Sunday, 26 July 2009

WHAM! The UCG gets blindsided!

Satan knows he has but a short time, brethren, and he's angry! Persecution is already upon God's church, with a horde of slathering, godless ATHEISTS descending on...

Oh, ooops, sorry. Caught in a time loop there. Hang on, I'll slap myself and start again.

Cop a gawk at the GN ad. It's been appearing uninvited on the blog of P.Z. Myers, one of the outriders for the Four Horsepersons of New Atheism. There's been a link to Myers' blog (Pharyngula) here on the AW sidebar for several months. Myers is articulate and entertaining, but clearly not a fan of religion in any form.

But, P.Z. - or more likely his host ScienceBlogs - makes a little extra moolah by selling advertising space on his blog via Google. And here's where the UCG comes in. Talk about niche marketing from hell!

P.Z. however has noticed, and has launched an apocalyptic plague of near-Weinlandian proportions on the lads from Cincinnati.

[H]ere's something I'd like you all to do. Go to that obnoxious creationist ad that keeps appearing here, and take them up on their offer of a FREE booklet. Order it, I did, and it really is free — they don't ask for a credit card number, there are no hidden shipping fees, but they probably will stick your name and address on a mailing list of the gullible (don't worry, though, you aren't, so you are contaminating their list).

It says it takes two to four weeks to ship. As soon as I get mine, I'll open up a thread here with the same title as the book, and we shall all join in a gleeful public evisceration of their crappy little booklet. If you've got a blog, put a critical dissection of the book there and send me the link, and I'll add it to the post. We'll give them publicity, all right, but it will be the harshest, nastiest, meanest publicity possible — we will do everything we can to make sure that when someone googles their organization or their booklet, all that comes back is a mountain of snarling contempt.

Bear in mind that Myers has what is probably the most popular science blog on the planet, the flagship for ScienceBlogs (which has a current Alexa ranking of 5,859.)

If I was Scott Ashley, I'd be shaking in my boots. Whoop, whoop; red alert. Captain Kilough to the bridge! Charge the phasers and man the photon torpedos Mr. Seiglie... INCOMING!

Hey, that's at least gotta start up a new thread on the elders' forum!

Godless atheists huh? Gotta love 'em! Now, I'm off to order a copy of that booklet... if they haven't been all snapped up already.

And stay tuned!


Byker Bob said...

This is so deliciously subversive! It is a very joyous occasion when atheists get to do some of God's work, stamping out heresy and lies!

Why don't we supply Myers with the addresses and websites of the other ACOGs, as well?


larry said...

I am not sure exactly what it is, but there is something incredibly devious about such a plot.

Both sides are very sincere in their respective beliefs. Both sides obviously believe that the other side is delusional. But, such an attack, while it may be satisfying to the attackers, just doesn't seem sporting.

Corky said...

Well, the cat's out of the bag now, I imagine that there will be a "shortage" of booklet occur pretty soon.

What an enormous waste of trees the CoG literature has been over the past 50 years.

For that matter, think of all the trees wasted on all religious literature and books over just the last 200 years. Enough for a huge forest, I'd wager, and the wasted tank car loads of ink . . .

Purple Hymnal said...

Well, I left a comment, straightening them all out about the "free" fallacy, with a link to ISA under my name, AND a link to US&BC, courtesy the UCG.

Should be fun all right. :-)

Russell Miller said...

larry, actually, I'm inclined to agree with you. It's not really sporting to give someone deaf, dumb, and blind, a sword, and challenge them to a duel.

On the flip side, this is gonna be FUN.

GL said...

The only place COG literature belongs is in the bottom of a birdcage. It's a collection of cr@ap that is great to catch the bird cr@p on!


I order a copy for the vacant house next door!

Bamboo_bends said...

They used to call throwing away literature, "the Newstand program".

Anonymous said...

i think it's funny. who knows what person or persons will come across this info because of an atheist's attempt to smear, and will become converted and a member of God's Church.

