God Needs Spin Doctor
Sep 6th, 2010, in Opinion, by Guest WriterReligion is faith. Faith is an absence of Reason. Lack of Reason leads to the absurd.
When considering evolution, a debate kept alive by hardened theologists, facts are often misconstrued to the level of individualistic proselytization, highly probable the result of indoctrination none of which are scientific nor rational and too often misleading. Evolution never questions nor attempts to disprove the existence of a mighty supernatural being. It simply states that over time organism transforms by mutation. Biological based virus go through forms of mutation. It is a well proven fact. Even the ancient Greek catered to that idea.
However, this essay relates to another form of evolution. One that is specifically cognitive based: intellectualism.
With the advent of science, humans have progressed exponentially. Not only have we reached the stars we can also define in specific terms what a star is made of. Science is dynamic, what we have established today as scientific Law (eg, the Law of Gravity) can change as our technology advances leading to discoveries which may disprove the latter. That is the beauty of science. The Truth is a variable that can only be accepted as true when tested by varying intermediaries until proven otherwise. Whether Jane jumps off the Empire State Building or Fifi vaulted over the Eiffel Tower, their final destination is always down. Thus the Law of Gravity is True.
Religion, however, is the exact opposite. It is fixed, constant, if not latently updated yet still must stand to inquiries based on obsolete – some mythical – antiquities thus remain spiteful of modernity. The latter is true at least in the intellectual sense.
Consider the modern concept of Human Equality popularized by the General Assembly of the United Nation in 1948. The idea that one’s religion is equal to any other religion, therefore Allah is equal to Vishnu, will incite bomb threats from every Islamists all over the globe. Will the Christian exact the same reverence to the Islamic Quran as the literal word of God? One church in Florida plans to burn the Quran this September 11.
The Abrahamic religions preach everything is equal before the eyes of God. But it is not very truthful is it? It wasn’t true for the Ammonite and the Moabite. In the Quran, Allah turned Jews into monkeys and pigs. Certainly favoritism not equality is the nature of God. Accept Jesus and you will be saved. How about for the other billions of people on this planet who don’t?
When we compare the Acts of God in the Old Testament, the Bible and the Quran, it is apparent we, humans, have transgressed the greatest and most fearsome sin of all, we have evolved.
Consider Lot of Sodom. Both in the Christian and Islam tradition, when the hedonistic Sodomites insisted Lot gave away his angelic visitors, he offered his daughters instead. No human of high moral upstanding today would callously offer the flesh of his daughter to satiate the public’s lust. To prove his loyalty to God, Abraham without hesitation placed his son on the altar ready to slit the boy’s throat. Insanity would be Abraham’s best choice for defense in the modern court today. In the Islamic Hadith, Muhammad was documented to favor stoning for charges of adultery. Well, that issue is still an ongoing controversy on CNN.
Apologists will and very often debate that actions done or commanded to God’s apostles have temporal relevance. But isn’t God infinite? Should not God, by His Glorified Wisdom, guess that in a thousand years we will deemed such deeds as barbaric and inhumane? Wouldn’t have God foresee that by the twentieth century, us, humans, advocating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which condemns, pretty much a large percentage in His Holy Texts, as a crime against humanity? I would expect Allah to whisper in Muhammad’s ear to lay off Aisha cause she’ll reflect negatively in public opinion a couple of centuries later.
With the promulgation of Christianity of the Byzantine period in Europe, the old ancient gods were eschewed to obscurity. Now that we are in the twenty first century, humans once again evolved intellectually and outgrew their celestial lord. The One God needs a major upgrade to maintain relevance or hires one kick-ass public relation officer.
155 Comments on “God Needs Spin Doctor”
-
Joenathan. T says:
the last sentence… AWESOME !!!!
and that’s what they were doing nowadays…Especially in nowadays “success is our right” and “entrepreneurship madness” which is so “HOT” in Indonesia.
people starts to implement the theory and ideology of business into the other aspect of life, which includes religion.But the funny thing is that how they called themselves (Islam and Christianity),,, the holiest of holy…
Some articles and journals even stated them as the “2 holiest religion”
=.=”
Then, does that mean the other religion is not holy ? =.=’ that’s just tick me off…. -
Patrick says:
Mmmm? The article states that “Faith is an absence of reason” and “God needs a spin-doctor”. Topping this, David declares the entire article as “very refreshing” Ha ha ha! Somebody wake poor David up from what must be an alcohol binged delusional comment! Pull back the blinds, open the windows and throw David and poor Tania into a cold shower of reality.
