GOD IS DEAD

How can I be a member of a blog and I rarely ever write posts? Nawa for me o


“God is dead.” Those words were uttered by Friedrich Nietzsche [exceptional fellow] sometime in the 19th century. Apparently, Friedrich was convinced he had stumbled upon an epiphany no one could deny. As far as he was concerned, the spread of science and enlightenment in Europe guaranteed God’s days were numbered. He believed this so much that he set out to devise a means of maintaining moral order in the absence of God. LOL.


Fast forward many many years to the present. Mr Nietzsche is dead and God apparently isn’t. Yes, there has been a clear decline in belief in God over the past century, but with Europe harboring believers in the healthy double digit percentage range and Africa in a conflagration for God; it's hard to make the case that God is in anyway desperate for some sort of life support.


On the one hand, I can see why the man thought the way he did. With the emergence of Darwin’s theories on evolution, advancements in astronomy and science in general, he was convinced that the truth will set us free. He probably believed that the natural consequence of such developments is an insurmountable burden on faith. I suspect he imagined that, in his time, one would need an unattainable size of faith to believe in tales of a talking snake convincing a grown woman [fashioned after a rib] to fail a test of obedience set by a God who drowns his own people in genocidal numbers. A God who, by the way, didn’t equip man with “the knowledge of good and evil” before going ahead to test man’s tendency to choose evil over good. A test posed as a onetime true/false exam, in the form of a fruit, and punishable by the death of all generations. What a fool Nietzsche was for having so much faith in common sense.


On the other hand; the guy underestimated God’s self preservation instincts, overstated man's capacity for radical ideological change and was just plain silly to put an expiration date on an idea. The sad irony is, for all his obsession with Darwin's work on evolutionary biology, and his own study of God morphing over time and across cultures, the man didn't count on God evolving to samba to the tune of the alleged death knell sounded by science. A dance that has grown in sophistication as God's followers edit, evermore rapidly, what they believe of him to suit their taste.

That one is a metaphor. This one, a translation error. Ignore that bit, that's just a reflection of their abhorrent cultural practices. No, that's just mans imperfection/prejudice sneaking into the word you can ignore it. Yup, It's the age of the personalized God. God 2.0. They may call themselves Christians/Muslims or Mormons, but within each group every individual worships a different customized version of God. This is very easy to verify, challenge any critical part of their books and the fevered editing takes off in every direction.

Maybe this unconscious breakup of the one God into a pantheon is indeed symptomatic of his demise. It is just possible that he is edited into oblivion, bit by bit, one fantastic tale after another. Perhaps that's what Friedrich foresaw? Chances are, he just got the obituary date wrong. Oh, how fulfilled he would be if he could witness this all too subtle slow death of God at the hands of God's own worshipers. Patricide of a divine variety. If he was a sadist, the pace might excite him.



Anyways, on to my question. As a believer, if you had the chance to speak with that clueless heretic, what would you tell Nietzsche is the basis of your faith?


PS: Please. This is about "belief in God" dying. It is not about God dying. It's a metaphor. That's how the phrase "God is dead" was originally used, and that's what this post is about. I didn't think I needed to spell it out, but judging from the number of comments I've received pointing out that "logical flaw," I should have included this PS from the start. I am however, amused to see that religious folks make the "belief is not equal to existence" connection easily.

BLOGSVILLE PEEPS PLEASE COME HITHER!!

Quick Edit - We have a new contributor on this blog, his name is Messiah. Chai, the things I learnt from this dude had me laughing my ass off. He is going to be 'anonymous' so nobody should be SNOOPY!
I have been talking to this boy called Chuks on my Facebook and this boy has been trying to convince me of the err of my 'religious views'. Now because of this boy I have decided to do this post, because it is going to explain once and forever what I think about 'Faith'. Sogbo? Ok lets move on.
First of all I am going to teach you all one phrase called 'False Dilemma'.
False Dilemma - is is based on the assumption that the choices offered are the only choices. By focusing on the choice, the decision to be made, the other person is distracted from the fact that there may be other alternatives.

This is usually presented as two choices.

Usually, a lot of things happen to us in this life that are strange or mysterious and maybe we have some good luck and we attribute what has happened in our lives at that point as being a 'MIRACLE' from God".
Now I do not know about how many of you have watched 'Crash' but I will give you all a breakdown of what happened towards the end of the move.

'An Arabian Father had beef with a Mexican dude who had a daugher. The Arabian dude went over to the Mexican dude's house to shoot him dead, as he accosted the Mexican dude he pulled out his gun. But the little daughter of the Mexican ran into her father's arms just as the bullet was shot at her 'Dad'. The Mexican thought that he was dead and the Arabian dude thought he had killed the daugher of the Mexican. Now prior to the shooting, the Mexican dude had told his daughter that he had given her an 'invisible cloak' which would make her bulletproof so when she was now shot. There was no blood and she had not been hit, the Arabian dude thought it was a miracle, and the Mexican dude also though it was a Miracle. Now the Arabian dude went to his house and unbeknownst to the Arabian guy, his daughter had replaced the bullets in his gun with 'blanks' meaning that there were no live bullets in the gun. But she never told her dad what she had done. The Arabian dude now told his daughter that he had met an angel from 'God' and that the daughter of the Mexican dude is his angel, now that arabian dude will now start being a 'good' man and he will probably give testimony/offering in his church/mosque and his faith has been thoroughly throughly strengthened. The same goes for the Mexican dude who's daughter was shot, he would now view what happened as a miracle and he will go and say God saved his daughter and given testimony in church and his faith will also be strengthened.'

What is my point?My point is this, both the Mexican and Arabian dude have had their faith strengthened abi? But what is that their faith based on? A lie. Because they both do not know that the bullets in the gun was a blank. And this is the case in so many so many cases. A lot of people get their 'Faith' reinforced daily by little things in their day and they'll say stuff like 'God' helped me today, yet they never know what actually caused the things that made them happy. I mean think about it? For all they know it could be the devil who did them a favor? I mean if we are going to thank God for good things, we should thank him for bad things as well nah. I mean take the 'Haitian Earthquake' for example, we should thank God for that afterall only 100 thousand people died but it could have been worse abi? It could have been 200k, 500k, 1million but it was only a measly 100k? Hiss.  And tomany times, a lot of religious people commit this false dilemma fallacy, take for example the crisis in Haiti where a 65 year old woman was pulled out from the rubble after 7 days, a guy on my facebook was saying that it was a 'miracle'. He did not seek other 'alternatives' to explain what had happened, until somebody on his friend's list explained to him why it would be possible for somebody to still be alive after 7 days inside the rubble'. Now if nobody had told that guy why it was possible, his faith would have been 'strenghtened' and when he meets people like me he'll say stuff like 'You do not understand/know what I've seen and been through in this life to make me put all my faith/trust in God.' Don't lie, most of you have heard people say this and you have probably been the ones who've said this.

My point to people like Chuks is this, your faith might make you be a 'good' person and Enoch I am    

putting quotation marks around the word 'good' because of the discussion you and I had about it.But seeing as these good people are not privy to the discussion I will use the word 'good' for now. So as I was saying jare, Chuks and people like Chuks, your faith might make you be a good person and you might be charitable,kind, generous etc. But ask yourself what your faith is really based on? Is it based on 'Truth'? What is the foundational bases of your faith? 

And does it matter to you whether your faith is based on a Truth or a lie? Because in the Dark Knight at the end of the movie when Batman took the blame for the 'two-faced' dude and told the cop to let the people of Gotham think that it was Batman who had been the bad guy because it was important for the people of Gotham not to lose faith. This is what Batman said "Sometimes, truth isn't good enough, sometimes people deserve more. Sometimes people deserve to have their faith rewarded." 

My question then to you all would be, do you want your faith to be based on Truth or do you want it to be based on lies? Personally I want mine to be based on Truth, not just on a lie. Even if the lie brings about goody goody stuff, but the foundation is still a lie. As I was telling Chuks, I would rather be 'mad' with the truth than to be 'sane' with lies. I hope I have succeeded in teaching you all something lol.
This is not to say that I believe all 'Faith' is based on lies, am sure that there might be some 'Faith' how there there can be based on 'Truth'. And how do you discover the 'Truth' by asking questions. And how do you know when a belief is not based on 'Truth' when people 'cringe' or try to shut you up when you sincerely ask them for the basis of their faith. Formerly Stealth Reader and Chuks/people like them I honestly ask you to check/verify that your faith is based on 'Truth' not on a 'lie'. Or maybe it might not matter to you all what your faith is based on, as long as it promotes 'good' etc. 
Chuks has been trying to get me to 'open my heart' and welcome the Lord Jesus into my heart and I've consistently told him that it really is not easy being a christian. To be a good Christian, one must have the ability to delegate the responsibility of thinking from their brain to the anus. No offence lol.

Stubborn pathogen, unsuspecting host.

Hi.

My name is Enoch. Most of you know me as that commenter with a peculiar fondness for ludicrously long comments.

Imagine how long this post is going to be now that there are no character limits :)

Anyway, there is nothing controversial in my post. In fact I am assuming a different role today. I'll be your cheerful tour guide.

You see, a crime has been committed and I'll take you on a tour of the crime scene. I'll be as careful as I can because the crime is in progress and the criminal never stops. The criminal has total control over the scene and would kick me out the second I get him too uncomfortable. You are no stranger to the scene and you're familiar with the wrongs, you just don't see them as such. All I can to do is point this out to you and show you the evidence. You will have to decide to either; ignore it, prosecute it or judge yourself to be in too deep. Hate to break it to you but you are the victim and the perpetrator. And your mind, is the scene of the crime.


Imagine an idea as dangerous as a thermonuclear device and more virulent than the seasonal flu/conjunctivitis. An idea so well crafted such that once a person decides to play host to this idea and accepts it, the host can almost never let it go. He is compelled to nuture it and spread it and is blinded to the fact that it imprisons him and intends to keep him locked up forever. Now imagine you are infected with this idea.

How do you design an idea to meet those specifications? Simple, all you need are five components. I'll play the role of the designer. Let the tour begin.

On my left you've got the ultimate THREAT.

1) The THREAT: Why have one? well, fear is the number one motivator. It is so because evolution's critical goal has always been self preservation. For this reason, it was important that your ancestors be filled with fear when they encountered a predator like say, a lion. Fear provided the trigger for the biological precursors that gave them a heightened sense of awareness and the ability to stretch their bodies and minds to the limit. That was evolution's perfect tool to ensure the survival of a species. This is the reason fear is the most compelling emotion. If our dangerous idea is going to be self sustaining, it would need fear to keep our host on his toes. To elicit this emotion, the THREAT has got to come in two parts. The earthly version which is every conceivable wrong that can happen to a person on earth and the otherworldly version which has to be abstract and vague but represent the very essence of pain. That way everyone experiences it in their own personal visceral way. Since evolution has conditioned us to fear death, why don't we take a page from Ivan Pavlov and profit from evolution's million year effort? Our imaginary otherworldly THREAT would be just like death but unimaginably worse. Some sort of an enduring death with copious amounts of suffering. Perpetual pain and death in one package.

Right above the THREAT, in appealing glitter, you've got the PROMISE.

2) The PROMISE: Is this even necessary? Of course it is. We've got to respect the dichotomy of nature. Besides, being rewarded is also part of evolution's toolkit. We should keep borrowing from her. Fear is nothing without a reward. All animals harness fear to escape predators in order to continue living. When they do so, they are rewarded with life. Sounds good enough. We will make our otherworldly PROMISE life without end. On earth, we could throw in all kinds of promises. All imaginable goodies obtainable on earth. But how can you manage this, you ask? Surely , in reality, the idea can't live up to such expectations! Its host would surely smell a rat once the cruelties of life hits him in the face. Have faith my friend, have faith. Faith? what is that? I'll be designing that too in a moment just keep reading and you'll observe how to take care of the problem you've just highlighted.

That right there in the dark is the bad cop.

3) The BAD COP: The boogieman. The evil dude. Remember what you mentioned earlier about the cruelties of life? This is our fall guy. He would take the fall for everything that falls out of favor with our host. He will also be the resident punching bag on demand to take out all your frustrations.

And then we've got the GOOD COP. He is all around you.

4) The GOOD COP: The nice imaginary friend. The antithesis of the evil dude. He takes credit for everything positive that randomly happens to our host. The host has cancer? Bad cop! Narrowly escapes a car crash? Good cop! pretty simple. Naturally, he also takes credit for the PROMISE. His job, essentially, is to be an opportunist in every sense of the word. Limited only by the imagination of the host. If the host can imagine a positive spin on any scenario/circumsttance, he steps in and snatches the credit. No questions asked. Also, we ascribe him the attribute of being infinitely wise. That way if things go inexplicably wrong the host gets to chuck it up to the mystery of infinite wisdom.

And lastly, the HEAD SHOT. I can't show it to you because it is not a thing, rather, it is the absence of something.

5) The HEAD SHOT: This is the most critical of all components of the idea. It is so important because none of the others are real. Essentially, this is where we take out the head of the host. We've got to shut down his ability to reason for himself. We can't have him thinking and seeing through our folly. Since all the aforementioned components are fake there is no evidence for any of them but we need to convince our host somehow. How do we do this? Faith. What is that, you ask? Well, its really nothing new. I'm borrowing again, this time from the insane. You notice how psychiatric cases have strong convictions about imaginary stuff? We'll just rebrand that. We will call it faith and classify it as good. You might think to yourself, don't be silly, no one is going to accommodate subtle bouts of insanity just to host your idea. That's what you think but in reality all I need is to employ the THREAT and offer the PROMISE and its a done deal.


There you have it. The blueprint for lifelong incarceration. Totally self contained. All imaginary but that doesn't matter. The HEAD SHOT takes care of that.

AS long as it is noted that hosts are more welcoming to the idea when their minds are most pliable (young age or following a traumatic experience) and the host is offered the PROMISE as a reward for spreading the idea then everyone is a potential vector for this pathogen of an idea and its virulence can only grow in bounds.


Don't you just love religious beliefs?

RELIGION OR FAITH

It might come as surprise to all, that well, there is a difference between these two concepts. Are people religious, or are they men/women of faith. At the end, I will go into more details because you find that by observing, you can note the difference between the two.
This post has the potential to be a long one, therefore, I am going to cliff note it as much as I can.
So here is an introduction course to religions. ( To clear up some misunderstandings)
There are, two frame works in religion:
1. Western thought (Islam, Judaism, Christianity). These are also termed as Abrahamic Religions.
2. Eastern thought (eg. Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Confucianism...). Also known as Dharmic Religions.
These two frameworks are coined, partially based on their point of origin, but mostly in their differences. Western religions are monotheistic, and Eastern religions are polytheistic. They consequently follow the differences between Eastern and Western philosophies...that is to say, what we all must know by now...the east and the west have different ways of life.

When I accepted to be a contributor, my main reason was to clear up some misunderstanding, on God/Gods. and how authors in this blog and those who made comments loosely used the word. Western religions believe in ONE God. Therefore, I do not understand why ignorance calls for people to say a Muslim God, a Jewish God, and a Christian God. That is wrong, because all three religions believe in the same God. Allah, is not another God. ( we can discuss this further if people wish) and Yahweh is not different from God...although it is deemed more respectable.

It is also wrong to say, Hindu or Buddhist God....because there are many Gods. For example, there are approximately 330 million gods in Hinduism. Some of them actually can be termed as henotheistic. I dont have to go through all these religions, and the breakdown of their gods because that requires a lifetime of dedication to the study of this. However, it must be noted that Eastern religions are much embedded in their philosophy, and the two are most of the time synonymous.

Now back to faith and religion. Religion exists to control faith, faith exists to keep religion in check. Religion is man's interpretation of God's will, faith is its acceptance. Or rather, Religion is man's attempt to reach God, and faith, is a lifestyle of total contentment in who you are as Created being, living and breathing in assurance that there is a higher power that is watching over you.
Faith is our fundamental understanding of reality. This is an expression of the way we understand the world, what values we believe are important not only to us, but to others as well, what ideals we hold sacred and what is not, what we believe is right and wrong, what we aspire for not only in this world, but beyond this world. Religion on the other hand, is an outward expression of that belief. This is why I will tell people that I am a woman of faith, but I am not religious. I go to Church when I want to, and I participate in organized religions, when and however I chose to, because my practicing religion does not affirm my faith.

BY SACRED

THE DAY I LOST MY FAITH!!!

First of all, I have never revealed this to anyone, but this particular passage in the bible was the straw that broke the camel's back. This made me renounce Christianity altogether. I and a friend used to have this bible questions discussions and so from time to time I would bring up a bible question or something that was bugging me in the bible so that she could answer. And truth be told, this my friend who I shall term as "Goddess" was usually on point when it came to answering bible questions. She did her best to answer my questions about the bible, so on a certain day I discovered this passage in 2 Samuel 12. I had read this passage so many times, but never took the time to really meditate on it, so as usual I brought this passage to the notice of "Goddess" and for the first time in our religious discussion history she did not have an answer. She flatout told me that "controversy, I honestly do not have an answer to this" I thank God that "goddess" is one of those sincere christians who say the truth no matter what.And with this introduction I present this blog post to you.


P.S. So as I was about to post this blogpost, I open my email and staring right at me is an email from my aunty. Who I shall call "Aunty O". Aunty "O" is my favorite aunty and apparently she's discovered that I've become a deist. Surprisingly, I am not worried about whether Aunty O will seek to inform my parents that their "First son" has turned into a deist. My parents are btw, firebrand christians. I am quite relieved, I knew that this day would surely come I do not agree with my parents religion, and it's about time that they know about that. I believe that every man/woman must do two things alone in this world, he/she must do their own believing and their own dying. Anywayz BACK TO THE MAIN POST.

The question is "Is God obligated to follow the laws he himself laid down for us to follow? Or can he flout them whenever he chooses? Does he rule arbitrarily and are we forbidden to question his laws even when he himself fails to obey them? Why is it that so many Christians strongly believe that God should be able to get away with anything? If God kills, lies, cheats, discriminates, and otherwise behaves in a manner that puts the Mafia to shame, that's okay, he's God. He can do whatever he wants.But anyone else who adheres to this same philosophy is said to have had his/her sense of morality, decency, justice and humaneness warped beyond recognition by the very book that is supposedly preaching the opposite.

And I ask you, are we truly all equal in God's eyes? Lets be honest, everyone preaches that everybody is equal in the eyes of the Lord, but is that really the case? Take for example, the book of Deuteronomy 24:16. Where God explicitly commands/states that "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin"

Fast-forward to 2 Samuel 12, God apparently does a roundabout when he kills/murders the innocent child of King David after David had Uriah the husband of his current wife Bethsheeba killed.This is what Nathan the prophet told David
2 Samuel 12 - 13
"For thou didst it secretly: but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun.

13And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die. 14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.

My fundamental problem with this passage is the very clear and straightforward fact that God cut David some very serious slack and openly flouted his own Law that he himself had created. The child did not deserve to die for the crimes of David. David committed the crime, David deserved to pay for it by himself. Common sense tells we humans, that we do not punish somebody else for the crimes of another, that is totally wrong and if we humans created by God have been able to come to that very same conclusion. Why would God go ahead and break his own law, so that he could protect David? Was David that great a man, that the almighty himself was forced to break a law on his behalf? When Moses disobeyed God by striking the "rock" in exodus God punished him by not letting him into the promised land, when Jonah refused to obey God's orders to go to Ninevah in the book of Jonah, God also punished him by putting him in the belly of a whale for three whole days. When Paul, persecuted Christians in the new testament, God struck him blind for three days. The sins all these people committed ultimately "pale" in comparison to that of King David. Kind David murdered a man, a husband and moreover a God fearing man and King David got to escape scot free. His new born baby had to bear the brunt of his punishment, when God had explicitly stated that the "children will never pay for the sins of the father".

In conclusion, if any one of you can provide me with a clear/succint explanation to this question, I might gradually start to regain faith again.
BY CONTROVERSY