Dismantling The Obscene – Part 4

This is part 4 of a blog post about 15 Questions Atheists Are Sick Of Answering

Part one is here and part two is here and part three is here

I’ll make this the last one. Apologies for the length – in advance.

11) Atheists, do you idolize Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedung?

Are you out of  your fucking mind? Well, that’s my first reaction. Perhaps I should be a bit more calm about it.

I don’t understand the question? Could  you repeat that please? Oh, I see. Well, the short answer is no. I presume that a short answer is not what you were looking for. Let’s look this one over:

Idolize : to worship as a god; broadly : to love or admire to excess

I guess my first questions for clarification would be: Have you ever heard of any group that idolizes these characters? Do I look like one of those people? Are you saying there is a fan club I might be able to sign up for?

No, I suppose those are no good either. You’re implying that atheists worship famous atheists. To this I must reply that just because you worship a heinous, genocidal, jealous, bigoted, vengeful, murderous, asshat does not mean that everyone does. I, in fact and deed, do not worship anyone. Not even myself despite some rumors to the contrary. I don’t have pictures of them in my house or car, I don’t wear symbolism of them around my neck, nor do I make graven images of them as most monotheists seem to think it is good to do for those they worship, despite the laws against such in their holy texts.

It must be said that Stalin and Zedung are not famous for their lack of belief. They’re famous because of their political agendas and the wrath they used to implement them. Their lack of belief was not important to their agenda in a primary way.

Wikipedia on Stalin and religion:

Although raised in the Georgian Orthodox faith, Stalin was an atheist. Stalin had a complex relationship with religious institutions in the Soviet Union.[329] Historians Vladislav Zubok and Constantine Pleshakov have suggested that “[Stalin’s] atheism remained rooted in some vague idea of a God of nature.”[330]

During the Second World War Stalin reopened the churches. One reason could have been to motivate the majority of the population who had Christian beliefs. The reasoning behind this is that by changing the official policy of the party and the state towards religion, the Church and its clergymen could be to his disposal in mobilizing the war effort. On 4 September 1943, Stalin invited Metropolitan Sergius, Metropolitan Alexius and Metropolitan Nicholas to the Kremlin and proposed to reestablish the Moscow Patriarchate, which had been suspended since 1925, and elect the Patriarch. On 8 September 1943, Metropolitan Sergius was elected patriarch.

The CPSU Central Committee continued to promote atheism and the elimination of religion during the remainder of Stalin’s lifetime after the 1943 concordat.[331] Stalin’s greater tolerance for religion after 1943 was limited by party machinations. Whether persecutions after World War II were more aimed at certain sections of society over and above detractors is a disputed point.

There isn’t much there to idolize. He used the church as a tool. He was not a good man, that he did not believe is a matter of coincidence and is not a causal relationship. Before we stop, let’s remember what the church did which was much like Stalin. The killing by the church was done in the name of a god. The killing done by Stalin was not done in ‘the belief in no gods’. Do you idolize the Popes?

Wikipedia on Zedung:

Actually, there isn’t much about religion where Zedung is concerned, except this:

The worst of the famine was steered towards enemies of the state.[182] As Jasper Becker explains:

“The most vulnerable section of China’s population, around five per cent, were those whom Mao called ‘enemies of the people‘. Anyone who had in previous campaigns of repression been labeled a ‘black element’ was given the lowest priority in the allocation of food. Landlords, rich peasants, former members of the nationalist regime, religious leaders, rightists, counter-revolutionaries and the families of such individuals died in the greatest numbers.”[183]

Basically, any anti-religious effort was part of a greater political agenda. Oh my, poor cleric got treated poorly like everyone else. What is the state of religion in China? Hmmm Doesn’t look like the godliest place on Earth, at least not for monotheists. It’s kind of a red herring to compare Zedung’s non-belief to your standard gnu-atheist of today.  Again, idolizing such a character would require admiration for more than a lack of belief.

Why don’t you ask a sensible question like “do you idolize Christopher Hitchens?” No, I guess you wouldn’t do that because then you’d have to refute what he has done and you can’t do that, can you? No, it’s far better to throw up strawman arguments and pretend that you’re clever.

Do you, dear believer, idolize Hitler? He was doing his god’s work. Do you idolize the Popes? Do you idolize Joshua? Do you idolize Moses? Do you … never mind because you’re not going to give a coherent answer anyway, are you? Of course, if you want to answer, by all means make use of the comments section. We’re listening.

12) Why do atheists offend us religious people, especially Catholics?

