Friday, May 01, 2009

Atheism: A Dangerous Cult


[the best parody of atheism on youtube]

Atheism is a popular modern religion.

Founder: Charles Darwin.

Sacred text: Origin of Species.

Core beliefs: There is no Biblical God and evolution created us. Evolution is different from God in that it has no intelligence, therefore it demands nothing.

Basic proof: The fossils prove the Torah is false and evolution is true.

Debunked: In this post and this post.

Pope: Richard Dawkins

Bishops: Secular professors.

Cathedrals: Secular universities which teach evolution as fact and God as fiction.

Priests: Secular public school teachers.

Churches: Secular public schools which teach evolution.

Common rituals: Binge drinking, drug abuse, promiscuity. (Basically, alcohol and opiates are the the atheist version of prayer; they offer comfort and solace.)


Atheism is especially attractive to several types of people:

Addicts. Atheism teaches that no God will punish their selfish and destructive behavior. Therefore addicts, whether alcohol, drugs, pornography, etc. flock to atheism. This is the typical atheist in Western Europe or English speaking counties. Part of recovery is belief in God.

Communists. Traditional religions might be a threat to totalitarian dictorships, therefore Communists are militant atheists. Additionally, atheism permits everything, including murder. Murder is necessary to carry out the proletarian revolution and maintain the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Scientists. According to atheism prophesy cannot exist and therefore clergymen are unimportant, making scientists society's most important intellectuals. Many scientists have therefore enthusiastically promoted atheism while many young atheists have chosen a career in science. (The 1860 Oxford evolution debate and the 1925 Scopes Trial have become the legendary symbols of scientists triumphing over clergymen.)

In general, atheists are frequently either debauched libertines, murderers or both. Many are psychopaths - remorseless and egocentric.

Atheist = immature, irresponsible lowlife.


Agnosticism, humanism and indifferentism are transitional stages between either Christianity and Judaism on one hand and atheism on the other.

Reform, Conservative and Modern Orthodox Judaism are transitional stages between Judaism and atheism. Liberal Christianity is a transitional stage between Christianity and atheism.


It should be mentioned incidentally that many atheists would strenuously object to this post. They would argue that atheism is not a religion at all. Rather atheism simply means analyzing things rationally while “religion” means believing in things which are obviously fictional. In other words atheism is true and other religions are not. Of course many adherents to other religion believe this as well.

Atheists may argue that since they do not believe in a personal god and do not pray, atheism is not a religion, however the same is true of some Buddhists and Scientologists. Atheism is a belief system concerning spirituality, the afterlife, man’s origin and morality and therefore I believe it is a religion. The American government defines atheism as a religion and surveys regarding religion usually include "atheism" as an option. This video clip features atheist missionaries. There is an Atheist Alliance International complete with all sorts of activities, awards, conventions, publications, etc. There is no "People Who Don't Believe in Leprechauns Alliance International".

Animals truly have no religious beliefs. Asking "What religion is your dog?" is like asking "What color is a bald man's hair?" However atheism is simply another religion, although a somewhat bizarre, new and very dangerous one.

I also want to point out that while it is true that atheism did exist prior to Darwin, however "Origin of Species" made atheism respectable, popular and supposedly scientific. Before "Origin", "atheist" was used almost solely as an insult directed at others.

155 comments:

defenestration said...

JP, you may wish to introduce your readers to James Le Fanu:
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/04/who_is_james_le_fanu_i.html
(It's part 1 of 5)

I know many Modern Orthodox Jews who are more God-conscious than I am, and I consider myself right-of-Modern.

Child Ish Behavior said...

"Only Sith Deal In Absolutes" (Sith were the bad guys in Star Wars)

I find your philosophizing very humorous. As someone who calls himself, 'Jewish Philosopher' I would suppose you would be focused more on actual Jewish Philosophy.

You seem to believe that people choose their belief system based on convince. Atheists just want to do what ever they want w/o consequences, they therefore edit God out of their lives. Why can't you say the same thing about Judaism, say that we are just people with extreme risk aversion and extreme fear of death and the unknown, we therefore invented a purpose to make us happy so many years ago, and the attraction has never worn off (except for the people which have lost their risk aversion, and embraced present thinking.)

If all that guides people is personal convenience and preference(and that may very well be the case), how is your search for happiness any different that the atheist's supposed search for a guilt free existence?

jewish philosopher said...

I think my own motives are pretty solid.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/01/motives.html

Child Ish Behavior said...

I'm glad that you are ok with your own motives. That isn't the point. The Atheists would say that their motives are solid as well, and its back to a he said she said game, with you asking who the person is, and is the person really happy and secure in their motives, as if anyone who doesn't come to the same conclusion as you must be lying.

In the real world things are not as cut and dry as you make them seem. The black and white motivations that you think guide every individual don't really exist. People are the product of complexity, and most ideas are more complex than you make them seem.

jewish philosopher said...

The "nutshell" means I'm trying to simplify things. However, I think I'm being fairly accurate.

Joshua said...

JP, You rarely state anything I agree with, but it is quite rare for me to see you state something that is so unambiguously just false. This is what you have done by claiming that Darwin founded atheism.

Obvious prominent atheists before Darwin include Hume, Baron d'Holbach (who if I'm not mistaken even used the word "atheism" to describe his beliefs), and Diderot. All died well before Darwin was even born.

jewish philosopher said...

"atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."
-- Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, page 6

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/dawkins.htm

The "nutshell" means I'm trying to simplify things. However, I think I'm being fairly accurate.

Sam said...

"The "nutshell" means I'm trying to simplify things. However, I think I'm being fairly accurate."

Other than the fact that Darwin was a religious man who thought he had figured out God's workings, sure, it's very accurate.

jewish philosopher said...

It doesn't seem that way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin's_views_on_religion#Aveling_and_B.C3.BCchner

FrumJewInYU said...

Hey, JP, I'm obviously frum, but I object to this post. First of all, MOdern Orthodoxy is in no way a "transitional stage between Judaism and atheism." I find that very offensive. Do you believe in G-d any more than I do? I don't think so. I get the feeling you'd use me to be mitztaref in a minyan, so why the hate and untruthfulness?

Also, this whole idea of "____ in a nutshell" is ridiculous. You're just saying unfounded, statements about atheists and atheism. I'm not defending them, mind you - I'm just pointing to the ridiculousness of your post.

jewish philosopher said...

The distinction between Modern Orthodox and other Orthodox is primarily that MO Jews believe in evolution and Zionism, both of which were founded by atheists, Darwin and Herzl respectively. (Darwin may have been an agnostic, but whatever.) Therefore MO is clearly a transitional stage between the two religions. This is besides the fact that, based on the blogging that I have been doing (read all the millions of comments "DrJ" keeps leaving on this blog, or check out this lunatic http://modernorthoprax.blogspot.com/) apparently a large percentage of MO are in fact quietly really atheists.

jewish philosopher said...

I just wish to point out incidentally that if I claim that atheists are lazy slobs, drunks and whoremongers, I am not claiming that they are necessarily dishonest. I am sure that most atheists are very sincere, just as most Nazis, Holocaust deniers and Islamic jihadists are also very sincere. People have an infinite capacity to deceive themselves and to believe wicked nonsense.
Atheists are often delusional, which is far worse than dishonest.

onionsoupmix said...

JP, if you check, many, if not most of your posts are in clear violation of the hate speech clause of the terms and conditions you accepted when using this site to host your content. I would really look into that before you get reported.

jewish philosopher said...

http://www.blogger.com/content.g

HATEFUL CONTENT: Users may not publish material that promotes hate toward groups based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity.

That's fine with me. So long as they also terminate all the "Jewish skeptic" blogs which promote hatred of rabbis.

Anonymous said...

I pray to god everyday that he save me from people like yourself who believe in him.

Besides, people with high IQs are less likely to believe in God, according to a new study.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23859947-401,00.html

jewish philosopher said...

American Mensa is the national high IQ society, to which I belong. A March, 2006 survey of members, published in the Mensa bulletin, showed 4.06% claiming to be atheists.

I wonder if atheism is more closely linked to premarital sex and drug abuse.

FrumJewInYU said...

JP, the fact that the Jewish State and evolution were conceived by atheists doesn't make their supporters atheists. Learn some logic. If Isaac Newton were an athiest, would you then not believe in calculus?

jewish philosopher said...

What often happens is that when a new religion appears, some people at first try to practice both - the old and the new. For example, in medieval Scandinavia some people apparently worshiped both Thor and Jesus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mjolnir#Archaeological_record

This seems to be happening today as well, in regards to God and evolution.

onionsoupmix said...

That's fine with me. So long as they also terminate all the "Jewish skeptic" blogs which promote hatred of rabbisIt makes no difference whether it's fine with you or not or whether they terminate Jewish skeptic blogs or not. They are a private company and have no obligation to host your blog if your content violates their standards.

jewish philosopher said...

Translation: I'm really bothering you because I've discovered the truth about atheism. Good.

onionsoupmix said...

I'll help you with the translation, since it's clear you're having a little trouble. Anyone who reads your blog and is offended by your hateful speech towards gays, muslims or people of any other religious belief can report your blog to the administrators of blogspot and eventually, your blog will be disabled. If you don't want to be shut down, you'll have to be a bit more polite.

Joshua said...

Being fairly accurate doesn't make sense. You can't claim someone founded an idea that they a) didn't subscribe to and b) existed prior to the person. If you want to say that Darwin helped found "modern atheism" or made atheism credible that's a different claim. But your statement as written isn't accurate as a nutshell; it is just wrong.

Now, regarding Mensa: First, IQ is an awful determinant of intelligence. In general, standardized tests aren't very helpful methods of determining intelligence beyond an extremely rough measure.

But I don't think you want to actually bring up the Mensa example because it hurts your argument a bit when you consider that only about 1% of the US self-identifies as atheist:
(http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html ). That means that members of Mensa are about 4 times as likely to be atheists as members of the general population. (Incidentally, it wouldn't surprise me if atheists had a highly correlation with premarital sex, because if one is an atheist one likely doesn't see anything intrinsically wrong with premarital sex)

Your claims about the nature of Modern Orthodoxy are more or less ridiculous. Whether an idea was founded by an atheist doesn't make the idea somehow intrinsically connected to atheism. G.H. Hardy and Betrand Russell were both atheists and the math they discovered isn't somehow connected to atheism. Similarly, Ramanujan was very religious Hindu. Studying the works of Ramanujan is not avodah zarah. And this applies to areas other than mathematics. Discoveries and ideas have validity independent of their originators.

FrumJewInYU said...

JP, just realize that what you say makes very little sense. Is chassidus also between atheism and Judaism? Are Yekkes between atheism and Judaism? Is anybody who thinks something you disagree with on the road to atheism?

As per your attempted historical parallels: I support Israel, I don't worship it. This is not an ALTERNATIVE to Judaism; it is part of it. So too evolution: I believe evolution can be made to fit into the Torah, same as calculus or the heliocentric system of the solar system. I'm not worshipping two different things- that's a ridiculous statement.

And, once we've shifted the point of contention, will you at least concede that this post of yours makes absolutely no sense?:

"The distinction between Modern Orthodox and other Orthodox is primarily that MO Jews believe in evolution and Zionism, both of which were founded by atheists, Darwin and Herzl respectively. (Darwin may have been an agnostic, but whatever.) Therefore MO is clearly a transitional stage between the two religions. This is besides the fact that, based on the blogging that I have been doing (read all the millions of comments "DrJ" keeps leaving on this blog, or check out this lunatic http://modernorthoprax.blogspot.com/) apparently a large percentage of MO are in fact quietly really atheists."

Why does it make no sense? Because belief in something doesn't mean you believe evreything its founder believed. Does paskening like the Rambam once means you have to hold like him every time? No. Does everything that an atheist thinks of contradict Judaism? No - only the kefira thoughts he has do.
And you conclude based on TWO people that "apparently a large percentage of MO are in fact quietly really atheists"? Really?! Two people are enough to set that precedent for you? Laughable. By that logic, the existence of two chareidi child molesters makes all chareidim child molesters. So, JP, why do you do such terrible things?

jewish philosopher said...

Onion, it is my great privilege to pull the mask off that avalanche of BS known as atheism and I intend to continue to do so wherever and however I can. If some people want to try and stop me from using my first amendment right of free speech, I guess that proves how really frightened they are. And should be. You're welcome.

Josh, atheistic statistics are complicated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism#Statistical_problems
Mensans however, in spite of our high intelligence, seem to be about as devout, or secular, as everyone else.

About atheism and Darwin, check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dW-bt_1LzY
http://atheistnexus.org/group/darwinday

About modern Orthodox Judaism:
MO Jews have accepted ideas which originated with atheists.
Many MO Jews are privately atheists.
Many MO Jews, after graduating high school, openly declare their atheism.
http://jewishatheist.blogspot.com/2005/06/how-i-left-orthodoxy.html

What exactly would prove to you that a group is transitional between Judaism and atheism? Would they have to declare it officially?

Child Ish Behavior said...

Your proofs are circumstantial and your evidence is anecdotal. Nothing you say or do will change that, unless you back down from your absolute claims. Otherwise every line you say can be picked apart and actually proven conclusively wrong.

jewish philosopher said...

My proofs against atheism are based on direct evidence from the text of the Torah and midrashim and the fossil evidence.

Child Ish Behavior said...

I'm not talking about your proofs against atheism. The Torah talks of Hashem, obviously if you believe in the Torah, you deny atheism. What I am talking about is your proofs for your claims about atheism, your selective reading of things(including Medrashim) to fit your own view of reality, and your view of human motivation.

jewish philosopher said...

OK, the idea that atheists don't believe in a Biblical God is anecdotal and conclusively wrong.

You know, would it be wrong of me not to post comments which don't make any sense when they are posted by people who don't care how stupid they sound because they are hiding behind the veil of an anonymous Internet connection?

DrJ said...

"...if I claim that atheists are lazy slobs, drunks and whoremongers..."

Sounds like what the Nazis said about the Jews. But, no, that's not hate speech.

If MO is "transitional" from Judaism to atheism, than JPism is transitional from Judaism to Nazism.

All of you commentors should recognize by now that 99% of JPs so-called arguments are simply ad hominem attacks.

DrJ (AKA transitional life form)

jewish philosopher said...

DrJ, you're my prime evidence that many modern Orthodox are privately atheists. I'm sure that you won't disagree with that. And as I understand it, one of your children is openly secular now, so there you go.

About the drunks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens#Use_of_alcohol

and the whoremongers
http://richarddawkins.net/article,1926,Banishing-the-Green-Eyed-Monster,Richard-Dawkins-On-Faith

And bear in mind, these are the leaders of the atheist community, the crème de la crème. What are some more lower class atheists doing? We can only guess.
http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/07/atheists-in-their-own-words.html

So what is the world supposed do while atheists destroy it? Remain politely silent? Not me baby!

Atheists certainly have no problem critiquing religious people like me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Harris_(author)#Conversational_intolerance

DrJ AKA transitional said...

All of your favorite Bible heroes had extramarital sex or were polygamists. Just read the bible a little. The creme de la creme "leaders", as you say. Monogamy certainly did not originate with Judaism.

Anyway, the atheist world has no leaders and doesn't need them either, because its not an authority based system of knowledge, like your religion.

I don't know how many of my co-MO are agnostic, I haven't done a poll. I suspect that most aren't.

Yes, one of my kids is secular, another is heredi, and the other two are middle of the road religious zionists serving their country. I'm thrilled with them all, because they are moral, conscientious and productive people. And they're loyal to their people, the Jews, and to their family. That's whats important in my Judaism.

In your religion, on the other hand, you explicity stated in a previous post that your would dump your kids if their beliefs differed from your own.

jewish philosopher said...

Polygamy is not whoremongering. And of course there are atheist leaders. Here's another great example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_Murray_O'Hair

FrumJewInYU said...

Here we go, JP. All your attacks on MO, picked apart:

>>MO Jews have accepted ideas which originated with atheists.

I've addressed this already. If I accept a scientific fact that has nothing to do with religion, does this mean anything about my belief in G-d? No, it doesn't. Once again, if Newton had been an atheist, would belief in calculus make you an atheist-in-training. Just because Herzl had his own ideas about a Jewish state that I disagree with doesn't mean that choosing to support simply the fact that we HAVE a state makes me totally agree with Herzl. These are elementary points. You're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

>>Many MO Jews are privately atheists.
Many MO Jews, after graduating high school, openly declare their atheism.
http://jewishatheist.blogspot.com/2005/06/how-i-left-orthodoxy.html

Anecdotal. Tell me, what's your proof besides like 10 people on the Internet saying so? And, by your logic, the existence of several formerly chareidi bloggers mean that many in chareid world are atheists, and the existence of several chareidi pedophiles also means that many in the chareidi world are pedophiles.
Stop with the anecdotal proofs; you're embarrassing yourself.

jewish philosopher said...

The name "modern Orthodox" implies "modern - the new religion - atheism" combined with "Orthodox - the old religion - Judaism".

I think this sums it up nicely:

When I once complained that one of the people coming to the Chozon Ish's house was not too particular in his fulfillment of mitzvohs, he told that one should not estrange even those who are on the 'in between' level. I found the opportunity to argue: "Why then the strong opposition to Misrachi? Aren't they also 'in between' and why all this great anger? He explained to me that the difference is that the term of 'in between' cannot include a specific ideology in itself, and even one who is 'in between' realized and knows that it is better to be completely righteous and that every must aspire to complete righteousness, but that he (the individual) does not have the ability to withstand temptation and trial. But on the other hand, Mizrachi comprises an ideology of 'inbetweeness' that preaches that all Jews be 'in between' and nothing more. They have also based their educational theories on this, and they relate to a completely righteous person negatively, without seeing him as a complete (perfect) person, and in this is hidden a great danger. (Reb Shlomo Cohen)

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/rabbi_quotes/karelitz.cfm

FrumJewInYU said...

>>The name "modern Orthodox" implies "modern - the new religion - atheism" combined with "Orthodox - the old religion - Judaism".

OK, so when you're playing word association games with your therapist you associate "modern" with "atheism." Good for you. But normal people don't; we just think modern means you're allowed to be involved in the world. And kudos, at least, for discontinuing your old "Herzl was an atheist" arguments. At least I've accomplished something.

As per that whole quote of yours: I am not "not too particular in [my] fulfillment of mitzvohs." Perhaps I'm even more particular than you are; who's to say? My ideology doesn't maintain we must be "in-between" Orthodoxy and anything else; we are squarely in Orthodoxy. We don't preach a doctine of "in between and nothing more." And I don't react to a completely righteous person negatively, because such a thing hasn't existed for thousands of years. When I meet one I expect I'll react pretty positively.

Oh, and quoting Netuei Karta propaganda? How low can you go?

jewish philosopher said...

You have now heard from me (a philosopher), DrJ (an atheist) and the Chazon Ish (a rabbi) that modern Orthodoxy is an intermediate stage between Judaism and atheism.

Now, I am sure that there are modern Orthodox leaders who will deny this and claim that modern Orthodoxy is as sincere, legitimate and stable as any other Orthodox community. Of course they would; what would they say? However, let me bestow upon you a crumb of wisdom:

They are lying.

You're welcome.

FrumJewInYU said...

Um, first of all, calling yourself a philosopher doesn't make you one. By that argument, if a philosopher tells you there's no G-d you'd have to believe him, no?

And I don't care what atheists label MO; they know just about ,as much about it as you do if not more.

I'm not just basing on myself on what MO Rabbanim say; I'm basing myself on what I see and think every day: everybody I know is firmly planted in sincere, legitimate, and stable Orthodoxy.

Once again, you fail to provide anything besides anecdotal "evidence." Every argument you have provided in this whole thread is a logical travesty. Please do yourself a favor and think a little more before you post anything.

Larry Tanner said...

JP,

I know I'm taught to love my fellow Jew and my fellow human beings, but your posts revel in the most vile disdain of people.

I'm nearly 40 and not given to emotion, but the way you put down people, judge them harshly, and wrap yourself in conceit...well, it makes me nearly want to cry.

It makes me ashamed to call myself Jewish or be Jewish.

Thanks.

Anonymous said...

I used to be ultra-chareidi, but after perusing your comments, I have decided to go off the derech.
I am converting to Hinduism. At least the cows only moo instead of that awful noise that you make.

jewish philosopher said...

Jewinyu, how about Messianic Judaism?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Judaism

Is it a transitional stage between Judaism and Christianity because it combines elements of both religions? How is that different from MO?

Larry, you're welcome.

Anon, I don't think I know you, but I'm sure this is good riddance of bad garbage.

FrumJewInYU said...

I noticed you left out frum from my name. Very mature.

And as far as this nonsense:

>>Jewinyu, how about Messianic Judaism?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Judaism
Is it a transitional stage between Judaism and Christianity because it combines elements of both religions? How is that different from MO?

Yes, you are correct that Messianic Judaism is a transitional stage between Christianity and Judaism. What exactly does this have to do with MO, which only uses aspects of ONE religion (Judaism, in case you couldn't figure that one out)? Please, do explain. Or you can move on to the next one of the many ridiculously invalid arguments you concoct; I'll be waiting.

jewish philosopher said...

Messianic Jews believe in Jesus and Torah.

Modern Orthodox Jews believe in Zionism, evolution and Torah.

Same idea.

Joshua said...

Also, continuing on the IQ claim, there's actually an apparent correlation between a countries average IQ and their religiosity: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/12/god_boffins/ (I can't unfortunately find the study in question online).

I'm not at all convinced that intelligence in any way makes people more likely to be areligious in any substantial causal fashion or that even if there is such a causal link that it is in any way an argument against religion. But there's no way one can reasonably look at the data and make the conclusions you've have.

Now, moving on to the issue of Modern Orthodoxy. I think pretty much everyone agrees that the MJs are engagin in avodah zarah. Are you claiming that that evolution now constitutes avodah zarah? Also, your comment about zionism is equally problematic. Many people who are fairly frum have prop zionist beliefs. Moreover, many classical charedi Rabbis had strong zionists sympathies. The most obvious example would be the Netziv.

Disagreeing with zionism is one thing. Comparing it to MJism is quite another.

jewish philosopher said...

From the article you cite:

"Why should fewer academics believe in God than the general population? I believe it is simply a matter of the IQ. Academics have higher IQs than the general population."

Does that include yeshiva deans? I think most have high IQ's and do believe in God. Or was this only a survey of secular university academics? Which therefore proves what - that secular professors are secular?

"I think pretty much everyone agrees that the MJs are engagin in avodah zarah"

They don't agree.

"Are you claiming that that evolution now constitutes avodah zarah?"

Basically, yes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution#Jewish_opposition_to_Darwinian_theory

Joshua said...

JP, I agree that looking at the proportion of academics who are atheists isn't necessarily helpful. The primary point I was bringing up that article was because of the statement about different countries. The point is that IQ is a good predictor for religiosity levels on a global scale.

As to MJs: Pretty much everyone but MJs think they are Christians. The Orthodox, Conservative and Reform all agree. All the major Christian denominations consider the MJs to be Christian. The Israeli Supreme Court considers them to be Christian. The fact that they don't doesn't have much weight.

Regarding the evolution matter, the problem seems to be there with apikorsus or kefirah, not avodah zarah.

And should I conclude from your lack of response that you agree with my point about zionism?

jewish philosopher said...

"as average IQ in Western societies increased through the 20th century, so did rates of atheism, he said."

I think he just made that up. Who said IQ has increased?

"Regarding the evolution matter, the problem seems to be there with apikorsus or kefirah, not avodah zarah."

Which is what I wrote - modern Orthodox is a transitional stage between Judaism and atheism.

"And should I conclude from your lack of response that you agree with my point about zionism?"

No.

FrumJewInYU said...

>> Messianic Jews believe in Jesus and Torah.
Modern Orthodox Jews believe in Zionism, evolution and Torah.
Same idea.

OK, so let me get this straight - Zionism + evolution = Jesus?

Please explain, sir. I highly doubt you'll be able to. Once again, a claim as equally ridiculous as the ones that preceded it.

And besides, before you said that MO is a transition between Judaism and atheism. But now we're in a transition between Judaism and Jesus? Maybe you should make up your mind!


Joshua, I really think JP is either a non-Chareidi (either MO, Conservative, or not frum at all) trying to make chareidim or frum Jews looks bad, or else is just seriously disturbed. How else to explain the complete and total embargo on logical thought and consistency?

Joshua said...

JP. The increase in IQ scores over time in Western cultures is a very well known phenomenon. It is known as the Flynn effect. See for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect . To be blunt, if you are going to talk about a subject it helps if you know a little bit about it. The Flynn effect is one of the most basic, well-established trends in IQ. Frankly, trying to discuss what IQ scores might imply with someone who hasn't heard of it is a bit like trying to talk about the halachot of shabbat with someone who doesn't know that there are 39 types of explicitly enumerated malachah. It might not be that extreme but it feels that way. It might be closer to having such a discussion with someone who doesn't know that lighting a fire is malachah. It might be possible to have such a discussion, but it isn't likely going to go well. Imagine if you were trying to explain to someone why one can't drive a car on Shabbat and you mentioned that you can't light a fire and someone said "I think he just made that up. Who said you can't light a fire?" That's about the equivalent.

In any event, you are nitpicking at things that aren't relevant to the point, since I was citing the article for the observation about the correlation between countries IQ and their atheism levels.

Again, this is not intended an argument for atheism. There are a variety of other reasons that this might be the case that have nothing to do with correctness of atheism. But the trend is clear.

If you see evolution as kefirah, not avodah zarah then the situation isn't comparable to the MJ situation.

Now, regarding Zionism then, is my understanding that you consider Rav Kook to have been a kofer?

Anonymous said...

There exist considerable evidence that anyone in academia who questions the prevailng orthodoxy will suffer for it. People are afraid to speak out.

jewish philosopher said...

Zionism and evolution are atheistic ideas. This is evident by the fact that they were founded by atheists (Herzl and Darwin) and have been denounced as heretical by virtually all great Talmudic scholars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_opposition_to_evolution

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/rabbi_quotes/index.cfm

Therefore modern Orthodox Jews are clearly a transitional stage between Judaism and atheism.

Regarding the Flynn effect and the alleged increase in intelligence in recent years, "Test scores are certainly going up all over the world, but whether intelligence itself has risen remains controversial," psychologist Ulric Neisser wrote in an article in 1997 in The American Scientist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

I realize that atheists may be comforted by the idea that only primitive people believe in God and the Bible, however I don't think the evidence bears this out. The doctors, lawyers and other professionals who are Orthodox Jews or devout Mormons for example are not so primitive. Likewise, Mensa is not a hotbed of flaming atheists by any means, as anyone involved in it will tell you. We are about as diverse as society in general.

I think we could better explain increases atheism by increases in pornography. Pornography encourages sexual promiscuity, which atheism permits. Children do not view porn, so they believe in God. As they grow older and view porn they question and abandon religion. In more developed countries, where people view more porn, atheism has increased. In earlier generations, porn was less available and atheism was less common.

Anonymous said...

Is it ever logical or moral to question the existence of gods and the supernatural?

Is it ever reasonable to conclude that gods and the supernatural do not exist?

Do you think the only logical and moral conclusion for all people everywhere is to believe as Orthodox Jews do?

Would you mandate or legislate that all people everywhere should conduct themselves as Orthodox Jews do?

Who do you think is the most promising future candidate for president of the USA?

jewish philosopher said...

No.

No.

Yes.

Jews, yes. Gentiles must observe a different code of law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Laws_of_Noah

I don't know.

Anonymous said...

>Joshua, I really think JP is either a non-Chareidi (either MO, Conservative, or not frum at all) trying to make chareidim or frum Jews looks bad, or else is just seriously disturbed. How else to explain the complete and total embargo on logical thought and consistency?<

Nah, neither of the above.
Jacob Stein was molested by his Lutheran priest during sunday catechism. That's what prompted him to convert to Judaism. Unfortunately the psychological damage has manifested itself rather prominently in his absurd fallacious rantings.
Hashem Yerachem.

jewish philosopher said...

I love it - I can see I am really making heretics and atheists feel guilty. Good. You are.

Child אִישׁ Behavior said...

Dude, when you insult people, you make them uncomfortable. People are not feeling guilty, they are feeling POed. By insulting all of Modern Orthodoxy this way you have committed the sin of Loshin Hara(Slander). You probably have your own reasons to get around why this isn't so, but you are probably just lying to yourself, as you claim most people do when they hold beliefs that are in the realm of sin. Sins that are between a man and his neighbor, Yom Kippur does not forgive. You must ask forgiveness from the people you have wronged. I wish you good luck in doing so to all people who call themselves Modern Orthodox. You can start on this blog with a post doing just that.

jewish philosopher said...

Dude, if I'm as great a sinner as the Chazon Ish was I will be very happy.

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/rabbi_quotes/karelitz.cfm

And I have an idea - if you're uncomfortable with my blog, don't read it.

Anonymous said...

Do you think it's reasonable and moral to kill people who deny the existence of God?

jewish philosopher said...

It depends on the circumstances. Today, no.

Child אִישׁ Behavior said...

Your blog doesn't make me uncomfortable. It is the other side of the extremist coin. I find both your version of orthodoxy, as well as atheism both extreme forms of thinking, both based on nothing but the believers want to believe in the truth of their idea, and both equally illogical, and funny. You, for completely focusing on Dogma over sense. and them for likewise being completely biased. I laugh at you as I would laugh at a Muslim declaring the death to the Jews. I laugh at you as I would laugh at the conspiracy theorists who insist that Bush caused 9/11. And I laugh at you as I would laugh at anyone else who spews nonsense. Just because you have someone else that feels it is true doesn't mean it is, it is a logical fallacy known as Appeal to authority. If you wont ask Michila from the people you have wronged, you are no different than the people you despise. Not to worry though, I'm sure there is a special place in hell for all of us Bloggers.

jewish philosopher said...

"I find both your version of orthodoxy, as well as atheism both extreme forms of thinking"

Thank you. I think you just proved my point:

"Modern Orthodox Judaism are transitional stages between Judaism and atheism."

Child אִישׁ Behavior said...

