The Tooth Fairy Has Greater Believability Than God

There’s a hundred times over more evidence for the existence of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny than there is for an almighty deity, oft called God. It’s rather disquieting that there’s massive amounts of evidence for what we don’t believe in, what we know is make-believe, yet no evidence at all for the reality of what multi-millions of individuals accept without question. Something is screwy somewhere.

What’s the reality of God vs. the reality of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny? Its child’s’ play really!

GOD

When it comes to deities, God (and Son) are pretty much the new kids on the block, which is really odd if you think about it if God is the one true god and has been here since, well, “In the beginning”. Polytheism has a far longer history and timeline than monotheism and even the first (and rather short lived) go at quasi-monotheism in Ancient Egypt had the Sun playing the role of Mister Big (the Aten). Religious scholars can trace the evolution of belief in deities from place to place and culture to culture and time to time. I like to think that God was created in the image of Zeus* who in turn was created in the image of even earlier deities that were worshiped by those earlier societies and so on back through the centuries, so far back in fact that one can trace unnamed fertility goddesses back into prehistoric time via artifacts that clearly had the same sort of meaning as today’s Christ-on-the-dashboard.     

SANTA CLAUS

What more can one say about Santa (or Saint Nicholas, Father Christmas or Kris Kringle) that hasn’t been stated hundreds of times before. Come Xmas time, indeed even months before Xmas, Santa and Santa’s image is everywhere. You’d have to be a hermit living in a cave somewhere out back of beyond, in Whoop-Whoop or some such place in order to escape Santa’s hype, or the hype about Santa. 

This character of originally and essentially European folklore can be traced back to the fourth century CE and can just about give God a run for the money in the longevity stakes

We all know what the modern Santa does and what products Santa is associated with and how Santa helps the shops bring in an extra buck or two or twenty. But at least Santa is an in-your-face sort of guy, not afraid to mix it with the kiddies (and should get a Victoria Cross, Medal of Honor, or similar medals for bravery above and beyond the call of duty).

On the other hand, kids don’t get to sit in God’s lap while at the shopping mall or department store. There’s no images of God on Xmas cards (or any other Xmas merchandise for that matter) so God’s pretty shy. Kiddies get no presents under the tree from God. God doesn’t stand on street corners ringing bells and collecting for charities.

THE EASTER BUNNY

The Easter Bunny (or Rabbit or Hare) that brings Easter Eggs to good little boys and girls is an ancient German tradition that predates the late 1600’s. So the Easter Bunny is certainly not a modern invention by the manufactures of chocolate in order to up the obesity rate.

The Easter Bunny is a tad more elusive than Santa though there have been occasional sightings around the Easter period of giant bipedal rabbits. Authority figures assure skeptical kiddies that the Easter Bunny is really real. Proof of that fact resides in all those Easter Bunny statues carved in and out of various kinds and brands of chocolate. Some Christians might call that idolatry; most call it tasteful, even yummy.  Then there are all those stuffed and cuddly Easter Bunny toys (more idolatry) and EB images appear on all sorts of Easter-related merchandise and goodies. So there’s lots of evidence that the Easter Bunny (or Bunnies) exist.   

On the other side of the Easter coin, God doesn’t provide yummy Easter treats; there are no cuddly stuffed God toys for young girls (and boys) to hug and snuggle up to in bed at night. God doesn’t sanction His image to be used at anytime in anyplace, far less the marketplace. IMHO I think God is ashamed of how He looks. God probably looks very old; very wrinkled; very gray and probably very naked.

THE TOOTH FAIRY

The Tooth Fairy is rooted in folklore that goes back to ancient Europe and Northern Europe (the Norse countries), spreading throughout at least primarily English speaking nations, so like Santa and the Easter Bunny, is hardly a new concept.

The Tooth Fairy is also a bit more elusive than Santa, but we have her (?) existence on record as testified by authority figures (i.e. – mom and dad) and the kids see the proof of the pudding next morning as in whatever the local exchange rate is between tooth enamel and the coinage of the realm.

God doesn’t give a royal stuff about your kid’s loose tooth and certainly isn’t going to give the kid so much as a red cent or even a wooden nickel for it.

In short, God can’t apparently be bothered to show His face and interact with humanity, especially the little children – although in retrospect, He’s perhaps showing good sense. Who really would want to interact and associate with all those hoards of noisy, screaming, drooling, smelly, foulmouthed, brats!!!

CONCLUSION

There’s no evidence for the existence of God, yet there is massive amounts of evidence for the reality of the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny and especially Santa Claus. But we know that the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny and especially Santa Claus are fictitious or mythological and have no basis in reality. So, from all of that, what can one conclude about the existence of God? What odds there really is a bona-fide supernatural deity who can’t be bothered to show up at the shopping mall and let little I’ve-peed-in-my-pants kiddies sit is His lap? What odds there really is a bona-fide supernatural deity who can’t be bothered to show up at Easter and give those little I’ve-crapped-in-my-pants brats a colored hardboiled egg or two? What odds there really is a bona-fide supernatural deity who doesn’t seem to give a damn about all those baby teeth from those little I’ve-spewed-all-over-my-pants babes-in-the-woods; He who can’t spare a bit of Holy Change?

* However, it is far more likely that the God of the Old Testament morphed out of the various Mesopotamia gods and was in transition from the ones to the other via that first monotheistic religion, Zoroastrianism. 



Have You A Soul?

There would be few among us who would deny the existence of a soul; specifically their soul; probably of supernatural origin; and their ticket to an eternal afterlife – somewhere. But no matter how you slice and dice the concept, you open up a can of worms at every turn. And once those worms get loose, it’s near impossible to re-can them.

The concept of a soul tends to be one of those ideas shared across each and every culture, every society, every religion, nearly every philosophy, and from each and every historical period since recorded history began right up through and including modern 21^st Century times. As such, it is a concept that one has to come to terms with as one could hardly call such a universal concept trivial.

However, it must be noted that cultures of any kind can be very, very wrong. For example, the ancient Egyptians thought that the heart was the be all and end all of what made you, you and thus was left inside their mummies. The heart was your soul. The brain (mind) on the other hand was a worthless structure regarding the afterlife and was pulled out of the deceased and discarded.

Then there are the old standbys, no longer credible, that the Sun went around the Earth, the centre of the cosmos; the Earth was flat; the Earth was created in 4004 BC; natural disasters weren’t natural but supernatural; the atomic theory was nonsense; there were only four elements (air, earth, fire & water); racial and cultural superiority are obvious (if you were of that race or culture), and there are hundreds of other examples that proved really wrong that came from all possible walks of life.

Whether or not the concept of a soul proves to be another analogy to that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow remains to be ‘seen’.

Fundamental Characteristics

The generally accepted criteria part and parcel of the soul is: Only human beings have a soul. The soul is the essence of what makes you, you. The soul is alleged to be indestructible. The soul is separate and apart from the physical body (which has mass, takes up space and uses energy). The soul is immortal (starts at conception and goes on everlasting from that point) and according to some eternal (what would become your soul pre-existed your conception). There are many variations on the theme of the soul. Some say animals, even non-living things like mountains have a soul, but the above tends to be the norm. Some say you have more than one soul, a yin soul and a yang soul for example. The nice thing is that you can claim whatever you want to about the nature of your soul, or even the soul, and odds are nobody could contradict you with solid evidence.

