Church | The Armchair Antichrist

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

The Eleven Commandments?

On April 23, 2010, In Religion, By The Armchair Antichrist

This is a review of the The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth of LaVeyan Satanism:

1. Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.
I guess I agree with this to some extent. But, is this really important enough to make a rule out of?

2. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them.
Again, I somewhat agree. But, aren’t there more pressing issues?

3. When in another’s home, show them respect or else do not go there.
I also agree with this. This is a completely rational rule and somewhat relevant.

4. If a guest in your home annoys you, treat them cruelly and without mercy.
I do not agree with this at all. This is where Satanism goes wrong and where I would go with Jesus about turning the other cheek. If someone annoys you in your house don’t torture them. Just kick them out.

5. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.
I don’t really agree with this because mating signals are difficult for some people to detect. As long as the advances aren’t aggressive I see no harm.

6. Do not take that which does not belong to you, unless it is a burden to the other person and they cry out to be relieved.
Great, a rule which has an equivalent with the Ten Commandents. And one that is revelant for that matter; not one of those jealous God ones. So, yes I agree with this one.

7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.
This is one of the big turn-offs of Satanism for me. What is the point of escaping all the supernatural stuff and rituals found in Christianity if you’re going to have it in Satanism too? Using New Age language mixed with pseudo-psychology jargon does not make it any less bullshit.

8. Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.
This seems a lot like the second one.

9. Do not harm young children.
This is a rule that the Catholic Church should take note of. If this was in the Ten Commandments we may have had less of a problem with pedophile priests.

10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.
Insects and other smaller creatures are ‘animals’ too, so this would be a hard rule to follow if you take the scientific meaning of the world ‘animal’. On the other hand, I do not agree with its intended meaning because I think responsible hunting is alright.

11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask them to stop. If they do not stop, destroy them.
The first and second parts make perfect sense. But, something just went terribly wrong with the last part. What is with this destroying business? The world is not a videogame. How can you possibly call these the ‘Rules of the Earth’.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: catholic • church • commandments • destroy • earth • layevan • pedophile • priest • rules • satanic • satanism

Lost in Translation

On April 7, 2010, In Arguments Against Christianity, Bible, By The Armchair Antichrist

I am no biblical scholar nor have I even studied the bible at all. But, I will attempt to outline the process by which God’s word got to you.

Here we go:

1. Various authors (supposedly inspired by God) write the New Testaments books sometime around A.D. 50 (50 years after Jesus’ death) in Koine Greek (Jesus probably spoke Aramaic).

2. The first Christians copy the books and in the process make many mistakes along the way such as skipping lines and missing entire pages.

3. Soon there are copies of copies and so on ad nauseum which add on more and more mistakes. So, even in the very beginning of the circulation of these books there are many different versions.

4. The original books are lost. We don’t even have the first copies or the copies of those first copies. The copies we have don’t come at least 100 years after the originals were written.

5. The copies of the copies and so on ad naseum of the books are translated to Latin for the Catholic Church. (Copying still)

6. The Catholic Church decides which of these books are canon by A.D. 325. (Copying still)

7. Luther begins to define the Protestant canon, rejecting some of the books of the Roman Catholic Canon during the Protestant Reformation in the early 16th century.

8. John Mill creates the first printed edition of the Greek New Testament in 1707 and counts over 30,000 significant discrepancies between the approximately 100 existing New Testament manuscripts.

9. The bible is first (fully) translated into English in the 15th century.

Counting all the mistakes there are more discrepancies than there are words in the bible. There is also evidence that some scribes attempted to correct things they saw as mistakes in the bible creating yet more discrepancies. For example, the ‘He who has not sinned shall cast the first stone’ story is something that is added much later.

So, even if I grant you that the original authors were divinely inspired and were writing God’s word you cannot say that the New Testament we have today is the word of God.

There are also of course discrepancies between the New Testament books on the account of the resurrection and the events surrounding it (e.g. what is said and who is there). If you don’t even have consensus on what happened at the resurrection which is the cornerstone of Christianity then what basis do you have for your religion?

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: bible • biblical • catholic • Christianity • church • circulation • discrepancies • god • greek • latin • new testament • nicaea • resurrection

In the Defence of Secularism

On March 21, 2010, In Politics, Religion, By The Armchair Antichrist

Secularism and separation of church and state are concepts that many religious people just don’t understand. One of the misconceptions is that you can have freedom of religion without having freedom from religion. This of course is wrong because if the government or any public institution were to privelege one religion over another then you would not have freedom of religion. Freedom from religion is necessarily tied to freedom of religion.

Another misconception is that secularism censors free expression of religious beliefs. This is another lie. Secularism is in fact what makes free expression of religious beliefs even possible. Because the government does not privelege one religion over others it provides equality for all beliefs. Only the government and public institutions are the ones who are censored in order to give private citizens the freedom to express themselves freely. So, secularism is not state established ‘non-belief’ because it doesn’t make sense that public institutions should believe in anything in terms of religion. For the government to properly serve and represent citizens from a host of diverse religious backgrounds it must stay neutral to religion.

