"truth" under "the razor"

determining "truth" with feelings and emotions

2012-01-16T11:08:00.004+01:00

do you think feelings and emotions are an infallible way of determining truth? then maybe you havent heard of hypochondriasis:
"This debilitating condition is the result of an inaccurate perception of the body’s condition despite the absence of an actual medical condition"

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

feelings vs facts in the mormon church

2012-01-13T13:07:00.003+01:00

i saw this on the exmormon yahoo mail list:

My former RS press whom I am very close to, came over today and demanded to know what is going on with me. We talked for awhile. She bore her "testimony". Later she facebooked me and said her heart is breaking and she wished she could give me her testimony because her feeling is that everything good she has is because of the church. This was my response. I thought you might like to read it.
The feeling that something is true cannot replace cold hard facts. When DNA evidence proves that the modern Indian is not a descendant of israelites all the good feelings or testimony in the world cannot make it true. When egyptologists translate the papyri and inform us that they are only funeral documents and not the Book of Abraham that Joseph smith claimed, all the good feeling in the world cannot make it so. So we have discovered that the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham are not accurate translations of ancient records and therefore cast doubt on the prophetic calling of Joseph smith.

well said.

my views on relativism and sophism

2012-01-11T11:01:00.000+01:00

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

Their philosophy contains criticism of religion, law, and ethics. Though many sophists were apparently as religious as their contemporaries, some held atheistic or agnostic views (for example, Protagoras and Diagoras of Melos).

I also criticize religion, law and ethics and also morality. I am atheist.

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

Relativism is sometimes (though not always) interpreted as saying that all points of view are equally valid

i think it would depend on what the point of view was about, e.g. you dont value a car mechanic's point of view on a specific surgical procedure as much as you would a surgeon's.

Relativism is the concept that points of view have no absolute truth or validity, having only relative, subjective value according to differences in perception and consideration

if this were taken to mean that there is no such thing as truth or fact, then i would disagree. if it is restricted to views about non-testable, non-verifiable, non-scientific claims and personal preference (e.g. the "best" music artist) then i could agree with it.

the NDAA H. R.1540 signed by barack obama does not specifically exempt US citizens from indefinite military detention without trial

2012-01-06T10:45:00.002+01:00

the whole problem is that the legislation is not written in "plain english", it's vague and is written in a way so that the administration/military can interpret it in any way that suits them best. section 1021 is the key issue. it's not long at all so read it for yourself and see how many different ways you could interpret those words.

page 265 of the pdf, section 1021.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540enr.pdf

so here's my attempt at plain english:

(a) military can detain anyone defined in section b

(b) people who can be detained:

1. A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attack

(THIS IS PRETTY PLAIN, BUT HERE'S WHERE IT GETS VAGUE AND SCARY)

2. A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

define:

* "associated forces" (could mean anything they want it to)

* "hostilities" (could mean anything they want it to, e.g. even criticism? and note "or its coalition partners"

* "beligerent act" (could mean anything)

* "directly supported" (could mean anything)

there is no clause that excludes americans from military detention without trial, otherwise it would have read "non-US citizen" instead of "a person". paragraph (e) pretends to appear like it exempts american citizens:

(e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed

to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of

United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States,

or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United

States.

all it says is that it doesnt affect existing law or authorities concerning the detention of american citizens or *anyone* (citizen or not) captured or arrested in the US.

section 1022 also pretends to appear to be an exemption of military detention for US citizens:

RESIDENT ALIENS.—

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain

a person in military custody under this section does not extend

to citizens of the United State

but all it does is exempt US citizens from the *requirement* of military detention. it's not *required*, but it could still be *legal*.

http://www.facebook.com/notes/nick-humphrey/my-attempt-to-explain-the-ndaa-scary-part-in-plain-english/10150571833737292

update: i found this article about a US citizen, allegedly tied to al qaeda who was assassinated, along with his 16 year old son--without trial:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

what is the value of an NDE really?

2011-12-20T12:06:00.002+01:00

how relevant could "near death" be anyways? the brain is freaking out and you're not dead so what value would it have anyways? if someone's body starts to decay, THEN they come back to life, then i'll listen to their story. i also had a near death experience when i was shot at age 18--i saw the tunnel of light (as i had heard others have experienced), saw god and jesus (as i was taught was truth from mormonism), saw my whole life on a "movie screen" (as i had heard others had experienced), i "saw" when i was "looking at god and jesus" that we were walking on clouds (like in the movie "heaven can wait", which i saw many times as a kid). i learned/experienced nothing "new", that i hadnt already heard about or seen in movies.

is the lds mormon church a cult? susan's review

2011-10-20T08:12:00.002+02:00

thanks to susan for this summary of her experiences about the cult-status of the "church of jesus christ of latter-day saints":

I've been around long enough to know that there are thousands of closet drinkers, porn lovers, adulterers, fornicators, etc. etc. etc. amongst the Mormon population. If there were really some way to gather true statistics, I think you would find that (as in divorce) the Mormon statistics on all this would fall right in there with the general populations. I don't think Mormon kids are avoiding drugs and sex. I have enough older grandkids now to know that they are just more adept at hiding it.

So, if one can assume that what I've just typed is correct, then I would have to say that the added pressures of a perfectionistic religion that controls ever aspect of one's life, demands that money be paid in order to participate in certain church rituals, asks you to promise that you will give everything you have to the upbuilding of the kingdom, doesn't respect woman and never lets them be in control, grossly emotionally abuses homosexuals, expects its membership to agree with and acquiesce to everything that comes out of the mouths of the suits in SLC, robs young men and women of two years of their lives to proselyte no differently than the Moonies on the corner, tries to control a married couple's sex life, teaches the evils of sex so often to young people that they don't have a chance for a normal/sensual/passionate sex life for the first few years of their marriages (and maybe never) ......sounds like a cult to me!

LDS/Mormon Indian Placement Program

2011-10-13T08:31:00.001+02:00

turning the "indians" "white and delightsome":
http://nataliercollins.com/2011/10/10/columbus-day-how-about-indigenous-peoples-day/

What Does Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney Really Believe?

2011-10-11T09:32:00.001+02:00

He believes that Jesus is Satan's brother.
He believes that the jewish god yahweh lives near a planet called "Kolob".
He believes in baptizing dead people.
He believes that it was impossible for black people to go to heaven before 1978.
He believes that he is going to become a god after he dies.
He believes he will own his own personal planet after he dies.
He believes he needs to wear underwear created by Mormons and he is never to take it off unless he is bathing, having sex or playing sports.
He believes that 10% tithing is mandatory.
He believes that the Mormon/LDS church does not have to give an audit/accounting of its wealth (estimated $100B).
He believes that Jesus isn't coming back until at least when kids today have grown up and had grandchildren, "maybe even great-grandchildren".

mormon "apostle" boyd packer prophesies "the end isnt near" (jesus isnt coming back any time soon)

2011-10-05T10:45:00.002+02:00

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/52664839-78/church-lds-packer-temple.html.csp
when the time for "youth living now who have have great grandchildren" has passed and jesus still hasnt come back, church leaders at that time will simply say that packer was speaking as a man, that his words werent official church doctrine. it will mostly likely be exactly the same as cult apologetics' response to joseph smith's failed prophecies:
"Prophets are allowed not only to have personal opinions, or even misunderstandings, but also to express them. It is up to those who hear the words spoken by a prophet to listen carefully, use their intelligence, and discern with the spirit whether a prophet is acting as a prophet or expressing his own views"
http://www.shields-research.org/General/LDS_Leaders/1stPres/Joseph_Smith/56_Year.htm

does packer (the senior "apostle") know the following?:
"Sometimes it is obvious when a prophet is acting as a prophet. "Thus saith the Lord...," "I prophesy in the name of the Lord...," or some similar phrase, are pretty good indications that he is acting as a prophet. Without some such statement it is not clear whether he is speaking for God or expressing his own views. That is why discernment by the spirit is so necessary."
http://www.shields-research.org/General/LDS_Leaders/1stPres/Joseph_Smith/56_Year.htm#2.

of course he does. did packer use any of these qualifiers in his "prophecy" about "the end isnt near"? no. why? because he doesnt really know when the end is coming (you can actually conclude that they KNOW there is no jesus who is going to "come back"). would it seem rational/reasonable/be expected that he would use such qualifiers if jesus/yahweh in fact really had personally and clearly revealed to him that "the end isnt near"? yes.

see also: https://lds.org/youth/video/look-forward-to-your-future?lang=eng#look-forward-to-your-future

Cubist on scientific "proof"

2011-09-22T10:42:00.000+02:00

If you want scientific evidence, forget about "proves", because science just doesn't *do* proof. Science does 'supported by the evidence', and 'well-supported by the evidence', and '*so* extremely well-supported by the evidence that you've gotta have a screw loose to reject it'. Scientists do not pretend to omniscience. It's always possible that there *might* be some overlooked factor that *could* make hamburger out of whatever scientific theory/conclusion.

http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/e47f58c431cebabe?hl=en

christopher hitchens on the morally disgusting religious practice called circumcision

2011-08-26T07:35:00.000+02:00

christopher hitchens on circumcision:

there are things no morally normal person would THINK of doing, if it wasnt for that they believed in religion or divine instruction. take a transcendent experience that i'm sure a lot of you have had, i've had it 3 times: take a newborn baby in your hands...so here's this bundle, you look at the little indentations in the ear lobes, etc, and THEN you should be getting on with parenting, but NO, first let's find a sharp stone or knife and start hacking away at the genitalia! because it turns out that the design isnt that great and in a crucial feature too! it needs to be sawed away, a lot of it .... no morally person would do such a thing if it wasnt for superstition...

why cant ex-mormons just "leave the church alone"? =)

2011-08-22T10:16:00.001+02:00

from "larry" lawrence pratt:

During much of the 20th century, hundreds of thousands of individuals
escaped from living under totalitarian regimes such as Communism and Nazism
to seek lives elsewhere. Although free from oppression, these people
continued to seek justice for those still under the influence of dictatorial
and personally destructive systems.

when asked this question, i like to respond with the question "why cant the mormon cult leave the *world* alone?" =)

see also: http://latterdaymainstreet.com/2011/08/19/ex-mormons-angry-and-questions-part/

evidence that joseph smith knew about engraved plates during his time--apologists panic =)

2011-08-22T09:39:00.000+02:00

Mike Reed Drops Bomb on Metal Plates

a good definition of "religion"

2011-08-19T09:50:00.002+02:00

from the wikipedia religion page:

The word religion is sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief system, but religion differs from private belief in that it has a public aspect. Most religions have organized behaviors, including clerical hierarchies, a definition of what constitutes adherence or membership, congregations of laity, regular meetings or services for the purposes of veneration of a deity or for prayer, holy places (either natural or architectural), and/or scriptures. The practice of a religion may also include sermons, commemoration of the activities of a god or gods, sacrifices, festivals, feasts, trance, initiations, funerary services, matrimonial services, meditation, music, art, dance, public service, or other aspects of human culture.

rational thinking vs religion

2011-08-15T14:54:00.000+02:00

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=2324005980922&id=1272787049

main post by ED:
Is god all powerful, in that he can do anything he wanted to? If so, then he can create a plan where all his children could return to live with him WITHOUT having to murder one of his children to make it possible. Christianity FAIL. Reason wins.

Nick Humphrey: and what kind of "loving father" lets his kids rape and murder each other? i dont know of any. i usually step in and stop my kids' from fighting when it gets violent. i am really forgiving too and certainly wouldnt ban them from ever being in my presence again if they were to deny the existence of an invisible spirit. =)

TB: So E, let's say "Christianity fails, reason wins". Now what?

Nick Humphrey: ‎TB "Now what?"
* tell your friends =)
* lobby for teaching of rational thinking, skepticism and logic starting in the public elementary education level
* study to build your own repertoire of rational arguments to use in debate with theists
?

TB: What makes you think that reason alone, or empirically justifiable beliefs alone, can ever serve as a substitute for religion, Nick? Haven't you met any of your fellow humans? They don't operate that way. Your war is a war against humanity itself, because humanity is innately religious.
Besides, there is no historical basis for assuming that cold, hard reason cannot itself be made into an idol and worshipped, with its worshippers acting as wickedly as any religious believers. The French Revolution is only one example.
The bloodletting there was orgiastic, and was done entirely in the name of reason and atheism.
If I could have told my friends in France 220 years ago anything, it would have been to continue on as believing Catholics, because they were much better as believing Catholics than as atheists.

Nick Humphrey: ‎TB "What makes you think that reason alone, or empirically justifiable beliefs alone, can ever serve as a substitute for religion, Nick?"
you incorrectly assume at least 2 things:
1) that humanity needs to replace religion with something, instead of just doing away with it.

maybe *you* personally need to "establish contact with a perceived higher power". i dont.

2) that religionists are completely DEVOID of rationality.

they at least put it aside when it concerns their views of the existence of supernatural entities and interpretation of sensory perceptions and coincidences.

your argument is a straw man.

"They don't operate that way. Your war is a war against humanity itself, because humanity is innately religious."

this is known as the "naturalistic fallacy", but what IS does not imply what OUGHT to be. if homo sapiens are inclined towards religion, it doesnt mean we *should* be religious.

"there is no historical basis for assuming that cold, hard reason cannot itself be made into an idol and worshipped with its worshippers acting as wickedly as any religious believers."

this behavior IS *religious* just without an extra-terrestrial deity. assuming that rational thinking alone leads to such behavior is simply fallacious.

falsifiability of the mormon lds church cult "truth claims"

2011-08-10T10:22:00.001+02:00

an interesting thread:
http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/43632-which-lds-truth-claims-are-falsifiable/

possible candidates to falsifiability of "truth claims" (one person stated the importance of the definition of that term):
book of abraham fascimilies
native american dna
plan of happiness <-- lol! =)

"Mormons practice polygamy". myth? technically, no.

2011-08-08T11:44:00.000+02:00

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-mormonism/2011/08/03/gIQAyIhTwI_story.html
this is technically not a myth. ask mormons if they believe in eternal plural marriage? i.e. can a mormon man today be eternally married to more than one woman? (answer: yes. if a man's wife dies, he may be married for "time and all eternity" to a new woman, *in addition to his dead wife*). "eternal" polygamy is still practiced. joseph smith is btw sealed/married to more than 200 women. one of them women is 169 years older than him and another was born 15 years after he died! (source 1: http://www.flickr.com/photos/nickleus/4960128084/ ) (source 2: new.familysearch.org)

ansvar vs årsak og forsvare vs forklare

2011-08-04T14:13:00.000+02:00

when talking about the ABB case in norway, arne tumyr said:

«det politisk korrekte Norge må ta sin del av skylden for den rystende terror-tragedien»

some good points were made about the difference between responsibility and cause, and defending vs explaining.

‎"No cure for pedophilia has been developed."

2011-08-04T11:27:00.000+02:00

‎"No cure for pedophilia has been developed."

i remember before when people thought that homosexuality could be "cured" =) it's interesting that homophilia used to be classified as a mental/psychiatric disorder (paraphilia), as pedophilia still is today. today, homophilia is no longer classified as a paraphilia.

self defense in norway

2011-08-03T11:19:00.001+02:00

Inne på et arrangement på Facebook som kaller seg "Ingen rasister i våre gater" planlegges det demonstrasjoner mot SIAN's arrangementer. I den anledning vil jeg minne SIAN om at man med hjemmel i norsk straffelov §48 helt lovlig kan forsvare seg dersom man føler seg truet av slike "antirasister". Oppfører folk seg truende kan man hevde nødvergerett og man kan til og med foreta sivil pågripelse med hjemmel i straffeprosessloven §171-176.

norway's done doing a good job killing people in libya

2011-08-02T10:49:00.002+02:00

"Det norske bidraget har høstet meget gode tilbakemeldinger for den jobben som vi har gjort..."
...ved å drepe andre mennesker =)

"Ingen skal få bombe Norge til taushet"

nei, det er norges oppgave.

"vi står sammen mot terror"

no shit!

"Heldigvis har reaksjonene etterpå vist at det norske demokratiet og den norske rettsstaten er sterkere enn noe våpen"

med unntak av krigen i libya.

"For hatet, ekstremismen og intoleransen er uvanlige organismer...Den beste måten å stanse dem er gjennom en åpen debatt og med argumenter."

og f-16 jagerfly og bomber.

