Nathan Bond's TART Remarks

Religion: Respect? Ridicule!

Revisiting “Does Yahwe Exist?”

with 57 comments

He wrote it in 2003.

I read again Jaco Gericke’s doctoral thesis Does Yahwe Exist these holidays.

I am reluctantly revising my decision to shut the hell up about religion – because it just ain’t worth any trouble – because Gericke’s dissertation is so damn good.

I rate it with that thing Epicurus said… the thing no-one ever did answer yet:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

I wrote a review of Does Yahwe Exist? many years ago.

Here it is again:

Having accepted Gericke’s vantage and his acknowledgement of particular possible objections from conservative, critical and radical scholars, I take issue with “Does Yahweh Exist” on two counts: approach and epistemological desirability, if not validity.

The Devil’s Advocate (a somewhat dubious position given that “God” is being argued) is someone who takes the worse side just for the sake of argument. The Devil’s Advocate, specifically in Roman Catholic cant, is the ultimate defender. I cannot but object to this approach.

Gericke apologises profusely for any crisis of belief on account of reading the thesis (of a third party Devil’s Advocate). He warns against erroneous deductions regarding personal attitude towards his third personae’s “acerbic atheism”. He hopes and prays (to the god that does not exist?) that someone might refute the third party’s case against realism. He is forever trapped between the burning bush and the burning bridge.

It was, I think, the “Ugly”, he of the Hollywood Western “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly”, who shot a man from a tub, and quipped over the dead body, “If you want to talk, talk; if you want to shoot, shoot.” Indeed. If you want to criticize, criticize, and don’t be mealy-mouthed or contrite about it.

Richard Dawkins once were supremely offended when he learned that the opposing speaker in an Evolution/Creation debate was in fact an evolutionist hoping to clarify her own position by speaking to Creationism. Dawkins could not abide that such an important issue as scientific integrity be negated to an exercise in debating technique. That theologians appear at ease with such food fights is perhaps a supreme indication of theology’s folly.

I think this analogy apposite: A senior sales executive at Acme Inc. discovers by meticulous market research that the corporation’s supreme product, the Silver Bullet MRK IV, is but a placebo – not a single werewolf kill has ever been confirmed. The executive is discomfited and reports comprehensively to his superiors. A loyal team member of irreproachable standing, the executive endeavours not to offend sensibilities and even expresses the almost certain hope that some peer might soon be able to indicate, by more market research, that the devastating report is erroneous.

Acme continues unabatedly to ship the MRK IV, and to guarantee werewolf kills. And an unsuspecting public continues to entrust their very lives to Acme’s product. Acme continues as if nothing of any importance has happened.

The Business World, and the Scientific World, will not abide such atrocious behaviour. But then again, theology probably does not matter much, as is indicated by its own champions. This indifference, more than conclusive argument and creative writing, confirms the nullity of “Yahweh”.

The futility of the arrant amalgam of ontological philosophy and biblical criticism may well be platitudinously obvious, but I remain concerned with the question of whether a literary construct can be subjected to some distorted griotic verisimilitude. Can story characters, cartoons, be subjected to falsification? It can. But should it?

The conclusion, “… therefore Yahweh does not exist” necessarily imparts subsistence to “Yahweh” in order that “Yahweh” can be referred to and his existence denied. This offends against a sense of reality which is to be preserved even in the most abstract disciplines. The “subsistence” notion creates a menagerie of ontological monsters.

All knowledge is but an inference from personal sensation, and philosophy, the love of wisdom, exists foremost to discipline thought, to reflect reality as accurately as possible – making philosophy and science natural allies.

It is a moot point, for example, whether Shakespeare has an “impossible narrator’s perspective” when his Horatio addresses the royal phantasma of Elsinore, “Stay, illusion. If thou hast any sound or use of voice, Speak to me.”

My affinity for the Bard compels me to press my point by indicating that the prick-eared child with crooked grin, one Puck, never could, and never did, “put a girdle round the earth… in forty minutes.”

No treatise concluding “… therefore Lady Mac Beth does not exist” will curtail, for even a moment, my relish of Her Ladyship’s bloody pun: “Infirm of purpose! Give me the daggers. The sleeping and the dead are but as pictures; t’is the eye of childhood that fears a painted devil. If he do bleed, I’ll gild the faces of the grooms withal, for it must seem their guilt.”

Why, o why, can not the Bible simply be savoured for the acme of literature that it is – a select compilation of pre-scientific documents depicting warts and all human traits: loyalty and prejudice; belief and disbelief; despair and expectation; hope and desperation; joy and sorrow – regaled from the distant past, vested with the knowledge and insight of particular times, without espying the Draconian, the Gordian, and the Permian behind each and every inflection?!

Frankly, even a perfunctory scan of the Old Testament identifies Yahweh as a jealous, vindictive and homicidal ogre of quite stupendous obstinacy. Spawned of the noisome agglomeration of ignorance, mental faineance and irrational fear, Yahweh has the manners and the morals of a mollycoddled minor. No measure of exegetical contortion and hermeneutical prevarication can deny that Yahweh is an embarrassment to rational people. Yahweh has no standing in the 21st Century.

This ideogenous Yahweh, like his multitudinous localised peers over the breadth of time immemorial, was spawned of the early human terror of origin, of the grotesque, of the rumble of panic from the fault line of existence. Human ignorance raised god, evolving human understanding can raze god.

It is outrageous to impart subsistence to this utilitarian conception created by fear and nourished by ignorance, clothed in the vestiges of fanatic deceit, worshiped by weakness, preserved by credulity; supported by custom and tyranny – a bespoke chimera in service of psychedelic human experience: a cheap analgesic; a ready hallucinogenic.

Clothing the most elaborate Cartoon of all time, beyond even the constructs of a Rube Goldberg, with subsistence, confirms theology’s mortifying position on the eitchen midden of Academe.

Having stated my objection to the very provenance of this well authored and well argued tome, I shall now invoke my almost uncanny, and most regrettable instinct for intellectual suicide and assert that Gericke’s postulate is of extreme importance to theology.

By constructing a cumulative argument against realism out of the arguments from theological pluralism, unorthodox theology, polymorphic projection, mythology and syncretism, fictitious cosmography, fictitious history and meta-textual history, Gericke engages a traditionalist, fundamentalist (behoudende; verkrampte in deference to Wimpie de Klerk) mentality, inasmuch as such individuals are exposed to the text, by their own rules of engagement, and secures, by, an admittedly terpsichorean, analogy, the cup in an away match. For this, Gericke deserves praise abundant. In fact, Gericke eliminates “God” on two counts – by committed research; by indifference to the conclusion.

The foremost business philosopher and infotainer, Tom Peters, in whose company I find myself more naturally at home, says in his unique hellfire way, “Change? Change! Yes, we’ve almost all, finally, embraced the notion that ‘change is the only constant.’ Well, sorry. Forget change! The word is feeble. Keep saying ‘revolution.’ If it doesn’t roll easily off your tongue, then I suggest you have a perception problem – and, more to the point, a business or a career problem. What we do. What we make. How we work. Each is the subject of nothing less than revolution.”

Our world needs Voltaire’s theologian: “The more he became truly wise, the more he distrusted everything he knew.”

In epistemology propositions which seem to breed paradoxes are to be cleaned up by being shown to be misleadingly expressed.

The object of philosophy is to respond to the intellectual bewitchment of the bewildered self by establishing contextual atpeacement, maturing contentment through linguistic expression of an afferent empirical model of “being”: ataraxis by evolving insight affords peace of mind even under conditions of anxiety.