Is there really any reason to answer a question for which there is no better answer than it was as easy as breathing, and just as unavoidable. “you religious people” seem to take offence at anything which is not directly supportive of your delusions. The various governments of the world guarantee many rights but the right to not be offended is not one of them. Read it again. You do not have the right to be not offended. It has been shown that just the word Atheist is offensive to religious people. Our very existence offends you to the point you have to speak out about it, at which point many of us wonder how you managed to survive long enough to learn to speak. I wish I could say that it was a genuine surprise but I’ve become tainted – religious people are all to eager to tell others what offends them without ever stopping to think how offensive they are in doing so. For the Christians who are reading: Love your neighbor as yourself. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. And then there is this:

Matthew 6:1-34 ESV / 78 helpful votes

“Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. “Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. …

Perhaps the Christians among us might take note from their own holy text. I’m not going to hold my breath because I have learned that being Christ-like is the last thing they actually want to do. It would mean giving up their possessions and helping the needy and so on, things that they really aren’t very good at when it comes to getting your hands dirty.

What was the question again?

13) Atheists, why don’t  you have faith?

By this, dear theist, I presume (as I must) that you are asking why we don’t have blind faith. Why don’t we believe in what has no credible evidence? Why are we not gullible? Why do we require evidence before believing? Why don’t we just give our money to any jackass that says they are going to use it to help the world? Why don’t we have faith that a non-existent god will help us? Why don’t we have faith in a god who set up the original sin racket and created hell to torture those who don’t fall for the gambit? After refining the question a bit, I’m going to simply ask: why do _you_ have faith? It profits you nothing. It requires you adhere to doctrine that you are unable to adhere to. It requires a lifetime of hard work, failing all the way, for the promise of an eternity of slavery to some entity that you’ve never even met.  Why do you have faith?

14) Don’t atheists rely on faith because they can’t prove god doesn’t exist?

No is the short answer but again I’ll assume that you wanted something more. It is not faith that the atheist sees. It is the complete lack of credible evidence for the claims of monotheism they see. I don’t have to prove that a god does not exist to say that I don’t know but the evidence does not match the claims therefore I discount the claims… leaving me with no reason to think that gods can exist, never  mind that one does. The simple truth of the matter is that believers have no proof that their god exists so they MUST have faith. They are not being honest with themselves or others but claim faith as a virtue. It’s not. Faith is the belief in that which has no evidence. No, none of the examples that apologists use are applicable. Yes, I have faith that the Sun will appear to rise in the morning, as it has done for millions of years. This definition of faith is based on previous examples, experience, and credible evidence about the probability of a future event. The blind faith required to say that a god exists and that the only god that exists is the one that you believe in and that god is exactly as you believe it to be is a huge leap into delusional territory.

A theist cannot show that the RCC version of god is wrong and their own right, nor the Muslim version of god is wrong and their own right yet they will act like their version is the only one possible and accuse non-believers of being perverse in thought because the non-believer does not believe with blind faith in their personal version of a creator deity. They should ask themselves this question because they cannot prove the gods of other religions do not exist.

I think it rather silly (wow, that’s being kind) that I would be asked to do something for which they themselves cannot do. That is why I don’t have faith. My personal world view is based on logic, reason, and evidence… not fairy tales and magic.

15) Why do atheists celebrate Christmas?

This is one of the most ignorant questions ever asked. Yes there damn well are stupid questions. This is one of them. The ONLY thing about the winter festival celebrations that is about the Christian Christ is the manger scene and all sane Christian theologians will admit that December 25th was not the day he was supposedly born. The inconsistencies and contradictions in the Christian bible regarding the birth of their Christ is staggering. That anyone could study it and still believe that December 25th is the day their deity was born is beyond belief. It’s beyond faith. There are hundreds and thousands of web sites which will inform you that the winter holiday has a tradition of pagan flavor that goes back long before Christians decided to take over the holiday.

Lets see what people say about the hoildays:

 

 

 

This explanation is as good as any. It’s from wiki.answers.com

Christmas Beginnings

Christmas or “Christ’s Mass,” the celebration of Jesus Christ’s birth, began in European and Middle Eastern Christendom in the 3rd Century. These early celebrations, feasts, or “Masses” were not standardized or widely held. It is thought that the early Christians did not widely celebrate the birth of Jesus. This is most likely true since the primary focus was on His life, crucifixion, and particularly His resurrection (Easter).

