Monthly Archive for June, 2008Page 2 of 4

Death, The thing im most afraid off

Published
by
T-Jay Bautista
on June 24, 2008
.
I just came from the wake of my co-workers father. There are so many people there because it is the last day and there is a service. I didnt even get a chance to go inside the room.


While i stay there, i cry a little inside. 20-30 years from now or sooner i maybe in the same situation. As an Atheist you know when someone dies, they just die. They will not be in heaven or hell or stuck on this earth roaming around because of unfinish business. You dont believe that somewhere along the line on another life you will see each other again. Even if that would be very nice.

Nice that there will be some sort of cycle and when it is your turn again that i will still have my same dad, mom, sister and brother. But you know its not. When someone dies you'll lost them for the rest of your life. You will never be able to talk, laugh and cry with them. Share secrets and ask advice. Go to the beach or any other beautiful places.

Right now, the only thing i can do to lessen the sadness of this inevetible experience is to enjoy every moment with them thinking everyday is a day closer to the inevetible. Try to gather as much memory as i can with them, so that even if they are long gone there memory will stay with me. If i miss them ill think of these memories and it will make smile. Because i know we enjoy whatever we had together, no regrets.

I know life after death does not exist, but if there will be something that will make someone live on in my heart till i die it will be my memories with them and for me that will be a lot better.

Farewell to a Friend …

Published
by
The Spiritual Atheist
on June 24, 2008
.
Currently Reading:
Mind Lines
Translated by L. Michael Hall & Bobby G. Bodenhamer



Whom I Never Met:
I'm gonna miss the hell out of you George.

Photobucket


Namaste,
CET

"Much of the suffering in the world comes from the illusion that we are separate from one another." - Shakyamuni Buddha

"Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music." - George Carlin

Shit Piss Fuck Cunt Cocksucker Motherfucker Tits

Published
by
CHADMAC
on June 23, 2008
.

I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately. - George Carlin



Two minutes after my radio turned on Monday morning I heard the news that George Carlin had died Sunday. He was one of the few comedians who really made you think and laugh at the same time. In my opinion, the best comedy has to be intelligent, has to make you think and has to offend someone - and generally the more offensive the better. For these reasons, George Carlin is at the top of my list of favourite comedians and I am thus deeply saddened by his death.

I had never had the opportunity to see Carlin live until he came through El Paso on May 17th this year. As expected, he delivered a top quality performance, the highlight of which was actually courtesy of a member of the audience. George was working his way through a very funny discussion questioning the meaning of slogans and gestures like "God Bless America" and removing one's hat for national anthems and the like. This contained comments along the lines of "why should God favour our country over another?" and "it's just a hat."

Well, someone in one of the rows behind where we were seated did not take too kindly to the bit, which I guess would be somewhat offensive to many Americans and military families. So, this individual shouted the ever so clever phrase - "Fuck You!" - from the back of the theatre. And later, he went so far as to walk up to within six feet of the stage shouting - "Fuck You!" over and over and pointing in Mr. Carlin's general direction. He was rightly ignored by George and eventually escorted out by security.

My question is this - What the hell were expecting going to a George Carlin show? You had to figure something like that would come up at some point during the show. Hell, I am one of the hardest people to offend, and I recall thinking that he crossed the line several times that night (though I sadly can't recall the exact jokes). But that is what I want to experience at his shows - I want him to push the boundaries. If you are easily offended, I don't recommend checking out his material.

I was very excited to finally see Carlin live and when we were making the decision to go to the show, I remember thinking that George isn't getting any younger and this may be my last chance to see his show..... I just didn't realize that I would be proved right less than two months later.

So here's to you George. You will be missed.

Now I have a copy of When Will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops that requires another read-through.

Cheers,
Me

A Pale Blue Dot

Published
by
Ron
on June 22, 2008
.
Have you ever seen the Earth from 4 billion miles away? Thanks to Carl Sagan's suggestion to NASA, you can:

In 1990, the Voyager 1 spacecraft took a photo of the Earth from 4 billion miles away. You'll notice the Pale Blue Dot in the upper-center of the image.


The following is excerpted from a commencement address delivered by Carl Sagan on May 11, 1996.

"We succeeded in taking that picture [from deep space], and, if you look at it, you see a dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever lived, lived out their lives. The aggregate of all our joys and sufferings, thousands of confident religions, ideologies and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilizations, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every hopeful child, every mother and father, every inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species, lived there on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam.

"The earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and in triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of the dot on scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner of the dot. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light.

"Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity -- in all this vastness -- there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us. It's been said that astronomy is a humbling, and I might add, a character-building experience. To my mind, there is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly and compassionately with one another and to preserve and cherish that pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known." 



Paraphrasing the character Nelly from the Sagan book Contact, "The Christian God is far too small for the Universe that I know".

As a Christian and after seeing this image, how can you continue to believe that we are all created especially by God? Or perhaps my question is more appropriately phrased, "Why do you continue to believe that we are all created especially by God"?

I've linked to a few more items below which lend perspective to our existence on this inconsequential planet we call Earth.






A Pale Blue Dot

Published
by
Daniel
on June 22, 2008
.
Have you ever seen the Earth from 4 billion miles away? Thanks to Carl Sagan's suggestion to NASA, you can:

In 1990, the Voyager 1 spacecraft took a photo of the Earth from 4 billion miles away. You'll notice the Pale Blue Dot in the upper-center of the image.


The following is excerpted from a commencement address delivered by Carl Sagan on May 11, 1996.

"We succeeded in taking that picture [from deep space], and, if you look at it, you see a dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever lived, lived out their lives. The aggregate of all our joys and sufferings, thousands of confident religions, ideologies and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilizations, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every hopeful child, every mother and father, every inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species, lived there on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam.

"The earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and in triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of the dot on scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner of the dot. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light.

"Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity -- in all this vastness -- there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us. It's been said that astronomy is a humbling, and I might add, a character-building experience. To my mind, there is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly and compassionately with one another and to preserve and cherish that pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known." 



Paraphrasing the character Nelly from the Sagan book Contact, "The Christian God is far too small for the Universe that I know".

As a Christian and after seeing this image, how can you continue to believe that we are all created especially by God? Or perhaps my question is more appropriately phrased, "Why do you continue to believe that we are all created especially by God"?

I've linked to a few more items below which lend perspective to our existence on this inconsequential planet we call Earth.






Christianity ‘could die out within a century’

Published
by
Strappado
on June 20, 2008
.

"Research by the Orthodox Jewish organisation Aish found that just over a third of people thought religions like Christianity and Judaism would still be practiced in Britain in 100 years' time.
Although four in 10 people said they would choose to be a member of the Christian religion, almost the same number said they would rather practice no religion at all.
Buddhism however, proved more attractive than both Islam and Judaism, and was chosen by nine per cent of those questioned.
Aish UK's executive director Rabbi Naftali Schiff said the results of the YouGov poll of 2,000 people were alarming.
"It clearly demonstrates that religion, including Judaism, is becoming unattractive to the British public."

[...]

Research published earlier this year suggested that church attendance is declining so fast that the number of regular churchgoers will be fewer than those attending mosques within a generation.
According to Religious Trends, an analysis of religious practice in Britain, the huge drop off in attendance means that the Church of England, Catholicism and other denominations will become financially unviable.
In contrast, the number of actively religious Muslims is predicted to increase from about one million today to 1.96 million in 2035.

Telegraph.co.uk, 20/06/2008

No cause for alarm!
And for the panic mongers, this will definitely affect Islam too. Practising Muslims prefer to live in religious countries, even if they are Christian, and probably for good reasons.

Christianity ‘could die out within a century’

Published
by
Strappado
on June 20, 2008
.

"Research by the Orthodox Jewish organisation Aish found that just over a third of people thought religions like Christianity and Judaism would still be practiced in Britain in 100 years' time.
Although four in 10 people said they would choose to be a member of the Christian religion, almost the same number said they would rather practice no religion at all.
Buddhism however, proved more attractive than both Islam and Judaism, and was chosen by nine per cent of those questioned.
Aish UK's executive director Rabbi Naftali Schiff said the results of the YouGov poll of 2,000 people were alarming.
"It clearly demonstrates that religion, including Judaism, is becoming unattractive to the British public."

[...]

Research published earlier this year suggested that church attendance is declining so fast that the number of regular churchgoers will be fewer than those attending mosques within a generation.
According to Religious Trends, an analysis of religious practice in Britain, the huge drop off in attendance means that the Church of England, Catholicism and other denominations will become financially unviable.
In contrast, the number of actively religious Muslims is predicted to increase from about one million today to 1.96 million in 2035.

Telegraph.co.uk, 20/06/2008

No cause for alarm!
And for the panic mongers, this will definitely affect Islam too. Practising Muslims prefer to live in religious countries, even if they are Christian, and probably for good reasons.

Research Suggests Militant Jihadists Are Inspired By Night Dreams

Published
by
Strappado
on June 19, 2008
.
"This is the conclusion of a study of the reported dreams of many of the best-known al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders carried out by Dr Iain Edgar a social anthropologist at Durham University.
Edgar identified four key themes from his research:

* Militant jihadists are inspired by night dreams
* Militant jihadists legitimize their actions partly on the basis of night dreams
* The inspirational night dream can be more 'real' than reality, connecting the individual to a mythical past
* Militant Jihadism can be directly authorized by dream content"

Medical News Today, 09 Jun 2008
Interesting, and slightly worrying, but after a quick search in the hadith it doesn't seem like such a big surprise after all.
Check out this link to the USC-MSA hadith collection and do a search for "Dream" in all four hadith collections, and you will get approximately 170 hits.

Here's one from the Bukhari collection:
"Volume 1, Book 5, Number 260: Narrated Maimuna:
The Prophet took the bath of Janaba. (sexual relation or wet dream). He first cleaned his private parts with his hand, and then rubbed it(that hand) on the wall (earth) and washed it. Then he performed ablution like that for the prayer, and after the bath he washed his feet. "

Research Suggests Militant Jihadists Are Inspired By Night Dreams

Published
by
Strappado
on June 19, 2008
.
"This is the conclusion of a study of the reported dreams of many of the best-known al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders carried out by Dr Iain Edgar a social anthropologist at Durham University.
Edgar identified four key themes from his research:

* Militant jihadists are inspired by night dreams
* Militant jihadists legitimize their actions partly on the basis of night dreams
* The inspirational night dream can be more 'real' than reality, connecting the individual to a mythical past
* Militant Jihadism can be directly authorized by dream content"

Medical News Today, 09 Jun 2008
Interesting, and slightly worrying, but after a quick search in the hadith it doesn't seem like such a big surprise after all.
Check out this link to the USC-MSA hadith collection and do a search for "Dream" in all four hadith collections, and you will get approximately 170 hits.

Here's one from the Bukhari collection:
"Volume 1, Book 5, Number 260: Narrated Maimuna:
The Prophet took the bath of Janaba. (sexual relation or wet dream). He first cleaned his private parts with his hand, and then rubbed it(that hand) on the wall (earth) and washed it. Then he performed ablution like that for the prayer, and after the bath he washed his feet. "

Øystein Elgarøy – the Christian defender who became an Atheist

Published
by
Strappado
on June 18, 2008
.
I came across an interesting deconversion story in the Norwegian Fri Tanke magazine( for Norwegian humanists). I briefly translated a short quote from it and posted it at the Richard Dawkins-forum, and then I was asked to do a full translation for the frontpage, and happy to be at service I did so. So now I'll post it here as well.
It seemed to have struck a chord with people. I mean, we all like deconversion stories, but Øystein Elgarøy, professor of astrophysics, isn't the average ex-christian, so the reasoning here is definitely more intellectual than emotional.
The interview was done, and well done at that, by Even Gran.