"mer åpenhet, mer demokrati"

og mer avanserte jagerfly til 800 millioner per stk.

heia jens stoltenberg. stem arbeiderpartiet og deres hyklersk, politisk "talking out of both sides of your mouth".

hippocrates, 400+ years before "jesus" casts out the "demons", understands that epilepsy is an illness

2011-08-02T09:08:00.001+02:00

thanks to Rob Hogue for this quote:

"Men think epilepsy divine, merely because they do not understand it. We will one day understand what causes it, and then cease to call it divine. And so it is with everything in the universe." - Hippocrates 400 BC

now look at the next quote, ca. 400 later on in history:

In the Gospel According to Mark (9:14-29), Jesus Christ casts out a devil from a young man with epilepsy: "Teacher, I brought you my son, who is possessed by a spirit that has robbed him of speech. Whenever it seizes him, it throws him to the ground. He foams at the mouth, gnashes his teeth, and becomes rigid. I asked your disciples to drive the spirit out, but they could not." (NIV) 70 AD

god of the gaps

2011-07-09T10:39:00.001+02:00

a christian on talk.origins said that "god of the gaps" was offensive =) i liked this reply by "r norman":

I suppose it is also offensive to claim that the cosmos and the earth
and humanity were not created in six 24 hour periods less than ten
thousand years ago. I suppose it is also offensive to claim that a
massive flood initiated by forty days and nights of rain did not
inundate the entire earth and kill all living things (animals, at
least) except for the few occupants of one wooden boat. I suppose it
is also offensive to claim that no individual human has ever lived for
900 years, begetting a child at almost 200 years of age. I suppose it
is also offensive to claim that human languages did not originate
during the construction of a single tall building.
Science makes claims about processes in the physical world. There are
gaps in the knowledge that science has so far developed. To claim
that any or all gaps in our knowledge must be due to failures in
science and hence can only be attributed to divine action is offensive
to science. So there.

book review: friedrich nietzsche, beyond good and evil

2011-07-03T19:12:00.009+02:00

things i found interesting in friedrich nietzsche's book beyond good and evil:

page xv

In Beyond Good and Evil he maintains that original Christianity represents 'an ongoing suicide of reason' (p.44; 46), ascribing it to an Oriental slave revolt against Roman antiquity. Like Freud after him, Nietzsche considered religion a 'neurosis' (p. 45; 47); it involves an unnatural self-denial and sacrifice. In one of his most interesting observations, Nietzsche compares the history of 'religious cruelty' to a ladder with three important rungs: the first entails the sacrifice of one's loved ones to the deity; the second demands the sacrifice of one's own instincts or inner nature; and the final rung, which we are now coming to know, involves the sacrifice of God himself for the worship of 'stone, stupidity, heaviness, fate, nothingness' (p. 50; 55). Nietzsche here suggests that our modern penchant for science or nihilism, as atheistic as it appears at first glance, is merely a replacement for religious belief.

page xvi

Nietzsche is not unaware of the advantages that religion has brought to human society,
even as it has debased human nature. It has helped humankind to endure an otherwise intolerable existence and has assisted us in constructing a viable social order by demanding that we love each other. But religion also has other essential socializing functions. For a particular group of people Nietzsche mentions the Brahmans by name--religion provides a spirituality that permits them to remove themselves from the mundane and crude world surrounding them. For those who are destined to be rulers it is one means for overcoming resistance in their subjects, since it forms a common bond with ordinary people and pacifies them into obedience. It also serves as a pedagogical and disciplinary device for the ascending classes, teaching them a certain abnegation that ennobles their spirit and allows them to rise above the common rabble. Finally, for the vast masses, religion provides a solace for their suffering and the meaninglessness of their existence, 'something that justifies their everyday lives, all the baseness, all the semi-animal poverty of their souls' (p. 55;61). In general, however, Nietzsche's attitude towards religion is that it represents a stage of human development that must be overcome. Christianity, in particular, has led to a 'degeneration of the European race' (p. 56; 62), and the persistence of Christian belief is a sign that the human being has not developed into a creature that is strong enough to achieve the type of self-contained nobility of spirit Nietzsche envisions.

page xvii

The Jews, he asserts, 'brought about that tour de force of a reversal of values' (p. 83; 195); they negated a noble order in which richness, excess, cruelty, and sensuality were validated, and substituted for it a value system in which poverty, godliness, timidity, and spirituality hold sway. This 'slave revolt in morals' (p. 83; 195) disdains as evil the beast of prey and the man of prey, for Nietzsche the 'most healthy of all tropical plants and brutes' (pp. 834; 197), while affirming abstinence, pity, and a tolerance for suffering. The institution of the Judaeo-Christian 'herd' morality has made modern Europe possible even as it has meant an impoverishment of possibilities and human potential. Nietzsche reasons that there have always been rulers and subjects, and he recognizes that a morality preaching docile obedience is a necessity for the masses.

page xix

He [the free spirit] will rid himself of moralities that preach equality, democracy, the general welfare, and utilitarian values, and affirm instead the natural hierarchy Nietzsche captures repeatedly in the term Rangordnung.

page xx

More problematically Nietzsche propagates a human being that will not feel compassion with the oppressed and the unfortunate in society, and that will not seek to do away with suffering, including his own suffering. Rather, the pity this future man feels will involve the disdain for the manner in which the human race has made itself small and petty, and he will nourish suffering as the aid to 'depth, mystery, mask, spirit, cleverness, greatness' (p. 117; 225). In a controversial aphorism Nietzsche even ventures a reconsideration of cruelty as an essential part of human nature. All higher culture, all great tragedy, everything sublime, all knowledge, he contends, are ultimately based on cruelty, either towards ourselves or towards others. ... The task Nietzsche assigns his free spirits is 'to return man to nature; to master the many conceited and gushing interpretations and secondary meanings that have heretofore been scribbled and painted over that eternal original text homo natura'(p. 123; 230). In terms of present values Nietzsche's free spirit will thus prove to be an 'immoralist' who affirms life and aspires to the heights of culture and creativity.

page 7

We do not object to a judgement just because it is false; ... The question is rather to what extent the judgement furthers life, preserves life, preserves the species, perhaps even cultivates the species; ... Admitting untruth as a condition of life ... and a philosophy that dares this has already placed itself beyond good and evil.

this review is ongoing (not finished)...

mormon missionaries will tell people that you only have to pay 10%

2011-07-01T14:26:00.001+02:00

which, by itself, is a shock for most people, but what they DONT tell you is that once you get to the temple you have to agree to the law of consecration which requires you to give 100%, that you have to:

"covenant and promise before God, angels , and these witnesses at this alter, that you do accept the Law of Consecration as contained in the Doctrine and Covenant, in that you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents, and ***everything with which the Lord has blessed you, or with which he may bless you***, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion."

"mormons only pay 10% (tithing) of their income" is a whopping lie =) the figure is missing a zero--100% (if the church requires it of you)

mormon apologetics - pseudo-science + ad hoc assumptions

2011-06-29T15:18:00.000+02:00

by Holy the Ghost

An ad hoc assumption or adhoc hypothesis is a way of explaining away your wrongness.
After you discover that you are mistaken, you make an assumption that, if true, allows you to conclude that you were not really mistaken
If I run an experiment in which I predict some psychic phenomena, but the results contradict my hypothesis, I can argue that my psychic phenomena still exists, but the problem is that there were skeptics who were observing the experiment, and they sent off bad psi vibes (or some such thing).

We believe that Joseph Smith is a mouthpiece for God.
Observation: He was wrong about men on the moon.
Ad hoc assumption: he was speaking as a man.

We believe Joseph Smith was a translator:
Observation: Book of Abraham
Ad hoc assumption: he didn't literally translate it, it was simply a tool of inspiration

We believe we will be blessed for paying tithing.
Observation: You are a bankrupt
Ad hoc assumption: God is testing you

We believe we can be healed by blessings
Observation: non healing
Ad hoc assumption: the recipient lacks faith

We believe that the church takes tithing & offerings for purposes of charity
Observation: There is little evidence that this is true
Ad hoc assumption: the church doesn't want to brag about it's charitableness

We believe that black people are cursed, and were less valiant in the pre-existence
Observation: 1978 revelation
Ad hoc assumption: that was simply a policy, never a doctrine

by Fetal Deity

Apologists are pseudo-scientists. That is, they do their "science" in reverse. They start with a conclusion. In the case of Mopologists, that means, for instance, that they have concluded ("spiritually") that the BoM is the word of God. Then, they look for evidence that supports their conclusion; any evidence that contradicts their previously arrived-at conclusion is either ignored, distorted or completely redefined.

Bottom line: it is impossible to engage in a rational, objective argument with an apologist in the area he or she is defending ... IMPOSSIBLE ... as in: DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME!!!

stephen hawking on the probability of intelligent life

2011-06-29T12:56:00.000+02:00

Stephen Hawking: Asking big questions about the universe
05:35 despite an extensive search by the SETI project we haven't heard any alien television quiz shows. this probably indicates that there are no alien civilizations at our stage of development within the radius of a few hundred light years. issuing an insurance policy for abduction by aliens seems a pretty safe bet.

movie review - IOUSA - documentary about the US deficit

2011-06-28T21:38:00.006+02:00

17:49 the only issue that's more severe than this (the projected social security + medical deficit after 2017: -2 trillion within 3 decades) would be the idea that an islamic fundamentalist will his hands on (or her hands on) a nuclear weapon and use it against us. - senator judd gregg, NH

43:48 in 2007, china had the largest trade surplus in the world ($315,700,000,000) and who was dead last? the united states of america (-$816,000,000,000)

1:07:49 our country would need $53,000,000,000,000 invested today which is about $175,000 per person to deliver on the government's obligations and promises. how much of this 53 trillion dollars to we have? zip. by the time today's college graduates are going to retire 40 years from now, the only things our government will be able to pay for are interest on the federal debt and some social security, medicare and medicaid benefits. all other parts of the federal government will be closed and out of business.

1:21:01 while you watched this film $85 million was added to the federal debt.

ragnar redbeard's real(istic) beatitudes

2011-06-28T14:23:00.003+02:00

here are my "picks" from redbeard's beatitudes from might is right:

Blessed are the strong, for they shall possess the Earth.
Blessed are the powerful for they shall be reverenced among men.
Blessed are the bold for they shall be masters of the world.
Blessed are the iron-handed, the unfit shall flee before them.
Blessed are the destroyers of false hope, they are the true Messiahs.
Blessed are they who believe in nothing, never shall it terrorize their minds.

Cursed are the believers in good and evil for they are frightened by shadows.
Cursed are the God-adorers, they shall be shorn sheep.
Cursed are the haters of battle, subjugation is their portion.
Cursed are the humble, for they shall be trodden under hoofs.
Cursed are the weak, for they shall inherit the yoke.
Cursed are the feeble for they shall be blotted out.
Cursed are the poor in spirit, they shall be spat upon.

if you're looking for truth, redbeard's beatitudes are at least true. jesus' are wishful thinking, claimed to be true, when they dont represent reality, thus they are lies (or empty metaphorical promises, not intended to be fulfilled here in this life--how convenient), in my eyes =) there's a theory that jesus was invented by josephus flavius to keep the jews under rome's control. jesus' teachings would do just that, e.g. "turn the other cheek", "blessed are the humble", "if a man asks for your shirt give him your coat", etc.
historicity of jesus

caesar's messiah (this book is really interesting. i have it if you want to borrow it.)

jesus also fits the profile of a mythological hero. on Lord Raglan's scale of 1-22 of common traits for a mythological hero, jesus ranks around 19. it is said that no real, historical figure has ever scored above a 7 (alexander the great == not a mythological hero).
see also this lord raglan's hero page and jesus' hero explanation

see also:
jesus myth theory
jesus christ and comparative mythology

i originally posted all of this on facebook: http://www.facebook.com/notes/nick-humphrey/the-realistic-beatitudes/10150277538262292

why the mormons always list a new leader's accomplishments before he speaks for the first time

2011-06-28T12:08:00.003+02:00

while growing up in the lds cult i was always bothered by the bragging about the new leader or "important" guest speaker being presented to the congregation, how the person introducing him would always read through a long list of accomplishments/bragging points about all the education and positions he's held, etc. i always knew of somebody in my ward who was most likely way more humble and "spiritually qualified" to help and teach others, but who hadnt accomplished a lot in the worldly sense when compared to this businessman in a nice suit. it bothered me that the church leaders put such an emphasis on worldly achievements of their leaders.

i remember saying to myself every single time this happened: "why do they do this? what does this have to do with anything about the gospel?"

today i was reading The Essential Guide to Rhetoric
and found the answer to my lifelong question =)

page 38

ETHOS
Argument is not the only dimension of persuasive proof. You might sometimes hear what sound like strong arguments, yet be inclined to doubt them. To accept someone’s argument is, in a sense, to trust that person, so audiences make judgments about the speaker. Audiences ask questions (such as “What kind of person is this?") to evaluate the speaker and decide if she is credible and whether to change their mind about the topic at hand. This is the same as asking, “What kind of ethos does this person have?” When audiences wonder about the speaker’s ethos, they are considering his credibility (believability) and trustworthiness.

By telling the people in church the "impressive" info about the new leader/guest speaker, they are establishing the credibility of that person, which increases the chances that the people will trust him and believe what he says. It's a simple, well-known, rhetoric tactic.

if what the speaker was going to say was really true, and the "holy ghost" really existed, then creating ethos to strengthen your message (argument) would just be a waste of time and effort.

the equinox volume 3 number 10 book review

2011-06-27T23:32:00.003+02:00

to apply for the OTO here in norway i was told to read the equinox vol. III no. 10. i had already the book of the law and didnt really get anything out of it. i like the idea of pursuing/testing religion/mysticism using the scientific method, but it's hard for me to get past a couple of things i read in the first chapter "the master therion":

page 16

The climax of their dealings with him came in the weeks immediately
preceding and following the Spring Equinox of 1924 E.V. At this time
he lay sick unto death. He was entirely alone; for They would even
permit the presence of those few whom They had themselves appointed to
aid him in this final initiation. In this last ordeal the earthly part
of him was dissolved in water; the water was vaporized into air; the
air was rarified utterly, until he was free to make the last effort,
and to pass into the vast caverns of the Threshold which guards the
Realm of Fire. Now naught human may come through those immensities. So
in that Fire he was consumed wholly, and as pure Spirit alone did he
return, little by little, during the months that followed, into the
body and mind that had perished in that great ordeal of which he can
say no more than: I died.

But these six months being accomplished, a certain Virgin came forth
at the bidding of the Secret Chiefs, at whose touch he resumed contact
with his human life.

Her he conveyed swiftly to the Desert of the Sahara, that in silent
communion with her Soul he might become aware of the intimate nature
of his Work for the Masters; for she was verily a symbol of the Virgin
Bride, whose redemption is the mystery of the Perpetuation of the
Godhead.

do thelemites really believe this? aleister crowley was vaporized, died, then brought back to the flesh by a virgin? come-the-fuck-on.

the next thing that bothered me was something in the oath:

page 18

that i will interpret every phenomenon as a particular dealing of God with my soul

how completely unscientific. after reading these two things i haven't had the motivation to read on. maybe i will, maybe i wont.

"god" as a "loving heavenly father"

2011-06-11T21:07:00.000+02:00

here's my response to a christian friend on facebook telling me i have a heavenly father who loves me =)

the bible is a collection of (and excluding a lot of) writings from different people, many we dont even know who the author was, and contains contradicting statements about the nature of god. you have a "loving heavenly father" who says and does things like:
* stone your disobedient children (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
* I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. (Exodus 20:5)
* God is jealous, and the LORD revengeth; the LORD revengeth, and is furious; (Nahum 1:2)
* The LORD slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of beast. Exodus (13:15)
* Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. (Ezekiel 8:18)
* Thou shalt fear thy God: for I am the LORD your God. (Leviticus 25:17)

the list goes on an on. christians cherry pick the nice scriptures about god, but the bible is full of contradictions or evidence against a loving god. even though i'm not the best father in the world, i'm confident in saying i'm way nicer than the god of the bible. if my child was crying out to me for help, i would help him immediately. i also dont want my children to fear me or mindlessly do everything i say or do.

i think if you feel like you have a connection to a heavenly father, it's not the one in the bible =)

this is a great article:
http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2008/12/richard-dawkins-god-of-old-testament.html

the "evils" of socialism (tongue in cheek)

2011-06-11T10:38:00.003+02:00

it is hilarious how many americans dont realize how much socialism is in their democracy =) and how they think socialism is some kind of evil =) here's some insider info from someone living in a socialist country:
* there is no illiteracy in norway
* there are no homeless
* i dont have to have health insurance--my basic needs have always been taken care of, if i want to speed things up i can go to a private clinic or go to another country (i personally dont know of anybody who has ever had to do this though)
* we get paid to have children, get monthly allowance until the kid turns 18
* daycare is heavily subsidized
* there's no wealth distribution like the fairytale in american minds--many people still have a lot more than other people. you can make as much money as you're able to make, there's still incentive to invent, create, work hard, etc. the difference is that (see also point 2) the "poorest" have all their basic needs covered.
* if you need help with your kids for example, people from the government will come to your house for free and give you advice/help
* free dental care for children until they are 18.
* everyone is guaranteed 4 weeks paid vacation and 1 week unpaid if you want to take an extra week.
* it is very hard to get fired from your job
* our oldest has adhd and the government pays his aunt and uncle to watch him 2 weekends a month
* super low crime rate
etc

how to write yourself out of the lds mormon church by email

2011-06-08T13:16:00.000+02:00

My full name is X
My date of birth is X
My membership number is X.
My residence address is: X

I am a member in the X ward.

I hereby resign my membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, effective immediately, and request you to remove my name permanently from your membership records. Please confirm that my name has been removed from your records. I expect to receive that confirmation within a reasonably short time.
-----
send this in an email to dodgegw@ldschurch.org
replace all X's if you know what they are. you might need to follow up with the bishop from the ward you attended last, calling him and sending him messages until he complies. my process took exactly 7 days from when i sent my email to when i received my resignation letter from my bishop saying i had been removed. tell you bishop you do not want to wait the standard 30 days (at the stake president level), but that you want your resignation to be processed immediately.

joseph smith boasting he is greater than jesus

2011-06-05T11:56:00.000+02:00

history of the church, page 2432

I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet.

thelema's the equinox volume 1 number 2 book review

2011-06-04T13:30:00.009+02:00

this is my review of equinox 1.2

page 4

joseph smith is mentioned in a list of incompatible forms of faith =)

Faith has been proposed as a remedy. But we perceive many incompatible forms of Faith founded on Authority—The Vedas, The Quran, The Bible; Buddha, Christ, Joseph Smith

this appeals to me:

5. There is only one Rock which Scepticism cannot shake;
the Rock of Experience.
6. We have therefore endeavoured to eliminate from the
conditions of acquiring Spiritual Experience its dogmatic,
theological, accidental, climatic and other inessential elements.
7. We require the employment of a strictly scientific
method. The mind of the seeker must be unbiased: all
prejudice and other sources of error must be perceived as such
and extirpated.
8. We have therefore devised a Syncretic-Eclectic Method
combining the essentials of all methods, rejecting all their
trammels, to attack the Problem, through exact experiments
and not by guesses.

page 5

1. There is no hope in physical life, since death of the
individual, the race, and ultimately the planet, ends all.
2. There is no hope in reason, since it contradicts itself,
and is in any case no more than a reflection upon the facts of
physical life.
...
4. There is no hope in Faith, for there are many warring
Faiths, all equally positive.

2. We are Men of Science, ever eagerly acquiring
pertinent facts.
3. We are Sceptics, ever eagerly examining those facts.
4. We are Philosophers, ever eagerly classifying and coordinating those well-criticised facts.
5. We are Epicureans, ever eagerly enjoying the
unification of those facts.
6. We are Philanthropists, ever eagerly transmitting our
knowledge of those facts to others.
7. Further, we are Syncretists, taking truth from all
systems, ancient and modern; and Eclectics, ruthlessly
discarding the inessential factors in any one system, however
perfect.

page 6

3. Mysticism, being based on pure experience, is always a
vital force; but owing to the lack of trained observation, has
always been a mass of error. Spiritual Experience, interpreted
in the terms of Intellect, is distorted; just as sunrise shows the
grass green and the sea blue. Both were invisible until sunrise;
yet the diversity of colour is not in the sun, but in the objects
on which its light falls, and their contradiction does not prove
the sun to be an illusion.
4. We shall correct Mysticism (or Illuminism) by Science,
and explain Science by Illuminism.

1. We have one method, that of Science.

page 13

2. In this book it is spoken of the Sephiroth and the Paths;
of Spirits and Conjurations; of Gods, Spheres, Planes, and
many other things that may or may not exist.
It is immaterial whether these exist or not. By doing
certain things, certain results will follow; students are
earnestly warned against attributing objective reality or philosophical validity to any of them.
3. The advantages to be gained from them are chiefly
these:
(a) A widening of the horizon of the mind.
(b) An improvement of the control of the mind.

lds mormon "holy ghost"/"spirit" testimony

2011-06-03T11:59:00.001+02:00

from Lyndon Lamborn "Standing for Something More",

The holy spirit as a sole guide is very unreliable. Many examples
prove this point

1. Since the holy spirit truth test is universally used by all
religions, and most religions conclude that their way is the only true
way to find God, they cannot all be correct. Therefore, there are
hundreds of millions of false positives. The truth test formula is
therefore proven unreliable.
2. Many LDS have described the confirmation truth test feelings in
relation to stories that were ultimately found to be fabricated.
Examples include the faith-building stories told by Paul H. Dunn.
These stories were absolute treasures to many, and accompanied by the
warm feelings, tingly spine, and burning in the bosom for thousands.
Dunn later confessed that the stories were contrived . The truth test
formula is therefore proven unreliable, even among LDS members.
3. Many LDS describe the burning in the bosom, the tingly spine, etc.
as being indistinguishable from feelings when reading other inspiring
stories (especially patriotic) or quotes that have nothing to do with
religion or the plan of salvation. This is more evidence confirming
the unreliability of the truth test.
4. Finally, unfulfilled and false prophecies made by prophets when
‘under the influence of the Holy Ghost’ are another indicator of the
unreliable nature of the truth test. In 1835 Smith prophesied that the
second coming would take place by the year 1891 . April 5, 1843, at
the General Conference of the Church, while the Spirit rested upon
him, the Prophet Joseph said: “Were I going to prophecy, I would say
the end would not come in 1844, 5, or 6, or in forty years. There are
those of the rising generation who shall not taste death till Christ
comes. ” Since all those in the rising generation are now dead, the
truth test failed Smith. The truth test is therefore also unreliable
for LDS prophets. (Joseph Fielding Smith, Teachings of the Prophet
Joseph Smith page 286 )

here's a great quote by "apostle" dallin oaks:

"What does a “burning in the bosom” mean? Does it need to be a feeling of caloric heat, like the burning produced by combustion? If that is the meaning, I have never had a burning in the bosom."

"The holy spirit as a sole guide is very unreliable"
the "holy spirit" can actually be explained by biology/psychology =)

read about "A Short Experiment – Comparing Descriptions of Spiritual Feelings from Different Religions"

then read about the church's registered trademark called HeartSell

bonneville was established and is owned and run by deseret management--the church's for-profit "arm"

"i know gravity is true"

2011-05-31T12:23:00.002+02:00

from eric davis' facebook status:

No one ever stands in front of a group and says "I know gravity is true." Why is that? It's because evidence makes gravity an accepted reality. Be wary of any idea in which people feel the need to repeatedly declare how "true" it is. Chances are that such ideas have no factual support, and those people are either (A) deluded, or (B) still trying to convince themselves despite lack of factual support.

this reminds me of the boyd packer quote about self-brainwashing:

"A testimony is found in the bearing of it."

and its implication: "If you don't believe something that we teach, or if you have doubts, BEAR FALSE WITNESS about it, and KEEP LYING until you've convinced yourself that your testimony is true."

jesus tells pharisees they are sinning by not stoning disrespectful children

2011-05-25T09:27:00.000+02:00

new testament scripture where jesus condones stoning disrespectful children

1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,

2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

---
this message has been brought to you by the "loving" "savior" jesus =)

the rest of the story FAIR deliberately left out about joseph smith's moon men beliefs

2011-05-16T13:37:00.000+02:00

oliver b. huntington's testimony about joseph smith's teachings about men on the moon:

As far back as 1837, I know that he [Joseph Smith] said the moon was inhabited by men and women the same as this earth, and that they lived to a greater age than we do -- that they live generally to near the age of a 1,000 years.
He described the men as averaging nearly six feet in height, and dressing quite uniformly in something near the Quaker style

FAIR'S main response (in addition to the "speaking as a man" copout):

However, it should be remembered that this concept was considered 'scientific fact' by many at the time.

but FAIR intentionally leaves out a rather key part of that testimony:

"Astronomers and philosophers have, from time almost immemorial until very recently, asserted that the moon was uninhabited, that it had no atmosphere, etc. But recent discoveries, through the means of powerful telescopes, have given scientists a doubt or two upon the old theory.
Nearly all the great discoveries of man in the last half century have, in one way or another, either directly or indirectly, contributed to prove Joseph Smith to be a Prophet."

FAIR is just doing what dallin oaks describes as the mission of official church literature--misrepresentation (lying):

Balance is telling both sides. This is not the mission of the official Church literature

ann coulter on racially profiling muslims

2011-05-12T13:11:00.000+02:00

ann coulter on racially profiling muslims

07:40 "100% of the terrorist attacks on US airlines for 20 years have been commited by muslims. when there is a 100% chance, it ceases to be a profile, it's called a description of the suspect."

racism is about biology not ideology

2011-05-11T12:35:00.001+02:00

thoughts and beliefs have no "protection" under the definition of "racism"--the hatred, discrimination or intolerance of another race or other races.

e.g. muslims are not a race. they are believers of a certain ideology--islam.

islam: women, pray to the god who allows you to be beaten by your husbands

2011-05-11T12:19:00.000+02:00

an important example of cognitive dissonance in islam that ayaan hirsi ali wants muslim women to wake up and realize:

01:08 we can for instance wake up to the fact that the god that says in chapter 4 verse 34 tells the husband you have the right to beat your woman, is the same god, after we are beaten and bruised, that we pray to for comfort.

creationist/theist: "how could the entire universe simply pop into existence magically for no reason at all?"

2011-05-10T09:17:00.000+02:00

atheist: "how could *God* magically pop into existence magically for no reason at all?"

death to "allah's" and muhammad's enemies!

2011-05-09T18:01:00.000+02:00

koran, surah 5:33

The punishment for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive
to create mischief in the land is death or crucifixion or the cutting off their hands and
feet from opposite sides or exile from the land based on the gravity of their offense.
This will be their humiliation in this world and in the Hereafter they will have grievous
punishment,[33]

this message has been brought to you by islam--the "religion of peace"

there's no "moderate" islam according to the koran

2011-05-09T17:52:00.000+02:00

cherry picking teachings to follow is not allowed for muslims according to the koran in surah 4:150-151:

Those who deny Allah and his Messenger and those who intend to draw a line between Allah and His Messengers saying: "We believe in some, and reject the rest" - desiring to take a middle way between belief and unbelief [150] - these are the real unbelievers and We have prepared for such unbelievers a humiliating punishment.[151]

islam: painful punishment for apostasy (muslims who reject their faith)

2011-05-09T17:47:00.002+02:00

koran, surah 4:137-139:

As for those who accept the faith then renounce it, who again embrace it and again deny
it, and go on increasing in unbelief, Allah will neither forgive them nor guide them to
the Right Way.[137] Announce the painful punishment to those hypocrites[138] who
choose the unbelievers to be their protectors rather than believers.

teachings like this are dangerous because they can be interpreted in many, potentially dangerous ways.

pakistani imam in norway demands beheading of muslims who dont fast during ramadan

2011-05-09T11:48:00.001+02:00

Syed Farasat Ali Bukhari says that muslims who dont fast during ramadan should be beheaded and muslims who dont pray should be jailed. now he wants to start his own private school for muslim children!

sam harris on islam - the last word with lawrence o'donnell

2011-05-08T22:37:00.002+02:00

sam harris on islam - the last word with lawrence o'donnell

04:03 sam harris: islam is at a very different moment in its history and it's as though we're encountering the christians of the 14th century, armed with 21st century weapons. we have a real problem with islam and it's not an accident that we're not having this conversation about the amish or quakers or jains or even buddhists. ideas have consequences and the idea that you can get to paradise by dying in the defense of the faith, in fact dying in the defense of the faith is the best thing that can possibly happen to you--that is a mainstream notion in islam.

04:37 lawrence o'donnell: is there any lesson in how catholicism worked its way through its homicidal phase of a couple of centuries, for present day islamic extremists?
sam harris: yes, the problem is that we just dont have 500 years to work it out. we were burning heretics alive for 5 centuries in europe and it's understandable, based on a certain reading of the bible. we have incredibly destructive technology spreading all over the world and it's getting increasingly easy for one person to screw up life for millions. and so i think we have some decades at best, to get straight about this and to build a viable, global civilization that is compatible with human well-being and religious demagoguery of any kind is the worse piece of software to have running on your brain when it comes to actually engage that challenge.

i know the church is true "Because feelings are unmistakeable" / "i cant deny the spiritual experiences i've had"

2011-05-08T22:04:00.002+02:00

in a recent facebook discussion an lds tbm friend said to me that he knows the church is true and what he has experienced is true "Because feelings are unmistakeable". there are a lot of ways to say this, but the response is:

i hope you're not serious...
people all over the world in many different religions "feel the spirit" of what they believe is true, mormons dont have a monopoly on these feelings:
A Short Experiment – Comparing Descriptions of Spiritual Feelings from Different Religions

read also about the lds church's registered trademark "HeartSell":

"Our unique strength is the ability to touch the hearts and minds of our audiences, evoking first feeling, then thought and, finally, action. We call this uniquely powerful brand of creative "HeartSell"® - strategic emotional advertising that stimulates response."

if you can read those 2 pages and not be convinced that you are being duped, that your emotions and mind are being manipulated, then you are in serious trouble. HeartSell is the mormon church's MO *in black and white* and it's even *for sale*! wake up people!

islam vs muslims

2011-05-08T14:14:00.000+02:00

the best thing to do is keep the focus on islam, the religion, the political ideology. to say that "there's no such thing as a peaceful muslim" is to set yourself up for failure. what you can prove is that the koran encourages violence and is full of contradictory teachings (read about the problems with islamic/quranic abrogation). this makes the koran dangerous because there is plenty of room for different interpretations. islam doesnt have a living prophet; it isnt organized in the sense that there are many different sects, but what they all have in common is the koran and the potential to interpret it in a way that brings about fatal consequences. we cannot let islam sneak into our governments and into our laws.

jeg tror det er best å holde fokuset på religionen/ideologien *islam*. å si "det finnes ingen fredelige muslimer" er å starte en kamp du ikke kan vinne. det som kan bevises er at koranen oppfordrer til vold og er full av motsigelser (les om problemer med "abrogation"). dette gjør at koranen er farlig fordi det er masse rom for forskjellige fortolkninger. islam har ingen levende overhode/profet, er ikke organisert i den forstand at det finnes mange forskjellige sekter, men det alle har felles er koranen og potensialen til å tolke den på en måte som fører til dødelige konsekvenser og vi KAN IKKE tillate at islam sniker seg inn i regjeringen og inn i lovverket.

exmormon review: "New Harmony: Spirit will help young adults who wander"

2011-05-07T10:28:00.001+02:00

my review of jerry earl johnston's (aka "locke" from "Lost") article New Harmony: Spirit will help young adults who wander

"When people go AWOL from the church"

AWOL == absence without leave. interesting choice of words. as if people need permission to leave =) "my experience" is that many people do feel the church is controlling their lives.

"we think it may be a social problem, or an intellectual problem"

typical mormon pride. are we to interpret this as "people who leave are intellectually deficient"? my reason for leaving was a combination of the control factor and intellectual aspects of contradictory church teachings and church teachings compared with reality and science. my bishop was trying to tell me and my wife what we could and couldnt do in the bedroom. most mormons will reply "he was wrong, the church has no official doctrine on that, etc", but the first presidency released a letter which contradicts this reply: "Official Declaration of the First Presidency of the Church, January 5th, 1982".

Second, I had no use for people in authority. I saw them as people who wanted me to behave a certain way because somebody had made them behave that way. A classic child of the '60s, I trusted no one over 30.

this is a straw man argument. of course we need people in authority. what we *dont need* is people falsely claiming authority--telling people they will be burned if they dont pay money to the church, telling people they should feel guilty and ashamed because of their normal, healthy sexual desires, telling consenting adults how, when and who they can and cant have sex with, telling people they have to do this and that (a long list of things), otherwise they are not "worthy"/acceptable/good, etc.

"It usually takes an individual, not an institution."

this is yet another straw man argument--no mention of the *essential* converting "power" of the "holy ghost"? =) if jerry earl had grown up in the church, been praying and reading scriptures then the "holy ghost" would have had ample time to "tell him the truth of all things".

exmormon review: "Friday Minute: 10 member-missionary tips"

2011-05-05T11:11:00.001+02:00

i only evaluated the first 5 points of Friday Minute: 10 member-missionary tips:

"Understanding how the public views us can improve our responses to gospel questions."

because the holy ghost which will tell you "the truth of all things" apparently isn't enough.

"I joined the church at 18 because a wonderful member-missionary understood that friendship is an extension of Christ’s way of life"

i.e. a well known principle of social psychology (for some reason he left out the part about the "holy ghost").

"Ditch the lingo"

i wholeheartedly agree.

"'men changed' instead of 'apostasy'"

just like "speaking as a man" or "only stating his opinion" or "that wasn't official church doctrine" instead of "wrong".

"Trust. When we earn our friends’ trust, they will trust our message"

provide full historical financial disclosure. only then i think you can begin to talk about trust.

"When the trainer retrieved his dog, I recognized him as an investigator... God loved him enough to send that dog to our garage so that we might bear a second witness"

this is called a post hoc fallacy. "A" happened, then "B", therefore "A" caused "B".

"God loved him enough"

stating *belief* as fact.

Mohammed: the end will NOT come UNLESS you wipe out the jews!

2011-05-03T17:39:00.000+02:00

Translation of Sahih Muslim, Book 41: The Book Pertaining to the Turmoil and Portents of the Last Hour (Kitab Al-Fitan wa Ashrat As-Sa`ah) Book 041, Number 6985:

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

sahih muslim is one of the Six major collections of the hadith in Sunni Islam, oral traditions relating to the words and deeds of the Islamic *"Prophet" Muhammad* and the second most authentic hadith collection after Sahih Al-Bukhari, and is highly acclaimed by Sunni Muslims--the largest denomination of muslims (80-90% of all muslims).
sahih translates as "authentic" or "correct".

what is official lds mormon church doctrine?

2011-05-03T13:43:00.002+02:00

i call it the "official doctrine" dilemma:

where does it say what official lds doctrine is?

"source X"

where does it say that "source X" is official doctrine?

"source Y"

where does it say that "source Y" is official doctrine?

"source Z"

ad infinitum or "it doesnt".

most people, when asked this question cite this source:
http://fairlds.org/FAIR_Brochures/What_is_Mormon_Doctrine.pdf

the problem is that michael ash isnt an official spokesman for the lds church so this article about what is official doctrine isnt official.

if someone suggests this link:
http://newsroom.lds.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

then my reply is:
is everything on newsroom.lds.org official doctrine? if so, where does it say that? who says this "authorless" article is official doctrine? is everything on lds.org official doctrine? if so, where does it say that?

is everything in the scriptures even official doctrine? what about polygamy? what about stoning your child if he doesnt obey you? see the dilemma?

IMPORTANT: when debating with an apologist, dont let the apologist set the rules of what is official doctrine or not. dont play by their rules. state something like: just so you know, i intend to take apostles and prophets of god at their word that what they say is official revelation from god when speaking in public or publicly publishing their teachings (independent of when the teachings were given--dead prophets and apostles count just as much as living), in addition to all "scriptures" in their original, "most perfect"/"directly revealed by god" versions--all changes to these sources will be disregarded. if the changes were purely spelling errors or dont change the meaning of the context then it wont matter anyways.

lds claim: "True wealth comes by living the gospel"

2011-05-03T12:43:00.001+02:00

articles and statements like this are so ridiculous:

Hannah understood that worldly wealth and applause pales into insignificance when compared to the riches of eternity.

not if you're starving or need expensive medical care.

yes what the sick, poor and hungry children in the world definitely need is more metaphorical wealth =)

i suspect "true wealth" really has nothing to do with monetary wealth, otherwise why would the church have a "welfare" system then? =)

statements like this are so easy to say, especially from people who are not poor and starving.

elaine, from the exmormon yahoo group had a great comment:

> "Hannah understood that worldly wealth and applause pales into
> insignificance when compared to the riches of eternity."

Oh that must be why Mormons have totally forsaken materialism and MBAs and instead turned toward healing the sick and succoring those in need and restoring the earth toward its paradisaical glory. ;-)

Elaine

"the 6th sense" (norwegian edition: jakten på den sjette sans) FAIL =)

2011-05-02T11:31:00.001+02:00

last night i watched "the 6th sense" (norwegian edition). the challenge was a medium sitting in an apartment in front of like 20 pictures of other mediums/psychics and the medium is supposed to say which one of those is on their way to visit them right now. the psychic/medium coming to visit them is carrying a picture of the medium in the apartment and is supposed to be sending them information/energy about who they are. one after the other is choosing the wrong person and each time they give excuses like "I have a sore throat so I'm not so susceptible to energy right now" or "we must have been on different frequencies" or "you're the wrong person" (I cant remember what the medium said, but she tried to blame the person who came to visit =) lmao =)

"Elohim can also mean many gods."

2011-05-01T23:36:00.004+02:00

another claim by TheSkepticChristian:

"Elohim can also mean many gods."

my response:
judaism is a monotheistic religion. in hebrew, elohim is a homonym, and when used with plural verbs, can mean things like gods, angels, judges, etc. in the context of the god of the old testament it is a name/title that represents god's attribute of a "pluralistic reality in nature". ask any jewish rabbi, or read here:
http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/275,2024029/Why-is-the-name-Elohim-plural.html

elohim as meaning many gods in the context of the creation in the first book of moses is a great example of the falsehood of the mormon book of abraham.

UPDATE: there apparently is a theory that early judaism was polytheistic. but not in the same way as mormonism suggests.

Ancient gold plates in Mesoamerica By Daniel Johnson, For Mormon Times

2011-05-01T17:17:00.002+02:00

even the first sentence of the article is misleading:

"Archaeologists have know for about a century that gold plates with carved writing have been found in Mesoamerica, yet it is still not common knowledge outside their discipline."

engraving on gold plates has been common knowledge and practice in the occult for centuries at least. agrippa, the most influential writer of renaissance esoterica, wrote about it in the 16th century:

"this being engraven on a golden plate with the Sun being fortunate, renders him that wears it to be renowned, amiable, acceptable, potent in all his works, and equals a man to kings, and princes, elevating him to high fortunes, enabling to do whatsoever he pleaseth;"

(p. 319 Three Books of Occult Philosophy by Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim)

this comment was DENIED by deseret news yet the church claims "The religion of the Latter-day Saints is not hostile to any truth, nor to scientific search for truth" (Elder Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations)

what a crock of shit!

UPDATE: i wrote to gregory (greg) kratz at gkratz@desnews.com and he told me to repost it and it was accepted =) they've got some real tightwad moderators over there.

how long are the days in the creation story in genesis?

2011-05-01T02:53:00.001+02:00

if you're a christian apologist trying to consolidate evolution into the literal creation story (which cant be done) then one day would be approximately (4,500,000,000-6000)/7 = 642,856,286 years long.

"We can believe or reject evolution, it doesn't matter, the church has no official position."

2011-04-30T14:26:00.006+02:00

i've been recently messaging back and forth with a somewhat brainwashed and non-rational mormon who goes by the youtube username TheSkepticChristian (NOT!). he wrote the following claim to me:

"We can believe or reject evolution, it doesn't matter, the church has no official position."

and a personal-christian contact of mine on facebook wrote something similar to me today:

"I am rather conflicted because of understanding both views (atheism and Christianity)."

here's my response:
evolution by mutations, genetic drift and natural selection and the literal, young earth, old testament creation by YHWH are mutually exclusive models.

furthermore, a key element of natural selection is death, (the survival of the fittest). according to the old (genesis 2:17) and new testament (romans 5:12), death was introduced with the fall about 5800 years ago. according to the current model of evolution, we are but one of millions of interrelated species. the old testament tells us that we're not related to any other lifeform on earth whatsoever, but that we are created in god's image and are his children and he is our father.

an exmormon named chulotc (on exmormon.org) responded to me with the following:

When I was a kolobian it was easy to rationilize evolution and maintain my core belief system. Elohim organized matter which already existed (preserving thermodynamics), that matter coalesced into stars, supernovae, smaller stars, planets, moons, etc.

The conditions were such that biological life manifested and eventually evolved into higher primates, two of which elohim placed in a garden and put kolobian spirits into.

wherein i responded:

the problems with this are that the book of genesis claims:
1) adam was the first man, the father of humans.
2) YHWH created adam from the dust, he wasnt an evolved, living man, plucked from a group of other living men and put into a garden of eden. he didnt have a homo sapien father and mother and neither did eve because YHWH created eve from the rib of adam.
3) adam was immortal to begin with and death entered the world after eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
4) creation of animals and man happened on different "days" or iterations, whereas with evolution, homo sapiens and animals (and plants, etc) have been evolving side by side in one long continuous process.

then there's the anachronism in genesis 1:1-5 that the earth was created *before* the sun and then in verse 16, that the stars (the rest of the universe) were not created until the fourth day, long after the creation of the earth and sun.

according to nasa, about half the stars in our milky way galaxy alone are older than our sun.

"mark hofmann didnt dupe the mormon prophet and apostles"

2011-04-28T15:51:00.001+02:00

http://mormonstories.org/?p=1236

Terry Anderson 6 months ago

@Richard Packham
I remember listening to GBH making a reference to the salamander letter during GC and he specifically said that it didn't really matter whether the document was real or a forgery, as it related to the Restoration claims. From this I gathered that they weren't convinced if its authenticity. I don't see why they had to receive a revelation (or at least publicly say so) when the forgery was eventually uncovered anyway. Revelations are not always necessary when we can also use our own resources.

nick humphrey 0 minutes ago in reply to Terry Anderson

"it didn't really matter whether the document was real or a forgery, as it related to the Restoration claims"
this is absolute hogwash. with that logic, anyone can make anything, tell the church it is a forgery and still expect the church to pay them lots of money for it as long as it "relates to restoration claims". c'mon, stop deceiving yourself. they were duped into thinking it was real that's why they "bought it". there's no magical holy ghost that uncovers hidden truth, this is just one example to support that. there are no consistent, testable, supernatural powers.

"Revelations are not always necessary when we can also use our own resources."
then apply that reasoning to the rest of your life.

i like this users comment too:

Patrick 6 months ago

The criticism for me is not that Prophets and Apostles got duped. I'm perfectly willing to let people be human and stupid at times. Everyone is. I've was always taught the pseudo-doctrine that Prophets are only perfect in teaching doctrine...(yeah, I know that one has issues too.)

For me, the biggest issue was and is that the Church censors its history by preventing access to historical documents. To me, this is dishonest, bordering on lying, to its members and the world.

If knowledge is light, why is the Church hiding it under a bushel?

"in billions of years anything can happen" doesnt explain anything!

2011-04-28T12:33:00.001+02:00

here's my response to a young earth creationist argument:

nick humphrey Apr 27, 11:08 am
On Apr 27, 9:18 am, rmj wrote:

> The old "in billions of years anything can happen" argument. Irrefutable
> because it says nothing.

as opposed to the everything happened in the last 10,000 years =)

"there is no one single way to disprove a church/religion"

2011-04-28T12:00:00.000+02:00

here's my response to the claim that it is impossible to disprove a religion. the key is disproving direct or indirect scientific claims.

Your comment is misleading. There is no single piece of logic that will ever prove/disprove a church. It is just one piece of the puzzle
judastefarianist 1 year ago

@judastefarianist actually the evidence that homo sapiens began approximately 200,000 years ago and not 5800-6000 years ago is a great single way to discredit judaism, christianity, islam and any other old-testament-based/abrahamic religion.
nickleus1977 1 sec ago

my response to apologist explanations about why "prophets" have been wrong for so long about native american ancestry/dna

2011-04-28T11:39:00.001+02:00

here are my and fairlds' comments on Part 3 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA

your channel's flagship video (this video) is 2.5 years old. here's a quote from Ugo Perego's most recent conclusion on the subject, from the fairlds website: "the DNA of Lehi and his party has not been detected in modern Native American populations"
nickleus1977 8 months ago

@nickleus1977 And I agree with him. We will never detect Lehi DNA in the Americas, simply because we don't know what Lehis DNA looked like.
fairldsorg 8 months ago

@fairldsorg the issue is not lehi's dna, it's finding mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) in native "americans" today that matches mtDNA in jerusalem.
nickleus1977 8 months ago

@nickleus1977 I am not sure how much Ugo has looked into the SNP data that is mentioned in this video, therefore, cannot comment on his beliefs. I am also curious why you are only interested in mitochondrial DNA?
fairldsorg 8 months ago

@fairldsorg 1) who from fairlds am i conversing with? =) 2), the book of mormon claims, and it has been taught for over 170+ years by church "prophets", that the natives of the americas and even neighboring islands are direct descendants of the house of israel, that the americas were reserved for these peoples, that nobody may be brought there w/o "God"s approval (9/11?). DNA (tangible, physical, testable evidence) tells a completely different story. for the record i'm interested in ydna too =)
nickleus1977 8 months ago

@nickleus1977 " it has been taught for over 170+ years" yes but you have to understand the Gospel, and the purpose of the church, and that the prophets of God are also human.
TheSkepticChristian 4 hours ago

@TheSkepticChristian i was a mormon for 32 years or were you being sarcastic? =) the gospel and the purpose have absolutely nothing to do with this issue. that the "prophets of YHWH/elohim" are human is a weak apologetic argument because they have the problem of then explaining why the "holy ghost" has "confirmed these 'truths'" from the "prophets" to members for 170+ years =)

then i got this message from an apologist TheSkepticChristian (although i think you'll agree that he doesnt seem too skeptic):

Consider the following statement by Elder Dallin H. Oaks:
"[A person may have] a strong desire to be led by the Spirit of the Lord but . . .
unwisely extends that desire to the point of wanting to be led in all things. A
desire to be led by the Lord is a strength, but it needs to be accompanied by an
understanding that our Heavenly Father leaves many decisions for our personal
choices. Personal decision making is one of the sources of the growth we are
meant to experience in mortality. Persons who try to shift all decision making to
the Lord and plead for revelation in every choice will soon find circumstances in
which they pray for guidance and don't receive it. For example, this is likely to
occur in those numerous circumstances in which the choices are trivial or either
choice is acceptable.
"We should study things out in our minds, using the reasoning powers our Creator
has placed within us. Then we should pray for guidance and act upon it if we
receive it. If we do not receive guidance, we should act upon our best judgment.
Persons who persist in seeking revelatory guidance on subjects on which the Lord
has not chosen to direct us may concoct an answer out of their own fantasy or
bias, or they may even receive an answer through the medium of false revelation"
("Our Strengths Can Become Our Downfall," Ensign, Oct. 1994, 13--14)

Todd Compton said:
"First, I include problematic events in my faith perspective not by viewing church leaders as infallible,[20] but by recognizing that they can make serious mistakes. I accept inspiration of many sorts coming to church leaders on occasion. But an oversimplified view of revelation and inspiration is that they come to mindless, will-less puppets, receiving revelation passively, like blank containers for inspiration to be poured in from on high. Instead, I believe God allows church leaders complete free will, which means they have to work through decisions, using all of their resources of thought, doing their homework or not doing their homework, being tested in their moral insight. And because they have free will, sometimes they make wrong choices. They learn through trial and error. Some fail in the major challenges of their lives. (And often these are behind-the-scene, rather than melodramatically obvious, failures.) This does not deny that church leaders often make right choices and receive inspiration. "
Todd Compton

"Actually, there are many possible middle grounds. First, God will use the personality of the prophet when giving revelation. Thus, an analysis of a prophet's personality, psychology and character is not by definition atheistic. Second, God can use the prophet's culture to influence him. The prophet interrelates with it. True, he will react firmly against some aspects of it; but he will be nurtured by other aspects of it."

my response:

"For example, this is likely to occur in those numerous circumstances in which the choices are trivial or either choice is acceptable."

your oaks quote is completely irrelevant to the issue of a truth that is taught consistently for 170+ years.

"but by recognizing that they can make serious mistakes."

consistently for 170+ years.

what percent of religious belief is based on the old testament, globally?

2011-04-26T15:01:00.000+02:00

what percentage of world religions are abrahamic (based on the old testament)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups#Largest_religions_or_belief_systems_by_number_of_adherents

low: 38%
2200+1650+187.9+0.7=4038.6
2200+1650+187.9+0.7+1000+1500+3000+1000+65+29+12+3+3+2+1+1+0.8+0.63=10656.03
4038.6/10656.03=0.378996681

high: 61%
2,000+1,570+828+400+600+400+27+24+14+8+7.6+1+3+2+1+1+0.8+0.7+0.63=5888.73
2,000+1,570+14+7.6+0.7=5888.73=3592.3
3592.3/5888.73=0.610029667

does dna evidence/research disprove the book of mormon?

2011-04-26T13:49:00.001+02:00

does dna evidence refute the book of mormon? yes it does. if dna evidence supported book of mormon claims then the church wouldnt have changed the book of mormon intro in 2007 from

"the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians"

"the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians"

my response to a mormon questioning her faith

2011-04-26T10:54:00.002+02:00

today i got a mail from a friend who is still in the church:

So Nick. How are you? I have to say that I was pretty surprised to see that you left the church. You always seemed so devoted to me when we were kids. I was hoping you would be okay if I asked you a few questions. You've been pretty open in a more public discussion, but if you aren't comfortable with a more private one, I understand.
I kind of always thought of church as a fun place to mingle, basically. My dad is, well.. I'm not even sure what he is. He neither agrees or disagrees with the idea of God. Whatever that means. And my mom is like yours. Or at least how I remember yours.. fighting for the church even though everyone else in her life seemed to be against it. I never really cared for or against it until I was 17. I started going back to church because I started dating a member who wouldn't marry a nonmember. Long story short, 13 years later I find myself wishing I had 13 years of my life back. I decided years ago to make my peace with the church and fake it til I make it. It's not really working for me real well. So now I want to learn. Being that you were so devoted and then walked away, I kind of feel like you are a good person to ask questions to. Right now, my questions are pretty basic. I just want to know why I have always felt so creepy in church. How can something that seems so good and pure envoke these feelings in a person? Joseph Smith. He's never really set very well with me. Historically and reasonably, the Book of Mormon seems like such a fairy tale! And I would LOVE to kow why this church is the only church that insists on striking so much fear in a member and then chastize them for being less than faithful if they have fear in their hearts. The principles of the church are very scary and intimidating! How can you not be afraid? Any member who truly believes in the gospel and claims it doesn't frighten them, is a liar.. in my opinion. Anyway, as you can see, I have a lot to learn. I'm having surgery tomorrow and will be down for 6 weeks. It seemed like as good a time as any to start reading!
Thanks Nick!

and here is my response:

Hi, it was great to read your message =) yes i was the most devoted of all my brothers, probably even more than my mom. there were always things that didnt make sense to me, but i tried to either rationalize them away or just hope for an answer some day. for someone like me, i "needed" an experience that conflicted with my values down to my very core and that happened when our bishop here in norway told me and my wife that we needed to repent of oral sex. the church deciding what me and my wife could do in our bedroom? that was it. i started on a major study of church history and to see what other people were saying about the church--members who had left. i started reading about psychology. i quickly saw how the church (mis)uses principles of psychology to influence and control members. i read about cults and cult psychology and found that the church easily fits the cult profile. for example, in this list of 100 attributes:
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q0.html
i could immediately identify at least 65 traits found in the church:
1, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 43, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 52, 53, 55, 56, 59, 60, 61, 62, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 72, 73, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 97, 98

i started reading about science (archeology, anthropology, dna, cosmology, etc) but the most important issue is this: the old testament claims that homo sapiens began in the garden of eden. the christian world puts the date to around 6500 years ago. if you ask the jews, the ones who *wrote* the old testament, they put the date to around 5800 years ago. this is around 200,000 years off by what scientific evidence shows:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens_sapiens

this one fact alone disproves all religions based on the old testament (abrahamic): judaism, christianity, islam, etc... -- 38%-61% (low/high estimate) of religious belief in the world:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups#Largest_religions_or_belief_systems_by_number_of_adherents

it disproves everything that follows--all their creeds and claims to revelation, the whole shabang. anything else i tell you now is just additional, supporting evidence against the church.

i started writing my exit story here:
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1jBgSzf90ONPlif_jNHu_pV0UKZQQ3pFNpAgX-YsYW94

there i've listed a LOT of additional evidence against the church. the hardest thing for people questioning the church is the feelings and spiritual experiences they think they've had. the church uses this for all it's worth to get people to prioritize that over fact and reasoning or even conflicting feelings/emotions. up until recently, it has been quite difficult to help people realize that these experiences are merely psychological and are a result of preconditioning, brainwashing and social psychology techniques, BUT then i found something wonderful:
http://www.bonneville.com/?nid=32

bonneville is the church's PR firm, and when i say "church's" i mean *owned by the church* and *started by the church*:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonneville_International

on that bonneville homepage you can read about their product called HeartSell:
"Our unique strength is the ability to touch the hearts and minds of our audiences, evoking first feeling, then thought and, finally, action. We call this uniquely powerful brand of creative "HeartSell"® - strategic emotional advertising that stimulates response."

if a member reads this and still cant see that he/she is being duped, then there seriously is no hope for that person. this is the church's MO in black and white--and for sale even =)

when i realized that the church was a sham, it was seriously like waking up from a bad dream. i have never enjoyed life more than i do now and have never known what *true freedom* really is until now =)

i am totally here for you, you can contact me whenever you like and ask me anything you like =)

i hope your surgery goes well and it might sound odd, but i totally envy you that you will have 6 weeks to just sit/lay and read! (my favorite thing to do)

here are some great videos to watch while you're resting:
the stanley milgram experiment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g1MJeHYlE0
the stanford prison experiment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd3KXppIBDs
the asch experiment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRh5qy09nNw
christopher hitchens (the best of):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQorzOS-F6w
christopher hitchens' ten commandments:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-63cTYJDCA
sam harris - religion as a failed science:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkTTCgECCoc
richard dawkins (pascal's wager - what if you're wrong?):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg

and really anything by any of these people is great:
richard dawkins on youtube
christopher hitchens on youtube
sam harris on youtube
dan dennett on youtube
michael shermer on youtube
victor stenger on youtube
james randi on youtube
pat condell on youtube
richard feynman on youtube
carl sagan on youtube

if you want a good book to read, i suggest reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0618918248?tag=truthinthemul-20&camp=213761&creative=393545&linkCode=bpl&creativeASIN=0618918248&adid=195X0238GED74BR8XQNV&

if you want specific lds stuff to read then you should read the research on the book of abraham:
http://www.irr.org/mit/bhoh-order.html

irr.org will send it to you for free! (you only pay 5 dollars shipping). watch the video first:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcyzkd_m6KE
=)

if you want to read other people's experiences then hang out here for a day:
http://exmormon.org/phorum/list.php?2

good responses to "Europol Report: All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 99.6% that Aren’t"

2011-04-25T20:03:00.001+02:00

http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/

democritus Says:
May 30th, 2010 at 10:08 am

It is easy to infer from the comments for this post that both this webside, and its readers, are very unserious and easily fooled people. “An interesting find”, “an excellent article” and “outstanding reserach” (the latter by a person who seems to be a politician). My god! If this had been a semester paper it would have been slaughtered and the person thrown out of the university or college.

