 am

Good to see this collection of work in Edinburgh. Edinburgh was very much the centre of the Enlightenment, the "Athens of the North"

Lets hope the fundraising goes well

767. The God disunion: there is a place for faith in science, insists Winston

Comment #34887 by scottishgeologist on April 25, 2007 at 2:05 pm

I found I could never look at Lord Winston in quite the same way after seeing him on one of his programs - the one where he looked at his own sperm under a microscope. All these tadpoles wriggling away.

I thought, "Hmmm, you just had a wank...."

:-))))

768. Imagine No Religion

Comment #34801 by scottishgeologist on April 25, 2007 at 9:41 am

Yes, just imagine it - a world composed of countries like the Scandinavian ones. Just think how crap that would be. Much better to have a world composed of countries ruled by the Pat Robertsons and Benny Hinns of this world. Counterbalanced of course by several nations ruled by throat-slitting bearded a-holes waving their AK47s about.

I've an idea. Lets all get together and pray for such a world..... religion has obviously got SO much more to offer than social democracy and science.

769. Shout your doubt out loud, my fellow unbelievers

Comment #34798 by scottishgeologist on April 25, 2007 at 9:08 am

Weefree:

You said:

"The use of the word fundamentalist implies that there are degrees of atheism - which is ridiculous."

The use of the word fundamentalist implies that there are degrees of theism - which is ridiculous. Except it is not. And your 'logic' is flawed in the extreme

Sorry, I just dont get it, I honestly cannot fathom out what you are on about. Can anyone else?

The other point about scottish church history was quite simple - Yorker made a comment which got me thinking about sects and so on. You cannot possibly deny that Scottish church history is full of this Pythonesque stuff. Right up to recent times in your own denomination.

Since all these branches claim to know the truth, it makes me wonder, who is right? And why are the others wrong? Now I know all the stuff about calvinism /arminianism /legalism / voluntaryism / patronage / establishment principle / I've been through all that years ago. Angels on pinheads spring to ind.

If the Bible which is supposedly the infallible guide to this stuff was REALLY that clear (and after all it does carry a message of salvation, so it is pretty important, you would say?) then there would be no need for all these sects and denominations. There would be ONE church . Period.

So when it comes to "the truth" only one lot can be right - the others MUST contain some degree of eror or omission.

So which is it? Which one is right? And why? Or maybe they are all simply wrong.

770. Shout your doubt out loud, my fellow unbelievers

Comment #34744 by scottishgeologist on April 25, 2007 at 4:22 am

Yorker: "freakish sect of religites" ROFLMAO!

Actually, in their determination to be the absolute bearers of this absolute truth, the Scottish churches over the years hae shown a mind-numbing number of splits, unions and general "rattle thrown out the pram" behaviour.

Look at this link:

http://uk.geocities.com/edward.andrews@btinternet.com/chart.html

Unbelievable. And that is just up to 1929. The chart is actually incomplete regarding the last few decades: Since then there was the formation of the Associated Presbyterian Churches in 1988 (they broke from the Free Presbyterians over the Lord Mackay affair).

And then there was the Free Church Continuing who broke from the Free Church in 2000 because one of the Free Church professors wasnt properly dealt with over alleged sexual misconduct in Australia. Allegedly. Or was it because of "liberalism" in the FC? Who knows, who cares?

And it goes on and on and on.


This is the sort of stuff that Monty Python parodied with their "Judean Popular Front" sketch in the Life of Brian

771. Shout your doubt out loud, my fellow unbelievers

Comment #34723 by scottishgeologist on April 25, 2007 at 2:07 am

Not sure I care for this expression "atheist fundamentalism" - it is meaningless. To be a-theist is to not believe in god or gods. end of story. You cant have degrees of "not-ness" You eiter "are " or "arent"

The use of the word fundamentalist implies that there are degrees of atheism - which is ridiculous.

Probably what people like weefree are referring to is "militant atheism" which is a rather more honest term. Sure, there are the sort of armchair, pipe-smoking don types of atheists who vote lib-dem and seldom mention their atheism. And yes there are people like Dawkins et al who shout more loudly.

there may be a differnce in their style but as far as their degree of atheism, there is no difference.

Unlike religion of course where there is a whole spectrum of belief from "just about touching atheism" liberalism (eg John Spong) right through to the Fred Phelps of this world. In which case the word "fundamentalist" can be properly used.