A short while ago professor of astrophysics Øystein Elgarøy was a profiled liberal Christian who defended his faith in articles and at debates. But then he discovered that he actually agreed more with his opponents.

The first time the undersigned got acquainted with Øystein Elgarøy was at a debate about faith and science at a pub in Oslo, autumn 2005.
Elgarøy sat there with all his ballast as a professor of astrophysics and assured the audience that there are no conflicts between his field of research and God's existence. On the contrary, what we know of the cosmos points to there in fact being a god, he thought. The arguments from the Atheists in the panel, among others professor of biology, Dag Hessen, bounced off.

A little later, in 2006, the book "Tro og vitenskap – sammenheng eller sammenstøt"("Faith and science – connection or conflict") was released by the Christian publisher Lunde Forlag. Elgarøy contributed here too, and there was no doubt that his answer to the title was "connection".

– There is a beautiful symmetry and simple laws that govern nature. [...] Where I see God's hand clearest is in the beauty of these laws of nature, said Elgarøy in the interview he gave together with the nun and astrophysicist Katrina Pajchel in the beginning of the book.

But all this happened before he one Sunday in January this year heard a debate between the Atheist Christopher Hitchens and the theologian Alister McGrath.

Most in agreement with the opponent

– Suddenly I realized that it was much easier to agree with Hitchens than with McGrath. To put it short, I agreed more with the person I should disagree with. I then realised that I had to take the consequence of this. I could no longer live on an illusion. You might say that this Sunday became a turning point of sorts, Elgarøy says to Fritanke.no

He says that this of course had matured within him for quite a while. The disappointment over the book "The Dawkins Delusion" by the same McGrath was one of the factors. In this book McGrath tries to rebut the Atheist Richard Dawkins' attack on faith in the book "The God Delusion".

– I read McGrath's book hoping to find some good answers to the challenges from Dawkins, but the book was a genuine disappointment. While reading it struck me that "is this really the best answer a theologian can come up with?" I don't think he came up with any good arguments. It was a surprisingly weak answer in many ways, says Elgarøy.

Irrational to believe without reason

He adds that even if both Dawkins and Hitchens are imprecise and may not come up with the most sophisticated arguments against religious faith, it's hard for Christians to come up with good answers to the main accusation that there's no empirical evidence for Christianity, or any other religion, being true.

– And that's not enough for me. As a scientist and astrophysicist I am used to rejecting hypotheses that don't cut it. That's what after a while made it hard for me to hold on to the hypothesis about God. I could not support it rationally, and realised in the end that I could not live with that there should be an exception for just this question. That's probably what I realised that Sunday in January, he says.

– So you're not an adherent to the widespread idea that religion and science are "two non-overlapping spheres"?

– I used to think so. But I can't really see any reason to believe that there's anything more than one reality. Religious allegations then becomes allegations about this one reality, and then they will also have to accept critical examination, as well as being rejected if they don't measure up.

– You say that you could not support the faith in God rationally. Are you saying that it is irrational to believe in God?

– Yes, I think so. It is irrational to hold on to something that simply is not the best explanation, and which has no empirical support. When one is examining the Christian notion of God, it just ends up as a fanciful idea, he says.

Elgarøy points out that there are so many other strange things too, that you're forced to accept if you want to be a Christian. A lot of stuff goes with it that makes it even harder to believe.

– Healing and miracles for example. As a scientist I can't believe that things like this happens now, and then it becomes difficult to believe that it might have happened 2000 years ago as well. Another problem is why one isn't instead a Muslim or Hindu. How can Christians say that they are right and the others are wrong, when they don't have any empirical evidence to build upon? When I was a Christian I could not come up with any good answers to this, he says.

The existence of evil was also something that bothered Elgarøy.

– There's so much going on in the world that is inconsistent with the existence of a benevolent and almighty god, and I think the Christian attempts to answer this are far-fetched and hapless, he says.

A relief to be spared from defending the faith

After a while Elgarøy realised that things fall better into place if the starting point is that there's no god, and that everything is created by humans.

– Reality and theory cohere better this way. If humans have created God and religions, and not the other way round, then it explains most of the paradoxes that Christians are struggling with today. As an example, it's not a problem that evil exists if everything around us is a result from natural processes that don't separate between good and evil. All the variations within and between religions, are no mystery either if your starting point is that only humans have created religions. But for a person with a Christian view of life, all of this is a great problem, he says.

– How did you react personally to the loss of faith?

– It was no sad experience. Absolutely not. It felt liberating. Suddenly I was free to use my energy on better things than defending self-contradictory religious dogmas and justify that I still called myself "Christian". It was a relief to let go of this, he says.

He adds that he never really had any strong religious experiences as many other believers report they've had. Therefore, this has not been a loss for him either.

Article in "Kirke og kultur" started the process

Øystein Elgarøy grew up in a family that was active in "Den evangelisk-lutherske frikirke", and during his teens he was a rather conservative Christian.

– In the beginning I found all the answers I needed in the Bible, but as I grew older, and started to study, I realised that conservative Christianity did not measure up. I became more and more liberal, and in the end there wasn't much left other than that I "believed that there perhaps exists a god". And then it starts wearing a little thin, he says.

However, it's only a few years ago that he really got interested in the relationship between faith and science.

– Around 2004-2005 I was asked to write an article for the periodical "Kirke og kultur" ("Church and culture") about the relationship between Christian faith and my field of research, cosmology. Before this I merely separated faith and science into two spheres, and didn't think much more about it. But through the work with this article, I was forced to think about the borders for my field of research and my own faith. The work made me more aware of what one can really know. You might say that this article in Kirke og Kultur was the beginning of my departure from Christian faith, Elgarøy says.

Liberal Christian relativism becomes meaningless

Elgarøy doesn't fancy the liberal Christianity with an abstract concept of God and which says that whether God "exists in reality" really isn't that important.

– That's not enough for me. This relativism that the liberal Christians are up to is just nonsense. Whether or not there's a god, is an important question. That God exists "in the eye", "in the language" and "as a concept" there's no doubt about. But that's after all not what Christianity is about. The question is whether or not there exists a personal god that that has created everything we know. If one can't make oneself to believe in this concrete personal image of God, then one is not Christian, as I see it.

He can't do other than see this as an either/or question.

– Either one believes in this god, or one doesn't. Either Christianity is true, or it's untrue. There's nothing between, Elgarøy says.

– Do you think that liberal Christians' relativisation and abstraction of God is an attempt to make their own faith easier to defend?

– Yes, I think that's true for many of them. It was like this for me at least. I resorted to this strategy to escape from the notion of God that I after a while found more and more difficult to defend rationally, that is the belief in the really existing, personal, creation and conscious god. But one can't get around that this personal notion of God is of vital importance for the Christian faith, he says.

– Mankind is the only source of moral and ethics.On the way out the astrophysicist is asked if he wants the latest paper version of Fri Tanke, that just arrived from the printers. But it's not needed, we learn.

– I probably get it in the mail. You see I just joined Human-Etisk Forbund, he says.

– What made you do it?

– It felt natural. It's very important for me that it's possible to have morality and ethics without God. Not even when I considered myself a Christian I based my morality and ethics in the Bible and the word of God. As I see it, it's only the ethics that starts with humans and human reason that holds water, he says.

Facts

Øystein Elgarøy (born 1972) is a professor in Astrophysics. He was only 27 years old when he did his Ph.D. a work he received H.M. the King's gold medal for. Elgarøy had by then published eleven scientific works. In 2004 he received Fridtjof Nansen's award for younger scientists.
In the 1990s Elgarøy was active in Norges Kristelige student– og skoleungdomslag, and has during the 2000s made a word for himself in the public as a defender of Christian faith.
Now he has abandoned the faith and joined Human-Etisk Forbund.(The Norwegian Humanist association) "

Fri Tanke, 16.06.2008

Øystein Elgarøy – the Christian defender who became an Atheist

Published
by
Strappado
on June 18, 2008
.
I came across an interesting deconversion story in the Norwegian Fri Tanke magazine( for Norwegian humanists). I briefly translated a short quote from it and posted it at the Richard Dawkins-forum, and then I was asked to do a full translation for the frontpage, and happy to be at service I did so. So now I'll post it here as well.
It seemed to have struck a chord with people. I mean, we all like deconversion stories, but Øystein Elgarøy, professor of astrophysics, isn't the average ex-christian, so the reasoning here is definitely more intellectual than emotional.
The interview was done, and well done at that, by Even Gran.

A short while ago professor of astrophysics Øystein Elgarøy was a profiled liberal Christian who defended his faith in articles and at debates. But then he discovered that he actually agreed more with his opponents.

The first time the undersigned got acquainted with Øystein Elgarøy was at a debate about faith and science at a pub in Oslo, autumn 2005.
Elgarøy sat there with all his ballast as a professor of astrophysics and assured the audience that there are no conflicts between his field of research and God's existence. On the contrary, what we know of the cosmos points to there in fact being a god, he thought. The arguments from the Atheists in the panel, among others professor of biology, Dag Hessen, bounced off.

A little later, in 2006, the book "Tro og vitenskap – sammenheng eller sammenstøt"("Faith and science – connection or conflict") was released by the Christian publisher Lunde Forlag. Elgarøy contributed here too, and there was no doubt that his answer to the title was "connection".

– There is a beautiful symmetry and simple laws that govern nature. [...] Where I see God's hand clearest is in the beauty of these laws of nature, said Elgarøy in the interview he gave together with the nun and astrophysicist Katrina Pajchel in the beginning of the book.

But all this happened before he one Sunday in January this year heard a debate between the Atheist Christopher Hitchens and the theologian Alister McGrath.

Most in agreement with the opponent

– Suddenly I realized that it was much easier to agree with Hitchens than with McGrath. To put it short, I agreed more with the person I should disagree with. I then realised that I had to take the consequence of this. I could no longer live on an illusion. You might say that this Sunday became a turning point of sorts, Elgarøy says to Fritanke.no

He says that this of course had matured within him for quite a while. The disappointment over the book "The Dawkins Delusion" by the same McGrath was one of the factors. In this book McGrath tries to rebut the Atheist Richard Dawkins' attack on faith in the book "The God Delusion".

– I read McGrath's book hoping to find some good answers to the challenges from Dawkins, but the book was a genuine disappointment. While reading it struck me that "is this really the best answer a theologian can come up with?" I don't think he came up with any good arguments. It was a surprisingly weak answer in many ways, says Elgarøy.

Irrational to believe without reason

He adds that even if both Dawkins and Hitchens are imprecise and may not come up with the most sophisticated arguments against religious faith, it's hard for Christians to come up with good answers to the main accusation that there's no empirical evidence for Christianity, or any other religion, being true.

– And that's not enough for me. As a scientist and astrophysicist I am used to rejecting hypotheses that don't cut it. That's what after a while made it hard for me to hold on to the hypothesis about God. I could not support it rationally, and realised in the end that I could not live with that there should be an exception for just this question. That's probably what I realised that Sunday in January, he says.

– So you're not an adherent to the widespread idea that religion and science are "two non-overlapping spheres"?

– I used to think so. But I can't really see any reason to believe that there's anything more than one reality. Religious allegations then becomes allegations about this one reality, and then they will also have to accept critical examination, as well as being rejected if they don't measure up.

– You say that you could not support the faith in God rationally. Are you saying that it is irrational to believe in God?

– Yes, I think so. It is irrational to hold on to something that simply is not the best explanation, and which has no empirical support. When one is examining the Christian notion of God, it just ends up as a fanciful idea, he says.

Elgarøy points out that there are so many other strange things too, that you're forced to accept if you want to be a Christian. A lot of stuff goes with it that makes it even harder to believe.

– Healing and miracles for example. As a scientist I can't believe that things like this happens now, and then it becomes difficult to believe that it might have happened 2000 years ago as well. Another problem is why one isn't instead a Muslim or Hindu. How can Christians say that they are right and the others are wrong, when they don't have any empirical evidence to build upon? When I was a Christian I could not come up with any good answers to this, he says.

The existence of evil was also something that bothered Elgarøy.

– There's so much going on in the world that is inconsistent with the existence of a benevolent and almighty god, and I think the Christian attempts to answer this are far-fetched and hapless, he says.

A relief to be spared from defending the faith

After a while Elgarøy realised that things fall better into place if the starting point is that there's no god, and that everything is created by humans.

– Reality and theory cohere better this way. If humans have created God and religions, and not the other way round, then it explains most of the paradoxes that Christians are struggling with today. As an example, it's not a problem that evil exists if everything around us is a result from natural processes that don't separate between good and evil. All the variations within and between religions, are no mystery either if your starting point is that only humans have created religions. But for a person with a Christian view of life, all of this is a great problem, he says.

– How did you react personally to the loss of faith?

– It was no sad experience. Absolutely not. It felt liberating. Suddenly I was free to use my energy on better things than defending self-contradictory religious dogmas and justify that I still called myself "Christian". It was a relief to let go of this, he says.

He adds that he never really had any strong religious experiences as many other believers report they've had. Therefore, this has not been a loss for him either.

Article in "Kirke og kultur" started the process

Øystein Elgarøy grew up in a family that was active in "Den evangelisk-lutherske frikirke", and during his teens he was a rather conservative Christian.

– In the beginning I found all the answers I needed in the Bible, but as I grew older, and started to study, I realised that conservative Christianity did not measure up. I became more and more liberal, and in the end there wasn't much left other than that I "believed that there perhaps exists a god". And then it starts wearing a little thin, he says.

However, it's only a few years ago that he really got interested in the relationship between faith and science.

– Around 2004-2005 I was asked to write an article for the periodical "Kirke og kultur" ("Church and culture") about the relationship between Christian faith and my field of research, cosmology. Before this I merely separated faith and science into two spheres, and didn't think much more about it. But through the work with this article, I was forced to think about the borders for my field of research and my own faith. The work made me more aware of what one can really know. You might say that this article in Kirke og Kultur was the beginning of my departure from Christian faith, Elgarøy says.

Liberal Christian relativism becomes meaningless

Elgarøy doesn't fancy the liberal Christianity with an abstract concept of God and which says that whether God "exists in reality" really isn't that important.

– That's not enough for me. This relativism that the liberal Christians are up to is just nonsense. Whether or not there's a god, is an important question. That God exists "in the eye", "in the language" and "as a concept" there's no doubt about. But that's after all not what Christianity is about. The question is whether or not there exists a personal god that that has created everything we know. If one can't make oneself to believe in this concrete personal image of God, then one is not Christian, as I see it.

He can't do other than see this as an either/or question.

– Either one believes in this god, or one doesn't. Either Christianity is true, or it's untrue. There's nothing between, Elgarøy says.

– Do you think that liberal Christians' relativisation and abstraction of God is an attempt to make their own faith easier to defend?

– Yes, I think that's true for many of them. It was like this for me at least. I resorted to this strategy to escape from the notion of God that I after a while found more and more difficult to defend rationally, that is the belief in the really existing, personal, creation and conscious god. But one can't get around that this personal notion of God is of vital importance for the Christian faith, he says.

– Mankind is the only source of moral and ethics.On the way out the astrophysicist is asked if he wants the latest paper version of Fri Tanke, that just arrived from the printers. But it's not needed, we learn.

– I probably get it in the mail. You see I just joined Human-Etisk Forbund, he says.

– What made you do it?

– It felt natural. It's very important for me that it's possible to have morality and ethics without God. Not even when I considered myself a Christian I based my morality and ethics in the Bible and the word of God. As I see it, it's only the ethics that starts with humans and human reason that holds water, he says.

Facts

Øystein Elgarøy (born 1972) is a professor in Astrophysics. He was only 27 years old when he did his Ph.D. a work he received H.M. the King's gold medal for. Elgarøy had by then published eleven scientific works. In 2004 he received Fridtjof Nansen's award for younger scientists.
In the 1990s Elgarøy was active in Norges Kristelige student– og skoleungdomslag, and has during the 2000s made a word for himself in the public as a defender of Christian faith.
Now he has abandoned the faith and joined Human-Etisk Forbund.(The Norwegian Humanist association) "

Fri Tanke, 16.06.2008

Name of the Earth

Published
by
Abacquer
on June 18, 2008
.

Mara finished her book and wandered into the atrium Kennis had entered a few days earlier.

"What are you doing Kennis?"

"I am watching the moon."

"Why?"

"It pleases me to do so, Mara."

"Will you do so awhile longer then?"

"For at least a thousand more years."

Folding her delicate arms, Mara leaned against the doorway and stared at her. Kennis sat, legs folded, mouth slightly open, her olive skin and brown eyes awash in the moonlight that poured through the windows of the atrium and bathed her slight features.

"Will you stand there and study me all night?" Kennis asked without turning to look at her.

