Thursday, August 16, 2012

FacePlant of the Day - A Really Bad Pro-Homosexual Argument! that Twists the Bible.

On Tuesday, Dr James White responded to an argument that's becoming quite popular in which people try to suggest that Jesus condoned homosexuality because he healed the young gay lover of a Roman Centurion. They base this farce on Matthew 8 and Luke 7. They want to argue that the one Jesus healed was not the Centurion servant but the centurion's gay lover. They go as far as saying that the Greek word  "pais" does not mean "servant" but "lover". Such an argument can't hold together, and  Dr White truly shows how this "reasoning" is really a fail.


Here is a link to the original article by Jay Michaelson: Link


Today on the Dividing Line: A Bunch of Really Bad Arguments on Very Different Topics
Enhanced by Zemanta

We're NASA and We Know It (Mars Curiosity) - YouTube




Lyrics
When I EDL, time for seven minutes of flamin' hell
Rover's touchin' down
everybody passin' peanuts around, yeah
We're at mission control, getting full use outta ev-er-y Sol (wa!)
Just 25 feet left to go
It's Curiosity, look out below (yo)

Crane lower that rover (ah)
Crane lower that rover (ah)
Crane lower that rover (ah)

N-N-N-Now bug out!

Crane lower that rover
Crane lower that rove
Crane lower that rover

Now bug out!

Kickin' it at my con(sole), this is what I see (okay)
Data streaming back from curiosity
I got stars on my 'hawk
and I ain't afraid to show it (show it, show it, show it)
We're NASA and we know it

We're NASA and we know it

(Yo)
When I look for ice, gotta calibrate, gotta be precise
And when I raise the mast, panoramic views are unsurpassed (wha?)
This is how I rove, baking red rocks in my nuclear stove
We headed to the peak, with my laser eye
No one to bury me when it's time to die (ow!)

Crane lower that rover
Crane lower that rover
Crane lower that rover

Now bug out!

Crane lower that rover
Crane lower that rover
Crane lower that rover

Now bug out!

Shoutout to Carl the Sage (and) Neil Degrasse T (B.A.!)
Shoutout to JPL and the Rocker-Bogie
We're better than SpaceX
And we ain't afraid to show it (show it, show it, show it)
We're NASA and we know it
We're NASA and we know it

We're NASA and We Know It (Mars Curiosity) - YouTube
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

People Who Think Like Scientists

I would argue that this word cloud does not only describe the thinking of a good scientist but any responisble person who is interested in interacting with the world on true and honest terms. It can and should be employed in all human interactions and in pursuit of knowledge in any and all fields. I find it amazing how quickly people's emotions immediately causes them to violate these guidelines while accusing others of breaking them.

People Who Think Like Scientists

Sunday, August 12, 2012

UPdate: A Reply to "So You Still Think Homosexuality is Sinful"

I saw the following graphic on Facebook and I think that it not only explains the standard arguments against homosexual lifestyle on Biblical grounds. The following link is a great essay to explain why the Bible should not be ignored. Take a look at the link.

A Reply to "So You Still Think Homosexuality is Sinful"

UPDATE:

Dr  James White has weighed in on the graphic on his Dividing Line webcast August 16, 2012.

Covered a bunch of stuff, starting off examining this really bad pro-homosexual argument, discussed a little about the LGBT terrorist in Washington, D.C., and then discussed the appearance of non-Trinitarian singing group PC&D at a local church (Scottsdale Bible Church) and the very odd response from the "Worship and Creative Arts Pastor" of the church. Then we moved back to examining Paul Williams' comments and, quite honestly, abuse of the biblical text, in the recent debate in London. Here's the program

A Wide Ranging Dividing Line Today

Geek Zodiac - What's Your Sign!!

New Fan-Made Star Trek Web Series

Saturday, August 11, 2012

FacePlant of the Day - Debunking Christianity: Paul Tells Us in His Last Letter (Romans) That God Has Alzheimer’s Disease

Just when I think that Harry McCall can't make a more dumber argument, he ups and surprises me. In this article he tries to make are ally dumb argument he cannot even begin to substantiate.