A “cognitive ontogenesis” is demanded, triggered by a non-intuitive, anti-metaphysical temper; developed by observation (seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling and tasting), expression (making statements describing observations) and evaluation (subjecting comparative expressions to falsification); matured by a preparedness, a qui vive, to calibrate insight continuously because observation is limited by physical imperfection, expression by linguistic lacunae and evaluation by prejudice.

Evaluation is ultimately an exercise in comparing expressions, the plural initially indicating that different models of understanding can coexist when they cannot be translated one into the other until elimination by falsification, or rejection through the impossibility of falsification, reduce parallel models to a single best fit approximation of exactitude – the quality of being marked by strict and particular and complete accordance with the speciating falsification remnant.

Without god, theology can raise its chagrined head. Without god, theology can become relevant. Without god, theology can contribute to an ordered community. Without god, theology can take its place as an academic discipline in its own right.

Without god believers can face up to the crucial question: Why do I believe? What is faith? And what makes a life of faith meaningful? What value does faith add to life in the 21st century?

Science does not address this question. Philosophy can at best evaluate this question. Theology, if it is to remain relevant in this age, will have to find a legitimate response to the reality that ordinary people face in this day and age.

A non-existent god makes theology a misnomer, to be sure. Perhaps Homology – for lack of an immediately appropriate alternative noun – should rise to take a place among the great knowledge systems of the world.

As theology becomes Homology, as theologians become homologians, a groundswell of positive energy shall emerge from the logic of a new morality – born of Nature itself, shaped by evolving human excellence.

Religion. A strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny. We can hardly hope for a community where religion becomes extinct, but we can stop behaving as if religion deserves respect.

Said another cartoon character, Lt. Commander Worf, of the Starship Enterprise, “We killed all our Klingon gods centuries ago. They were more trouble than they were worth.”

Get your copy of Does Yahwe Exist? here.

HOME

Written by Nathan Bond

January 5, 2014 at 09:25

Posted in Religion must go!

57 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Prrof, jy maak my na Hans verlang. Hy was entertaining in sy bygelofies. Jy is bloot vervelig

    shazee

    December 25, 2014 at 08:03

  2. Hey Proffie, where’s our sermon this morning? You know, the one that’s the same as all the others, except for the date. C’mon, c’mon, what’s the delay? We need our daily drivel fix!

    Con-Tester

    December 24, 2014 at 07:46

  3. Bwahahahahahahahaaa!!! Proffie Piet “Profanity” Stassen strikes yet again with the same load of ripe old Holey Babble horse apples!

    Run out of cogent things to say, eh Stassen? Mind you, you’ve never actually offered anything cogent to begin with, just fanciful horse apples, so this addiction to mindless repetition is understandable. Autism can be a real bitch, though. Do you also get cranky and hysterical when someone tries to take your toys away?

    Con-Tester

    December 23, 2014 at 09:40

  4. INVITATION STILL STANDS ON 23 December 2014

    Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
    John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
    John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
    John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
    John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
    John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
    John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
    John 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
    John 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
    1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
    1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
    1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
    Mark 8 :38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

    JESUS CHRIST STILL SAVES TODAY!
    [TOMORROW MAY BE TOO LATE … AND THE CLOCK IS TICKING].

    [Acknowledgements: King James Version/www.e-sword.net]

    Piet Stassen

    December 23, 2014 at 09:23

  5. Bwahahahahahaaa, Proffie Piet “Profanity” Stassen strikes again with another load of especially ripe Holey Babble horse apples!

    Actually, they’re exactly the same horse apples he’s dished up before. It would be really good to know how much of your brain you have to be missing to keep vomiting up the same asinine drivel repeatedly. It’s gotta be more that 80% because if you’ve got 20% or more brain function left, that’s enough to realise when you’re poeping against thunder.

    Upshot: Invitation declined (with a great, big horse laugh). Yet again.

    Con-Tester

    December 22, 2014 at 22:00

  6. INVITATION STILL STANDS ON 22 December 2014

    Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
    John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
    John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
    John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
    John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
    John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
    John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
    John 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
    John 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
    1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
    1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
    1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
    Mark 8 :38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

    [Acknowledgements: King James Version/www.e-sword.net]

    JESUS CHRIST STILL SAVES TODAY [TOMORROW MAY BE TOO LATE … AND THE CLOCK IS TICKING].

    Piet Stassen

    December 22, 2014 at 20:15

  7. Just as expected, Proffie Piet “Profanity” Stassen continues unabated to spray his foul intellectual diarrhoea into the indifferent void. Clearly St Augustine’s admonitions are lost on this cerebral giant among men, probably because they are quite hard to follow when your brain is so thoroughly pickled in god sauce that the only thing left for you is to carry on making a wrinkly old poes of yourself with curly orange hair and a big red nose. And of course 1600-year-old criticisms can safely be drowned out by the din of beating the same lamebrain drum well past the point of soporific tedium if you’re dim enough to think that it’ll result in people buying your juvenile stupidities.

    So, let’s see now. Ah, here we are — an apt characterisation by Robert Heinlein (from If This Goes On–)—

    … From my point of view, a great deal of openly expressed piety is insufferable conceit… Not every case – I’ve known the good and the humble and the devout. But how about the man who claims to know what the Great Architect is thinking? The man who claims to be privy to His Inner Plans? It strikes me as sacrilegious conceit of the worst sort – this character probably has never been any closer to His Trestle Board than you or I. But it makes him feel good to claim to be on chummy terms with the Almighty, it builds his ego, and lets him lay down the law to you and me. Pfui! Along comes a knothead with a loud voice, an IQ around 90, hair in his ears, dirty underwear, and a lot of ambition. He’s too lazy to be a farmer, too stupid to be an engineer, too unreliable to be a banker – but brother, can he pray! After a while he has gathered around him other knotheads who don’t have his vivid imagination and self-assurance but like the idea of having a direct line of Omnipotence. Then this character is no longer Nehemiah Scudder Piet Stassen, but the First Prophet.

    (Adapted for context.)

    Con-Tester

    October 31, 2014 at 11:06

  8. Prof. Het jy niks ingeneem van wat Con-Tester geskryf het nie? Het jy al enigiemand bekeer deur tot vervelens toe bybelversies te herhaal?

    Shazee

    October 31, 2014 at 10:37

  9. INVITATION STILL STANDS ON 31 OCTOBER 2014.

    Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
    John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
    John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
    John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
    John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
    John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
    John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
    John 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
    John 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
    1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
    1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
    1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
    Mark 8 :38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

    [Acknowledgements: King James Version/www.e-sword.net]

    JESUS CHRIST STILL SAVES … TODAY: TOMORROW MAY BE TOO LATE.
    [THE CLOCK IS TICKING].

    Piet Stassen

    October 31, 2014 at 10:00

  10. Wat het hy vir jou gese Johannes?

    Shazee

    October 31, 2014 at 09:18

  11. Augustine of Hippo in The Literal Meaning of Genesis cautions his fellow godiots—

    It often happens that even a non-Christian knows a thing or two about the earth, the sky, the various elements of the world, about the movement and revolution of the stars and even their size and distance, about the nature of animals, shrubs, rocks, and the like, and maintains this knowledge with sure reason and experience. It is offensive and ruinous, something to be avoided at all cost, for a nonbeliever to hear a Christian talking about these things as though with Christian writings as his source, and yet so nonsensically and with such obvious error that the nonbeliever can hardly keep from laughing.

    The trouble is not so much that the erring fellow is laughed at but that our authors are believed by outsiders to have held those same opinions and so are despised and rejected as untutored men, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil … How are they going to believe our books concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven when they think they are filled with fallacious writing about things which they know from experience or sure calculation?