772. The God disunion: there is a place for faith in science, insists Winston

Comment #34717 by scottishgeologist on April 25, 2007 at 1:54 am

According to the web site;

http://www.medicdirect.co.uk/news/news.ihtml?pid=1193&step=2


Winston is going to: "look at the nature of human uncertainty and argues that it is as equally 'deluded' to believe that Science has all the answers as it is to profess a belief in God. Both are critically important in the history of humanity and both religion and science have important and valuable contributions to make about the nature of the world around us."

No self respecting scientist WOULD claim to have all the answers - that position would be clearly ridiculous.

And according to the bit I have just quoted, he says: "equally deluded to profess a belief in god"

So does this mean he DOESNT believe in god as it is just as deluded as thinking that science has all the answers?

This doesnt quite square with what the Guardian article says.

I suppose the only proper way to find out would be to go along.

No doubt, the Wee Flea will be there since his church is in Dundee....

773. Sam's Flea!

Comment #34565 by scottishgeologist on April 24, 2007 at 1:54 pm

kroger asks "why allow sin in the first place" Good questions esp since God is supposed to be perfect.

This insanity reaches its climax in Genesis 6 where God gets miffed and decides to kill everything (except fish presumably...)

If you want a real laugh, look at this (the Brick Testament )

http://www.thebricktestament.com//genesis/the_flood/gn06_11.html

People lying around pissed, fighting, shagging sheep!!!! , and gambling.

So God regrets it all:

http://www.thebricktestament.com//genesis/the_flood/gn06_07.html



The Brick Testament is worth checking out - some of it is seriously funny. I particularly like the Holy Ghost about to give Mary a good seeing-to....

http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_life_of_jesus/jesus_is_born_02/lk01_35.html

774. Pope abolishes limbo

Comment #34410 by scottishgeologist on April 24, 2007 at 2:00 am

devolved wrote:

"Published in Chemistry in Australia April 2007, pp. 19–20. Ashton, J"

There is already controversy over this article. It is NOT peer-reviewed. This guy Ashton is a YEC 6 day AiG type.

Ashton uses Francis Collins for support. (Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute)Collins is also a Christian who believes in "theistic evolution" as opposed to the YEC school of wingnuttery.

Collins point about YEC / 6 day creationism is that:

'If the tenets of young-earth creationism were true, basically all the sciences of geology, cosmology, and biology would utterly collapse. It would be the same as saying 2 plus 2 is actually 5. The tragedy of young-earth creationism is that it takes a relatively recent and extreme view of Genesis, applies to it an unjustified scientific gloss, and then asks sincere and well-meaning seekers to swallow this whole, despite the massive discordance with decades of scientific evidence from multiple disciplines. Is it any wonder that many sadly turn away from faith concluding that they cannot believe in a God who calls for an abandonment of logic and reason?'

In other words those that subscribe to this sort of pish are ridiculous and are actually dangerous to faith. A large number of theists ARE evolutionists. (No doubt they are heading off to hell by the truck load...)

So when a YEC / 6 day nutjob like Ashton writes a non -peer reviewed article , which is little more than an opinion column, it carries no weight whatsoever.

The biggest problem with this sorry incident is when a scientific journal publishes this sort of stuff. It damages the credibiity of the journal in question.

You would think these people would learn after that flawed study into prayer and fertility that appeared in the Journal of Reproductive Medicine. You can read about it here:

http://www.randi.org/jr/070904that.html#1

Peer reviewed journals represent the absolute cutting edge of scientific knowledge - when this sort of nonsense appears it damages the entire scientific community.

Editors, take care will you?

775. Atheists split on how to not believe

Comment #34242 by scottishgeologist on April 23, 2007 at 3:42 pm

Weefree said: "I prefer the truth" Presumably, you consider the following "the truth":

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh to the Father but by me"

and "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved"

So when you have finished a funeral service for an "unsaved" man, you would have no difficulty in telling the grieving widow that her late husband is actually in hell. And not as she thinks "at his rest"

After all, you prefer the truth....

776. 'The Day They Kicked God out of the Schools' & Rebuttal

Comment #34230 by scottishgeologist on April 23, 2007 at 3:06 pm

I must say that I am intrigued by this business of "keeping God out of the schools" Others have touched on this omnipotence thing. I was always led to believe that coming to faith was the work of the holy Spirit, that grace was irresistable and to quote C H Spurgeon "Defend the Gospel? The Gospel is like a lion - it just needs to be turned loose"

So surely, if God "wanted " to be in school, his Holy Spirit would NOT be resisted and the efforts of secularists would be thwarted?

I find this business to be a little bit like these Christians who talk about "letting" God into their lives and "letting " God talk to you through the Bible. Almost as if God can be shut out and controlled.

I dont find that sort of Deity very omnipotent....

777. Street Evangelist Saves 300 Souls From Enjoying Park

Comment #33855 by scottishgeologist on April 22, 2007 at 8:27 am

Re oeditor's post about the Edinburgh Festival:

There was also another group that used to protest, although I am not sure if they went to the Ed Fest. I am talking of course about the late Pastor Jack Glass and his flock.

A bit like a Scottish Ian Paisley, Jack Glass was never far from controversy. You can read about him here:

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=224442004

and

http://news.scotsman.com/obituaries.cfm?id=225132004

Definitely a colourful character, actually sadly missed in a lot of ways, despite his fundie-ism, he never wavered in his faith. He actually "walked the walk", even if it was a flawed path he strode.

778. Gay hate church to picket VT gun rampage funerals

Comment #33834 by scottishgeologist on April 22, 2007 at 4:13 am

Actually, the sign that the kid is holding is OK:- "Dont pray for the USA" Exactly, Dont pray for anything. Youre either talking to yourself, the floor or the sky.

Either way youre wasting your time.

And you sound like a complete 'tard as well....

779. Medicine without Evolution Make Sense?

Comment #33831 by scottishgeologist on April 22, 2007 at 4:09 am

Yorker has asked a very interesting question: "

"How can anyone against evolution want to be a doctor in the first place?"

There are certain evangelical churches that I know of that have a very high number of medics in them. St Georges Tron in Glasgow is one. SO is the Charlotte Baptist Chapel in Edinburgh. From anecdotal evidence, I know of many "christian" medics, consultants, doctors etc in Inverness.

For some reason, a lot of medics are evangelicals. There used to be a joke about the Charlotte Baptist Church that if you took ill there, you would probably get crushed in the stampede of doctors rushing to help you.

So 2 questions. Why are so many medics faith heads? I am sure its not just a Scottish phenomenon, although Scotland has been famous for both medicine and religion in the past. It seems to me that medics, almost stand apart from other scientists in this respect

The second question is: How many of them are anti -evolution? I would suspect, from anecdotal evidence and from those that I know, that a lot probably believe in "theistic evolution" - ie Evo is the process that God used to create the species. Rather than YEC or other such nonsense.

Figures are probably very hard to come by.

Has anyone else encountered this "medics at church" phenomenon?

780. Gay hate church to picket VT gun rampage funerals

Comment #33675 by scottishgeologist on April 21, 2007 at 4:26 am

Bizarro

I dont think my point is an over-generalisation. There is plenty of hate amongst Muslim and Christian fundies. Sure, the moderates dont go around waving aloft pictures of hate filled clerics and shouting Allahu Akhbar! Neither do moderate christians go around like Phelps bunch

But I was talking about the fundies - I used to go to a fundie church. There was nothing they liked better at the after church "fellowship" than to get together and say how awful certains groups of people were - gays for example, liberal types, people like Bishop holloway. I never once heard the word "love " used. OK, that's anecdotal, but I know it is pretty general among these types. I have a lot of acquaintances and indeed some relatives who attend fundie churches and I knwo exactly their position.

They say things like "love the sinner and hate the sin" They dont mean it. Their hatred is almost palpable at times. they love the idea of certain people burning in hell. They get a kick out of it. They love it when their preachers talk about it.

Besides, hate is a biblical value. Try Romans 9:13 - "As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated" . This part of Romans deals clearly with the concept of election - the saved vs the unsaved. God loves the saved ie Jacob. And hates the unsaved ie Esau.

And of course, if you continue toread it, those that are saved because God foreordained them to salvation. And those that are damned are damned because God arranged it so!

So in order to be "Godly" (how I f****** hate that word) you need to be like God and do some Hating. WBC are actually quite right in what they believe, in a bizarre sort of way.

And to get back to my original point, the other side of it of course is that the churches that are most likely to show any sort of Love to gays are the very liberal ones, the ones that get described as "synagogues of Satan" by the fundies!

781. Gay hate church to picket VT gun rampage funerals

Comment #33377 by scottishgeologist on April 20, 2007 at 1:10 am

"The evidence is they were not Christian. God does not do that to his servants," a church spokesperson told CBS news

Eh? So Christians dont get killed?

So much for the "blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" and also these guys who were murdered in Turkey.

These guys need locking up

All this "hate " talk.

When RD was talking to that nutjob "jew turned muzzie" in the "Root of all Evil", the guy said he "hated atheists" Dawkins said "he didnt hate anyone"

Seems like Love and Fundieism are mutually exclusive.

782. Where Is Atheism When Bad Things Happen?

Comment #33370 by scottishgeologist on April 20, 2007 at 12:59 am

Gordon Brown

That web link is spot on. There are some very good questions there for the believers. Of course when bad things happen then "he moves inm ysterious ways" or "His ways are above ours" or "he must have a special plan for them" or "god must have wanted them very badly" (That last one isplain ridiculous - God is impatient?)

But whjen good happens, then its "PTL" or " Isnt God good" or "prayer answered - God is faithful" or that cloyingly sickening one "Our god is good"

Whereas if they were to stand back, take their heads out their arses and see the truth for what it is - there is no god. Period.

In fact, the complete uslessness of prayer is , IMO, the nearest there is to proof that God doesnt exist. Despite the lies in the Bible about prayer being answered.

I dont know what it is, there is just something about praying that seems so childish, puerile, pathetic. Even when I followed the belief bullshit several years ago, I was never ever comfortable with it.

As a complete aside, we have a 50 day "prayer walk" taking place in Scotland right now. A bunch of charismatic nutjobs driving around and praying over various places. If you want a laugh, have a look at the blog:

http://connectingscotland.blogspot.com/

Delusional or what?

Of course in a couple of weeks time, it will all be forgotten, it will achieve nothing except give the deludees a warm cozy fuzzy feeling and they'll retreat into their comfort zone, secure in their delusion.

783. Flea Circus!

Comment #33221 by scottishgeologist on April 19, 2007 at 3:45 pm

I'd be surprised if there wasnt some sort of religious angle to this guy. In addition to this "jesus" stuff, he had apparently "Ismail Ax" written on his arm and also as the return address on the package he sent. WTF is all that about?

The worlds biggest church is Korean. Pentecostalism is massive there.
Heres some info: http://www.rickross.com/reference/yoidoyonggi/yoido12.html

Back to the massacre. This VT maniac has a sister who apparently has "got religion" and has spoken about it

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3057057&page=1

So who knows what was going on in this guys head? Could be he was simply nuts.

784. Flea Circus!

Comment #33130 by scottishgeologist on April 19, 2007 at 12:03 pm

jam007

What weefree is referring to happened in the 90's. There may have been incidents in the 70s but I dont know about them.

It is linked to death metal, heathen, satanist types who burned some old stave churches.

They referred to christianity getting rid of their old pagan, heathen culture.

In other words they want to swap one dose of delusion for another.

The church burning was one group of delusionists destroying the symbols of another.

Actually, I think this sort of thing is pretty stupid. THe Norwegian stave churches are part of the Norwegian culture, they are remarkable buildings, and strangely, they actually contain pagan elements in their design.

In that respect it is like a lot of other Christian stuff (Easter and Christmas) for instance which are absolutely steeped in paganism. But thats another thread I am sure!

785. Christians at Bible publishers have their throats cut

Comment #33100 by scottishgeologist on April 19, 2007 at 7:31 am

weefree mentioned the Norwegian church burnings. These were done by self styled HM "Satanists" In other words, they got rid of one delusion and latched onto another. Of course, for us people of reason, there is no evidence of "Satan" whatsoever. However, weefree believes in him.

Tell me, what is Satans weight, height, colour, refractive index, specific gravity, specific heat capacity? Any albedo effect? Or is he totally "dark"? Does he orbit the Sun? Moon? Zeta Reticulli?

Could try applying the same tests to "God" you'd get the same results: zilch, zero, nothing, neoni.

But back to Norway. Actually, weefree reckons its a cool sort of place. He wrote this (talking about a Norwegian financialist):

"I don't know if he is a Christian but he certainly operates in a much more Christian system and country than we have. If Santa was to visit me this Christmas I would ask for two things – firstly that Murdo Fraser (vice-President of the Scottish Conservatives) and Alex Salmond (leader of the Scottish Nationalists) would unite and lead Scotland to being an independent nation with a Scandinavian sense of moral rectitude and secondly that Knut Kjaer would take over the disastrous Free Church pension fund so that we would have a Church left and I would get a pension. "

Weefree, I like your longing for Scotland to be like Norway. Norway, like the other Scandinavian countries is among the most secular in Europe. And also among the most societally UN-dysfunctional.

Is there a connection? Perhaps we should be told... there is you know - its here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article571206.ece

786. Mozart doesn't make you clever

Comment #32609 by scottishgeologist on April 17, 2007 at 3:11 pm

Steelman, thanks for that link - that's amazing isnt it? The transformation!!! When you read the article, it appears that he was quite radical back then and sounds quite radical now, so he sounds OK.


Actually, that album cover isnt really too bad when you consider the times - there were millions of guys who looked like that at the time.

On the other hand, that John Bult album cover is just hideous.... really disturbing.... I love the comments underneath it.

787. Mozart doesn't make you clever

Comment #32476 by scottishgeologist on April 17, 2007 at 6:18 am

Oh yes, a few more ludicrous albums for you:

This from a South African site:

http://www.africans.co.za/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=959

Look at that "All my friends are dead" !!

Amd good old Landover Baptist has got this page of crackers (scroll down a bit to see them)

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=2024

Some of these are openly racist as well as ridiculous... But of course, being Landover Baptist, they are probably all spoofs anyway...

PS: Note that "I wrestled with God" cover. The guy's name is Phelps!!! Hmmmmm...

788. Mozart doesn't make you clever

Comment #32458 by scottishgeologist on April 17, 2007 at 5:48 am

I definitely go along with Yorker's comments on Beethoven - the violin concerto is sublime. Actually one of my best Beethoven moments was when in the car, parked at the side of the road in Glen Torridon (for those of you who are familiar with the place, you'll get a feel for this) Massive thunderstorm, serious lightning and thunder. On the radio (Radio 3) Beethoven's 7th Symphony was playing. Could not have had a better soundtrack.

Love the piano sonatas as well.


On a differnet note (!) Logicel, glad you liked that link - I was in fits first time I saw those pictures.

789. Mozart doesn't make you clever

Comment #32382 by scottishgeologist on April 17, 2007 at 1:23 am

Lord_Satorius,

You have just made my day! "Leafbanging!" ROFLMAO!!

And just to keep the amusement levels high, how about this picture:

http://www.kapelovitz.com/christianmetal.htm

(The article is quite interesting too)

Of course when it comes to music and faith, you really have to look at some of the album covers to get a proper feel for it. Have a look at this lot - these are notorious album covers, note how many of them are "faith based"

http://www.atlantaillustrated.com/blogs/blog02/2005_05_01_atlantablog02.asp

There is actually a website devoted to bad album covers www.bizarrerecords.com

790. For Some Hispanics, Coming to America Also Means Abandoning Religion

Comment #32236 by scottishgeologist on April 16, 2007 at 9:54 am

Pentecost,

Hey you hit the nail on the head - I like that "rock oldies" Absolutely spot on too - anything late 60s, early 70s, classic rock, HM, all that stuff.

Been downhill ever since then, with a slight bump upwards however with NWOBHM, but since then, nah, ageing hippie thats me! :-))))

Gimme a Strat, a Marshall with a bottle of Jack Daniels sitting on it, some like minded company and hey, beats religion hands down!

791. For Some Hispanics, Coming to America Also Means Abandoning Religion

Comment #32220 by scottishgeologist on April 16, 2007 at 8:25 am

Pentecost asked; And who, even here at richarddawkins.net, does not like gospel music?

Ans: I dont. I f------- hate it!

But you do raise an intersting point with the churches and the music and all that. The music, esp that repetitive charismatic mind numbing puerile drivel that they wave their arms about to is little more than a hypnotic way of getting them into the altered state of consciousness that allows their slick pastors to manipulate them, and tell them what to believe.

Even non-charismaniac conservative believers see through this BS.

792. Praying for the Apocalypse

Comment #31517 by scottishgeologist on April 13, 2007 at 4:55 am

Re the Alpha course. These courses are little more than charismatic mind control and manipulation events. Even other conservative christians (non charismatic) will say this. Pure poison.

For a good critique of how these evil mind controlling people operate read this article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4078844,00.html

Note this comment: "Why didn't anyone tell me I'd signed up for a brainwashing cult?" says one. "I felt like I was in a pack of hyenas. I wanted someone to come up and ask me if I was okay, and instead someone came up and said, 'Would you like me to pray for you?'"

Bullshit stacked miles high....

793. Pope says science too narrow to explain creation

Comment #31308 by scottishgeologist on April 12, 2007 at 1:38 am

Infidel Michaels comment above is spot on and ver succinct. Good one!

