God and Santa Claus are Real!

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately. I was seriously considering that god might exist. After all, there’s so much literature on him: The Bible, Quran, and Old Testament to name the big three. Plus there’s a ton of extra stuff like stories, hadith, and such. Compared to other subjects, god has quite a bit of literature devoted to describing and praising him.

But so does Santa Claus…

After a single search, I was able to see at a variety of poetry and stories written by many people, all describing old Saint Nick. Just like with god, there are a few versions of him. There’s a younger one, older one, skinny and fat, much like Elvis, but much more intangible. There are so many songs, movies, and TV shows that portray Chris Cringle that it’s hard to deny his existence.

After all, no one can disprove that he’s real, right?

Afraid of Religious People

You probably hear often that atheists are inherently immoral, but this has already been proven false. It’s the religious, god-fearing people we should really be afraid of. Just think about what happens to people who, at times, question their religious belief.

You start out with an upright religious citizen who follows a moral code according to god every day of his life. During a particularly trying time in his life, he feels abandoned by god and stops believing. All of a sudden he’s left without any guidance or moral code to follow. He thinks “There’s no god or objective morality, so I can do whatever I want.” He then goes on to murder, rape, and steal because there are no far reaching consequences.

I wouldn’t ever want to be around religious people for this reason. You never know when they might stop believing and lose their morality. Your own neighbor may be one hair away from snapping and going on a killing spree, but you’d never know until it’s too late.

If you have any sense whatsoever, you’d realize that this is nonsense. People don’t just lose their morality when they stop believing in god(s), temporarily or for life. It’s ludicrous to think like that.

When you realize how foolish the earlier argument was, you’ll realize why it’s easy for atheists to be moral.

Atheism is More Logical than Monotheism

Not only is it illogical for people to try and convince me to believe that their god or gods exist since they can’t prove it, but it is actually more logical to deny the existence of any gods. I’m not saying it’s logical that god(s) don’t/doesn’t exist, but rather it’s illogical to believe in him/them. It’s a very fine distinction since everything is only what we believe and perceive but for the sake of argument it’s easier to deal with.

There’s one great argument against believing in any one god or in any subset of the total set of gods that could possibly exist or that any person can believe in. The common picture shows two lists. One is of all of the gods that a monotheist doesn’t believe in while the other list is of all of the gods that atheists don’t believe in. Of course, there is only a difference of one, so our beliefs are practically identical according to the math. By extension, if we take into account every god that any person in the history of the world has ever believed in and every god that anyone might come to believe in (flying spaghetti monster, Elrond Hubbard, the Fonz), then the entire set of gods is an infinite set. In terms of numbers, we have a potentially infinite number of gods we can believe in or deny.

As an atheist, I deny the existence of any god, so I don’t believe in any number of gods. That means that I don’t believe in an infinite number of gods. Now a monotheist believes in one god, so he denies belief in an infinite number of gods minus one. But taking one away from infinity is still infinity so monotheists also deny the existence of an infinite number of gods. In this manner, atheists and monotheists alike deny the existence of an infinite number of gods, so we’re not that different. The same logic applies to theists of any kind unless they believe in an infinite number of gods which I won’t go into. If anyone believes in a finite number of gods, they must still deny belief in the same number of gods as atheists.

There is one logical hitch, though, for the finite theist. For example, take the monotheist. Consider how many gods he believes in versus the atheist. The atheist believes in zero gods. The monotheist believes in one god. But they both deny belief in an infinite number of gods, so the one god that the monotheist professes belief in falls into the category of gods that he doesn’t believe in. This means that one cannot logically be a monotheist by virtue of the math. One must either deny the existence of all gods or believe in the existence of an infinite number of gods to be consistent. Since believing in no gods and denying any of an infinite number of gods is more plausible than trying to rationalize the existence of every god (since many are mutually exclusive) except when a single religion provides for an infinite number of gods. In that case, the point is moot. With an infinite number of gods, it’s impossible to schedule any meetings so they’d be essentially powerless.

How many people believe in god (and understand him)?

Only a handful at most. No one really believes in god barring a few individuals who truly devote their lives to him and worshiping him in the manner that they believe is right.Think about it. How many people sin willingly?