    There is no telling how much harm these rash and presumptuous people bring upon their more prudent brethren when they begin to be caught and argued down by those who are not bound by the authority of our Scriptures, and when they then try to defend their flippant, rash, and obviously erroneous statements by quoting a shower of words from those same Sacred Scriptures, even citing from memory those passages which they think support their case, ‘without understanding either what they are saying or things about which they make assertions’ (I Tim. 1:7).

    That was about 16 centuries ago. Godiots like Proffie Piet “Profanity” Stassen have obviously learned nothing since that time, least of all about intellectual honesty. Then again, in Stassen’s odd little world, Augustine of Hippo probably features as an embarrassing old heretic, a poor misguided degenerate, sort of like the drooling Alzheimer-riddled uncle everyone’s studiously trying to pretend doesn’t exist out of morbid embarrassment.

    And of course there’s nothing you can present to pathetic dopes of Stassen’s impressive calibre that would give them pause to reassess their hilarious strategy of continuously making ever-bigger poeses of themselves by pretending knowledge they not only clearly don’t possess, but also knowledge (as “true, justified belief”) that they cannot possibly have.

    The whole thing is better slapstick than any Boswell-Wilkie clown show could ever hope to achieve, and these INVITATIONs that are perpetually STILL STANDing because TOMORROW MAY BE TOO LATE are a hoot except for the noxious stench of abject stupidity and infantile ignorance that pervades them. Clown Stassen’s autistic fascination with citing Holey Buybull verses as if they proved anything besides his incorrigibly immature delusions is the clowning glory of this buffoon’s parade to which he is treating readers. It’s almost as hilarious as his belief that his intellectually bankrupt farce will actually convert anyone with more than three brain cells to rub together.

    Then again, he is dredging for those of diminished cognitive capacity.

    Con-Tester

    October 28, 2014 at 10:31

  12. Hy bestaan….ek het nou net met Hom gepraat….

    johannes coetzee

    October 28, 2014 at 10:08

  13. Hy bestaan….ek praat gedurigdeur met hom.

    johannes coetzee

    October 28, 2014 at 10:07

  14. INVITATION STILL STANDS ON 28 OCTOBER 2014.

    Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
    John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
    John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
    John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
    John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
    John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
    John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
    John 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
    John 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
    1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
    1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
    1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
    Mark 8 :38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

    [Acknowledgements: King James Version/www.e-sword.net]

    JESUS CHRIST STILL SAVES … TODAY: TOMORROW MAY BE TOO LATE. THE CLOCK IS TICKING.

    Piet Stassen

    October 28, 2014 at 10:03

  15. INVITATION STILL STANDS ON 26 OCTOBER 2014.

    John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
    John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
    John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
    John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
    John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
    John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
    John 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
    John 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

    JESUS CHRIST STILL SAVES … TODAY: TOMORROW MAY BE TOO LATE.

    Piet Stassen

    October 26, 2014 at 12:50

  16. Fok, Malherbe, dit klink na n vreesaanjaende got wat jou bekeer het. Gaan jy ook vir ewig in die hel brand as jy hom afpis? Maar dit klink my hy is ok as hy jou toelaat om Vegas toe te gaan. Stuur vir my sy babbel. Ek wil ook vir hom bid!!

    Shazee

    October 14, 2014 at 20:42

  17. Hallo oom Piet,
    Ek skryf om te sê hoe jammer ek is oor my spelfout. Eintlik was dit meer dom vingers wat nie wou saamwerk op MCarren lughawe in Vegas nie. Weereens jammer oom. Sallie weerie.

    Maar ek wil graag by oom weet, aangesien oom duidelik ‘n slim man is – het oom al die gotte gesien wat oom so aanbid? Ek vra maar, want ek is onlangs ook bekeer, Na die almagtige Batgod. Het hom met my eie oë gesien, oom. Een aadn met volmaan nadat ek my laaste Batmancomix neergesit het, sien ek een merske skaduwee buite my kamervenster. Ek kon die buitelyne van Batgod duidelik sien en ek verbeel my (of nee, ek is seker!) hy het vir my gewink en daarna gebulder : “Ek is die ware een! Aanbid my of die ewige dood is jou voorland!” Nodeloos om te noem, ek is nou bekeer oom. Ek dog net ek noem dit aan oom, want oom klink na ‘n goeie ou en ek wille hê oom moet suffer nie.

    Malherbe

    October 14, 2014 at 14:06

  18. Wat nou prof?? Is persoonlik beledigings jou enigste reaksie? Glo jy mense was al in die hemel en het teruggekom om daarvan te vertel? Ek sal ook graag wil hoor waar jy dink die hemel is en wat julle daar gaan doen om die tyd om te kry?

    Shazee

    October 14, 2014 at 08:42

  19. Oom Piet, vergeet die typo en fokus op die punt wat ek maak. N persoon met n gesofistikeerde mediese en wetenskaplike opleiding kan aan geen beter verduideliking vir sy ervaring dink as dat hy in die hemel was nie. Se jy my of jy ook glo dat hy daar was. Ek sal graag jou antwoord wil hoor.

    Shazee

    October 13, 2014 at 18:34

  20. Proffie Piet “Profanity” Stassen defecates an especially malodorous intellectual turd—

    Miskien moet julle albei eers leer spel voordat julle jul op die gebied van die filosofie en teologie waag.

    [Translation: Perhaps you two should both first learn to spell before daring to broach the area of philosophy and theology.]

    Bwahahahahahahahaaa!!! Really now, Stassen, your shamelessly arrogant hypocrisy and laughably bankrupt bloviatory intellectual conceit are showing. You present yourself publicly as far more knowledgeable and immensely better informed on evolutionary biology and related disciplines, as well as cosmogony, than hundreds of thousands of experts in those fields who have on their side several dozen decades of dedicated study, plus mountains and inundations of evidence all converging on the same essential narrative. Meanwhile, all you have is old book and an endless supply of turbocharged superciliousness.

    And from your conceited perch on your armchair, you presume to lecture others on ignorance. This is a fine bit pungently smug vanity, particularly in view of your own laughable philosophical and theological naïveté.

    Also, didn’t your skydaddy admonish something relevant about motes, eyes and logs? Not that it really matters. You godiots always pick and choose the bits you like and flatly ignore the ones you don’t — a pretty handy approach for always being right, eh?

    ————————————————

    Nathan, there are two prior comments of mine waiting in your moderation queue.

    Con-Tester

    October 13, 2014 at 09:51

  21. 1. Shazee: Jy suggereer dat gelowiges nie onnosel is nie, maar wel “smart stuped.” Is ‘stuped’ nie eintlik veronderstel om ‘stupid’ gespel te word nie? Jou spelling is, soos jou vriend Malherbe tereg noem, uiters “frutrerend”. (Terloops Malherbe, moes dit nie ‘frustrerend’ gewees het nie?). Miskien moet julle albei eers leer spel voordat julle jul op die gebied van die filosofie en teologie waag.

    The Holy Bible says:

    Psalms 7:9 Oh let the wickedness of the wicked come to an end; but establish the just: for the righteous God trieth the hearts and reins.
    Psalms 7:10 My defence is of God, which saveth the upright in heart.
    Psalms 7:11 God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day.

    With compliments –
    Piet S.

    (Acknowledgements: Bible: King James Version / http://www.e-sword.net).

    Piet Stassen

    October 12, 2014 at 21:49

  22. Lyk my Nathan is vrek besig. Daar’s kommentaar van my wat sedert Dinsdag oggend al in die moderasie tou wag.

    Con-Tester

    October 10, 2014 at 14:52

  23. Ja Shazee, dis soms uiters frutrerend – to so ‘n mate dat ek soms voel of ek die enigste een is wat op daaglikse basis hierdie dubbekle standaarde beleef.Vit politieke korrektheid moet mens mos maar bekhou, want anders gaan jy heeldag baklei, en daarvoor is ek ook nie meer lus nie. Soms voel ek hul moet maar voortfok in hul gekkeparadys . Probleem is egter dat hul nie my kinders uitlos nie. Nee daar word gebid voort sportwedstryde en voor ‘n velduistappie (voordat jy ‘n donderse toebroodjie in jou mond mag sit). Annerdag is ek na die opedag van ‘n bekende staats hoërskool op Stellenbosch. Ek het letterlik naar geword – net daar besluit, al moet ek my laaste sent hierop uitgee, privaatskool is my kind se voorland. Hulle het meer gehamer op hul “christelike waardes” as op akademie. Het met groot bravade vertel oor hul JAM program – ek dog dit het iets met konfyt te doen, maar vind toe ui dit staan vir “Jesus and me”. Waar in hierdie wêreld sal so iets geduld word , behalwe miskien in USA se midwest? Ons volkie is oudergewoonte maar ver agter die res. Mens sou dink dat hulle ‘n les sou leer uit ons politieke verlede rakende ‘n blinde dogmatiese gevolg, maar niee, soos skape volg hul die kudde sonder om twee keer te dink of te wonder.

    Malherbe

    October 10, 2014 at 14:48

  24. Malherbe, dit is n siekte wat die mense het. Hulle is nie noodwendig onnosel nie. Bill Maher praat van die “smart stuped”. N neurochirurg wat vertel van sy besoek aan die hemel. Hy het bygekom uit n koma en die visioen gehad. Hy is n breinchirurg, for pete’s sake! Hy oorweeg nie dat hy op n trip was van chirurgiese verdowingsmiddels nie. Nee, hy vertel hoe hy gesweef het op die vlerke van vlinders en van die wonderlike kleure wat hy gesien het. Hy was in die hemel broer! Onteenseglike bewys. As iemand soos hy wat n wetenskaplike, rasionele verklaring vir sy ondervinding moet he sulke nonsens kan glo, moet ons vra wat hier aan die gang is. Soos ek se, n siekte. N virus van die brein. Hulle kan hulself nie help nie. Ek kry hulle amper jammer. Net amper.

    Shazee

    October 9, 2014 at 10:00

  25. Malherbe, yes, it’s been quiet around here.

    My own observations (not just here) lead me to believe that there is an increasing measure of desperation brewing among the evangelising godiots. Levels of religiosity have steadily and gradually declined in the West over the past few decades and our godiots are feeling a bit miffed about it. If one looks at the more recent output from centres of wilful ignorance such as Creation Ministries International, Answers in Genesis or the Discovery Institute, it soon becomes obvious that their stance is now even more rabidly radical and forcefully fundamentalist, probably in response to the “threat” of secular values simply ignoring their worldview, and thereby rendering it irrelevant and obsolete.

    For example, over the last year or so, the Discovery Institute has pretty much dropped its pretence of being a scientific body, and is now quite openly declaring alliances with various cretinist organisations.

    What those blokes will of course never admit is that they want to establish theocracies in which they exercise significant control over the nation and population. They want Crushtian versions of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia but they’re too dishonest to say so outright. And what they want most is significant political control over the thoughts and behaviour of everyone else. They are, in short, megalomaniacs at heart.

    The obvious irony is that they will desperately deny craving a stake in such temporal and material matters; instead, they’ll try and bamboozle you about it being “spiritual” and “eternal” and “transcendent” values they’re promoting. But that’s such obvious bullshit it doesn’t even deserve a smirk.

    The real threat they pose is that their continuous assault on Enlightenment values of reason, liberty, science and free enterprise. Their weapon of choice is barrage upon broadside of ignorant, antediluvian denial and ignorance. Here is a good description of that tactic…

    Con-Tester

    October 7, 2014 at 08:51

  26. A long time since I’ve been on this site. Going through the comments below I cannot help but wonder if us non-believers are not farting against thunderous loads of bullshit. Guys like Oompie Piet Profanity, simply does not grasp the concept of reason. He wants us to believe in his book of fables without questioning. To him, not to understand his fairy tail, admitting it and accepting it, is the ultimate compliment! For anyone interested in promoting common sense and the progress that would follow, this should be a clear indication that religion is not for the thinking individual and that it is a serious threat to progress. Over time I think knowledge will drive the religiots into their caves where they will suffocate and eventually die out. It might take a while, but it will happen.

    On a different topic, I cannot help finding it comical to see Christian squirm at the irony (and hypocrisy)when they site ISIS fundamentalism as a threat for common decency and progress.

    Malherbe

    October 6, 2014 at 22:54

  27. Perhaps the type of person that dices a powerful motorcycle while driving a car does so to elicit a kneejerk response from a predictable rider, who is both aware of and self indulgent in that power, which allows that driver to appreciate the powerful motorcycle.

    Does God existing always lead to a necessary suspension of the laws of logical reasoning?

    Meisie

    April 20, 2014 at 13:52

  28. Yes C-T, I know it is pointless trying to have a rational debate with godiots.
    Somebody once said something to the effect that if religious people were open to reason, there would be no religious people.
    I just cannot help myself though, I just have to throw it out there and see what they come up with. Pretty childish of me, I know, but I find it highly entertaining to read the convoluted and tortured arguments they come up with to try and convince themselves of what Mark Twain once said “they know it aint so”
    In their heart of hearts, deep down, they just have to know it is all crap, I am convinced of it. If I am wrong, and sane adults have really convinced themselves of this tripe, I think I would like to get of the planet.
    I envy you the bike though, I think I am going to pray for one. If god do not answer my prayer I will just steal one and pray for forgiveness.

    Shazee

    April 4, 2014 at 14:37

  29. REMINDER #3

    1. RED-LETTER DAY (3 APRIL 2014). Another precious day has passed since the 3 April 2014 reminder of the forgiveness of sins and Salvation offered by Jesus Christ in the Bible, provided the atheists recant, repent and accept Him as Saviour and Lord:

    [Do the math: One day extra of amassed, unconfessed sin for the headstrong atheist, and one day less left over in life for him to confess it in. The clock is ticking and the pendulum is already swinging into the red-alert danger zone with the danger increasing by the minute, especially when you are a biker in South African traffic].

    2. WARNING AGAINST THE RELIGIOUS CULT OF ATHEISM:

    “The good man out of his good treasure bringeth forth good things: and the evil man out of his evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. And I say unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.”

    – Jesus of Nazareth, Approx. 30-33 A.D.
    (Matthew 12:35-36 ASV).

    3. ALL IS NOT LOST PROVIDED THE ATHEISTS ACCEPT JESUS CHRIST AS SAVIOUR TODAY … TOMORROW MAY BE TOO LATE):

    “There is a fountain filled with blood
    Drawn from Emmanuel’s veins;
    And sinners plunged beneath that flood
    Lose all their guilty stains!”

    – William Cowper
    1731-1800.

    4. IN SPITE OF THE INSULTS, BLASPHEMY, VULGARITY & PROFANITY THE INVITATION STILL STANDS:

    “Come now, and let us reason together”, saith Jehovah: “though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.”
    (Isaiah 1:18 ASV).

    Piet Stassen
    4 April 2014

    Websites/Blogs:
    http://www.bibarcdir.blogspot.com
    http://www.buzzbell.blogspot.com
    http://www.scribd.com/PietStassen/documents
    http://www.e-sword.net [Bible references & free Bible downloads].

    evangelisasiersa

    April 4, 2014 at 10:24

  30. Shazee writes—

    … I have seen this funny argument cropping up lately that atheists are obsessed with a god that they believe not to exist. It is really quite a laugh.
    Richard Dawkins did not write a 600 page book debunking the tooth fairy…

    Shazee, what you have to realise is that godiots are entirely unfamiliar with most of the basic principles and methods of logic, as applied in discourse. Not only are they unfamiliar with them, they also couldn’t care less about learning or applying them coherently and consistently. If they did, they’d have no choice but to watch their whole imaginary house of cards get blown away by a whiff of logic but they are so besotted with their own illusory intellectual acuity that they miss what is smack-in-the-face obvious. And this is a large part of why the only thing dumber than a godiot is thinking that there can be any rational debate with a godiot.

     
    

    In the specific case of the dim-witted claim that atheists are incoherent because of an obsession with and/or anger towards something they don’t believe exists, the smack-in-the-face-obvious thing that godiots always conveniently insist on missing is the implicit reductio ad absurdum (which is why I mentioned it in a previous comment). It’s a perfectly valid piece of logical reasoning that goes like this: To determine the truth or falsity of a proposition P, check whether assuming P to be true leads to absurd consequences; if it does, then P must be false. In P = “god exists”, we have a proposition that leads, among many others, to such absurd consequences as a necessary suspension of the laws of logical reasoning, and so P must logically be false. But that’s unconvincing to godiots who go on to pull all manner of special pleading from their arses in order to save their fantasies, and then they claim victory. How laughable.

     
    

    It reminds of a more prosaic experience I have surprisingly often. I ride a powerful motorcycle but still there is the odd Golf, BMW, Porsche, Audi, Chev, Merc, etc. that thinks he actually stands a chance on pull-off from a red traffic light. When the light changes and I realise that this oke next to me wants a drag, I give the throttle half a twist, and the rest is tickets. Typically, the would-be racer is a whole lot more muted at the next traffic light. The godiots are just like those challengers but with one major difference: They just don’t know when they’ve been decisively klapped.

    Con-Tester

    April 4, 2014 at 08:35

  31. Reminder #2

    Warning Against The Religious Cult Of Atheism:

    “The good man out of his good treasure bringeth forth good things: and the evil man out of his evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. And I say unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.”

    – Jesus of Nazareth, Approx. 30-33 A.D.
    (Matthew 12:35-36 ASV).

    Piet Stassen

    Websites/Blogs:
    http://www.bibarcdir.blogspot.com
    http://www.buzzbell.blogspot.com
    http://www.scribd.com/PietStassen/documents

    There is a fountain filled with blood
    Drawn from Emmanuel’s veins;
    And sinners plunged beneath that flood
    Lose all their guilty stains!

    – William Cowper
    1731-1800.

    evangelisasiersa

    April 3, 2014 at 18:45

  32. But it is interesting that you should mention the tooth fairy………

    Shazee

    April 3, 2014 at 17:07

  33. Prof. Piet, I have seen this funny argument cropping up lately that atheists are obsessed with a god that they believe not to exist. It is really quite a laugh.
    Richard Dawkins did not write a 600 page book debunking the tooth fairy because nobody tries to tell our children in school that the tooth fairy created the universe in six days 6000 years ago.
    Nobody tells us that the tooth fairy will burn us in hell for ever if we do not believe in her and suck up to her every day of our lives.
    Nor do anybody strap dynamite packs to their wastes an blow innocents to pieces for the joy of joining the tooth fairy in paradise.
    Nobody goes to war over the tooth fairy.
    It is not the non existing god that we are obsessed with, it is the brain dead followers of this delusion that piss us of. It is the harm they cause by teaching impressionable children that is a virtue to believe a harmful delusion despite the lack of evidence, or even better, in the teeth of evidence.
    Surely you can see the difference Oom Piet?

    Shazee

    April 3, 2014 at 17:00

  34. Amusement compels me to make the following confession. Many years ago I was a committed true believer, so any of that no-true-Scotsman malarkey simply won’t fly here. Having attentively read Mark 3:28–30, Matthew 12:30–32, Luke 12:8–10, Hebrews 6:4–6 and Hebrews 10:26–29, it cannot be argued that I am unaware, either wholly or partly, of the alleged consequences of what I have said in the past, which I’m about to repeat:

    Salvation, just like your god, is a vile, fraudulent, manipulative figment foisted on your fevered and stunted imagination by other people, just as you seek to foist in on others; Jeeeebussssst! was little more than a delusional and opportunistic psychopath, albeit a charismatic one; and the holy ghost is what makes people do evil by way of the fetid stench coming off this bullshit fairy tale and hanging around the neck of humanity, weighing us all down like a useless millstone.

    Unforgivable sin, indeed. What a pitifully vacuous notion.

    Hi ho, hi ho, it’s off to Hell I go,
    With a bucket and a spade and my fireproof shade,
    Hi ho, hi ho, hi ho!

    Con-Tester

    April 3, 2014 at 15:23

  35. Warning Against The Religious Cult Of Atheism:

    “The good man out of his good treasure bringeth forth good things: and the evil man out of his evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. And I say unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.”

    – Jesus of Nazareth, Approx. 30-33 A.D.
    (Matthew 12:35-36 ASV).

    Piet Stassen

    Websites/Blogs:
    http://www.bibarcdir.blogspot.com
    http://www.buzzbell.blogspot.com
    http://www.scribd.com/PietStassen/documents

    evangelisasiersa

    April 3, 2014 at 13:14

  36. Bwaaahahahahahahahahaaa!!! What a self-serving confection of unhinged tripe our dear Proffie Piet “Profanity” Stassen manages to serve up. Obliviousness abounds in it. With just about every available informal fallacy and false claim on display, it is indeed a rare treat — and a deep peek into the puerile and deranged world of the godiot where the only known tools are flat assertion, quote mining, evasion, wilful ignorance, monotonous repetition, and shamelessness.

    Shazee, please feel free to tear this clueless and intransigent dolt a brace of new ones. Not that he’d notice, mind you, though everyone else will. I’m still shaking too much from all the laughter prompted by his latest post.

    I struggle to fathom when it will ever stop being sadly funny how any adult in the 21st century can swallow the undiluted lightweight bullshit this guy dishes up. He wouldn’t recognise a reductio ad absurdum if a red herring smacked him in the argumentum ad verecundiam with a hasty generalisation.

     
     
     
    

    😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆

    Con-Tester

    April 3, 2014 at 12:50

  37. Shazee:

    1. The evidence for God and His love (as revealed through Jesus Christ) ) is crystal clear and embarrassingly abundant. Jesus has said: “By their fruits ye shall know them!” Does the trademark bitterness, blasphemy, profanity and vulgarity of the average (cynical) atheist (just check out some of the comments on this blog!) not prove his/her lack of love, courtesy and compassion? Or his/her lack of reconciliation, friendship and fellowship with a loving Saviour? After all, a bitter fountain cannot bring forth water that is sweet. And if God did not exist, why are they mad at Him? Is it not true that atheists often talk more about God than Christians do and are absolutely obsessed with Him? Richard Dawkins is so infatuated with God (who doesn’t ‘exist’) that he even writes full-length books about Him. Do the math: What ‘scientist’ in his right mind will write a 600 page book to prove that the tooth fairy does not exist, unless he wanted to insult the tooth fairy?

    2. The evidence is there, just look for it. The Bible says:

    ” … because that which is known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested it unto them. For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse: because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened.” (Romans 1:19-21 ASV).

    3. If you do not accept the authority of the Bible (a book that has stood the test of time) by faith, what other options do you have? The ‘Qur ‘an’? The ‘Upanishads’? The ‘Book of Mormon’? The ‘I Ching’? The ‘Government Gazette’? ‘The God Delusion’? ‘Scientology’? Show me any piece of ‘sacred literature’ that can even remotely compare with the beautiful simplicity and historical veracity of the Bible .. it is probably impossible. Check out your history: There is more proof that Jesus Christ lived and did what He did than proof that Alexander The Great had ever lived, yet nobody questions the veracity of the books of history on the life of Alexander. If that is not atheistic bias of the worst kind then I don’t know what is.

    4. If you are asking for empirical scientific proof, you are asking for the impossible. God has clearly taught us (through Moses) that we will never (on Earth) be allowed to see God and live. That is not because He is mad at us, but because our physical constitutions probably will not be able to take it. We can only know God through the Scriptures and through prayer while He deals with us in daily life, and of that many people can testify, just read Dr. Lee Strobel’s testimony (‘The Case For A Creator’) of how, as an atheist, he came to Christ through the testimony of ordinary but God-honouring people. The Apostle Paul also clearly teaches that ‘Eternal things are invisible’. The Universe is visible to the naked human eye because it is a temporary structure and is going to implode (collapse) and perish (read the Apostle Peter’s epistles in the Bible).

    5. Here is the deal: How can any scientist know where God is and where to look for Him to test whether He exists or is real? Even if all the scientists in the world together had known 99% of everything there is to be known about the Universe (which they certainly don’t) God could still (theoretically) be ‘hiding’ in the 1% they they don’t yet know. Do you anyway really think God is going to allow a bunch of nerds in white overcoats with thick spectacles and dandruff problems to study Him and observe Him like an experimental lab-animal? Only an Almighty God has the authority, knowledge, education, influence, power, intelligence to ever prove the existence (or non-existence) of an Almighty God. As far as we are concerned, we do not have 100% access to the Universe (with 100% scientific insight) to prove either the (I) existence or (II) non-existence of God empirically by means of traditional measuring instruments. The person who claims that he can do that is lying to you.

    6. Nevertheless, should you ever decide to reject reason and faith as your way back to Jesus Christ who loves us and has promised the forgiveness of our sins provided we repent and put our trust in Him, bear in mind that nobody is forcing you to believe in God, to trust in Jesus or to become a Christian. Faith in God has been optional ever since Cain killed Abel and David killed Goliath, and it will remain optional until we die or Jesus comes, whichever comes first.

    7. I recommend the litmus-test for faith in Christ, as this is what I did in 1974. Like you I also used to try to be an atheist (and you should have heard the questions I rolled out to the ‘religious establishment’!):

    Go on your knees in the privacy of your own bedroom and ask Jesus directly: “Lord, I am sick and tired of all this vacillating and arguing over your existence on Internet blogs … please show me whether you exist or not. Please save my soul, forgive my sins and make me a believing child of God. If you do exist, I cannot afford to gamble with the love of an Almighty God.” (Jesus has promised that the person who will come to Him He will in no way cast out or ever reject).

    Warning Against The Religious Cult Of Atheism:

    “The good man out of his good treasure bringeth forth good things: and the evil man out of his evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. And I say unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.”

    – Jesus of Nazareth, Approx. 30-33 A.D.
    (Matthew 12:35-36 ASV).

    evangelisasiersa

    April 3, 2014 at 11:06

  38. Proffie Piet “Profanity” Stassen as evangelisasiersa vomits up the following especially malodourous intellectual turd—

    Don’t try to understand it … if it could be understood or comprehended by our pathetic little brains then He would not be God.

    And there you have it, dear international readers/Internet surfers for the benefit of whom I am replying in English. There you have exemplified the shameless hypocrisy, the scurrilous imposture, the egregious anti-intellectualism and the unadorned arrogance of the evangelising godiot. He posits that the object of his faith is essentially ineffable and characterised by “mysterious ways” that are unknowable to “our pathetic little brains”. He offers exactly fuck-all basis, reason, argument or evidence for this presumptuous claim, yet he expects that you must just accept it on his say-so, bolstered by nothing more than convenient quote-mines from an old book of fairy tales. More than that, by posing as a figure of profound erudition, he wants you to follow his example and believe exactly as he does because anything that conflicts with his view is rejected as heresy. That’s the scurrilous imposture, the egregious anti-intellectualism and the unadorned arrogance part of this clown’s blather.

    But the conceit goes further still. The shameless hypocrisy part inheres in the logical absurdity of asserting that something is, one the one hand, incomprehensible and, on the other hand, then proceeding to dress it up as some kind of useful explanation for observables. In case it’s not obvious, an explanation can’t invoke the mysterious otherwise it is an evasion, not an explanation. To pretend not only that one can make any reasonable statements about the unknowable, but also that this unknowable serves a useful epistemological purpose is nothing short of having your cake and eating it too. It is a pathetic farce that attempts to make an utter mockery of reason. In short, if you assert that your “god” is unknowable and you desire to be logically coherent, you had better stop right there and not say anything more about him because, after all, he’s unknowable and so anything goes. But the godiot with his marinated brain continues undaunted to eject intellectual turds onto a growing heap, and thus is evidently incapable of acknowledging this cognitive dissonance, let alone understanding it, and that’s why mockery, ridicule, derision and laughter will continue to feature large in deconstructing this childish nonsense they’re punting.

    Con-Tester

    April 3, 2014 at 08:35

  39. Yes, but the only authority you are quoting is a book, once again. Please give me something that resembles evidence. Rational evidence, as opposed to wishfull thinking or “feelings” in your “heart”.

    Shazee

    April 2, 2014 at 21:27

  40. Shazee … I am replying to you in English for the benefit of international readers/Internet surfers:

    1. God is the great (timeless) ‘I AM’:

    Exodus 3:14 ASV And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

    2. Jesus of Nazareth confirms that He (Jesus) also is the timeless ‘I AM’:

    John 8:56 ASV Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad.
    John 8:57 ASV The Jews therefore said unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
    John 8:58 ASV Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am.

    3. Debriefing: If God is really the God that the Bible claims He is, then He certainly is not subject to (or the prisoner of) the physical constraints defining this Universe’s four-dimensional space-time continuum, a space-time continuum He Himself had created in the beginning in the first place. Don’t try to understand it … if it could be understood or comprehended by our pathetic little brains then He would not be God. (P.S. ‘Four-dimentional space-time continuum’ = Length x Breadth x Height x Time).

    evangelisasiersa

    April 2, 2014 at 19:39

  41. Oom Piet, ek sien jy se my vraag oor waar god vandaan kom is kinderagtig.
    Ne? En jou verduideliking dat hy nog altyd was, gebasseer op n boek wat deur
    bronstydperk bokwagters geskryf is, sonder enige verdere rasionele bewys is volwasse????

    Shazee

    April 2, 2014 at 18:42

  42. 1. JESUS STILL SAVES TODAY; WHO KNOWS …TOMORROW MAY BE TOO LATE!

    Why do the nations rage, and the peoples meditate on a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers plot together, against Jehovah and against His anointed, saying, Let us break their bands in two and cast away their cords from us. He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; Jehovah shall mock at them. (Psalms 2:1-4 MKJV, http://www.e-sword.net).