So, it is without question that secularism is not state atheism. The government is not forcing all of its citizens to be atheists. It is not closing down religious buildings. There are no punishments for practicing your religion. Secularism and state atheism simply have nothing in common. You have the freedom to practice your religion and believe what you want to believe. But, to use the government or any public institution as a platform to push your religious beliefs onto others is not within your rights.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: Atheism • atheist • belief • censor • church • citizen • government • Religion • religious • separation • state

The Chaplain is Back for More

On March 18, 2010, In Answers to Stupid People, University, By The Armchair Antichrist

Brian Bork seriously does not understand the concept of separation of church and state. After my first response I thought he would, but I guess I was wrong.

People should be free to express their religious beliefs and they are. But, that is completely different from public institutions such as universities privileging one religion over others. Freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. You do not have the right to push your religious beliefs from the platform of a public institution.

He also claims that the questions “what is good?” or “what is best?” cannot be answered within a secular context. I wonder if he has ever heard of Socrates or Plato among others. I know he works at a university, but I’m beginning to wonder if he has ever attended one.

His entire argument is basically a false equivocation of secularism with state atheism. Secularism is not even close to becoming a “hegemonic force against religious points of view”. It is merely the concept that religion should be separate from the state which is one of the foundations of modern democracy. And only through secularism is freedom of religion even possible in the first place.

I also do not appreciate being indirectly accused of hiding behind a veil of secularism even if that accusation made sense in the first place. With all his talk about pluralism it is quite ironic that he is actually the one who is trying to justify his religion’s hegemony over the Chaplain’s Office.

The article I am responding to can be found here (http://thecord NULL.ca/articles/28714).

Read the heavily edited version on TheCord.ca (http://thecord NULL.ca/articles/29401)

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: Atheism • brian bork • chaplain • church • democracy • plato • pluralism • Religion • religious • secular • secularism • separation • socrates • state • University

A Failing Apologetics Indeed

On January 9, 2010, In Christianity, Religious Arguments, Religious Stupidity, University, By The Armchair Antichrist

Recently, I attended the first of a series of lectures by Peter Erb at St. Jerome’s University of the University of Waterloo. The series is titled “Facing a Secular Age: Notes for the Modern Sceptic”. And this first lecture was titled “The New Atheism and the Old Church: A failing apologetics”. More information for these lectures can be found here (http://www NULL.sju NULL.ca/centre/speakers/erb_january2010 NULL.html).

Given the title of the lectures and the lecture series I initially thought that they would lean towards a secular view of the world. I could never have been more wrong. This professor did not only promote Christianity, he promoted Catholicism in particular while putting down Protestantism at the same time as atheism and secularism.

There was a deja vu feeling with this lecture. I was mislead two months earlier by a student ministry called “The Embassy” on the topic of hell. But, with that presentation there was no pretension of scholarly work. It was straight up preaching without apologies. This time around the preaching was disguised behind an air of academia.

He correctly named Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Dennett as the prime movers of the “new atheist” movement. But, he brushed them off nonchalantly without any real critique and said that their books lacked depth. Meanwhile, he held up some books by religious authors which he gave praise to and recommended to the audience. So, much for being unbiased.

Next, he described “new atheism” as a phenomenon that emerged from Christianity itself. And he explained how “new atheism” wasn’t new at all. I don’t know why the religious think this something surprising. Philosophical atheist thought first appears in the 6th or 5th century BCE both in Europe and Asia, before Christianity was even a cult.

Further into the lecture he uses a series of religious paintings to illustrate his point. He uses these paintings to say that there was less of a boundary between the supernatural and the natural world before and later the boundary became more and more defined. This results in people are doing things less and less for God and more for humanity. I don’t know why, but this is something he regards as bad.

He also argues against people who tried to use reason to justify their belief in God. This he says leads to the creation of a deistic God which has nothing to do with Christianity. Instead he says that since God resides in the supernatural world we can only use faith. Apparently, he didn’t feel any pain from shooting himself in the foot.

Not surprisingly he also takes shots at Francis Bacon, the pioneer of the scientific method. He says that Bacon shifted the focus away from the final cause of explaining things by their (divine) purpose or goal to the material cause of explaining things by their composition and the efficient cause of explaining things by the mechanism of how they came to be. Thus, he claims that secularists are obssessed with origins. I guess he never heard of James Ussher.

He even takes a potshot at Galileo whom he says shifted the focus away from God and toward the self. Galileo, he explains did not move the centre of the universe from the Earth to the Sun, but to his own eye (i.e. himself). This is accompanied by a picture of Galileo looking through a telescope aimed at the stars. And since we have turned away from God he says that everything became subjective.

Throughout the lecture he also used many quotes from the likes of Pascal and other religious people to support his claims. These people he collectively calls “dead white guys”.

I was very disappointed in being mislead once again. I expected to hear a progressive presentation, but what I actually got was someone who wanted people to actually take steps backward (e.g. his anti-reason stance). This is a professor who I can honestly say is at the level of William Lane Craig in terms of bullshit. This guy was gifted with a silver tongue. He was a real propagandist.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: apologetics • Atheism • catholicism • Christianity • church • cult • philosophical • secular • supernatural • University • waterloo • william lane craig

Sensitive Are We?

On December 25, 2009, In Religious Stupidity, By The Armchair Antichrist

Are atheists offended by religious holidays and being wished a merry <insert religious holiday>? On the whole I don’t think so. As secularists we believe in separation of church and state. And what comes naturally with that is freedom of religion and freedom from religion. So, we believe that people should be able to believe in whatever religion and celebrate whatever holiday they wish.

I think the ones who are sensitive are the religious. In this case it is the Christians. Time and time again I see on American television Christians who are offended when an atheist sign is put next to their nativity scene in a public building. They should feel lucky enough that they can actually put their religious displays in public buildings at all since it is contrary to their constitution and, therefore illegal.

Some Christians are also offended when they are not greeted with Merry Christmas. This is evident in this website: Stand for Christmas (http://standforchristmas NULL.com). Many of them actually say that they will not shop in certain stores anymore because they are “Christmas-Offensive”. The rating of “Christmas-Negligent” makes some sense to me. But, how can a store be offensive to Christmas? I just don’t understand these people.

Fortunately, most Christians are not this sensitive and childish. And I think most of them are liberal enough to not try to shove their religion down our throats (e.g. religious displays in public buildings).

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: atheist • christian • christmas • church • constitution • freedom • holiday • Religion • religious • secularist • separation • state

Witch Hunter Sues Humanist Activist in Attempt to Quell Criticism

On December 7, 2009, In Morality, Religion, Respect for Religion?, By The Armchair Antichrist

In May 2009, the Center for Inquiry (CFI) launched an anti-superstition campaign to highlight and combat the abuse of alleged child witches throughout the African continent. Now witch hunter Helen Ukpabio, head of the Liberty Gospel Church in Nigeria and a frequent target of criticism by CFI, has filed a lawsuit in Nigerian federal court against Leo Igwe, CFI’s representative in Nigeria.

The events were set into motion on July 29 when a mob of about 150 members from Ukpabio’s Liberty Gospel Church attacked Igwe and others during a “Child Rights and Witchcraft” event in Calabar, Nigeria. Police finally broke up the mob and arrested one person. Igwe’s bag, phone, camera, and a copy of his planned speech were stolen and his eyeglasses were smashed.

The complaint filed by Ukpabio essentially alleges religious discrimination on the part of Igwe, who has been a tireless vocal critic of Ukpabio’s claims that many of Nigeria’s children and women are witches. The suit, scheduled for a hearing on December 17, is seeking an injunction to prevent Igwe and other humanist groups from holding seminars or workshops aimed at raising awareness about the dangers associated with the religious belief in witchcraft. Ukpabio is attempting to erect a legal barrier against humanist groups who might criticize her group for their practices. Learn more about CFI’s anti-superstition campaign and Ukpabio’s law suit by reading our recent press release.

“The persecution of alleged child witches underscores the importance of our anti-superstition campaign in Africa,” said Norm R. Allen Jr., executive director of African Americans for Humanism and CFI’s Transnational Programs. “Superstition has dire consequences to individuals and societies and often contributes greatly to gross human rights abuses. Those who continue to view superstition as benign must think again.”

The anti-superstition campaign can save lives. We hope that you can provide a gift at this time to help us continue this most important work. Please give as generously as possible. Thank you!

This just makes my blood boil. The crimes these people have committed are no less than crimes against humanity. And they have the nerve to sue these CFI representatives after they viciously attacked them during a child’s rights event. I’m against the death penalty, but in the case of Helen Ukpabio and her followers even the death penalty is inadequate retribution.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: african • CFI • church • gospel • human rights • humanist • nigeria • religious • superstition • witchcraft

Church 2.0

On December 4, 2009, In Cartoons, Christianity, Funny Stuff, Religion, By The Armchair Antichrist

This was such an epic picture that I had to post it.

Personally, I would click the ignore button for both of them.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: button • church • epic • ignore • sign

Intelligence Squared Debates

On December 2, 2009, In Atheism, Debates, Religion, YouTube Videos, By The Armchair Antichrist

I would like to direct you to some great debates.

The first debate had Archbishop John Onaiyekan and Anne Widdecombe MP against Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry on the motion of “Is the Catholic Church a force for good in the world?”

The second debate had Richard Harries and John Moore against A.C. Grayling and Richard Dawkins on the motion of “Is atheism the new fundamentalism?”

I decided not to review the debates and spoil all the good parts for you. Have fun watching.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)