There certainly were some early celebrations. Early writings including a “feast calendar” written in 243AD indicate that there were some celebrations in the third century and perhaps in the second century. Christmas celebrations did not gain widespread prominence however until the Middle Ages or starting from around 400AD.

These celebrations began and occurred in the areas where Christianity started and spread, the areas around the Mediterranean, including the Middle East, North Africa, southern Europe.

Christmas day, December 25, is not necessarily the actual date of Christ’s birth. The true date may not be known because we lack enough information to pinpoint it precisely. (Beware that there are many who claim to have calculated the actual date and are most likely no more accurate than December 25.) Other dates including December 25 were used for this feast.

December 25 was settled on by the early church for reasons that are not absolutely clear (but there are some logical reasons for that date). There were pagan celebrations on and around December 25th. There were pagan holidays year round.

No one can be absolutely certain of the exact day of Christ’s birth. An early winter date is as reasonable a guess as any and December 25th has been the frontrunner for eighteen centuries.

There are many theories surrounding Christmas, such as the belief that it was created simply to convert pagans and/or replace the pagan celebrations around the winter solstice. The problem with these theories is two-fold. First, there is a lack of evidence. There was no big push in early church to create a birthday celebration for Christ. Of course, the church was and is “in the business” of spreading Christianity so there is no doubt that the early church fathers wanted pagans to convert and wanted celebrations to honor God.

Second, pagan worship practices were seasonal and on-going. That is, almost any date or time frame could be said to be a pagan “Holy” day. That Christian Holy Days would clash with and even replace pagan days was inevitable.

In short, Christmas began in the early areas of Christendom in the 2nd or 3rd Centuries.

It is also Jesus Christ’s Birthday
Actually it is possible to approximately determine when Jesus’ birth was. First of all the Gospel of Matthew that Jesus’ birth occurred before the death of Herod the Great (Matthew 2:15), which occurred in the spring of 4 BC (or BCE) so Jesus’s birth most likely occurred in 5 BCE. secondly the Gospel of Luke records that Zachariah, John the Baptist’s father, was serving in the Temple as a priest of the Division of Abijah, which was the 8th of 24 priestly divisions. This service would have ended around May 20th 6 BC. This would have resulted in a likely birth of John the Baptist around the end of February 5 BC, and Jesus birth would have likely occurred near the end of August or the first week of September 5 BC. In any case Jesus was not born on Dec. 25. That date was chosen for Christmas because it was the date when the Winter Solstice occurred. THis date was widely celebrated as the birth date of the Persian sun god Mithras, who was widely worshipped in the Roman Empire, particularly among soldiers. The Emperor Constantine was among those who worshiped Mithras. When the chucrch became flooded with pagan converts, a huge problem arose. The converted pagans did not want to give up the Winter Solstice festival as it was a time of much celebrating. The church basically followed the old saying “If you can’t beat them, join them” and decreed that December 25 should not be celebrated as the birth date of the sun god, but rather as the birth date of the Son of God. Christmas is a pagan holiday and the fact that virtually all of the popular customs observed on this date are of pagan origin confirms that fact.

We celebrate it because it is OUR holiday, not yours. We celebrate it because it is fun. We celebrate it because it is a time of family gathering. We celebrate the winter season because we effing want to. Next question!

————————–

This is getting a bit too long for reading in one sitting, so I’ll stop here and continue in another post. I would like to say that I hope these posts serve as a call to recite facts and discuss facts, not just the sound bites. These questions and ideas are very important and deserve the time and effort it takes for us to discuss the facts, not just quick sound bites. Truth requires effort in most cases. It is often enough not readily apparent or intuitive. This is why we have great thinkers like Einstein et al who push our species forward through much hard effort to work out the details. Try to give their effort the credit it deserves by talking facts rather than sound bites.

Next up, my own personal list of questions for monotheists, especially those that espouse NT Christianity or Jesus worship etc.

Thanks for reading. These posts have been long.

Advertisements
  1. Thank you for writing this. I’m having difficulty taking life seriously at the moment and mean no disrespect by this ridiculous reply …

    People who believe ridiculous, outdated things cannot maturely give or receive ridicule. Like a deluded ex sex goddess who has let herself go but not comes to terms with it … Make a comment around her like “look at that poor shar pei over there” … Though you were making an innocent, unrelated comment, and certainly not comparing the creature’s face to hers, she may respond with something like, “fuck you, stinky old man balls.” Hurtful and unwarranted.