Can of Worms: So what happens to all those immortal souls if the cosmos has a finite lifetime or lifespan?

The Nebulous (Non-Physical) Soul

If the soul is nebulous or incorporeal, that is it has no mass and uses up no energy and takes up no space.

Can of Worms: If the soul is your ticket to the afterlife, yet your soul is a non-substantial ‘substance’, then you exist in the afterlife as a non-substantial ‘substance’ (a contradiction in terms) which would mean you would be deaf and blind since you wouldn’t have ears or eyes; not even a brain to receive or neural networks to carry sensory signals. Of course you couldn’t touch, taste or smell either. If you didn’t have a physical brain; no neural network, with no neural chemistry to support this non-existing infrastructure, could you honestly claim (not that you could of course) to be you? Where would your personality, memories, emotions, creative abilities, etc. be housed, all of which require a substantial substance. Even ghosts*, assuming such things, are corporeal since they can be seen and heard and thus must be comprised of matter and possess energy. 

The Physical Soul

Some have suggested that the soul weighs about 21 grams but such claims have never been verified to the satisfaction of the wider based biological, medical, and theological communities. But if the soul has mass, then the soul is a physical thing.

Can of worms: If the soul is physical and has structure, modern medicine would know about it. Since modern medical textbooks don’t mention and place and identify and label the soul as an anatomical structure, it isn’t.

If the soul is biochemistry that’s disbursed through X (presumably the brain) then it would be subject to being altered by other chemistries resulting from aging, injury, drug use, sleep or lack of sleep, and all of the other solid, liquid and gaseous substances you ingest and excrete. That actually makes a bit of sense since the essence of you naturally changes over time but can also be altered by you accidentally or deliberately.

Can of Worms: If the soul is just chemistry then the ‘soul’ doesn’t go anywhere when you die. But at least chemistry is immortal, or at least the basic fundamental building blocks (i.e. – electrons, quarks, etc.) that make up chemistry are.

Origins of the Soul

Presumably your father’s sperm cell didn’t house your soul (or even half of it) and neither did your mother’s egg cell, so at conception you were soulless. Presumably therefore, if one accepts that conception is the beginnings of you and that you have a soul, presumably a soul was somehow naturally or supernaturally (usually the latter) a part of the conception process. Sperm and egg meet – no soul. One nanosecond later, the newly formed zygote now has a soul. Or, perhaps the acquisition of a soul in slightly further on down the track to allow for identical twins to have non-identical souls. Regardless of exactly when in that nine month gestation, before the baby pops out of the womb, it has acquired a soul.

Can of Worms: Say one has a five month old foetus, who received his or her soul at conception (by whatever means, natural or supernatural), but who is spontaneously aborted (naturally) at five months. Now presumably Christian theologians will tell you that five month old foetus went to Heaven. Now I ask, what does an eternal five month old foetus do in Heaven? Of what possible use is Heaven to a five month old foetus? I mean the foetus has no command of any communications ability (i.e. – language). It cannot read or write. It has no conception of good and evil or of sin. It knows bugger-all about religion and theology and God. It could not recognise any of its relatives like its natural parents when they go to Heaven. Would you like to spend eternity as a five month old foetus? The same could be said about a five day old blastula or a five hour old baby.

Evolution of the Soul

The self-aware you that is you changes over time; over the duration of your lifetime. Therefore, your soul, assuming a soul of course, must change over time. Therefore, if you get a soul at conception – by whatever means going – it must be a book of blank pages that can be written and written over again and again as you naturally change until the definite version is completed – at the moment of your death when change is no longer possible.

Can of Worms: Again, if the soul is incorporeal, how can it change (i.e. – evolve)?

Disposition and Fate of the Soul

Okay, you’ve kicked the bucket. Now what?

Can of Worms: See conclusions directly below.

Transmigration of the Soul

The equation isn’t one soul for one individual. Souls are too valuable to waste and so it’s one soul for many bodies, each in turn. The soul travels from body to body. As one body dies, the soul migrates to a newly formed body. Some suggest this is an ever upwards process from lower life form to higher life form. Others suggest that the playing field is level or that if you haven’t performed deeds up to expectations your soul can go downhill.

Can of Worms: That would mean that the contents of one’s soul get wiped clean or deleted between the time it leaves the newly deceased body and the time it enters a new body. How that happens isn’t clear whatsoever.

Conclusions

The soul, especially in connection with an afterlife, makes little actual sense at all. How can a something soul actually be nothing physical? If your soul is incorporeal then your so-called Heavenly afterlife is akin to being eternally asleep, comatose, in a vegetative state (i.e. – a ‘dead’ afterlife, for all practical purposes).

If your something soul is something physical then it stays with the body when you die – there is no mind (i.e. – soul) body duality.

* Ghosts have nothing to do with the soul since after death the soul resides in either Heaven or Hell or Purgatory. Ghosts are terrestrial – obviously.



Zeus the Almighty!

Within all human cultures over all of recorded history, there have been literally multi-thousands and thousands of supernatural deities that have formed the heart and soul of the world’s religions. Today, most educated people can name say a dozen or so of the better known. First and foremost would be the monotheistic deity, God, Allah and related names. Within the remaining polytheistic deities, most would have heard of Thor, Apollo, Quetzalcoatl, Atlas, Gaia, Poseidon, and related. One such related is the Greek King of the [Olympian] Gods – Zeus (Jupiter to the Romans). The heavyweight champion believability fight – God vs. Zeus – is the match-up of the millennia.  

God vs. Zeus: Let’s start with a thought experiment or hypothetical question. What’s more believable, monotheism or polytheism? Well, ask yourself this, if you see a bird (singular) fly overhead, do you assume that’s a one-off mono-bird or a part of a poly-bird set? Even if you just see the one, you no doubt assume the latter. A bird does not exist in isolation. Why should deities be any different? You cannot have a species of one and only one individual. The species called ‘deity’, ditto. The species God cannot exist in isolation. Monotheism is nonsense. The species of Zeus is part of polytheism – there are many Zeus-like deities. Zeus does not exist in isolation.

God’s empire vs. the domain of Zeus is cheek-by-jowl, though the contrast couldn’t be more different. You must have some general idea what life must have been like under Zeus in the days of Homer, Plato, Socrates, Aristotle right through to Alexander the Great. Equally, you must have some notion of life under the rule of the God of Israel in Old Testament times, from Moses to Abraham to Joshua and Solomon (assuming these ‘historical’ figures were actually historical. So, given a choice, which society would you opt to live in – Ancient Greece or the lands of the Bible, the so-called Holy Lands. For me it is a no-brainer. Zeus could hurl around the lightning bolts with the best of the Sky Gods, but compared to God, God’s wrath and God’s laws, Zeus is my kind of deity – if deities there must be.