If a person really believed with 100% of their brain that there was an all powerful being that could do ANYTHING, would he take the risk of a small sin when the punishment is eternal? How can you say you believe in god and then do anything that’s less than 100% effort? How can you willingly do something bad or avoid doing something good for your own personal enjoyment when he’s watching?

The answer is that you can’t have it both ways. Either you truly believe in god, both on and off the camera (if you’re a celebrity *ahem* popes*) and never sin, or you take temporary enjoyment in things you know are sins yet do anyway because they’re fun and you accept your fallibility as a human and show that you really don’t believe.

I dare anyone who says he believes in god and subscribes to a particular religion to argue that a person who really believes in and understands an omnipotent god could ever willingly sin when so much is at stake.

Of course, some people do argue that you don’t have to be perfect to go to heaven. This just means you have to come in slightly under budget to win. In a perfect afterlife,winning is winning right? A little perfect is a lot perfect.

After all, the only reason self righteous preachers rant and rave is to compensate for their own sin. People with small penises drive hummers just like people who commit sins preach against them.

Proof that no god(s) exist(s)- There is no god!

Here’s proof that an all powerful being cannot exist. Ask a theist this question:

“Can god do something that he can’t do?”

If he says something like ‘The English language isn’t capable of encompassing god’s power’, then just explain that it’s a cop out argument. Also, rephrase it:

“Is god able to create a task that he cannot complete/accomplish?”

Think about another paradox and it will all make sense. Consider Pinocchio. Suppose he said “My nose will grow.” If he’s lying, his nose won’t grow, but since the rule is that his nose grows when he lies, it should grow. What a paradox!

The only solution is to realize that the rule doesn’t make sense and is irrational and a fantasy, just like omnipotence. Since the only way to break the paradox is to admit that an assumption is false – that is, admit that there is no omnipotent god – it must be the right solution.

God, the Imaginary Friend

I love the comics that show adults with shirts showing their faiths and then a child pointing at them and asking “Aren’t you a little old to have an imaginary friend?” Priceless

I always wonder about how our logic works as we grow older. As children, it’s perfectly normal to have an imaginary friend. It’s very healthy.

In fact, it’s a sign that a child is intelligent and creative because such imagination requires abstract thought. It’s also a good sign if you are able to play two sides of a conversation, unless you do it compulsively…

But it begs the question: When does our imagination stifle our creativity rather than encourage it? I think it’s when we limit ourselves to only one imaginary friend.

It’s the most uncreative friend ever because everyone’s already thought of him. It’s hard to believe we put up with adults having imaginary friends. Belief in god might explain why some parents chide their children for having strong imaginations, but that’s besides the point.

The point is that while having an imaginary friend of your own shows good imagination and is a sign of intelligence and creativity, it’s a sign of stupidity and a marked lack of creativity when you believe in other people’s imaginary friend.

Poor Priests

Priests really get a bad rap for all of the molestation stuff. Just think about their situation for a moment. They have to be celibate and they’re not supposed to masturbate. Sex with women is ideologically ingrained as a huge sin for them. The church didn’t focus as much on little boys though, so I guess that didn’t take for a few. Also, people keep calling them “father” or “padre”. Suppose a lovely young lady comes up to you while you’re feeling horny and trying to suppress the urge. She says “Forgive me father, for I have sinned”. You ask and she replies “I cannot control my sexual urges and I often fantasize about intercourse with my classmates. I gave in once and am now unclean.” You say your benediction and she goes on her way. But looking at her, you can’t help but think what she must have looked like enjoying the organs that God gave her. Uh-oh, you’re in trouble now.

The urge is becoming uncontrollable, but your education strictly and vehemently forbade sex with women. It sucks because you’re such a nice guy with great character and everyone loves you. If you weren’t a priest, you’d be married in a heartbeat. But there are little boys around. You don’t have to wear a condom since pregnancy is impossible. Plus condoms are sinful. Don’t have to worry about STDs either as you are both virgins. This could be kept quiet, and it’d only be one time. The ancient Greeks and Romans did it too right?

Priests, you see, are in such a very precarious position. They are handpicked as having the strongest of religious conviction and moral character, but sometimes it’s not enough to deal with so many of the strictures imposed by the institution. The church chooses the best of us and takes them out of the gene pool. They take people who would have been the best fathers and turn them into “fathers”. Sounds counterintuitive to me. If they just let priests masturbate, they could deal with the urges God gave us. Or better yet, let them get married and have a nice family. They would end up having familial problems like everyone else and learn what works in a family and what doesn’t. Then they would be more qualified to give advice about those aspects of life.

God’s Mistakes

Ok this one is going to be short and sweet, since god never makes mistakes. Oh wait, he made Adam and Eve and purposely made Eve smart enough to harvest food, then punished her for it. Or he made her unable to resist temptation and punished her anyway. But that’s just one time. Or is it? He “ruined” two cities and rather than trying to bring them in line, he wiped them out, including non-sinners like Lot’s wife who had the decency to mourn the deaths of her fellow human beings, thereby punishing Lot, another good soul. I thought we’re supposed to hate the sin, not the sinner, and talk about giving up easily. The door to door bible pushers would be ashamed. Something doesn’t quite make sense though. Two of the sins mentioned in the Quran is that the people were homosexuals and cheated on their wives. Well, if they were allowed to have relationships with other men, then they’d be happy wouldn’t they? It’s like forcing a homosexual into a heterosexual.

Even worse than with Lot, though, is what happened with Noah. Is it me, or does God just give up really quickly? And if Noah and his family were the last remaining humans after the flood, doesn’t that make Adam and Eve completely irrelevant? God essentially wiped the slate clean so everything that happened before is inconsequential. Oh yeah, and god let Noah’s son die. Who did he think he was climbing the tallest mountain above sea level (So they were in India?) but still drowned? For an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent being, he just can’t seem to keep people in line. Not sure if this is chronological, but Abraham’s story is pretty troubling. This is less of a mistake and more an April fool’s prank. I guess he didn’t expect Abraham to have such a follower’s attitude. Or old Abe just hated his son and needed a good excuse. In any case, god retracted that order quickly enough, thankfully, so I’ll let that one slide…barely. Then Jesus, oh man.

God had sex with Mary (which must have been A-MA-ZING) and had a magician son who he then had violently killed, brought back to life, then eventually let die again. God gave Mohammed a faulty memory too. In one story, Mohammed knew the Night of Power (Laylut al Qadr) during Ramadan where you pray a ton and your blessings are multiplied over a thousand-fold. Mohammed was about to tell everyone the date but came across two guys fighting. Being aggravated at having to deal with such idiocy, he forgets the date of what is nearly the most important night of everyone’s lives. He can only remember its one of the last odd numbered nights that will be characterized as a foggy night. I think god was just being selfish since Mohammed was supposed to be his last prophet and he was trying nickel and dime the Muslims for more prayer.

But there’s a pattern here with killing children, isn’t there? He tries to get Abraham to kill his son, he lets Noah’s son die, and he let Moses commit mass infanticide. Then he goes ahead and kills his son. TWICE! I thought that was age where people valued sons because they could continue the family line. It must be some type of morbid fascination.

Finally, every problem that has ever existed and ever will exist in the entire universe from the beginning of existence until the end of time are all god’s mistakes because he is supposed to be omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. He controls everything and so he is the puppet master who punishes his dolls for not acting the way he wants. If a person does it, it might be mental disorder since the dolls are extensions of the master’s personalities. If we deny god that responsibility, we deny his omnipotence, breaking the definition of Yahweh, Adonai, or Allah. God is either weak or evil.

No Gays In Our Club?

Let’s expose the whole anti-gay marriage movement for what it really is: a bunch of people showing off their own insecurities about their relationships while trying to be elitist. It seems analogous to country clubs not allowing non-whites or non-Asians. Remember when blacks could never get into any country clubs (as if it doesn’t still happen)? How is this any different? What’s going on here is that heterosexual couples white Christian couples belonged to a group with strictly controlled membership. Then blacks were allowed in but not interracially. Then interracial and interreligious marriages were legalized. Now any man and any woman can get married. The WASPs must be furious to have their exclusive club be opened up so widely. Every step of the way to crack open this exclusive club was difficult. The moment a group of people make it into the club, they want to exclude everyone else who didn’t make it in. Not every married couple feels threatened by homosexual marriage, but those who do must feel violated by having outsiders allowed into their group. The “sanctity” of marriage is really “exclusivity” that people don’t want given to others.

The solution: Everyone who wants to get “married” just gets a civil union which is allowed for everyone. If you want to get married, go to a religious institution for the ceremony. It’s a simple and elegant solution that should satisfy everyone except those with so much pride that they can’t let go of being part of an exclusive club.

I particularly like  video as a good example of the religious hypocrisy of the anti-gay marriage movement.

Conversion Aversion

I never used to question the motivation some people have to convert others to their religion. I always thought it was just the natural order of the world. You embrace the truth as you see it and try to get everyone else on board. The same goes with other issues like abortion, gay rights, drug policy reform. People usually come up with a set of evidence, present their arguments and convince some people that they’re right. But at some point I started to question the reasoning behind some people’s desire to convert others. Jehovah’s witnesses have an excuse that the only way they can get into heaven is if they recruit you and then the only way you can go to heaven is to recruit more people into what is likely the most zealous and self-righteous pyramid scheme movement ever conceived. That aside, most religions do not have a prerequisite that you are required to convert people to get into heaven. It’ll earn some points unless you’re a Calvinist but it’s not required. In Islam, you get earn points based on the actions of people you’ve taught, again

Since there’s no requirement to convert other people, we have to wonder about why some people are so adamant in their attempts. I’ve read that these people are insecure in their beliefs and need validation. The best way to get validation is see everyone around you agreeing with you (and ignoring those who disagree, as is only human).  This is why it’s so discomforting to have someone close to you who disagrees with your beliefs. It’s scary that someone whose opinion matters thinks you’re wrong. Another reason is that it looks good in front of other religious brethren to bring salvation to the masses. It’s certainly a great way to get noticed as a pillar of faith in the religious community except that such public displays are pompous and motivated by the worldly desire to be admired. God knows this of course, so if he existed, those hypocrites would burn in the flames. Another reason which is more obvious to religious people is that they want to get others into heaven, particularly their close friends. This sounds very nice and noble of them to want to help you out. I imagine my friends would be sad to not see me in heaven.

But hold on a minute there. What did I just say? My friends would be sad to not see me in heaven? How is that possible? Heaven is supposed to be an amazing place where we feel nothing but happiness, joy and satisfaction as an eternal reward for abstaining from worldly desires. If I were sure that I could get into heaven with just a baseline amount of worship, why would I bother doing anything more? Even if I thought there were multiple levels of heaven, what does it matter? Am I going to enjoy my first level less because there are higher levels? It’s not like there’s anything to gain in the grand scheme of it all. Envy and jealousy are human character flaws that we wouldn’t have in heaven since we are perfectly content. It’s silly to think that those of greater piety would be more perfectly content than others.

Forgetting about the absurdity of levels, even if there were heaven, where’s the motivation to do more than the bare minimum? In real life, it doesn’t always pay to put in 100% but it often does, especially when it’s revealed later that you worked hard. In life, how much you do and how hard you work often correlate with how well you do. This is ideal, but the heavenly scheme is far from ideal. Infinite punishment or reward for finite sin or merit, respectively, is not only unfair, but irrational. There is actually no real motivation to try to be more religious than is absolutely necessary to ensure a spot in heaven. People say that it’s not really being religious if you’re only doing it to get into heaven, but what else is there? The betterment of this world is meaningless in the scope of the situation, so you may as well enjoy what you can while you can and still skate by the guard at the gate.

If you say that it’s for the love of god, I challenge anyone to believe in and worship a god that they believe will definitely send them to hell anyway. There’s no way in the world that anyone would submit to a god or give up worldly pleasures in order to worship a god who banishes him/her to hell anyway without any chance for redemption. What would be the point? No one worships and loves god unconditionally. It’s based on the hope that god will let followers into heaven. That’s why preachers always toe the “seek salvation and you shall be saved” line and it’s also why Calvinism isn’t very popular. It’s a quid pro quo that has nothing to do with love or reverence. It’s just business.