    2. ‘RECOMMENDED READING FOR ATHEISTS, AGNOSTICS, EVOLUTIONISTS, CREATIONISTS & STUDENTS OF THE BIBLE’ (ePamphlet):

    3. ‘TEST YOUR EVOLUTION KNOWLEDGE’ (Questionnaire):

    4. ‘WHY DARWINISM (EVOLUTION) DOES NOT MAKE SENSE’ (ePamphlet):

    5. BERTRAND RUSSELL REVISITED (eBook):

    6. THE SCIENCE THAT EVOLVED INTO A FAIRY TALE (eBook):

    7. THE BIBLE (Free downloads):

    http://www.e-sword.net

    Free, downloadable eBooks to discerning readers who love GOD and love TRUTH … with the compliments of:

    Piet Stassen.
    South Africa.

    O the blood of Jesus … it cleanseth whiter than the snow!

    evangelisasiersa

    March 21, 2014 at 01:09

  43. FOLLY WAVES!

    “Come now, and let us put on a really good show of reasoning together,” says the poseur: “though your dimness be as murk, it shall remain as dense as osmium; though it be dark like darkness, it shall be as coal.” (Con-Tester 3:20 QED, http://whywontgodhealamputees.com)

    (Our favourite purveyor of ridiculous tripe relentlessly graces us with more of his pitiful proselytising. He must think this blog and its commenters constitute some divine test of his fealty. Or maybe he really has lots of faith that these hilarious stupidities he spouts withg such haughty assurance have some persuasive weight. What a slow joke, watching somebody keep dropping a bowling ball on their foot. Or maybe he just likes my prose but is too much of a poltroon to say so. And notice how this dopey dolt keeps changing the subject, no doubt steeped in the delusion that nobody notices. Sad and pathetic, really. But still funny.)

    Con-Tester

    March 20, 2014 at 20:23

  44. JESUS SAVES!

    “Come now, and let us reason together”, saith Jehovah: “though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” (Isaiah 1:18 ASV, http://www.e-sword.net)

    evangelisasiersa

    March 20, 2014 at 19:43

  45. STUPIDITY RAVES!

    “There is a fountain filled with childish asininity,
    drawn from every religiot’s brain;
    And believers eagerly plunging themselves beneath that flood,
    willingly jettison all their functioning faculties!”

    – Con-Tester, 19??-20??.

    (Trust a dim-witted evangelical BS-monger not only to hold forth rhetoric that is more than 200 years old as compelling, but also to screw up “there” and “their”. Too hilarious.)

    Con-Tester

    March 20, 2014 at 18:04

  46. JESUS SAVES!

    “There is a fountain filled with blood,
    drawn from Immanuel’s veins;
    And sinners plunged beneath that flood,
    lose all there guilty stains!”

    – William Cowper, 1731-1800.

    evangelisasiersa

    March 20, 2014 at 17:50

  47. Dear Proffie Piet “Prophanity” Stassen

    1. ‘COMMON BELIEVER’ HOKUM.
    Thanks for confirming that the calcified cretinist/fundamentalist godiot brain is so pervasively infused with the nonsensical notion of faith’s primacy that it is wholly impervious to anything reasonable. Yet it arrogates a shabby semblance of reason wherever it can in order only to distort and panelbeat the facts to its own ends. But the owner of such a defective brain is also the most outrageous of hypocrites. He cites, “Ask, and it shall be given you” (Matt 7:7, KJV) and then goes and buys petrol for his car, food for his table and medication when he’s ill. When challenged, his calcified cretinist/fundamentalist godiot brain ejects another intellectual turd: “Oh, but it doesn’t work that way, it’s symbolic!” without the slightest clue of the comically flatulent self-contradiction just spouted. Too precious.

    2. THE FANTASY OF A LIFETIME.
    Here is a fact of LIFE that may interest you:
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people.” (House, MD). Then of course there’s the idea that there’s a magic man in the world whose son Jesus is anything more than a powerless remnant of a corpse. What a crock of unadorned bovine ordure! The sheer childish inanity of this 2,000-plus-year-old fairytale is astonishing in its ability to infect and putrefy the minds of adults in the 21st century. More, such adults then proceed to compound their conceit by pretending knowledge (“Knowledge,” for fuck’s sake; they clearly don’t even know what that word means!) of the unknowable, the incomprehensible and the plainly absurd. Yet more, their smug vanity soon billows into full-blown arrogant arsehole mode where they fancy themselves experts on scientific matters that they really haven’t any understanding of, or indeed any genuine interest in studying meaningfully. The products of these utterly laughable ejaculations of hidebound, wilful ignorance they parade around as “superior argument.” What a grand old hoot! More like “inferior baloney.” They are, in short, the very embodiment of the intellectual turds they so love to exhibit, oblivious of the faecal essence thereof. Witlessness on stilts, carrying stupidity and arrogance on steroids, trumpeting nonsense on crutches.

    3. INVITATION.
    Feel free to keep your juvenile fantasies and wishful intellectual turds to yourself. Their only use is to assuage any incipient or lingering doubts the already-committed believer might have. They do so as toys in a sort of onanistic I’ll-stroke-yours-and-you-stroke-mine. Every rational fence-sitter will be repulsed by the suppurating immorality of such manipulations. The alternative is to invite ever more ridicule, derision and laughter. Your choice.

    Con-Tester

    March 20, 2014 at 09:26

  48. Piet Stassen – As Paasfees nie oorspronlik ‘n Christelike fees is nie, hoekom verander die Christene nie die datum nie? Korrek, want hulle kan nie! = Lank lewe Ishtar!

    Rick

    March 20, 2014 at 02:47

  49. Dear Con-Tester –

    1. ‘COMMON ERA’ NEUROSIS.

    Thanks for confirming the historical Jesus Christ (and consequently, His divine stature) in public with the quoting of the date in your comment (‘C.E.’). However, people may write ‘Common Era’ as much as they like to evade the issue but everybody on the planet still knows that it refers to 2014 years ‘After Christ’ (A.D.). If Jesus Christ really has become as irrelevant as Atheists Inc. so graciously suggest, why don’t Atheists Inc. change the calender … is it perhaps because they CAN’T? [Tip: You cannot change what God has ordained].

    2. THE FACT OF LIFE.

    Here is a fact of LIFE that may interest you:

    Jesus loves you, He will stay –
    Close beside you all the way;
    He has bled and died for you;
    One day you’ll find it to be true!

    (Acknowledgements: Adapted from ‘JESUS LOVES ME’ by Anna B. Warner, 1820-1915 & William J. Bradbury, 1816-1868).

    3. INVITATION.

    I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright, the morning star. And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And he that heareth, let him say, Come. And he that is athirst, let him come: he that will, let him take the water of life freely. (Revelation 22:16-17 ASV, http://www.e-sword.net).

    Piet Stassen

    March 20, 2014 at 00:31

  50. It is not uncommon for idiocies of the most abject inanity to be followed up with even more asinine bluster and demented puffery. Vulgarity, profanity, ridicule and derision are the only things these intellectually bankrupt turds are worthy of. Shitting more of them onto the dinner table merely underscores their profligate hollowness and meaningless triviality. Still, they do stink up the room mightily. The invitation nevertheless stands:

    “When you have something besides childish fairytales and wishful bullshit posing as truth, something that has some actual substance, please feel free to present it. Short of that, you’re just reaffirming your status as a brain-dead moron.”

    —Con-Tester 16:03, 2014 C.E. (Exactly)

    Con-Tester

    March 16, 2014 at 22:32

  51. It is not uncommon for a limited vocabulary and a cramped ideological perspective to respond to superior arguments with vulgarity, profanity and blasphemy, a useless and impotent gutter-strategy. We got a lot of that during national conscription in 1966 and things apparently haven’t changed that much since. The invitation nevertheless stands:

    “All things have been delivered unto me of my Father: and no one knoweth the Son, save the Father; neither doth any know the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal him. Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. (Matthew 11:27-30 ASV, http://www.e-sword.net).”