Obviously the interesting information is not the number of “attacks” (the majority are small insignificant “incidents” like burning down a shack or throwing bricks at windows), but the number of persons killed or seriously wounded, and the total economic loss and material damage. And obviously: A person that don’t understand that instently is a fool.

So why not instead inform us of how many lives lost in the “western” world because of terrorist attacks. Well, WTC om 9/11 alone killed 2996 innocent persons. And then we have London and Madrid. How many people have ETA killed since the year 2000? Probably less than 20! That bad enough, but nothing in comparison. Besides. You can’t move separatists because they have lived where they live for generations and centuries. Islamist terrorism on the other hand, is an imported problem.

how to respond to a pro-lifer

2011-04-24T22:08:00.007+02:00

next time you meet someone promoting pro-life, ask them questions like:
* do you eat meat?
* do you hunt?
* do you support capital punishment?
* is war sometimes necessary?
* if your wife/daughter was pregnant and her doctor said that if we dont abort the fetus now, your wife/daughter will die, what would you do? how about if the doctor said that the fetus had a condition that would cause it to die within a couple of days after birth anyways (e.g. an anencephalic fetus), would you still let your wife/daughter die?
* if someone was attempting to kill your child and the only way you could stop him was to kill him, would you do it?

see also my discussion with a fb friend: http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150230454801469&id=604046468

RH: Official Mormon stance is anti-abortion "except in case of rape or when the life of mother or child are in jeopardy." Most pro-lifers think that way.

me: ‎"Most pro-lifers think that way." do you have any statistics on this? when i look at the main prolife websites i mostly see messages like "abortion kills babies", "does your doctor kill babies?", "help us *end* abortion", etc...

"Those involved in the pro-life movement generally maintain that the human fetus (and in most cases the human embryo) is a person and therefore has a right to life"

"A child conceived through rape or incest does not deserve the death penalty for his or her father's crime."

also interesting, an example of a disorder where most fetuses dont survive birth: Anencephaly

"The Pro-Life Action League rejects abortion for the alleged purpose of preserving the health of the mother...it is wrong to deliberately, directly kill one innocent person to save another."

apparently obama's experience was that the debate was quite polarized, i.e. pro-lifers promoting total ban on abortion:

"Oftentimes what they were trying to do was to polarize the debate and make it more difficult for people, so that they could try to bring an end to abortions overall."

the mormon faith isnt racist

2011-04-18T14:58:00.001+02:00

here's my response to a facebook thread where it was claimed that the mormon church isnt racist.

‎@mindy

"I have a really hard time believing the Mormon faith is racist."

1) in the *current* aaronic priesthood manual, the church discourages interracial marriages:
“We recommend that people marry those who are of the same racial background"

2) see recent articles about BYU's unproportional punishment of black athletes concerning honor code violations:
Since 1993, according to our research, at least 70 athletes have been suspended, dismissed, put on probation, or forced to withdraw from their teams or the school after running afoul of the honor code. Fifty-four of them, or nearly 80 percent, are minorities. Forty-one, or almost 60 percent, are black men.
0.6% of BYU student body is black, yet the *majority* of honor code violations are by black athletes.

3) Jane Elizabeth Manning James was "attached as a Servitor for eternity to the prophet Joseph Smith and in this capacity be connected with his family and be obedient to him in all things in the Lord as a faithful Servitor".

4) read all the ridiculously racist statements made by lds prophets and apostles

5) the book of mormon has a general racist theme of one people with black skin vs the white and delightsome people

6) the lds church finally giving in to pressure in 1978 to let blacks participate equally with whites in the church

7) google "mormonism racism" =)

"life after death is true" and "theists are happier and atheists are more self-destructive and negative"

2011-04-17T23:54:00.004+02:00

just posting my reply to a theist's comments on facebook:
@mindy

"I completely believe in life after death."

but you stated as a fact that 'no life after death' *isnt true* in an earlier post.

"In the end, my heart chose for me."

feelings are a poor basis for a successful decision making model--it's not the way of science, it's not the way of economics, it's not the way of the judicial system, it's not how we earn our university degrees, it's now how technology is developed, etc. even when choosing a lifelong mate--a decision where feelings actually play a huge role--most people ask themselves practical questions like:
* is this person responsible?
* does this person have any addictions/problems that might be difficult to break?
* is this person good with money?
* does this person have goals and a plan for the future?

yet the only thing mormon missionaries try to get people to do is to feel good about the message. they dont encourage people e.g. to read in depth about church history or to think critically about their message...

"It's interesting to me how truly happy people are once they fully embrace God and after life."

you say happy, i say delusional =)

"It's also very interesting to me how self destructive and negative people who don't tend to be."

utah leads the nation in porn usage and anti-depressant usage =) there are so many happy and funny atheists and so many racist/gay-hating theists as to completely destroy this claim. the lds church for one fits both the racist and gay-hating qualities even in recent history. and just look at the word "gay"--it means "happy" =)

i've never been happier than after i left the mormon church. when i finally realized it was a sham, it was like waking up from a terrible nightmare and realizing i was safe in bed on a warm, sunny, first day of a 5 week vacation =) now i've got more money, more time, less stress, less responsibility, more friends, more things in life to enjoy, etc... i can choose, if i want to, to do anything a theist can do:
* go to church
* pay money to the church
* read scriptures
* fast
* pray
* love my neighbor as myself

but a theist cant do everything an atheist can do =) i love that distinction =)

how is mitochondrial eve (ME) dated?

2011-04-09T01:13:00.000+02:00

familytreedna.com puts mtdna-eve at about 120,000 ybp.

so how do scientists arrive at that date?

the mutations in the mitochondrial DNA provide the molecular clock that allows us to determine how much time has elapsed since the ME lived

my response to a user named cats from utah about why people leave the lds church

2011-04-04T22:25:00.002+02:00

my response:

@Cats i concluded the mormon church was false when i compared the scientific claims of the old testament with actual evidence. the first homo sapien offspring didnt appear 6-7000 years ago (adam and eve). it was more than 100,000+ years ago. i concluded the mormon church was false when i realized that all of my "spiritual" experiences could be explained by psychology and biology. i concluded that the mormon church was false when i read about cults and could quickly identify the church in at least 65 points out of a list of 100 elements of a cult.
i am also way happier now after leaving the church. i have more money, i have more time, i am less stressed and our family life is more harmonious. all the things the church promises to the faithful, but simply cant deliver...and i get it for free =)

to this user comment:

Cats | 7:43 a.m. April 4, 2011
Somewhere In Time, UT
Once again, this article is RIGHT ON TARGET.

I have seen many atheists who claim they don't believe in God because of rational or intellectual reasons. That fact is, they reject faith because they have had some bad or hurtful experiences regarding religion--i.e. they went to Catholic school and the nuns were mean....or their mother made them go to church and they resented that. The president of the American atheists said that she hated the church because her mother spent all her time there. It all involves emotion and NOT logic. The fact is, if they were being logical and rational they WOULD believe in God.

Former Mormons leave the Church because they just don't want to bother with the requirements....or they had something bad happen and just don't have the maturity to deal with it...or they've done something wrong and they don't want to repent so they try to justify themselves.

These people have the right do anything they want, but I hope no one is fooled. There's no logic or rationality involved with it and I hope everyone has the insight to see that.

on this article:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705369908/Challenging-Issues-Keeping-the-Faith-Emotion-is-part-of-testimony-2-and-decision-making.html

NOTE: my comment was not approved by deseret news. shocker.

the lds church cult

2011-04-04T22:19:00.000+02:00

there are many elements to a cult. one of the most well-known experts today is steve hassan.
http://freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/m/mormon/steve-hassan-how-the-lds-fits-the-cult-profile/

there's also rick ross:
http://rickross.com/deprogramming.html

and early pioneer in cult mentality, margaret singer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9rj4R4QhQg

on this list of 100 elements, i could easily identify the church in 65 of them:
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q0.html

the lds church can definitely be classified as a cult, but "dangerous" is a matter of definition:
* homosexuals commit suicide because of emotional and social "torture" (isolation, ridicule, dehumanizing, physical/oral abuse):
http://www.delicious.com/tlgaia/suicide+lds
* they believe in the rapture:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LXuNpF6NVg
* they bleed people of their time and money
* earlier leaders taught that it is better to die than to lose your chastity
* they emotionally/psychologically "abuse" members who masturbate, telling them that it is evil (compare with homosexuality). there are actually even cases of masturbation-related suicides (kip eliason):
http://exposingmormonism.blogspot.com/2007/10/mormon-suicide-list.html
* they encourage single mothers to give up their children for adoption, breaking up families
* they perpetuate the us vs them mentality, discouraging marrying/dating non-members and even interracial marriages when both are members (in the most recent aaronic priesthood handbook)
* cover up cases of child and wife abuse and many women report not being believed by bishops and stake presidents
* the dangers of healing and faith was put into perspective when the sister missionary influenced an investigator to get baptized against her doctor's advice and she ended up having to amputate her legs:
http://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/gexpd/my_sister_the_missionary/

sam harris puts religion/god into perspective

2011-04-03T01:58:00.000+02:00

sam harris' opening remarks in part 2 of the "does god have a future?" debate are simply hilarious, the way he puts religion into such a ridiculous perspective:

01:23 the god that our neighbors believe in is essentially an invisible person. it's a creator deity who created the universe to have a relationship with one species of primate. lucky us. and he's got galaxy upon galaxy to attend to, but he's especially concerned with what we do, and he's especially concerned with what we do while naked. and he almost certainly disapproves of homosexuality. and he's created this cosmos as a vast laboratory in which to test our powers of credulity, and the test is this "can you believe in this god on bad evidence--which is to say on faith?" and if you can, you will win an eternity of happiness after you die.

mormon garments as a protection from danger

2011-04-02T20:27:00.001+02:00

CBS 60 MINUTES: BILL MARRIOT on LDS TEMPLE GARMENTS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cC1VHMQmAUw

bill marriott, if he's telling the truth, is just confusing coincidence with magic. i wonder what bill would have said if mike wallace had said "i've brought with me a blow torch and i was wondering if you would submit your crotch to a scientific experiment?" (well i can guess he'd say something weasly to the effect of "thou shalt not tempt the lord thy god") or even better he could have simply asked "do you ever have to replace garments? do they ever get worn, e.g. like getting holes in them or coming apart at the seams?" =)

in the washing and annointing ceremony in the temple it says:

the Garment of the Holy Priesthood. Inasmuch as you do not defile it, but are true and faithful to your covenants, it will be a shield and a protection to you against the power of the destroyer

it does not specifically say that this is a physical protection. even if it was then bill was lying because his company has been selling pornography in their hotels for years, so marriot couldnt possibly have qualified as being "true and faithful to [his] covenants" according to mormon temple standards, but then again, BYU did use pornography in their gay-curing experiments on homosexuals... =)

"the largest group of suicide terrorists are the Tamil Tigers, a group of atheist Marxists." DEBUNKED

2011-03-31T19:42:00.002+02:00

i saw an interesting claim in the comments of bill maher to Muslim Rep. Keith Ellison: The Qur'an Is A 'Hate Filled Holy Book by user ProIndividual

largest group of suicide terrorists..are the Tamil Tigers, a group of atheist Marxists.

according to time magazine "The Tigers ... include 5,000 to 10,000 guerillas".

how many muslims are there? about 1.5 billion. obviously not all of them would carry out a suicide bombing, but you can see the ridiculous difference in numbers. and just look at some of the suicide bombing statistics:

according to the wikipedia article LTTE: "between 1980 and 2000, the LTTE carried out 168 suicide attacks".

and the wikipedia Suicide attack article: "In 2004 in Iraq alone there were 400 suicide attacks".

it's quite common, irresponsible and incorrect to cite atheism as a key source and motivator of violence in non-religious political ideologies.

atheism+'no afterlife' is completely incompatible with suicide.

religion+'salvation/glory/rewards after death' is an important motivator for islamic suicide bombers. non-religious people also carry out suicide bombings, as in the case of the Tamil Tigers, but they are doing it because they are influenced, persuaded and coerced by the political ideology, NOT because of their critical analysis of the existence of god (i.e. atheism).

LTTE is a political ideology.
atheism is the disbelief in deity. period.

book of abraham couldnt possibly come from the papyri joseph smith said he translated it from

2011-03-31T14:42:00.000+02:00

this is taken from "The Book of Abraham" by Robert M. Bowman Jr., Director of Research, Institute for Religious Research (irr.org march 2011 e-newsletter)

The surviving pieces from the Hor papyrus total about three feet long. According to University of Chicago Egyptology professors Klaus Baer and Robert Ritner, the original papyrus was probably about five feet long (so that roughly two feet are missing). LDS scholars such as John Gee often suggest that the text for the Book of Abraham was on the missing papyrus. Gee’s original suggestion was that the papyrus was about ten feet long, a claim that Ritner (Gee’s former professor) said has “no justification.” In 2008, Gee went further and argued that a complex mathematical formula based on the winding of the papyrus shows that over forty feet of papyrus are missing from the original roll. In 2010 Andrew Cook and Christopher Smith applied the same method in a more sophisticated analysis and concluded that about two feet of papyrus are missing, agreeing with Baer and Ritner’s estimates. Cook and Smith also estimated that the existing text of the Book of Abraham, if written in the same Egyptian script on the same roll, would take up about 17 feet. Given these estimates, it is simply not possible for the text Joseph Smith claimed was the Book of Abraham to have fit on the Hor papyrus. In fact, even Gee’s supposed missing forty feet would not be enough, since as Gee himself admits, the present Book of Abraham represents only a small fraction of the total writings of Abraham that Joseph Smith claimed were on the roll.

the two-tongued "mysterious logic" of christianity

2011-03-29T11:22:00.000+02:00

sent to my by email from a good friend:

You proclaim with certainty that if I use my mind, I can see, with clarity, the truth of the Bible. That with intuition from my heart, and the soundness of my brain, the word will be revealed as truth, because truth is clear and illuminating. You insist the existence of God is clear to any person who, logically, thinks it through.

You tell me that the world around us evidences a creator. That without a cause, there can be no effect. That entropy demands the complexity of life proves its own impossibility, therefore necessitating a transcendent God. You plead with me to use human reason to "see" that the precision of the Universe demands that there must be God. That it is the only, "scientifically" plausible conclusion. You base your arguments in logic, and arrive at conclusions with linguistic ingenuity worthy of the finest debate . You explain the inner workings of cells and other precise scientifically derived mechanics which evidence profound design. You stand confident on the shoulders of great scientific giants whose works form the basis of your arguments. You understand that to convince, it is pristine facts, logic, and reason which must form the basis of human communication as otherwise we would be lost in an ocean of falsehood and uncertainty.

But when 15,000 innocent men women and children die in a Tsunami, you tell me that God works in mysterious ways. When I ask about babies who were not fortunate to receive the "word" being "saved" or "damned" you explain that we shouldn't expect to understand with our limited minds things in the heavenly realm. Things, like - God. You tell me that God doesn't have to be logical. You assure me there is no problem since the great mystery of God is his beauty.

You use "logic" when it suits you.

You use "mystery" when it suits you.

This, Christian, is called duplicity and according to you, it is a trait of the devil.

similarities between mormons and muslims

2011-03-14T09:57:00.002+01:00

a prophet, an angel, revelation, new scripture and polygamy

islam and antisemitism

2011-03-10T23:18:00.001+01:00

"Mein Kampf has been published and was 6th on the Palestinian best-seller list in 1999"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_antisemitism#Antisemitism_in_the_Islamic_Middle_East

faith and/vs obedience and the reason god doesnt show himself to the world

2011-03-09T10:00:00.004+01:00

mormons pride themselves on believing that the typical christian/jesus/NT believing isnt enough to get into heaven. "obedience is the first law of heaven." (DC 130:20-21) you have to be obedient and repent when you do something wrong. THAT is how you get into heaven.

you cant be saved by faith alone. "faith without works is dead."

if this is true, then there would be nothing hindering god in showing himself to everybody in the world. it wouldnt destroy his plan because everybody would still have to choose to be obedient. after all, that is how you get into heaven--by obeying god's commandments.

thus, the reason the mormon god doesnt show himself to the world is NOT because it would destroy his plan, but because he doesnt exist.

the mormon "war in heaven" story is the perfect implementation of my theory. everybody--in the presence of god--had to choose whether or not to follow jesus' plan. 2/3rds of the people chose to follow satan. it makes absolutely no sense then to make it a blind choice once here on earth.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,132179

muslim heckler trying to glorify islam by pointing out deaths by the "west"

2011-03-08T02:21:00.000+01:00

this is someone named SA posting on sian's facebook page:

SA: MÅ stoppe NAZISTER og terror fra vestlige verden.

TVN: Ja, for nazister fra den vestilge verden er det mange av... not!

MA: Den vestlige nazismen forsvant heldigvis som liksur røyk fra bensinbålet med levningene av Der Führer utenfor Rikskanselliet i Berlin en aprildag i 1945. Bortsett fra noen knapt merkbare, nervøse krampetrekninger fra et slagent, totalitært ...beist er nazismen et tankesystem som er helt og fullstendig forkastet – i det minste for den del av menneskeheten som seiret gjennom uavlatelig kamp for sine frihetsidealer. Det forstemmende nå er at Hitlers og resten av den totalitære familiens ånder fortsatt byr opp til dans inn i det nye årtusen – til rytmer fra Riyadh, Teheran, Gaza og ellers hvor diktaturet, antisemittismen, rasismen og menneskehatet blomstrer i giftgrønn sjattering.

SA: WOW så bra, mener du at norge er tomt av nazister?? det viste jeg ikke. :)

KJB: Muslimer liker godt nazismen! Hitlers (min kamp) er bestselger i Tyrkia.. Islam er nazisme---

SA: Kanksje Hilter kom fra Saudia arabia ;) Hat lever i dere blod og aldri kommer ut. Jødene ble drept og kastet ut av vestlige folk, svarte folk ble drept ok sparket av vestlige folk, Indianer ble drept og sparket av vestlige folk.. Algeria,Tunisia,Syria,Japan;vietnam,Irak,afganistan osv.. ble okupert av vestlige verden milloner av sivile ble drept av dem.Men jeg må ikke glemme at vestlige folk har sendte hjelp til dødene folk også.

MA: Du forsøker med andre ord å saldere islams forbryterkonto ved å henvise til all annen urett som er blitt begått gjennom historien. Altså, historisk finnes intet annet formål for hvilket mer blod er blitt spilt enn islams. 270 millioner drep...te kafirer vil uansett veie tyngst på kjøttvekta – dersom du er tilhenger av den typen forenklet logikk.
I følge historikere er mer enn 80 millioner mennesker drept kun i India ved islams sverd. Millioner ble drept i Persia, Egypt og i alle andre land som ble angrepet av de muslimske plyndrerhordene – både under erobringstoktene og tiden som fulgte. Det fortsetter også i dag.
Det viktigste er imidlertid dagens situasjon. Ingen annen ideologi utgjør en slik overhengende trussel mot vår fred og frihet som islam. Islamske terrorister har utført mer enn 15 000 dødbringende angrep kun siden 11.9.2001. For alle andre religioner sammenlagt teller tilsvarende angrep rundt 12 i samme tidsperiode. Det går ikke én eneste uke uten at muslimer forsøker å drepe kristne, jøder, hinduister, buddhister, ateister med flere – eksplisitt i Allahs navn.
Tror du virkelig at muslimene ofre for en kristen-animistisk-serbisk-gresk-jødisk-russisk-armensk-sekulær-kommunistisk-hinduistisk-sikhistisk-buddhistisk-katolsk sammensvergelse, eller kan det tenkes at det er islam det er noe galt med?

SA: I 1 og 2 verdens krig over 70 milloner ble drept og dette er ikke noe fals tallet, men dine er bare propagende.

MA: Nei, ærlig talt. Nå står du bare ved dørstokken og gneldrer som en angstbitersk kjøter. Mine tall kan jeg for det første understøtte med litteraturhenvisninger. Se blant annet Ali Sinas «Understanding Mohammad, A Psychobiography» (2007). For det andre bør du ta i betraktning at også islam spilte en rolle i verdenskrigene, men du har kanskje aldri hørt om Det osmanske rike – eller Hajj Amin al-Husseini, stormuftien av Jerusalem, som rådslo om «Die Judenfrage» med selveste Adolf Eichmanns helt samtidig som kremasjonsovnene i Auschwitz knitret med hissig flamme?

MA: Ja, også glemte jeg til og med hele poenget mitt i forbifarten: Ofrene for de to verdenskrigene skyldes selvfølgelig ikke én «vestlig» ideologi. Det er en påstand så skingrende falsk at den burde fått krystallglassene til å slå sprekker over eteren.

JT: SA. Om du tror virkelig at historier om andres bloodstrids gjennom tidligere århundrer skal redferdigegjør det Islam holder på med I dag? Jeg driter i all skiten Kristendommen har gjort før i tiden, alt som engaserer meg er hvor mange Islam dreper I dag, Hvor mange som må lide mens vi snakker! Alle religioner uten om islam høres ganske fristende ut nå til dags, fordi de har klart å integrere seg i samtiden og kulturen.

TLG: srur ta en titt her: http://www.delicious.com/tlgaia/islam+nazism

good atheist videos about science and religion and superstition

2011-03-02T21:31:00.009+01:00

http://ted.com/talks/tags
http://ted.com/talks/tags/psychology
http://ted.com/talks/tags/brain
http://ted.com/talks/tags/consciousness

richard dawkins on youtube
christopher hitchens on youtube
sam harris on youtube
dan dennett on youtube
michael shermer on youtube
victor stenger on youtube
james randi on youtube
pat condell on youtube
richard feynman on youtube
carl sagan on youtube
eugenie scott on youtube

http://ted.com/talks/tags
http://ted.com/talks/tags/psychology
http://ted.com/talks/tags/brain
http://ted.com/talks/tags/consciousness
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=richard+dawkins
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=christopher+hitchens
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=sam+harris
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=dan+dennett
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=michael+shermer
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=victor+stenger
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=james+randi
http://youtube.com/user/patcondell
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=richard+feynman
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=carl+sagan
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=eugenie+scott

deepak chopra on belief and science

2011-02-22T12:00:00.001+01:00

The Nightline Face-Off: Does God Have a Future? (1 of 12)
Sam Harris and Michael Shermer vs. Deepak Chopra and Jean Houston

"i am not here to discuss belief. i think belief is a coverup for insecurity. you only believe in things that you dont know the truth of and you want to know the truth of. if i asked you "do you believe in electricity or electromagnetism?" you would say "what kind of a ridiculous question is that?" if you want to know the truth you must have the experience, you must have a theoretical basis and you must have the rules of science to either falsify what you are saying, experimentally prove it or at least submit to what is called occam's principle, the theory or parsimony--the simplest explanations are the best explanations. so i'm not here to defend the god of primitve theology...we are here not to argue the validity of science. science is the most impeccable way of understanding the rules, the laws of nature. it is science that brought us the rules of mathematics, physics, chemistry, cosmology, evolution. so we're not going to argue about that."

as a side note, i really love michael shermer's comments:

if there really is a god, then obviously he or she has a future. if there is no god then we're really only talking about the future of the belief in god.

the lds apologetic "speaking as a man"+"leaders aren't perfect" vs. "divinely inspired leadership" problem

2011-02-10T10:01:00.000+01:00

when mormons want to claim that some statement/action was inspired they claim that the prophet, apostle, leader, etc. "was guided by the holy ghost" and use that as a proof that their belief is true.

however when the same prophet, apostle, leader, etc. says something proven to be false they'll say things like:
* "he wasn't speaking as a prophet, etc., he was only speaking as a man; he was only giving his opinion"
* "nobody's perfect"
* "he was simply telling his audience then and there what they needed to hear to benefit them"

user crossroads on exmormon.org brought up a good point:

I do find it quite foolish that members don't seem to worry about financial transparency regarding church funds. This especially since an important teaching spouted by the door to door salesmen is regarding "the great apostacy", where the church after Christ, led by prophets and "righteous" priesthood holders fell into sin and wickedness, eventually losing its divine authority.
Modern members seem not to realize that early apostles of the LDS were excommunicated, or if they do, they do not make the connection that this clearly means the GAs of today can be corrupt.
Why have members now seemed to accept so blindly that their leaders are infallible? It is ridiculous and evidence of a personality cult.

if you come across these apologetic excuses simply ask:
then why do you trust church leaders blindly with the member's tithing money and donations and require no transparency?

christianity and homosexuality

2011-02-06T01:03:00.000+01:00

a nice comment by billpeet on Religious freedom under siege, Mormon leader says:

Question for religious people regarding your disapproval of homosexuality:

Why does your god create hermaphradites (people born with both male and female genitalia)?

Obviously, your god deliberately and consciously created these people as sexual deviants and biologically abnormal. Should we judge them immoral beings?

And of course, your god also deliberately creates infertile people. These people are clearly not helpful at all in reproducing the species, and cannot further your god's aim to spread his creation throughout the world. Why does he create them, then? Should they be celibate for life, given that their sexual activity is merely for self-gratification, and cannot lead to reproduction?

Obviously, it is not too far a leap to then ask, if your god deliberately created these sexual deviations and abnormalities, why is it fantastical to wonder if he also created homosexuals, as they are? With the two previous examples, it is fairly easy to see the obvious abnormality. But with homosexuality, sexual orientation is within the mind, and not an obvious physical abnormality like a hermaphrodite. But the brain is every bit as physical and biological as any other aspect--why would you pronounce a negative moral judgement, simply because you cannot physically see your god's abnormal choice?

my response to a letter from a tbm to his exmormon brother

2011-02-05T01:15:00.000+01:00

> As you know it is a sad day when a brother, figuratively and literally, loses his testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel as you have recently declared. And so it is with a heavy heart that I write this letter. First, I must tell you that I am sad for you.

I understand that you are sad brother, but I feel good about my decision.

> This gospel is true! Of that I have no doubt.

I know you *believe* the gospel is true. It is not unlikely that you have no doubt. I too had no doubt before until I researched church history and found many issues and events that I was never told about in church, which cast great shadows of doubt on what I have been taught. Even more frightening is that the church (e.g. Apostle Boyd Packer) even admits that "some things [truths] are just not useful" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boyd_K._Packer#Faith-promoting_history ):

##
In a 1981 speech to educators in the LDS Church Educational System, he cautioned them that "There is a temptation for the writer or teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful." Arguing that teachers should "give milk before meat", he stated that "some things are to be taught selectively and some things are to be given only to those who are worthy." Packer's opinion applied to all historians who were members of the LDS Church: he stated, "One who chooses to follow the tenets of his profession, regardless of how they may injure the Church or destroy the faith of those not ready for 'advanced history', is himself in spiritual jeopardy. If that one is a member of the Church, he has broken his covenants and will be held accountable."
##

and that Apostle Dallin Oaks even admits that the church doesn't represent itself in a balanced way ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historians_of_the_Latter_Day_Saint_movement#Range_of_perspective ):

##
"Balance is telling both sides. This is not the mission of the official Church literature or avowedly anti-Mormon literature. Neither has any responsibility to present both sides." (Dallin H. Oaks, Reading Church History, Ninth Annual Church Educational System religious Educators' Symposium, August 16, 1985, Brigham Young University.)
##

The problem with Oaks' statement is that anti-mormons CAN tell both sides, but the non-faith-promoting information--Packer's so-called "advanced history"--will always be damaging for the church, thus the church is in the weaker and less-truthful unbalanced position because they CANNOT tell both sides or--to repeat myself--it would be damaging. to reiterate once again: the anti-mormon side is the only side which CAN give a balanced view, whereas the church CANNOT present itself in a balanced way.

> has denied the testimony delivered by the Holy Ghost so many times in his life, has caused my heart to grieve.

I know this seems hard for you to understand, but when you realize that most people in all other religions (e.g. 2+ billion christians, 1.5+ billion muslims) believe just as strongly that THEIR religion is true--and have had similar religious experiences to mormons--really discounts feelings and emotions as a valid indicator of truth. In the real world, truth is established by evidence and data that are testable, reproducable and peer-reviewed. It is a good thing that people cannot be convincted in a court of law, merely based upon feelings, but rather by physical evidence which establishes proof beyond reasonable doubt.

> First, I'm angry. I'm angry that you have made a declaration so strong and bold

Please don't be angry.

> "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free".

I understand your desire to quote this phrase to defend your faith, but it is a contradiction to the concept of being a "slave of Christ". I do however think that the more knowledge one obtains, the better the position we are in to make a rational, wise decision. This is how I arrived at my decision to leave the church. After seeing the real *balanced* view of the church, its history and it's contradictory teachings, the choice was quite simple. Feelings and emotions simply cannot trump facts.

> I'm surprised that you've thrown away all that you once knew to be true

what I believed to be true about the church, yes, but I haven't thrown away ALL that I know to be true.

> along with the accompanying blessings that come through obedience

the fact that "blessings" also come to people who DON'T obey "god's" laws nullifies this claim, just as much as the fact that bad things happen to obedient people.

> with so little evidence to back up your new found `religion'.

non-belief in deity is not a religion. the *much* evidence AGAINST the church is the issue.

> I too could be standing in your shoes, the shoes of apostasy.

I call it enlightenment.

> I don't believe you found the `truth' through thorough and thoughtful research; I believe you lost the truth because you failed to `endure to the end'.

to your credit, you use the word "believe" instead of "know" this time. you "believe", but you are however mistaken. I DID thoroughly research the church and have critically thought about it's teachings and what they mean in the real world and how they affect real people in the real world. E.g. Prop8 is a great contradiction to the 11th Article of Faith:
"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

Attempting to take away the civil rights of homosexuals flies in the face of this claim by the church and it is inhumane. the church's actions and statements against homosexuals are hurtful, have caused immeasurable suffering, suicides and are not something I want to associate myself with.

> At any time have you done all of the following: Attended church consistently all 3 hours; held a calling; been assigned as a home teacher; had home teachers; gone on splits with the missionaries; paid a full tithing; attended the temple regularly; prayed daily; read the scriptures daily? This is full activity, and this is what it takes to stay strong and firm in the gospel.

After my thorough research, I also realized that extreme mental gymnastics and cognitive dissonance would also be requirements to stay active and "firm in the gospel".

> Satan is real, and anything less than this slows our progress and opens the door ever so slightly for him to begin to influence us. He never sleeps, is always patient, and takes every opportunity to blind us and make us lose our way. Nothing makes him happier.

the concept of a devil, troublemaker or adversary has existed in religions and many cultures, some older than christianity. it is one way that humans have tried to explain hurtful human actions and has served many well as a scapegoat for responsibility of their own actions. the "satan" figure is actually the church's greatest ally--without him and "hell" there would be nothing to threaten believers with if they were disobedient. in new testament times, when someone started convulsing, people thought they were possessed by a demon. today we know what epilepsi is and we take these people to a doctor, not a religious leader.

> an apostate organization who thought they were being brainwashed and abused. And by the way, they were being brainwashed and abused. Duh!

the major difference between the FLDS and the LDS church, as we all know is the issue of polygamy. brainwashing and abuse however are present in both organizations. here is a great list of attributes and requirements of a cult:
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q0.html

i can easily recognize AT LEAST the following points:
1, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 43, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 52, 53, 55, 56, 59, 60, 61, 62, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 72, 73, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 8...2, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 97, 98

> I personally believe this is the process the Lord expects all of his children to follow.

yes, the church teaches that you should have faith and that "blessed is he that believeth without seeing", but in the real world this amounts to foolishness and naivete. airplanes are not made using faith. you don't buy a car based on faith.

> I've known you for 48 years and I smell a cut and paste.

why do you hold joseph smith to a different standard, who cut and pasted large portions of the king james bible into the book of mormon?

> So, if these words aren't really yours, I don't believe the searching of the factual accounts is yours either.

will you then apply this to your belief in the book of mormon?

> They are men, not Gods.

no, they are "men of god", prophets, the lord's annointed, etc..

> You don't expect every founder of the early church to be perfect, right?
> But if the church were ever being led by a prophet who was not following the Lord he would be removed from his post. That is true.

joseph smith and his polygamous and polyandrous behavior serve as a good example of this actually, but really this line of thinking is contradictory:

* if a man isn't following the Lord, then he will be removed by his post
* he's only a man, he's not perfect
* if a prophet dies, was he not following the lord?
* if a prophet or apostle decides to leave the church because of his conviction that it is wrong, he will be assumed to have not been following the Lord and have been doing evil, even though he has broken no commandment

apologists like to use this fallacious thinking to both take credit for the good and explain away the bad:

* prophet A said X <-- he was speaking as a prophet* prophet B said something contradictory or was shown to be proven false over time <-- he was only speaking as a man> One perplexing fact is that I have never known another religion that professes to know the answers to these questions. In fact they revel in their non-committal reply when they say, "God does not share all his mysteries with men". That's an excuse that means, I don't have the answer because God hasn't told me the answer, because I don't believe in personal revelation. That's heresy in most religions. God is so great that he doesn't talk to losers like us.

when will the exact time of the second coming be?

"God does not share all his mysteries with men"

enough said.

> I know this to be true because if truth is what you are truly after, there is only one place on the face of the earth where you will find it in its entirety… the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

in its *entirety*? are you serious? c'mon....

> we will always love you and appreciate you for the value you add to our family. You can leave the church, but you can't ever stop being our brother.

thank you, i love you too.

conversation between me and my tbm mormon friend

2011-02-03T15:50:00.000+01:00

his comments begin with ">". my response comes beneath that line.
------------

> I believe that the world is surrounded by proof that God does exist. Alma 30:44 - "...all things denote there is a God; yea, even the earth, and all things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form do witness that there is a Supreme Creator."

because things exist, god exists? how about the dairy cow or the dog or giant strawberries or...? these are things designed by man. because something exists doesnt equate to PROOF that there is a supernatural god, yahweh--one of a thousand different gods we have "scriptures" about.

> God does exist. My belief in Him does not take away freedom or pursuit of happiness. My belief system does not infringe on others ability to believe how they wish. I believe that others have the God given right to believe and worship how they choose. My understanding doesn't remove or impose upon the free will of others.

one word: prop8

> God does exist

stating something as a fact doesnt make it true, even though boyd packer tells you so:
"A testimony is found in the bearing of it." (from "The Candle of the Lord," Ensign, Jan. 1983, pp. 54-55)

this implies:
If you don't know whether something [we Mormons teach] is true, just bear your testimony of it anyway, as if you knew it, and eventually you will come to find that you 'know' it.

this is called self-brainwashing.

> The creation of life cannot be explained by science. Sure, there might be a process explained through the use of combining DNA from a man and DNA from a woman. Chromosomal Pairs from each combining to form a new entity that then begins to replicate and "create" a new human. But how does science explain how each individual body part is created through that replication process.

science can sure explain A LOT about the creation of life and is finding out new information all the time. what is religion doing: god created life. period.? doctors and scientists know how to clone biological organisms, regrow tissue and manipulate the human body in many ways. you can technically choose the gender of your baby these days. geneticists KNOW how cells reproduce based on genetic encoding.

> Science does explain some things, but it has the inability to explain all things. That is why both Science and Faith are important.

you keep trying to marginalize science, when religion explains nothing. saying "a miracle happened" explains NOTHING. saying "god created the universe" explains NOTHING. every comfort and technology you have is the product of the scientific process.

> I take that same understanding through science, combine it with my faith and knowledge of God, and increase my peace and understanding.

sorry, but this sounds really pompous.

> I do not impose my belief system on others.

missionary work, temple ordinances for the dead, indoctrination of children. can your kids stay home from church whenever they want to?

> Neither of us will ever be persuaded by the other.

tell me something persuasive =)

my response to john gray's words about atheism and nazi germany/adolf hitler

2011-02-03T15:14:00.000+01:00

this is my response to john gray's remarks about atheism and nazi germany/hitler.

"Something like this occurred in Nazi Germany. Dawkins dismisses any suggestion that the crimes of the Nazis could be linked with atheism. "What matters," he declares in The God Delusion, "is not whether Hitler and Stalin were atheists, but whether atheism systematically influences people to do bad things. There is not the smallest evidence that it does." This is simple-minded reasoning. Always a tremendous booster of science, Hitler was much impressed by vulgarised Darwinism and by theories of eugenics that had developed from Enlightenment philosophies of materialism. He used Christian antisemitic demonology in his persecution of Jews, and the churches collaborated with him to a horrifying degree. But it was the Nazi belief in race as a scientific category that opened the way to a crime without parallel in history. Hitler's world-view was that of many semi-literate people in interwar Europe, a hotchpotch of counterfeit science and animus towards religion. There can be no reasonable doubt that this was a type of atheism, or that it helped make Nazi crimes possible."

> He used Christian antisemitic demonology in his persecution of Jews, and the churches collaborated with him to a horrifying degree.

exactly. he used religious ideology, BELIEF IN GOD, to justify his persecution of jews, not a DISBELIEF in god.

> But it was the Nazi belief in race as a scientific category that opened the way to a crime without parallel in history.

race IS a scientific category whether you are theistic or atheistic. the OPPOSITE however is the more dangerous belief, that one race is divinely appointed to rule over another race!

> Hitler's world-view was that of many semi-literate people in interwar Europe, a hotchpotch of counterfeit science and animus towards religion.

this completely contradicts hitler's use of religious belief in god and biblical antisemitism as grounds for persecuting jews.

> There can be no reasonable doubt that this was a type of atheism, or that it helped make Nazi crimes possible.

type of atheism? atheism is merely ONE SINGLE aspect of a person's psychology--non-belief in deity/supernatural. period. it doesn't have any "types". what made nazi crimes possible was shown by the stanley milgram experiment on obedience and philip zimbardo's standford prison experiment.

my response to "No one has all the answers, and the world is surrounded by contradictions."

2011-02-03T10:37:00.000+01:00

my mormon friend wrote to me in a mail recently:

So now that you have found a new way of life, tell me what your purpose is. Do you now intend on trying to contradict all religions, or just the LDS Faith? No one has all the answers, and the world is surrounded by contradictions.

my response:

well, i don't have a purpose, i simply exist, but isn't everybody's *real* desire to do things that make them happy/give them pleasure?
i enjoy discovering and uncovering logical fallacies, yes, especially when they are a part of a belief/political system that tries to take away people's freedoms and pursuit of happiness, as long as THAT pursuit of happiness doesn't infringe upon others, etc.

> No one has all the answers, and the world is surrounded by contradictions.

this is exactly how religions full of cognitive dissonance want their believers to respond to things they are taught that are contradictory or things they don't understand:
"well, god understands it. he'll sort it out in the eternities. it's not relevant to my salvation."
"if it can't be explained then god must have done it"
"no one will ever be able to understand/explain that. god's ways are not our ways, his ways are higher than our ways"
etc...

on the contrary, science can explain A LOT of things; science has A LOT of answers. it's the BEST tool we have to understand the world around us. like i've mentioned before, just look at all that science ALREADY has given us answers to. we have, e.g.:
* microwave ovens
* atom smashers
* lasers
* virtual reality
* computers and the www
* organ transplants
* we've been to the moon

the list goes on and on.

there's a really cool debate between sam harris and michael shermer vs. deepak chopra about "the future of god". a really cool opening remark by shermer was that "we're only really talking about the future of the *belief* in god. belief in belief."

i know the church teaches you that you can only know REAL truth by "the testimony of the holy ghost", but when you think rationally about it, this is absolutely untrue, and the REAL world doesn't work that way. testable, reproducible and peer-reviewed scientific data is the only way people in the real world establish "truth". the FDA requires this in order to legalize medicine.
the only way poor kids get into ivy league colleges is a scholarship, granted on the basis of perfect grades and the highest test scores. and so on and so on.

when you look e.g. at the old testament's teachings, you can see that these were based on the knowledge (science) that they had at that time in the bronze age. we know that the earth revolves around the sun. we know the earth is not flat. we know there wasn't a global flood. we know that homo sapiens have existed for at least 100,000 years. we know what epilepsi is--we take our child to a doctor when he starts seizing, not a priest because we think he's possessed of the devil or a demon. we know that you don't stone your child if he doesn't obey you. we know you don't stone a woman if she commits adultery.

i know it might be hard to swallow (for me it was the opposite, i was excited when i understood all of this), and the natural reaction is to fall back on feelings you get, feelings/impressions you think come from god or the holy ghost, but like i've said before, suicide bombers believe in their cause even MORE than you believe in yours, because they LITERALLY believe that they will enter paradise and meet muhammad and receive their virgins enough to actually kill themselves (and others). most people in other religions have the exact same feelings/impressions that you have experienced. the simple explanation for this is psychology. and again thinking rationally about it, feelings and the supernatural never trump scientific facts. that's why no one has ever taken james randi's 1 million dollar prize for anyone who can prove he has supernatural abilities

lds cult attributes

2011-02-02T21:50:00.000+01:00

http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q0.html

from only a quick glance, without reading further about each of the other points i dont list here, i can "testify" of at least these points and give examples where the lds church uses these tactics or fulfills these requirements:
1, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 43, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 52, 53, 55, 56, 59, 60, 61, 62, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 72, 73, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 97, 98

how to argue against the theist claim that "god gives scientists their knowledge and ideas"

2011-02-01T12:57:00.004+01:00

my theist pharm rep friend says:
claim 1
> Chemical Engineers are using the scientific method to develop the drugs I sell, but I do believe the intelligence and ideas they are given come from God.

then he tries to downplay science ("god" in his previous statement):
claim 2
> Science is a constantly changing set of theories. What is "known and true" today, may be different in ten years, and then change back ten years later.

-------

"skunk puppet" makes a good response to the first claim:
mankind's steps in science and medicine been so slow and painstaking with advances usually opposed and blocked by religious leaders (e.g., Galileo).

"Jon" responds to the first claim as well:
Which scientists does god give ideas to? Just the ones whose findings support your religion or all of them?

where i then add:
"god" did not inspire nazi doctors to perform human torture experiments on jews during WW2 so that we could learn what they learned.

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

"
Contemporary knowledge concerning the manner in which the human body reacts to freezing is based almost exclusively on these Nazi experiments.
"

and my response to the second claim is this:
eventually things in science stick, otherwise we wouldnt have airplanes making transatlantic flights or supercomputers or satellites if theories were constantly changing and flip-flopping like you suggest.

in conclusion, when put together, these two poor, theistic claims/arguments contradict themselves:
* god gives science its knowledge
* science is wishywashy and cant be trusted because its truths change all the time and change from true to false and then back to true

and there's not much more to the argument when you look at science's *knowledge* about how long homo sapiens have lived: at least 100,000 years

compared to the old testament's claim of about 6-7000 years.

hi i'm jessica, i'm a mormon

2011-02-01T10:37:00.000+01:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIjQ2Num_9w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkYIjQceoRs

book of mormon contradiction: god was and is eternal and unchangeable

2011-02-01T10:30:00.001+01:00

my good friend lisa pointed this out to me:

(Moroni 8:18)For I know that God is not a partial god, neither a changable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity......(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.345) We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea...he was once a man like us.

Jon replies:

It's not just the Book of Mormon that gets contradicted.
Mormonism is just one big contradictory hypocritical pantomime:
Polygamy is okay - oh no it isn't...
Blacks can't have the Priesthood - oh yes they can...
Adam is God - oh no he isn't...
God was once a man - oh no he wasn't - errr I mean oh yes he was...
Give generously to the poor - even if the Church doesn't...
Stay out of debt - but pay tithing before any bills...
Listen to the Prophet - oh no don't listen to those old Prophets...
Women can't pray in sacrament meeting - oh yes they can...
Gays can't be married - *watch this space*

enochian magick pele ring and temple garments connection

2011-02-01T09:46:00.001+01:00

i have independently found elements in the temple ceremony in some of my old occult books (that joseph smith reportedly had in his day), e.g. the pele ring (from the year 1583):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nickleus/4189028450/

look at that square symbol (from enochian magick) and you will see all the marks on the temple garment: the L, V, and the horizontal line, on top of an O, which represents the navel =)

and then there's the word PELE. sound familiar?
"pay-lay-ale"
=)

i haven't read all of d michael quinn's book early mormonism and the magic world view, so i'm not sure if he has noticed this.

source: my post on exmormon.org

theists reaction to a friend saying he wrote himself out of the mormon church

2011-02-01T09:33:00.002+01:00

here's the facebook conversation so far:

"Atheist A"
Da er det gjort:))
January 25 at 9:15pm · · Comment · Share

*
*
You, "Theist LW" and "Person B" like this.
*
o
"Person C" Flott;)
January 25 at 9:16pm ·
o
"Person D" what?? :)
January 25 at 9:25pm ·
o
"Person E" Hva har du gjort nå....?
January 25 at 9:25pm ·
o
"Theist LW" I det stadiet du har vært den siste tiden, så er nok dette for tiden kanskje det beste for deg. Men på lang sikt så er jeg lei meg for denne avgjørelsen din. Evigheten er myyyye lengre enn den lille tiden vi flyr rundt her på jorda å virrer rundt som bortkommne insekt.
Sunday at 8:28pm ·
o
"Atheist A" Hva har du fått i deg "Theist LW" ??;))
Sunday at 8:37pm ·
o
"Theist LW" Litt cola bare ; ) he he he
Sunday at 10:14pm ·
o
Nicholas Christian Humphrey da er det gjort her også =)
Sunday at 10:27pm ·
o
Nicholas Christian Humphrey "Theist LW", you are stating a belief as a fact: that the soul exists eternally. there is no scientific and testable proof of anything other than the fact that we are primates.
Sunday at 10:30pm ·
o
"Person E" Fortiden og fremtiden er bare en illusjon, det eneste vi vet helt sikkert er at vi lever her og nå!
Sunday at 10:34pm · · 1 personLoading...
o
"Theist LW"
I am not one who needs scientific proofs. I Get my answers, I have found peace, and Need no DNA proof, that is written on a piece of paper. Verry scientific by the way.....
And i already knew that you wrote yourself out. I guess I can refe...r to a great Metallica song, "sad but true" ; ) Wich also leads me to another great song by Whitney Houston " I will always love you" : DSee More
Sunday at 10:45pm ·
o
"Person D" geez!!!!
Sunday at 11:08pm ·
o
"Theist LW" Jeg er veldig nysgjerrig på hvordan du får fortiden til å bli en illusjon. Sier du da at jeg egentlig ikke var på Kongsberg skisenter på lørdag ???? Og at jeg ikke hadde taco til middag igår ???? Veldig interresant tanke......
Yesterday at 8:37am ·
o
Nicholas Christian Humphrey
"Theist LW", listen to yourself. these are the classic words of what is called "a science denier". dont you want scientific proof that a medicine works and doesnt have dangerous side effects before you take it? dont you want scientific proof that... a new airplane model has been thoroughly tested before you get on it for a transatlantic flight? if you were accused of rape, wouldnt you demand scientific (dna) evidence and rely on that evidence to get you acquitted? did religion make your video camera or your computer? no, it was made using the scientific process. did religion make your car or your clothes or the birth control you use? religion only takes people's money, tells them to be nice while at the same time telling them to hate certain people and gives people false hope. homo sapiens have existed for at least 100,000 years. the bible claims the first offspring (cain) was born around 6000-7000 years ago.
"Theist LW", can i suggest a video for you?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQorzOS-F6wSee More
23 hours ago ·
o
"Person D" Nicholas: Signerer innlegget ditt!!! ;)
23 hours ago · · 1 personLoading...
o
"Theist LW"
NO NICK, you listen to yourself. Three years ago you where preaching this stuff that you are now in total denial of, 15 years ago you knocked down thousands of doors in Norway for two years and spent either your or the Church`s money to sha...re the Gosspel. I gotta say, you`ve come a looooong way since that. Until last year, And unfortunatly I feel it`s the wrong way since then. Money will always be a temporary state of luck, and the past year or so, that`s been your quest, to see how "gold diggin" the lds church is. And how much money you`ve "lost".
I could share tons of links to proove you wrong, but you can search em up, just like you search for everything else ; ) www.google.com
True happyness, comes without the dough $$$$
And I know this, since I`ve experienced both sides of good and bad economics. True happyness is something you gotta earn spritualy. Not with your wallet.See More
23 hours ago ·
o
Nicholas Christian Humphrey
exactly "Theist LW". i was raised in a cult that told me NOT to think outside the box, i.e. church, who controlled what information i had about them by telling me NOT to read anything contrary to their teachings, who told me what to think and wha...t NOT to think, what to feel and what NOT to feel. i was brainwashed by a cult.

> you`ve come a looooong way since that

no shit =) thank science and reasoning for that!

> True happyness, comes without the dough $$$$

and who do you think taught you that "Theist LW"? this is EXACTLY the kind of shit they WANT you to believe.

> True happyness is something you gotta earn spritualy. Not with your wallet.

true happiness starts with financial independence: the ability to do what you want, when you want and not be under the control of anyone else. true happiness ends with/is completed by doing what makes you most happy.

> Money will always be a temporary state of luck

have you heard of economics? fiscal responsibility? controlling spending? investing? education? do you think the church just "got lucky" with their money? no, they implemented a law requiring people to pay them 10% of the income in order to be saved. you can't NOT pay tithing and be "saved in the highest celestial kingdom".

listen to what hinckley says: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxClKTZj5Fg

(in any other context this would be considered a threat and extortion)

you still haven't responded to the science denying and i hope you watch that video i suggested.See More
22 hours ago ·
o
"Person D" And what are members of the church doing on the internet anyway??
members of that church really needs a wake-up call!!!!!
22 hours ago ·
o
Nicholas Christian Humphrey
sorry "Theist LW", but its easier for me to type on my keyboard than an sms so i'll post the argument you just send me on my phone. you wrote:
> "if anyone is in denial it would be you. reason number one: you keep calling me a denier"

i fail to see... your logic.

> "reason number two: if you never had a doubt about god or his existence, you would never choose to walk the path you are now on."

i dont have a doubt that god (YHWH, the god of the old testament) doesnt exist. i want my friends and family to realize this too and stop letting themselves be controlled by a corporation pretending to be a church. and what can i say? i was raised to tell others about my "beliefs". who can blame me? =)

> "which leads on to reason 3: your constant need to "prove" that you are right"

it's my need to destroy organizations who control and rob people of their freedom, joy and money. see also my response to "reason 2".

> "the fact that you wrote yourself out of the church was wise though. this means that there's still hope, after this life at the latest"

by baptizing me for the dead? =) i'll pass. i hereby deny god/elohim/yhwh, jesus and the holy ghost as false, monstrous idols. see, nothing really happens "Theist LW" =) all the church's threats are empty =) the godhead can suck my dick =) see? god's not striking me down =)

> "hugs and squeeze"

the same to you =)See More
22 hours ago ·
o
"Theist LW"
So just live it up then, and leave the rest of us LDS in peace. You have no power over my beliefs, even with your links and "proofs". I just gotta wish you the best of Luck. ; )
Post one of my personal SMS messages out on FB again, and we'l...l just close our friendshipp with that.See More
22 hours ago ·
o
"Theist LW" And where would we get that wake up call ???
22 hours ago ·
o
Nicholas Christian Humphrey
‎> leave the rest of us LDS in peace.

if i'm not mistaken "Theist LW", you commented on bårds status on his own page. the fact is that LDS and other religions dont let the rest of US live in peace. they're out there proselyting and meddling with p...olitical affairs, e.g. Prop 8, lobbying for teaching of ID in schools, trying to stop non-believers from living the way THEY want to live, trying to take away THEIR joy. reread your 11th article of faith:
"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

hugs and squeezes =)

> "Post one of my personal SMS messages out on FB again, and we'l...l just close our friendshipp with that."

goddamn your love runs deep =) sorry "Theist LW", wont happen again.See More
21 hours ago ·
o
Nicholas Christian Humphrey i love you "Theist LW" despite our differences in opinion =)
21 hours ago ·
o
"Theist CL"
Your arguments are horribly framed "Theist LW". As someone that is LDS I'm asking you to please give independent thought to what it is Nick and everyone is saying. Faith is not something that can be explained. There is no "proof" we can offer.... If people are better w/out their faith, let them be and be happy that they are "better". All of your post make you seem so threatened by what other people are doing with their lives. Let your faith in God give you comfort that his plan includes what Bard and Nick do with their lives and let it support you in your endeavors to better your own.See More
9 hours ago ·
o
"Theist LW"
You are right "Theist CL", and I suck at anything that has to do with explaining, it is not ment as judgmental or anything, I am actually trying to tell them to leave us LDS in peace as well, but as long as I see a fist, I guess I suck at turnin...g the other cheek. But yeah I do it wrong, and it always ends up looking like a mess. But thanks for the heads up l ; )
Pluss I love these guys like they where my own brothers, so it gets complicated realy fast.See More
7 hours ago ·
o
"Theist CL"
I agree about the brothers thing but your ARE making judgments left and right (both sides are btw). I just don't know what you mean about being "left alone". Athiest have an agenda just as valid as any religion does. If they feel they're... making the world better by helping people think a different way then great. No different than what we did for two years in Norge...right? Like me I assume you still support the LDS missionary program because you believe in what it has to offer. You can't be "left in peace" unless you tell your sons and daughters to let people be "left in peace" regarding the LDS missionaries. Do you watch the stuff Nick posts? It's actually quite interesting. Food for thought and such.See More
7 hours ago ·
o
"Person TKP"
It's great to see that there finally has come some sense to this discussion.

A religion (or the lack of it) should tolerate critisicm, so a discussion is sometimes good. I just felt that this one wasn't a constructive one, so I didn't want t...o participate.

We should all respect each others standpoints, either way.

Scientific evidence does exist, but is man-made and hence a good, but artificial one. Absolute evidence cannot be communicated because all our information comes through our senses, meaning they are all illusions one way or another. And even if The Holy Spirit did exist and did speak to us, without our normal senses, we wouldn't be able to prove it. So it all boils down to beliefs.

I think Bård is brave to make his standpoint clear, the same way he was brave to make his standpoint when he attended the church earlier.See More
7 hours ago · · 1 personLoading...
o
"Theist LW"
"Person TKP" I am glad you joined this little debate here, cause what you say, is pretty much what I think, but like I said earlier, I suck at getting this right. And having a strong belief in one thing and seeing great friends such as Nick and Bå...rd, take a stand like this is a great mixture of feelings. But it all comes down to Respect. And I do respect the choice they made. I will work at the Judgmental part, and show some love : )
Peace out for now ; )See More
6 hours ago ·
o
"Person TKP" Peace :)
6 hours ago ·
o
Nicholas Christian Humphrey
‎@"Person TKP"

> It's great to see that there finally has come some sense to this discussion.

please point out the things that i wrote that DONT make sense.
...
> We should all respect each others standpoints, either way.

religion deserves NO respect. it is dangerous and counterproductive to progress, understanding of the universe and all that humanism stands for; teaching people:

* that it is a good thing to believe in things they cant see or prove (funny how believers dont apply this principle to any OTHER part of their life like buying a house, car, stocks, legal matters, flying airplanes, taking medicine or medical procedures. for all those things they want evidence that their decision is correct and safe and guaranteed. but if a guy comes and says give me your money and let me dictate exactly how you should live your life and in return i'll give you eternal life, then suddenly they DONT NEED evidence!)

* to hate, kill, and judge others who dont share the same beliefs and lifestyles. e.g. issues like homosexuals and marriage, suicide bombers killing infidels, killing abortion doctors, hating jews

* to accept non-answers about our existence like "if it can't be explained, god must have done it" and "his ways are higher than our ways, we can never possibly understand why". we would still be living in the stone age with no computers, no medicine, no machines, no advanced technology whatsoever if everyone still thought like that.

> Scientific evidence does exist, but is man-made and hence a good, but artificial one. Absolute evidence cannot be communicated because all our information comes through our senses, meaning they are all illusions one way or another.

"Person TKP", is it an illusion that you are a man? that you have a penis? is it an illusion that somebody raping your sister is a bad thing? is it an illusion that the world trade center was destroyed along with thousands of lives? is it an illusion that surgeons can give women artificially larger breasts? is it an illusion that you can open a web browser and talk with someone on the other side of the planet in real time?

scientific claims CAN be tested and PROVED with a high level of accuracy by several independent parties. this is HOW we have the technology that we do: medicine, computers, skyscrapers, telecommunications, etc! some religions make scientific claims and can be disproved using the scientific method, religions like christianity, islam, judaism, all based on the old testament which claims that homo sapiens began 6-7000 years ago and that there was a global flood that wiped out every living thing except some people on a boat about 4-5000 years ago.

the old testament also teaches such irrational, inhumane and destructive and, in religious terms, "evil" things like that homosexuals are evil, that genocide, stoning children and raping women is justifiable.

steve hassan and the mind control BITE model

2011-02-01T09:20:00.000+01:00

What is "mind control?" Is all "mind control" bad?

My mind control model outlines many key elements that need to be controlled: Behavior, Information, Thoughts and Emotions (BITE). If these four components can be controlled, then an individual's identity can be systematically manipulated and changed.
...The person is systematically deceived about the beliefs and practices of the person (or group) and manipulated throughout the recruitment process...The person's identity is profoundly influenced through a set of social influence techniques and a "new identity" is created- programmed to be dependent on the leader or group ideology...The cult system reinforces an "illusion of control."

JESUS this looks familiar! =)

margaret singer - on cults

2011-02-01T00:06:00.001+01:00

cults: dr. margaret singer speaks at a conference
11:56 cultic relationships are those relationships in which a person intentionally induces others to become totally or nearly totally dependent on him or her for almost all major life decisions and inculcates in these followers a belief that he or she has some special talent, gift or knowledge.

boy that sure fits joseph smith and the mormon church to the T!

13:15 the term cult refers to the political and power structure

13:28 our first amendment absolutely protects freedom of belief. our first amendment does not say that, in the pursuit of that, you can go do any old conduct. the law that applies to each of us applies to cult leaders and cult followers as far as conduct goes.

14:16 cult leaders are self-appointed persons who claim to have a special mission or special knowledge in life

14:36 cult leaders tend to be charismatic. if you aren't a little bit charismatic, it's awfully hard to get a following... it helps to be determined and it helps to be domineering...and [have] a low conscience level.

15:58 cults in the modern day sense basically have two purposes: recruiting new members and fundraising

17:04 cults are elitist organizations. all of the cults that i've studied of the modern day ones have the attitude that once you join you're one of the elite.

19:30 cults are authoritarian in their power structure, they tend to be totalitarian and totalistic in the control of the behavior of their members.

20:38 their way is the only way

22:15 most of us in psychology and psychiatry are not interested very much at all in the content of the belief systems. what we're interested in is the packaging of the influence techniques, in what we're coming to call "coordinated programs of coercive influence and behavior control"

29:51 6 conditions, if you have them present, you have a good chance of being able to conduct a thought reform program.

the first thing you need to do is get control of the person's time. you don't have to have them 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, but try to get control over their time.

two, create a sense of powerlessness in them, so that when they're at your group, they hear people talking in certain ways and they don't know what the words mean, but most of the people present seem to. so that the new persons into the group want to become like the rest of the group. those of us that are social creatures really want to have group connections. we want to get some warmth and acceptance from other human beings. so if you're at a meeting like this you hear new terms and you ask what they are because you want to be able to go home and read and understand more and follow what's going on.

so if you're going to do the standard conditions, first, get control over the person's time. two, create a sense of powerlessness in the person. then by manipulating, rewards, punishments and experiences, you start inhibiting and suppressing the old social behavior that the person brought with them and you start by eliciting the new behavior that you want the people to show. you have to do it in a closed system of logic where there are no complaints from the underlings; it's all from the top down; and the final critical thing is: people must be unaware that they're being moved through a program whose goal it is to make them deployable agents of management. that means in the end you'll buy courses, you'll sign up for the duration with the cult leader. you don't know it at the beginning. there has to be this special uninformed state.

people are always saying to me "well, isn't that how it is when you go off to be a jesuit? isn't that how it is when you go off to join the marine corp?" and the answer is "no". you know when you go to the marine corp, you may not know how muddy it's going to be and exactly what drill seargents are going to be like. and when you join the jesuits you don't know how hard it may be in the end to wrestle with your own human conscience and your own human mind, but you know ahead of time and they have a long period and i swear, somebody should make me an honorary jesuit or an honorary marine corp person because every time i testify in court i have to defend these organizations as not being mind controlling and thought reform organizations and i have a great long list of how they differ and especially i have to have a great long list for the marine corp because there are always a bunch of people present that have not been in the military and think that it's a horrible place that brainwashes people. no, it's an indoctrination program for the military and you know what it is when you're going. the recruiting officer doesn't have on a dress and pretend he's a sister of mercy. you know what you're joining and that it's rough

1) the lds church sure has control of their members' time:
meetings during the week
meetings on sunday
home teaching/visiting teaching
cleaning the church
going to the temple
morning/afternoon seminary
events, activities
service projects
missionary work, members on splits with missionaries
open houses
devotionals, firesides (evenings in someone's home or at the church where a guest speaker speaks about a particular topic)
ward, stake and general conferences
leadership training meetings
scripture reading every day
family home evening
various callings like working in the geneological center or serving at the temple as a veil worker or patron/helper
missions

2) the lds church has so many new vocabulary words and concepts that non/new-members have never heard before--their own religious language really

3) the church totally suppresses old social behavior and is VERY conformist! there are dress codes, ways of speaking and ways NOT to speak

43:03 the discrepency between the followers' standard of living and that of the cult leader. remember these programs change an individual a step at a time. and the leaders have ways of rationalizing and usually the way they rationalize that they live in such style and glory is because they've gotten the followers to believe that the outside world and their parents and their old life is a corrupt and venal and evil group. they say that the leader has to deal with these bad and evil people in the outside world who only respect money and jewels and silk clothing, so that at a step at a time people have become made dependent on the leader, they come to accept a step at a time his or her philosophy and then a step at a time they come to literally push their old conscience--and because they're so dependent upon the organization, that they're taught that negativity is wrong. you can't run a cult and let people complain to management, it's just very difficult... the cult leader, in order to deal with these outside people has to look like a successful and powerful person.

the church leaders in their nice suits, throwing huge banquets for other leaders on the outside, inviting them to their huge, spacious, expensive buildings. their church office building offices and bathrooms are decked out with expensive woods and marble, etc.

46:09 i've interviewed a large number of people who have left some of the major cults as well as small cults. some of them were totally aware that it was a corrupt leader. they knew he was having sexual hanky panky with the teenage children of the followers, they knew a lot of the underside and the shady side of the cult leader, but at that point, usually they were so dependent that they stayed even though they knew it. some of them, when they discovered it and their old conscience flashed back to the center of their thinking, they left.... the people at the top are really a mixed bag.... it's like any great big business enterprise: some are going to know and some aren't.

the reason that those in the lds church don't quit: they're too dependent, they're locked in, their social/family life would be deeply affected

53:16 those are called a hook. those of you who are in sales know you have to have a hook to get a person to look at the merchandise. sometimes the hook is taking yoga lessons, sometimes it's a free meditation lesson, sometimes a free massage lesson, health food lectures, any kind of an introductory thing and then the group tries to recruit out of those who do show an interest.

like the lds church missionaries offering english classes or playing sports (teaching american sports, etc) or doing service or young adult programs where they ask the youth to bring a friend.

"truth" under "the razor"

determining "truth" with feelings and emotions

do you think feelings and emotions are an infallible way of determining truth? then maybe you havent heard of hypochondriasis:"This debilitating condition is the result of an inaccurate perception of the body’s condition despite the absence of an actual medical condition"

feelings vs facts in the mormon church

my views on relativism and sophism

the NDAA H. R.1540 signed by barack obama does not specifically exempt US citizens from indefinite military detention without trial

what is the value of an NDE really?

is the lds mormon church a cult? susan's review

LDS/Mormon Indian Placement Program

What Does Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney Really Believe?

mormon "apostle" boyd packer prophesies "the end isnt near" (jesus isnt coming back any time soon)

Cubist on scientific "proof"

christopher hitchens on the morally disgusting religious practice called circumcision

why cant ex-mormons just "leave the church alone"? =)

evidence that joseph smith knew about engraved plates during his time--apologists panic =)

a good definition of "religion"

rational thinking vs religion

falsifiability of the mormon lds church cult "truth claims"

"Mormons practice polygamy". myth? technically, no.

ansvar vs årsak og forsvare vs forklare

‎"No cure for pedophilia has been developed."

self defense in norway

norway's done doing a good job killing people in libya

hippocrates, 400+ years before "jesus" casts out the "demons", understands that epilepsy is an illness

god of the gaps

book review: friedrich nietzsche, beyond good and evil

mormon missionaries will tell people that you only have to pay 10%

mormon apologetics - pseudo-science + ad hoc assumptions

stephen hawking on the probability of intelligent life

movie review - IOUSA - documentary about the US deficit

ragnar redbeard's real(istic) beatitudes

why the mormons always list a new leader's accomplishments before he speaks for the first time

the equinox volume 3 number 10 book review

"god" as a "loving heavenly father"

the "evils" of socialism (tongue in cheek)

how to write yourself out of the lds mormon church by email

joseph smith boasting he is greater than jesus

thelema's the equinox volume 1 number 2 book review

lds mormon "holy ghost"/"spirit" testimony

"i know gravity is true"

jesus tells pharisees they are sinning by not stoning disrespectful children

the rest of the story FAIR deliberately left out about joseph smith's moon men beliefs

ann coulter on racially profiling muslims

racism is about biology not ideology

islam: women, pray to the god who allows you to be beaten by your husbands

creationist/theist: "how could the entire universe simply pop into existence magically for no reason at all?"

death to "allah's" and muhammad's enemies!

there's no "moderate" islam according to the koran

islam: painful punishment for apostasy (muslims who reject their faith)

pakistani imam in norway demands beheading of muslims who dont fast during ramadan

sam harris on islam - the last word with lawrence o'donnell

i know the church is true "Because feelings are unmistakeable" / "i cant deny the spiritual experiences i've had"

islam vs muslims

exmormon review: "New Harmony: Spirit will help young adults who wander"

exmormon review: "Friday Minute: 10 member-missionary tips"

Mohammed: the end will NOT come UNLESS you wipe out the jews!

what is official lds mormon church doctrine?

lds claim: "True wealth comes by living the gospel"

"the 6th sense" (norwegian edition: jakten på den sjette sans) FAIL =)

"Elohim can also mean many gods."

Ancient gold plates in Mesoamerica By Daniel Johnson, For Mormon Times

how long are the days in the creation story in genesis?

"We can believe or reject evolution, it doesn't matter, the church has no official position."

"mark hofmann didnt dupe the mormon prophet and apostles"

"in billions of years anything can happen" doesnt explain anything!

"there is no one single way to disprove a church/religion"

my response to apologist explanations about why "prophets" have been wrong for so long about native american ancestry/dna

what percent of religious belief is based on the old testament, globally?

does dna evidence/research disprove the book of mormon?

my response to a mormon questioning her faith

good responses to "Europol Report: All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 99.6% that Aren’t"

how to respond to a pro-lifer

the mormon faith isnt racist

"life after death is true" and "theists are happier and atheists are more self-destructive and negative"

how is mitochondrial eve (ME) dated?

my response to a user named cats from utah about why people leave the lds church

the lds church cult

sam harris puts religion/god into perspective

mormon garments as a protection from danger

"the largest group of suicide terrorists are the Tamil Tigers, a group of atheist Marxists." DEBUNKED

do you think feelings and emotions are an infallible way of determining truth? then maybe you havent heard of hypochondriasis:
"This debilitating condition is the result of an inaccurate perception of the body’s condition despite the absence of an actual medical condition"