Both Zeus, king of the Greek pantheon, and God (of Israel) have human qualities, but of the two, Zeus is way more credible as something humans can identify with – if you’ve got to believe in any deity that is. God’s just plain nasty, wrathful, vain and jealous. Zeus at least has some other qualities that we can admire, like bedding down the ladies, goddesses, demigoddesses and mortals alike.

Put it this way, God is prohibition, the Salem Witch trials, the Inquisition, hellfire and brimstone and the Taliban rolled into one. God’s idea of a fun afternoon is having sinners stoned to death or burned at the stake. Zeus on the other hand is a Hugh Heffner type; Zeus is a party animal. Mount Olympus is the Playboy Mansion of Ancient Greece. Zeus too has a fun afternoon of, well, never mind. This is a family-friendly essay and displayed on a family-friendly website. 

Most people in most societies have to earn or work their way up to whatever level in whatever occupation they aspire to. And so it was with Zeus. No one handed him the Olympian throne on a silver platter. He fought like the dickens for that position. God, on the other hand, we assume always had that silver spoon in His mouth and occupied that top penthouse in Heaven from Day One.

Mount Olympus vs. Heaven (somewhere over the rainbow in Never-Never Land). Zeus and company chose to live in a readily identifiable geographic location – Mount Olympus. Any mortal tourist or worshiper could venture there and pay homage. God’s abode, on the other hand, isn’t on the map. In fact it’s totally invisible geography that’s never been verified.

We know what Zeus looked like. One of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World was a super-statue of Zeus at Olympia inside a super-temple, by the Greek sculptor Phidias. Zeus, at 42 feet high, is depicted sitting on an elaborate cedar-wood throne ornamented with ebony, ivory, gold, and precious stones - and that’s just one of many statues that existed or still exist to this day. Although the Olympia super-statue is no more, we know what it, and Zeus, looked like – records survive. No Wonder of the Ancient World is dedicated to the God of Israel – nobody has the foggiest idea what God looks like even though images of God are modelled after Zeus by those who artists who have to work with something, anything. It’s not east imaging the invisible.

Zeus is clearly supernatural – he can and does shape-shift for example into both organic and inorganic forms, usually for randy purposes. But, as you’d expect, the species or clan to which Zeus belongs also are supernatural, or at least exhibit some supernatural abilities. For example, Prometheus created humans from the ground up (without need of any rib structures for the female of the species). Poseidon can ‘wave’ his magic trident and cause the seas to boil with tempest. Hermes had his magic helmet and winged sandals. And if the Gorgon Medusa could turn someone to stone just by looking at them (the evil eye?), well that’s got to be the equal of that Pillar of Salt episode. 

Poor God of Israel, He has no parents or grandparents; no brothers of sisters; He had no childhood, no playmates; He has no wife, no lovers or a mistress; He has no children. In fact, no other of His species exists. He can’t even celebrate His birthday since He has no actual birth (not having a Mum and all). How sad. I wonder what Sigmund Freud or Carl Gustav Jung would make of that? I’m no psychoanalyst or psychiatrist, but with an upbringing (or rather lack thereof), God’s got to be a few coins short of a dollar.

Zeus on the other hand had parents (Cronus and Rhea) and grandparents (Gaia and Uranus); lots of brothers (Hades and Poseidon) and sisters (Hestia, Demeter & Hera); Zeus had a childhood spend on Crete; Zeus has a sister-wife (Hera – the last of several) and many lovers/mistresses; Zeus begat lots of brats, both legit and illegit (Hercules and Helen of Troy and a whole lot more besides), and many other species of his kind – the Olympians – exist.

One quality often quoted about as a generality has something to do with absolute power and corruption. God wields absolute power, and not always for the betterment of the human race as the Old Testament verifies in graphic and gory detail. Zeus on the other hand, while king of the gods, didn’t hold absolute power. It was shared with the other Olympians. Zeus is also way more modest, making no grandiose claims about creating life, the universe and everything. Further, Zeus doesn’t refer to himself in capital letters, unlike the LORD God. It’s hard to read the Old Testament and not come to the conclusion that God is an egomaniac.

It’s rather unlikely that Zeus would have had any bone to pick with God’s realm to the east. God, on the other hand, if He be consistent, would have had two bones to chew over with His neighbour to the west. Firstly, there be gods over there, and that’s a Big No-No to the Lord God of Israel who refers to Himself as the One-and-only-God (reference the first of the Ten Commandments).  Secondly, the realm of Zeus condoned homosexuality. Zeus himself apparently had a close encounter of the gay kind with a strapping handsome young lad by the name of Ganymede. However, God apparently adopted a live-and-let-live policy. That’s just as well since, as the Titans and the Giants found out to their cost, you don’t mess with the Olympians.

Zeus and company, as well as God share one thing in common. None have been seen or heard from in thousands of years. They’ve all vanished into thin air, or maybe into the Bermuda Triangle – who knows. Perhaps that says a lot about their reality in the first place.

Ultimate Purpose, Meaning and Destiny: Part One

If there is a common theme within religions and associated philosophies, it’s one of trying to position oneself in the broad context of life, the universe and everything as something special. You have somehow been tapped on the shoulder with a special and unique mission or destiny, or a special purpose or meaning that you have to carry during the time of your existence, something that places you uniquely above the rest of life, the universe and everything. Hogwash!

Author’s note: for the sake of brevity, I intend to use the acronym for self-awareness or consciousness as SAC; for the overlapping concepts of destiny, fate, function, meaning, purpose or reason as DFMPR. That should save a bit of space!

A Few Ultimate Questions:

Is there a DFMPR to life, the universe and everything?

What is the DFMPR to life, the universe and everything?

What is my DFMPR within life, the universe and everything?

Does the universe have a SAC?

A SAC universe, well that’s the only way it could assign you a, or influence your, DFMPR. But, looking up at the night sky, do you really think the universe gives a damn about your alleged DFMPR in life? That would indeed imply that the universe has some sort of SAC. But, IMHO, the universe did not assign you a DFMP at birth and does not acknowledge any DFMPR to your existence. You can contemplate the universe; the universe can not contemplate you. Alas, that’s because the universe is not alive, it doesn’t have a mind; it does not have any SAC. To argue otherwise is to invite trouble.

Some readers might recall the controversy of James Lovelock’s Gaia theory which seemed to imply that Earth (Gaia) had a SAC and the planet could somehow intellectually manipulate the various geo-chemical cycles (feedback mechanisms) to optimise the environmental balance between extremes that could otherwise result without those mechanisms. Gaia’s DFMPR was to produce and ensure an optimum Earth; a Goldilocks Earth, an Earth that’s just right for life. Of course those feedback mechanisms were just the result of natural unconscious physical laws, and too many New Agers read too much into Lovelock’s ideas. Planet Earth exhibits no SAC and neither does the universe.

By extension, there is no nebulous supernatural other within the universe that serves as a substitute for a SAC universe. As a jumping off premise, there is no such thing as either a SAC universe, or a supernatural realm that contains any deity or family of deities within that universe.

Speaking of the universe, I should mention here the Anthropic Cosmological Principle which comes in two basic formats, weak and strong. The weak version basically states the bleeding obvious, and that is the universe is bio-friendly. If the universe wasn’t bio-friendly, we wouldn’t be here to make note of that fact. The strong version however implies a DFMPR to the universe. The universe has a DFMPR to be bio-friendly and to produce life forms, like us, that can appreciate the DFMPR of the universe. Of course for the universe to have a DFMPR, it either has to be SAC of have a supernatural creator that is, unless of course the universe and its DFMPR is a simulated universe. See below.  

I guess I should also mention astrology here if for no other reason than readers would expect to find it mentioned. OK, I’ve mentioned it, now it’s time to move forward. Astrology is a 100% human invention and has no cosmic or personal significance in any shape, manner or form. Of course you are perfectly free to adopt astrology as your answer to your DFMPR, but that suggests you are happy to negate any free will others might think you have.

Let’s start at the most elementary basics and work the way upwards, starting with the four forces and associated particles plus the elementary particles (electron and quarks).

There are four fundamental forces in the universe, with associated particles that form the entire bedrock for all of life, the universe and everything. They are gravity, the weak nuclear and strong nuclear forces, and electromagnetism. You know all about gravity; electromagnetism is also a pretty familiar concept from the light that you read by, to the compass that guides you from Point A to Point B. Now do you associate any intelligence or SAC with these four forces? - Probably not.

There are also a few fundamental particles that you have probably heard about, namely electrons and quarks. Quark combinations make up protons and neutrons, and they in turn, in association with electrons make up atoms. Are electrons and quarks SAC? Do they have intellect? Do they have free will? – Probably not.

Atoms combine to form molecules, and molecules can combine to form really complex molecules, and combinations of really complex molecules can form life within all those other non-life bits that comprise the rest of the universe and everything. But if the fundamental building blocks have no SAC, how can combinations of them have SAC? It’s like building a house of red bricks only to have the finished house appear blue!

Still, somewhere along the line, un-SAC bricks can form a SAC house – you, for example. Therefore, the eternal question – the bits and pieces what makes me up has no SAC, yet I have, a SAC that is. Therefore, I’m more than the sum of my parts and I am somehow special (relative to the universe) and no doubt endowed therefore with some special DFMPR, if I can only figure out what.

Conversely, one could take the point of view and argue that gravity has a DFMPR to its existence, ditto a quark and therefore they have a SAC in order to carry out their DFMPR (like keeping Earth in its orbit, or making those neutrons) and therefore a rock has SAC (being made up of bits and pieces of SAC bits and pieces) and therefore you aren’t unique in your SAC vis-à-vis the inanimate world. But you still have to figure it out – either way you have to figure it out what your special DFMPR is. However, I have a hard time thinking that most living things would accept that all non-living things have a SAC, so let’s scratch that option.

Okay, the universe isn’t SAC and has no DFMPR, it just is; you on the other hand are SAC and therefore assume you have a unique DFMPR, whatever. But is that by your choice and alterable (free will) or by the design of the universe and unalterable?

From the moment of the Big Bang, all the laws, principles and relationships of physics became hardwired into the fabric of the universe, fixed and forever unalterable. That implies total causality and that outcomes are fixed. Plug in the numbers into the equation, crunch the numbers, and out will come the answer, fixed and immovable. Everything that happens in the universe is predetermined even unto billions of years into the future, including you and your DFMPR. Your life may have DFMPR except you have no choice, no free will, in what that DFMPR is. Absolute cause-and-effect rules out free will. Let’s move on from there.

Let’s forge ahead instead with the standard model and see where that leads us. The standard model, scientific model, being that the universe has no SAC or DFMPR, causality is iffy (due to quantum physics); you have SAC so there’s a transition between no SAC and SAC as complexity increases. There is no nebulous other (something supernatural) pulling your strings; you have free will.

You exist. You have not always existed and you will not always exist.

You did not create yourself.  Is there a reason you exist apart from the sex act that created you and perhaps the wishes of your parents to have a child (you) – though that may be a good enough reason in itself.

A more interesting question though is, is there really a DFMPR to your existence, and by extension to all that came before you, leading up to you, since if you have a DFMPR your parents had at least one DFMPR – creating you – and so on back on down the line.

Working backwards, if there was a reason for you, therefore there was a reason for your parent’s existence, your parent’s parents, back to the rise of Homo sapiens, the primates, the mammals, life itself, stuff (planets, stars, and galaxies), the creation of matter/energy and the time and space to ultimately produce you. If you exist for a reason, then everything that went before had a reason to exist as well.

To be continued…

The Creationist’s Bible, Literally: Part Two

It’s one thing to hold extremely religious right-wing fundamentalist views, but quite another to bring them to the fore in a personal manner when holding not only an elected position as a Congressman but also holding a position on a Committee that by its very nature must be the antithesis of that worldview. Such has been the sad case that recently surfaced in the United States. Unfortunately, it’s not a one-off, and the implications are considerable.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

I do agree with Congressman Broun in that we, humanity, if it needs anything at all it needs a saviour because collectively the human race has within, if you believe the Bible, just a few thousand years, screwed up Planet Earth, from top to bottom, so badly as to endanger God’s supreme creation, mankind’s very existence. Of course I pin the blame for that on God as related in Genesis 1: 28. You should look it up and check it out.

Another basic philosophy here is that if whatever the Bible says is true, and is OK or sanction or performed by God, then you can vote for the following as public policy and for the good of society as a whole with a totally clear conscience.

* Slavery is OK.

* Beating children, even killing them is OK.

* Genocide is OK.

* Mass murder is OK.

* Invading other countries and making warfare is OK. 

* Rape is OK.

* Women’s rights are not OK.

* Animal welfare is not OK.

* Equal rights for same-sex couples are not OK.

* Any ethnic group not of the Chosen People variety are second class citizens.

Belief in a literal Bible, the literal absolute word of God, requires not just faith in a deity, but presumably you have to put your faith in the humans who penned the Bible to have gotten it right, and that’s a whole lot of absolute faith to trust in the human species right there.

Belief in a literal Bible suggests that all those bits and pieces that were arbitrarily excluded from the Bible, then included, and then excluded again, the missing books, the Apocrypha, are irrelevant, which then invites the question, why do they exist at all.

That the Bible alone is the “manufacturer’s handbook” is bound to spark some opposition from Muslims, Hindus, supporters of Buddha, and all others who have their own versions of, and beliefs in, a ‘manufacturer’s handbook’.

Belief in a literal Bible, the literal absolute word of God means that you believe that every other religion and religious text must be false, including presumably all but one version of the Bible (since there are many differing versions) and that one true version would not be in English as the Bible wasn’t originally conceived and written in English.

In any event, there’s not the slightest shred of hardcore evidence that God, or Allah or any deity for that matter exists outside of whatever religious text supports that existence, but then again anyone can write words and make a book. There’s a book that supports the existence of Moby Dick, and numerous texts that verify the existence of Tarzan and Harry Potter. Shall we have faith therefore in the existence of and worship Moby Dick, Tarzan and Harry Potter too?

There’s a more fundamental question here. What if every elected member of any congress or any parliament or any assembly or whatever elected body you might call it voted according to their religious beliefs? That’s not why they were elected. They were elected to represent their constituents, to carry forth their political party’s platform (which presumably they agree in general or in overall terms with) but not themselves. Repeat, they are not elected to represent their personal worldview, religious or otherwise.

Further, it is incomprehensible that anyone who proposes an anti-science, pro creationism, worldview, like Congressman Broun (but there are numerous others as well), could or should hold a position of responsibility on a Congressional committee that should advocate or promote a pro-science point-of-view for the advancement or betterment of the nation. 

It would appear that the Dark Ages are encroaching back upon us. Congressman Broun joins the ranks of all things whacko when it comes to having unquestioned and blind belief in God and Company. It’s bad enough that 1.5 billion whacko Islamic fanatics in the world are seeking the ultimate goal of a single global Fundamentalist Islamic state where the Koran is absolute law, without people like radical Christian creationists also muddying the waters, fanatics who no doubt would like to see a unified and fundamentalist Christian global state where the Bible is absolute law. Is history doomed to repeat itself – The Crusades Mark II but this time with 21^st Century weaponry?

Created in Man’s Image: God’s Virtual Reality: Part Three

Reality isn’t all that complicated. It resides 100% within that brain-thingy of yours. The Big Question is, is that (your brain) the sum total of reality or are their other realities outside of your own that reside as both an outside reality and in other brain-thingies? And where does the reality of a god (or any supernatural deity) fit into that Big Mental Picture? Perhaps God was created in man’s image.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

NO TWO GODS ARE THE SAME BECAUSE NO TWO BRAINS ARE IDENTICAL

I read recently that “… nothing precise can be said about God, because God is that which is beyond the scope of human thought or experience”. That’s wrong. At least I was under the impression that a whole potful of Biblical characters experienced God, like Moses. Anyway, God is totally within the scope of human thought since God’s our mental creation (recall all those human traits God has), and even if by chance God has some sort of independent existence, as per all else in life, the universe and everything, that existence is shovelled into and contemplated within something that’s human, the human mind. The human mind absorbs and reduces God down to understandably human terms. How many zillions upon zillions of words have been written and spoken about the concept of God (or Allah or whoever). 100% of those words have been generated via the human mind, so we’ve certainly spared no mental expense in dealing with the Almighty! Even if God is the sound of one hand clapping, well we can contemplate that. That contemplation might be wrong, and again every person will have his or her own personal contemplations that will all be different, but everyone comes to terms with the concept, so God (or the lack of a god if you’re an atheist) is not beyond the scope of the human mind.

Even if there is an external reality (your brain isn’t the sum total of all things), no two individuals, or rather their brains, will perceive that external reality down to the last and infinite decimal place. I believe in a god; you believe in a god, but when we compare notes, subtle shades of grey appear. How can there be such a thing as absolute reality when no two people will ever agree on what that reality is, even if it takes going down to the quantum level to find the split in the perception of that reality.

So there are as many versions of God’s (or equivalent) existence and nature as there are human minds. Quite apart from the formal definitions and distinctions between the thousands of formal religions that have been in the past and that are now in the present as to ‘who and what is god’ (all formally presented by the human mind), or even restricting things to God-of-the-Bible (the Bible by the way is the product of the human mind, as is the Koran, as are all religious texts), each individual human member of each religious sect or cult (like Christianity) has his or her own variation on the God theme, courtesy of their unique brain chemistry. So considering God apart from the thousands upon thousands of polytheistic deities (and who’s to deny their validity), there isn’t one God, but billions of Gods, each a unique God in the mind of that beholder. No two insides (minds) are identical.

GOD ON THE BRAIN

To illustrate all of the above with a specific concept near and dear to the hearts and minds of many a human, we shall further consider the lone ranger we call “God” or in more general terms the concept of a supernatural god or deity.

That God exists in one form or another is in no dispute since there are zillions of references to Him in all manner of formats, from the printed word like the Bible to what resides inside your wetware. That existence however can be akin to that of say Allan Quatermain, the creation of H. Rider Haggard. That Allan Quatermain exists is in no dispute either since there are millions of references to his existence too. But, Allan Quatermain is virtual reality – perhaps God is too.

That God is near and dear to the hearts and minds of humans is also because that’s probably what’s been taught or otherwise rammed down our collective throats by parents, teachers, church and sometimes state. Or, perhaps you have self learned about this godly concept off your own bat. Or you may have had what you perceive as having had a direct experience – a eureka moment – when God talked to you, or the angels paid you a visit, or you had some sort of defining rapturous moment that you identified with the supernatural, like your prayers were answered or you experienced a miracle.

Why would the human mind, the human imagination invent a god, or the human mind accept as given the concept of a god? Well probably because the human mind, of all the animal kingdom’s minds, is the one unique mind to have foreknowledge about personal death. Humans, like all animals who battle for survival, don’t want to die. Humans know that they will die and that they are powerless to prevent their death. But what if (a variation of the phrase let’s ‘make believe’), there was someone or something that could rescue one from this pending unfortunate state of affairs of kicking the bucket and give one a second (after) life? To do so, the imagination has to go beyond the natural to the supernatural (why not) and to a local inhabitant of that supernatural world, a god or a deity, who can make it so. 

The key word here seems to me to be ‘supernatural’ not God, since God is a small subset of alleged deities inhabiting the realm of the supernatural. It doesn’t really matter if you substitute Odin or Zeus or even the Rainbow Serpent for God – same general concept.

Perhaps because of that concept of impending finality, death, our brains seem to be hardwired or conditioned to accept the general nature of the supernatural – things which are ‘above and beyond’ the natural or normal bits and pieces we associate with the concept of a Mother Nature. For comparison, it would be interesting to have conservations with, or read the mind of, your cat or dog or an elephant or chimpanzee (our ultimate primate ancestral species) and find out what beliefs or worldviews they have in all things supernatural, like in a deity or life after death. My guess is that only humans ponder over the possibilities of deities which maybe extra evidence that someone or something impersonating a deity (i.e. - ‘ancient astronauts’) has mucked about with our wetware to ensure this.

So somehow or other, the human mind, brain, and all associated electromagnetic energy and biochemical bits that collective make up our brain’s neural networks, are quasi-hardwired to invent and contemplate and in general put faith in the reality of the supernatural and a supernatural deity, albeit, if I’m right, it’s really just virtual reality since it all stems from within the mind contemplated by the mind and not from an external outside to the mind via the five senses.  

THE END

When your wetware dries out; when your neurons cease firing; when the microbes attack and the rot sets in and the chemistry stops, then your inner reality ceases too. Whether you take life, the universe and everything with you or not is irrelevant. Your reality is just as kaput as kaput can be. 

CONCLUSION

Assuming a really real reality, an external reality (and that’s probably the way to bet) coming to terms with life, the universe and everything is a job performed by your brain chemistry. The concept of God (or equivalent) is part of life, the universe and everything, so coming to terms with the nature of God is also a function of and a task performed by your wetware. I suggest that ‘coming to terms’ with God is entirely an internal mental affair; God was created in our image.

Created in Man’s Image: God’s Virtual Reality: Part Two

Reality isn’t all that complicated. It resides 100% within that brain-thingy of yours. The Big Question is, is that (your brain) the sum total of reality or are their other realities outside of your own that reside as both an outside reality and in other brain-thingies? And where does the reality of a god (or any supernatural deity) fit into that Big Mental Picture? Perhaps God was created in man’s image.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

GOD AND THE INSIDE LOOKING OUTSIDE: IS THERE AN OUTSIDE AT ALL?

In theory there are two forms of existence – reality and virtual reality. You, or at least your brain, have reality. If someone, even yourself, dreams about you or writes a story about you, that particular version of you is a virtual reality you.

For all you know there is no external outside reality. All that is ‘outside’ is a figment of your imagination, of your mind, of your brain chemistry in the exact same way as your dreams (inside looking inside) are imaginary and not literally a part of external reality. Your dreams (while asleep) might be a dream within a daydream (your so-called external reality – life is but a dream), which is a variation on the standard simulated universe (virtual reality) scenario only substituting wetware for software. The only thing that is really real is your wetware, but that is subject to various outside forces, as noted above, assuming of course there are outside forces.

Even the body to which the brain is attached might be illusionary. There’s the famous tale of the two philosophers, one of whom said that a large rock was but an illusion and had no reality (Philosopher-I) and the other (Philosopher-R) who refuted that theory by giving the rock a really swift and violent kick, and in intense pain noted that he had indeed refuted the claim of Philosopher-I. But did he? Philosopher-I could argue that Philosopher-R was as imaginary as the rock; his kick was an illusion, and the pain therefore nonexistent. Philosopher-I could further argue that since he hadn’t kicked the rock not a thing about the reality of the rock was proved to his satisfaction. Even if Philosopher-I had kicked the rock and ended up with a black-and-blue big toe for his trouble, he could still argue that the pain was just his imagination, it resided only within his brain, and existed independently of his unreal illusory bruised big toe. All that was apparently outside of Philosopher-I’s brain, Philosopher-I’s body, Philosopher-R, the rock, the kick, etc., was just all make believe done via Philosopher-I’s brain chemistry.

So there may not be an ‘outside’ at all – your brain is the universe. But if there is an outside it could be drastically different than what you perceive it to be, as in the case of someone seeing sounds. Your brain chemistry has taken an outside reality and turned it into an alternative and inner reality, a personal reality, a reality unique to you and only you because your brain and brain chemistry is uniquely yours.

Contrast that when I’m asleep and dreaming ‘reality’ with your wide awake ‘reality’. Both can seem equally real, as anyone who has had nightmares can testify to.

Contrast your wide awake ‘reality’ to that when you are ill or exhausted or under the influence or after taking LSD or marijuana. Your ‘reality’ changes as circumstances change. Further, someone who is ill or tired or under the influence, etc. or is otherwise hallucinating, isn’t witnessing the same reality that you are.

Reality is a rather nebulous concept!

But either there is an external reality, or there is not. If there is not and you accept the validity of a god or a deity then that god or deity is a creation of your imagination and part of your fantasy world. If there is an external reality, then either a god (or gods) exists within that external life, the universe and everything or does not exist. In other words, either there is, or is not, a real supernatural deity who creates, controls and destroys, a deity that has an existence independent from your own. Regardless, let’s call this ‘is’ or ‘is not’ supernatural entity “God”. There can be no wriggle room between the two possibilities*.

Even in an external reality, Superman has no reality, only virtual reality. Superman was conceived in the human mind. In contrast, does God have reality, or just a virtual reality? If it’s the latter, then God was conceived and born in the human mind, where God resides to this very day. God is a figment of our imagination. In short, God didn’t make us in His image; we made God in our image since God was our creation. Of course if God was created in our image then it’s not surprising that what we like God likes and what we don’t like, well there’s God’s wrath we conjured up to deal with that. God’s virtual reality actions and reactions, as related in the Bible at least, are totally comprehensible to us. God is depicted as often violent, prone to temper tantrums, authoritarian, cruel, demanding, jealous, vindictive, vain, in sort, God’s human. But God’s not unique in that capacity. Zeus ain’t any better – he’s a downright sex maniac, even rapist. In fact if you examine any deity from any mythology you’ll find very, very human qualities exhibited. Hera (Mrs. Zeus) is a jealous scheming bitch; Zeus’s brother Poseidon is vindictive and bad tempered; his other brother Hades was a kidnapper. I’d better stop there; otherwise an essay turns into a full-length book!

How do we know for absolute certain that God didn’t create mankind in His image and not the other way around, as I believe? We don’t! But if God really wanted to make His humans a unique creation, really separate and apart from all else, He would not have moulded us with the same basic body plan and biochemistry as the rest of the animal kingdom. We might have been created instead with a silicon-based biochemistry and we certainly wouldn’t share any DNA with anything else, since that just confuses the creation picture. Further, the dust-and-rib scenario of Genesis is pretty ludicrous even to the relatively uneducated. Even Frankenstein’s monster is a more plausible account or act of creation than Genesis.

To be continued…

*There might be a third possibility. Something or someone masquerading as a deity, say ‘ancient astronauts’, who by artificial selection, starting with primitive primates through to the hominids and eventually to us, genetically engineered our wetware such that the concept of ‘god’ was hardwired into our brains, such that we would accept the external reality of a god(s) (with themselves in the starring role), all the better with which to control the great unwashed masses. ‘God’ carries a bigger more awe-inspiring stick than mere flesh-and-blood aliens.

Created in Man’s Image: God’s Virtual Reality: Part One

Reality isn’t all that complicated. It resides 100% within that brain-thingy of yours. The Big Question is, is that (your brain) the sum total of reality or are their other realities outside of your own that reside as both an outside reality and in other brain-thingies? And where does the reality of a god (or any supernatural deity) fit into that Big Mental Picture? Perhaps God was created in man’s image.

INTRODUCTION

God (or any supernatural equivalent deity) is a figment of your imagination and a creation of that same imagination, probably aided, abetted and reinforced by your peers, your culture and your society. God therefore has a virtual reality but not a really real reality not that of necessity there even has to be a really real reality of anything, apart from your very own mind and mind’s imagination, imagination that has its ultimate foundations and is rooted in brain chemistry.

INSIDE: THE BRAIN RULES THE ROOST

You are defined by your brain. You are not defined by your big toe or your set of lungs or your good looking facial features or how much you weigh or how old you are. What makes you, you is all that which is contained within those cubic centimetres of grey matter, wetware, the brain, the mind (a subpart of the anatomical organ), whatever you wish to call it.

Your brain, or more to the point your brain chemistry, defines you. Everything that you are resides in your brain under the control of wetware chemistry. Consider the following list of things that are you and that are part and parcel of holding residence in your wetware: Awe, wonder and a sense of mystery; spirituality; a sense of purpose; all learning; all memory; all your emotions; all your likes and dislikes; all that you see, hear, taste, touch and smell; all of your thoughts; all pleasure and pain; all of your creativity; all your questions (but not always the answers); art appreciation; your sense of right and wrong or of morality and ethics; your values, beliefs or faiths; your all encompassing worldviews; all of your behaviour; your sense of self; your ego; your intelligence; your choice of spouse or partner or for that matter, choice or decision making – full stop; your ability or affinity to learn languages; your degree of numeracy; and of course and finally your perception and acceptance or rejection of the supernatural, including supernatural beings like deities, like God (for example). All this and more in such a limited space, but it’s true.

All this and more comes to the fore via your five senses, perhaps starting even before birth (a sense of warmth, wetness, body sounds like a mother’s heartbeat) but certainly the moment you pop out of the womb. Throughout your life, all of this input via your five senses, brought to you courtesy of life, the universe and everything, all of this data, is filtered and refiltered and mixed and matched and contemplated and broken down and constructed and deconstructed and reconstructed again and manipulated into one you, one personality, one mind, one unique worldview albeit forever changing, until the day you are finally declared brain dead.

But all of the above traits and abilities of the human brain says bugger-all about the reality of a deity, which is a bit of an abstract concept in its own right.

Brain chemistry ensures that humans (probably uniquely so) can try, but not succeed, in coming to terms with other abstract questions like what’s the maximum number of leprechauns that can hold a picnic using a dime for a blanket; what is the sound of one hand clapping; what’s south of the South Pole; what’s the nature and extent of infinity; and what transpired before the Big Bang?

One has to be careful of not reading too much into abstractions. We often see messages or meanings where there is none to be found, like seeing ‘pictures’ in clouds or the face of Jesus on a piece of toast or, for example, people who listened to Aaron Copland’s musical composition “Appalachian Spring” would comment to the composer how that music so perfectly described an Appalachian spring day. But Copland said the composition had nothing to do with the Appalachians or with spring and the title was chosen to please his benefactor or sponsor. It was all wishful thinking on the part of the listener.

Images are all in the mind, perhaps aided by the power of suggestion as in the case of the title “Appalachian Spring”. Now not every listener in the audience would have had identical mental images when hearing the music. Even the same listener could have had a slightly differing mental image upon a later hearing. Does the “Grand Canyon Suite” really conjure up a picture of the Grand Canyon (if say you heard the piece without knowing the title) or might it suggest a different place or a lot of different places or maybe it’s just a nice piece of music full-stop, just as a god or God can be a nice abstract concept, full-stop.

Humans can mentally conjure up an image of the Appalachians or the Grand Canyon from a piece of music (with a suggestive title) just like they can conjure up and contemplate the existence of a god or a deity (from something equally suggestive like the Bible or from a sermon), but that doesn’t mean any god or deity actually exists in any shape manner or form, any more so than “Appalachian Spring” or the “Grand Canyon Suite” of necessity requires the actual existence of a mountain range or a time of year or a hole in the ground in Arizona. 

More to the point of the imaginary, and musical compositions stem from the imagination, actual objects like Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon exists in our culture, like God, though there’s way more evidence for those space heroes vis-à-vis God, as kids who routinely attended the Saturday matinees in the pre-Sputnik era would (if still alive) testify to. 

And that’s another concept we have that animals probably don’t; the ability to conjure up the imaginary. Animals probably don’t have a world of make believe or fiction. There are human fans, even fanatics, of all manner of make believe human characters like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, James Bond, Batman, Captain Kirk, to Harry Potter and Sherlock Holmes, even down to those who follow Greek mythology, the life and times of the Olympians, demigoddesses like Helen (of Troy), and demigods like Hercules. Even aliens like those in Star Trek or say Superman are still human otherwise we couldn’t easily relate to them. All of these and a whole lot more besides were created in man’s (and woman’s) image as the product of the human imagination. So let’s just add God to the list of imaginary beings created in the image of God’s collective creator. Why? Because it is not surprising or beyond the realm of possibility that God et al. also fits into that category of make believe, especially since there’s not any trace of any evidence that any supernatural deity, God included, has ever existed.

But is brain chemistry, the ultimate cause of all things mental, really all that important? We’ve all seen the unfortunate results of what can happen when brain chemistry malfunctions or misfires due to disease, genetics, physical damage or injury, drug use and abuse, so there is no doubting the importance of brain chemistry and the relationship between it and what makes you, you. It can produce all kinds of oddities as well like mathematical wizards who can do mentally in seconds what it would take you minutes to do using pen and paper. Then too there are the strange cases of people who can hear colours or taste sounds, etc. 

GOD AND THE INSIDE LOOKING INSIDE: OUR FANTASY WORLDS

Your mind can examine the intricacies of your mind. Your wetware has an existence independent of anything else. Your brain could be the be-all-and-end-all of life, the universe and everything. If nothing else, you can only come to terms with life, the universe and everything after it has been tucked away into one of those recesses within your mind. In other words, you exist inside the universe, but the universe in all its entirety has to exist inside of you, or your mind. Life, the universe and everything can only be dealt with after it has found a home within your brain and can thus be contemplated via your brain chemistry.

“I think, therefore I am” is a widely bandied about quote, but it’s a case of your inside wetware contemplating itself. Even if you are removed from external stimuli, say in an isolation tank, you can still think, imagine, compose, invent, daydream, and if you fall asleep, dream. I think of things, therefore they are too. Your mind creates internal fantasy worlds full of things. For example, children often have imaginary friends and playmates. As an adult, we sort-of outgrow that, but we still create every day in every way internal fantasy worlds as part of our worldviews.

As such, your creative mind is akin to being a god, an inventive mind which creates and controls and perhaps destroys all sorts of mental fantasy worlds. Haven’t you often pictured the sorts of things you’d really like to do to Person X or Country Y if only you could get away with it?

While ‘day-dreaming’, you will often hold imaginary conversations with others in imaginary scenarios as rehearsals for dealing with all those possible scenarios that the real outside reality of life, the universe and everything could throw at you: which leads itself to the next section…

To be continued…

Reasons to Question an Alleged Supreme Being’s Bona-Fides

There are lots of names applied to our monotheistic deity. There's God, the Almighty, the Supreme Being, the Lord, and so on. But no matter the name, no matter which way you slice and dice the concept, it retains such philosophical baggage that any rational being has just got to question the bona-fides of such a deity.

There’s something odd about God’s origin and nature. It’s downright illogical at best; in fact it’s really quite impossible! The concept of God has the same degree of believability as the concept of Santa Claus.

If a Supreme Being created the Universe, then what, or who, created that Being? Who are the Almighty's parents in other words? Causality applies to Supreme Beings as well as anything else. And if something or someone created the Supreme Being, what then created that something or someone and so on and so on down the line? It's an infinite regression. It's far easier to believe the cosmos has always existed though that doesn't mean our Universe didn't have a point-in-time origin or beginning since a previous universe can give rise to another universe (like ours) in sequence.

Actually, I strongly suspect the answer to 'who created the Almighty?' is fairly easy, probably downright obvious in an intuitive sort of way. Humans created the Almighty in mans' image (and probably all other supreme deities as well), rather than the reverse - The Almighty didn't create humans in His own image.

However, as an afterthought, perhaps man was created in the image of the Almighty. Based on the texts of the Biblical Old Testament, our Supreme Being has to be described as a dictator what with all those "thou shall not..." commandments. The Almighty is also a hypocrite as in 'do as I say, not as I do', for example "Thou shall not kill". Further, the Almighty is someone who's vain and petty always demanding all and sundry to bow and scrape to Him. He's also someone who sanctions any number of atrocities in His name, such as the Battle of Jericho, which if committed today would results in charges of war crimes. All up, the Almighty is just someone who's cruel, jealous, nasty, raciest, and sexist; someone who's totally up Himself, highly demanding and basically an all around Son of a Bitch. Remind you of anyone you know, or know of, like your average run-of-the-mill Homo sapiens?

If cats have a deity, I'm sure their supreme deity would have whiskers and claws and purr (or more likely go 'meow-meow'). I suspect that humans have a quasi hard-wired need to believe in a something(s) that one can always fall back on to explain and answer those unanswerable questions, as well as provide comfort for that ultimate question - the nature of death and what follows on from that.

Anyway, if the Almighty has always existed, then He is infinitely old, beating Methuselah's longevity by a mile. In that case, an infinite amount of time had to pass before His (I'll keep with tradition and assume the masculine) creation of our Universe - which is an absurdity. How is it that you exist for an infinite amount of time and the get then all of a sudden get this bright idea or urge to create a Universe? What was our Supreme Being doing the 'day' before He created our Universe? Perhaps one answer is that He has always created universes, one after another after another - creating universes, that's the Almighty's thing! And if the Almighty is infinitely old, then there must have been, or are, an infinite number of universes created and in existence. Well, some cosmologists do postulate that our Universe is one of many - the concept of the Multiverse.

Speaking of creation, but assuming just one Universe, that's an awful lot of Universe created just for little old us! Seriously, and for example, if Mr. Supreme Deity created everything, then He created the planetoid Pluto (and associated moons). My question is what was the point of expending the resources to do that? We can't see Pluto with the naked eye. Even with a telescope Pluto is just a tiny dot. If Pluto didn't exist would anything on Earth be different? Pluto adds nothing to our quality of life (or lack of it) and presumably ditto applies to any extraterrestrials in our solar system (assuming that Pluto and moon are uninhabited that is, and that's a fairly safe bet). Of course you may argue that perhaps Pluto was impacted by a killer asteroid that otherwise would have hit us and therefore has affected our quality of life. Then wouldn't it have been easier on Mr. Supreme Deity not to have created Pluto and not created that asteroid as well? This creation of things with no relevance to the apparent pinnacle of creation (the be-all-and-end-all of the Almighty's efforts), that is to say, us, makes no sense. It's sort of like buying a china teapot or a baseball bat, for your pet canary. What would be the point? Further a field, we couldn't see 99.99% of the observable universe, and 99.99% of the observable universe has no bearing on our day-to-day existence. What's the point then of creating all that extra 99.99%?

If the Almighty exists, why doesn't He show His warts-and-all face today? I mean, He wasn't all that shy about getting in humanity's face way back in the days of the Old Testament, so what is He so wary of today? Maybe He's afraid of our nukes! But that's silly seeing as how He's all-powerful. That aside, it wouldn't be all the difficult for a Supreme Being to make a showing today akin to some of the stunts He pulled way back when!

If the Almighty so wants humans to believe in Him, then it would have been so ultra easy to have just one sentence somewhere in the Bible that would be understandable to later generations, even if that Biblical sentence were baffling to contemporaries. The sentence would have been a sentence attributed to an Almighty that something only an Almighty (or an extraterrestrial) could have known at the time. For example, if kiwi birds had been mentioned, or icebergs, or that bright light in the sky that moves slowly through the heavens had rings around it, or that sugar was a mixture of several things, or what about another commandment akin to "Thou shall not travel faster than the speed of light". Just one simple little sentence - that's all it would have taken - something, anything one-off that illustrated a knowledge of biology, geography, astronomy, chemistry or physics that the natives of the time wouldn't have known about. Alas, it was not to be. Methinks the Almighty missed a golden opportunity to reveal His actual existence beyond reasonable question. Or, updating to the present, our Supreme Being could fuse the Ten Commandments onto the surface of the Moon, easily visible through modest telescopes, or do a repeat of one of those Biblical happenings like making the Red Sea split asunder for a spell!

If a Supreme Being exists, yet we can explain life, the Universe, and simply everything without requiring an Almighty hypothesis, then the Almighty has gone to extraordinary lengths to make Himself a total irrelevance!

In conclusion, the Almighty, the supernatural deity, doesn't exist. That’s the most obvious logical option when looking at the Almighty’s bona-fides. One line of evidence in support of that is that our alleged Supreme Being hasn't struck me down dead by lightning by writing and posting this! So you see, blasphemy is a victimless 'crime'. And no, I don't hate the Almighty. You can't hate something that doesn't exist.

Jesus of Nazareth: R.I.P.

Assuming that the Christian religious figurehead known as Jesus Christ or Jesus of Nazareth actually existed, and that is not a given by any stretch of the imagination, then the odds are, IMHO, that he was just another mortal human and not an immortal supernatural deity, the alleged ‘Son of God’.

There's this concept or character of Jesus Christ (JC), or Jesus of Nazareth (depending on religious philosophy), the alleged Son of God. JC is probably the most famous or most well known character in all of recorded history, even if in his own time he was as unknown and unheard of as 99.9% of rock and film star wannabes are today. But did Jesus actually exist? It would really be a bummer if JC had all the reality of other famous and well known but fictional characters like Sherlock Holmes, James Bond and Santa Claus. Yet for someone so famous after-the-fact, there's damn little documentation outside of religious texts to support his reality, and all of that 'reality' was penned many decades after-the-fact. Not only that, but the four main New Testament gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, that detail the life and times of JC don’t always agree on various key points.

While there is relatively little doubt in my mind that there really was an historical figure that went by the name of Jesus, there are those scholars who would, and do, argue that Jesus was as totally a mythological figure as Zeus and Apollo, or for that matter Santa. That aside, I suggest that JC was a person who was very human, born in the normal way, died as any human eventually does, and has remained dead ever since.

If JC is indeed an historical figure, I suggest that while he existed he was seen as a very charismatic character, but one who alas, would most certainly have been mentally ill. Our mental institutions or asylums are full of people who sincerely believe that they are this person, or that person, or a reincarnation of this or that historical figure, but in reality, are totally delusional. I'm sure this syndrome is not unique to this era. I just mean that I'm sure mental illness existed some 2100 years ago - then as now - and it's possible that JC could have suffered from delusions of grandeur to some greater or lesser degree assuming he made some extraordinary claims about himself.

There have been lots of charismatic religious figures over the centuries, which, in another time and place, if claiming to be the Son of God, would have attracted a massive following, and a near mythological aura. Perhaps JC just happened to be in the right place, at the right time, with the right personality to pull the charade off - in fact JC probably sincerely believed his own story. I'm no expert on what exactly JC said about himself, or has been alleged he said (if any of his quotations can be taken a face value). Perhaps he made relatively few claims at all and it was only others who embellished him as something he never really claimed to be. If that's the case, then of course maybe he wasn't mentally ill. Regardless, the bottom line is that JC, whatever he and/or others thought he was, was the son of a man and a woman, not the Son of God. To accept JC as a deity is to, IMHO, accept one of Alice’s White Queen's pre-breakfast impossibilities.