  2. This, this is the state of humanity. It has been so since the times we were living in the trees. We seek meaning and stature because it eases the pain. Consciousness is a curse in more ways than one. Life is not to be taken seriously beyond the thought that this is it. This one chance to experience and learn and be. Pettiness and drama are for those that do not understand, who think that there is some gain to be made in being more than those they observe by their own measure of what is good. Life is. We are. Nothing more is certain. We can dream of meaning and love but it fails to fulfill yet a single moment of connection with another living being holds all that we have ever hoped to gain… and then it is gone again. Life is not fair. It will never be. Fairness is a paradigm invented by those who wish for more and a poorly thought out world view according to those that have what they want. Look around you, for if society collapses, which among your tribe will survive? Will you? Is your worth contingent on the existence of others, or do you stand alone?

    I find no disrespect in your reply. In fact I find kinship.

    • Well … good. Damn it.

      Good Damn, everyone. Since there is no hell, perhaps we can change the meaning of that word.

  3. This is the load of trollop I (you and everyone else) got yesterday, indirectly mind you, a comment i came across on another persons blog:

    “Those atheists on John’s blog believe we have no purpose, life is indifferent and we have no soul. To me that seems like the future and our evolution to a higher awareness is not a worthwhile pursuit.”

    I wonder if it was the photo of me eating a fresh baby on my About page which gave it away?

    • What they fail to understand (because they do not leave enough will for themselves to try. thanks to God.) is that we cannot even BEGIN to create purpose or meaning until we accept our insignificance. There’s nothing indifferent about willfully shedding delusions …

      It saddens me that they think that even wanting a soul is a positive thing. “Higher awareness” begins in our neurons.

    • I love this quote from Bertrand Russell’s “The Conquest of Happiness,” because of how he uses the word “soul” …

      “A man who has once perceived, however temporarily and however briefly, what makes greatness of soul, can no longer be happy if he allows himself to be petty, self-seeking, troubled by trivial misfortunes, dreading what fate may have in store for him.The man capable of greatness of soul will open wide the windows of his mind, letting the winds blow freely upon it from every portion of the universe. He will see himself and life and the world as truly as our human limitations will permit; realizing the brevity and minuteness of human life, he will realize also that in individual minds is concentrated whatever of value the known universe contains. And, he will see that the man whose mind mirrors the world becomes in a sense as great as the world.”

      Spring that on hatin’ mother f’r next time.

      • Love it!

      • Dude, thanks for that. I’m posting on that quote alone today. It’s inspiring.

        • Awesome. Glad to hear it. You will present it with more clarity than I am capable.

          Should you throw in some brackets …? Like [person] instead of man … [itself] instead of himself … [we] instead of he …?

          Not making a request … just throwing that out there …don’t want to leave out the females. Plus, perhaps “he” and “she” is a little egotistical, no? Why are we not subject to “it”? I am not afraid of being an it. I like the idea of sharing “it” with other animals and even inanimate objects.

          Why are we like, “shhhhh, It, I am not you — you are full of shit.”

        • I was hoping to see where you’d go with this quote.

          I received some opposition on my use of it from someone who was trying to compare B.R. to Thomas Jefferson. Suggesting that it’s easy for privileged people to say smart, eloquent things.

          My response was something to the effect of …

          First of all, I don’t suggest that anyone should confuse poetic wisdom with logical truth. Such is the mistake that people love to make with the bible.

          2ndly, a person’s status or decisions in life should not detract from the objective truth that we can derive from their words (poetic or logical). If a homeless person says something of value, then we’ve got to give credit. If a rich person says something of value, then we’ve got to give credit. If SATAN said something of value, then we’d have to give credit.

          Even if a child mutters something exceptional, we can’t say, “well, what does a child know? I won’t believe a word that kid says till they’ve got all of their pubic hair.”

          • Well, now you can see: https://myatheistlife.wordpress.com/2013/02/20/my-world-view-what-it-means-to-truly-live/
            Thanks for the inspiration.

            • oh, I got it. well done.

  4. The atheist/Stalin/Hitler/Mao is always one of the first things thrown up in the “Who killed More Humans Contest.”

    Thus if Stalin/Hitler/Mao were atheists, then all atheist have genocidal tendencies no morals and no ethics.

    Yawn…thank the gods Yahweh only wiped out almost every living thing bar Noah only once, hey? 🙂

    • Some days, I wonder how much intelligence that YHWH has. We might have lost any number of great minds to stupidity over time but killing everyone but one family is certain to have destroyed greatness in pursuit of perfection. What a fucking idiot.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: