Prometheus Unbound

April 25, 2008

Mighty but so ignorant men

“So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence; and in this respect ministers of religion follow gospel authority more closely than in some others.”

These words by Bertrand Russell more or less summarise the religious hysteria gripping the country with the Mighty Men’s Conference of 60 000 men gathering to listen to the potato prophet Angus Buchan telling us how God can change their lives.

But with respect to Russell: not only the ministers follow gospel authority; the way the media have been going on about Buchan and the absolute nonsense he is propagating, reflects on the lack of rational thinking and scientific knowledge among many journalists.

Buchan, the farmer of the astonishing naive film Faith Like Potatoes, tells his captivated and totally uncritical audience how his God will change their lives, how miracles have saved him as a farmer. And on and on he goes.

What astonishes me, is the way one reporter from the Afrikaans daily Beeld, Neels Jackson, has become the cheer leader for this epitome of ignorance and irrational thinking. Shouldn’t a journalist have a baloney detector? And if Jackson has one, when was the last time he has switched it on?

Instead of asking critical questions about the miracles of God – against all natural laws – Buchan tells us about, why don’t Jackson and those 60 000 mighty men change the batteries of their baloney detectors? They are obviously flat.

Or maybe I am wrong. Is this not a classical example of the fact that the religious meme does not include a critical thinking faculty in human beings? They are mutually exclusive. That so many South African men truly believe Buchan is a messenger from God, emphasises Russell’s view that “dogma demands authority, rather than intelligent thought, as the source of opinion; it requires persecution of heretics and hostility to unbelievers.”

Why do I refer to the latter part of the quotation (“… it requires persecution of heretics and hostility to unbelievers”)?

Because the letter of Denker van Pretoria (Thinker from Pretoria), published in Beeld on 23 April (http://www.news24.com/Beeld/Opinie/Briewe/Home/0,,3-2085-73,00.html) led to a spate of letters, some even threats by Buchan supporters who do not want the newspaper to publish anything negative on their hero. I learnt that some writers even threatened the newspaper with an action similar to the anti-Deon Maas campaign against the Sunday paper Rapport.  

So much for freedom of speech and tolerance of other views. Why is this always the route that believers follow, to persecute others as heretics? Russell wrote “Heretical views arise when the truth is uncertain, and it is only when the truth is uncertain that censorship is invoked.”

Denker exposed the ridiculous hysteria created by Buchan and his followers. He or she  is not a heretic, rather someone who proves Russell’s wise words that “The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” Denker is the doubter, Buchan and his followers are the cocksure, the intolerant.

Those 60 000 men, Buchan and Jackson could only benefit from reading a little more (not the Bible, but modern science and philosophy), thinking a little more, and exposing themselves to a good dose of Russell.

He was right that “religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines.”

Unfortunately the 60 000 seem far away from moving a step upwards from the infancy of their intelligence. Not while Buchan and his prophet Jackson are around.

 

 

 

 

317 Comments »

  1. Good post. George Eliot described the Buchan-type long ago (1855, Evangelical Teaching):

    Given a man with a moderate intellect, a moral standard not higher than the average, some rhetorical affluence and great glibness of speech, what is the career in which, without the aid of birth or money, he may most easily attain power and reputation in English society? Where is that Goshen of intellectual mediocrity in which a smattering of science and learning will pass for profound instruction, where platitudes will be accepted as wisdom, bigoted narrowness as holy zeal, unctuous egoism as God-given piety?

    Let such a man become an evangelical preacher; he will then find it possible to reconcile small ability with great ambition, superficial knowledge with the prestige of erudition, a middling morale with a high reputation for sanctity.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 25, 2008 @ 2:52 pm | Reply

  2. Scary! The Greytown gathering of fools and the reaction on Denker’s letter.

    Reminds me of a women’s day some years ago I was forced to attend, sort of. The chairperson, a very prominent woman, supported by a very prominent lady dominie, lamented about how the Bible was written by men for men. And they almost decreed that women were going to write the Bible for women. Come question time I very scarily lifted my hand to ask a question. (You must remember I was one of not more than 5 men amongst 200 odd women; and trust me they looked formidable). I said I thought God wrote the Bible. The chairperson said: “No! Inspired by God.” I asked to which women God was going to appear to inspire them for the Bible to be written for women.

    She said in shrill voice: “Man, jy is ‘n ketter! Sit!” If stares could kill I would have perished that day.

    I wonder how the Bible written by women for women is coming along?

    Comment by Savage — April 25, 2008 @ 4:13 pm | Reply

  3. Funny how none of these believers ever want to see proof of these miracles the believe happened. If anyone does ask to see the proof, they are the heretics.

    James Randy makes it his business to ask for the proof. He has investigated many “miracles”, and debunked them all. But none of the believers want to listen to him. Here is the link to his website: http://www.randi.org. Check it out.

    George wrote:

    That so many South African men truly believe Buchan is a messenger from God, emphasises Russell’s view that “dogma demands authority, rather than intelligent thought, as the source of opinion; it requires persecution of heretics and hostility to unbelievers.”

    60 000 South African men can’t be wrong, can they? The South African culture, and more precisely, the Afrikaans culture, superstition is still very much alive and well.

    When the Bulls won the Super 14 last year, it was all a big show for Jesus after the end whistle blew. Quite embarrassing considering the whole world was watching.

    When the Springboks won the World Cup last year, the whole team took quite a couple of minutes to pray to god and jesus, thanking them for letting them win the world cup.

    Through the eyes of the superstitious and the religious, god gets all the credit if things go right. If things go wrong, they all believe it wasn’t god’s will, or he is punishing them.

    After the September 11, 2001 attacks, Jerry Falwell said on The 700 Club, “I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say ‘you helped this happen.’” Fellow evangelist Pat Robertson concurred with his sentiment. After heavy criticism, Falwell apologized,[30] though he later said that he stood by his statement, stating “If we decide to change all the rules on which this Judeo-Christian nation was built, we cannot expect the Lord to put his shield of protection around us as he has in the past.”

    This is a very good example of a very popular religious leader, trying to get his flock to start the persecution of heretics and hostility towards the unbelievers, by blaming them for gods wrath, and their (the flock’s) inaction.

    I would like to end this post with one of my favourite quotes:

    “Fanaticism and fear is forever busy, and needs feeding! And so Your Honor, with banners flying, and with drums beating, we’ll be marching backward! Backward through the glorious ages of that 16th century, when bigots burned the man who dared bring enlightenment and intelligence to the human mind!” – Inherit the Wind

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 25, 2008 @ 6:20 pm | Reply

  4. I just hope somebody takes a few fish and a loaf or two of bread….those guys are going to be hungry after the sermon…and a 200 ltr drum with water…who knows…they may want wine to get the dry bread down.

    Comment by Objective — April 25, 2008 @ 6:32 pm | Reply

  5. Oubaas #1

    “Let such a man become an evangelical preacher; he will then find it possible to reconcile small ability with great ambition, superficial knowledge with the prestige of erudition, a middling morale with a high reputation for sanctity.”

    Waht Elliot didnt say is that in order for such a man to achieve this he needs a lot of willing idiots…which seems to contradict the saying: you cannot bs all the people all the time :)

    I was thinking that one should change that to: you cannot bs all the people all the time, but you can come close.

    Comment by Objective — April 25, 2008 @ 6:39 pm | Reply

  6. Once again the Christian blind spot. George asks: “why don’t Jackson and those 60 000 mighty men change the batteries of their baloney detectors? They are obviously flat.”

    Imagine the event described was a political rally, or a trade union gathering, or even a motivational session. The press would have been all over them in terms of a critical analysis of what was being said, and especially an analysis of the thinking of the speaker(s) at such an event.

    This did not happen – in fact, the opposite happened, a sickening display of the “don’t touch god and his prophets” mentality.

    We, as responsible citizens, should be extremely concerned by events drawing such a large number of people – especially men. The obvious militant overtones of “mighty men”, the exclusion of woman, the emotional bend, the “call to action” – all signs that should shivers down the spine of any student of history. Who want’s another Kristallnacht?

    Let’s not forget that Hitler’s “willing executioners” were also just a bunch of “simple” believers, happy to have found “the one” who could lead them out of their political and economic “wilderness”, and childlike in their application of his monstrous teachings.

    Mr. Buchan and his “mighty men” deserve at least 60 000 lines of critical thinking by South Africa’s press. This cancer should not be ignored.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 26, 2008 @ 9:05 am | Reply

  7. The Bible teaches that those wise in their own site will see the things of God as foolish an even ridicule them…

    Comment by Thomas Dreyer — April 26, 2008 @ 9:10 am | Reply

  8. Thomas Dreyer in #7, thanks for 1 Corinthians 3:19. You’ve been at the conference, it seems. Why don’t you tell us what you think?

    Comment by Oubaas — April 26, 2008 @ 9:26 am | Reply

  9. Thomas Dreyer,

    The bible teaches a lot of bs…that isnt an isolated instance…scroll through this post and some of the previous to get an idea. You can get an idea can you?

    Comment by Objective — April 26, 2008 @ 9:35 am | Reply

  10. Oubaas

    You will have to make that 120 000 lines …i understand that the tickets were sold out days before the event….It may be even more…. the Afrikaner always wanted someone to lead them wherever that leader determined was their destiny..of course all directed by this god.

    I have an interesting sermon bundle by a Ds Van der Lingen dating from the 1800 that equates the destiny and purpose of the Afrikaner directly with the jews…. and incidents in the bible with the destiny of the volk….its been scary for years and i can only thank nature that so many people are coming forward to counter this madness.

    Comment by Objective — April 26, 2008 @ 9:39 am | Reply

  11. “Thomas Dreyer in #7, thanks for 1 Corinthians 3:19. You’ve been at the conference, it seems. Why don’t you tell us what you think?”

    Comment by Oubaas — April 26, 2008 @ 9:26 am

    ;) i thought he did…

    Comment by Objective — April 26, 2008 @ 9:41 am | Reply

  12. Objective in #10: “the Afrikaner always wanted someone to lead them”

    And they have always found someone.

    The recent “De La Rey” spectacle seems to have paved the way Buchan, just as John paved the way for Jesus. Rich material for a study of the Afrikaner psyche. Always a victim, always in need of redemption, always someone pointing the way. And always ready to offer their first-born, I should add.

    Would love to have a look at those sermons, being a PK and all…

    Re your comment in #11: Touché.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 26, 2008 @ 9:53 am | Reply

  13. Oubaas wrote:

    “Objective in #10: “the Afrikaner always wanted someone to lead them”

    And they have always found someone.

    The recent “De La Rey” spectacle seems to have paved the way Buchan, just as John paved the way for Jesus. Rich material for a study of the Afrikaner psyche. Always a victim, always in need of redemption, always someone pointing the way. And always ready to offer their first-born, I should add.”

    The Afrikaner lost the Boer war because he picked weak leaders and generals, and was fighting with the bible under one arm and a rifle in the other. After the war they were led by the same weak leaders. Jan Smuts didn’t have their best interests at heart either. Later they picked the boneheads who started apartheid. I remember PW Botha. What a dumb arsehole! Now they can’t pick anybody who gets to run the country any more, so they are turning to other dumb morons to lead them on their spiritual journey.

    The Afrikaner has always been his own worst enemy. Always divided, always bickering about nonsense, always picking the weakest of the weak to lead them, always believing in absurd superstitions and always very religious.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 26, 2008 @ 2:25 pm | Reply

  14. Today on the BBC.

    A good example how the religious right can hurt children by their stupid policy’s. Especially when they get involved in policy and law making.

    “Has US abstinence policy failed?

    By Jane O’Brien
    BBC News, Washington

    US lawmakers are investigating whether to cut government funding for health education programmes that promote sexual abstinence until marriage.

    The move follows a report earlier this year from America’s leading health agency, the Center for Disease Control, which revealed one in four teenage girls has a sexually transmitted disease.

    Opponents of abstinence education say the approach ignores the fact that teenagers are sexually active and fails to give them accurate medical information or advice on safer sex.

    “We get sex-ed classes in school and that should be where teens get the right information – but that isn’t happening,” says 15-year-old Mildred, from Arizona, who volunteers as a peer educator with the pro-choice organisation Planned Parenthood.

    “They don’t touch on subjects like sexuality, STDs (sexually transmitted diseases), birth control – it’s not allowed because of abstinence-only education. It leaves you on a cliff-hanger – and a lot of teenagers become sexually active in their middle school years.”

    “Teens are curious and they want to experiment and if they know what’s out there and they have the correct information, they’re going to know how to protect themselves and prevent an unwanted pregnancy and an STD,” adds Maryland high school student Melissa.

    “Putting up a wall and saying ‘don’t have sex’ makes them more curious and wanting to know what it is. But if you tell them the straight facts they’re going to know how to protect themselves. It’s about taking care of yourself.”

    Teen pregnancy

    Planned Parenthood estimates that two thirds of teenagers will have experienced sexual intercourse by the time they leave school.

    And with some 750,000 teenage pregnancies a year, America has one of the highest teen birth rates in the developed world.

    “This national programme which has wasted $1.5bn (£750m) of tax money is a failure and our teens are paying the price,” says Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood.

    If we can learn to control the most basic of drives – the sex drive – for good, then we can control drugs, gangs, alcohol and abusive anger
    Roger Norman
    ‘Wonderful Days’ abstinence programme

    “We’ve been wasting money on programmes that don’t work and we’re seeing the consequences every single day.”

    State governments receive federal money they must match to fund abstinence programmes.

    At least 17 states have opted out of the system and others have suspended funding while Congress investigates whether such programmes work.

    Critics say there is no evidence that they delay sexual activity and teenagers who have taken a vow of virginity are less likely to use protection if they break their promise.

    Religious right

    Roger Norman, a Texas lawyer, describes himself as being part of the religious right.

    He runs an organization called Wonderful Days which does not receive government funding but teaches abstinence as part of the health curriculum in some local schools.

    “I am convinced that abstinence is the only way for kids,” he says. “You begin by teaching the consequences of bad behaviour and the benefits of proper behaviour and you do that in a way that a child can grasp.

    “Self control leads to a happy, joyful life. If we can learn to control the most basic of drives – the sex drive – for good, then we can control drugs, gangs, alcohol and abusive anger.”

    His lessons promote marriage and virginity – for both partners – as an ideal.

    A lot of the young people I know who go around have experiences with lots of different people are just preparing themselves for not knowing how to be committed to somebody
    Ashley, 18

    They emphasise disease as a consequence of sex before marriage.

    Some of his former students say that sexual abstinence is sensible and beneficial.

    Eighteen-year-old Ashley says she believes teenagers who experiment with sex are laying the foundations for troubled relationships later in life.

    “At some point everybody ends up getting married. Everybody wants commitment at some point and nobody likes to be cheated on.

    “But a lot of the young people I know who go around have experiences with lots of different people are just preparing themselves for not knowing how to be committed to somebody.

    “Once you get into the practice of doing whatever you want, it’s hard to change when you’re older.”

    Sixteen-year-old Josh says he relies on friends to help him stay abstinent.

    “I have a lot of close friends and we pretty much agree on the same thing so we keep each other in line most of the time. Yes, it’s difficult, but my friends are there and I’m there for them, and it gets easier if you have friends who agree with you.”

    “I’m pretty confident I can keep my abstinence vows,” says 15-year-old Kirsten. “It was pretty hard reaching that decision, because living in this world today, it’s almost expected of you to ‘do it.’ But with my religious upbringing and convictions and commonsense, it’s really not that hard.”

    “Secondary virgins”

    Teenagers who do have sex before marriage are given another chance by becoming “secondary virgins”.

    “Of course, if you view virginity as number one, and you’ve slept with someone, of course it’s going to be different and you can never go back – but that doesn’t mean there’s no tomorrow,” explains Ashley.

    “Every day is a new decision and abstinence is not one you make once. You’re going to have to make this decision over and over again. So if you fail once, you get back up and you try again.”

    The row over abstinence education is part of a much wider debate in the US about “family values”.

    Many conservatives are concerned that “American values” are being eroded.

    But their opponents believe that the conservatives have an overly influential political voice, particularly within the current Bush administration.

    For liberals, the campaign to roll back the abstinence programmes is part of a broader struggle against what they regard as reactionary elements in the US government.

    Pro-abstinence campaigners say it is unfair to blame abstinence programmes for America’s teenage health crisis.

    Valerie Huber, chief executive of the National Abstinence Education Association, says only one in four schools teaches abstinence – the vast majority use comprehensive sex education.

    That, she says is the real reason for the rise in STDs and teenage pregnancies.

    “We would argue that abstinence education is not an ideological approach. We know that in the area of teen sexual activity, abstinence is the optimal approach.

    “Compare this with healthful eating. We know that obesity is rising in America. That doesn’t mean though that we minimise the optimal health message.”

    “We still stress good eating habits, we still stress exercise, knowing that, unfortunately, many Americans are not going to listen.”

    If Congress does decide to cut government funding for abstinence programmes, they will still continue.

    Many enjoy public support and will likely find money elsewhere.”

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 26, 2008 @ 2:43 pm | Reply

  15. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7368219.stm

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 26, 2008 @ 2:44 pm | Reply

  16. Mack Brolloks wrote: “The Afrikaner has always been his own worst enemy. Always divided, always bickering about nonsense, always picking the weakest of the weak to lead them, always believing in absurd superstitions and always very religious.”

    So true. W A de Klerk wrote an enlightened book about the Afrikaner many years ago: “The Puritans in Africa”. Worth a read to see how complex we are.

    I remember my grandfather telling the story of a fight in an Afrikaans church. The one lot broke away and started their own church but made sure they stole the organ when they left. The fight against evolution is just one of the many raging country wide. As Mack Brolloks correctly points out they are now following arseholes like Angus Buchan and Fred May. And don’t get into an argument with these nitwits because you are likely to get donnered. Because they have never been endowed with argument skills, they revert to violence to get their point across; not that there ever is much of a point.

    Comment by Savage — April 27, 2008 @ 6:33 am | Reply

  17. It been Sunday and all, I love turning the radio on in the morning when I wake up. I listen to any channel that has a live church service on. Man, I am glad I don’t have to put a suit on and go and sit there and sweat. But to be able to listen to that crap and laugh my arse off in the privacy of my own house is priceless. I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a bit of entertainment. I love Monty Python too, and I can see where they get a lot of their comedy from. Sometimes it helps a lot to look at something from a distance, from a neutral point of view. I mean, how can people fall for this crap? It is absolutely the biggest con ever. But I find it extremely funny. It is also sad in a way. People let their lives be ruled by trying to please a mythical fairy tale figure. Absolutely absurd. Sadomasoquism! They pick a pretty evil bunch of fairy tale creatures. The Greeks, Romans and Scandinavians had a bit more choices as far as gods go. One for every occasion. It must have been a lot less stress full to perform the daily tasks required to survive. But still upsurd. I wonder why somebody hasn’t invented a new god, called Dollar. Money is very important to survive. If they start praying to a god called Dollar, I might be able to understand it a bit better. I might even through a couple of prayers his way just in case.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 3:27 pm | Reply

  18. I mean throw not through

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 3:29 pm | Reply

  19. God Dollar, are you there? Can you hear me? It’s Jonah here. How you been keeping. I suppose I’m ok but it’s been pretty dry the last few weeks. You know what I mean, God Dollar, no greenbacks falling my way. And you know Sarah don’t stand for that shit. I mean she needs these new dresses. And if she does not get them I get to sleep in the basement with the dog. As you know reception is pretty poor down there that’s why I’ve come outside to pray to you so you can hear me loud and clear. Just a few 10’s and 20’s will do for now, so I get to move back upstairs again. Old Mack, you know, the dog, has some mean fleas and they are chewing the hell out of me. Hope you keep well God Dollar, it is Jonah here signing off. Just remember God Dollar, Jonah at 8 Oak Road so you don’t get cross wires with old Jonah Tiller from 17 Elm.

    Comment by Savage — April 27, 2008 @ 4:13 pm | Reply

  20. And the god Dollar doesn’t ask his flock for money, because he has the market cornered on that subject.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 4:32 pm | Reply

  21. http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7368219.stm

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 4:36 pm | Reply

  22. http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7368219.stm

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 4:37 pm | Reply

  23. Read this article. Another sad example of how the religious bible thumpers are hurting children because of their moralistic demands. If these fucking arseholes will just keep their fucking noses out of law making and policy making, the whole country’s children will be better off. Leave these things to the experts, not the dumb mother fucking religious arseholes who do more harm than good with their stone age mentalities. And it is always the children that suffer.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 4:41 pm | Reply

  24. I was Unfortunatly Not able to attend the MMC at Greytown.I did however attended a “mannekamp” at Eksderde just outside Pretoria this past weekend.AWESOME!!!I think of myself as a free thinking individual not easily convinced about anything unless the Facts are proven beyond a reasonable doubt.The key word here is reasonable – not any.In a murder trial in South Africa(and most other countries)the state has to prove beyond a (reasonable) doubt that the accused did in fact commit murder NOT beyond (any) doubt!Do you think that is fair Oubaas,Objective,Savage,Mr.Brolloks? If you dont,well then maybe you with your superior intelligence should make new laws regarding evidence(and who knows the whole world might benefit from these new laws)If you do,well then im confused.I mean really confused.

    Lets get back to the meaning of the word “reasonable” – according to the Oxford English Dictionary it means 1.fair and sensible 2.appropriate in a particular situation 3.fairly good 4.not too expensive.OK now that we know the meaning – lets move on.If you DO believe in the “reasonable doubt” concept then obviously you MUST believe that its ok to convict someone of murder if it is proven beyond,lets say (3.fairly good) a chance that they in fact did commit murder.Got it ?

    Now tell me Oubaas,Objective,Savage,Mr.Brolloks can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that GOD does not exist? I THINK NOT!!!Then why on earth would you convict christians of being 1.people with moderate intellect 2.fanatics 3.idiots 4.comedians 5.Bible thumpers ect.?

    All that i DO know is that i must forgive your ignorance as JESUS already has!

    Comment by Pollie Beukes — April 27, 2008 @ 8:51 pm | Reply

  25. He he, the cave men are coming out again, swinging their clubs, grunting and ranting. Very funny indeed.

    Hi Pollie Beukes. Hoe gaan dit ou pel. Hope you did some real good bonding with the other manne there at your mannekamp. I would have loved to have been there. Really. Please tell us all some more of what happens at these mannekampe.

    You wrote: “If you dont,well then maybe you with your superior intelligence should make new laws regarding evidence(and who knows the whole world might benefit from these new laws)If you do,well then im confused.I mean really confused.”

    You see mister, we don’t want to make any laws, we just want to stop you guys from making the laws. And we can see you are really really confused. And you should be. That is a sign of your bullshit detectors going off. It means you should start thinking with the brain you were born with. Start practicing some critical thinking and anallises. Read a couple of real science books. We can give you a long list of very interesting books, that is easy to read and to understand.

    You wrote: “Now tell me Oubaas,Objective,Savage,Mr.Brolloks can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that GOD does not exist? I THINK NOT!!!Then why on earth would you convict christians of being 1.people with moderate intellect 2.fanatics 3.idiots 4.comedians 5.Bible thumpers ect.?”

    1.) Which god do you refer too?
    2.) Are we convicting you?
    You guys would love that wouldn’t you? But if you believe so blindly in a god because it is written in an old book, then you are “people with moderate intellect 2.fanatics 3.idiots 4.comedians 5.Bible thumpers ect.”
    3.) It has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that there is no god, like the god from your bible.

    Do you believe in evolution? Quite a valid question. Please answer it for me since you did state the following: “I think of myself as a free thinking individual not easily convinced about anything unless the Facts are proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”

    Do you believe in Noah’s ark? Jonah and the big fish? In all the other fairy tales of the bible?
    Do you believe that Jesus was the son of a god and died and was reborn? Where is your proof? I will believe it too if you show me the proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, as you prefer it.

    I am really glad you believe Jesus has forgiven my ignorance. But he is dead. If I remember correctly, if this chapter in history is true, it was the Romans who killed him. He was just a mortal man. And yes, his mother did have sex 9 months before he was born. It was ignorant people who made him into a martyr. Now you and your manne believe he is watching over you, died for your sins etc. It is a delusion. It is all because you and your manne don’t want to take any accountability for anything you do. It is all up to jesus now. He has taken the wheel. He will get you home.

    Do you really want to live your live like this? I mean, don’t get me wrong, I don’t care what you believe, or who you pray too. I just think you and your manne are very dangerous people, who want to control everybody.

    Do yourself a favour, and read 1 book other than the bible for a change. Please start with: “The God Delusion” – by Richard Dawkins

    Don’t worry, it is not as bad as your manne has told you, and you won’t go to hell if you read it. But it could make you think a bit. A lot of pastors, ministers etc. has read it and wrote good reviews about the book. But your manne probably demonized it already, like they demonized Darwin’s “The Origin of the Species.”

    Before you run back to your cave, I have one more question for you. It is something I ask most people who are confused. Are you a big Star Trek fan?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 9:42 pm | Reply

  26. I found the link to the mannekamp

    http://www.eksderde.co.za/

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 10:01 pm | Reply

  27. This is from the home page of their website:

    “Dink jy niemand gee meer vir jou om nie? Dat jou lewe net een groot gejaag na NIKS is nie? Dat niemand, insluitende jyself, meer dink jy is spesiaal nie? Is alles donker om jou?

    MAAR…wéét jy hoe SPESIAAL jy WERKLIK is, liewe mens? Weet jy dat God vir JOU ‘n spesiale plan uitgewerk gehad het selfs nog voordat jy gebore was? By ons kry jy presies net daardie geleentheid om vas te stel hoe JESUS CHRISTUS oor jou dink, maak nie saak wat die mense om jou en van jou sê nie.”

    So I guess jesus made the atheists too. He planned our lives before we were even born. He put us here to challenge the people who believe in him, so they can prove they love him.

    I remember the first time I said the words “jesus fucking christ”. I was about 14 years old, and I thought I was now well and truly fucked. His dad was going to totally destroy my life. I knew I had to start praying right away, and ask for forgiveness. Truly torture. Thats why religion forced upon children is classed as child abuse by a lot of people today.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 10:08 pm | Reply

  28. Eksderde = God is eerste, my medemens is tweede, en ek is derde!

    The atheists are number 666 in the cue.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 10:09 pm | Reply

  29. Eksderde has a Jeugprogram (youth program), where young people pay them approx. R28000 for a year course on how to get in touch with god. It’s on the website, and you can download an application with all the prices on it.

    For just R25000 I can also give a year course on a much more interesting subject. I will send the link to my new website soon, with an application form and my bank account details.

    Watch this space, all the info will follow here shortly.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 10:15 pm | Reply

  30. It makes me wonder now, is Vinkie en Jan Bronkhorst just delusional, or are they in it for the money?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 27, 2008 @ 10:23 pm | Reply

  31. O velskoen! If I was that way inclined, I’d seriously start suspecting a conspiracy of, er…, deliberate slowness. The goal of such a conspiracy would be to drive rational people insane with frustrated disbelief. Or, if not insane, then at least silent by incredulity at the repetitiousness. What is needed is a machine or method for automatically framing replies to certain types of comment. Composing the same essential rejoinders over and over and over again does get tedious, a dreariness imposed by the failure of some commentators at the simple task of parsing one or two prior blog entries. Such failures inevitably produce (probably) unwitting visions of originality that are almost impossible to dislodge later on, specifically once the “Submit Comment” commitment has been entered into.

    What a great pity. And a waste.

    Comment by Con-Tester — April 27, 2008 @ 10:34 pm | Reply

  32. Con-Tester wrote: “O velskoen! If I was that way inclined, I’d seriously start suspecting a conspiracy of, er…, deliberate slowness.”

    Nice try to give them a complement, Con-Tester, but these guys are not capable of such intricate thinking and planning like conspiring. And we also have the wrong opinion about them; they don’t always think of god, but when they think, they think of god. How can you expect them to read a previous blog, and Mack Brolloks even expect them to read a book! Now I ask you.

    One of their chief gurus uttering unadulterated bullshit is old Berhard Ficker. Those who have followed his crusade against evolution and saw what a downright liar the man is, and how he is exposed and ridiculed week after week but still persists with his delusional “science”, must realize that these guys are from another planet. The planet where the attention span of a person is no longer than his nose, where rational thinking is a discussion whether god created Earth 4 October 4004 BC at 10 am Greenwich or EST time, and the rationale that it is in order to commit any sin, like raping children, because Jesus has already paid for their sins at the cross.

    You guys are truly dangerous. But we’ll keep on fighting you assholes, make no mistake about that.

    Comment by Savage — April 28, 2008 @ 5:39 am | Reply

  33. Pollie Beukes wrote: ”Now tell me Oubaas,Objective,Savage,Mr.Brolloks can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that GOD does not exist? I THINK NOT!!!Then why on earth would you convict christians of being 1.people with moderate intellect 2.fanatics 3.idiots 4.comedians 5.Bible thumpers ect.?”

    Pollie, since no god has been observed by any of the billions of people over many centuries, I am sure a rational person would agree that there are no gods. Then you call yourself a “free thinking individual not easily convinced about anything”, and conclude with “All that i DO know is that i must forgive your ignorance as JESUS already has!”
    Firstly, you are not rational, perhaps free thinking delusional, but not rational. How can you “prove beyond a reasonable doubt” that Jesus has forgiven our ignorance when Jesus beyond reasonable doubt does not exist?

    Stick around, Pollie, you will meet many of your brethren just as “free thinking” as you are. That is why Con-Tester says its tedious bringing up the same argument over and over to point out how delusional you guys are.

    Comment by Savage — April 28, 2008 @ 6:27 am | Reply

  34. I wonder how many of these wise, yet cynical men, will be made fools on the return of Christ! How arrogant as mere mortals, to think that we have any control of this planet and our universe. I pray that Mack opens his eyes, to avoid eternal suffering for his self-righteousness.

    Comment by Allan — April 28, 2008 @ 7:05 am | Reply

  35. Allan – So many False Expectations Appearing Real. You know, I’d rather be made a fool than act a fool. I’d rather be a mere mortal without control than believe that I am a son of god with some control. I’d rather think than pray. And I’d rather wish someone well than damn them to eternal suffering.

    A good morning to you as well.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 28, 2008 @ 8:15 am | Reply

  36. Ek moet se ek blameer nie vir Brolloks,Savage,Oubaas ens. nie.Hulle glo nie want hulle sien nie.Ek self het my hele lewe gestoei met hierdie God-ding.My (hoogs intelligente gesofistikeerde brein)wou maar net nie byt aan Iets wat nie tasbaar en konkreet voor my staan nie.Tot ek fisies gewys is HY leef!Hiermee gaan ek julle nie nou belas – se maar net as julle dink GOD is n fairy tale dan gaan julle dink my storie is tom en jerry!
    Brolloks – 1.Ek aanbid die LEWENDE DRIE ENIGE GOD.2.Ja jy convict my tot n kierieswaaiende,idiotiese,deurmekaar grotman met beperkte denke.3.Daar is nog NOOIT en sal NOOIT bewys word dat GOD nie bestaan nie!!!
    Verstaaan julle dan nie – jy moet juis(soos die Bybel) vir ons se,soos n kind glo – nie met jou brein nie maar met jou hart.Die rede hiervoor is voor die hand liggend – as jy/ek met ons(beperkte breintjies)probeer glo sal dit nooit in der ewigheid sin maak nie omrede GOD se wysheid verstommend is.Glo egter eers met jou hart soos n kind en jy sal sprakeloos staan oor wat alles aan jou/my(ongelooflike groot breine)geopenbaar word – dan besef n mens vir die eerste keer dat ons almal eintlik maar “grotmanne” is in SY teenwoordigheid.

    Glo jy in liefde? Wel as jy doen – SY NAAM IS GOD!! Dis reg – liefde is nie n emosie,gevoel,opoffering of wat ookal nie – dis n persoon en SY NAAM IS GOD.Ek hoop regtig uit my hart dat jy eendag die absolute voorreg sal he om dit te besef en te ervaar.

    PS Ek is seker dat GOD die aarde en alles daarop deur evolusie kon maak,evolusie self is deur HOM gemaak.7 dae vir n mens en 7 dae vir GOD is twee heeltemal verskillende dinge.

    Liefde en geluk vir julle almal!

    Comment by Pollie Beukes — April 28, 2008 @ 9:14 am | Reply

  37. Pollie in #33: “Hulle glo nie want hulle sien nie”.

    En siedaar… jy sien! Want sien, as ons geglo het sou ons gesien het. Reg? En die van ons wat eens op ‘n tyd geglo het, en nie gesien het nie, het nie regtig geglo nie. Reg? Ons sal nooit vir jou kan oortuig nie, Pollie – jy gebruik immers nie jou rede nie. En ons sal altyd vir jou die “rebelle”, die “blindes”, die “verdwaaldes” wees. Hoe jammer dat jy eerstens besluit het om nie meer jou denke te gebruik nie, en tweedens dat almal wat dit nie doen nie, verlore is. Dis inderdaad ‘n vreesanjaende lewensfilosofie. Terloops – jy gebruik heeltemal te veel uitroeptekens, maar ek verstaan dat dit ‘n emosionele besluit was om te sien wat jou brein nie wou sien nie.

    Dankie vir jou goeie wense (liefde en geluk), maar ek sou dit meer spesiaal gevind het indien jy dit nie so in die bondel gegooi het nie. Jy ken my nie eers nie…

    Comment by Oubaas — April 28, 2008 @ 9:37 am | Reply

  38. Oubaas wrote (#32 or thereabouts):

    So many False Expectations Appearing Real.

    Oooh, I luuurrrv it! But I FEAR that it is lost on its target audience…

    Pollie Beukes wrote (#33 or thereabouts):

    My (hoogs intelligente gesofistikeerde brein)wou maar net nie byt aan Iets wat nie tasbaar en konkreet voor my staan nie.

    Two things: First, one of the dimensions that constitute g, the latent variable psychologists call “general intelligence”, is a facility with language and expression, so the above citation appears somewhat self-limiting. Second, in your blustery testimonial, there are only appeals to ignorance, no actual reasons to believe. Third, the onus of proving your god’s existence rests on the believer – that would be you – not on the doubter. Finally, you say something to the effect that your god’s existence has not and never will be disproved. You’re probably right, but then neither will the existence of Baal or Zeus or Shiva ever be disproved. What, if any, lesson can you draw from that observation?

    Comment by Con-Tester — April 28, 2008 @ 10:02 am | Reply

  39. Con-Tester in #35: ” there are only appeals to ignorance, no actual reasons to believe.”

    And so it will always be. Reasons to believe will provide certainty, a realm where faith has no function. Faith demands ignorance. And, when not ignorant, schizophrenia.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 28, 2008 @ 10:46 am | Reply

  40. … using faith as in “belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.” – Ambrose Bierce

    Comment by Oubaas — April 28, 2008 @ 11:02 am | Reply

  41. … or perhaps as in “Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable. A man full of faith is simply one who has lost (or never had) the capacity for clear and realistic thought. He is not a mere ass; he is actually ill.” – H.L. Mencken

    Comment by Oubaas — April 28, 2008 @ 11:09 am | Reply

  42. Pollie wrote:

    “PS Ek is seker dat GOD die aarde en alles daarop deur evolusie kon maak,evolusie self is deur HOM gemaak.7 dae vir n mens en 7 dae vir GOD is twee heeltemal verskillende dinge.”

    So you are a believer of Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design Is Creationism in a Cheap Tuxedo.

    http://WWW.scitation.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_55/iss_6/48_1.shtml

    You probably want this taught in science class rooms everywhere.

    Evolutions is still going on. Does your god help viruses evolve too? Who gets to die from these viruses? Does your god decide that too?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 12:38 pm | Reply

  43. Allen wrote:

    “I wonder how many of these wise, yet cynical men, will be made fools on the return of Christ! How arrogant as mere mortals, to think that we have any control of this planet and our universe. I pray that Mack opens his eyes, to avoid eternal suffering for his self-righteousness.”

    Comment by Allan — April 28, 2008 @ 7:05 am

    Allen, good day mate! I see you have joined some of your cavemen buddies. Welcome.

    Do you believe global warming is a conspiracy? Do you believe it your gods will? We actually do have control over this planet. And we are busy fucking it up big time.

    You really believe christ is coming back. Good for you. The thing I find disturbing, is that a lot of you guys can’t wait for the world to end. And some of you think it will be a good thing to help it all along.

    I am glad you admit that we are “mere mortals”. When a human dies, it is dead. Like switching a TV off for good. There is no hell. There is no heaven. You guys believe there is, because nobody can proof there isn’t. Your pal, Pollie, stressed the point, “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Well, we can prove there isn’t a god, heaven, hell etc. beyond a reasonable doubt. But can you prove, even with a reasonable doubt, that there is such things? Please try to explain it to us rogues here.

    You and your pals always use jesus and god as a crutch. If you believe in them, they will save you, help you, forgive you etc. etc. etc. But if you don’t, they will totally make you suffer for ever and ever and ever. That is pretty fucked up!!!!!

    Ok, tell me this, if our brain capacity is too limited to understand the existence of god and jesus and the other ghost, then why doesn’t he or they give us a simple sign. Like how about if one of them come down to the United Nations headquarters and give a speech, assure us everything is the way they planned it, and that we should prepare ourselves for heaven. Then they could clear up some other issues too, like why are some people hindus, and some are buddhists, and some are muslims and some are jewish and how about all the different christians, all claiming they are the only ones that are right? Then we can all do the right thing according to their will. There will be no more confusion and no more wars.

    Are you a big Star Trek fan too? Just a question. I wonder about this.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 12:57 pm | Reply

  44. Perhaps we shouldn’t criticise these gatherings of lost souls. It could be soul finding. Like the preacher in Steinbeck’s “The Grapes of Wrath”: “Tell you what-I used ta get the people jumpin’ an’ talkin’ in tongues, an’ glory-shoutin’ till they just fell down an’ passed out. An’ some I’d baptize to bring ‘em to. An’ then-you know what I’d do? I’d take one of them girls out in the grass, an’ I’d lay with her. Done it every time.” Makes you wonder, doesn’t it.

    Comment by Savage — April 28, 2008 @ 1:10 pm | Reply

  45. Pollie wrote:

    “Brolloks – 1.Ek aanbid die LEWENDE DRIE ENIGE GOD.2.Ja jy convict my tot n kierieswaaiende,idiotiese,deurmekaar grotman met beperkte denke.3.Daar is nog NOOIT en sal NOOIT bewys word dat GOD nie bestaan nie!!!”

    Ok, you were the one who “stressed” the term “reasonable doubt”. It is clear that there is no “LEWENDE DRIE ENIGE GOD” beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Can you prove there is one even with a reasonable doubt? You have nothing!!!!!! Just an old fairy tale book. It isn’t even your book, it belongs to the Jews. It is their god as well, you just changed a couple of things.

    “Ja jy convict my tot n kierieswaaiende,idiotiese,deurmekaar grotman met beperkte denke”. Well, what would you call someone who argues like you do? Confused? Stupid? Caveman mentality?

    What do you call a hindu who believes that his religion is completely right?

    Pollie wrote: “dan besef n mens vir die eerste keer dat ons almal eintlik maar “grotmanne” is in SY teenwoordigheid.”

    Watse teenwoordigheid? Waar is hy? Is hy in Iraq? In Afghanistan, in Uganda, Somalia, Suid Afrika, Zimbabwe, Amerika? Switserland?

    Pollie wrote:

    “Glo jy in liefde? Wel as jy doen – SY NAAM IS GOD!! Dis reg – liefde is nie n emosie,gevoel,opoffering of wat ookal nie – dis n persoon en SY NAAM IS GOD.Ek hoop regtig uit my hart dat jy eendag die absolute voorreg sal he om dit te besef en te ervaar.”

    Liefde is god? Probeer jy vir my se dit is jou bewyse dat hy bestaan? Wat is jagsgeid? Deel van god? Dis deel van liefde. As jy lief is vir jou buurvrou, en jy steek die kak uit haar uit, doen jy god se werk?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 1:14 pm | Reply

  46. Mack Brolloks, I think you and I are going to get some beanballs from the fundies. We are crowding their plate.

    Comment by Savage — April 28, 2008 @ 1:25 pm | Reply

  47. Savage, if these guys had any ability to reason, I would be nicer, but they refuse to answer any of the questions I am asking. Instead they rant on and on about a god, and a heaven and a hell, with the only proof they come forward with is a very old book, a fairy tale actually, written by men a long long time ago.

    They refuse to take any accountability for their lives, but instead blame or thank god for everything.

    They can worship who they want to, but when they start making the rules, everybody suffers. I have a serious problem with that when it is the children who suffers the most. The fucking dumb bastard cavemen should stay in their caves and their mannekampe and leave the rest of the humans out of their ideological bullshit.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 1:32 pm | Reply

  48. I am sure heaven is not going to be very crowded at all anyway. And with those dumb motherfuckers there, I will take hell every time.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 1:34 pm | Reply

  49. From the article Mack Brolloks linked to in #39 or thereabouts:

    Perhaps because [ID advocates’] religious faith is rather weak, they need to bolster their beliefs every way they can – including hijacking science to save souls and prove the existence of God.

    This suggestion strikes me as one of the most astute observations I have read in a long time, one that has a ring of truth to it. If true, it would explain why ID advocates get quite so passionate and are so eager to call an inordinately well-stocked arsenal of fallacies of argumentation into their service. Sad thing is, that way they never get to feel the profound sense of liberation felt upon jettisoning this nonsense they so desperately cling to, a deadweight that would, in reality, sooner drown than save them.

    Comment by Con-Tester — April 28, 2008 @ 2:00 pm | Reply

  50. Again for Mack: If you do not believe in Heaven or Hell you should have no concerns “dust to dust”. If you are happy with the state of this world and believe that it will be a great place for your grandkids to enjoy, again no problem; if the planets came from a puff of dust (see http://www.drdino.com nature and the universe being proof of God!) this is the stuff for the start trek fans!
    If on the other hand God created all (see http://www.cslewis.org), created us in his likeness, provided the Scriptures and will judge all according to His will, is offering a life of eternity in Heaven with Him and all we have to do is BELIEVE; what have you got to lose (humanistic principals)?
    Do you think that if God went to the United Nations, that this planet would listen (they didn’t last time)!?? If you want a simple sign it is right in front of you (Scripture!) and as Scripture points out “the Universe was created to show God’s glory”, just look around you, imagine what it would have looked like upon creation(wow).
    Jesus Christ offered homself as our “crutch”, who are you relying on for your future peace and happiness?

    Comment by Allan — April 28, 2008 @ 2:05 pm | Reply

  51. Allan in #47, Dr Dino is a fraud. The site is a fraud. Since January 2007 Kent Hovind has been serving a ten-year term in the Federal Correctional Institution, Edgefield in Edgefield, South Carolina, for 58 tax offenses, obstructing federal agents and related charges.

    Choose your references better.

    Comment by somewill — April 28, 2008 @ 2:12 pm | Reply

  52. Sorry guys, somewill is oubaas. Logged in somewhere else, wordpress seems to remember all.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 28, 2008 @ 2:15 pm | Reply

  53. Allan in #48: “what have you got to lose”

    That’s called Pascal’s Wager. Blaise Pascal – I loved his Pensées as a teenager… no, I still do :) – argued that it would be safer to wrongly believe in God than to wrongly not believe in God. Problem is, how do you choose between all the religions? Which god? And why should we allow fear to determine our reasoning?

    Comment by Oubaas — April 28, 2008 @ 2:21 pm | Reply

  54. Oh yes, I forget to answer your question: My self-respect.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 28, 2008 @ 2:24 pm | Reply

  55. Allan wrote (#47 or thereabouts):

    If you are happy with the state of this world and believe that it will be a great place for your grandkids to enjoy, again no problem;

    While I understand that your response was directed at Mack Brolloks, I’m curious to know how you conclude that disbelief in your god automatically entails unconcern for our home planets future. Failing an adequate rationale for this apparent non sequitur, the conclusion will be forced that you conveniently invented it from whole cloth.

    Allan wrote (#47 or thereabouts):

    Do you think that if God went to the United Nations, that this planet would listen (they didn’t last time)!??

    S/he must have neglected to sign the register, as there is no record of his/her attendance.

    Allan wrote (#47 or thereabouts):

    [W]ho are you relying on for your future peace and happiness?

    I’m working towards the goal that it will be, on the whole, people of reason who will make up the majority because that would largely ensure peace from which general happiness is certain to follow. But you know how it is, what with all these uncritical nuts running around, pontificating about how the world is and thereby thwarting such efforts.

    Comment by Con-Tester — April 28, 2008 @ 2:30 pm | Reply

  56. Hey Allen, when are you going to understand that that old fairy tale book you read so literally is just an old fairy tale book, and not written by the hand of a god.

    You live your whole life according to a myth, and a pretty fucked up one at that too.

    Then you and your pals go about living your lives without any real accountability, because what ever you do, god will forgive, what ever you fail at, god will fix, if you suffer it is gods will.

    You all want to control everything you can, especially what other say and do and think. You will and have in the past, pass brutal laws, destroy peoples lives, and call it part of a bigger plan.

    What does your god say about the children that gets raped by people of the cloth? What does your god say about the wars waged in his name? What does your god say about wankers like you who want to brainwash children in the school systems, using our taxpayers money? What does your god say about fuckers like you who want to ban women from making choices about their own bodies?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 3:03 pm | Reply

  57. Oh, wait, your god does not really believe women should be treated as equals. The vagina is a horrible thing to you and your fundie friends. Look at how women gets treated in any religious society.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 3:06 pm | Reply

  58. You are always trying to control everybody.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 3:08 pm | Reply

  59. Reminds me of the fundie mentality. Column 2 row 5.

    http://www.sciencecartoonsplus.com/galmath2b.htm

    Comment by Savage — April 28, 2008 @ 3:24 pm | Reply

  60. I see the Eksderde also offer Marriage Camps. For just R700 they will teach couples what marriage is all about. I wonder what it is they teach them.

    Day one:
    Morning: how to pick a good vibrator, and how to use it.
    Lunch 12-1
    Afternoon: How much wine is enough, how much is too much. Is Viagra the answer.
    Dinner: 6-7
    Evening: Wine drinking and then a practical tutorial. Our experts will be there to assist our couples in achieving maximum pleasure.

    Day 2

    Breakfast 7-8
    Morning: Dealing with scruples.
    Lunch 12-1
    Afternoon: How to use porn to spice up your love life. What gets her in the mood?
    Dinner 8-9
    Evening: Wife swopping, to learn some tricks from other peoples experience.

    Day 3
    How to find a good divorce lawyer.

    We also have a big selection of sex toys in our kiosk, Viagra, DVD’s, and many experts eager to assist in any way you want, with anything, really, anything.

    No refunds, all sales final.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 3:28 pm | Reply

  61. That would be a class I might be interested in attending

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 3:31 pm | Reply

  62. A number of fundies just phoned and asked “what is a row, and what is a column?”, so here is the direct link.

    http://www.sciencecartoonsplus.com/gallery/math/math22.gif

    Comment by Savage — April 28, 2008 @ 3:48 pm | Reply

  63. God must be an asshole if he created you guys in his image

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 3:59 pm | Reply

  64. Savage, I must admit: that was very, very funny. Your “fundies phoning”, more than the cartoon, I mean. Thanks.

    Comment by Con-Tester — April 28, 2008 @ 4:07 pm | Reply

  65. http://www.sciencecartoonsplus.com/gallery/math/math07.gif

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 9:18 pm | Reply

  66. Con-Tester it would be funny if it wasn’t so scary. I can just picture a fundie arriving at my front door with a sawn off 12 bore to give me proof. Mack Brolloks, I think you should seriously consider getting an unlisted tel. no. and address; you’re in great peril.

    Comment by Savage — April 29, 2008 @ 5:17 am | Reply

  67. O(ne of these assholes wrote somewhere up there:

    “Brolloks – 1.Ek aanbid die LEWENDE DRIE ENIGE GOD.2.Ja jy convict my tot n kierieswaaiende,idiotiese,deurmekaar grotman met beperkte denke.3.Daar is nog NOOIT en sal NOOIT bewys word dat GOD nie bestaan nie!!!”

    I wonder if this guy has ever read any of his church history…if he does he will find out that JFC was voted in by a small majority as the son of god at the synod of Nice (?) [Oubaas help!] around 350 – 400 AD and the holy fairy was added some 200 years later…to make up the trinity (of course also democratically :) ).

    I try not to clutter my brain with useless knowledge but this got stuck up there for some reason.

    Comment by Objective — April 29, 2008 @ 5:41 am | Reply

  68. I also seem to recall somewhere in Galatians (5?) something to the effect: jesis whom you stoned to death and hung on a tree….seems god couldnt make up his mind when he inspired the authors of the bible to write down his revealed wisdom…. of course it has to be revealed and inspired…who would believe it otherwise?

    Comment by Objective — April 29, 2008 @ 5:46 am | Reply

  69. I am sure heaven is not going to be very crowded at all anyway. And with those dumb motherfuckers there, I will take hell every time.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 28, 2008 @ 1:34 pm

    Yeh hell would be preferrable anytime: imagine all of use sitting around with sexy women drinking wine and discussing interesting topics while we occasionally ruminate on the boredom of those idiots in heaven….. eternally bowing down before the great asshole chanting: allah allah canary!

    Comment by Objective — April 29, 2008 @ 6:04 am | Reply

  70. Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven

    I believe it was Nietzsche who said that

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 7:20 am | Reply

  71. Anyway, for someone who believes in a superior being, to be so arrogant as to say that that superior being made humans in it’s image, has to be completely out of their mind and very very delusional. I wonder what kind of toilet paper god uses. I wonder if he wages war with other gods in the universe. I wonder if he likes sex. I wonder what he thinks of our dumb arses. He either does not give a shit about us, or he is a very sick bastard, or he doesn’t exist. Maybe he is a total drunk. That would explain a lot of the flaws in his creation, including the bible thumpers. He must really be laughing his arse off at these guys. Hell, he could have a MAD sense of humor.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 7:28 am | Reply

  72. Pollie writes about “die LEWENDE DRIE ENIGE GOD” in #33.

    It should be noted that the idea of a triune god is an attempt to marry the Jewish idea of God with the later idea that Jesus was both “very” human and “very” divine, resulting in a third separate “person” called the Christian God. This contradictory arrangement has, unfortunately, no scriptural basis.

    Jesus never said that he was God, but the son of God. As a matter of fact, he went to great lengths to distinguish himself from God. Verses such as Luke 23:46, Mark 13:32, Mark 10:18, Luke 18:17, Matthew 19:17, John 5:22, John 20:21 and many others clearly indicate that he did not see himself as divine.

    Not one of the gospels claim that Jesus was God, and the idea of the “trinity” is not present in the Bible. What is clear is that Jesus was illegitimate and that people in his community seemed to be aware of this fact (Matthew 1:18-24 and John 8:41). He told his mother at age 12 (Luke 2:48) that the temple was “his Father’s house”. Make your own deductions, but the fact that he did not want to be known as Joseph’s son (being an illegitimate child), and told everyone that he was the son of God, says a lot.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 29, 2008 @ 7:44 am | Reply

  73. Here is an interview with Kent Hovind

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 9:20 am | Reply

  74. Conducted by Ali G a.k.a Borat

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 9:21 am | Reply

  75. It looks like the cavemen ran back to their caves because it is time to howl at the moon again.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 9:22 am | Reply

  76. Robert M. Price writes in his book, Deconstructing Jesus, that “when an evangelist or an apologist invites you to have faith “in Christ,” he is in fact smuggling in a great number of other issues. For example, Chalcedonian Christology, the doctrine of the Trinity, the Protestant idea of faith and grace, a particular nineteenth-century theory of biblical inspiration and literalism, habits of church attendance, and so on, are all distinct and open questions, or should be. And yet no evangelist ever invites people to accept Christ by faith and then to start examining all these other associated issues for themselves. Not one! The Trinity, biblical inerrantism, for some even anti-Darwinism, are nonnegotiable. They say you cannot be genuinely “saved” if you do not toe the party line on these points. Thus for them, to “accept Christ” means to accept Trinitarianism, biblicism, inerrantism, creationism, and so on. All this, in turn, means that “Christ” has become a shorthand designation for this whole raft of doctrines and opinions, all of which one is to accept “by faith,” on someone else’s say-so. Christ has become an umbrella for an unquestioning acceptance of what some preacher or institution tells you to believe. Once the believer begins to “deconstruct” what “Jesus Christ” has come to denote in his particular religious community, he may discover that his primary religious allegiance has been utilized to manipulate him into transferring the same diehard loyalty to other secondary or tertiary issues, political and cultural.”

    So when Pollie writes in #33 “Glo jy in liefde? Wel as jy doen – SY NAAM IS GOD!! Dis reg – liefde is nie n emosie,gevoel,opoffering of wat ookal nie – dis n persoon en SY NAAM IS GOD”, and when Allen writes in #47 “provided the Scriptures and will judge all according to His will, is offering a life of eternity in Heaven with Him and all we have to do is BELIEVE”, they are not concerned with the fact that their ideas have very little to do with Jesus or his message, but everything with history and politics.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 29, 2008 @ 9:27 am | Reply

  77. “…..is offering a life of eternity in Heaven with Him and all we have to do is BELIEVE”

    They believe this because they don’t want to accept accountability for anything they might do or did. They believe all their sins (crimes) will be forgiven, if they believe in Jesus. They can continue to commit crimes and they don’t have to accept accountability for anything.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 9:38 am | Reply

  78. They are insecure, thats why they try to convert other people all over the world.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 9:50 am | Reply

  79. Thomas Dreyer wrote: “The Bible teaches that those wise in their own site will see the things of God as foolish an even ridicule them…”

    It does not take a divine being to predict that people will laugh at foolishness. It is foolish, so we laugh. Even I could have told you that.

    Pollie Beukes wrote : “Then why on earth would you convict christians of being 1.people with moderate intellect 2.fanatics 3.idiots 4.comedians 5.Bible thumpers ect.?”

    Because they believe in a make-belief friend, is convinced he is real, tells everyone else to also believe in their make belief friend, gives their make-belief friend money, worships him, asks him favours and is convinced their make-belief friend will torture all the people who does not believe in their make-belief friend. Does that clear it up for you?

    Pollie Beukes wrote : “Now tell me Oubaas,Objective,Savage,Mr.Brolloks can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that GOD does not exist? ”

    Only if you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that fairies and invisible pink unicorns does not exist. You don’t believe in fairies do you? Why not? Because there is no proof? We could say you are atheistic towards fairies. It’s the same with us towards your imaginary god. How does one differentiate your god from something that does no exist?

    Pollie Beukes wrote: “All that i DO know is that i must forgive your ignorance as JESUS already has!”

    If Jesus has already forgiven our ignorance then what’s al this talk about hell? You see, you are a liar, because your Bible is clear that people who do not believe in your god, ignorance or not, will be tortured forever. But please, make up stories about who your god will forgive and who not. Shall we call your imagination god?

    Allan wrote: ” [...] I pray that Mack opens his eyes, to avoid eternal suffering for his self-righteousness”

    Oh please. Like we don’t get threatened with hell on every goddamn thread. If fear was taken out of your religion there would be no more of your religion left. Take your god and his threats of hell and worship the fear all you want. Don’t blame us if we don’t join you and point out that your god is nothing more than a fear monger.

    Pollie Beukes wrote: “Tot ek fisies gewys is HY leef!”

    Regtig? Fisies? Jy is fisies ‘n zombie (uit did dood uit opgestaan) gewys? Fok! Gaan jy kwaad wees as ek jou nie glo nie? Sou jy my glo as as ek beweer ek is fisies gewys dat Julius Ceaser leef? Hoekom moet ek jou dan glo? Kan jy ‘n stukkie van die zombie afsny vir DNA ontleding of iets? Enige iets was as bewyse kan dien, beyond a reasonable doubt. Of verbeel jy jou dalk dinge? Maak jy dalk dinge op en glo dit later self?

    Pollie Beukes wrote: “Ek aanbid die LEWENDE DRIE ENIGE GOD”

    Hey, if your god has multiple personality disorder, then that’s *your* problem. I prefer to avoid gods with multiple personality disorders.

    Pollie Beukes wrote: “Daar is nog NOOIT en sal NOOIT bewys word dat GOD nie bestaan nie!!!”

    Daar is nog NOOIT en sal NOOIT bewys word dat ODIN nie bestaan nie!!!

    Pollie Beukes wrote: “Verstaaan julle dan nie – jy moet juis(soos die Bybel) vir ons se,soos n kind glo ”

    Soos kinders aan die Tooth Fairy glo? Soos jy in god glo? Soos Muslim kinders aan Allah glo? Soos kinders aan hulle denkbeeldige vriende glo? Soos kinders alles glo wat mens hulle vertel?

    Pollie Beukes wrote: “omrede GOD se wysheid verstommend is”

    Is dit? Hoe weet jy? Omdat ‘n ou boek sulke bewerings maak?

    Pollie wrote: “Glo egter eers met jou hart soos n kind en jy sal sprakeloos staan oor wat alles aan jou/my(ongelooflike groot breine)geopenbaar word ”

    Of jy staan sprakeloos vir die goed wat jou verbeelding opdis, die verduidelikings wat jou verbeelding opdis en die snert wat ander mense se verbeeldings kan opdis. Staan sprakeloos dat jy jou verbeelding met realiteit verwar. Staan eerder sprakeloos dat jy soos ‘n kind glo, aan slange wat praat, ‘n donkie wat praat, ‘n vloed met ‘n boot wat AL die diere op het, ‘n god wat ‘n maagd wiks en haar pregnant maak, ‘n dooie man wat uit die dood opstaan, demone, spoke, geraamtes wat uit die graf uit opstaan, hekse wat dooies oproep, duiwels wat varke beset en die mensdom wat suffer omdat Eva ‘n appel geeet het. Maar fok nee, ons gaan hel toe as ons nie die kak glo nie.

    Pollie skryf: “PS Ek is seker dat GOD die aarde en alles daarop deur evolusie kon maak,evolusie self is deur HOM gemaak.7 dae vir n mens en 7 dae vir GOD is twee heeltemal verskillende dinge.”

    As god die Bybel “inspireer” het, wie was die audience? Mense, reg? Ek bedoel, god het die Bybel mos kastig geinspireer sodat mense dit kan lees en verstaan. As god dan sy eie woorde gebruik wat nie met mense se konsep van die woorde gepaard gaan nie, dan is hy ‘n idioot. Hoekom se “ek het dit in ‘n dag gemaak” terwyl hy bedoel “Ek het dit stadig maar seker deur biljoene jare gemaak”. Dis ‘n moerse verskil. Ek stort elke dag. O, by the way, my dag is nie 24 uur lank nie want my fokken planeet draai te stadig. Is god ‘n alien op ‘n planeet waar ‘n dag biljoene jare vat of is die Bybel sommer net verkeerd?

    Allen wrote: “If you want a simple sign it is right in front of you (Scripture!)”

    Scripture is a sign for the existence of god? So Homer’s Iliad is therefore a sign for the existence of the greek gods? Is the Elder Edda a sign for the Norse gods? Does your logic hold? Did you even think before you wrote that?

    Now to sit and wait. Will Pollie, Allen and Thomas reply or be silent like their god?

    Comment by Renier — April 29, 2008 @ 11:13 am | Reply

  80. Renier skryf in #76: “Staan sprakeloos dat jy jou verbeelding met realiteit verwar. Staan eerder sprakeloos dat jy soos ‘n kind glo, aan slange wat praat, ‘n donkie wat praat, ‘n vloed met ‘n boot wat AL die diere op het, ‘n god wat ‘n maagd wiks en haar pregnant maak, ‘n dooie man wat uit die dood opstaan, demone, spoke, geraamtes wat uit die graf uit opstaan, hekse wat dooies oproep, duiwels wat varke beset en die mensdom wat suffer omdat Eva ‘n appel geeet het.”

    Netjies gestel. Dit klink na ‘n wonderlike storie… vir kinders.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 29, 2008 @ 11:41 am | Reply

  81. Ek’s nou so gatvol dat ek al die pret hier gemis het.
    “…god wat ‘n maagd wiks…” ROFLMAO!

    Comment by Hendrik — April 29, 2008 @ 12:08 pm | Reply

  82. Hendrik skryf: “Ek’s nou so gatvol dat ek al die pret hier gemis het.”

    Ek self was nogal jammer ek kon nie vroegtydig inspring sodat ek dalk ‘n response of 2 terug kan kry voordat die “Mighty Men” die hasepad vat nie. Ai, een lang naweek en ek mis al die fun :-) Ek moes actually ‘n paar keer opstaan en gaan rook terwyl ek die comments oor “You cannot prove god does not exist” lees. Die “Mighty Men” slinger die argument rond asof dit bewyse is vir god se bestaan. Dink hulle nie?

    Oubaas skryf: “Netjies gestel. Dit klink na ‘n wonderlike storie… vir kinders.”

    Dankie :-) Dit help partykeer as mens al die fancy teologie afsny en die goed wat hulle glo sommer net oop en bloot, eenvoudig stel. Dat hulle so trots is dat hulle soos naiewe kinders sulke snert glo is vir my die cherry op die koek. Dink hulle nie?

    Comment by Renier — April 29, 2008 @ 12:37 pm | Reply

  83. Renier, jy is medisyne…ek het nou so lekker gelag dat almal hier wou weet waaroor dit gaan …toe lees ek maar vir hulle van die god wat die maagd wiks….

    Comment by Objective — April 29, 2008 @ 1:17 pm | Reply

  84. Nota aan self:
    1. Moet nooit, ooit weer langnaweek vat sonder om die laptop met die 3G-kaart saam te sleep nie.
    2. Lees liewers nie in ‘n oopplan-kantoor die kommentaar op hierdie blog nie – nog meer kollegas gaan dink jy’s dalk so drie of vier broodjies kort van ‘n dosyn.
    3. Moet nooit verwag dat die fundies mettertyd ‘n klein bietjie slimmer of meer rasioneel sal word nie. Indien enigiets, word hulle algaande net nog meer klipkoppig.
    4. As 60 000 manne iets glo, moet dit mos waar wees, of hoe? “Werklikheid” en “waarheid” word immers by wyse van meerderheidstem bepaal, of nie?
    5. Kyk weer die naweek Spungebob se fliek saam met die kinders – veral daardie stuk waar almal se emmertjies oor die kop aanskakel en hulle uit een mond bely: “All hail Plankton!”

    Comment by Hendrik — April 29, 2008 @ 1:42 pm | Reply

  85. Renier en Oubaas skryf:

    “Renier skryf in #76: “Staan sprakeloos dat jy jou verbeelding met realiteit verwar. Staan eerder sprakeloos dat jy soos ‘n kind glo, aan slange wat praat, ‘n donkie wat praat, ‘n vloed met ‘n boot wat AL die diere op het, ‘n god wat ‘n maagd wiks en haar pregnant maak, ‘n dooie man wat uit die dood opstaan, demone, spoke, geraamtes wat uit die graf uit opstaan, hekse wat dooies oproep, duiwels wat varke beset en die mensdom wat suffer omdat Eva ‘n appel geeet het.”

    Netjies gestel. Dit klink na ‘n wonderlike storie… vir kinders.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 29, 2008 @ 11:41 am ”

    Nogal snaaks dat hulle almal Harry Potter haat, maar kyk net na al die ooreenkomste. Miskien hou hulle nie van die kiompetiesie nie.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 2:02 pm | Reply

  86. Renier # 76, brilliant. “Now to sit and wait. Will Pollie, Allen and Thomas reply or be silent like their god?”

    I hope they reply. They have had enough time to lick their wounds; I mean with you, Con-Tester, Oubaas, and Objective, at the front and Mack Brolloks finishing off any one still standing must be quite an experience for them here. I wonder how they are doing at other blogs. Come on guys, give us the blog references and your names so we can see your performance amongst your brethren.

    Comment by Savage — April 29, 2008 @ 2:06 pm | Reply

  87. Harry Potter, Jesus and Star Trek

    http://lfab-uvm.blogspot.com/2007/08/harry-potter-vs-jesus.html

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 2:08 pm | Reply

  88. Harry Potter, Jesus and Star Trek

    http://www.lfab-uvm.blogspot.com/2007/08/harry-potter-vs-jesus.html

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 2:11 pm | Reply

  89. Harry Potter, Jesus and Star Trek

    “http://www.lfab-uvm.blogspot.com/2007/08/harry-potter-vs-jesus.html”

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 2:12 pm | Reply

  90. “Renier # 76, brilliant. “Now to sit and wait. Will Pollie, Allen and Thomas reply or be silent like their god?”

    I hope they reply.”

    By my judgement most of them are children…well young adults perhaps…and i have been contemplating why their instructors/pastors/brain washers dont ever come here…. You think perhaps they know better? Perhaps they even know the truth :) of course it doesnt pay to tell the truth does it? Better to bs them with eternal life and god loves you and get paid for it than say: hey ive been bs you guys…now give me some money.

    Comment by Objective — April 29, 2008 @ 2:45 pm | Reply

  91. Objective writes in #85: “Perhaps they even know the truth”

    I believe many of them do. And that they pay a price by not speaking up. Daniel Dennett writes: “In fact, there is good reason to believe that the varieties of self-admonition and self-blinding that people have to indulge in to gird their creedal loins may actually cost them something substantial in the moral agency department: a debilitating willingness to profess solemnly in the utter absence of conviction, a well-entrenched habit of deflecting their attention from evidence that is crying out for consideration, and plenty of experience biting their tongues and saying nothing when others around them make assumptions that they know in their hearts to be false.”

    Comment by Oubaas — April 29, 2008 @ 3:22 pm | Reply

  92. Feynman said if you think you understand something, explain it to yourself. I admit I’ve done it a number of times and many times discovered; back to the books, pal. I wonder if bible thumpers have tried to explain their doctrine to themselves? Why did miracles happen then but not now? Why did the ancient tribes see god but we don’t? Why hasn’t science confirmed any of our claims of supernatural beings while there is a lot of money out to gain? Why don’t you prove them wrong? And you know your god always needs money. Its up for the taking if your claims could be proven.

    Makes you think that you haven’t actually developed your brains. Its been stagnated since you have been abused by grownups to believe their nonsense. Break away, and have a life. Shit, its actually a great life. Short, but great.

    Comment by Savage — April 29, 2008 @ 4:02 pm | Reply

  93. Mack Brolloks wrote Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven might have bene written by Nietzsche. No, it was John Milton in Paradise Lost. Go and read Lucifer’s wonderful rebellious speech there.

    It seems as if the 60 000 men have disappeared to where they feel safe, protected by their silent god.

    Comment by George Claassen — April 29, 2008 @ 4:07 pm | Reply

  94. Savage in #87: “Short, but great.”

    Life is a sexually-transmitted, terminal disease :)

    Comment by Oubaas — April 29, 2008 @ 4:24 pm | Reply

  95. I say that it’s a good thing they aren’t 66,666 men. Then we’d see faith like slaptjips and some regte kak. ;)

    Comment by Con-Tester — April 29, 2008 @ 4:26 pm | Reply

  96. “Life is a sexually-transmitted, terminal disease.”

    One for “The Book of Quotations.” Cave men, this philosophical quote even applies to you! Enjoy life now; when you’re dead, that’s it. Ikabod!

    Comment by Savage — April 29, 2008 @ 4:52 pm | Reply

  97. George wrote:

    “It seems as if the 60 000 men have disappeared to where they feel safe, protected by their silent god.”

    Yes, as Savage pointed out before, they always run back to their caves.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 5:08 pm | Reply

  98. George wrote:

    “Mack Brolloks wrote Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven might have bene written by Nietzsche. No, it was John Milton in Paradise Lost. Go and read Lucifer’s wonderful rebellious speech there.

    It seems as if the 60 000 men have disappeared to where they feel safe, protected by their silent god.

    Comment by George Claassen — April 29, 2008 @ 4:07 pm ”

    Here is the book, for free, online, I just found it, so I will start to look for that speech.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=pO4MAAAAYAAJ&dq=milton+in+paradise+lost&pg=PP1&ots=bLKJ8IVFXn&sig=OFhWqgHe8tDXxMhKQi2MwzY-Ypc&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.com/search?q=Milton+in+Paradise+Lost&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail#PPR5,M1

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 5:13 pm | Reply

  99. You can download it as well. It is 9.4 MB.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 5:16 pm | Reply

  100. George, do you know what page approx. the speech is on? Thanks.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 6:12 pm | Reply

  101. Ok, an update on the cult in Texas. How is this not rape?

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24356447/

    Most teen girls from ranch have been pregnant
    Of 53 girls ages 14-17, 31 have children or are pregnant, Texas officials say

    SAN ANTONIO – More than half the teen girls taken from a polygamist compound in west Texas have children or are pregnant, state officials said Monday.

    A total of 53 girls between the ages of 14 and 17 are in state custody after a raid 3 1/2 weeks ago at the Yearning For Zion Ranch in Eldorado. Of those girls, 31 either have children or are pregnant, said Child Protective Services spokesman Darrell Azar. Two of those are pregnant now, he said; it was unclear whether either of those two already have children.

    “It shows you a pretty distinct pattern, that it was pretty pervasive,” he said.

    State officials took custody of all 463 children at the ranch controlled by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, saying a pattern of teen girls forced into underage “spiritual” marriages and sex with much older men created an unsafe environment for the sect’s children.

    Under Texas law, children under the age of 17 generally cannot consent to sex with an adult. A girl can get married with parental permission at 16, but none of these girls is believed to have a legal marriage under state law.

    A call seeking comment from FLDS spokesman Rod Parker was not immediately returned. Church officials have denied that any children were abused at the ranch and say the state’s actions are a form of religious persecution.

    Civil-liberties groups and lawyers for the children have criticized the state for sweeping all the children, from nursing infants to teen boys, into foster care when only teen girls are alleged to have been sexually abused.

    No one has been charged since the raid, which was prompted by a series of calls to a domestic abuse hotline, purportedly from a 16-year-old forced into a marriage recognized only by the sect with a man three times her age. That girl has not been found, and authorities are investigating whether the call was a hoax.

    On Monday, CPS also revised its total count of children in state custody to 463, up one from Friday. Azar said the change resulted from finally getting the children out of the San Angelo Coliseum and into foster facilities around the state, where they were able to get a more accurate count.

    Of those 463 children, 250 are girls and 213 are boys.

    The sect, which broke from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints more than a century ago, believes polygamy brings glorification in heaven. Its leader, Warren Jeffs, is revered as a prophet. Jeffs was convicted last year in Utah of forcing a 14-year-old girl into marriage with an older cousin.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 6:18 pm | Reply

  102. Update on the Texan cult.

    Most teen girls from ranch have been pregnant
    Of 53 girls ages 14-17, 31 have children or are pregnant, Texas officials say

    updated 5:40 p.m. ET, Mon., April. 28, 2008

    SAN ANTONIO – More than half the teen girls taken from a polygamist compound in west Texas have children or are pregnant, state officials said Monday.

    A total of 53 girls between the ages of 14 and 17 are in state custody after a raid 3 1/2 weeks ago at the Yearning For Zion Ranch in Eldorado. Of those girls, 31 either have children or are pregnant, said Child Protective Services spokesman Darrell Azar. Two of those are pregnant now, he said; it was unclear whether either of those two already have children.

    “It shows you a pretty distinct pattern, that it was pretty pervasive,” he said.

    State officials took custody of all 463 children at the ranch controlled by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, saying a pattern of teen girls forced into underage “spiritual” marriages and sex with much older men created an unsafe environment for the sect’s children.

    Under Texas law, children under the age of 17 generally cannot consent to sex with an adult. A girl can get married with parental permission at 16, but none of these girls is believed to have a legal marriage under state law.

    A call seeking comment from FLDS spokesman Rod Parker was not immediately returned. Church officials have denied that any children were abused at the ranch and say the state’s actions are a form of religious persecution.

    Civil-liberties groups and lawyers for the children have criticized the state for sweeping all the children, from nursing infants to teen boys, into foster care when only teen girls are alleged to have been sexually abused.

    No one has been charged since the raid, which was prompted by a series of calls to a domestic abuse hotline, purportedly from a 16-year-old forced into a marriage recognized only by the sect with a man three times her age. That girl has not been found, and authorities are investigating whether the call was a hoax.

    On Monday, CPS also revised its total count of children in state custody to 463, up one from Friday. Azar said the change resulted from finally getting the children out of the San Angelo Coliseum and into foster facilities around the state, where they were able to get a more accurate count.

    Of those 463 children, 250 are girls and 213 are boys.

    The sect, which broke from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints more than a century ago, believes polygamy brings glorification in heaven. Its leader, Warren Jeffs, is revered as a prophet. Jeffs was convicted last year in Utah of forcing a 14-year-old girl into marriage with an older cousin.

    “http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24356447/”

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 6:19 pm | Reply

  103. Looks like posts do not go through with some links. So what I do now is put the links in ” ” when that happens, and the posts go through.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 6:20 pm | Reply

  104. Savage #87 asked: “Why did miracles happen then but not now?”
    Sir, you obviously don’t read the daily newspapers. In just about every report on a house/farm robbery or horrific road accident, you will read: “It was a miracle nobody was killed / Die Here se hand was oor my / Dis net genade van Bo dat die koeël my gemis het” etc etc. The fact that the other driver and 10 passengers were killed in the collision, or that the robbery victim’s wife and daughter were tortured, raped and killed right next to him, is quite besides the point. It was God’s will.

    Comment by Oom Stoffel — April 29, 2008 @ 6:47 pm | Reply

  105. Jissie Oom Stoffel,

    I am very very bad with picking up on sarcasm, but I think you are being sarcastic right now, right?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 7:32 pm | Reply

  106. Ok, I think I get it. Good point. If that’s the case then a lot of miracles happen to me every year.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 7:48 pm | Reply

  107. George wrote: No, it was John Milton in Paradise Lost. Go and read Lucifer’s wonderful rebellious speech there.

    Ok, I found the speech the devil makes. It is book 2. Very good.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 29, 2008 @ 9:24 pm | Reply

  108. Oubaas quoted Dennett in #86

    From the same article:

    ‘I get mail all the time from religious leaders who admit to me in private that they do not believe in God but think that the best way to continue their lives is to swallow hard and get on with their ministries, concentrating on bringing more good than evil into the lives of their parishioners and those for whom their churches provide care.’

    I find it interesting that they can think that the lie cab produce good. I for one would expect them to understand that when the bible states ”You will reap what you sow” it is asserting a scientific fact – when was the idea introduced that you can sow a lie and reap truth…that because you profess to lie for the sake of some unknown entity called a god your lie will somehow contradict the basic principle of existence?

    Commenting on Mother Teresa, Dennett notes: “She could have devoted herself more single-mindedly to helping the poor instead of trying to convert them. Perhaps it was her guilt at being unable to convert herself that drove her to work so hard to convert others to take her place among the believers.”

    At one stage of my life I worked hard at convincing the powers in my life to read more than the bible…to include some history, archaeology, palaeontology, chemistry, geology etc. This was attempted briefly…but then abandoned because (I think) the cost of having to explain to others around us why there was a change of mind, far outweighed the cost of maintaining the status quo… it was easier to sacrifice your own mind and one person in a large family than put the rest through the agony of having to attempt an understanding of existence and knowledge.

    It remains interesting to be a bystander and watch the chickens come home to roost….

    Comment by Objective — April 30, 2008 @ 5:26 am | Reply

  109. It seems I have yet again to admit I was wrong with something. Seems like a habit. In the previous thread Hendrik and I disagreed over the moderates, me claiming that they are not real issue.

    But note this, written by Pollie: “PS Ek is seker dat GOD die aarde en alles daarop deur evolusie kon maak,evolusie self is deur HOM gemaak.7 dae vir n mens en 7 dae vir GOD is twee heeltemal verskillende dinge.”

    Pollie appears not to be a fundie, but a moderate. I then have to wonder why Pollie pops up here with the 60 000 “mighty” men thread to defend god. 60 000 men. How many fundies, how many moderates? All standing together against reason. I ask myself, what is a fundie if not just an arrogant (cocksure) moderate? So, Hendrik, you (and Dawkins) were right.

    Comment by Renier — April 30, 2008 @ 5:36 am | Reply

  110. Objective wrote: “Commenting on Mother Teresa…”

    May I recommend Penn & Teller (Bullshit)? They had an episode on the old hag. She was not a good woman, it is all a myth and once again people worship it. They even interviewed Hitchens about her.

    No, really guys, get Penn & Teller’s Bullshit series. Five seasons I think. You will LOVE it. Good humour too.

    Comment by Renier — April 30, 2008 @ 5:41 am | Reply

  111. The SMS campaign has started, just as expected. I spoke to a Christian lady this morning, who received a SMS stating that Mr Buchan is being watched by the government because of his large rallies, and that all Christians should pray for him (protection, guidance, etc). She was requested to forward this to as many people as possible. Just part of his marketing ploy, I presume… getting the common people ready for his grand entrance into Jerusalem (or is that Ellis Park). On the other hand – he should be carefully watched, so if the government is doing that, good for them.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 30, 2008 @ 6:03 am | Reply

  112. #104

    Their dishonest lies and tactics, the chosen of god. Lying for Jesus again.

    Comment by Renier — April 30, 2008 @ 8:33 am | Reply

  113. Oom Stoffel writes in #97: “The fact that the other driver and 10 passengers were killed in the collision, or that the robbery victim’s wife and daughter were tortured, raped and killed right next to him, is quite besides the point. It was God’s will.”

    So true. So immoral. Dealing with people who believe that they are doing the good lord’s work, that their god is the personification of “love”, that they cannot but “do good” if they follow his commands, and that he is the ultimate source of “all good morals”, and then seeing the exact opposite in their actions, has always been a tremendous source of irritation to me.

    If you disagree with them, they become concerned. If you do so with reason, they become frustrated. If you persist, they become angry. That’s why they burned people in the good old days. Today they just “love you”, not because they don’t want to “give you over to satan” like they used to, but because our free-thinking forefathers have paid with their blood to create a world with laws (the “human rights” which these willing “slaves of Jesus” so despise) that stops them from expressing their unnatural selves like they used to. Their belief compels them to shun knowledge and follow charismatic miracle-workers such as Mr. Buchan, who never studied theology, and who believes that he knows Jesus real well (”Ek praat nie oor iemand van wie ek in ’n boek gelees het nie. Ek ken Hom. Hy is my beste vriend.”). They want what he has. And they have what he wants.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 30, 2008 @ 11:50 am | Reply

  114. Oubaas wrote: “Today they just “love you”, not because they don’t want to “give you over to satan” like they used to[...]”

    Quoting from memory here, Nietzsche: “The Christians don’t burn us, not because they love us but because their love is impotent”.

    Comment by Renier — April 30, 2008 @ 12:05 pm | Reply

  115. Oubaas in #113

    ‘…personification of “love”, that they cannot but “do good” if they follow his commands, and that he is the ultimate source of “all good morals”, and then seeing the exact opposite in their actions, has al…”

    The trouble is that ever since Augustine “the good” has always been defined as what is “god’s will” meaning as articulated by the representative of the specific god….bend the tree when it is young (meaning inflict pain until he comes round to your view of things)…submit the non believer (the disobedient) to the most horrible forms of torture….in order that it may believe as we do… iow. whatever we do is good as long as we can vaguely demonstrate that it serves the glory of god…(all such activities are expressions of our love for our brothers..)
    I never understood the common saying: i beat the hell out of you because i love you”

    Comment by Objective — April 30, 2008 @ 1:47 pm | Reply

  116. The thing Pollie wrote: “Ek aanbid die LEWENDE DRIE ENIGE GOD”

    It’s still freaking me out. There is only one god they claim. This god then gets a virgin pregnant and a son is born. The son is also god. So god is his own father. God got his own mother pregnant and then he was born from that union. That’s really bizarre. Then god tortured himself on the cross. But if you don’t believe this bizarre story, oooh boy, the god will torture you, not just on a cross, but for eternity in fire. How come I am feeling REALLY sheepish that I ever believed this? I used to laugh at silly people that believe in zombies but I worshipped one as god. I used to think people who saw ghosts were nuts but had no problem believing in a “holy” ghost. I used to think people who threatened other people with severe violence were too weak to make a good point and convince people. Yet, I adored the greatest windbag with threats of eternal torture as “abba”, father. The allmighty god, fails to convince people he is real and starts threatening them with hell. And somehow, people think this is the ultimate wisdom and love.

    Comment by Renier — April 30, 2008 @ 1:52 pm | Reply

  117. People call me an angry atheist. Perhaps they are right. I am angry. I am angry at the memes that reduced me to a stupid fool, enslaved me and made me fuck up my early life and ambition so that I could spread the memes (missionary work). I am angry because I sacrificed my love for chemistry/biology so that I could “spread the good news”. Good news my ass, bullshit is more like it. I am angry because I spend good money on crap books, Xian books always promising a better, a more “alive” relationship with god, never delivering. I am angry because I gave away a 10th I earned to nothing. I am angry, because one in every seven days I wasted, listening to false promises and threats of hell. I am angry because I took so many other people down the same path, giving them Jesus as if it was the greatest gift and in reality it was a nightmare curse. I am angry because I gave good people something bad and was proud of it. I am angry because I spent more time reading Bible, praying and keeping “quiet time” than just being human. I am angry, because to me humans were reduced to just possible objects for conversion. I am angry at the Xian memes, for making people I love turn away from me just because I no longer blindly accepted myths. The memes don’t just abuse children, they abuse adults too. There is no god to forgive me for bulshitting so many people, infecting them with really bad and abusive memes. No god’s blood can make up for what religion has done to human minds, not in a million eternities.

    So in short, the next asshole who accuses me of being a “militant” angry atheist is going to get a middle finger with some conviction behind it.

    Sorry, I was reading the previous thread about how atheists are just as bad as the fundies, even worse, because they are so “smug” in their reasoning and logic.

    Comment by Renier — April 30, 2008 @ 2:04 pm | Reply

  118. Renier wrote:

    “Objective wrote: “Commenting on Mother Teresa…”

    May I recommend Penn & Teller (Bullshit)? They had an episode on the old hag. She was not a good woman, it is all a myth and once again people worship it. They even interviewed Hitchens about her.

    No, really guys, get Penn & Teller’s Bullshit series. Five seasons I think. You will LOVE it. Good humour too.”

    Yes, I have watched every show up till the end of season 4. Very very good. They do not have anything good to say about mother Theresa. She was a fraud, and a fony money grabber.

    Hitchens goes further in other comments about her, calling her all sorts of things.

    The old hoor lobbied in Ireland for years to make sure the government does not legalize abortion and condoms.

    I don’t think hell would want her.

    She made people suffer. As much as she could without getting arrested for torture. She believed suffering was the way to jesus. Of the millions and millions (hundreds of millions) of dollars she raised hardly anything ever got to the poor people she claimed she was helping. It was wasted on nunneries and fundraising campaigns and went into the Vatican’s coffers.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 30, 2008 @ 2:22 pm | Reply

  119. It seems there are some rational thinkers allowed to air their views suddenly on Beeld’s letter page. Today two letters, at long last, appeared supporting Denker van Pretoria.

    The first one is by André Cruywagen from Randburg. He writes the following brilliant letter:

    André Cruywagen, Randburg

    “Ná die bohaai wat ontstaan het oor die brief van “Denker” het ek die briewekolom dopgehou, maar geen teken gesien van iemand wat hom/haar ondersteun nie.

    “Ek sal nou maar moet toetree tot die ietwat eensydige debat.

    “Die magtige mans se jamboree het nou al só ’n heilige status gekry dat kritiek daarteen blykbaar in sekere kringe as ’n tipe aanval op die mensdom as geheel beskou word.

    “Die eenvoudige feit is dat, buiten die nuutjie van ’n aartappel-tema en ’n soort gereflekteerde glorie van die rolprent Faith like potatoes, die Greytown-byeenkoms nie veel anders was as al die swetterjoel godsdienstige byeenkomste van die baie kompeterende gelowe op die aarde nie – waar mense bymekaarkom en mekaar opsweep en dan tog só-ó-ó goed voel en dink ’n groot waarheid is so pas ontdek.

    “Daar moet mos ’n God wees as tienduisende om jou jubel en arms swaai.

    “Hulle kan mos nie almal verkeerd wees nie?

    “Die feit is egter dat die Christendom maar net nog ’n geloof is wat aanhangers dink die ware een is. Islam, Hindoeïsme, ?Boeddhisme, Sion en vele ander dink ook so.

    “Almal val egter oor die hekkie van ’n onvermoë om te kan bewys dat hul god bestaan, wat nog dat dit ’n goeie god is.

    “Die mees steurende aspek van hierdie Christen-Woodstock was die oproep op die “Manne” om weer baas van hul huis te word.

    “Maar dis bemoedigend om te sien dat hulle darem aangesê is om hul vrouens goed te behandel. Sjoe, wat ’n verligting!

    “Die magtige manlike chauviniste wat so op vliegtuie ge-hosanna en ge-amen het, moet seker wonder hoekom dit vir hul ghoeroe nodige was om so ’n ooglopende beginsel weer onder hul aandag te bring.

    “Ek lees dat Loftus uitverkoop is vir Angus se volgende optrede.

    “Laat my dink dat hy ’n nuwe en meer winsgewende aartappelkultivar ontdek het.

    “Ek is ook ’n denker en my naam verskyn hier onder vir kennisname.”

    The 2nd letter is by Ongelowige in Nelspruit, again a true reflection on the Mighty Men’s ignorance:

    “Na aanleiding van die brief “Gee ongelowige ’n Loftus-kaartjie” (29 April) – nee dankie. Ek is ’n ongelowige, hoekom? U kan nie aan my bewys hoekom ek u God en nie Baäl moet aanbid nie.

    “Wat ek in die wêreld sien, is dat daar nog nooit ’n god was nie. Volgens die Bybel is Hy in elk geval nie ’n nice ou nie.”

    At least there are some people outside the Might Men circle who are not fooled by the potato hysteria.

    Comment by George Claassen — April 30, 2008 @ 2:26 pm | Reply

  120. Here are the links if anyone want to watch the Pen & Teller show about mother (fucker) theresa.

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=OPsQCutg2Fw

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 30, 2008 @ 2:26 pm | Reply

  121. Renier wrote (#117 or thereabouts):

    Sorry, I was reading the previous thread about how atheists are just as bad as the fundies, even worse, because they are so “smug” in their reasoning and logic.

    Renier, you and me both, mate, you and me both, and for the same essential reasons. See, there’s this poseur who barges in, fostering hallucinations of his/her own brilliance, pontificating about how things are in the world, what a scourge atheists are, and how ignorant and hypocritical everyone is – except, of course, for him/herself.

    Comment by Con-Tester — April 30, 2008 @ 2:32 pm | Reply

  122. Wow, if Beeld published those two letter, good for them. But they still don’t publish a fraction of the letters they receive that criticizes religion and these crazy religious leaders in South Africa.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 30, 2008 @ 2:38 pm | Reply

  123. Look at the numbers on this website.

    These arseholes who say atheists are militant and bad and criminal, just scroll down and look at the stats on prison inmates according to religious conviction.

    http://www.atheistempire.com/reference/stats/main.html

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 30, 2008 @ 2:41 pm | Reply

  124. Jis Renier (#11), obviously you’re not only angry – you’re really the moer in. And I have much sympathy with how you feel. I (and many others you and I know) came down the same road but fortunately my eyes started opening early in my life (in my teens in fact). So I have much less to be angry about – and anyway, time heals. Long time ago I learnt to bite my tongue in conversations with people I love and esteem (or who hold me in esteem) because I have seen how much damage doubt can cause in the minds of people who have little else to lean on than their religion. And how they feel betrayed by you for trying to rob them of it. In conversations with rank outsiders, of course, I really lay into people who make patently absurd statements concerning religion or the supernatural. Unfortunately, those chances occur far too seldom — which is why I’m addicted to threads like this one.
    My hope is that venting your anger in this way will help you make peace with the past and help you make the most of your remaining years for your own sake and for the sake of those you love.

    Comment by Oom Stoffel — April 30, 2008 @ 3:04 pm | Reply

  125. Of course I meant to refer to Renier (#117) – not #11.

    Comment by Oom Stoffel — April 30, 2008 @ 3:06 pm | Reply

  126. Renier in #117: Amen brother. Jy laat my hart warm klop.

    Comment by Oubaas — April 30, 2008 @ 3:15 pm | Reply

  127. Renier # 117

    “So in short, the next asshole who accuses me of being a “militant” angry atheist is going to get a middle finger with some conviction behind it.”

    You are really really militant angry atheist. :)

    I always tell people i have a mutant gene called G666 – it gave me two stiff middle fingers at birth and a desire to show them to people.

    Comment by Objective — April 30, 2008 @ 3:18 pm | Reply

  128. George writes in #119: “It seems there are some rational thinkers allowed to air their views”

    Do you mean to say that Beeld has a policy of censoring letters such as the above?

    Comment by Oubaas — April 30, 2008 @ 3:20 pm | Reply

  129. Oubaas, of course Beeld (and other papers) refuse to publish letters that may rub their religious readers (and especially their advertisers) up the wrong way — I have first-hand experience of it: I recently wrote several letters to Beeld pointing out the moral indefensibility of shamelessly accepting huge advertisements from con artists making unfounded claims about patently worthless bracelets, magnets, medical devices, alternative medicines, dietary aids, supplements, sex aids etc etc. I listed references to relevant court judgements and research findings about similar/identical bogus products in other countries. The result: A deafening silence. While Beeld and other Naspers papers always claim the moral high ground in their editorials, they turn a blind eye to the shenanigans of the advertising space peddlers who bring in the money that pays the salaries of the editor and his staff. So it’s hands off our advertisers. Weird world indeed.
    PS: Come to think of it: Has George Claassen perhaps something to say about this?

    Comment by Oom Stoffel — April 30, 2008 @ 3:42 pm | Reply

  130. George Claassen, if I remember right, has written an article about this.

    Part of it was what happened when a journalist who tested the new Land Rover didn’t give it a top rating or something of the sort, and Land Rover threatened to pull a lot of their advertising.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 30, 2008 @ 3:46 pm | Reply

  131. “It ain’t the parts of the Bible that I can’t understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand.” – Mark Twain

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 30, 2008 @ 4:00 pm | Reply

  132. Mack Brolloks, that Mark Twain quote reminds of something that’s bothered me for some time now about the bible and the christian god. Many christians will tell you that the ten commandments are the central and most important primary edicts of their god’s moral code for people. Some will even tell you that all other decrees, e.g. those in Leviticus or Deuteronomy, can be selectively applied, if at all. The ten commandments, however, do not include an admonition that goes something like, “Thou shalt not frolic lasciviously with a minor” – i.e. one that forbids paedophilia. It seems that the christian god frowns on lying and avarice with a good deal more disdain than on child abuse, an issue s/he chose to remain completely silent on, except for occasionally encouraging its practice like feeding the disobedient ones to wild animals.

    The whole thought is almost too ghastly to contemplate.

    Comment by Con-Tester — April 30, 2008 @ 4:38 pm | Reply

  133. If you are a sceptic, you have to wonder about this.

    “Blaine sets breathtaking record”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7376101.stm

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 30, 2008 @ 6:09 pm | Reply

  134. If you are a sceptic, you have to wonder about this.

    “Blaine sets breathtaking record”

    “http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7376101.stm”

    Especially it been done on the mother of pseudo science’s show, Oprah Winfrey.

    I wonder what the Guinness Book of Records has to say about this feat.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 30, 2008 @ 6:11 pm | Reply

  135. Con Tester, yes, you are right.

    Here is another quote:

    “No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says; he is always convinced that it says what he means.”
    - George Bernard Shaw

    The bible is full of contradictions. People who believe that crap have a serious mental illness.

    And as I said in an earlier post, Moses broke some of the slates god wrote his commandments on when he came down the mountain, and delivered only ten. Mel Brooks will back this up.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — April 30, 2008 @ 6:15 pm | Reply

  136. I did attend the MMC 2008 at Greytown and it was a blessing. Thanks to all the anti – Christ and doubters who aired their opinions and tried their best to shoot it down. If I ever wondered if the meeting was Christ inspired and blessed by the Holy Spirit, you guys have show me through your negative comments that it indeed was part of a great revival. Praise the Lord for your guys. You and the Devil would never have spend time and breath to shoot down anything that is not a danger to you.
    Yes, I am a Christian, and yes, I do read the Bible as well as other books. And yes, it is a joy to be a Christia, and not only a Christian, but a son of the living God.
    I bless you all and thank you again for the confirmation of the importance of the MMC 2008.

    Comment by Kowie — May 2, 2008 @ 1:36 pm | Reply

  137. He he, another caveman outside. This one is waving a bible.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 1:58 pm | Reply

  138. No, not waving the Bible, living it. Its ok, if you are right about everything and the “there is no God thing”, we will all be happy. But what if I am right and you are wrong? What if there is really a God? (and I assure you – He is there). Enjoy!

    Comment by Kowie — May 2, 2008 @ 2:05 pm | Reply

  139. Hallo Kowie. What other books do you read? If you are the son of a living god, can we meet him? What is his address? Are you talking about your dad? I am glad you praise the lord for “us guys”. I am sure you praise him for everything else too. You are right, we would never, especially with the devil, spend any time shooting something down if we didn’t believe it is a danger to us. And yes, just to make sure you understand, you and your delusional fundie friends are very very dangerous. You guys want to make the laws so you can control everything and everybody. You are fundamentalists.

    How much did it cost you to attend the MMC? How much money did you spend there on books, dvd’s, cd’s etc. etc.
    You should save your hard earned money for something better. You are just making these frauds rich.

    “If I ever wondered if the meeting was Christ inspired and blessed by the Holy Spirit, you guys have show me through your negative comments that it indeed was part of a great revival. Praise the Lord for your guys.”

    If you need to be criticized and prosecuted to believe again, you are completely insane.

    “I bless you all and thank you again for the confirmation of the importance of the MMC 2008.”

    You are welcome my friend.

    Did you guys howl at the moon? Or something like the sorts right? Speak in tongues? Yes, until the preacher asks for money, then he speaks clearly.

    60000 Men all acting like little children who all worship a dead guy who they think is still in control of their lives sounds scary to me.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:12 pm | Reply

  140. “No, not waving the Bible, living it. Its ok, if you are right about everything and the “there is no God thing”, we will all be happy. But what if I am right and you are wrong? What if there is really a God? (and I assure you – He is there). Enjoy!”

    What we are right? What if you are wrong?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:15 pm | Reply

  141. Here is a link where Richard Dawkins answers this question you just put to me, do yourself a favour and watch it, it is only 1 minute long. Enjoy.

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:16 pm | Reply

  142. Not only is he waving his god’s book, he’s also a blindingly good example of how these people conjure up “evidence” from nothing: according to Kowie, we are near enough the antichrist and our criticisms are “proof” that this MMC fallacy-fest was divinely inspired. Had no such criticisms been made or Kowie not happened onto this website, their get-together would still and anyway have been divinely inspired. With rubber-duck reasoning skills like that, you simply can’t lose.

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 2, 2008 @ 2:19 pm | Reply

  143. yes all are ignorant but you mr o.p writer…only you have brains only you can think…only you can only you can…and all who disagree are ignorant…

    sheesh…do you wake up and tell yourself that everyday?…

    my bologney detector is going off and it says you are it…

    what silly arrogance and stupidity you have displayed…

    Comment by Mr. D Paul — May 2, 2008 @ 2:25 pm | Reply

  144. Kowie has surely brightened up my day. Praise the lord!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:27 pm | Reply

  145. Mack Brollocks writes in #138: “If you need to be criticized and prosecuted to believe again, you are completely insane.”

    Just finished reading an interesting (if long-winded) book by Bruce Chilton called Abraham’s Curse where he discusses the persecution complex of Christians in detail. He is a well-known theologian, and worth a read.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 2, 2008 @ 2:27 pm | Reply

  146. Who is mr o.p.writer?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:28 pm | Reply

  147. Whoever wrote #142, please sober up and try again.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 2, 2008 @ 2:29 pm | Reply

  148. Is Mr Paul speaking in tongues?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:29 pm | Reply

  149. Looks like the cavemen are out in numbers today. This will be fun.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:36 pm | Reply

  150. Here is some footage of the MMC 2008. Reminds me of Hitlers national socialism hysteria.

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=XON5b1dg7Dc

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:36 pm | Reply

  151. They salute god like Hitler saluted his men, and his men him.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:37 pm | Reply

  152. Found their website too:

    http://www.mightymen.org.za/

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:38 pm | Reply

  153. Have a look at the books you can buy. Very powerful reading material. I bet most of those books have a lot of pictures in them, for those birdbrains to understand it better.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:40 pm | Reply

  154. From MMC website

    “# Are women allowed?

    No provision has been made for ladies to camp on and around Shalom. Ladies are not permitted to attend any of the Friday or Saturday meetings – they are welcome to attend the Sunday service.”

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 2:42 pm | Reply

  155. Kowie in #135:”You and the Devil would never have spend time and breath to shoot down anything that is not a danger to you.”

    Very consistent with 1 John 3:13 “Do not be surprised, my brothers, if the world hates you”, John 15:18-19 “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first”, John 17:14 “I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world”, Mark 13:13 “All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved”, and Luke 6:22 “Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man”.

    What a philosophy! Just run around, lift your leg against a few posts, be a complete asshole, reason without reason, read a few critical comments, and say: “They hate me, therefore I’m right”.

    “Hatred”, as in “immense feelings of dislike toward a person or a thing, as well as prejudice or bigotry against a class of people, racism being a prominent example of this”, finds it’s true home in religion.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 2, 2008 @ 3:10 pm | Reply

  156. Oubaas can run rings around these arseholes using their own book. They haven’t got a chance. It is also very effective since it the only source they use.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 3:17 pm | Reply

  157. Mack, “mr o.p writer” = Ongebonde Prometheus? Most likely, as these people always start with the end in mind.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 2, 2008 @ 3:34 pm | Reply

  158. Thanks Oubaas. The end of the world in mind. Scary to think that is what they really want, since they believe that will be the day they all go to heaven.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 3:37 pm | Reply

  159. “O.P.” is forum jargon for “opening post” – i.e. the first post in a discussion “thread”, so, yes, it is, I think, safe to say that George is being addressed because his blog entry would be the “O.P.”, rather than any of the comments. Capitalisation and punctuation also seem to have our Mr. D Paul somewhat muddled.

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 2, 2008 @ 3:54 pm | Reply

  160. Yes Con-Tester. I think Mr Paul has a lot more muddled than his capitalisation and punctuation.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 3:57 pm | Reply

  161. Mack in #157: “since they believe that will be the day they all go to heaven”.

    And we will go to hell, I may add. This single idea has scared the shit out of millions of people, which not only explains their preference for brown uniforms and crowds (proper philosophers wear red when speaking about god), but the awful lack of decent literature on the idea of heaven.

    I have to assume that “heaven” represents a state too wonderful to contemplate, while “hell” motivates the troops beyond end.

    So, when religious folk speak about “heaven”, we have to bear in mind that they are mostly thinking of hell, and how incredibly lucky they are (or “chosen”) in avoiding it.

    You have to admit that it’s a brilliant trick – of course, until you see the hands move.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 2, 2008 @ 4:03 pm | Reply

  162. Well said Oubaas. It is a brilliant trick. The best part of it is that it still works today.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 4:11 pm | Reply

  163. Sheesh, but you guys are cruel. The poor cavemen come out to join the blog for a little enlightenment, and what do you do? Chase them right back home to their life of darkness. Have a heart!

    Or perhaps they left on their own free will because a verse in their book of stories says if you mingle with swine the pigs will eat you.

    Comment by Savage — May 2, 2008 @ 4:26 pm | Reply

  164. Oubaas inspires me to want to go out and buy a new bible.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 4:43 pm | Reply

  165. Makes sense to me. Mr Paul must have been at the MMC 2008. I am totally in the wrong business. If I knew how easy it was to take money from delusional and confused men, I would have been a very wealthy man by now. Most of these religious leaders are complete con men. Billy Graham comes to mind here. He was just in it for the money. But hey, they reckon they aren’t doing any harm. If people want to give them money, whose business is that of ours anyway. James Randi exposed a couple of these religious healers as total and complete frauds. But guess what, a lot of them are back in business again. People forgive them and then keep on giving them money. What about the grandmother who lives on a very small pension, who sends these guys checks, while she doesn’t have enough to eat. They do a lot of harm, to the poor. They are fraudsters. If there really was a hell they would be very surprised to find themselves there when they die, or maybe not, since they knew what they were doing was evil. Wolves in sheep’s clothing.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 6:01 pm | Reply

  166. Here is the youtube link where Randi exposes Popoff

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=0zl3I5y4cZc

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 6:02 pm | Reply

  167. Rev Peter Popoff Exposed again

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=xPBKOqsGBfg&feature=related

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 6:15 pm | Reply

  168. Charlatans thrive on selling false hope to the quietly desperate. For that, there can be no excuse, but it reveals the alarming number of desperate people out there.

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 2, 2008 @ 6:42 pm | Reply

  169. It is sad when only a miracle can save you, because there are no miracles. It’s even sadder when people who know this take advantage of the desperate. Especially when they do it for their own personal gain, at the expense of the ones who can least afford it. They also give false hope, and that must hurt the innocent even more during their time of suffering, when they discover it was all a lie. But then these guys tell them it wasn’t gods will, or that god changed his mind, or that this is exactly gods will. They have all their bases covered.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 7:52 pm | Reply

  170. An heaven behold if someone gets well. Then they all cry “miracle, miracle, miracle”

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 8:10 pm | Reply

  171. Maybe one of religion’s most subversive talents is the ability to lead people, by subterfuge, into the conviction that they are desperate when, really, they are just being naturally reflective about their relationship to the world. There is a maudlin aspect, seemingly inescapable, to such self-reflection, one that is particularly amenable to religious exploitation because religions succeed in supplanting notions of a world that is wholly indifferent to one’s existence with notions of a world in which one’s existence is only temporarily insignificant as the price of admission to full insight into ultimate truth and eternity, i.e. some transcendent realm that makes sense of the incomprehensible.

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 2, 2008 @ 8:52 pm | Reply

  172. Yes, it’s very clever. It would be nice if there really was a heaven, and it would be terrifying if there really was a hell. I would already be trying hard to make a deal with the devil now, because I would be seeing him later for sure. So if I go to hell, I have that base covered, and if by some flook, I manage to get into heaven, well great.

    I guess it is hard for people to deal with the one sure thing we all know: that we are all going to die. So if someone comes along and tells you there is options here, of course there is going to be some who will believe it, and want it to be true. The biggest thing all religions have in common is: death. That is the whole basis of them all. What happens to you when you die.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 9:15 pm | Reply

  173. I wonder what these religious people think heaven is going to be like. If I can design my own heaven, it would be a very sinfull place. If you can’t do any of the things in heaven the bible tells us is a sin, well, what the hell do they do there all day and night long for all eternity? It must be very boring. If you go to hell for doing the things you enjoy, then I guess hell doesn’t sound so bad. I bet most of the cool people will be there anyway. Heaven will be full of the stupid bible-thumpers groveling in front of god, I guess. And if they play gospel music all the time, I wonder if suicide is an option in heaven.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 2, 2008 @ 9:29 pm | Reply

  174. Mack in #172, wonder no more. New York Times bestseller 90 minutes in heaven tells us how it is.

    Which reminds me of Ambrose Bierce’s definition of “Clairvoyant”, n.: A person, commonly a woman, who has the power of seeing that which is invisible to her patron – namely, that he is a blockhead.

    In this case, it’s a man (Don Piper) and, as always, the blockheads believe. I wish more Christians would read Ecclesiastes 9:5: “For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.”

    Kevin Rushby wrote a wonderful little book called Paradise, showing that there is always someone promising a better tomorrow if we’ll only do what they say.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 3, 2008 @ 9:23 am | Reply

  175. Oh man, you guys scared them away again, you evil unbelievers! Shame on you. The devil chasing god around a tree. Sometimes I wish they would engage a bit. At least Brendon tried, but these loonies are like Cape Town weather. Wind, wind and more wind. Mighty men? Ga! Scared little stofpoepers.

    Thanks for the nice words Oom Stoffel. I take them to heart.

    Comment by Renier — May 3, 2008 @ 3:25 pm | Reply

  176. Mack, glad to meet another Penn & Teller fan. Those guys rock! And then there’s *THIS* asshole… hehehehe

    Comment by Renier — May 3, 2008 @ 3:27 pm | Reply

  177. Renier, yes, Penn & Teller are the best. They are also good friends with James Randi. The skeptic world is a very small one.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 3, 2008 @ 4:27 pm | Reply

  178. Another sect scandal in US
    03/05/2008 20:38 – (SA)

    http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2316214,00.html

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 3, 2008 @ 9:49 pm | Reply

  179. Talk about putting your own children totally in the hands of a sick bastard who said god anointed him messiah in July 2000.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 3, 2008 @ 9:58 pm | Reply

  180. Mack wrote in #171.

    “It would be nice if there really was a heaven, and it would …” be nice to sit around with Oubaas and Con Tester and Mack and Renier and Einstein and Godel and Dawkings and all the others to contemplate the beauty of science and the brilliance of human reason with an asshole god….i can think of some interesting questions to ask her…. and well perhaps she is even good looking and if she fails to impress we can always just look at her.

    Comment by Objective — May 4, 2008 @ 7:32 am | Reply

  181. To all people above against God.

    no. 1 – people like you proves the bible true: christians will be persecuted by the people who belongs to the world the bible teaches.

    no. 2 – it takes a man to be a christian: it doesnt fit your life style to be a christian, because you love the pleasures of the world, i know because i were there to. i did every thing the world had to offer and found it to be worthless compared to JESUS. i can never go back to that, because without my GOD live is dull and has no meaning.

    no. 3 – true christians does not judge the people that do not believe like they do. if we judge you, we go against our believs, our truth. GOD judges, he allone. we love you and pray that God will forgive you, and that some how you will see the truth. why do you hate us? and waste your time on proving us wrong. it wont work because miracles has taken place in our lives. this i promise you and that is why we know that JESUS lives.

    no. 4 – we as christians were just like you people. it is God thru his grace that showed us the truth, and we accepted it and so can you. but it doesnt fit your life style, does it? please do not let the pleasures of this world become your GOD. it is false and leads to death. please accept JESUS and seek HIM with all your heart and you will find Him. He is true to his word and will never disapoint you. your problems might not end, but you will have the most high GOD on your side. GOD opens doors that no man can shut and closes doors that no man can open.

    no. 5 – do you not fear the GOD that has given you life as a gift! do you not understand the meaning of the word GOD! HE is ALL MIGHTY and yet he HUMBLED Himself and became a man, to die for us so that we can be saved from death. this is why we as children of the living GOD submit our lives to HIM and prosper in everything we do(if we live by his word).

    no. 6 – concerning other believes: it is a lie brought into the world by satan. he hates us and knows that JESUS is the only way to GOD. that is why he brought this lies and deception into the world. we as christians do not judge them, we love them and try to show them the way to the only living GOD.
    why is christianity the only religion that is persecuted by the world? because it is the only true religion. why is christianits the only people that lay their lives down to spread the gosple if GOD didn’t reveal Himself to us in a very real way.

    no. 7 – i promise you today that everybody who ever lived will bow on their knees before JESUS when HE comes on judgment day, and declare that he is GOD, even YOU! i say this in LOVE and pray that you will be saved before that day comes.

    HE IS GOD AND LIVES FOREVER. AMEN!! GOD LOVES YOU AND DO NOT WANT YOU TO PERISH.

    Comment by johan smuts — May 4, 2008 @ 10:19 am | Reply

  182. Mack, be kind.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 4, 2008 @ 10:21 am | Reply

  183. Objective wrote (#178 or thereabouts):

    … to contemplate the beauty of science and the brilliance of human reason …

    That’s the thing, isn’t it? Not content to make the effort it requires to wrestle with and to recognise such thoughts, religion chooses instead actively to devalue them through subordinating them under some mythical überbeast’s allegedly ineffably superiority, which really is not much more than sadism dressed up as “love”. The only reason I can see for such intellectual sedition is that it would place all of mankind’s achievements – from the most trivially mundane to the truly, awe-inspiringly excellent – on an essentially equal and inferior footing so that the religious can feel less inadequate. The greatest con ever pulled by religion is inventing a “spiritual” realm and convincing people of its reality; the second greatest con is that this “spiritual” realm overrides all others in significance.

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 4, 2008 @ 10:28 am | Reply

  184. Allow me:

    johan smuts wrote (#179 or thereabouts):

    no. 1 – people like you proves the bible true: …

    How do we do that? You came here of your own, presumably free, will. How is that “persecution”?

    johan smuts wrote (#179 or thereabouts):

    no. 2 – it takes a man to be a christian: …

    Sounds like women are excluded. But if, according to you, it takes courage to believe, how much more courage do you think it takes to disbelieve, considering the punishment you claim will inevitably follow?

    johan smuts wrote (#179 or thereabouts):

    no. 3 – true christians does not judge the people that do not believe like they do.

    What’s with all the finger-pointing, then? Light entertainment, perhaps?

    johan smuts wrote (#179 or thereabouts):

    no. 4 – we as christians were just like you people.

    No we’re not, as you yourself proceed to point out. You, after all, know the truth, which means that those who differ with you are wrong.

    johan smuts wrote (#179 or thereabouts):

    no. 5 – do you not fear the GOD that has given you life as a gift!

    Nah, personally I’m more afraid that the world will be rent asunder through stupid, archaic superstitions.

    johan smuts wrote (#179 or thereabouts):

    no. 6 – concerning other believes: it is a lie brought into the world by satan.

    That’s very convenient. But why did your god make Satan in the first place if not purposely to temp people and lead them astray?

    johan smuts wrote (#179 or thereabouts):

    no. 7 – i promise you today that everybody who ever lived will bow on their knees before JESUS when HE comes on judgment day, and declare that he is GOD, even YOU! i say this in LOVE and pray that you will be saved before that day comes.

    “Promise”, eh?

    johan smuts wrote (#179 or thereabouts):

    HE IS GOD AND LIVES FOREVER. AMEN!! GOD LOVES YOU AND DO NOT WANT YOU TO PERISH.

    There’s no need to shout. We read you just fine. And for someone who doesn’t want his creations to perish, your god sure has an awkward way of doing away with people for no good reason, including those who pledge eternal fidelity to him.

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 4, 2008 @ 10:59 am | Reply

  185. That should be “… purposely to tempt people…”, although “temp” is also quite apt. ;)

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 4, 2008 @ 11:05 am | Reply

  186. Oh, and isn’t johan smuts violating the fourth commandment? That would be the one about not desecrating his god’s sabbath by working on it. Or is denouncing heathens pleasure, rather than work?

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 4, 2008 @ 11:13 am | Reply

  187. Johan Smuts (#180), (1) if you believe that the Bible is true because it is written that you will be “persecuted”, then the Book of Mormon must also be true because it says very much the same thing.

    (2) No, it doesn’t take a man to be a Christian; it takes someone too afraid to think. And yes, we do love the pleasures of the world. We do not hate our flesh, and we do not teach our children that they will go to hell if they are bad. I am happy that you have found meaning and worth in your religion, but find it a pity that you do not extend the courtesy to others.

    (3) You say that “true” Christians do not judge, and then you “judge” by saying that we need forgiveness. Please explain how you manage to do this. Perhaps you mean to say that Christians should not burn or kill unbelievers, as God will do this. Thank you.

    You say you love us. History teaches me otherwise. You love us in exactly the same way that a salesman loves the face behind the next door. Perhaps even less, for the salesman does not demand forgiveness from unwilling customers.

    (4) Yes, we are all the same. But some (who have found faith) tend to see themselves as more equal than others. Why do you believe that the world is bad? The world is beautiful. I’m filled with wonder and excitement by the beauty of it all every day of my life.

    (5) Horoscopes, rabbit’s feet, gods, lucky coins, horse-shoes – yes, they are “all mighty” if you believe in them. Why so greedy? Why do you want to “be saved from death”, live forever, prosper in everything you do? This casino-mentality causes much poverty, guilt, and general unhappiness. Don’t you know that the only flashy car at church is the pastor’s?

    How can you “live by his word” if you can’t even agree amongst yourselves what these words really say? People believe the pastor, not the word.

    (6) You have a very unfortunate view of history, as persecution was (is?) very much a Christian pastime. You’ve not only persecuted just about every other religious group in the past 2000 years, you’ve also persecuted your own people. By the way, Muslims and Jews also believe themselves to be persecuted (mostly by Christians), not to mention the Hindus. This religious sadomasochism is really not good for your morals, Johan.

    (7) As someone once said, I do not need the promise of an afterlife to provide me with a reason to live. Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote that “Death is not an event in life: we do not live to experience death. If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present.”

    Comment by Oubaas — May 4, 2008 @ 11:51 am | Reply

  188. Con-Tester in #185: “Or is denouncing heathens pleasure, rather than work?”

    How terrible it must be to live in continual fear of god’s punishment, of physical pleasure, of the devil, of the unknown, of simple thoughts. How disappointing it must be to be told time and again that you are not good enough, that you are backsliding, that it’s time for renewal, that you can always love more, give more, be more, and experience more. And, once you have committed your life to these ideas, emotionally protected by (and in the comforting company of) the other “faithful”, how frustrating it must be to see others who are in open disagreement with them, who enjoy life, who love without effort, who do without reward, and who think without fear.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 4, 2008 @ 12:25 pm | Reply

  189. Heaven by Talking Heads, 1979

    Everyone is trying to get to the bar,
    the name of the bar, the bar is called Heaven.
    The band in Heaven, they play my favourite song,
    they play it once again, they play it all night long.

    Heaven,
    Heaven is a place,
    a place where nothing,
    nothing ever happens.
    Heaven,
    Heaven is a place,
    a place where nothing,
    nothing ever happens.

    There is a party, everyone is there,
    everyone will leave at exactly the same time.
    It’s hard to imagine that nothing at all
    could be so exciting, could be so much fun.

    Heaven,
    Heaven is a place,
    a place where nothing,
    nothing ever happens.
    Heaven,
    Heaven is a place,
    a place where nothing,
    nothing ever happens.

    When this kiss is over, it will start again,
    it will not be any different, it will be exactly the same.
    It’s hard to imagine that nothing at all
    could be so exciting, could be so much fun.

    Heaven,
    Heaven is a place,
    a place where nothing,
    nothing ever happens.
    Heaven,
    Heaven is a place,
    a place where nothing,
    nothing ever happens.

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 4, 2008 @ 1:49 pm | Reply

  190. When The Angels by Prefab Sprout, 1985

    When the angels take
    the angel voice away,
    some lower their eyes,
    some of us shout, “Cheats!”
    for cheating on the deal,
    for pulling off the sting.

    Tuning up the harps,
    then dishing out the wings,
    if they can dance someone
    on the head of a pin,
    don’t that tell you something
    about their skin?
    Hard-faced little bastards.

    When the angels take
    the angel voice away,
    jealously, they seek
    the sometimes man you’d be.
    Must get so blasé,
    knowing you’ll never die!

    Lounging on a cloud,
    polishing the sky,
    their memories are blue,
    borrowed for the day,
    they sit around, ignored,
    ’til someone goes away.

    If they can dance someone
    on the head of a pin,
    don’t that tell you something
    about their skin?
    Hard-faced little bastards.

    When the angels take
    the angel voice away,
    jealously, they seek
    the sometimes man you’d be.

    For memories are blue,
    but borrowed for the day,
    they sit around, ignored,
    ’til someone goes away
    for cheating on the deal,
    for pulling off the sting.

    Tuning up the harps,
    then dishing out the wings,
    if they can dance someone
    on the head of a pin,
    don’t that tell you something
    about their skin?
    Hard faced-little bastards.

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 4, 2008 @ 1:49 pm | Reply

  191. Con-Tester in #187 and 188: Thank you very much. This prompted me to open a good Cabernet Sauvignon. Sitting in front of my fireplace, smelling the divine flavours of a simmering lamb’s curry, and wondering if we will ever be able to have a decent conversation with the likes of Johan Smuts. Is there a secret entry to their minds that we miss? How can we help them to flee from their prisons? Is there any hope that we will get through to them?

    Comment by Oubaas — May 4, 2008 @ 3:54 pm | Reply

  192. Probably not. I just realised that they are in church.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 4, 2008 @ 3:58 pm | Reply

  193. These lyrics are, of course, far better savoured when sung (as they should be), instead of read, which misses much of the requisite intense passion and passionate intensity. The Cabernet Sauvignon, while optional, is surely a fine enhancer of the moment. The Talking Heads’ song, in particular, manages to capture the bankruptcy of the ultimate christian hope without rancour or snidery – its strength is its matter-of-factness. The Prefab Sprout effort is musically far more sophisticated and points out the bitterness one should feel upon a fair appraisal of life’s caprices, supposing it all to be ruled by a christian divinity and his winged handmaidens.

    As for a bridge connecting the strictly orthodox believer with the incorrigible sceptic, such most likely exist in mundane interactions, i.e. connections of an everyday kind, such as doing things for one another and being, simply, people. In those places where we meet as essentially similar humans, with comparable hopes and fears, without feeling the need to trade blows or accumulate kudos or prove a point. A blog such as this cannot help but be a repository of intellectual aggression and confrontation, and that is, I think, just as it should be. Most, if not all, of the regular contributors to these pages’ comments have in one way or another succeeded in shedding their religious finery, mainly, I suppose, by seeing through its hollowness, and for that I salute them, one and all. I can only hope that others who come to read here (but not necessarily write) might be prompted to follow suit, or at least to ask themselves some really hard questions.

    But I can dream, can’t I?

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 4, 2008 @ 5:15 pm | Reply

  194. Synde as hoe Con Tester vir ons twee liedjies gepos het dink ek dit van pas om ‘n ou gedig hier te pos…

    Ballade van `n denker (1969 – )

    Gulsig slurp die wese ? dom
    instink krul die tong
    harde tepel, sagte bors
    wat, soos die jare kom
    van hom ‘n mens sal maak.
    uit die tepel kom die krag
    uit die bors die mag?
    KOOR:
    om te handhaaf,
    om te bou?

    Oë blink en breë bors
    traditioneel: “Albertus Opperman”
    koue water uit die kom
    Vader, Seun en Heilig` Gees.
    eensydig die verbond
    soos die brandmerk van `n bees
    of hond
    Koor:
    om te handhaaf
    en te hou.

    Tenger riet, die sagte roos
    Aarde, maan en son ?
    die blink verskied,
    uit die donker dieptes
    van die niet roep God:
    om te wees, wat is?
    Sy ewebeeld, wat deur die vrug,
    nog mens sou word;
    moet mens goed en kwaad kan ken
    om mens te wees?
    Koor:
    Om te handhaaf
    en te bou?

    Sonskyn op die koper kronkels
    wat mens maklik vir versiering
    om jou nek kon hang.

    Boosheid van die bose slang:
    dis sy skuld dat ons mense is;
    in ons gene ? onlosmaakbaar ?
    sonde dra: die dood bewustelik,
    in volle kennis die finaliteit
    as enkelinge moet begroet.
    Al het Hy aan die kruis
    alreeds geboet?
    Koor:
    Om te handhaaf
    en te bou.

    “Vergeet van dit en moenie dat”.
    In simpel eenvoud hou hy vas
    streef onverpoos en vas vertrouend
    na die dieper logos Theos
    in die bos.
    As rede opstaan onverwags
    weier om te konformeer?
    “Weet dan wag die helse vuur
    en die woede van die Heer”
    dwingend by die agterdeur…..
    integriteit van meet en pas
    `n oog wat sien en hande tas
    versigtig onderskeidend
    en die korteks integreer….
    Koor:
    Om te hou
    of te bou

    Die pyn van baringsnood;
    onsekerheid van leef of dood,
    is meer as een maal
    vir die kind beskore.
    Dit kom weer as hy weet
    sy kindwees is verlore.
    Die keuse om te hou of bou
    is syne, tot die dood,
    sy kroon word of sy kruis.
    As sy knieë buig voor die werklikheid
    of die waansin van geloof.
    Koor:
    Gaan hy handhaaf?
    gaan hy bou?

    My oë sien, my ore hoor
    Ek gryp die werklikheid
    met albei hande vas
    my brein, my rede nou van pas
    beskerm teen die kwaad
    en meer as dit,
    dit wys die pad
    lynreg sonder kronkel
    integreerbaar, nie teenstrydig
    logies, suiwer: lewensredder
    Koor:
    om te handhaaf
    en om te bou
    te bou.

    Comment by Objective — May 5, 2008 @ 5:31 am | Reply

  195. Johan Smuts wrote: “no. 1 – people like you proves the bible true: christians will be persecuted by the people who belongs to the world the bible teaches.”

    I don’t think “persecute” means what you think it means. Disagreeing with you on your fantasies is not persecution. Are you scarred the nasty atheists will track you down and force you to give up your fantasies? No? Then it’s not persecution, is it? So tell us, how exactly are *you* persecuted?

    I am no prophet but my prediction is that another “mighty man” will fail to back up his beliefs. They appear to have more in common with Mafia hit and run tactics. Now, if only they could actually hit something for a change. It’s like a driveby shooting aiming at the nasty atheists and missing with their water pistols. Laughing at them is of course persecution. Since they are now feeling persecuted, the Bible is “proven” and therefore a snaked talked 6000 years ago and their god made Mary cheat on Joseph. Ai.

    Comment by Renier — May 5, 2008 @ 8:56 am | Reply

  196. @ Objective #192: Baie mooi gedig. Is jy die outeur? Waarom ek vra: Die jaartal (1969 – ) is geskryf soos ‘n geboortejaar en nie ‘n jaar van komposisie nie.

    @ Renier #109 en #193: Enigste verklaring: die meme het hulle so goed aan die kort hare beet dat hulle geen rasionele opinies oor hierdie onderwerp kan vorm of verwoord nie. Hulle moet vlug, anders word hulle eie wankelrige fondamente ondergrawe.

    Comment by Hendrik — May 5, 2008 @ 1:35 pm | Reply

  197. I received an email last week (from a colleague with postgraduate qualifications nogal) in which the planets in our solar system are shown to scale and then compared to the sun and to other stars. The biggest star shown in the little sequence is Antares which, if our sun is represented by one pixel, would be roughly the size of a tennis ball – 700 times the sun’s diameter.
    At the end of this email was a little religious message about how big “GOD” is and how each hair on everyone’s head is counted, etc, etc.

    I almost cr#pped in my pants, for two reasons:
    Firstly, the fact that we have this (or any other information) about stars is solely due to the hard work of scientists and science. If the godbots had had it their way, we would have still believed that the centre of the universe was in fact the earth, about which the sun revolved, and that the stars were some kind of “cloth” backdrop to the heavens.
    Secondly, the data justifies exactly the opposite conclusion than what the little religious message tries to draw! How did every single person who forwarded the message miss this point?

    Which brought me to the question: What proof will ever convince the godbots that they are wrong? Is there any data out there that will convince them that their god does not exist and that they are not the sole purpose for the existence of the universe? Why did, to give just one example, all the genetic evidence for our close relationship to chimpanzees cause me (and probably most of the regular posters here) to sit back and seriously question the beliefs we held? But the religious do not even register the conflict between their beliefs and reality?

    Comment by Hendrik — May 5, 2008 @ 1:39 pm | Reply

  198. Hendrik wrote : “What proof will ever convince the godbots that they are wrong?”

    Good question. For a moment, imagine Allah is the One True God (TM). Allah comes down to earth, booms a message from the sky saying “I am God, I am Allah. Christians, you are wrong”. What do you think the Xians will do? Yup, you are right. They will say it was the Devil. Because their beliefs are their gods.

    Did you guys see that Hawkins will be here to lecture (CPT, nah nah) on 11 May, 2008 at 6pm? I am so going! It is blasphemous because it is Sunday, but what the hell :-)

    Another thing. I spoke to a student at Stellenbosch over the weekend, doing some kind of bio engineering thinghy. He mentioned an interesting incident. After a professor gave a lecture on evolution some Shofar thugs waithed outside, Biblse under the arms. Apparently they spat at him or his books/notes. I will mail the bloke and find out the whole story. I will also try to get the profs name and see if I can verify the incident. The thing is, I never even mentioned Shofar, he just saw one of my Dawkins books.

    Thinking about the upcoming lecture by Hawkins, I was wondering if there might be a thread by fundie thugs such a Shofar. And, in the event of such an incident, what should one do? Any advice?

    Comment by Renier — May 5, 2008 @ 2:03 pm | Reply

  199. Threat! Threat, not thread. Ai.

    Comment by Renier — May 5, 2008 @ 2:05 pm | Reply

  200. Hendrik, the answer is (as I’ve said here before) that probably not one of the godbots posting here, nor one of the zillions of others out there, has ever been persuaded by our arguments that they are wrong, for the simple reason that they BELIEVE –– which by definition precludes the option to think or to reason for oneself. They come, they get hammered to a pulp, and they slither away lest they be further contaminated by this ungodly disease called REASON.

    Comment by Oom Stoffel — May 5, 2008 @ 2:28 pm | Reply

  201. Renier, my advice would be to film any “protest action” taken by Shofar etc. at the event. It will:
    1. Make good evidence for any criminal proceedings that may follow and
    2. Show the rest of society how people behave when god really inspires them.

    Comment by Hendrik — May 5, 2008 @ 2:39 pm | Reply

  202. Con-Tester #191: One of the most inspiring comments I’ve read in a long time. The 2nd par should find a welcome place on George’s “about” page.

    Objective #192: Wil ook soos Hendrik in #194 meer weet hieroor.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 5, 2008 @ 4:02 pm | Reply

  203. Hendrik #194.

    Nie geboortedatum nie – die goed strek oor sowat 3 jaar (1969 tot omtrent 1971 miskien bietjie langer)- maar ek was jonk (19/22) en romanties en net so de moer in soos Renier….het op daardie stadium hele aantal sulke emosionele goed geskryf om my gedagtes te orden en veral om myself te troos na al die hartseer en stryd wat gevolg het op my “sonde teen die heilige spook”.

    #195 “Which brought me to the question: What proof will ever convince the godbots that they are wrong? ”

    There is no proof that will convince them. You have to make peace with the fact: people convince themselves…if they care for reason, proof and life.

    And Con Tester remains my favourite author..he is one of those people i would like to meet, if not in this world then in heaven… :) i can imagine an argument or ten between him and god … :) and i would be there to enjoy the fun. (People like us after all wont end in hell…not unless god is much denser than i think – i cannot imagine a god who would want to spend her time with a group of non thinking doffels going allah allah canarie from morning till night. let me rather say that…if i were god i would far rather spend time with you lot than with anyone else.)

    Comment by Objective — May 5, 2008 @ 7:14 pm | Reply

  204. Renier wrote:

    “Did you guys see that Hawkins will be here to lecture (CPT, nah nah) on 11 May, 2008 at 6pm? I am so going! It is blasphemous because it is Sunday, but what the hell”

    What is blasphemous is that it is in Cape Town. and you are going to go to hell for enjoying the fact that some of us are so far away.

    On Thursday 8/5/08 it will be 214 years since the dros decapitated one of the great sons of science: Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier (1743 – 8/5/1794). Spare a thought for the martyrs.

    Comment by Objective — May 5, 2008 @ 7:25 pm | Reply

  205. Objective, let’s have a bottle of Overgaauw Cabernet here in Gauteng on Sunday afternoon.

    We can toast a curse on all the Capetonian attendees of the Hawking lecture. And on the fundies.

    Comment by Hendrik — May 6, 2008 @ 7:46 am | Reply

  206. Oh man oh man… Laugh, weep, I dunno.

    http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/article.aspx?storyid=79533

    Comment by Renier — May 6, 2008 @ 10:20 am | Reply

  207. Objective skryf: “sonde teen die heilige spook”

    Goeg gestel. As jy die gedig op #193 geskryf het kan ek net se wow. Dit is baie goed. As jy nog het, post gerus, ’seblief!

    Objective wrote: “What is blasphemous is that it is in Cape Town. and you are going to go to hell for enjoying the fact that some of us are so far away.”

    We make up for up by making wine that you blokes can drink. It seems Hawkins is even smarter that I thought, being here in CPT and not that, uh, place you call Gauteng :-p.

    Hendrik wrote: “We can toast a curse on all the Capetonian attendees of the Hawking lecture.”

    Cursing us with Overgaauw that came from our region over here? Shame on you :-D

    Comment by Renier — May 6, 2008 @ 1:56 pm | Reply

  208. Dankie vir julle kommentaar – julle retoriek is egter afgesaag, flou en glad nie oorspronklik nie. Ek is bly dat daar ouens soos Oubaas is wat die Bybel ken – erens sal daar iets vassteek wat eendag jou na die troon van Jesus sal bring. Julle ander kan gerus sy voorbeeld volg – al glo julle nie – lees die Bybel sodat julle weet waarvan julle praat. Meeste raas in die wind – dit maak julle argumente sinneloos.
    O ja, – op die vraag wat daarvan as julle reg is en daar is nie ‘n God nie? Dan verloor ek mos niks nie – dan gaan ons almal in die niks in. Maar as ek reg is en daar is ‘n God?
    Mooi loop – en ja, ek kan in die bondel in vir julle bid en julle seen – dit hoef nie spesifiek vir jou te wees nie Oubaas. Die Here ken elkeen by die naam en hy hy sal my bondelgebed mooi opdeel – jy sal dus nie gecheat word nie. Daar sal seen vir elkeen wees. Ek hoef jou ook nie te ken nie – Hy ken jou. Maar as jy wil – se, en ek sal spesifiek vir jou bid.
    Mooi loop almal van julle en seen vir julle.

    Comment by Kowie — May 6, 2008 @ 4:28 pm | Reply

  209. Ag, ou Kowie, gaan jy ons dan nou verlaat? Ek begin nou net twyfel aan my “ongeloof” — wil jy nie maar nog iets diepsinnig sê nie? Soos om te verklaar hoekom jy ‘n dobbelaar is — jy sit jou geld op God sodat jy nie kan verloor nie al is daar nie ‘n god nie? Ag toe?

    Comment by Oom Stoffel — May 6, 2008 @ 5:55 pm | Reply

  210. Kowie # 207: This is a typical example of the rhetoric of the bible thumpers. They keep on telling that by reading the Bible over and over again you seem to gain confidence that the stories must somehow be true. “…lees die Bybel sodat julle weet waarvan julle praat.” What arrogance! I have read the Bible when I was young, and I don’t have such a great memory, but I remember a great deal of what I read; and it was mostly hogwash.

    “Die Here ken elkeen by die naam en hy hy sal my bondelgebed mooi opdeel .. “ Where is your proof, Kowie? Has God spoken to you? Did you have a visitation? Or is it just your delusional mind playing tricks on you?

    Comment by Savage — May 6, 2008 @ 6:16 pm | Reply

  211. Kowie, ek dink die probleem is dat ons almal wel die bybel gelees het. Dit verstom my dat ‘n groot mens die bybel kan lees en in daardie stories glo. Kinders glo dit nie eers nie. Dis hoekom die grootmense vir die kinders moet lieg sodat hullle uit vrees uit in die bybel glo. Dis nogal ‘n skande om vrees so diep in onskuldige kinders in te dryf. Dis kinder mishandeling. Dis seker een van die redes hoekom jy so blind glo. Dit het sekerlik met jou gebeur toe jy ‘n kind was. Dit en die feit dat jy obviously nie veel ander boeke lees nie, soos bv. boeke oor evolusie en die sterre en basiese wetenskap. Jy is baie oningelig. Jy kan maar gerus vir ons almal bid, maar as jou god wel bestaan het sou dit in elk geval nie gehelp het nie. Hy is ‘n bitter sadistiese ou fokker wat ons almal lankal sou opgefok het, en as hy kon sou hy ons defenitief hell toe gestuur het, al bid jy en al jou tjommies elke liewe dag vir ons. So doen jouself ‘n guns, en spaar jou tyd. Gaan doen liewer iets lekkers in plaas van om vir ons te bid. Ek sal my eie kanse vat, baie dankie.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 6, 2008 @ 6:31 pm | Reply

  212. What’s this? I go away for a few days and you chaps go all sentimental, handing out gratuitous and touching compliments! ;) Thanks, Oubaas (#201) and Objective (#202).

    Objective, my Afrikaans is inadequate for me to make any kind of relevant comment on the artistic merit of your poem, but I understand the ideas it intends to convey, and that’s more than cool. If you’re earnest in your suggestion, a meeting on this earthly plane is quite possible. I’m in the Jhb/Pta area, which by many accounts is a godforsaken country – unfortunately not enough so, should anyone bother to ask me… :)

    Comment by Con-Tester — May 6, 2008 @ 7:59 pm | Reply

  213. #207 is the Christian way of saying f*ck you.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 6, 2008 @ 8:28 pm | Reply

  214. #210 is my way of saying “go fuck yourself”

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 6, 2008 @ 9:25 pm | Reply

  215. Oom Stoffel in #208: “wil jy nie maar nog iets diepsinnig sê nie?”

    Die hoop beskaam nie… Dit bly vir my ‘n ongelooflike pyn in die agterent, hierdie “seen julle” houding van gelowiges. Hulle se dit nie omdat hulle dit wil se nie, maar omdat hulle dit behoort te se. Dis so oneerlik – aan die een kant voel hulle hierdie geweldige “verantwoordelikheid” om nie die Here se naam skade aan te doen nie, maar aan die ander kant weet ek hulle is briesend en beledig en wil so graag “f*k julle” se… maar dan dink hulle aan hoe bevoorreg hulle is, hoe spesiaal hulle is dat die Here Jesus vir hulle aan die kruis gesterf het en hulle op hulle naam geroep het, en hoe verskriklik die straf is wat vir ons wag (en hulle wil tog nie ‘n struikelblok wees nie), en dan se hulle maar “seen julle”. Ek gril soos ek hier sit.

    Dis seker die ding wat my die meeste afp*s (sorry, ek is in Renier-mode – of is dit Mack-mode?): Hoekom kan mens nie net “connect” met Christene nie? Daar is altyd ‘n ander agenda as jy met hulle praat. Hulle is nie in staat om werklik lief te he nie, want hul liefde word altyd geprojekteer op die groot skerm van die hiernamaals. Hulle sien jou nie vir wie jy is nie, maar vir wie jy kan wees. Dis oneindig onbevredigend en bitter voorspelbaar. Daar is geen vrae nie, geen uitdagings nie, geen stimulasie nie. Net: Jesus.

    En die absurditeit is dat hulle nie eers vir Jesus ken nie. As hulle werklik gedoen het wat hy voorgestel het, sou die wereld moontlik ‘n beter plek gewees het. Maar Jesus draai tien teen een in sy f*kken graf om by aanhore van hul gebede. Stel jou voor: “Bondelgebed”. Dit klink effe soos “fondle”-gebed. Hierdie Mills & Boon’s romantisering van Jesus is niks anders as emosionele masturbasie nie. Wat natuurlik te verstane is – hulle moet iewers hul seksuele frustrasie uitleef.

    Gelowiges se klakkelose navolging van skynheilige smartvrate verhoed hulle om werklik mens te wees. Hulle is robotte (”godbots”), geen woorde van hul eie nie, geen denke van hul eie nie. Dieselfde patrone, dieselfde ritmes, dieselfde verveling, dieselfde arrogansie, dieselfde vrees. Altyd vrees. Watter geen veroorsaak die verslawing?

    Daar is baie gelowiges, en meeste van hulle is skadeloos. Hulle glo nie eintlik wat hulle koppelaars vir hulle vertel nie. Hul “geloof” is blote gewoonte – noem dit sommer kultuur. Iets om te gebruik by geboortes, dope, begrafnisse, krisisse, en Sondae voor die reuk van gestoofde vleis en die stilte van ‘n middagslapie. Dit werk vir hulle want dit het vir hulle ouers gewerk.

    Maar dan het jy die wat werklik glo (en ek sluit hier meeste predikante / pastore / en ander soortgelyke geld- en gevoelswassers uit): Hulle glo omdat hulle seergekry het, omdat hulle jonk (en driftig) is, om sin aan hul lewens te gee, of om ‘n dood of siekte of uitdaging te verwerk. Jesus werk vir hulle. En die vraag wat ons vir onsself moet vra is: Kan ons vir hulle iets beters gee?

    Comment by Oubaas — May 6, 2008 @ 9:40 pm | Reply

  216. Very well said, Oubaas. “Maar dan het jy die wat werklik glo … Jesus werk vir hulle. En die vraag wat ons vir onsself moet vra is: Kan ons vir hulle iets beters gee?”

    Yes, I think we can. What I list here is nothing new and has been said many times on the blog:

    1. Start questioning things. As George has said, develop your baloney detector and make sure you keep it switched on and change the batteries regularly.
    2. Start reading science and make a concerted effort to understand how Nature works.

    • If you have a little bit more than basic math you can get a quantitative feeling of the deepest beauty of Nature.
    • Discover the science explaining the theory of evolution. Once you have grasped the scientific discoveries proving how we all come from a common ancestor, you will laugh at creationists’ nonsense.
    • Read about astronomy and why scientists say the universe is 14 billion years old, and how it is possible that the observable universe could be 40 billion light years across.
    • Read about the totally weird discovery that the universe is accelerating due to an unknown force called dark energy.
    • Also read about the restrictions of the human brain. The inability to visualize quantum mechanics, the failure to unify the four forces of Nature, and the failure of mathematical proof of an intuitively correct hypothesis.

    Once the door to science has opened for you and you have walked through it, a new beautiful world opens up and there will be no regrets or urge to turn back. Then you will begin to understand why creationists abhor science. Science explains Nature and does not need a creationist god to do so. God becomes obsolete.

    Comment by Savage — May 7, 2008 @ 6:00 am | Reply

  217. Read about the totally weird discovery that the EXPANSION of the universe is accelerating due to an unknown force called dark energy.

    Comment by Savage — May 7, 2008 @ 6:03 am | Reply

  218. (en driftig) is, om sin aan hul lewens te gee, of om ‘n dood of siekte of uitdaging te verwerk. Jesus werk vir hulle. En die vraag wat ons vir onsself moet vra is: Kan ons vir hulle iets beters gee?

    Comment by Oubaas — May 6, 2008 @ 9:40 pm

    Yes we are offering science which means: reason, logic and reality. It wont help those who are desperately in need of some magical solution to a problem or death except insofar it helps people to deal with problem rationally and logically and to understand that all of existence is empirical and can only be dealt with on that level.

    “The truth sets you free” (by some clever person) means in essence: helps you to deal with reality in real terms instead of being dependent on some magical force to help you when no such help will be forthcoming.

    I am convinced that most of the errors and incompetence that we experience is the result of a non explicit belief that things will somehow “come right” “sort themselves out” ie that the laws of physics will somehow be inverted for the believer. Ie people do shoddy work because they refuse to accept that effect follows cause.

    I have a granddaughter who is only 8 years old and she asked me the other morning whether the Indian child with two faces (recently in the news) is the result of a mutation. I explain the developmental process of the foetus to her and explained why that happens…also showed her photographs of some human mutations….really grisly stuff…she had no qualms at all and accepted that those are simply the result of “nature gone wrong”. Not for one moment was she emotionally disturbed or her security in herself challenged.
    The problem is that grown people dont change their minds as easily as we think because it requires *structural adaptations* of the brain.

    Comment by Objective — May 7, 2008 @ 6:30 am | Reply

  219. Savage wrote #215

    “• Also read about the restrictions of the human brain. The inability to visualize quantum mechanics, the failure to unify the four forces of Nature, and the failure of mathematical proof of an intuitively correct hypothesis.”

    This is another hypothesis that i have no need of: the fact that we do not know all the variables available in weather patterns at any -point in time does not imply a failure of our brains. We still predict the weather fairly accurately in spite of our lack of specific knowledge.

    We may not be able to predict both the position and the direction of a particle but we know enough to control the positions and directions of atoms and electrons in applications such as microscopes, scanners etc.

    If the brain can know any one thing it can know all things: the very fact of quantum mechanics higlights this point – we know that particles as small as quarks leptons etc exist and postulate others like gravitons….perhaps the four forces cannot be unified :) (neither conceptually nor empirically) – i always think that any such attempt consist of attempting to unify molecular form with structural form as if the two are seperate..as if the one can exist without the other….are not already *unified*.

    The problem i think :) (and sometimes i think shit) starts with the BB theory… IOW we are attempting to explain the origin of existence instead of accepting that existence exists and we have to understand how – we need to explain change not how existence came into being.

    I am always open to rational refutation.

    Comment by Objective — May 7, 2008 @ 9:06 am | Reply

  220. Objective, it is a beautiful story about your granddaughter. If grownups could only realise the damage they do by withholding the truth from children. As far as the human brain goes, I think we are limited in our perception of what actually happens at the quantum scale at this point in time. Quantum physics is basically a science of statistics: given enough “hits” a pattern will result that results in the laser, CCD, etc. But to predict the outcome of individual “hits” leads to failure.

    Btw I’m not remotely a physicist and only have my opinion from reading. Why I say we are pretty much stumped unifying the forces of nature is the huge amount of brainpower that has gone into super string theory (SST) and there is nothing to show for it. SST predicts nothing that could be tested by experiment. The pro and anti string theorists are at war at present.

    For me the BB is a very difficult theory to accept. All the experimental evidence is there up to the cosmic microwave background radiation, and experiments are in the design phase to predict the neutrino background radiation. It will be interesting to see what comes out of these. For my pennies worth I think the inflation theory is a convenient quick fix, but I could be totally wrong. I just get the feeling that we just don’t know what happens at the quantum scale, as well as what happened early in the universe’s life.

    Comment by Savage — May 7, 2008 @ 10:24 am | Reply

  221. Savage,

    “I just get the feeling that we just don’t know what happens at the quantum scale, as well as what happened early in the universe’s life.”

    I agree that we do not perceive at the quantum scale…. we do conceive however (the difference is neurological and a long story) otherwise how would we even know about the quantum level?

    The problem as i see it are the terms “early in the universe’s life.” We can see around 15 bn ly if i remember correctly. Is that the entirety of existence? I think not.

    I think that the cosmic background radiation etc can still make sense within the context of a regional level. Thus one must consider what we can see as a localised region with many more out of sight. If you use that concept you may consider a situation where inflation can be harmonised with the concept of change…ie inflation is the manifestation of a local *change event* that took place some 15 bn ly ago – there may be similar processes going on outside our visual horizon.

    It is interesting to consider that similar process take place on the micro scale as on the macro – ie stars are formed as the result of the interaction and of course existence of the 4 forces. Humans function according to the same principles except on a smaller scale… ;) unless of course you wish to introduce some form of duality.

    Comment by Objective — May 7, 2008 @ 12:57 pm | Reply

  222. Kowie would do himself the world of good by just reading one other book than the Bible: Daniel Dennett’s Breaking the Spell – Religion as a Natural Phenomenon. In it he writes inter alia:

    Everyday folk physics and folk biology and folk psychology work very well as a rule, and so does folk religion, but occasional doubts surface. The exploratory reflections of human beings have a way of snowballing into waves of doubt, and if these threaten our equanimity, we can be expected to seize upon any responses that happen to shore up the consensus or damp the challenge. When curiosity stubs its toe on an unexpected event, something has to give: “what everybody knows” has a counterexample, and either the doubt blossoms into a discovery, which leads to the abandonment or extinction of a dubious bit of local lore, or the dubious item secures itself with an ad hoc repair of one sort or another, or it allies itself with oter items that have in one way or another put themselves out of reach of gnawing skepticism.”

    Kowie, Angus Buchan, Fred May of Shofar and all their followers have never experienced the stubbing of a curious toe. They are NOT curious, their only framework of reference is the Bible, and their ad hoc repair of any doubt is to rush back into the cave of ignorance and “comfort” the Bible gives them.

    What a boring, drab life of no discovery, no curiosity, no venturing out into the field of doubt!

    Kowie, try stubbing your toe for once on curiosity’s stone.

    Comment by George Claassen — May 7, 2008 @ 3:24 pm | Reply

  223. Objective: “I agree that we do not perceive at the quantum scale…. we do conceive however.” I don’t conceive; I cannot explain how the double split experiment works, or many other photon behaviours.

    “We can see around 15 bn ly if i remember correctly. Is that the entirety of existence? I think not.”

    It all depends which cosmological model you use. The Einstein-de Sitter model using a Hubble constant of 50 gives an observable universe of 50 billion light years (bly) across. In one article (see below) the starting point of a photon that reaches us now after it travelled for 14 bly is now 78 bly away, that means the universe diameter is 156 bly.

    http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040524.html

    But you are right, this is just the observable universe, and as I could gather the total universe is bigger.

    “It is interesting to consider that similar process take place on the micro scale as on the macro”.

    What I can understand about gravity is that at the quantum scale the strong nuclear force is not detected at the macro scale.

    It will be interesting to see if the Higgs boson is detected by the LHC later this year or next year. I wonder if the standard model will be modified if it is not detected?

    Comment by Savage — May 7, 2008 @ 4:41 pm | Reply

  224. George,

    “They are NOT curious, their only framework of reference is the Bible, and their ad hoc repair of any doubt is to rush back into the cave of ignorance and “comfort” the Bible gives them.”

    A summary of how Christianity and every other religion is based on pagan ideas of many thousands of years ago will make an interesting post. I am thinking specifically of the role of the Sun as god/the lifegiver/the killer of darkness (evil), the emblem on the churches (cross and circled cross) and its origins in paganism and the role of astrology. [ ;) im good at dishing out work].

    :) i do not want to make the time for this (been planning to do so for some time) at the moment, but seeing as how you have access to the sources and resources…perhaps you may consider it.

    Comment by Objective — May 8, 2008 @ 5:58 am | Reply

  225. Ah, gravity, inflation, dark energy and such. These topics simply wow me out. It is often so hard to comprehend because our usual human reference framework is just so impotent when it comes to these grand topics.

    Not being a scientist I often sit and dream up my own explanations, trying to make sense of these things from my own perspective. I cannot do the fancy maths to see how gravity is just a bend of time and space. I wish I could. Of course, I claim no science or truth behind *any* my ideas, just good clean fun, to think about this great universe and the forces that shapes it.

    Two topics that really intertests me is gravity and dark energy. Dark energy.. what is it? How does it work? Why would it push galaxies away from each other? Where does it come from? Is it the opposite of gravity or something totally different? One of my favorite pet “theories” (in the mundane sense, not scientific), is that perhaps dark energy and gravity are opposites. If I look at gravity at another way, not as particles or a bending of time and space but as something that “eats” or absorbs space. A thing with mass would therefore constantly be absorbing, or “eating space, thus pulling other objects closer to it because it “eats” the distance between objects. Then dark energy would be the opposite, something that blurps or “makes” space. Therefore, dark energy would be making space between galaxies and therefore galaxies are drifting away from each other, unless of course there is enough mass and close enough distance where mass would be “eating” the space faster than dark energy blurps it out, then galaxies are close enough to “attract”. Since mass in my pet idea “eats” space, could dark energy have negative mass and therefore the opposite effect of gravity?

    I know, it sounds very loony, but it is fun to think about things in different ways. My silly little model would probably fall apart once it meets any type of maths. But that’s not the reason I think of things in such a way. I attempt to bring these weird forces in the weird universe within my reference framework because on their own they are just too strange for me to comprehend.

    No watch some of these smart blokes debunk my pet “theory”… 3..2..1 :-)

    Comment by Renier — May 8, 2008 @ 6:07 am | Reply

  226. “Ah, gravity, inflation, dark energy and such. These topics simply wow me out. It is often so hard to comprehend because our usual human reference framework is just so impotent when it comes to these grand topics.”

    Yes, Renier, these topics wow me out as well. That is why I try to read so much about them. I must say, my personal opinion is that physics needs a breakthrough. A new Einstein or Newton is required. Just look at all the different cosmological models that have been formulated from Einstein’s general theory of relativity.

    In the Friedman cosmological model, the Einstein-de Sitter universe has Λ=p=k=0. With the discovering of dark energy it looks as if the cosmological constant (CC) Λ ≠ 0. However, a Λ ≠ 0 causes grave problems for the super string theory (SST) guys according to Witten. (Witten is THE SST guru). This strengthens the hand of the anthropic landscape/multiverse idea which, in my opinion is not science. To see so many physicists involved with SST which have not produced any testable predictions in more than 20 years, is a clear indication that physics is pretty much stumped at present.

    So keep on producing your own theories, it is great fun. And I mean it; one day I’ll scrape enough courage around to write about my own “theory”. I can assure you no god features in it.

    Comment by Savage — May 8, 2008 @ 6:36 am | Reply

  227. Savage wrote: “I can assure you no god features in it.”

    Heathen! Well, there goes the tithes you could have been cashing in on, and of course, the Templeton Foundation prize :-p

    Comment by Renier — May 8, 2008 @ 10:24 am | Reply

  228. Savage #225

    “Einstein-de Sitter universe has Λ=p=k=0. With the discovering of dark energy it looks as if the cosmological constant (CC) Λ ≠ 0.

    That to me is the interesting thing: why can it not vary? Sometimes 1 ; iow sometimes the whole lot will shrink and create a 40 bly vacuum and at other times when the vacuum steals a bit from some other expanding portion it goes bang and the other one starts shrinking?
    That way maths wont fail at some inexplicable singularity and the BB wont look so much like a creation story.

    “I can assure you no god features in it.” Not even a Goditron or a Kreatron?

    Comment by Objective — May 8, 2008 @ 11:18 am | Reply

  229. “That to me is the interesting thing: why can it not vary?” Objective, these are not constants but variables and can of course vary. Taking Λ=p=k=0 is a very simple solution to Alexander Friedman’s derivation of Einstein’s field equations for a homogeneous and isotropically expanding universe. Using Friedman’s equations any number of possible models for the universe could be developed with different values for the above variables. Einstein and de Sitter first studied Friedman’s model with the variables = 0. It is now almost certain that Λ ≠ 0 with the discovery of dark energy. (I must add for absolute clarity that I find Einstein’s general relativity a very abstruse subject, but I hammer away).

    Hoyle coined the word Big Bang, Wheeler Black Hole, and let it be known to everybody, Objective coined Goditron and Kreatron. Brilliant. Just wait till the fundies get hold of this.

    Comment by Savage — May 8, 2008 @ 1:13 pm | Reply

  230. Savage in #215: “Once the door to science has opened for you and you have walked through it, a new beautiful world opens up and there will be no regrets or urge to turn back.”

    If you define science as “knowledge”, then yes, I agree. A more narrow definition will certainly exclude the many of us who prefer the pleasures of poetry to those of the scientific method, even though I understand that Λ=p=k=0 is poetry if the door to science has opened for you.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 8, 2008 @ 4:39 pm | Reply

  231. I was reading through the comments on this post yesterday and noticed that #7 Thomas Dreyer has his own blog. Under the heading “Iets oor my” he actually invites people to: “Kom gesels gerus saam”. So I attempted to post a comment, specifically in response to his post “Life after the MMC 2008” which you can read at
    “http://lewemeer.wordpress.com/2008/04/26/life-after-the-mmc-2008/”.

    You guessed it – my comment never appeared. It seems that Thomas strictly moderates all comments and does not actually want people to “gesels saam”. Which is rather unfair, seeing as he has no objection to leaving little coprolites here from time to time. So here is a copy of my attempted comment:
    “Thomas,
    Please take the time to have a second look at what you have written above:
    The word “dead” appears twice
    The word “death” appears thrice
    The word “die” appears 7 times
    The word “dying” appears 8 times
    And then this gem: “The theme of this year’s MMC was Dying to Live, and rightly so because we were called to die.”

    This is what you wish – for yourself.

    Why would you want to reject the incredible beauty of this (actual, existential) life and instead only focus on an imagined “future life” for which not one single shred of evidence exists? Why do you unthinkingly accept the contents of a book written by ignorant nomadic men who knew nothing at all about the world, the universe, science, mathematics, biology, etc? Nothing. They did not even know how to accurately calculate the ratio between the circumference and the diameter of a circle. Yet you accept what they write about a “future life” as the empirical truth. On such feeble basis, you are willing to reject everything in the existent world.

    I really hate to break this news to you, but you are simply a member of a death cult. Don’t drink the Kool Aid.”

    Comment by Hendrik — May 9, 2008 @ 10:47 am | Reply

  232. Yes Hendrik. Xians and free speech don’t really sit around the same fire and smoke a good ‘ol peace pipe. Reminds me of that comedy blog that Dembski runs uncommon stupidity… I was banned 3 times from it for simply disagreeing.

    Comment by Renier — May 9, 2008 @ 1:26 pm | Reply

  233. Hendrik, thanks for letting me (us) know. Guys, there is work to be done there!

    Comment by Savage — May 9, 2008 @ 2:38 pm | Reply

  234. Talk about a delusional insecure adult. Thomas Dreyer looks like he can’t wait to go to heaven. Imagine his surprise when he dies and finds out there isn’t a heaven, or hell. Or wait, if there isn’t a heaven or hell, he wouldn’t know anyway. In the mean time, he worships a ghost or three, he loves something that does not exist, he wastes hours of his week worrying about a mythical monster or 4 (counting the devil) who will fuck him up if he does anything wrong. And these monsters can read his mind. But 3 of them definitely loves him, as long as he does exactly what they want.

    The disturbing thing is all that talk about dying and killing and death, as Hendrik pointed out. You would think they can use a better more friendly metaphor or something. Very very scary. If you ever meet this arsehole, don’t turn your back on him and walk away very very slowly. Maybe he isn’t using a metaphor that day.

    Anyway, he must be retarded because he blindly follows an arsehole like Buchan. Believes every word he says, without question, because there are no questions on his blog, and he obviously don’t allow any either. Another thing that is scary is the fact that there was 60 000 other delusional dumb arseholes there, saluting Buchan and god like the nazis saluted, and they don’t question anything either.

    This raises an interesting question. Do they find it hard to question things, like faith, because they are all stupid cavemen, or is it because they are too scared, thinking that god and his son and that holy ghost and the devil really exist? These poor bastards must be fucking terrified!!!!!! Why else would they all stand together like this, and feel safer? Why else would they act like the bunch of brain washed dumb cavemen they act like? They aren’t too scared of the likes of us here on the blog, or the government, or the criminals in South Africa, but they are terrified of their own god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Time to break the shackles guys. Don’t you think you could do much better getting together for a better cause? Imagine 60 000 men and 60 000 women getting together to reason, and to try to solve some real problems in South Africa? Just think of the benefits something like this could have, not to mention the fact that some of them might even get laid.

    Burn your bibles, buy a case of beers, or a case of wine, get a box of condoms if you aren’t married, and lets all meet up to enjoy life a bit and discuss things that could make life better for us all and our children and our grand children.

    To waste all this time and resources on mythical monsters is very very childish, and a total waste of time and money, and could also be dangerous.

    I am going to get a drink, be right back.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 9:10 pm | Reply

  235. I see Renier posted on Dreyer’s blog.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 9:20 pm | Reply

  236. Another interesting post on birdbrains blog:

    “#
    Dirk West, on May 9th, 2008 at 6:24 pm Said:

    Julle arme fools , Angus het julle ‘n succer gevang.”

    Hy is reg!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 9:21 pm | Reply

  237. Ok, this is from Dreyers blog, the last part of life after the mmc 2008:

    “I don’t know about you, but I don’t die easy. Dying is painful and tough. I cling to stuff that I should actually let go of, which only increase the intensity of the whole dying process. Dying to self does not come easy, but it is possible and together we can do it. It is important to know that you cannot do it alone, you need God first and also the support of family or friends that are willing to walk to death with you that you may “attain to the resurrection of the dead””

    He has it all backwards. “I cling to stuff that I should actually let go of, which only increase the intensity of the whole dying process” -

    Yes Dreyer, you said it there!!!!!!!!!!! The stuff you cling to is god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And that only INCREASES THE INTENSITY OF THE WHOLE DYING PROCESS!!!!!!!!!!!! You dumb bastard. As soon as you accept the fact that there is no life after death, and no hell, no heaven, you will start to enjoy this life a lot more. It is all you have, all we all have. Enjoy it, it is short! Make the most of it. It isn’t so bad. Accept it, when you are dead, you are dead. But right now you are alive. You don’t have to understand it all, just remember this is it pal, there are no second chances at all.

    And do you really want to follow a bunch of dumb mother fucking arseholes all your 1 short life like Buchan? He just wants your money, and to have control over you.

    And one more thing: Read very carefully, this is important!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Dying is EASY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    It’s living that is hard.

    Good luck.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 9:30 pm | Reply

  238. I posted that on Dreyers blog too. I wonder if it will make those delusional people think a bit. My guess in no, it will just make them angry.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 9:40 pm | Reply

  239. But hey, if they want to come and piss in my valley, I will go and shit in theirs.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 9:41 pm | Reply

  240. Have any of you guys read Antony Flew’s “There is a God”? If so, any takes on it?

    Comment by Bill Fleetwood — May 9, 2008 @ 10:26 pm | Reply

  241. I haven’t read his book, but what I do know of him is that he believes in ID.

    This excerpt from an interview with Flew:

    “…my own insight that the integrated complexity of life itself – which is far more complex than the physical Universe – can only be explained in terms of an Intelligent Source. I believe that the origin of life and reproduction simply cannot be explained from a biological standpoint despite numerous efforts to do so. With every passing year, the more that was discovered about the richness and inherent intelligence of life, the less it seemed likely that a chemical soup could magically generate the genetic code. The difference between life and non-life, it became apparent to me, was ontological and not chemical.”

    Here is the link to the article:

    http://www.tothesource.org/10_30_2007/10_30_2007.htm

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 10:37 pm | Reply

  242. Also : “…The best confirmation of this radical gulf is Richard Dawkins’ comical effort to argue in The God Delusion that the origin of life can be attributed to a “lucky chance.” If that’s the best argument you have, then the game is over. No, I did not hear a Voice. It was the evidence itself that led me to this conclusion.”

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 10:37 pm | Reply

  243. and : “Flew: I accept the God of Aristotle who shares all the attributes you cite. Like Lewis I believe that God is a person but not the sort of person with whom you can have a talk. It is the ultimate being, the Creator of the Universe.”

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 10:39 pm | Reply

  244. As for my source, tothesource, here is what I got from their website:

    “tothesource is a forum for integrating thinking and action within a Judeo-Christian moral framework that takes into account our contemporary situation. We report the insights of cultural experts to the specific issues we face believing these sources will embolden people to greater faith and involvement.”

    Integrating thinking and action within a Judeo-Christian moral framework. In other words, they say right of the bat that they do not have any objectivity, apart from a Judeo-Christian moral framework.

    What does science have to do with morals anyway?

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 10:44 pm | Reply

  245. It also looks like a picture of Ben Stein looking at Darwin, on their home page.

    http://www.tothesource.org/index.htm

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 10:45 pm | Reply

  246. These guys from “tothesource” are really funny. Do yourselves a favor and read some of the articles in their archive.

    They do not try to prove anything about the existence of their god as far as I have read, but they try to debunk anybody who criticizes their god. Luckily they can’t burn them anymore.

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 11:02 pm | Reply

  247. If anyone hasn’t seen this yet, have a look at this article, and if you suffer from a hernia, don’t read this, you will hurt yourself:

    http://www.tothesource.org/4_15_2008/4_15_2008.htm

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 9, 2008 @ 11:28 pm | Reply

  248. What does MMC stand for? main manne what counts?

    Comment by Objective — May 10, 2008 @ 7:04 am | Reply

  249. The book by Flew is well worth reading. Its subtitle is: “How the world’s most notorious atheist changed his mind”. The book can probably be somewhat heavy going for those not versed in at least the basics of philosophy. I think Flew is a theist we can take seriously.

    Comment by Bill Fleetwood — May 10, 2008 @ 7:08 am | Reply

  250. Flew: (from the site posted above).
    “I believe that the origin of life and reproduction simply cannot be explained from a biological standpoint despite numerous efforts to do so.”

    The origin of life? Is life something else than an organization of molecules? Is life a quantity that you can put in a petri dish and analyse ; that is, something seperate from the organic molecules in which a process manifests? Waht makes an organic molecule different from an inorganic one?

    Flew obviously havent read much biology because i think that both the chemical origin and the structural organisation that makes the process of life possible has been demonstrated beyond doubt. The chemical basis of reproduction is also well described and understood.

    As far as the comment by Dawkins quoted in the text from the same page:

    “The best confirmation of this radical gulf is Richard Dawkins’ comical effort to argue in The God Delusion that the origin of life can be attributed to a “lucky chance.” If that’s the best argument you have, then the game is over.”

    In this respect i agree with Flew.

    Unless you wish to argue that oxygen and hydrogen binds by some “lucky chance” or that “ATP is formed and oxydized by chance” or that “ozone forms by chance” the statement that RNA and DNA (the molecules required to activate and maintain the processes of life) formed by chance is non sensical. Specific conditions existed on the early earth that facilitated the formation of these molecules – chance had nothing to do with it: the laws of physics applies across time and space and the four forces that make that possible are well known (and are most probably all that is required to understand the process, in spite of the refusal of so many to accept the fact).

    I think that the failure of science to solve the “problem” of consciousness, and of philosophy to produce a scientific explanation of knowledge acquisition (a scientific epistemology by combining its analytical and intellectual skills with scientific knowledge), are the primary causes of our inability to address questions of *life*, *consciousness* and *existence/energy* scientifically, and to refute the magi once and for all.

    That we can know (and do so absolutely and objectively) is beyond doubt – all that is required is to demonstrate it scientifically. That will relegate people like Anthony Flew, Carl Popper and the other dualistic philosphers and scientists to the oblivion where they belong.

    Comment by Objective — May 10, 2008 @ 8:10 am | Reply

  251. I should have added that perhaps then the *phenomenal* appearance of maths as opposed to that of literature will disappear….and we can “enjoy” a steak and a Cabernet and grasp that the difference between literature and maths is linguistic and not phenomenal.

    Comment by Objective — May 10, 2008 @ 8:16 am | Reply

  252. “ ..perhaps then the *phenomenal* appearance of maths as opposed to that of literature will disappear…” Interesting thought, Objective. Not many mathematicians will agree with you however. This is what Alain Connes, French mathematicaian who earned a Fields Medal said about it: “There exists, independently of the human mind, a raw and immutable mathematical reality. Mathematics is unquestionably the only universal language.”

    And G. H. Hardy, English mathematician: “317 is a prime not because we think so, or because our minds are shaped in one way or another, but because it is so, because mathematical reality is built that way.”

    And Marcus du Sautoy, English mathematician: “Some philosophers might take issue with such Platonist view of the world – this belief in an absolute and eternal reality beyond human existence – but to my mind that is what makes them philosophers and not mathematicians.”

    Comment by Savage — May 10, 2008 @ 9:53 am | Reply

  253. “The temperature of Heaven can be rather accurately computed. Our authority is Isaiah 30:26, “Moreover, the light of the Moon shall be as the light of the Sun and the light of the Sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days.” Thus Heaven receives from the Moon as much radiation as we do from the Sun, and in addition 7*7 (49) times as much as the Earth does from the Sun, or 50 times in all. The light we receive from the Moon is one 1/10,000 of the light we receive from the Sun, so we can ignore that… The radiation falling on Heaven will heat it to the point where the heat lost by radiation is just equal to the heat received by radiation, i.e., Heaven loses 50 times as much heat as the Earth by radiation. Using the Stefan-Boltzmann law for radiation, (H/E) temperature of the earth (-300K), gives H as 798K (525C). The exact temperature of Hell cannot be computed… [However] Revelations 21:8 says “But the fearful, and unbelieving…shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone.” A lake of molten brimstone means that its temperature must be at or below the boiling point, 444.6C. We have, then, that Heaven, at 525C is hotter than Hell at 445C. – Applied Optics, vol. 11, A14, 1972

    Comment by Oubaas — May 10, 2008 @ 10:39 am | Reply

  254. “Mathematics is unquestionably the only universal language.”

    He agrees with me then…tis a matter of language and not of phenomenality.

    “There exists, independently of the human mind, a raw and immutable mathematical reality.”

    Since mathematics is the use of symbols to describe reality and as such were discovered and formulated by the human mind i dont accept that a *symbolic reality independent of the human mind exists. He may have meant that mathematics describes a reality that exists independent of a consciousness to perceive it…..who knows?

    ““317 is a prime not because we think so, or because our minds are shaped in one way or another, but because it is so, because mathematical reality is built that way.””

    317 is a compound numeral that is built from the concept of *unit* (in this case 1) and it does not exists independent of the human mind and again….what is this mathematical reality that he is talking about? Again …he may be referring to the fact that we have discovered prime numbers… because the unit *1* has been conceptualized…but i suppose he will have to explain that…?

    “And Marcus du Sautoy, English mathematician: “Some philosophers might take issue with such Platonist view of the world – this belief in an absolute and eternal reality beyond human existence – but to my mind that is what makes them philosophers and not mathematicians.””

    :) well there are many more people whom i know who disagree with me on many issues and i dont expect them to agree, but the fact remains that our light depends on our knowledge….and thus i suspect there are mathematicians who would think that there is a world of numbers…. or flatland :) or a dualistic reality where a mathematical creatron sits amongst stacks of paper and calculators…..but then i suppose that is because, and why, they are mathematicians and not philosophers.

    Comment by Objective — May 10, 2008 @ 10:57 am | Reply

  255. Oubaas,

    “(525C). The exact temperature of Hell cannot be computed… [However] Revelations 21:8 says “But the fearful, and unbelieving…shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone.” A lake of molten brimstone means that its temperature must be at or below the boiling point, 444.6C. We have, then, that Heaven, at 525C is hotter than Hell at 445C. – Applied Optics, vol. 11, A14, 1972″

    LOLOLOL. God is a hot girl… didnt you know, or are the godbots in for a surprise?

    Comment by Objective — May 10, 2008 @ 11:13 am | Reply

  256. Is Hell Exothermic or Endothermic?
    As you study for exams, remember its not the quantity it’s the quantity. And remember there is no substitute for pure unadulterated bull

    ——————————————————————————–

    Dr. Schambaugh, of the University of Oklahoma School of Chemical Engineering, Final Exam question for May of 1997. Dr. Schambaugh is known for asking questions such as, “why do airplanes fly?” on his final exams. His one and only final exam question in May 1997 for his Momentum, Heat and Mass Transfer II class was: “Is hell exothermic or endothermic? Support your answer with proof.”

    Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle’s Law or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following:

    “First, We postulate that if souls exist, then they must have some mass. If they do, then a mole of souls can also have a mass. So, at what rate are souls moving into hell and at what rate are souls leaving? I think we can safely assume that once a soul gets to hell, it will not leave.

    Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for souls entering hell, let’s look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, then you will go to hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and souls go to hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in hell to increase exponentially.

    Now, we look at the rate of change in volume in hell. Boyle’s Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in hell to stay the same, the ratio of the mass of souls and volume needs to stay constant. Two options exist:

    If hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter hell, then the temperature and pressure in hell will increase until all hell breaks loose.
    If hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until hell freezes over.
    So which is it? If we accept the quote given to me by Theresa Manyan during Freshman year, “that it will be a cold night in hell before I sleep with you” and take into account the fact that I still have NOT succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then Option 2 cannot be true…Thus, hell is exothermic.”

    The student, Tim Graham, got the only A.

    http://www.pinetree.net/humor/thermodynamics.html

    Comment by Objective — May 10, 2008 @ 11:52 am | Reply

  257. Hell’s official homepage: http://www.hell.no/

    Comment by Objective — May 10, 2008 @ 12:12 pm | Reply

  258. The First Law of Philosophy: For every philosopher, there exists an equal and opposite philosopher.

    The Second Law of Philosophy: They’re both wrong.

    From: http://www.workjoke.com/projoke70.htm

    Philosophy is not a natural science because describing the world could be done in numerous totally contradicting ways, and could change from generation to generation without concrete experimental evidence to indicate which is actually correct. The same could be said for psychology, literature, or any of the humanities. Applying a basic explanation of Nature incorrectly will result in experimental failure; failure now and tomorrow. If numbers could be demonstrated by the beat of a drum, 317 beats will describe a prime number throughout the universe. Mathematics is the only language that can be used to explain Nature. What language do the humanities have?

    Comment by Savage — May 10, 2008 @ 5:02 pm | Reply

  259. Savage,

    “The First Law of Philosophy: For every philosopher, there exists an equal and opposite philosopher.
    The Second Law of Philosophy: They’re both wrong.”

    LOL – i have to admit that in most cases both those laws are correct…but then i havent verified my statement experimentally and therefor i could be wrong. :)

    “Philosophy is not a natural science because describing the world could be done in numerous totally contradicting ways, and could change from generation to generation without concrete experimental evidence to indicate which is actually correct. The same could be said for psychology, literature, or any of the humanities.”

    Your metaphysics here is that the concrete (experimental) is the only means to verify any description of the natural world.
    Your epistemology is that man can only know through by means of concrete descriptions of the world.
    Your conclusion: man can only know by means of the empirical (concrete experiment).

    The argument fails though – on philosophical grounds – because your second premise is not necessarily true because: in order to establish some experimental means man has to know first the elements from which he is going to construct the experiment, the materials and method he is going to use etcetera. Since you cannot conduct and experiment to prove your second premise it fails and therefor your conclusion is (not necessarily true) but fails by your own criteria.

    Thus there must be some other means that man uses to describe the world that is not dependent on concrete facts. (iow this proposition fails in terms of your argument: “Applying a basic explanation of Nature incorrectly will result in experimental failure; failure now and tomorrow.”

    “If numbers could be demonstrated by the beat of a drum, 317 beats will describe a prime number throughout the universe. Mathematics is the only language that can be used to explain Nature.”

    How do you arrive at mathematics? Did you conduct some concrete experiment or are you arguing like Kant that your brain contains some mathematical category from which you derive this “absolute” truth?

    But i agree that mathematics is a universal language and therefor the easiest way to explain nature over time and space as i originally asserted.

    Mathematics uses symbols to ascribe values to variables and the human race (the humanities) have been called ‘the symbolic species’ (Deacon, 1997) because of his use of symbols as representative of his ideas, which means that man has been using symbols long before mathematics was invented AS a universal LANGUAGE.
    Of course in academic jargon the term *humanities* refers to the so called soft sciences because it has been believed that man has certain attributes (a soul) that is not subject to experimental procedure AND that man can only know subjectively because his brain constructs his knowledge. These premises however may be false (in fact are false) and your *philosophical* approach fails for the reason that you accept them. :) Man is an existent in reality, like a tree or an Amoeba, and may, and can, be studied by concrete experiment.

    Let us not accept the premises of the dualists or build on their errors. You see that you have a philosophy too and use it to think and argue about science and dualism even while you may not want to accept it. Since all scientists (all humans) function from some philosophy (they hold certain premises from which they work)and they many therefor be wrong in all cases. That however is not proof that they are…all we need to do is find a way that is not based on empirical science.

    But hey, i am most probably wrong, because i am after all, primarily a philospher. :)

    But i am keeping you and i have to rush off to church ,,,, LOLOLOL

    Philosophy cannot consistently fail but must be the product of some duality from which knowledge is obtained and therefor your conclusions stated in the first two propositions fail.

    Comment by Objective — May 11, 2008 @ 5:31 am | Reply

  260. Objective, thanks for the explanation where I am wrong. My brain does not grasp the concepts of rational reasoning readily. I think you will find the book, “Conversations on Mind, Matter and Mathematics” interesting. It is a dialogue between Alain Connes and the neurobiologist Jean-Pierre Changuex.

    J-P C: “I therefore remain doubtful that mathematical objects exist ‘somewhere in the universe’, independent of all material and cerebral support, as you would have it.”

    It makes for heavy reading (for me) but I support Connes arguments more than Changuex’s.

    What I believe the difference between mathematics and for instance, philosophy, is the fact that deductions by the former can describe a system that could be verified ad infinitum, whereas it does not hold true for the latter. Now whether a mathematical reality exists independent of the human mind (Connes) could, I’m sure, be great point of argument.

    Comment by Savage — May 11, 2008 @ 6:59 am | Reply

  261. :) ive heard it said that a philosopher is like a blind man looking for a black cat in a dark room when the cat is not there….

    the mathematician on the other hand claims to have found the cat.

    Comment by Objective — May 11, 2008 @ 10:42 am | Reply

  262. The cat, the philosopher and the mathematician: very good. Now the physicist appears: “You are both correct but also wrong. You looked for the cat in the wrong universe of the multiverse.”

    Comment by Savage — May 11, 2008 @ 12:57 pm | Reply

  263. It is possible, replies the mathematician, that C=x (since a blind philosopher simply cannot see that the cat is there.)
    But since r=c^n (according to the physicist) and some mathematicians…
    it is also possible that r=c (since the philosopher may be correct).
    In that case x=r in which case r=C^n
    In which case the physicist is correct and there are in fact numerous cats in the room but the blind philosopher just cant see them.
    If however the author is correct and there is no cat then x=0.
    But if x=0 then r=0 in which case both the mathematician and the physicist is wrong because it cannot be the case that 0=C^n because r is an illusion.
    Why cant 0=C^n? well there is no reason really…all you need is lots of faith….

    It is clear then that both the mathematician and the physicist are wrong and the philosopher may or may not be right depending on whether there is in fact a cat or not….but how the hell to find out if there is?
    It is simple: you let loose a mouse in the room and listen if you can hear the cat going after the mouse…so then says the mathematician… you are introducing m into the equation…sure says the physicist and the philosopher simultaneously: we have to make the damn thing work!

    Comment by Objective — May 11, 2008 @ 2:17 pm | Reply

  264. :)

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 11, 2008 @ 5:10 pm | Reply

  265. Bill Fleetwood #249: “The book by Flew is well worth reading. Its subtitle is: “How the world’s most notorious atheist changed his mind”. The book can probably be somewhat heavy going for those not versed in at least the basics of philosophy. I think Flew is a theist we can take seriously.”

    Flew is at the age where, shall we say, people begin to lose (or have already lost?) their cognitive abilities.
    It seems the book was actually written by a Christian “ghost writer” and not by Flew himself.
    Read more here: http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2007/11/antony-flew-bogus-book.html

    Comment by Hendrik — May 12, 2008 @ 12:26 pm | Reply

  266. Gents, the talking fish is at it again:

    “It said ‘Tzaruch shemirah’ and ‘Hasof bah’,” Mr Rosen later told the New York Times newspaper.
    “[It] essentially means [in Hebrew] that everyone needs to account for themselves because the end is nigh.”

    “http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2854189.stm”

    Comment by Hendrik — May 12, 2008 @ 1:27 pm | Reply

  267. Hendrik #265

    Good blog. As someone there commented: the godbots are getting desperate.

    Comment by Objective — May 12, 2008 @ 3:19 pm | Reply

  268. Hendrik, this can be explained. The part the reporters were not told about was the fact that these men were victims of a practical joke. One of their co workers slipped a bit of LSD into their coffee, and stood watching with anticipation for 2 hours for the effects to take place. Either that or the fish market thought they were losing some of their Jewish clientel to another fish market, and thought out this brilliant plan of a fish talking in Hebrew. :)

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 12, 2008 @ 3:25 pm | Reply

  269. This is the Pope Benedict’s official statement apologizing for the child abuse scandal, to the victims.

    ” “It is in the context of this hope, born of God’s love and fidelity, that I acknowledge the pain which the church in America has experienced as the result of sexual abuse of minors,” Benedict said.

    “No words of mine could describe the pain and harm inflicted by such abuse. It is important that those who have suffered be given loving pastoral attention.”

    During the Mass, the pope said the church has worked “to deal honestly and fairly with this tragic situation” and to ensure that children are safe. ” ”

    If anybody calls this an apology to the victims……………………

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 12, 2008 @ 3:46 pm | Reply

  270. And they haven’t done much to assure children are safe

    Comment by Mack Brolloks — May 12, 2008 @ 3:47 pm | Reply

  271. Bishop John B. McCormack, who was one of the priests in Salem MA, during the time when the late Rev. Joseph E. Birmingham was molesting boys at the same parish, saw on several occasions when Birmingham took boys into his bedroom, and did nothing. Today his a a Bishop in Manchester, NH.

    http://boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/birmingham/

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 12, 2008 @ 4:01 pm | Reply

  272. New name, McBrolloks was formerly Mack Brolloks

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 12, 2008 @ 4:02 pm | Reply

  273. Objective & Savage, you’ve long ago lost me between philosophers and mathematicians etc, but hell – keep up this most entertaining debate. Isn’t that what we’re about?

    Comment by Oom Stoffel — May 12, 2008 @ 6:01 pm | Reply

  274. And McBrollocks, your name change has now revealed your true colours — I suspect you’re really a retired rich fundie Jew living in Spain. How else could you afford all the time & energy spent on this blog? ——-
    Just kidding man…!

    Comment by Oom Stoffel — May 12, 2008 @ 6:10 pm | Reply

  275. Oom Stoffel, you are good. Sherlock Holmes!!!! :)

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 12, 2008 @ 7:26 pm | Reply

  276. Hendrik, the link on #265 is very good. As someone on that blog posted: “Lying for Jesus…”

    What wonderful news it must have been to publish the words of a converted atheist in the world of the religious. And how wonderful it must be for a true believer and a fundie to read that book.

    How more self assured they must feel when a fundamentalist atheist changes his tune and starts to believe in god.

    What they fail to mention, is what god he now believes in.

    What they fail to mention, is that even if it was Flew who wrote that book, and even if he did believe in god now, he clearly does NOT believe in any of the gods man has invented, never mind that fucker from the bible.

    So to all you believers out there, this might be good news to you, but maybe you should think about what Flew or who ever wrote that book is actually saying. If you can understand this with your limited reasoning capabilities.

    If any of you fundies have any questions about this, I can spell it out for you if I really have to, fire away, I will respond.

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 12, 2008 @ 7:59 pm | Reply

  277. Comment by McBrolloks — May 12, 2008 @ 7:59 pm

    “So to all you believers out there, this might be good news to you, …”

    So now you know the reason why it is so important for believers to have everybody believe in a god. Unless all believe as they do….they have no confirmation of their beliefs…and they will always be sceptics (in their own minds) because they know that their god never appeared to anyone nor spoken to anyone…nor is she able to perform the simplest of logical arguments.

    The fact that a professed atheist suddenly turns believer (irrespective of which god/goddess/ghost he believes in is fantastic news for them because they are thinking “IF Flew, a ‘brilliant and well respected academic’ can see the truth all atheists must be wrong and WE are right.”

    So the problem remains for philosophers, scientists and all the ‘common’ people: how do we know what is true and what false….how do we know what is good and what is evil….what is truth? Didnt a philosopher after all agree that the positive cannot be asserted but only the negative? Do not many (if not most) practicing scientists agree with him? Isnt it true that knowledge exists a priori in our brains? And how could it have gotten there is some ghost didnt implant it? Isnt ethics and morality some inherent and inexplicable quantity in the human body? Isnt man the “crown” of “creation”? He does after all seem to have a consciousness not present in animals.

    The most urgent problem to be solved is the question of human consciousness and knowledge acquisition – nothing else will kill the cycle of ignorence to which people have been subject since they first discovered their own cognitive abilities.

    Comment by Objective — May 14, 2008 @ 5:32 am | Reply

  278. Antony Flew, the son of a Methodist minister, was born in London, England. He was educated at St Faith’s School, Cambridge followed by Kingswood School, Bath. During the Second World War he studied Japanese at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, and was a Royal Air Force intelligence officer.

    After the war, Flew achieved a first class degree in Literae Humaniores at St John’s College, Oxford. Flew was a graduate student of Gilbert Ryle, prominent in ordinary language philosophy. Both Flew and Ryle were among many Oxford philosophers fiercely criticised in Ernest Gellner’s book Words and Things (1959). A 1954 debate with Michael Dummett over backward causation was an early highlight in Flew’s career.[2]

    Flew was a Lecturer in Philosophy at Christ Church, Oxford from 1949 to 1950, following which he was a lecturer for four years at the University of Aberdeen, and a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Keele for twenty years. Between 1973 and 1983 he was Professor of Philosophy at the University of Reading. Upon his retirement, Flew took up a half-time post for a few years at York University, Toronto.

    Flew developed the No true Scotsman fallacy in his 1975 book, Thinking About Thinking.

    No true Scotsman, or the self-sealing fallacy, is a fallacy of equivocation and question begging. Its name was coined by philosopher Antony Flew in his 1975 book Thinking About Thinking – or do I sincerely want to be right?.[1]

    Argument: “No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”
    Reply: “But my uncle Angus, who is a Scotsman, likes sugar with his porridge.”
    Rebuttal: “Aye, but no **true** Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”

    From wiki…for those who are interested.

    See also the discussion between the mathematician and the philosopher above…

    Comment by Objective — May 14, 2008 @ 5:40 am | Reply

  279. “http://lewemeer.wordpress.com/2008/04/26/life-after-the-mmc-2008/#comment-427″

    While we wait for another thread, there is fun to be had.

    And if you want to get a bit pissed off, look at the comments on:

    “http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2321542,00.html”

    Comment by Renier — May 14, 2008 @ 7:55 am | Reply

  280. This time of year it is probably appropriate to keep in mind the following:
    (from: “The Scientific Indian” at http://www.thescian.com/?q=node/228)

    “The divine architect of runny noses,
    The wizard of ooze, of two stinky hoses,
    You made every man woman a misfit
    With appendages and stomach full of shit.

    Sexy theater in a messy sewer,
    Shame on you unintelligent designer!
    Harris, Hitchens, PZ, Dennett and Dawkins:
    May their godless fists land where your chin is.

    Old man Paley walking by a heath found,
    A perfectly wrought Timepiece on the ground.
    Inside his skull god’s bell went a’ringing,
    A wonderful spell! Paley went a’singing.

    Dear Mr Paley? Truth by rhetoric?
    When there is good science and proper logic?
    Teleology is warm and quite fuzzy
    But, surely, it’s for minds lazy and lousy.

    Acknowledgements:
    Endless supply of early morning sneezes -
    Thank you very much, Rhinoviruses.
    Dennett, Dawkins, Hitchens and Sam Harris:
    Them and others, also our appendix.
    Lastly, the mammalian vagina:
    What will we do without Pharyngula.”

    Comment by Hendrik — May 14, 2008 @ 11:06 am | Reply

  281. For all the Christians reading this post:

    “So far as I am concerned, I most cheerfully admit that most Christians are honest and most ministers sincere. We do not attack them; we attack their creed. We accord to them the same rights that we ask for ourselves. We believe that their doctrines are hurtful, and I am going to do what I can against them. We believe that the frightful text, “He that believes shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned,” has covered the earth with blood. You might as well say that all that have red hair shall be damned. It has filled the heart with arrogance, cruelty, and murder. It has caused the religious wars; bound hundreds of thousands to the stake; founded inquisitions; filled dungeons; invented instruments of torture; taught the mother to hate her child; imprisoned the mind; filled the world with ignorance; persecuted the lovers of wisdom; built the monasteries and convents; made happiness a crime, investigation a sin, and self-reliance a blasphemy. It has poisoned the springs of learning; misdirected the energies of the world; filled all countries with want; housed the people in hovels; fed them with famine; and but for the efforts of a few brave infidels, it would have taken the world back to the midnight of barbarism, and left the heavens without a star.” – R. G. Ingersoll.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 14, 2008 @ 11:16 am | Reply

  282. Ingersoll again: “If a man should tell you he had the most beautiful painting in the world, and after taking you where it was should insist upon having your eyes shut, you would likely suspect either that he had no painting or that it was some pitiful daub. Should he tell you that he was a most excellent performer on the violin, and yet refused to play unless your ears were stopped, you would think, to say the least of it, that he had an odd way of convincing you of his musical ability. But would this conduct be any more wonderful than that of a religionist who asks that before examining his creed you will have the kindness to throw away your reason? The first gentleman says: “Keep your eyes shut; my picture will bear everything but being seen. Keep your ears stopped; my music objects to nothing but being heard.” The last says: “Away with your reason; my religion dreads nothing but being understood.”

    Comment by Oubaas — May 14, 2008 @ 11:40 am | Reply

  283. View a portfolio of the event on http://www.alib.co.za/mighty.html

    Harold Churchill

    Comment by haroldc — May 14, 2008 @ 11:41 am | Reply

  284. Ahmen and hallaluja brother!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 11:44 am | Reply

  285. I love Ingersoll! What a mind to reason with.

    Comment by Renier — May 14, 2008 @ 12:00 pm | Reply

  286. It is amazing. The MMC shows how easy it is to lead the ignorant. How easy the ignorant lets themselves be led. 60 000 Big strong men, with not a brain between them. If you want to know what is really scary, it is what these guys would do if they had a lot of power. Oh, wait a minute, people like this has had a lot of power many many times during the history of the world. We all know what happens when the easily led gets power and are led by scoundrels. Look at Hitler, look at PW Botha, Voster and all those fuckers, not a too distant memory for most. Now luckily these 60 000 delusional men believe god and jesus will save them, has saved them etc. The leaders there are making millions, and they are telling these guys to go and save the world for jesus.

    It is terrifying to see these men all worshiping a ghost. They believe jesus is totally in control of their lives. There is no difference to believing Santa Claus is real and bringing me good fortune this year because I was a good boy.

    Quotes from that link Harold Churchill sent us.

    “Lynette Radley:
    My husband attended this life changing weekend and came back a changed man!! His vision renewed, and his eyes fixed on JESUS!
    What an AWESOME GOD we serve! “He who began a good work in us will be faithful to complete it in us!!”

    Lynette, I am glad for you.What was your husband like before he went to this event?

    “Corrie van Greunen:
    Al wat ons land kan red is ons geloof, ons bid elke dag vir mense soos Angus wat ons nader bring aan ons ALMAGTIGE GOD. JESUS is my vriend en hy leef in ons almal, die wat HOM nog nie ontmoet het nie ? steek uit jou hand, HY wag net daarvoor, sodat hy in jou hart kan woon. GOD seen angus vir sy verkondiging van ons GROTE VADER se naam. LOOF ons REDDER JESUS CHRISTUS.”

    Corrie, jy kan bid totdat die koeie huistoe kom, maar geloof gaan nie ons land red nie. Julle mense het net so hart gebid in die apartheid dae, en mense wat ander kleurige velle het verban van julle kerke af en van julle god af.

    “Stewart Cunningham:
    There is only ONE GOD and HE was present at the MMC, what an experience to see more than 60000 men gathered with one main goal, TO SERVE THE LORD. What a miracle weekend… I suffered from chronic back pain; that Friday night Oom Angus prayed for illnesses and since then my back pain left me for good.”

    Which god is this real one you rave about Stewart? Miracles hey? That is excellent. Maybe Angus can pray for the earth quake victims in China, and the cyclone victims in Burma. Or maybe your god is more concerned about your back. I had blue balls the other day, and after a good weekend they were cured. Praise the lord!!!!!

    “Mark Retief:
    Though at the time of the conference I was on business in Korea , I told as many people as I could that it would be bigger
    than predicted, GOD is bigger and Mightier than all we see and hear. Next year GOD comes first and business later.”

    Mark, for Oom Angus, it is business first and god later.

    Wake up you guys. Smell the flowers. Enjoy your lives. This ghost you worship does not exist.

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 12:02 pm | Reply

  287. “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

    So says Richard Dawkins.

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 12:16 pm | Reply

  288. Haroldc, I looked at your photos and the comments. Boy, you better hide these very well. Just imagine your grand children seeing where you’ve been. They will say: Yea, we always thought gramps was a nut, but now we know for sure.

    Comment by Savage — May 14, 2008 @ 12:21 pm | Reply

  289. And even more Ingersoll: “They say that God says to me, “Forgive your enemies.” I say, “All right, I do;” but he says, “I will damn mine.” God should be consistent. If He wants me to forgive my enemies, He should forgive His.”

    Comment by Oubaas — May 14, 2008 @ 12:27 pm | Reply

  290. Final bit of Ingersoll for the day, in response to #286: “In a world of ignorance, facts are blasphemy.”

    Comment by Oubaas — May 14, 2008 @ 12:41 pm | Reply

  291. From the website:

    “Only by Grace we enter in – Almighty God,
    not by the works we have done,
    but by the blood of Your Son.”

    This is from the bible, no?

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 1:17 pm | Reply

  292. Another quote from the website Churchill sent us:

    “Hans Feldhoff:
    This gathering was awesome, my life has changed completely, and I can’t wait to see what the Lord is going to do next year.
    I will be there with all my sons. (5 of them) and my wife can’t wait to attend the Sunday morning service.”

    How did your life change Hans? Yes, you will have to wait till next year to see what the lord is going to do, you see, his a little busy right now, and his schedule is completely full till next year, so we will all have to wait for him to do everything we expect by the end of next year. Or is it only Oom Angus who sees what the lord does. Is it only he who tells us all what he did this year, and what he is going to do next year?

    How much money did you spend at the MMC 2008?

    Oom Angus is thanking the lord for sending him all this fortune right now. And for sending him even more next year. You see, Oom Angus is the one who can really believe in miracles.

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 1:27 pm | Reply

  293. McBrolloks in #291: “How much money did you spend at the MMC 2008?”

    I don’t think it’s about the money… it’s about the box. It’s open. And inside you’ll find Death and Blood and Dying and Wounds and Hell and Sin and Struggles and Pain and Anguish and Fear. Imagine all those little crosses around innocent necks turning into designer electric chair jewellery. No difference – both symbols of death and suffering.

    I know, Christians say I’ve got it all wrong, that it’s about the resurrection, the life, the glory – but they don’t wear a “Jesus flying into heaven” pendant, a star, a fish, or any other such positive symbol around their necks.

    The Mighty Men’s slogan of “Dying in order to live” is a neat reminder of what religion is all about: Blood offerings to the gods, the sacrifice of people and animals, the notion that something must die if you want to “really” survive and live and be OK, the age old cycle of planting and harvesting and hoping that the laws of the universe will be suspended for my own greedy little purposes and that I will be the fortunate one… Certainly, it’s about the desire for certainty. In short, fear.

    Suspending the laws of the universe, or performing miracles, seems to be Mr. Buchan’s forte – or “gifting”, as the gullible calls it. He heals the sick, he raises the dead (no, he really said this)… but it’s not him, it’s Him. And then the footnote: You have to have faith. So, it’s not me, it’s Jesus, but it’s not only Jesus, it’s my faith, and if it’s just a “little” Jesus it’s because of my “little” faith, and if it’s “no Jesus” it’s either because of my total lack of faith or (and what a wonderful little exit this one is) because it’s God’s will, and because I do know that even I (poor and miserable sinner that I am) have a tiny bit of faith, it must be God’s will. Even small children will laugh at the stupidity of this type of thinking, but the idea of Hell keeps them silent.

    In his latest newsletter, Mr. Buchan writes: “I have always thought of myself as being a man who had a certain portion of faith given to me by the Holy Spirit, but now for the first time in my life, I can really and truly say to you that I know that my redeemer lives (Job 19:25).”

    That’s after the conference of the 60,000 deluded. In other words, the conference “for the first time” in his life “really and truly” convinced him that Jesus lives. He has at last seen the evidence of others believing him, because he had enough faith in Him. What a charlatan.

    I’ve written about this somewhere else, but I’ve asked my wife to keep certain people away from my deathbed, especially those timid souls who – when learning of my imminent demise, and not knowing whether I am “saved” or not – will feel it their duty to ensure that I wake up to the everlasting happiness and peace of heaven. But the thought that those who avoided me in life will meet me at the gates of death frightens me more than the idea of dying itself. They have no manners.

    Comment by Oubaas — May 14, 2008 @ 2:23 pm | Reply

  294. Well said Oubaas. I plan to have a 12 gage in my deathbed. I bet they won’t be that stupid to believe jesus will stop the buckshot.

    And yes, good point. A dead guy on a cross, that was basically murdered and then turned into a martyr, that is very twisted.

    That open box always has a lot of extra room for money.

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 2:44 pm | Reply

  295. “And yes, good point. A dead guy on a cross, that was basically murdered and then turned into a martyr, that is very twisted.” as their logo was what I meant to say. Sometimes I think faster than I can type.

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 2:45 pm | Reply

  296. McBrolloks wrote #293

    “And yes, good point. A dead guy on a cross, that was basically murdered and then turned into a martyr, that is very twisted.”

    :) that is the lie that succeeded. The truth is much simpler and easier to understand and accept. Perhaps George will do a piece on the panteist foundations of christianity and i do not wish to anticipate him.

    But… the jesus story…is built on a much earlier metaphor of the sun as the god of life and the night as the god of death….with 12 constellations as disciples….the winter soltice finds the sun in the constellation of the Southern cross and the sun appears to linger in ‘darkness’ on the horizon for around 3 days before it rises again…. – hell im even starting to talk like these assholes… the earth wobbles and causes the appearances of the sun …of course. anyway there is a jesis figure with 12 disciples in all major religions who is crucified and resurrected after three days …. :) like my granddaughter would say: who would believe that a rotting corpse can become alive again?
    i must add that the job story from which mr angus quote was written at least 1500 years before abraham was even born…. the story of noah comes from the epic of Gilgamesh and so do one of te books of solomon… i dont know what it is called: Prediker :) except solomon had a much more hedonistic approach to women than gilgamesh to Ishtar.

    The saddest thing to me are the wasted prayers…. for whatever…instead of learning to think and understand the principles of politics law etc they hope for some non existent god to save them… i remeber my own prayers as a child…. all i ever asked god was to help me make sense of the non sensical.

    LOL – perhaps there is a god and he did – that is why i am an atheist.

    Comment by Objective — May 14, 2008 @ 3:24 pm | Reply

  297. Objective writes “LOL – perhaps there is a god and he did – that is why i am an atheist.”

    Now you are talking. Wouldn’t that be a dream come true:) I can just imagine the theology that will sprout from such a position. And if anyone questions my assumptions, I can simply say that God is omnipotent, that God can do what God wants, and that God can decide that there is no God (not much more difficult than 3=1, now is it), and who are you to question my three holy positions anyway…

    Comment by Oubaas — May 14, 2008 @ 4:16 pm | Reply

  298. Objective said: “The saddest thing to me are the wasted prayers…” Not always wasted, though: As a teenager I prayed to God that he would help me do something (which was quite feasible even without His help), in return for which I would become a dominee (which was my father’s covenant with Him before I was born). He (I mean HE) decided not to help me (He is omnipotent, isn’t he?) so I thought stuff you too. The rest is history. Which is why I say prayer can help one see the real Light.

    Comment by Oom Stoffel — May 14, 2008 @ 7:09 pm | Reply

  299. Here is a peach!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Vatican says aliens could exist.

    The Pope’s chief astronomer says that life on Mars cannot be ruled out.

    Writing in the Vatican newspaper, the astronomer, Father Gabriel Funes, said intelligent beings created by God could exist in outer space.

    Father Funes, director of the Vatican Observatory near Rome, is a respected scientist who collaborates with universities around the world.

    The search for forms of extraterrestrial life, he says, does not contradict belief in God.

    The official Vatican newspaper headlines his article ‘Aliens Are My Brother’.

    ‘Free from sin’

    Just as there are multiple forms of life on earth, so there could exist intelligent beings in outer space created by God. And some aliens could even be free from original sin, he speculates.

    Asked about the Catholic Church’s condemnation four centuries ago of the Italian astronomer and physicist, Galileo, Father Funes diplomatically says mistakes were made, but it is time to turn the page and look towards the future.

    Science and religion need each other, and many astronomers believe in God, he assures readers.

    To strengthen its scientific credentials, the Vatican is organising a conference next year to mark the 200th anniversary of the birth of the author of the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7399661.stm

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 7:46 pm | Reply

  300. The RCC is getting really desperate. I wonder if they will send one of their bishops to greet the alians if they ever land here, and ask them if they have heard the good news. Or maybe if they have seen god out there in the galaxies. I can just see the aliens facial expression. They will definitely be convinced that this is one of the dumbest and most gullible life forms they have ever came across. Easy pickings!!!!!!!

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 7:52 pm | Reply

  301. “Just as there are multiple forms of life on earth, so there could exist intelligent beings in outer space created by God. And some aliens could even be free from original sin, he speculates.”

    This is priceless!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    From Wikipedia:

    “Original sin is said to result from the Fall of Man, when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit of a particular tree in the Garden of Eden. This first sin (”the original sin”), an action of the first human beings, is traditionally understood to be the cause of “original sin”, the fallen state from which human beings can be saved only by God’s grace.”

    So aliens get a free pass into heaven? Or they don’t need god’s grace.

    It is really hard for me to get my head around this.

    Also, does this mean plants go to heaven too? I guess so. What about poison ivy?

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 8:10 pm | Reply

  302. So aliens get a free pass into heaven? Or they don’t need god’s grace.

    It is really hard for me to get my head around this.

    Also, does this mean plants go to heaven too? I guess so. What about poison ivy?

    Comment by McBrolloks — May 14, 2008 @ 8:10 pm

    I dont think there is a living person that can get his/her head around the entire bs of original sin…what if you are baptised in the name of jesus and the idiot still allows you to become an atheist? oh no they say…you have free will but how you execise your free will is determined by god….

    As Oubaas said above: 3=1 and that isnt so difficult to accept…IF ONLY you had enough faith….

    Comment by Objective — May 15, 2008 @ 5:39 am | Reply

  303. George Orwell thought that collectivism can produce a highly technological society… Rand thought it was impossible, that collectivism can only lead to decay, stagnation and destruction. History and I am on Rand’s side. See what we have in the world today….increasing theft and violence…. inspite of the fact that 99.9% of all people believe in ghosts or other forms of mysticism. If you do not recognise property rights….there is no respect for property…. and isnt it written somewhere that “the earth belongs to god and the fullness thereof”? If it all belongs to god then nobody has any right to it and all have a right to it….and if god is too dumb to distribute it equally….to make food grow without planters… money retain value without monetary restraint, houses and leisure grow on trees for all to pick…then humans will show her how it should be done.

    Religion is all pervasive…it is a primitive form of philosophy and it will always destroy the good and promote evil: the greatest evil in the world is the destruction of free thought…and the inculcation of the ideas of mysticism in the minds of children….who grow up to be non thinking morons.

    See the evidence for my claim on these pages.

    Comment by Objective — May 15, 2008 @ 5:51 am | Reply

  304. Has anyone watched the Total Bullshit Network (TBN) lately? Really awesome stuff. The other night I saw a “Dr.” Richard Roberts (son of Oral Roberts, I believe) doing some really amazing miracles. He was sittting with a guy with a really wacky hairdo, getting all kinds of “revelations” from the Lord about sick people who were getting healed as he prayed for them through the T.V.. One case was particularly impressive: “The Lord is showing me someone who has had one lung removed on account of lung cancer, and he is about to go in to have the other lung removed”, he said. Really! I’m not kidding! Do you guys think “Dr.” (definitely not an M.D., I’m sure) Roberts’ Lord really doesn’t know that people can’t live with no lungs? If this kind of thing does not make your bullshit detector beep itself out of batteries, you ain’t got a bullshit detector.

    P.S. Would you believe that the guy with the wacky hairdo had a laptop and knew how to operate it with more than one finger!!? I say again: Pretty impressive stuff on the Total Bullshit Network.

    Comment by Bill Fleetwood — May 16, 2008 @ 5:44 pm | Reply

  305. Unfortunately guys. We don’t care if you don’t believe in hell. It’s still there and you are still going. Unless…
    1.Search the web about biblical prophesies that came true. Can you explain how the “idiotic bible writers” managed to pull this off not once but several times? Are these prophesies about Jerusalem, Alexander the Great, the city Tyre, jewish state etc. not fulfilled? I think even scientific historians and a highly intellectual species like yourself will agree that at least it makes for interesting reading.
    2. Another interesting question would be : Why would Assyrian Historical Artifacts depict miracles and historic facts described in the bible? No my friends to deny Christ, and God, is to deny the very thing that makes us human.

    Comment by Mario Benz — June 3, 2008 @ 6:10 pm | Reply

  306. Mario Benz, please read something else besides your bible and fundie literature.

    Comment by Con-Tester — June 3, 2008 @ 6:44 pm | Reply

  307. # 305 said: “Unfortunately guys. We don’t care if you don’t believe in hell. It’s still there and you are still going. Unless…”.

    Mario, if you said this in response to # 304, I fail to see the link. If you just said it simply to get something off your chest, do you feel better now- having once again relegated us all too hell? Have you any idea how scared of the Bible Richard (you-can-live-with-no-lungs-says-god) Richards and his dad Oral and their friend with the wacky hairdo makes “highly intellectual species” (what is that, by the way? Anyone who knows you can’t live with no lungs?). Or would one, in order to be counted one of the “highly intellectual species” at least have to be able to spot the problems surrounding all those “fulfilled prophecies”? What problems? Well, take the one in Mat.2:15 (which refers to Joseph and Mary having fled to Egypt and back with baby Jesus). It says:” This was to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: ‘Out of Egypt I called my son’ “. It claims to be a fulfilment of a prophecy. But just where is the “prophecy” that it “fulfils” and who made it? It is written down in Hosea 11:1 (as any cross reference Bible will show). But – and here is the problem – Hosea 11:1 is not at all a prophecy that God would call his son (Jesus) out of Egypt. It is merely a historical statement that God called “his son”, ISRAEL, out of Egypt (as the first part of the verse makes clear). It is a statement of what, at the time of Hosea writing it, had already happened in the past; it is not a prophecy of what would happen in the future (after Hosea). Did the inspired writer not know this? Is this the kind of “fulfilled prophecy” you are referring to? Do “highly intellectual species” in order to stay out of hell and remain true to “the very thing that makes us human” have to swallow this kind of historical cut-and-paste job as “fulfilled prophecy”? The day I get that right will put me one short step away from believing that a person can live without lungs, and from saying so on television. That scares me.

    Comment by Bill Fleetwood — June 4, 2008 @ 6:35 pm | Reply

  308. P.S. to # 307: O, Mario, does # 306 answer your question in # 305: “Search the web about biblical prophesies that came true. Can you explain how the “idiotic bible writers” managed to pull this off not once but several times?”. If not, nothing will.

    Comment by Bill Fleetwood — June 4, 2008 @ 6:41 pm | Reply

  309. I know the Mighty Men Conference is old news, if it ever was news, but I simply HAVE to back up a little and say something about this little gem in # 136: “I did attend the MMC 2008 at Greytown and it was a blessing… If I ever wondered if the meeting was Christ inspired and blessed by the Holy Spirit, you guys have show(n)me through your negative comments that it indeed was part of a great revival. You and the Devil would never have spen(t) time and breath to shoot down anything that is not a danger to you.”

    Boy, do I feel shot down now! Kowie, does the precious prayer and Bible reading time you spend coming to blogs like this in order to shoot the guys down indicate that you consider them a danger to you and uncle Angus? Do you really read the Bible- I mean really, really? What does MMC stand for- Moron Mass Circus? What do you mean it was “a blessing”? Did it make you feel dizzy? Do you know that holding your hands in the air for too long while crap music is ringing in your ears could have this effect on you? Will my questions and comments establish you in your faith even more? Will we (and the Devil) get some credit for that?

    Comment by Bill Fleetwood — June 5, 2008 @ 11:31 am | Reply

  310. I have some free time at the moment and, so it seems, some bottled up might men irritation. It is only now that I have taken time to carefully read some of the comments on this thread. This Kowie guy (# 136, 208 et al) is really something. Consider this again, point by point (#208):

    - “Dankie vir julle kommentaar” – Christian sarcasm or condescension- which is it, Kowie?
    - “julle retoriek is egter afgesaag, flou en glad nie oorspronklik nie”. (Condescension, so it seems). Kowie, is this your way of saying our rhetoric gets to you less effectively than that of uncle Angus? We know that, we just don’t know why.
    - “ek is bly dat daar ouens soos Oubaas is wat die Bybel ken – erens sal daar iets vassteek wat eendag jou na die troon van Jesus sal bring”. Kowie, so are we glad for guys like you who read “afgesaagde, flou en onoorspronklike retoriek” aimed at debunking bullshit. Perhaps something will get stuck somewhere and knock you off all those imaginery thrones and stuff. Keep reading, broe.
    - “Julle ander kan gerus sy voorbeeld volg – al glo julle nie – lees die Bybel sodat julle weet waarvan julle praat.” Lees jy die Bybel, Kowie? Regtig? Hoeveel daarvan en hoe? Weet jy waarvan jy praat?
    - “Meeste raas in die wind – dit maak julle argumente sinneloos”. Senseless, noise-in-the-wind arguments? How about answering one instead of just pronouncing it “senseless” (are you some pope, or what?). How about answering the one I put to Marion in #307. That shouldn’t be too difficult for a guy like you who knows what he is talking about, now should it?
    - “O ja, – op die vraag wat daarvan as julle reg is en daar is nie ‘n God nie? Dan verloor ek mos niks nie – dan gaan ons almal in die niks in. Maar as ek reg is en daar is ‘n God?” We call this argument “Pascal’s Wager”. Do you know why, or are you just farting in the wind? Have you read some replies to Pascal’s Wager?
    “Mooi loop” – Are you going now, Kowie?
    “en ja, ek kan in die bondel in vir julle bid en julle seen – dit hoef nie spesifiek vir jou te wees nie Oubaas. Die Here ken elkeen by die naam en hy hy sal my bondelgebed mooi opdeel – jy sal dus nie gecheat word nie. Daar sal seen vir elkeen wees. Ek hoef jou ook nie te ken nie – Hy ken jou.” Schucks, fanks, Kowie.
    “Maar as jy wil – se, en ek sal spesifiek vir jou bid”. How would you know if we asked, seeing as you’ve gone now?
    “Mooi loop almal van julle en seen vir julle”. Sincerely, thank you, Kowie. Good things for you too, man. Really. But can you answer us an empty argument, please?

    Comment by Bill Fleetwood — June 5, 2008 @ 1:11 pm | Reply

  311. IMPORTANT BULLETIN FROM BILL! On May 10, 2008 I posted this comment here (# 249). “The book by Flew is well worth reading. Its subtitle is: “How the world’s most notorious atheist changed his mind”. The book can probably be somewhat heavy going for those not versed in at least the basics of philosophy. I think Flew is a theist we can take seriously”. I was referring to a book entitled “There is a God. How the world’s most notorious atheist changed his mind”, purportedly by the former atheist, now deist philosopher, Antony Flew. That subtitle made me somewhat suspicious, although those suspicions were put to rest, by and large, by comments (purportedly from Flew) in the Introduction to the book. In the course of my second reading of this book (which I completed a couple of days ago), though, I flagged several things for verification. That is a a fancy way of saying that my bullshit detector buzzed rather regularly, rekindling the suspicions that the subtitle had stirred in me earlier. I began to seriously doubt if it was really Flew who wrote this book. When I went checking, I found that other more informed and able people than I not only shared my suspicions, but confirmed them! It seems the book has been exposed as another desperate attempt at Christian apologetics. The book is, so it seems, BOGUS. Those who are interested can read about it on Richard Carrier’s Blog. (Google it, please, and click on “Antony Flew” in the subject index. If I link it here my comment will be discarded, it seems). This matter is really worth looking into, I think. The whole thing, if true (i.e. that Christian apologists abused the intellectual goods and reputation of a fading old great in order to beef up their bullshit) would be quite sickening. Indeed, if true, this would be, to my mind, the greatest blot on Christian intellectual ethics since “Dr.” Carl Baugh opened the Creation Evidence Museum. If these Christians are indeed guilty of this act (and it seems quite certain that they are), I feel quite embarrassed that they nearly sneaked it by my bullshit detector, and I feel embarrassed for having commended the work here. It seems one just cannot be careful enough of these religious people and their tricks. When it comes to bullshit they sometimes seem to be as mighty as they are many. (Does MMC perhaps stand for Many Men CONference?)

    Comment by Bill Fleetwood — June 5, 2008 @ 6:42 pm | Reply

  312. “The astonishing naive film Faith Like Potatoes, tells his captivated and totally uncritical audience how his God will change their lives, how miracles have saved him as a farmer”

    I have something to say about him, and something about his local outlet Shofar and how wrong you are in your statement – but not for any reason you might think. Come folks … get past the mud slinging, this one’s a draw – your team won’t win, and all this noise – these reams and reams of ad hominems are awesome shit to the fundies behind all this, the colgate smilers…

    Firstly I have no bone to pick with anyone else’s world view – Cousin, what goes on behind your eyeballs is probably more scary than mine, so let’s not go there. And to me … read John 21, I don’t see what anyone can have against making breakfast for your chommies, especially when they apparently all ran off and left you in the poo. Feel me?

    See, after studying the Bible as a scholar for over twenty years – I have yet to find any man making his living out of the name of Christ or Christ’s teachings who can tell me – which chapter of the New Testament the entire Bible is written around? Which chapter of the Bible if read and taken to heart allows the student to put down the book and walk away understanding it completely? In other words – why write such a document, what purpose does a Testament serve? Old or New?

    If you say John 3:16, you are dead, dead wrong even though that is how you make your bucks. And like Christ in that chapter, I would have to tell you to start all over again from scratch, beginning with parents – because even though you might have put titles and shit in front of your name and degrees and shit behind your name, you still don’t know shit. Unfortunately.

    Else you would have said so here and elsewhere already. And the answer is Matthew 18. That is it.

    But to get back to the potato farmer – in the light of what I have just confronted every professor of theology and other ooik with, those who make their money out of Christ – if Matt 18 is the Biblical reality and consumation of true Christlikeness, then what exactly is Ray McCauley, Mr. Potato Head and our own God se Rykste Seun – Fred May of our little cult of personality – Shofar in Stellenbosch up to? In fact for what reason is anyone selling or buying Christ as a commercial commodity? For the sake of semantics let me define a Christian as someone who is into it for the personal payoff, be that the John 3:16 Eternal Life Policy, Salvation while snide unbelieving punks like you science geeks go to the centre of a fusion reaction and burn real slowly, a way out of personal shit OR the much, much more commmon of all human demoninators … demoninations actually … two hundreds preferably.

    60 000 DVD’s at a hundred or so a pop don’t seem naive to me sunshine, take it from an ex-organised crime boss – especially when you have primed your marks by telling them they are JC’s studs, the main ous what count my broer – stupid greedy mense playing Jesus for the two fisted pay off – the Eternal Life Policy and the 10% down for the Guaranteed Returns!!! Listen to my Story!!! Buy my DVD!!!

    Nothing fucking naive about six mil plus spinoffs at all.

    There is nothing naive about these con-artists. They are the rich aresholes while … face it, Jesus is easier, much easier money than a gram of cocaine or a child prostitute … one you can sell once in a night, one you can sell five times a night if it doesn’t get damaged too much but the other you can sell legally to a whole room full of eager and willing suckers every single Sunday, over and over and over again.

    Someone here seems to have bought a piece of the Original Cross and you find time to argue at such lengths over its validity … whose bullshit detectors exactly clearly don’t work at all?

    Expose the suckers for the cheap parasites that they really are if you want to do something constructive. Untangle the web … Shofar Christian Church is a non-profit organisation – Shofar Publishing is NOT and Shofar Christian Church provides the leadership tax exemption and the material to sell through Shofar Publishing – just like Mr. Potato Head.

    SUCKERS!!!!! Katching, katching, katching.

    Comment by Al Lovejoy — June 29, 2008 @ 10:57 pm | Reply

  313. Bill wrote: “and I feel embarrassed for having commended the work here.”

    We all make mistakes, me most of all. You acted with integrity when you took the effort to verify your opinion and thus corrected it. No harm done, instead, you have my respect for being honest. Thanks for the entry Bill, it is very interesting.

    Comment by Renier — July 8, 2008 @ 7:27 am | Reply

  314. Because post 1970 a lot changed in the guitar manufacturing industry. Instead of being more of a hand made guitar, they became production line produced. And the quality of materials declined. Such things as the wood used (Brazilian Rosewood was used a lot and then the importation laws changed on that into the US and it became illegal to import) was lower grade.

    Comment by Vintage Electric Guitar — August 13, 2008 @ 6:03 pm | Reply

  315. [...] Kombuis wrote a brilliant little piece on his blog about Angus Buchan, and I quote my favourite bit: [...]

    Pingback by Not Kook en Geniet « subtle shift in emphasis — September 16, 2008 @ 3:32 pm | Reply

  316. 2 Timothy 3 v 1 – 5 “But know this that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloveing, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, huaghty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn!” Yet Jesus still continues to love us all!

    Comment by Les Shaw — December 29, 2008 @ 6:45 pm | Reply

  317. Ek soek julle siele my maters…ek soek!

    Comment by André Everts — February 20, 2009 @ 1:43 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Blog at WordPress.com.