Not at all. I would say that extreme Charaidi Judaism as well as Atheism are the transitional phases away from a more sensible middle ground. Both distort the reality of things to bring about what they want. The starting point is moderation and sense. Not pulling the wool over your eyes when it comes to reality. To deny God is pointless, Hashgacha Pratis is evident in all of our everyday lives. To deny evolution is pointless as well, since evolution represents just another form of that Hashgacha Pratis through which our world came into being.

jewish philosopher said...

"I would say that extreme Charaidi Judaism as well as Atheism are the transitional phases away from a more sensible middle ground."

Of course that's what you'd say.

Also, don't miss my post on evolution.

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/03/evolution-science-hijacked-by-atheism.html

Joshua Zelinsky said...

JP, you didn't answer whether you think Rav Kook was a kofer or not.

Moreover, your repeated blaming of atheism on pornography is just silly. Many non-atheists of many different religions have zero problem with porn (and the halachic arguments against porn actually take a non-trivial amount of effort).

I'm curious, how do you explain the correlation between countries having higher IQ on average and having higher rates of atheism?

jewish philosopher said...

In more developed countries, where people view more porn, atheism has increased.

Anonymous said...

And your evidence that increased porn viewing causes atheism is what? Please provide evidence, not corelation.

Child אִישׁ Behavior said...

You Porn => atheism idea is a spurious correlation at best, and at worst probably untrue. More developed countries have a tendency to have more social freedom, and both atheism as well as pornography are a product of that social freedom.

jewish philosopher said...

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/07/jewish-skeptics-and-sex.html

Anonymous said...

I wasted 5 perfectly good minutes perusing your comments on your above referenced blog.
As I suspected, you offer no evidence, only your opinion and a few non-scientific anecdotes to justify your inane mindset.
You havn't got a clue regarding the difference between corelation and hard scientific, statistical evidence.
Do you have any idea how foolish you make yourself appear?

jewish philosopher said...

It's just a question of time and money.

What I would like to do is take 1,000 sets of twins and raise them in identical environments, except that one twin in each set will be raised exposed to a great deal of pornography while the other twin will be exposed to none. After thirty years, we will compare the twins. My hypothesis predicts that the pornography exposed twin will be on the average less religious than his non-porn exposed sibling.

If you can get the funding, I'm good to go. Mail the check to my home address.

Anonymous said...

There is considerable controversy about whether an IQ test actually measures anything beyond ones ability to take an IQ test. Also, any educator will tell that intelligence is extremely maleable. Education can raise a persons test scores. Other variables also effect IQ, such as the time of day the test was taken. And some questions on IQ tests are culturllay biased. And scoring can be subjective as well. People with Asperger's syndrome can score very high on IQ tests, but they are mentally ill. With so many problems we really need a better metrci than IQ tests.

Anonymous said...

>What I would like to do is take 1,000 sets of twins and raise them in identical environments...<

What you would like to do is hardly the stuff on which sound science is based.
As I said, you offer no evidence, just meaningless noise to flatter yourself. If these logical fallacies are the consequences of torah study, I suggest you not advertise it. You are endearing no one to Torah or anything else that you consider important.

jewish philosopher said...

And I'm supposed to be impressed by that ranting just because someone who is hiding behind an anonymous Internet connection says so.

In any case, it sounds like the truth is hurting some people.

FrumJewInYU said...

Anonymous at 9:20, thanks for the insight.

Listen, everybody: we're going to convince this guy of anything, because logic means nothing to him. His arguments against atheism (which, obviously, I highly disapprove of) are even worse than his arguments against Modern Orthodoxy. Luckily, nobody takes him seriously, and I think maybe we should stop bothering to convince him.

Jacob, I'm sorry about your unfortunate history and wish you the best of luck in sorting out your life.

Child Ish Behavior - I like your posts.

jewish philosopher said...

It actually looks like everyone takes me seriously, as indeed they should take someone who is intelligent, mature, educated, psychologically savvy and in short - the Jewish Philosopher.

Ploni Almoni said...

You are mischaracterizing the words of the Chazon Ish. In the Hebrew, it uses the term benoni, which has a meaning of in-between in the sense of between tzadik and rasha, not the sense of it being an in-between form of ideology. In other words, he was protesting against the Mizrahi movement not aiming high enough in halachic observance. It is quite clear from his quote that he was not accusing them of being atheists, or being even almost atheists, as you do by distorting his words. You have perhaps heard the phrase "Torah darchei noam"? Please explain how your behavior of encouraging machlokes and arrogant demonor is in consonance with the concept of darchei noam.

jewish philosopher said...

I studied in Kollel Chazon Ish, Bnei Brak Israel from 8/1981 to 12/1985. Among the disciples of the Chazon Ish, it was well known that the Chazon Ish considered wine which had been touched by a religious Zionist to be prohibited as is wine touched by a gentile.

Ploni Almoni said...

That does not contradict my hypothesis, if you're concerned about someone's Sabbath observance, you do the same thing.

Raithie said...

Oh, the old "atheism is a religion!" argument.

Pretty much everything you said in that post was false. Atheism is not a religion - it's not even a belief. The only thing that atheism requires is a lack of belief in supernatural deities. You don't even have to accept evolution to become an atheist.

"Calling atheism a belief is like calling bald a haircolour".

jewish philosopher said...

How do you define "supernatural deities"?

Let's say there exists an incredibly intelligent and powerful alien composed of dark energy who is capable of creating or destroying galaxies in seconds. Would that be a deity? How do you know it doesn't exist?

Anonymous said...

You are guilty of hate mongering in the most shameless and absolute sense. I can imagine no possible way in which your writing does good in the world, while I can imagine scores of ways it does evil.

I am not going to claim that I have no beliefs as an atheist. However, my beliefs are based on my observation of the world and my compassion is based on genuine respect for humanity rather than fear of divine retribution. I don't deny that there are atheists who lack compassion. But this blog post alone is evidence that they haven't cornered the market on disrespect and hate.

jewish philosopher said...

I have no problem with hatred. Hating evil is a good thing.

Anonymous said...

Just out of curiosity, have you actually met any atheists in real life? Actually carried on polite conversations with them? Met their families? Your assessment that we are "libertines or psychopaths" is an unfortunate misconception that a lot of the American public have about us.

jewish philosopher said...

Have you actually met any Nazis? Gotten to know their families? A lot of that genocide stuff is probably exaggerated.

Anonymous said...

Nazism =/= atheism. I can't believe I just had to explain that to someone. Really, all you're doing is pulling a Godwin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Why don't you make some real arguments instead of relying on tired old fallacies?

jewish philosopher said...

I think the Nazis were atheists.

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2011/03/were-nazis-atheists.html

Anonymous said...

Right, so that's why the Nazis wore belt buckles that read "God with us" ("Gott mit uns"). http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/1069962/

Also, Hitler was probably a lapsed Catholic who got into occultism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_religious_views

Anyway, my point is that you're making ridiculous assumptions about atheists without backing them up, which suggests you've never actually met an atheist. You probably pass atheists in the street every so often, or even hold conversations with them and think, "Oh, what a nice man" - without ever knowing that they don't believe in God. Frankly I feel if you met me or my atheist buddies on the street, you wouldn't be able to tell us apart from any other person (unless we started talking about religion, lol).

jewish philosopher said...

Many historians assert that Hitler had a general covert plan, which some say existed even before the Nazis' rise to power, to destroy Christianity within the Reich which was to be accomplished through control and subversion of the churches and to be completed after the war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians#Nazi_Germany

Gott mit uns was used by the German Army since the the First World War. Members of the Waffen SS, wore the motto Meine Ehre heißt Treue ('My honour is loyalty').

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gott_mit_uns

I'm sure many Nazis were nice guys too. They didn't have horns. Hitler loved animals and was a vegetarian.

Anonymous said...

Re: The belt buckles. It only begs the question why Hitler would continue to issue them to his army. In Mein Kampf and his speeches, he made many references to his supposed Christianity, so even if he was not actually a Christian, the bulk of his supporters definitely were. (We see this today in American with politicians trying to curry the favor of the "religious right.")

Hitler had his own version of Christianity and he suppressed any churches that did not preach his ideals. However, he was definitely not an atheist.

Do you have any statistics supporting the idea that atheists are more likely to commit crimes?

Atheists do not subscribe to Nazi ideology. As an ethnic Jew I certainly don't. I have no idea why you continue to make that analogy.

jewish philosopher said...

According to atheists, humans are merely cosmic bacillus, and were treated as such wherever openly atheistic governments have existed, whether in Nazi Germany or today's North Korea.

jewish philosopher said...

Atheists simply have a license to kill.

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2011/10/atheists-have-license-to-kill.html

Anonymous said...

Yeah, well according to Judaism we were made out of dirt. I don't see how that's much better.

Please stop citing yourself and get some real statistics to back up your outlandish claims.

jewish philosopher said...

Dirt infused with a divine soul. Big difference!

I've got statistics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism

Anonymous said...

lol no. You're equating atheism with communism. Obviously most atheists in Western society today are not communists. And it's not even accurate to say that all communists are atheists either.

I can't believe I have to explain this to you. I am not a communist. (I am a libertarian, which is basically being the polar opposite of a communist.) In fact, I do not personally know any communists. Not one of my atheist friends are communists. But I do know that many communists today (no, they're not extinct) do not consider the Soviet Union, North Korea, etc. to be a pure form of communism.

Again, direct question: Where is the proof that atheists are more likely to commit murder than the rest of the population? (And don't you dare pull your "herp derp communism=atheism" canard out of your ass again.)

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismmyths/a/Communism.htm

http://atheism.about.com/od/isatheismdangerous/a/AtheismKilled.htm

jewish philosopher said...

Well, you've got the Communists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism

The Nazis

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2011/03/were-nazis-atheists.html

Jim Jones

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2011/03/were-nazis-atheists.html

and serial killers

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2008/07/atheists-in-their-own-words.html

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2011/10/atheists-have-license-to-kill.html

I think it's absurd at this point to argue that atheists are no more prone to violence than anyone else. In addition, many people would argue that abortion is murder and what atheist is anti-abortion?

Anonymous said...

You can't cite yourself when providing proof. And I've already told you that I am not a communist.

In fact, statistics show that both atheists and Jews are under-represented in prison. http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison2.html

Also, pro-life atheists: http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html

Direct question: I'm an atheist, and as a libertarian I hold the rights of the individual to his or her life, liberty, and property in the highest regard. I have no history of mental illness, crime, or arrests. I haven't even gotten speeding tickets. Do you really think I would murder in cold blood?

jewish philosopher said...

"You can't cite yourself when providing proof."

My links contain links to other articles, which link to other articles, etc. That's why it's called the "World Wide Web". It's like a web of information.

"In fact, statistics show"

I have heard about those statistics, however do prisoners claim membership in a religion based on culture and ethnicity or based on beliefs and ideology? In other words could a prisoner who really believes in no God list himself as "catholic" or "baptist" merely because he was baptized into that church as an infant?

What I would be really curious to know, and it doesn't seem like it should be so complicated to discover this, is what percentage of convicted felons in the United States were ACTIVE monotheists at the time at which they committed their crime, in comparison to the US population in general? For example what percentage of felons were attending at least weekly public worship services in comparison to Americans as a whole? I can't find that data, and I suspect that atheistic academics are not interesting in discovering this data. My brother, who is a cop, says he's not typically arresting regular church goers. 

My guess, and it's just a guess, would be: felons 2%, American on the whole 20%.

"Do you really think I would murder in cold blood?"

Absolutely. Plenty of convicted killers have no prior record and all their neighbors are amazed since they were such nice, normal people. Read some true crime stories. 

jewish philosopher said...

This provides a little supportive data to my theory.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/1389231

jewish philosopher said...

And by the way, how many member does the Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League have? More than one?

B.R. said...

"Atheism is a popular modern religion."

Atheism is a disbelief in Gods. If it is a religion, then baldness is a hair color. Just the first sentence ans you're already lying. This looks promising...

"Founder: Charles Darwin."

Um, sorry, but no. Historical revision doesn't really work. Darwin was the founder of TOE, but not atheism, since it's probably existed since the dawn of civilization.

"Sacred text: Origin of Species."

Yeah right; a biological theory is a sacred text.

"Core beliefs: There is no Biblical God and evolution created us. Evolution is different from God in that it has no intelligence, therefore it demands nothing."

Actually, no. Atheism simply means you don't believe in god or gods. There are no "core beliefs".

"Basic proof: The fossils prove the Torah is false and evolution is true."

Thanks for admitting it.

"Debunked: In this post and this post."

In your dreams. Your first post consisted of a personal, unobservable, unfalsifiable interpretation of an ancient creation myth. That constitutes nothing more than sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "I can't hear you! Nah nah nah!" Your second post was ridiculous rhetoric based upon outdated misconceptions of the theory, which proves that you have no intellectual integrity whatsoever, otherwise you would read books and articles by opposing individuals and educate yourself.

"Pope: Richard Dawkins"

Asserting opinions as fact is pretty childish, but why should I expect any better from a creationist?

"Churches: Secular public schools which teach evolution."

Ah, the poor creationist is butt-hurt because schools teach facts instead of his cherished beliefs. Teaching evolution, a scientific theory with mountains of hard proof, does not equate to teaching evolution. Many biologists are religious, and religious people are accepting the theory in growing numbers.

"Common rituals: Binge drinking, drug abuse, promiscuity. (Basically, alcohol and opiates are the the atheist version of prayer; they offer comfort and solace.)"

[citation needed]

"Traditional religions might be a threat to totalitarian dictorships, therefore Communists are militant atheists."

Another propagandist who doesn't want his followers to know Communism is. It's a political and economic system, not an atheist club or something.

"Additionally, atheism permits everything, including murder."

Since atheism is neither a religion nor an ideology, it's statements on morality are non-existent. One could just as easily say that stamp-collecting permits everything, including murder. Or bicycle-riding. Or jogging. Or baking.

"Rather atheism simply means analyzing things rationally while “religion” means believing in things which are obviously fictional. In other words atheism is true and other religions are not."

Um, no. We'd just point the complete lack of central tenets, doctrines, and rituals, not to mention the complete absence of any central authority. We don't believe in gods. That's it.

jewish philosopher said...

"Atheism is a disbelief in Gods."

How do define "god"? Anything more powerful than humans? Are you sure there are no space aliens?

B.R. said...

Correction(from my comment); teaching evolution does not equate to teaching atheism.

"How do define "god"?"

As the theists do; the supposed creator of the universe, Supreme Being, etc.(omnipotence optional, depending on the theist).

"Anything more powerful than humans?"

Nope.

"Are you sure there are no space aliens?"

As the universe is infinite(or close to it), it would be illogical to say that no alien life exists; but there is no evidence of such, so basically, I'm open to any forthcoming proof.

jewish philosopher said...

So as I said the core belief of atheism is that the Biblical God does not exist and evolution created us.

Anonymous said...

You've gotten onto Fundies Say the Darndest Things (FSTDT) as a shining example of religious stupidity. Congratulations.

http://fstdt.com/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=86270

jewish philosopher said...

Look how commentators there are going crazy over it. Only the truth hurts!

B.R. said...

"So as I said the core belief of atheism is that the Biblical God does not exist and evolution created us."

Perhaps I did not clarify earlier; atheism is a disbelief in gods. There are no "core beliefs". In general, atheists accept evolution because unlike the deeply religious, they're open to the evidence, and are not laboring under the delusion that science is beholden to their personal opinions. And by the way, saying that evolution "created us" shows how scientifically illiterate you are. Evolution deals with the adaptation of organisms in earth's past; it does not deal with the origins of life. That would be abiogenesis. You really need to educate yourself.

jewish philosopher said...

"atheism is a disbelief in gods"

A disbelief, according to you, in an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal creator. In other words the Biblical God.

"In general, atheists accept evolution"

Which don't?

B.R. said...

"A disbelief, according to you, in an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal creator. In other words the Biblical God."

You need to start reading my comments instead of picking little sentences here in there. It is a disbelief in the biblical god, the Hindu gods, the Greek Gods, the Norse Gods, and any other gods you care to mention.

"Which don't?"

None that I know of, but who knows? There might be some out there that don't for whatever reason.

jewish philosopher said...

So how do you define "god"?

B.R. said...

"So how do you define "god"?"

Are you mentally impaired or something? Or is your computer screwing up and garbling your comments? I've already answered this question. Any way theists define god, I don't believe in it without evidence. It doesn't matter if you describe it as a him or a her, or whatever; without evidence, I see no reason to believe in either God or Zeus, Apollo, Thor, Krishna, or Lord Xenu. If you aren't even going to respond to my comments, then by doing so you're admitting your dishonesty for all to see.

jewish philosopher said...

Tens of millions of people worship the Ganges River as a goddess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganges#Religious_and_cultural_significance

You don't believe it exists. It's on Google maps.

B.R. said...

"You don't believe it exists. It's on Google maps."

Does the Ganges River exist? Yes. Is it a god? I doubt it. And I bet you doubt it too. Worshiping a physical object as a god means nothing without evidence, as you already know. Your arguments against atheism are becoming more breath-takingly asinine with every comment.

jewish philosopher said...

"Is it a god?"

How do you define "god"?

B.R. said...

"How do you define "god"?"

I think at this point it's safe to assume you're an imbecile. You're not even arguing now; just repeating the same question that I've already answered over and over and playing ridiculous word-games instead of citing evidence for any claim you make. If you want to know how I define god, read my previous comments. It's not difficult.

jewish philosopher said...

Until someone does better, I'm sticking with my definition of atheist.

B.R. said...

No one will do better as far as you're concerned. I ripped the OP apart, and refuted every claim you made, and yet you still mindlessly say "how do you define god?" over and over and over. Your definition of atheist is slander. It's lying propaganda with absolutely no supporting evidence. But nothing will ever make you admit you're wrong, because you're a propagandist.

jewish philosopher said...

Now you're angry because I have so totally outwitted you.

B.R. said...

"Now you're angry because I have so totally outwitted you."

LOL! I wish I could just unplug and go live in a fantasy realm as vibrant as yours. It must be quite soothing compared to living in the real world.

jewish philosopher said...

You really are embarrassing your religion by answering convincing arguments with mere insults.

B.R. said...

"You really are embarrassing your religion..."

To paraphrase Darth Vader, "The Stupid is strong with this one". Atheism is as much of a "religion" as baldness is a hair color. Saying over and over and over that it is a religion does not and will not make it into one, no matter how hard you wish it to be so.

"...by answering convincing arguments with mere insults."

You seem to be illiterate. Your "convincing arguments" might be convincing to basement-dwelling fundamentalists and fanatics with I.Q.s in the single digits, but not to anyone else. Your arguments consist of this;

"Dur, atheists are evil."
"Dur, atheists are Communists."
"Dur, atheists are debauched libertines."

And that's it. Nowhere on this entire blog do you link to statistics that support your claims. I have repeatedly challenged you to do so; as have other posters. Thus far, you've done nothing more than either link to Wikipedia, one of the most inaccurate sources of information on the Net, or self-reference to yet another post of saying that atheists are evil/Communists/murderers, etc., etc.(or just repeat "how do you define God?" over and over and over while ignoring my answers to that question).

If anyone here is embarrassing his religion, it's you.

jewish philosopher said...

Wikipedia is pretty good. 

http://newsfeed.time.com/2010/06/02/study-wikipedia-accurate-but-written-poorly/

And you can't even explain clearly what you don't believe in. Probably you're on drugs.

B.R. said...

"Wikipedia is pretty good."

Sometimes; not always. High school teachers and college professors will not allow their students to use Wikipedia as a source for papers. There's a reason for that.

"And you can't even explain clearly what you don't believe in."

That's because I don't "believe" in anything, in the classical sense. I have already explained what atheism is numerous times; I'm not doing it again. It's funny how you avoided responding to those portions of my comments.

"Probably you're on drugs."

I'm not the one mindlessly repeating the same question over and over and over, seemingly oblivious of the answer the other person gives me, which is much more akin to the symptoms of drug addiction than any behavior I've displayed here. Thanks for admitting to being a bottom-feeder who has no scruples on top of having no intellectual integrity. But why even bother responding to such a shameless libel? I probably post well above your reading comprehension level. Oh, and by the way, self-referencing is like masturbating to a picture of yourself. It says a lot about your ego, and nothing about the validity of opposing views. Anyway, I think I'm done here. You just discredit yourself further with every blog post and comment you do. G'day.

jewish philosopher said...

One idiot down; bring on the next please.

Anonymous said...

Do you really think most atheist scientists are homicidal communist drug addicts who spend all their spare time in Bacchanalian orgies? How many do you think is "many"?

jewish philosopher said...

Yes, that sounds about right.

Anonymous said...

As an atheist I find it a little hard to believe that the Average Atheist McCoy is really that evil of a person. I'm not a scientist (though I am interested in a career in neurology), I've never killed another human being, I'm not a communist, and I've never had any drugs in my life.

But frankly you make being an atheist sound like a lot of fun. Is that what you want?

jewish philosopher said...

"I've never killed another human being"

Yet.

Anonymous said...

Just a question, do you think Carl Sagan killed anybody? Because that's a really funny mental picture you just painted me.

Another question: In your opinion, most atheists are murderers. What do you think drives them to kill people all the time?

Because I'm not a psychopath, I have Pure OCD with obsessions about harm. OCD is a strange disease in that it takes a person's worst fears - that is, what's least likely to happen - and turn it against them. It happens to religious people too, in the form of blasphemous obsessions. (Apparently Martin Luther had them. Poor dude couldn't stop thinking about the devil's behind.)

jewish philosopher said...

I've actually only been able to find one well documented case of an atheist who was a decent person, and he regretted being an atheist.

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2008/01/chandra-good-atheist.html

Anonymous said...

You didn't answer my previous questions.

1) Do you think Carl Sagan murdered anybody?

2) Why do you think I would murder people, considering that it is essentially one of my worst fears?

Might as well throw this one in for good measure: Have you ever met an atheist in person?

jewish philosopher said...

Well, the obvious problem with atheism, is that without a fear of God people will do anything they feel like doing provided that they won't go to jail. If one is living in a place where the government encourages violence (let's say Nazi Germany) or even in a place where the government is very hesitant to punish criminals (let's say America today) the results are often very bad.

Anonymous said...

So.. basically if you were an atheist, you'd go on a killing spree? That's real reassuring.

I've never wanted to kill people, and never will. That won't change.

Also, the U.S. actually has a rather high incarceration rate - and the majority of those in jail don't identify as atheists or nontheists.

jewish philosopher said...

Can you point out one case of a primarily atheistic community which has not suffered either mass killings or reproduction below replacement levels? Atheism is a religion of death and extinction. It's the HIV of religion.

About the prisons, I have heard about those statistics, however do prisoners claim membership in a religion based on culture and ethnicity or based on beliefs and ideology? In other words could a prisoner who really believes in no God list himself as "catholic" or "baptist" merely because he was baptized into that church as an infant?

What I would be really curious to know, and it doesn't seem like it should be so complicated to discover this, is what percentage of convicted felons in the United States were ACTIVE monotheists at the time at which they committed their crime, in comparison to the US population in general? For example what percentage of felons were attending at least weekly public worship services in comparison to Americans as a whole? I can't find that data, and I suspect that atheistic academics are not interesting in discovering this data. My brother, who is a cop, says he's not typically arresting regular church goers. 

My guess, and it's just a guess, would be: felons 2%, American on the whole 20%.

Anonymous said...

It's sad to see a member of an often scapegoated and maligned minority vomiting bile on an another scapegoated and maligned minority.

jewish philosopher said...

When atheists had the opportunity, they closed nearly every synagogue and Jewish school in the USSR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union#Policy_towards_Judaism

I don't see much solidarity between Jews and atheists.

Anonymous said...

And this means all atheists hate Jews because...?

The reason you don't see much solidarity between Jews and atheists is because people like you aren't letting it happen. I am an atheist. I am also a Jew. My other Jewish friends are much more observant than I am, but this never gets between our friendship.

Oh, but they're probably fools for trusting me because I'll just murder them all for the laughs, right?

jewish philosopher said...

When given the opportunity atheists have a habit of murdering anyone who disagrees with them. And why not? Aren't humans merely bacillus?

Anonymous said...

I'm not out to de-convert anyone. Other people's religious beliefs are none of my business. In fact, my friends and I know to stay away rom topics like religion and politics. No murderous instincts here whatsoever.

Anonymous said...

I find it curious that you have not responded yet, yet published my comment on your blog anyway.

jewish philosopher said...

I think it's obvious that in most countries today atheists don't have the opportunity to kill monotheists without risking serious consequences.

Anonymous said...

I should've known. You won't even begin to contemplate the notion that atheists might not want to theists, even secretly.

Do you think Carl Sagan murdered anybody?

jewish philosopher said...

Given opportunity and motive, why wouldn't an atheist murder? I doubt that empathy, even assuming the atheist has any for the victim, would override let's say a million dollar profit or some other large reward which a murder might bring. 

Sagan actually called himself an agnostic. Additionally, he was divorced twice and brought a silly lawsuit against Apple Computer. He doesn't sound like a very kind man.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan#Personal_life_and_beliefs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation#Libel_dispute_with_Carl_Sagan

Anonymous said...

You insult atheists with your inflammatory rhetoric, as well as the general population with your lack of intelligence. If anyone here is not "a very kind man," it's you. Besides, a few divorces does not a mean man make.

Also, if money is enough to persuade atheists to disregard empathy to kill people, then what about religious people who kill for profit? Surely if money is enough to persuade atheists to cast aside their moral reason, then it's enough to get a religious man to not only kill, but justify it according to his faith?

jewish philosopher said...

"Surely if money is enough to persuade atheists to cast aside their moral reason, then it's enough to get a religious man to not only kill, but justify it according to his faith?"

No, because nothing is worth suffering in the fires of hell.

We see not merely in theory, but in practice:

atheists have a license to kill

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2011/10/atheists-have-license-to-kill.html

while orthodox Jews are generally very peaceful

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2008/09/orthodox-jewish-crime.html

Anonymous said...

I think it's hilarious that the two people you cite are 1) a serial killer and 2) yourself. Ignoring the fact that citing your own paper as evidence to back up your own point is intellectually dishonest in the extreme, here's something that even you would acknowledge: serial killers are psychopaths. They are pathological liars and are incapable of feeling empathy or remorse. There are physical flaws in their brains - namely, in the amygdala (emotional functions and learning) and the orbitofrontal cortex (planning and emotional regulationto be 1% of the population, and the violent offenders generally have patterns of cruelty in childhood that are precursors for more violent crimes.

Now, if there were any studies done on the religiosity of psychopaths, that would be interesting, but you'd probably just pull Jeffrey Dahmer anecdotes out of your ass as if a single anecdote can prove a point.

jewish philosopher said...

"Ignoring the fact that citing your own paper as evidence to back up your own point is intellectually dishonest"

I believe I always provide sources whenever possible.

"if there were any studies done on the religiosity of psychopaths"

Actually, until 1960, when atheism became the dominant religion in the US, serial killers were very rare. Since, then we've had tons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_in_the_United_States

same thing with school shootings

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#United_States

and child abductions

http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=4362

This is in a society where homicides are intensively investigated and severely punished. To see how atheists behave when given completely free reign, see Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia. 

jewish philosopher said...

To be honest, I think that not until the last surviving human staggers out of a gay bar and drops dead in the gutter from a heroin overdose, atheists will never stop denying the horrific damage which their religion inflicts on mankind and will just keeping smiling and insisting "you don't need God to be good". Sure, just like you don't need to breathe to be healthy. lol.

Anonymous said...

You know what's also become more common since the 60s? Microwave ovens. Ergo, microwave ovens cause crime.

Hey, if you're allowed to assert correlation between two completely different things, then so am I. And atheists still only make up a small percentage of the population.

Also, most Americans are Christians. What country did you grow up in?

You probably talk to atheists without knowing it every so often. You can't tell an atheist apart from the rest of the population by looking at them (pro-atheism t-shirts notwithstanding), which means you've probably met some "nice people" who are secretly godless.

If you passed me on the street or spoke to me, you would not know that I was an atheist unless I told you. Of course, I have no history of crime and am actually good friends with a number of people, who can all attest to the fact that I am a caring person.

jewish philosopher said...

"Ergo, microwave ovens cause crime."

Do microwaves teach children that humans are merely soulless animals and that as long as they can evade law enforcement, crime has no consequences? Atheism does.

"Also, most Americans are Christians."

I doubt that more than 20% of Americans today take Christianity seriously.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_rate.htm

Anonymous said...

Except anyone with half a brain knows that crime does have consequences, that you can't always run from the police, and that your conscience will give you a horrible time about it anyway.

That's true of anyone, even theists with the basest sense of morality.

jewish philosopher said...

"that you can't always run from the police"

You can if you ARE the police and you work for someone like Stalin or Hitler.

You can if it's a murder suicide.

And in a liberal democracy, with a lot of civil rights, you probably have less than a 50% chance of a conviction, and with a little caution and a good lawyer those odds probably go way up. Looking cute and being white helps a lot too (Casey Anthony).

Anonymous said...

It doesn't matter what the political environment is - philosophically speaking, it is impossible to morally justify murder.

jewish philosopher said...

"philosophically speaking, it is impossible to morally justify murder."

According to atheism, it's impossible not to.

Once we deny the existence of a God given, exceptional human soul, there is no basis for human exceptionalism. Humans are animals, no better or worse than bacillus.

Secondly, according to atheism, since we have no soul, we have no free will and therefore no moral responsibility for our behavior. My brain chemistry made me do it. 

Anonymous said...

I agree that free will is an illusion, but not for the reasons you think.

As an amoralist, my stance is that it is impossible to justify moral judgment statements such as "Stealing candy from babies is wrong" or "Stealing candy from babies is right". Even though I have my personal feelings about certain things, I know that it is logically impossible to consider something morally right or morally wrong.

And bacteria are pretty interesting, just ask a virologist. ;)

jewish philosopher said...

So therefore there is no fundamental difference between building auschwitz and taking an antibiotic.

Anonymous said...

There's a huge difference between the two that's pretty plain. But morally, yes, from an objective standpoint they are equivalent. I still feel that Auschwitz was a terrible tragedy, but that doesn't change the facts of the matter.