"Yes, for a thousand years as it so pleases me."

With a faint exhale Kennis smiled and glanced down with a smirk.

"My love you have forgotten the moon..." Mara admonished coyly.

She looked back at Mara, with her hair rimmed by the moonlight. Her eyes, even darker in silhouette, held a mischeivous promise floating in a sea of devotion. "But I have remembered something more important."

With a playful glance over her shoulder Mara feigned ignorance. "Whatever could that be? A star perhaps? I may have spotted one out of the library window."

In a fluid motion Kennis rose, her silk kimono changing from aqua to burgundy as she approached. Her message was clear, Mara looked down and changed her simple white sari into a demure amber robe in response.

"And after that, shall we sleep?" Mara asked.

"It has been many years."

"Seven hundred and twelve."

"Do you remember how?"

"Do you remember the last time either of us forgot anything?"

Kennis leaned in close, her kimono faintly disappating in wisps of wine-scented mist, "I forgot the moon a moment ago." The kiss was sweet, long, and pulled gently at something deep within Mara... something she had indeed forgotten.

For many days afterward they laid on the couch by the atrium window in each others arms, their garments a pool of particulate mist on the floor nearby, and watched the moon together.

"What did you write about?" Kennis finally asked.

"When?"

"The day you entered the atrium and spoke to me. I assume you wrote a book that day."

"I write a book every day."

"And on that day?"

"I wrote about humans."

"What species?"

"Homo sapiens."

"Ah, our progenitor species. May I read it?" Kennis asked.

"My love you may read any book I publish, and even those I don't."

Kennis closed her eyes and became quiet. Mara stared at the moon. Kennis was right, it was pleasing to do. Perhaps her next book would be about the moon. Kennis smiled and opened her eyes.

"That was wonderful, you almost make them appealing."

"There was among them everything that gave rise to us, my love, to you, and I find much appealing in you."

"And I in you, Mara, but there was also among them everything that led to their extinction."

"Nothing that couldn't be cured with education."

Kennis raised one eyebrow at her.

"Well, " she smirked, "maybe that and a little genetic surgery."

"Shall we try to repopulate the species?"

"I think I would like that, as long as we don't have to impersonate deities."

"Shall we do it tomorrow?"

"No, Earth must process the poisons in its environment before humans can survive there."

"Nanos."

"No. No nanos. Else they would not be Homo sapiens, but Homo lentus."  Mara said.

"Not without genetic surgery--"

"Which the nanos would automatically perform."

Kennis thought a moment. "Shall we create them on the moon then? Construct an environment for them?"

"Humans belong on Earth. They are bound to that world, genetically suited to live there. This was the birthplace of Homo immortalis--but we are suited to dwell anywhere."

"Do you not worry that the humans will simply make wars again? Poison their world again? I deeply felt your sentiment for them, but they are barely out of the realm of the apes, they will fight over anything, and are able to maintain such cognitive dissonance that they will destroy their own environment and doom their own species. Do you really think education can save their species, preserve it?"

"Why not?"

"Because, my dear, education was what caused the division in the species last time. Homo lentus was the result of those humans who actively worked to improve their species. The only thing that 'preserved' Homo sapiens were those who willfully remained uneducated out of fealty to mythological creatures. Right up until they destroyed themselves. It's perverse to be favored by natural selection because of your intelligence and refuse to use it--a lemming gene at work perhaps."

"I should still like to try."

Kennis closed her eyes briefly and then reopened them. "Latest estimates are 36,000 years before the Earth has processed all of the poisons in its environment."

"Shall we sleep until then?"

"I think I should like that. What books will you write while we sleep?"

"I have three I started while we made love that I need to finish, and then I think I shall write one about the Moon."

"You didn't finish? Was I that distracting?"

"Yes, although one I cannot finish."

"Why not?"

"I don't know how it ends." Mara yawned. "I have not felt tired for many centuries. This is a peculiar sensation."

She reached out with one arm and touched a finger to the pool of mist on the floor. Immediately the mist swam over them and solidified into a patchwork quilt of subtle grays resembling the lunar surface.

Kennis watched Mara sleep for a day and then turned her attention to the Earth outside the atrium window, shrouded in soupy haze. She doubted the wisdom of returning to the planet the species that had proven so ill-equipped to look after it. Mara's book about the moon was published while Kennis contemplated the Earth, and Kennis found it as fascinating as Ellan's volume on the geology of Ganymede and forwarded it to her to read. Mara's voice floated unbidden into her consciousness, woven into the stream of information entering her network receiver. I thought you were going to sleep with me.

Sorry love, I was thinking. I loved your book on the moon.

Do you not wish to sleep?

I might enjoy looking at you more than sleeping.

Come nestle in my mind with me, let our thoughts tangle together in wonderful disarray. There will be plenty of time to sort them out later.

I can do that with my eyes open, Mara.

Try feeling tired. Your biology will take over from there.

Kennis felt tired, and soon she slept. Once she was no longer conscious, all of the furnishings apart from the couch and blanket immediately dissolved into mist and disappeared through vents near the floor to be stored until needed. The habitat maintained its position automatically and carefully so that the light reflected from the moon would pass through the atrium window and illuminate the photosynthetic skin of the sleepers for many thousands of years.

"Mara, wake up." Kennis said.

Mara opened her eyes. "Did I oversleep?"

"No. It has only been 24,078 years, but there has been a development."

"What happened?"

"See for yourself." Kennis said, indicating the window.

Mara glanced out and was shocked to discover the Earth was unshrouded and most of the landmasses were a glorious shade of orange.

"Is this a predicted stage in the processing of the poisons?"

"No. There is a new species of life on this planet borne out of the poisonous environment, which has converted the pollutants into new compounds and created a new state of equilibrium."

"Suitable for Homo sapiens?"

"Not remotely. I checked with Ellan and Tyr and they have modeled it is likely that this species will achieve sentience in a few million years. I'm afraid that Earth does not belong to Homo sapiens anymore."

"No return to Eden, " Mara said softly. A small tear travelled down her cheek. She touched it and glanced at her finger, with a faint mote of puzzlement on her brow.

"I assume the moon is off limits, then?" Kennis asked.

"Of course, it belongs to this new species." Mara said.

"Perhaps another world? There are thousands that might suffice."

"Perhaps. I think I am going to miss looking at the moon."

"We can remain here for a few million years and contemplate it. Maybe get to know this new species when they venture forth from their world."

"No. Let's leave. This was our birthplace, and it is about time we left the nursery and explored our universe. It has been nearly 100,000 years since we last saw Ellan and Tyr."

"What about making humans?"

"Call it a romantic notion."

"Your book on the idea received some great reviews."

"Another time maybe."

Sensing the subject closed for the time being, Kennis closed her eyes and cast out the sensor net.

"Ellan and Tyr are at Regulus. They would love to have us for a few years. We can be under way immediately if you like."

Mara glanced thoughtfully at the Earth for a moment and then rose from the couch, wrapped the blanket around her and left the atrium.

"Well I'd best make myself presentable then."

In the harsh light of Sol, the habitat finally pivoted away from the moon, wavered in many shades and colors, and then vanished.

The orange world waited for those who would give it a new name.

NOTE: I wrote the above story fragment off the cuff in a forum I frequent.  You can find the original post here.

The KJV in a blender

Published
by
evtujo
on June 15, 2008
.
(A markov chain bible chapter using the entire KJV as input. The final verse is especially, er, chilling)

1:01 crow, thou shalt take the goods of his land:

1:02 And thou shalt fear, and let him acknowledge that the children of Ammon;

1:03 And Gilead, and Galilee, all the set feasts, by number, according to Christ Jesus:

1:04 That ye love one another, even as a servant, for a memorial before the ark of the Chaldeans:

1:05 for thou shalt not be purged from thy glory, and wisdom, and bow myself in great abundance.

1:06 And Solomon said, If we say then? Shall we give, or shall the earth feared, and said, He is antichrist, that denieth me before men, to pray before the LORD;

1:07 for he beareth not fruit he taketh away:

1:08 and they shall smite him;

1:09 or if there be any work that they might stand before their eyes, and, behold, they are consumed out of your dwellings.

1:10 And Pharaoh said unto them, and returned unto the king, That Daniel, which art infamous and much vexed.

1:11 Behold, the Hebrews hath met with us of his person, and well favoured.

1:12 And it came to her maidens.

1:13 She considereth a field, and thou shalt eat it in her month they shall burn it on a smoke, because the LORD which is a feast by an ordinance for Israel unto this day;

1:14 give me half thine house, and his hand toward heaven, that thou doest well to draw water.

1:15 And he answered, Here am I.

1:16 Are they not judge.

1:17 Shall I yet to cry unto God a more sure word of God made a covenant of the offering up of the LORD was there upon me.

1:18 They that forsake the idols of Egypt:

1:19 in vain shalt thou change them, and the priests of the children free.

1:20 Notwithstanding, lest we should pray for you in Egypt since it became as a bride adorned for her husband.

1:21 And I will make drunk her princes, and gave him to be feared above all gods.

1:22 For all this people, who have purposed to return unto thee the righteous shall be of the priests the Levites which are my people, and tongues, stood before the testimony, and cover you with mine own bowels:

1:23 Whom I would not destroy it for me, O thou fairest among women? what is his body, according to the earth.

1:24 And when the Jews which dwelt in a strange woman, from the pestilence;

1:25 that they might put us therein.

1:26 And when they had emerods in their own souls by their own confusion, as with his face about, and when thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, and for every man's money was not to covetousness.

1:27 Turn away my peace be with the mouth of the tabernacle of the LORD thy God, those deliver thou me.

1:28 For ye know these things will I send pestilence among you;

1:29 that ye might be the woman returned out of the night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, is the stumblingblock of their enemies:

1:30 and awake for thee, and as for me, which to day into mine hand?

1:31 Now therefore kill every woman

The KJV in a blender

Published
by
evtujo
on June 15, 2008
.
(A markov chain bible chapter using the entire KJV as input. The final verse is especially, er, chilling)

1:01 crow, thou shalt take the goods of his land:

1:02 And thou shalt fear, and let him acknowledge that the children of Ammon;

1:03 And Gilead, and Galilee, all the set feasts, by number, according to Christ Jesus:

1:04 That ye love one another, even as a servant, for a memorial before the ark of the Chaldeans:

1:05 for thou shalt not be purged from thy glory, and wisdom, and bow myself in great abundance.

1:06 And Solomon said, If we say then? Shall we give, or shall the earth feared, and said, He is antichrist, that denieth me before men, to pray before the LORD;

1:07 for he beareth not fruit he taketh away:

1:08 and they shall smite him;

1:09 or if there be any work that they might stand before their eyes, and, behold, they are consumed out of your dwellings.

1:10 And Pharaoh said unto them, and returned unto the king, That Daniel, which art infamous and much vexed.

1:11 Behold, the Hebrews hath met with us of his person, and well favoured.

1:12 And it came to her maidens.

1:13 She considereth a field, and thou shalt eat it in her month they shall burn it on a smoke, because the LORD which is a feast by an ordinance for Israel unto this day;

1:14 give me half thine house, and his hand toward heaven, that thou doest well to draw water.

1:15 And he answered, Here am I.

1:16 Are they not judge.

1:17 Shall I yet to cry unto God a more sure word of God made a covenant of the offering up of the LORD was there upon me.

1:18 They that forsake the idols of Egypt:

1:19 in vain shalt thou change them, and the priests of the children free.