    – Jesus of Nazareth, (Approx. 33 A.D.).

    Piet Stassen

    March 16, 2014 at 21:56

  52. Invitation to Professor Piet “Profanity” Stassen:

    “If you really think I thirst after your trite, inconsequential kindergarten ‘knowledge’, please go take a good, long walk off a short ice floe so that the cold water may wake you from your somnolent reverie, funny kak-talking man.”

    —Con-Tester 16:03, 2014 C.E. (Exactly)

    Con-Tester

    March 16, 2014 at 18:08

  53. Invitation To Con-Tester

    “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink.
    He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, from within him shall flow rivers of living water.”
    (John 7:37b-38 ASV, http://www.e-sword.net).

    – Jesus Of Nazareth, (Approx.) 33 A.D.

    Piet Stassen

    March 16, 2014 at 17:32

  54. Ha ha, Professor Piet “Profanity” Stassen strikes again! Allow me to respond:

    1. KAK. Sir, you are clearly grasping at straws, as is typical of such juvenile and feeble apologetics as you engage in. You can dress an intellectual turd up in all the retarded obfuscation, delusional sophistry and drooling banality you wish, but it will remain an intellectual turd. Your persistent fantasies are almost as ridiculous as your attempts to put them on some kind of coherent footing. But please do continue. It’s quite amusing to see you keep stuffing an ever increasing number of bullet-ridden feet into your mouth.

    2. KAK. See 1 above.

    3. KAK. See 1 above.

    4. KAK. See 1 above.

    5. KAK. See 1 above.

    6. KAK. See 1 above.

    7. KAK. See 1 above.

    However, for the sake of effecting a substantially higher standard of conversation than we are accustomed to from your quarter, please in future make an effort to present arguments that carry significantly greater weight and credibility than the pint-sized and disjointed intellectual turds you have so far, with great grunting and onerous labour, managed to eject.

    Con-Tester

    March 16, 2014 at 16:28

  55. 1. FREE MORAL AGENCY. Gentlemen, You clearly do not understand the dynamics of ‘Free Moral Agency’ and the delegated discretionary powers of ‘Free Moral Agents’ (including free moral agents like yourselves). Without the dichotomy of ‘Good’ versus ‘Evil’ (as willed by God) Free Moral Agency would have been impossible. ‘Freedom to choose’ includes the freedom to choose either the ‘right’ or the ‘wrong’ thing … do you really propose to take this wonderful facility away from us as free moral agents? How will the critically-important facility of ‘Experiential Learning’ ever be possible without the freedom of choices, mistakes and the inexorable learning curve of curious humans made in the image of Yahweh (YHVH)? Success comes from ‘good’ decisions, while ‘good’ decisions usually are learnt from mistakes, which probably came from ‘bad’ decisions in the first place, all made possible by the facility of God-given free choice.

    2. MORAL-RULE OR RULE-BY-COMPULSION? God had to choose between (i) rule-by-compulsion or (ii) ruling morally. Had He chosen to rule-by-compulsion all of us would have been ‘perfectly good and obedient’ simply by default. He, however, chose to rule morally, which means that the choice between EVIL and GOODNESS is optional and the exclusive domain of the Free Moral Agent. In the end God will, thanks to Jesus Christ, have real (although imperfect but redeemed) moral agents who follow Him by choice, and not (technically perfect) ‘androits’ who follow Him by compulsion, for where would be the fun in that?

    3. BELIEF IN GOD IS OPTIONAL. Nobody is forcing you to believe in God or to follow Him … so what is the reason for your fanatical pre-occupation with Him? Apparently it is thus true that nobody talks more about God today (Yahweh, YHVH) than the atheists themselves, of which this blog is one of the best examples online! Dawkins even writes full length books about Him! (He surely must be a great admirer).

    4. STOP TALKING ‘ABOUT’ GOD AND START TALKING ‘TO’ HIM. There is not an ounce of malice in God, as there was not an ounce of malice in Jesus of Nazareth … why then are you so malicious in your sarcasm about God? What did He do to you to have deserved that? Stop talking ‘about’ Him and start talking ‘to’ Him, and see how your life will change! (It is called PRAYER). The Bible says: “Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you … ‘(James 4:8a ASV).

    5. TRUE WISDOM. Since you gentlemen are also free moral agents created in the image of God, why not use your discretionary powers and make the right (wise) decision today? The fear of the Lord is wisdom. The Bible says: “And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; And to depart from evil is understanding.” Life is about CHOICES … the choice between good and evil, light and darkness, God and Satan. The choices we make today will have its consequences in Eternity. No human is exempt from the obligation to choose between FAITH IN GOD (the Gospel) and FAITH IN SATAN (atheism). There are no other options, and there is no demilitarised zone in this war of ideas. ‘Atheism’ is also a religion … don’t deceive yourselves by thinking it is ‘only philosophy’.

    6. WHERE DID GOD COME FROM? I noticed this question in one of the paragraphs. What an infantile question! God did not come from anywhere … He simply IS. (“I AM what I AM”). The whole phenomenon of CAUSE and EFFECT is peculiar to this Universe only. Where God lives a different physics (metaphysics?) applies … that is why Jesus stressed the huge difference between ‘temporary’ and ‘eternal’ life. The KALAM PRINCIPLE teaches that, “Everything that ‘begins to exist’ in this Universe must have had a cause”. God never ‘began to exist’, He just IS (Infinity-idea). So, His existence has had no previous or original cause. He did not need it … He is the great I AM. He is the INFINITE CREATOR, we are His finite creatures. He is the owner of this Universe, He makes the rules and we are to mind them.

    7. STOP INSULTING GOD. Let’s stop insulting God by arguing about and denying His existence and the integrity of the Bible. What makes you think that the small puny little human brain can comprehend and understand somebody as huge and awesome as the BEING who made this Universe? If we could do that, then He would not be GOD. Only an Almighty God would be able to prove the non-existence of an Almighty God, so no human will ever be equipped in terms of the knowledge, education, influence, power, resources, wisdom etc. required to accomplish that. God is so awesome, magnificent and incomprehensible that we must come to Him in FAITH. The Bible says: ” … and without faith it is impossible to be well-pleasing unto him; for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seek after him.” (Hebrews 11:6 ASV). Trusting you to make the right choices … God is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him!

    Piet Stassen

    March 16, 2014 at 14:07

  56. What I find hard to understand is why religious people seems to be unable, or unwilling, to apply logical reasoning to their beliefs?
    It always seems to come down to the “argument” that it would be a good thing if god exists, or where everything comes from if god did not create it?
    The question of where god comes from is never logically addressed.
    The show stopper, I have found, is always something like; “I have experienced his hand in my life” or ” I have beard his voice” or something to that effect. Never anything objectively verifiable.

    Shazee

    January 7, 2014 at 07:22

  57. Okay, so Jaco Gericke has marshalled seven arguments that individually challenge and collectively refute Yahweh’s reality, implying that the OT as a whole is mythology and, furthermore, that any belief system based on it is equally problematic.

    Does one really need to formalise this in a doctoral thesis of theology? I presume that’s what you were driving at when you write, “… I take issue with ‘Does Yahweh Exist’ on two counts: approach and epistemological desirability, if not validity.” Perhaps it was Gericke’s conscious intention to throw a deist cat (or possibly an atheist one) among the theist pigeons so as to rattle theology. However, it has been amply and repeatedly demonstrated that theology is completely impervious to anything that contests its tenets — tenets dressed up as conclusions.

    Con-Tester

    January 5, 2014 at 12:18


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: