The Vatican Acknowledges Life May Exist Elsewhere: The Implications

The Vatican seems to be getting more and more intelligent every day. At least in comparison with the Fundamentalist Baptists, the ones who continually make themselves look foolish by denying the reality of evolution, and in many cases, the real age of the earth and the universe.
The Catholics are embracing science, not fighting it. Maybe they realize that fighting science causes their flock to migrate to agnosticism and atheism. This is something the Baptists fail to grasp, or just willfully ignore.
Kieran Bennett has a post entitled What Works in Deconverting Christians? It is full of deconversion stories.
Jewish Atheist gives a breakdown of why people deconvert:

14.89% Stupid or incoherent answers by religious leaders to simple questions.
14.89% Science contradicted their religious dogma.
12.76% Contradictory dogma.
?% Exposure to atheism. [Kieran seems to have omitted the number here.]
10.63% Reading the Bible.
8.51% Hypocrisy of the Church.
8.51% Prayers went unanswered or person came to believe he was talking to self.
8.5% The existence of other religions.

Back to the Vatican. 'The Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, was quoted as saying the vastness of the universe means it is possible there could be other forms of life outside Earth, even intelligent ones.'
***********************************************
Now time to have fun with the implications:

If intelligent life forms exist in the universe outside earth, does that mean that Jesus visited other planets?

Do these planets have bibles? If so, how many?

How about Catholics, do aliens call themselves Catholics and Protestants?

Are their alien Jehovah Witnesses too? Maybe Jesus was able to convey God's word better with practice. Maybe there is only one Christianity cult/sect on some of the later planets Jesus visited.

Did Jesus die at the cross on these planets, or did he get killed in another manner? Remember Lenny Bruce's quote in the late 50's or early 60's: "If Jesus had been killed twenty years ago, Catholic school children would be wearing little electric chairs around their necks instead of crosses."

Is Jesus going to return to all these planets around the same time for the second coming? Does this mean he will have to clone himself, or is that God's job to clone him?

Kidding aside, the Catholic church is starting to swing away from the need for a Jesus. They are grasping on the need for a creator, but they need to grasp something other than little boys....oh wait, I said kidding aside...

A LOT!!!!!!!!!!

I'm finally snapping in regards to message board posters who have yet to realize that "a lot" is two friggin words. These posters are everywhere, and many seem to have above average intelligent levels as well.

IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT. IT IS A LOT, NOT ALOT OR ALLOT.

GOT IT YET???????

Genesis 1:27; Does God Have An Asshole?

I still don't understand how any grown up person can read a few lines of any bible and not figure out that it is a fairy tale. But the world is full of those who refuse to make that connection.

Still, there are many fundamentalists who swear that man was created in God's image, and in many interpretations, so were women.

Here are a few translations of Genesis 1:27. Of course, God's English isn't exactly perfect:

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

King James Bible
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

American King James Version
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Jewish Publication Society Tanakh
And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.

*********************************************
The anti-evolutionists and other YECs believe there is nothing allegorical about this verse. They "know" evolution can't be true, because he God created he man in he's image (that is my translation). They also "know" that all science that refutes or even attempts to refute Genesis 1:27 is not real science, but feeble attempts to disprove God.

Ok, so then, if man was created in God's image, and that is why evolution is false, then it has to be concluded that God has an asshole. My only question to creationists: Is God's asshole only for show, or does it serve a function?

High School Made Me Agnostic; It Paved My Way To Atheism

It is hard to think way back to high school (I'm 47 now, so details really escape me).
I do know that it was discussing literature that started making me really doubt the existence of God.
I acknowledge that even though I grew up in an ultra-secular Jewish home, I was brought up to assume God existed. Questions about the afterlife were not dealt with, but again, it was assumed that I had a lot of dead relatives I hardly knew waiting for me in heaven.
I've mentioned this before, we have evolved the susceptibility to believe in the supernatural to help us explain the unexplainable and to help us from going nuts (at least it worked well on our ancestors who couldn't explain lightning).
I had a crash course Bar Mitvah. I was in junior high school (in Canada, grades 7-9, while high school consisted of grades 10 through 13). I remember listening to two songs that made me "think" about the grand scheme of things. They seemed to be played every hour on the car radio: Imagine and We're Here For A Good Time (Not A Long Time).
The songs actually upset me, when I was thinking about the words...the tunes were good though. I started to come to grips that there doesn't have to be a heaven, that this might be our only shot at living.
I'd like to think that every thinking teenager goes through a time, when late at night, insomnia sets in as one thinks about mortality, the universe, even the beginning of time.
My father took me to Bar Mitvah lessons. The person giving me the lessons was probably in his early 20's. I remember after a lesson, my father started talking to my teacher and brought up heaven. My dad asked him about "Jewish heaven." I don't remember the specifics, but I do remember the answer that was given was definitely not cut and clear. I didn't know it at the time, but now I think the teacher was either agnostic or atheist.
The idea of the Bar Mitvah just seemed so irrational to me. Becoming a man? I didn't feel like a man. And besides, now what?
So that brings me to high school and the North York English curriculum. Again, the details escape me and so does the exact year, but grade 11 and a teacher named Mr. Perlmutter seems to stick in my head. Mr. Perlmutter was an ethnic Jew, and it was rumoured that he was from such a rich family that he didn't have to work but did because he enjoyed it so much. He used to call his students "goos." That aside, he had a really good sense of humour. I hated reading, but I looked forward to his class.
Again, I don't know if the books that officially turned me agnostic were taught in his class, but I will rattle off a few of them right now (without reasons why):

1. Waiting For Godot
2. The Stone Angel
3. Who Has Seen The Wind

Again, I can't remember exactly why, but these books got me questioning the existence of God, and coupled with grade 12 physics, a godless universe started making lots of sense.

Fundies, when your kids bring home any of those three books from school, be afraid, be very afraid!

An afterthought. In high school, I walked to school almost every day. It was an 18 minute walk each way. I wonder if there is a correlation having to do with us who are now atheists, and the distance we walked to school. A lot more thinking and reflection occurs during a long walk (assuming you are walking by yourself) than a bus ride, at least in my experience.


Thanks to Simply Jews for linking my blog post questioning theists in his Haveil Havalim # 164 post. Apparently, I'm some sort of opponent:)

Edward Current Takes No Chances: He Converts To All Religions

This is just really really funny:



The next time a Christian (usually) presents you with Pascal's Wager, it might be best to refer him or her to the above video.

Of course, there is also the Atheist's Wager:

(1) It is possible that God exists and it is possible that God does not exist.
(2) If one believes in God then if he exists then one either receives an infinitely great reward or an infinitely great punishment and if he does not exist then one loses little or nothing.
(3) If one does not believe in God then if he exists then one either receives an infinitely great reward or an infinitely great punishment and if he does not exist then one gains little or nothing.
(4) It is better to either receive an infinitely great reward or an infinitely great punishment or gain little or nothing than it is to either receive an infinitely great reward or an infinitely great punishment or lose little or nothing.
Therefore:
(5) It is better not to believe in God than it is to believe in God.
(6) If one course of action is better than another then it is rational to follow that course of action and irrational to follow the other.
Therefore:
(7) It is rational not to believe in God and irrational to believe in God.