I remember reading somewhere that theology was once known as the "queen of the sciences" Mind you that was in medieval times...

Anyway, if you are familiar with the mathematician Eric Temple Bell, you know that mathematics is the queen of the sciences:

http://www.archive.org/details/queenofthescienc031537mbp

(and also its servant!)

794. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30641 by scottishgeologist on April 9, 2007 at 5:49 am

Yorker

Thanks for the bit about the Gibson statue - I had completely forgotten about it. Actually, i've now got an image of it in my head that wont go away... :-)

Yes, I shook my head in disbelief the first time I saw it.

Your comment on nationalism is probably worthy of a thread in itself. When coupled with religious fervour it is a seriously dangerous combination - after all the OT history of Israel is all about that particular combination.

795. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30613 by scottishgeologist on April 9, 2007 at 3:14 am

All this talk about death - to me there is a striking point about how religites deal with this. All the Abrahamic relgions make claims that after death, a person is either punished for eternity or rewarded for eternity. One is unbelievable bliss, the other unimaginable agony.

If you were enduring fantastic, unbeleivable pleasure on earth, your mates would certainly mention it. If you were suffering appaling agonies here on earth, thay would be doing all they could to offer support or help.

Yet, when Aunt Aggie or Uncle George dies, how many of their Christian (for example) relatives ever say in the years afterwards, "Wonder what they are doing in heaven today?" or "Just think Aggie has been in heaven for 20 years now, wonder what it is like?" Of course they NEVER say that "unsaved" Uncle George is still being burned...

So why the silence? Why do they NEVER EVER discuss such things?

I'll tell you why: deep down, they dont really believe it. Neither do a lot of their preachers. The whole rotten thing is about mind control and manipulation

796. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30597 by scottishgeologist on April 9, 2007 at 1:44 am

His comments about the SNP are frankly ridiculous. The SNP bases its policies on Scandinavian style social democracy, which as far as I can make out are reasonably balanced, sensible countries that are thoroughly secular. The Braveheart comment is ludicrous. Most Scots find Mel Gibsons Braveheart an embarassment

As for the business of countering Islam by getting into Christianity... great. One dose of superstition counterbalanced by another. Both religions making mutually exclusive claims. End result conflict. Might as well just lift the flap turn the key and press the red button now... hey, that would keep the fundies happy - they'd get their armageddon.

797. Prophets of the new atheism

Comment #30432 by scottishgeologist on April 8, 2007 at 3:18 am

This guy talks about "nourishing faiths"

I hate it when these religious types talk about "feeding" on the word of god or "drinking deeply" from the "well of scripture"

I'd rather starve than be poisoned by that mind warping venom.

798. How to defend your faith with an electric wheelchair

Comment #30422 by scottishgeologist on April 8, 2007 at 3:10 am

Hey that tankchair is a cool looking machine. It reminds me of a Land Rover that I see regularly on my travels - the one at Lix Toll garage in Perthshire. Its a big yellow Series II with tracks. Theres a pic of it here:

http://www.lr-mad.co.uk/tracked.html

Huh! Now there's a Chelsea Tractor. Dont mess with that at Tesco!

All it needs is that ridiculous Ichthys fish logo on the back and you'd be welcome at any SUV infested evangie church...

799. Jesus and Mo: Dummy

Comment #30313 by scottishgeologist on April 7, 2007 at 2:08 pm

Wonderful word dummy. In Scotland at any rate it was an abbreviation of "dummy tit" Honest. I presume the correct usage was "dummy teat" but no one ever said that. Probably considered too posh or affected.

A popular playground rhyme of the time went "Tell tale tit, yer mammy cannae knit, yer daddy cannae go tae bed withoot a dummy tit"

(cannae: cant, withoot: without)

800. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30189 by scottishgeologist on April 7, 2007 at 7:18 am

Yorker's Achilles Heel of religion is right. I remember reading about the Puritan idea of "Two Books"

"We have available to us not just one book of God, but two: the book of God's word in Scripture, which concerns the ultimate nature and destiny of humanity, and the book of God's works in nature, which deals with the conditions of the created order…. The entire flowering of modern culture, and derivatively of modern technology, grew out of this essentially religious conception of the two books of God."

Which was all fine and well several hundred years ago. Problem for the theists is that the book of nature, ie scientific knowledge, is still being added to and growing and expanding. The so called word of God is stuck in the Bronze Age. There has been no new revelation, no new canonical books of scripture.

As the two move furthr apart, there has to come a time when religion just sounds ridiculous and of historical value only.