I think most Christians believe in mico-evolution as that can easily be seen in nature but it is maro-evolution theory that is vehmently opposed. Please understand the difference beacause while micro-evolution can be proved, macro-evolution has never been observed nor proved but please attempt to prove me wrong. See any sea gypsies with fins, flippers, or gills? How about Eskimos growing fur?2.Your point that the concept of God or Abrahamic religions treating everything as equal is a lie is based on very different sources of information that are sometimes agreeable & just as often unagreeable of what is truth. If you start with a false premise then of course you will end up with a false conclusion.
3. You stated that we humans have evolved to the degree that the concepts of God & religion are no longer relevent. You then ask us to consider Lot offering his daughters in place of his Angelic guests. At first glance your statement that “No high moral standing today…” seems reasonable & just when viewed from a contemporary point of perspective but again is it a correct assumption or is it yet another example of a false conclusion? I would argue it is the latter as the ancients would have viewed guests as under their protection and any injury to those guests would have brought his family great shame & dishonor. Temporal relevance 🙂
Please explain how we are better today with our scientific triumphs? We no longer need God or religion because wars are obsolete, illegal drug abuse is no longer epidemic, diseases & death have been conquered, people no longer lie, steal, murder (left out adultry since God is credited with inventing marriage)?
-
ET says:
This debate about science vs religion is senseless. Both try to explain the unknown but use different approaches and methodologies. Science is empirical and starts from observations, religion is deductive and starts from dogmatic principles or visionary phantasies. Some claim to offer the absolute truth for all times but always have been debunked. Newton – notwithstanding his tremendous influence on science – could in his time never have imagined something like quantum physics. The moral principles of Lot offering his daughters could have been based on priorities that nowadays have become obsolete. So temporal and even local relevance is a fact and should be taken into account. In the grand scheme of things relativism and uncertainty seem to play an important part.
The only reasonable attitude is to accept that we (still) don’t know everything. So a little modesty would be proper for both sides. Confronted with the great mysteries we can only stay in awe, go on with our lives and hope that the future will bring us closer to the truth. -
tania says:
hi
1) Microevolution and Macroevolution employ the same mechanism. Your attempt to differentiate the two is a common Creationist ploy and has been debunked numerous times by scientists in the field. And Eskimos can’t grow fur because it’s not in their paternal genetic makeup. Evolution is not affected only by adaptation.2) Isn’t God the All Merciful. The All Giving. You’re telling me it’s wrong to assume God sees everyone equally? *gasp*
3) Actually you answered your own question there. I would even agree that, yes, the ancients would probably didn’t see anything wrong about Lot’s action because they were the authors of religion. And that is really my entire point. When men created religion we weren’t very smart compared to today.
4) Wars, drugs, disease and death have always existed since the dawn of man. Given so, did we ever needed God? I’ll rephrase your question: How are we better today with our religion? I could prove to you in so many ways how this amazing technology called the internet improved communication. We have a treatment for Smallpox, the little nasty disease that ravaged Europe centuries ago. We’re working very hard to eradicate polio. It took Columbus weeks to cross the Atlantic, now Joe Blo could do it in hours, once every weekend. My cave is definitely much comfier now since i installed ac and a plasma TV. It wasn’t so accommodating, say, 8000 years ago. Heck the only entertainment i had back then was either hunting, gathering and drawing stick figures on the wall.
-
BrotherMouzone says:
@Joenathan. T
Especially in nowadays “success is our right” and “entrepreneurship madness” which is so “HOT” in Indonesia.
I think you’ll find that entrepreneurship has always been a cornerstone organized religion..
George Carlin said it better than I ever could;
He (God) loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bullsh*t story.
Enjoyable post!
-
Hi Tania, Your writing pattern is like a DNA map leading to your finger print.
Speaking of dna that was correctly identified by you as the limiting factor that makes macro evolution impossible. Thank you for that 🙂Don’t believe I wrote any statements that implied anything but how wrong it is to begin any discussion with a false premise. Judism, Catholicism (Christianity), & Islam view God differently & therefore each must stand independent of the others. If you want to ask me about Jesus than yes He said “love one another” meaning love all and not just who you choose to love. He is a forgiving just God who asked forgiveness from His enemies, forgave sinners & told the thief crucified along side of Him (who admitted He feared God because he was a sinner and deserved his punishment) that “this day you will be in paradise. The word Catholicism means the universal church so yes I would say it sees all men and women as equal 🙂
P.s., very happy you are now nice & cozy in your cave. Pleaase remember the words of jesus “what good is it that a man (woman) could gain the whole world but lose their soul”? -
Correction to my last post “from His enemies” should read “for His enemies”
-
Sometimes it’s money well spent.
-
@David
Sometimes it’s money well spent.
Charities asking for money is different to religions asking for money. What I’m uncomfortable with is that in many churches, the money goes into a vague pool of money, some of which will or may go to charity.
When the faithful run stand-alone charities they tend to do so very well. But the idea that your church donation/phone pledge/tithed direct debit goes into an untaxed, unaudited fund which may or may not be used for charitable purposes is a recipe for misuse and corruption.
-
Hans says:
All people other than Africans carry equal proportion of Neanderthal DNA, whether
come from Europe, where the Neanderthal lived, or China, where Neanderthal
never occurred. What religion says about this -
Religion is simply people’s way of trying to understand what we are and what we’re doing here. Given that we’re such fine chaps and chapesses, we naturally deduce that this mortal span is not the final delineation of our existence.
I have to say I agree with that. Is it really just 70 years and then zap? Nothingness?
In fact the seventy is effectively reduced to about fortyfive, given that we are too young to do much till we are in our mid-teens and once we hit the Big Six, we start contemplating the bone-yard.
Why on earth, or anywhere, would such enquiring minds as most of us, provided with time and opportunity, possess, be so concerned with the ultimate meaning if there were none?
It smacks of some sneaky plan by God, and religion is the word we use to encompass our attempts to out-smart the Almighty! -
@Hans-Relgion probably has little or nothing to say about Neanderthal Man since scientists are stii debating if they are a seperate species, a sub-species or part of the human species. The debate continues zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
-
I have to say I agree with that. Is it really just 70 years and then zap?
Why not? If you consider yourself just a phase in a continuing process, you yourself and what you’re doing becomes less, only temporarily, important. In the end only the fact of having done it is what counts. Not the individual an sich but the process is what drives evolution to its ultimate meaning, whatever this may be. The Chinese call it the Tao (the Way), it is driven by change and change depends on action. After we’re gone it’s up to the next generations to continue the process.
-
@ET – The process drives evolution? What prtocess? Is evolution proven sudah? When? Where? Who? What? Why? How?
Please explain? Gracias! 🙂 -
@ Patrick
It’s a bit complicated to condense in a few lines, but you may google Alfred North Whitehead or check this out
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/process-philosophy/But if you reject evolution a priori I don’t think it’s worth the trouble.
-
@Hans? My last post addressed the fact that the jury is still out among scientist about how to classify Neanderthals. My point was what would be the reason for religious to say anything about this matter at this juncture since their is no established consensus to oppose or support? If Neanderthal were human than yes interbreeding with other humans is likely. If they are a sub-species of humans then interbreeding would also be a very real possibility. Think of tigers and lions who have been successfully cross-bred by human intervention. The reason they can inter-breed is that they share virtually the same DNA. However, when this is done genetic defects will occur and or sterilization. Finally, if Neanderthals were a different species than it improbable that any cross-breeding could occur just as humans and monkeys cannot have off-spring even as they share similar DNA. Hope that explains it 🙂
-
@ET – Establishing a position against “The Theory of Evolution” is not necessarilly faith based alone but is also formed on existing evidence that does not support macro evolution. After all I did not grow-up in a vacuum & I have been exposed to Evolution Theory since a young age.Anyway I have begun to read the link you provided in my quest to expand my knowlege of the subject so thank you for that & after I have read it all I will share with you my thoughts 😉
-
Oigal says:
I do enjoy these Creationist people, after everything that is provided in support of Evolution they still manage to stand in the corner with folded arms, closed eyes and stamping their feet mumbling “does not” over n over again.
Although I would disagree She needs a Spin Doctor, any super duper being (real or imaginary) who gets off by sending floods and disease to kill little babies and children yet still is revered by millions obviously has a very good PR firm. Look at BP as far I am aware there were no little children killed in the Gulf but the CEO gets the bullet and BP is villified. I look forward to seeing the Pope in front of the senate committee.
There was a very funny movie “The man who sued God” after he was told by his insurance company that a lightening strike was “An act of God” therefore no claim could be made..He then sued God’s representive on Earth…who is??I forget who it was but a famous naturalist once said “When someone asks me if I am a believer, I think of the child in Africa with the crew worm eating away at the back of her eye as see she screams in agony and the answer is obvious” (paraphrased).
Still one should not forget the Catholic Churches contribution to science, Galileo springs to mind.
-
@Oigal – you always seem to make an appearance when all is lost and like some vengeful angel from hell who knows he must spread as much misery as possible before his fate is sealed. My answer is the same now as it was in the past to you and that is you must read the “Book of Job” to get God’s answer to all those nasty things you accuse Him of doing. You know Oigal being sloth is a “deadly sin” so get going dear girl and perhaps you will come to know “Wisdom” for the very first time in your pitiful existence here on earth. God speed to you 😉
-
Sorry Patrick bit busy with some other good books at the moment. Although “Vengeful Angel from Hell” seems quite a promotion even for me :-). I will be sure to pass your message onto the Sloths, they will be disappointed to hear that.
-
I’m all for religious belief, in fact I’m a little jealous of those who hold it. There’s plenty of evidence out there that the faithful (of all denominations) live longer, have better health, and donate more to charity than non-believers.
Personally, I think agnosticism is pretty much the only defensible position. Anyone who says that they are utterly convinced of either the existence or non-existence of God must be in on some information that is not available to the rest of us.
There’s just no incontrovertible evidence for either position, that’s why I find Dawkins et al just as irritating as anyone else who preaches an unknowable truth.
-
I’m all for religious belief, in fact I’m a little jealous of those who hold it That is a valid point BM, One of the best human beings I have ever known was an absolute believer, Muslim in fact and who actually lived the best aspects of religion and treatment of others. I was indeed somewhat envious of her surety someone was looking out for everyone at all times and there is a reason for everything despite the evidence to the contrary.
Only trouble is that is only one person out of tens of thousands, invairably the vast majority seem to think they are speaking for God and the moment that happens I have an overwhelming urge to wash my hands.
-
@Tania, Oigal and ET, but what proof did you offer that God needs a spin doctor? What overwhelming evidence that humans or present day animals evolved from lower species? Processes? Mmmmmmmm talk about a leap of faith. How can gravity come from nothing? The Greeks mean nothing and not a void of space. Yet evolutionist can explain everything and anything by complex processes despite no clear evidence to support these notions except through conjectures. It seems you who accuse God of needing a spin doctor have been worshipping the biggest spin doctor in History and his name is Charles Darwin.
-
@ Patrick
How can gravity come from nothing?
I’ll answer your question with a koan. What’s the starting point of a circle?
-
Gravity doesn’t come from nothing Patrick, how many science classes did you actually miss?
What overwhelming evidence that humans or present day animals evolved from lower species?
How many rooms do you need to fill?
Besides the obvious problem of a great diety in the sky using somewhat primative people and means to spread his message whne he could have waited a couple of hundred years and made a DVD seems a bit silly, the biggest problem the God Botherers have is “Who made God?” and if the earth was made in seven days, how long was a day if the sun was created until the end of the week.
Seriously, Patrick you are back into the stomping the feet and “does not” routine again
-
Ok, I have had a re-think you win Patrick..
Gravity: Doesn’t exist. If items of mass had any impact of others, then mountains should have people orbiting them. Or the space shuttle in space should have the astronauts orbiting it. Of course, that’s just the tip of the gravity myth. Think about it. Scientists want us to believe that the sun has a gravitation pull strong enough to keep a planet like neptune or pluto in orbit, but then it’s not strong enough to keep the moon in orbit? Why is that? What I believe is going on here is this: These objects in space have yet to receive mans touch, and thus have no sin to weigh them down. This isn’t the case for earth, where we see the impact of transfered sin to material objects. The more sin, the heavier something is. -
Lairedion says:
ET has said a little earlier:
The only reasonable attitude is to accept that we (still) don’t know everything.
This is essential. Contrary to what Patrick argues here:
Yet evolutionist can explain everything and anything by complex processes despite no clear evidence to support these notions except through conjectures.
This is certainly not the case. The evolution theory is still a theory and doesn’t describe everything. It searches for empirical evidences and always holds room for error. Buddha and Laozi were smart enough to acknowledge the fact we don’t know everything. that’s why they put so much emphasis on developing wisdom.
Creationists exempt themselves from such requirements. They encourage us to shut down reason and accept their religious scripts as the truth that explains everything. Feel free to take such a position but discussion is a dead end street.
I don’t believe in the evolution theory as the ultimate truth but to me it’s much more plausible than what semitic peoples cooked up with their knowledge limited by desert surroundings.
-
@Oigal, I placed a snare and you and ET fell right into it as you are evidently unfamilar with your newest spin doctor “Dr. Stephen Dawkins” whose newest book on Metaphysics called (I love this) “The Grand Design” claims that gravity came from nothing and through a long process (equally love process) the Universe can and will cresate itself from nothing. There you have it and I am the one who missed too many science classes. Ha ha ha! 😉
Comment on “God Needs Spin Doctor”.
Copyright Indonesia Matters 2006-2023
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact
Funny I made more or less the exact same point to someone on a forum many years ago; if God is omnipotent, then he knows everything backwards and forwards, and He would know.. well the point you made.
I’d be careful about the use of the word ‘everything’ there; organised Christianity, at any rate, only ever claimed that all souls are equal before God; Judaism references only to Jews I think, so that non-Jews are beyond its scope in a way, so it wouldn’t be surprising if the Old Testament regarded non-Jewish peoples as slave material, or however they were regarded.
There’s an awful lot in your post, it’s very refreshing to read it …