Paul tells us in his letter to the Romans that "Jesus is at the right hand of God interceding for us" (ἐντυγχάνει ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν = Present Indicative or to keep doing intercession for us) in Heaven. (Romans 8:34, NIV

31 What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33 Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34 Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died —more than that, who was raised to life —is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? 36 As it is written:
“For your sake we face death all day long;
    we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered.”[j]
37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,[k] neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. - Romans 8:31-39

It's interesting how McCall feels the need to rip verse 34 out of its context.  Notice how Paul is talking about believers on earth now being interceded by Jesus. McCall is going to try to make it seem that Paul is talking about judgement day and not the here and now.

Yet, even with all this pleading by Jesus, Romans 14:12 tells us that each person is going to have to step up and “will give account to God” (δώσει τῷ Θεῷ = Future Indicative Active) or we must tell God exactly what sins we did.

10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister[a]? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written:
“‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,
‘every knee will bow before me;
    every tongue will acknowledge God.’”[b]
12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.
13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister. - Romans 14:10-13
Nowhere does the text say we will be telling God exactly what sins we did. Besides we don't even know all the sins we have done. Giving "an account of ourselves" before God does not mean confessing our sins. God already knows what they are.

If we take the Bible seriously; we have an image of "Jesus being presently at the right hand of God interceding for us" in Heaven with the following scenario on how this action is playing out. 

Intercession does not mean God needs to be reminded about his mercy and kindness. 

So according to St. Paul, as each Christians commits a sin (based on both the Jewish Torah as well as the New Testament) we have this scene in Heaven: 

God: "Sinner, you stand condemned!"
Jesus: "You must forgive him father for I died and shed my blood for him!" 
God: "Oh, yeah, I remember now. O.K. But what about that other sinning Christian right there?”
Jesus: "Forgive her father. I died and shed my blood for her too!" 
God: "Oh, yeah, I remember now. O.K." 

God: “But what about that person right over there?”
And again, God try’s to condemn a sinner and yet again, Jesus intercedes for them by pleading his blood as shed on the cross. 

Jesus, now after 2,000 years and for the googolplex time: "Forgive him father. I died for him / her!" 
And God for the googolplex time: "Oh yeah! Now I remember . . . O.K: Forgiven!" 

Ironically, it’s little wonder neither God nor Jesus has time to answer prayers since both are in an eternal Catch-22 Situation; one of eternal condemning and interceding. 

Shows how much McCall does not understand anything bout the Father's relationship to Jesus. Jesus' sacrifice wasn't for those like him who reject Jesus but only for those who put their trust in Jesus. If Jesus did not die for you and raised for your justification (see Romans 8) you will be judged according to your own righteousness. Jesus did not die for everyone.  Jesus died for those who were given him by the Father. 

35 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37 All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40 For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
41 At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’?”
43 “Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. 44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’[d] Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. 47 Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” - John 6:35-51
Finally, here’s how salvation sounds in Heaven (at least to the angles). 
God: "Baugh, Baugh, Baugh; Condemed!"
Jesus: "Baugh, Baugh, Baugh." 
God: "Baugh, Baugh, Baugh: O.K. Forgiven!" 

I think that the angels are definitely more understanding of salvation than McCall is. 

F-O-R-E-V-E-R!
{As for as Romans14: 12 is concerned (with God being as forgetful as he is), I plan to lie and march myself right on into Heaven!}

Harry McCall

McCall attempts to debunk what the Bible says about Salvation but fails to accurately understand what it says about salvation. A God who knows the number of hairs on your head surely knows how many sins you have committed.

Jesus said:

29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care.[a] 30 And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.  - Matthew 10:29-31

Given that there are sins of ignorance that we are all guilty of we don't even know all the sins we have done - but God does.

The heart is deceitful above all things
    and beyond cure.
    Who can understand it?
10 “I the Lord search the heart
    and examine the mind,
to reward each person according to their conduct,
    according to what their deeds deserve.”- Jeremiah 17:9-10

Debunking Christianity: Paul Tells Us in His Last Letter (Romans) That God Has Alzheimer’s Disease
Enhanced by Zemanta

The Many Looks of Spiderman Over the Past 50 Years [INFOGRAPHIC]

Spider-Man debuted August 10, 1962! It's been 50 years!


Spiderman-Infographic


The Many Looks of Spiderman Over the Past 50 Years [INFOGRAPHIC]
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, August 10, 2012

How Big is Infinity? [Video]



How Big is Infinity? [Video]

FacePalm of the Day - Debunking Christianity: Solomon's Decision Was the Dumbest Judicial Ruling in History

I've got to wonder if John Loftus' crusade to debunk Christianity is motivated by emotional fear than by clear-thinking reason. It does not take much to see that given that he posts really shoddy logic like the following.

We all know the story told in I Kings 3. Solomon was given wisdom by God more than anyone else. To show us how wise he was Solomon issued a ruling involving two prostitutes who both claimed a particular baby was theirs. To settle the matter Solomon ordered that the child be cut in two, with each woman receiving half of him. This is supposed to be considered wise. I demurr. I think it was the dumbest judicial ruling in history, well, at least one of them. Here's why.

So let's look at what the Bible says that happened. Loftus makes it look like Solomon decides to cut the baby in half because he can't decide whose the baby's mother is. IF this was true, then maybe Loftus has a point. But before pulling the string revealing just how whacked Loftus' reasoning really is, let's see how he tried to develop his "point.

Just imagine Solomon’s so-called “wise” judgment in our day in a courtroom situation in a divorce child custody case.

How is a child custody case in a courtroom in anyway like the scenario in the Bible? In cases involving custody of children, the court knows the relationship of the people who are vying for custody to the child in question. And today with DNA, birth certificates, and all the documentation around today, it's almost impossible to not to be able to tell a child's parentage. In this case, Solomon was looking for the identity of the baby's mother given that two women claimed to be the baby's mother.

Go ahead. Imagine it. It was anything but wise. We would be morally repulsed if any judge issued such a judgment, for it was always possible that both women in Solomon's story might agree to have the child killed.

Given that people abort children without shame or conscious then maybe today both mothers could have an "as-long-as-she-doesn't-have-him "attitude, but I doubt it. I would think that a woman who goes through pregnancy and birth would so cavalierly give up her child. I mean there is that pesky little quality we call love. Even after 3000 years, I wouldn't count motherly love out. Solomon was wise enough not to ignore mothely love as a motivation for human action even if Loftus misses it.

Even the real mother might have wanted the child killed rather than have it raised by such a lying conniving pretender/thief. 

Why? Why would not a mother love her child so much that she would rather see him live than die.

If this had happened then the child would have been killed since that’s what Solomon said, and he could not back out of it, could he? Any civilized judge issuing such a judgment would be thrown out of the country it’s so utterly repulsive. It’s actually the dumbest ruling that was ever made.

I think the dumbest thing is that Loftus doesn't see that Solomon was wise enough to see that the real mother would love her son so much that she'd rather live without him than die. Don't forget that love is about sacrifice.

Unlike John Loftus, some atheists are honest. While I disagree with the conclusion the commenter draws on the Bible, he at least correctly states what the Bible does say..


I think you cut the story short, and missed the point. Before I explain, I'm an atheist, and I agree the bible is bullshit. But his ruling wasn't as "dumb" as you make it sound
The verse after he announces the baby will be cut in half is:
"Then spoke the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her heart yearned upon her son, and she said: 'Oh, my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it.' But the other said: 'It shall be neither mine nor thine; divide it. 27 Then the king answered and said: 'Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it: she is the mother thereof."
He knew that he would be able to determine who the real mother was by the reaction they gave to his order. He never truly intended to cut the child in half.



Solomon was wise enough to know that in the situation he orchestrated he would not have to kill the baby because her knew the baby's mother would rather give him up than for him to die. It's nice to see that a person can be honest with the Bible although they don't believe it.  As of posting this, I have not seen any response from Loftus. I hope that he's own up and just apologize for his blunder. Not sure if he's wise enough to see that.

Debunking Christianity: Solomon's Decision Was the Dumbest Judicial Ruling in History
Enhanced by Zemanta

The 10 Smartest People Alive Today

The 10 Smartest People Alive Today
Source: SuperScholar.org

Take a few minutes and think about what intelligence is and how you measure it? Bow ask: Is that how you would think God would define it?

The 10 Smartest People Alive Today

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Neo video games: mind controlled or mind control? - National Worldview and Science | Examiner.com

Mariano has posted an interesting article on mind controlled video games. I think he raises some valid points. I think that is a human mind can be read and manipulate a computer, I see no reason why it can't go the other way to some degree. Given the technology companies like Google are working one like Google's Glass, there is some evidence that things are going to be going this direction more and more..Some film-makers have created a short-film about how such technology would eventually look like. I would like  to point out that like all technology, this doesn't have to be evil or used nefariously. It can be used to help people and move us forward...provided we don't do with it as done at the end of the film.

Read Mariano's article here:

Neo video games: mind controlled or mind control? - National Worldview and Science | Examiner.com

And watch the short film I referenced here:


If you would like to know more about Google Glass check out this link and videos.
Project Glass: what you need to know




Enhanced by Zemanta

First Known Use Of OMG In Letter To Winston Churchill (PHOTO)

So when Solomon wrote that there was nothing new under the sun, he had a point. It turns out that "O.M.G."  was first recorded in correspondence almost 100 years ago in a letter to Winston Churchill from Lord Fisher back in 1917! I thought that it was only used in late twentieth century with people  passing notes in junior high school. Who knew?



First Known Use Of OMG In Letter To Winston Churchill (PHOTO)
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, August 6, 2012

Video Game Dating Advice [Pic]



Video Game Dating Advice [Pic]

Crip Walking on Heaux: Serena Williams' Gold Medal Dance Criticized

I should not be surprised given that our culture is brimming with racism, but Serena Williams has come under some tense criticism because when she won gold, she danced in victory and joy. Some people seem to think the dance was inappropriate. I just don't see why they would think that. It's an urban dance and comes from the culture she is a part of - and me too. It's insulting to call it or think of it as demeaning.




Crip Walking on Heaux: Serena Williams' Gold Medal Dance Criticized

Sunday, August 5, 2012

FacePalm of the Day - God and Thunderstorms

Today Debunking Christianity has not produced not one but two blog posts that must honestly result in FacePalms. Bot written by the usual suspects who never seem to disappoint for truly cringe-worthy arguments. The first one is by John Loftus and the second by Harry McCall. Both try to disprove the existence of God by attempting to show illogic and inconsistency in what Christians believe about God couched in theodicy. John Loftus wrote the following: 

Yesterday a thunderstorm got us. You've seen them approaching. You know their effects. I was thinking as one approached what God had to do with it. No really, what did God have to do with it? At what point did he decide when to send it?

Good question. I'd argue from the time God spoke the universe into existence, God knew when this particular storm was coming, where it went, and how long it would last. I'd argue this because of  God's omniscience. - which Loftus concedes that is a characteristic that describes God. 

Did he violate any known natural laws to do so? Did he make it rain here because of anything we had done or not done? Matthew 5:45 has Jesus, supposedly the Son of a creator God saying, "He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous."





Why would God need to violate natural laws in order for this storm to be created? There is no reason to conclude that or that the storm is a consequence of anything that particular people have said or done. The passage that Loftus quotes is taken completely out of context. Jesus was not talking about rain in terms of natural disasters but in terns of the sun and rain in the ways that benefits people.



 43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[i] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? - Matthew 5:43-47

I wonder why Loftus didn't use more appropriate words of Jesus....you know something that actually talks about why people suffer?

Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.” - Luke 13:1-5

With the rise of meteorology and of modern science how are we to understand this verse?

I don't think that Loftus understands the verse. 

We know what the ancients thought. They thought God literally makes these things happen. Well does he? Then God must continually intervene in the natural order of the world, to send the rain here rather than there. Does he do this? Then the world is full of miracles on a daily basis. If that's the case then we couldn't do any science at all, including predicting the weather.

Since when could we accurately  predict the weather? We can't - let alone control it.

Since we can do science then God doesn't intervene in the natural order of the world.

That is a seriously flawed conclusion based on nothing.  I think there is no way you can demonstrate that God never intervenes in the natural order no matter how often you assert it.

The very basis of science is predicated on a non-miraculous world order. Since science is possible a miracle working God doesn't exist. Scientists do not detect miracles in the natural world simply because they do not take place. This world looks exactly like one without a God in it. And if there is no miracle working God in our world now, then why should scientists think there was ever a miracle working God who created it? This goes for modern medicine too. The very fact that we can do medicine is predicated on the non-miraculous workings of the human body.

I would need to point out that the first of the greatest scientific minds of the modern world - Newton, Faraday, Copernicus, and many others -  would disagree. They believed that the reason that science works is because the universe was conceived by a mind that wants us to be able to discover the universe - God.



Christians have but one lame excuse. They try to save their faith from refutation by relegating God's activity in the world to merely creating the initial laws of nature.

I wouldn't make that argument. It is truly flawed. Why must it be God intervenes in nature moment-by-moment or not at all? The Bible does not give us the room for either flawed conclusion. God intervenes when God chooses to intervene. We have all heard stories of tornadoes inexplicably changing course, or whole neighborhoods being flattened in a natural disaster except for a single home.

This, however, is a deistic god not the Omni-God of Christianity, the one we read about in a canonized set of writings by ancient superstitious pre-scientific agency detectors. Such a God would have been rejected by Jesus himself, as this and many others passages in the Bible say. God is continually active in the world, the Bible says over and over. So doesn't this show us Jesus didn't know anything about science because like other ancient human beings he was a child of his times? I think so, most emphatically.

I think that Loftus makes the mistake that if a person accepts the idea that there can be miracles, then they must reject science. I see no reason at all that conclusion follows and he can't show that it does. Yes, the God revealed in the Bible is not deistic, however God is not said to be constantly fine-tuning everything moment-by-moment. 

Was Jesus a Man of Science?


Harry McCall wrote the following.

 John’s post got me thinking about my lake experience last month. While out water skiing, I noticed that when I cut my slalom ski, the spray behind my ski was making a rainbow in the noonday sun. So I decided to have some fun with God as based on his covenant with Noah. According to Genesis 9, God uses all rainbows throughout the world like a string tied around his figure to remind him: “Hey, you don’t need to use water again to destroy humanity!” (How quickly God keeps forgetting about the million he destroyed)!

God said, “This is the sign of the covenant which I am making between Me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all successive generations; set My bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a sign of a covenant between Me and the earth. “It shall come about, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow will be seen in the cloud, and I will remember My covenant, which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and never again shall the water become a flood to destroy all flesh. “When the bow is in the cloud, then I will look upon it, to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.” And God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is on the earth.” (Genesis 9: 12-17)



Compare what Loftus says the promise God made is and compare it with what Genesis says the promise is.

As I cut my ski, talking to myself I said, “God, show me your covenant with Noah.” God did!

As I cut a second time, sending up a spray rainbow, “I said, “God, show me your covenant with Satan.” God did!

Third cut spray, “I said, “Satan, show me your covenant with God.” Satan did!

Fourth cut spray, “I said, “Buddha, show me your covenant with Noah.” Buddha did!

Fifth cut spray, I said, “Show me a sign you don’t exist and the Bible is a lie via a rainbow. Damn, God does answer prayers, as he did!


This is a real stupid analogy because Noah didn't ask for the physical confirmation of the Covenant,. God did this.

More to the point, when it comes to the thousands killed in a tsunami, what difference does it make (apologetically) to the person (be it a Bible Believer or not) dying in a flood if the promise / covenant with Noah was about a worldwide flood? Rainbow or not, their asses are drowned!



There is a big difference. There will never  be another world-wide flood that will wipe out all life on land. God promised. 

Finally, if science wants to know about Global Warming flooding the major coastal cities . . . Screw it! Just look at the rainbow!



I haven't seen a single computer model anywhere that shows that Global Climate Change will lead to a flood covering the whole earth. Even if all the polar ice caps melt, there will still be dry land in some places on the earth. 

Thank you God!

 As well we should!
 
Debunking Christianity: Having Some Good Biblical Fun With God


Enhanced by Zemanta