1:20 Notwithstanding, lest we should pray for you in Egypt since it became as a bride adorned for her husband.

1:21 And I will make drunk her princes, and gave him to be feared above all gods.

1:22 For all this people, who have purposed to return unto thee the righteous shall be of the priests the Levites which are my people, and tongues, stood before the testimony, and cover you with mine own bowels:

1:23 Whom I would not destroy it for me, O thou fairest among women? what is his body, according to the earth.

1:24 And when the Jews which dwelt in a strange woman, from the pestilence;

1:25 that they might put us therein.

1:26 And when they had emerods in their own souls by their own confusion, as with his face about, and when thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, and for every man's money was not to covetousness.

1:27 Turn away my peace be with the mouth of the tabernacle of the LORD thy God, those deliver thou me.

1:28 For ye know these things will I send pestilence among you;

1:29 that ye might be the woman returned out of the night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, is the stumblingblock of their enemies:

1:30 and awake for thee, and as for me, which to day into mine hand?

1:31 Now therefore kill every woman

Make Your Own Bible Verses

Published
by
evtujo
on June 15, 2008
.
I was reading this article on the unholy union of Garfield and Markov models and it reminded me that I'd never gotten around to trying out markov modelling first hand.

Over my lunch hour I cranked out the code at the bottom of this entry. And yes I write code over my lunch hour as a form of relaxation. What do you do?

In any case, the previous blog entry was the result of running this script on the book of Mark. Mark, Markov, get it?

Any way if you've ever wanted to generate your own biblical sounding text, here's your chance. Just download some scripture and crank up your python interpreter and away you go!

BTW, I'm really curious if Mark(ov) Chapter 1 get's any hits from people seeking Biblical inspiration. I know it inspired me.


import sys
import random
import itertools

#http://www.o-bible.org/download/kjv.txt

def make_frequencies(words):
    result = {}

    for i in range(2, len(words)):
        w1, w2, w3 = words[i-2:i+1]
        if (w1,w2) not in result:
            result[(w1,w2)] = {}
        if w3 not in result[(w1,w2)]:
            result[(w1,w2)][w3] = 0
        result[(w1,w2)][w3] += 1

    return result
    
def find_first_random(freqs):
    return get_random_ith_item(list(set([x[0] for x in freqs])))

def find_second_random(first, freqs):
    pair = get_random_ith_item(list(set(x for x in freqs if x[0] == first)))
    if not pair:
        return find_first_random(freqs)
    return pair[1]

def find_markov_random(first, second, freqs):
    markov_words = freqs.get((first,second), {})
    word = get_random_ith_item(itertools.chain(*[[x]*count for (x,count) in markov_words.items()]))
    if not word:
        return find_second_random(second, freqs)

    return word

def get_random_ith_item(stream):
    item = None
    for i,x in enumerate(stream):
        if random.randint(0,i) == 0:
            item = x

    return item
   
def markovize(freqs, output_length):
    result = [find_first_random(freqs)]
    result.append(find_second_random(result[0], freqs))
    output_length -= 2

    while output_length > 0:
        w1, w2 = result[-2:] 
        result.append(find_markov_random(w1,w2,freqs))
        output_length -= 1

    return result

def main():
    output_length = 500

    words = ' '.join(sys.stdin.readlines())

    word_frequencies = make_frequencies(words.split())
    print ' '.join(markovize(word_frequencies, output_length))

if __name__ == '__main__':
    main()

Make Your Own Bible Verses

Published
by
evtujo
on June 15, 2008
.
I was reading this article on the unholy union of Garfield and Markov models and it reminded me that I'd never gotten around to trying out markov modelling first hand.

Over my lunch hour I cranked out the code at the bottom of this entry. And yes I write code over my lunch hour as a form of relaxation. What do you do?

In any case, the previous blog entry was the result of running this script on the book of Mark. Mark, Markov, get it?

Any way if you've ever wanted to generate your own biblical sounding text, here's your chance. Just download some scripture and crank up your python interpreter and away you go!

BTW, I'm really curious if Mark(ov) Chapter 1 get's any hits from people seeking Biblical inspiration. I know it inspired me.


import sys
import random
import itertools

#http://www.o-bible.org/download/kjv.txt

def make_frequencies(words):
    result = {}

    for i in range(2, len(words)):
        w1, w2, w3 = words[i-2:i+1]
        if (w1,w2) not in result:
            result[(w1,w2)] = {}
        if w3 not in result[(w1,w2)]:
            result[(w1,w2)][w3] = 0
        result[(w1,w2)][w3] += 1

    return result
    
def find_first_random(freqs):
    return get_random_ith_item(list(set([x[0] for x in freqs])))

def find_second_random(first, freqs):
    pair = get_random_ith_item(list(set(x for x in freqs if x[0] == first)))
    if not pair:
        return find_first_random(freqs)
    return pair[1]

def find_markov_random(first, second, freqs):
    markov_words = freqs.get((first,second), {})
    word = get_random_ith_item(itertools.chain(*[[x]*count for (x,count) in markov_words.items()]))
    if not word:
        return find_second_random(second, freqs)

    return word

def get_random_ith_item(stream):
    item = None
    for i,x in enumerate(stream):
        if random.randint(0,i) == 0:
            item = x

    return item
   
def markovize(freqs, output_length):
    result = [find_first_random(freqs)]
    result.append(find_second_random(result[0], freqs))
    output_length -= 2

    while output_length > 0:
        w1, w2 = result[-2:] 
        result.append(find_markov_random(w1,w2,freqs))
        output_length -= 1

    return result

def main():
    output_length = 500

    words = ' '.join(sys.stdin.readlines())

    word_frequencies = make_frequencies(words.split())
    print ' '.join(markovize(word_frequencies, output_length))

if __name__ == '__main__':
    main()