" ways are not your ways..."

Happy Birthday Darwin said...

An approach to booklets whose time has come! Considering the chimp on the cover looks rather human and shares 99.7% of our genetic make up, I think they are going to get a lesson in not only the gullible Bible readers are watching.

The evolution of human beings is a fact. Only the details will get better filled in as time goes by. Seems such a shame to know one is 200 years or so behind the times.
The last 20 years have revealed more than those previous 200.

Genesis is not a book of scientific origins. Women don't come from male ribs, snakes don't talk and no literal Eve sinned which now means women must be silent in the churches.

Until that truth is grasped by any literalist church, they will spin and spin while churning out "the Bible says...." just knowing it is true because, well..."the Bible says."

I still cannot more highly recommend, "Evolution..What the Rocks Say and Why It Matters" more highly. Prothero simply destroys all ignorance of the sincerely religious with pure scientific discovery.

To defend creationism and especially human origins as taught in the scripture is simply beyond ignorance of all that which has been understood the last two decades.

You can't get away with it in this time where in the "Whale of a Tale" days (they have vestigal hips and legs inside the body still) or "A Theory for the Birds," (feathers came first as adornment and not for flying and chickens are closely related to T-Rex) than one could in the 6o's.

GTA got stuck in the sixties level of material known all his life. Creationists often repeat very out of date material to their captive audiences.

Good on challenging the simple Bible answers that have long since been disposed of.

MJ said...

Let me see if I understand the money trail...UCG has contracted with Google to place their ads wherever the Google word search engines find a "fit." And now, P.Z., who makes money off these ads, is going to attack UCG? Isn't that attacking one's own revenue stream? Plus, does UCG have any control as to WHERE the ad pops up?

I tend to agree with Larry, both sides are passionately convinced their beliefs are correct. So what's the point? After all, isn't this just another case of blind faith vs. blind faith?

Neotherm said...

I know that the world is waiting tensely for this moment, but I have reformulated my view on evolution. I now believe that a form of evolution happened though I still do not believe that the fossil record in the conclusive evidence of this.

I have Michael Dowd's book but I have not taken the time to read it, so I don't know that what I write here aligns with his view.
What led me to this conclusion was a recent article in Wired magazine that indicates that T. Rex fossils have been analyzed and contain protein sequences that are identical to those of a chickens.

I believe it is plausible that T. Rex was developed from a chicken-like ancient bird through genetic manipulation. The original innocuous "chicken" was created by God. T. Rex was a derivative created by the Dark Side.

Natural selection may have some limited effect in transforming flora and fauna. The idea of a beneficial mutation that increases survivability of a species is a rare event based on observation of nature currently. Natural selection just cannot account for the prolific speciation that has occurred in the history of this planet. It is a small effect not the great engine of biological transformation.

After years of active manipulation of the Eocene genome, for instance, God wiped the slate clean with The Grand Coupure. Stephen Gould contributed that gradualism is not a realisic portrayal of the history of life.

There is a theme that runs through the geological epochs. These ecosystems were utterly hostile to modern man. Neither the flora or fauna provided a hospitable environment for mankind.

A final political statement. Natural selection is based on brutal and cruel competition. It is a diabolical mechanism. A socio-economic parallel to natural selection is the free market. Yet we have evangelicals who reject the idea of natural selection yet embrace the concept of the unregulated free market and a panacea. Ann Coulter claims to be an evangelical but is an avid free marketeer. I would assert that this view is internally inconsistent.

-- Neo

Russell Miller said...

MJ, atheism isn't blind faith.

Anonymous said...

I would not be too overjoyed with the prospects of what would come of this. First, there is a thing in the IT ad world called a fraud alert. If someone or a group of someones is pinging an ad to attack a company to 'make it pay' leads to a fraudulent clicks. United would not pay for them, and Google would not advertise that item there. Also, United may approach Google and tell them what this website is telling people to do, further dampening the likelihood of any remunuration for ads on the space.

Richard said...

Other COG's have their ads in unlikely places -- such as the PCG ads proclaiming "He (HWA) was RIGHT!" on religious web sites which tend to minimize Mr. Armstrong's impact.

Be careful with your keywords, COG marketing departments.

Anonymous said...

Evolutionary theory speculates on how it all happened and came to be, but scientifically, over vast stetches of scientific time.

More space, more time, more matter, more everlasting, perpetual energy and motion than our limited, seven-sensed brains can begin to fathom or control.

Present primitive evolutionary theory might be accurate in some respects to the true facts of acutal history on our planet.

But realize galactic evolution of life on Earth from crude, lifeless forms to innumerable complex living species doesn't for one single nanosecond disprove the existence of a higher Power!

Would it be such an ideal world of peace, happiness and prosperity were ushered in - if all world religions were completely eliminated by irresistible force. No Christians, Muslims, Buddists. No you name it.

All unscientific theories and unscientific emotions completely eliminated, too. We could all genetically evolve Spock's pointy ears. Have pointed cone heads without any unscientific religion, without such primitive emotion. All be created equally and scientifically evolved.

Just think rationally. Scientific rationalism is the answer to most, if not all, of the world's problems. Belief in materialism, reason alone. Science alone has all the answers we seek.

[Kirk] Those godless, slathering atheists are planning a scientific attack, eliminating the last traces of humanity from Earth.

Man the photon torpedoes! Beam us up, Scotty!

Anonymous said...

Saddened by the vile spirit of it all, even if the UCG publications lack truth.

I'm sure all atheists aren't hate-filled but this is definitely giving them a bad rap.

Purple Hymnal said...

"I believe it is plausible that T. Rex was developed from a chicken-like ancient bird through genetic manipulation. The original innocuous "chicken" was created by God. T. Rex was a derivative created by the Dark Side."

Neo, please, please, PLEASE tell me your tongue is planted firmly in your cheek here....I would rather you be an out-and-out "the world was created in six days and is only six thousand years old" type of creationist, than THIS kind of convoluted brain-twistery.....

Anonymous said...

Has anyone asked the animals how they feel about having humans as their relatives,petulant and acrimonious mammals that they be.?

Perhaps a bit of Dr Doolittle's philosophy might be allowed to range free,viz, "walk with the animals, talk with the animals".


Corky said...

Russell Miller said...
MJ, atheism isn't blind faith.
Certainly not. Atheism is based on the fact that theists have not and cannot prove their God exists.

A god never said anything or wrote anything, only men have said and wrote stuff - stuff they can't prove.

Should anyone be obligated to believe what men have said or wrote about a god that they cannot prove exists?

Personal experience? Why doesn't that count as evidence? Because other religions of past and present have folks with personal experiences that have convinced them also.

For example, the women weeping for Tammuz. Did Tammuz exist? The women of Ezek. 8:14 thought so and the people who sacrificed their first born to Ba'al also were "moved" to do such a thing.

Personal religious experience or a guilt trip? - I vote guilt trip. Why? Because that's what all religions lay on people, from the original sin folks to the people who just have regrets over past mistakes.

Do you feel convicted of sin? Do you know what that means? It means that you have finally come to realize that you have done some stuff wrong and you feel guilty about it.

So, what do you do? Weep for Tammuz or sacrifice your first born? OR, do you just amend your ways and let go of the past.

I vote for the latter but without entangling myself with some irrational belief in something that can't be proved to exist.

There is a good reason why Yahweh cannot be proved to exist and it's the same reason that Apollo cannot be proved to exist. Guess what that reason is.

Mel said...

This is indeed GOOD NEWS!

" deliciously subversive!", as BB opined.

I agree with PZ's opinion of the "Creation Museum", too.

To read about a very naughty visit to that edifice to idiocy, click here.

Make it up as we go said...

"I believe it is plausible that T. Rex was developed from a chicken-like ancient bird through genetic manipulation. The original innocuous "chicken" was created by God. T. Rex was a derivative created by the Dark Side."

Don't go into paleontology for a career and be very careful of reading the latest scientific findings done by the guys who actually do the work.

"There is a theme that runs through the geological epochs. These ecosystems were utterly hostile to modern man. Neither the flora or fauna provided a hospitable environment for mankind."

That's because homonids came along when they could do well and other forms left when they couldn't.

Where do you get this stuff?

larry said...

Corky said,

"Certainly not. Atheism is based on the fact that theists have not and cannot prove their God exists."

And Corky, you are absolutely right!

BUT, atheism is also based on the premise that sentient, complex life (which without question DOES exist) can arise from the chaos of nature either normally or by accident.

Sorry, it just doesn't happen. And while you criticize theists for being unable to prove the existence of God, you should just as much criticize those who have tried to create life. If it were so simple or could happen spontaneously, we should be able to do it ourselves. Many have tried unsuccessfully. We haven't even come close. In fact, the harder we try, the more we become aware at how difficult it is.

It takes a LOT of faith to be an atheist!

Ok I"m Not an Expert said...

"I still do not believe that the fossil record in the conclusive evidence of this."

And you have studied the entire fossil record, gone to where they originate, touched them and worked with the experts in their fields who explain them? Cool!

Chimp Religious Tract said...

The Chimp Tract asks....

Is Evolution True?
As a matter of fact, yes it is...

Does It Matter?
Darn right it does. One could save 10-30 of their yearly income knowing how much this matters.

What Do You Believe?
It doesn't matter what one believes. It's the truth that is true even if one gets his belief wrong that matters. Beliefs have agendas. Truth just bites through the bone.

Atheism Is Itself A Delusion said...

“The Dawkins Delusion”, subtitled “Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine” is a book by Alister McGrath written as a critical response from a Christian perspective to Richard Dawkins' book, “The God Delusion”.

Alister McGrath, the primary author, studied chemistry and molecular biophysics at Oxford university, and moved on to study Christian theology, specializing in issues of science and religion. He is also the author of “Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life”.

McGrath suggests that the fact that Dawkins has penned a 400-page book declaring that God is a delusion is itself highly significant and asks "Why is such a book still necessary? ... for more than a century, leading sociologists, anthropologists and psychologists have declared that their children would see the dawn of a new era in which the 'God delusion' would be left behind for good."

McGrath says he has the same background as Dawkins, and has often wondered how they could draw such totally different conclusions on the basis of reflecting long and hard on substantially the same world. He suggests that one possibility might be that he is deranged, deluded and hijacked by an infectious, malignant God-virus, but that the same ridiculous nonsense could be repeated applying it to Dawkins.

He compares atheist Dawkins's "total dogmatic conviction of correctness" to "a religious fundamentalism which refuses to allow its ideas to be examined or challenged."

McGrath agrees that we should not base our lives on delusions and that we all need to examine our beliefs, but disagrees that faith is infantile, saying many thinkers came to believe in God as adults. He argues that faith is not irrational, suggesting that Dawkins's presentation of the normal as if it were pathological is neither acceptable nor scientific and abandons even the pretense of rigorous evidence-based scholarship: "Anecdote is substituted for evidence; selective internet trawling for quotes displaces rigorous and comprehensive engagement with primary sources."

He agrees with Dawkins on Paley's arguments from Design, but suggests that on other 'arguments' he is clearly out of his depth and superficial.

He states that Aquinas never speaks of “proofs” for God's existence; rather they are demonstrations of the inner coherence of belief in God and that our beliefs may be shown to be justifiable, without thereby demonstrating that they are proven.

He claims that Dawkins's "Argument from improbability" is a poorly structured expansion of the 'who made God then?' question, and that if these "brash and simplistic" arguments carried weight, the scientific quest for a Grand Unified Theory could be dismissed with "what explains the explainer"?


Atheism Is Itself A Delusion said...

McGrath also suggests that a leap from complexity to improbability is highly problematic. Why is something complex improbable? A "theory of everything" may well be more complex than the lesser theories that it explains.

He cites Richard Swinburne as one of many writers to argue that the capacity of science to explain itself requires explanation – and that the most economical and reliable account of this explanatory capacity lies in the notion of a creator God.

McGrath suggests that "scientific theories do not, and are not intended to, describe and explain "everything about the world" – such as its purpose."

McGrath suggests that rather a lot of scientists do believe in God. There is a massive observational discrepancy between the number of scientists that Dawkins believes should be atheists, and those who are so in practice. Dawkins is clearly entrenched in his own peculiar version of a “fundamentalist dualism".

“Such is Dawkins's unruffled scientific impartiality that in a book of almost four hundred pages, he can scarcely bring himself to concede that a single human benefit has flowed from religious faith, a view which is as a priori improbable as it is empirically false.” and suggest that "Atheism must indeed be in a sorry state if its leading contemporary defender has to depend so heavily – and so obviously – on the improbable and the false to bolster his case."

“The Dawkins Delusion” concludes with the suggestion that belief in God has "rebounded", and that The God Delusion denotes "panic" on the part of non-believers, criticizing Dawkins' book as "a work of theater, rather than scholarship" and suggests atheism is itself a delusion about God.

Yes, it takes a lot of irrational faith to be a strong atheist!


Byker Bob said...

Theists can prove that their God exists, and what an awesome God He is! It's just that, rather put God to the test in their own lives, atheists simply reject the criteria behind our proofs, and God as well.

Blessings are wonderful examples, which I consider to be proofs. For the past year and a half, I've scoured all of the wrecking yards, Craig's List, Auto Trader, and my own contacts for a transmission for my 50 year old classic vehicle to no avail. Finally, I asked God to show me His will for that car. A week later, I have a working transmission, a rebuild kit for it, the original factory service manual, and the tranny was delivered to my house, all for $275! God did for me something which I had been unable to accomplish on my own.

I had taken a chance on a new customer, offering credit on $1300 worth of machine parts, some of which I'd charged on my Visa card. I became concerned when they went beyond my 30 day terms, and asked God to bless them so they could pay, and to give me favor with them. Two days later, a check arrived, paying their invoice in full.

Was this just luck, or random occurrence? Some might see it that way. But, the most likely outcome of both these situations would probably not have been best case scenario. I don't believe it is unwarranted or superstitious to consider them to have been blessings, and to thank our loving Creator!

Calling all atheists: The Blessing Train is now boarding at the station! This is a ride you do not want to miss!


Speakerbox said...

Well Said, Superman. It's hard to prove a negative.

Shucks that's easy said...

"Yes, it takes a lot of irrational faith to be a strong atheist!


Far less than talking donkeys and snakes, women from the ribs of man, arks and dinosaurs, humans stopping the rotation of the earth and leg irons falling off as the result of an earthquake :) (They knock down buildings too)

Neotherm said...

No tongue-in-cheek intended. I am quite serious. Scientists have long known that dinosaurs either have a bird-like hip joint or a reptilian hip join. Some artists have even depicted the bird-like ones with feathers.

And I have not looked at all the fossil evidence, but I can tap into the literature and see what is going on. For instance, gradualism would require that there would be many, many, many precursors to T. Rex. In fact, these precursors should occupy a place in the fossil record much, much larger than T. Rex himself. T. Rex is only the product of an enormous evolutionary line according to gradualism. But there are no such verifiable and numerous percursors to T. Rex found. T. Rex lived as T. Rex for a period of time and then became extinct. This lack of transitional forms is a problem for Darwinians. Stephen Gould tried to mend this problem with limited success.

Early homonids did not live in a hospitable environment. I visited the original Clovis site at Blackwater Draw. There was a large chart in the museum showing flunctuations in weather, some of it do to volcanic activity, that existed up until about 6,000 years ago. Then the weather became remarkably stable. No doubt the Pleistocene was better for homonids then the Jurassic would have been -- even though the short-faced bear is a little disturbing. There is a plant that still grows in the south Pacific that was here in the Jurassic. It is highly toxic and contains all kinds of bizarre chemicals. I believe that even ancient homonids were hostile to modern man. They were a part of the theme of hostility not an argument against.

-- Neo

Jethro said...

All too many people who reject evolution do not appreciate the fact that evolution, paleontolgy, genetics, and related fields are rigorous disciplines with many years of careful research and scholarship behind them. To say you have discovered and chopped down "the trunk of the tree" and just reject all of that knowledge out of hand soley for religious reasons is folly. It is possible for a Christian to appreciate both God's hand in creation and the scores of dedicated scientists, both believers and non-believers, who have enlightened us about our origins.

Anonymous said...

At his valedictory,our Zoology professor told us that there was no conflict between God and evolution,for those of a religious persuasion.

What a wonderful compromise.

God used evolution in the creation process.



Corky said...

Larry said...

BUT, atheism is also based on the premise that sentient, complex life (which without question DOES exist) can arise from the chaos of nature either normally or by accident.
No, Larry, it's not. Atheism is simply the disbelief in your God.

That evolution and other sciences back up the conclusion that atheists have come to has nothing to do with atheism itself.

Atheism is unbelief - that's it. The reasons for unbelief are varied. Mine is that there is simply no proof or evidence of the existence of any gods. Therefore, I don't believe that there are any gods or even anything supernatural in our natural world.

A person doesn't need any evidence for not believing something. It's the believer who needs to have evidence, or else what they believe can simply be dismissed.

Corky said...

Yes, it takes a lot of irrational faith to be a strong atheist!

NOPE! It doesn't take any faith at all to NOT believe something. I don't believe that you are superman, for example. I don't even believe you are Clark Kent.

Tkach's $wiss Bamker said...

Atheism Is Itself A Delusion said...
"McGrath suggests that rather a lot of scientists do believe in God."

This is the Logical Fallacy of APPEAL TO AUTHORITY

Anonymous said...

Something very different happened about between 3000 & 4000 BC. It was the beginning of civilization as we know it.

The archeological record shows this was quite sudden and quite dramatic. But it was not the result of evolution.

There is no scientific explanation for what happened in Mesopotamia.

The Sabbath is also first mentioned in this context, not by Hebrews, but by Mesopotamians.

" The Mesopotamians were also the first to celebrate the Sabbats, which were held in accordance with the lunar calendar. The very word Sabbat (or Sabbath) derives from the Assyrian word Sabattu, which means “a day of rest for the heart,” while the Akkadian equivalent meant “a day of completion of labor.”"

So is the creation story in Genesis more true then most people believe?

Did God create something, someone, and or change something some 6000 years ago?

Is that why civilization started?

There is the record of the Sabbath going back some 6000 years in non-biblical sources.

Did God give the Sabbath at the same time?

Russell Miller said...

"Theists can prove that their God exists"

Then do it already. I've been waiting for years for someone to do that. While you're at it, put it in a peer-reviewed paper and send it to a scientific journal, I'm sure you'll be famous beyond measure.

Of course, the anecdote you just dribbled out isn't proof at all.

Corky said...

I see that BykerBob is laboring under the impression that God finds transmissions for cars instead of food for the starving.

I reckon that, in his mind, God is like a genie in a bottle if you have the right spirit. Otherwise, starve you suffering little children, God has no use for you.

On the other hand, look what God allowed to happen to millions of Jews (and Christians) during WWII. I think that they were praying also but to no avail, God did not intervene.

But, God will find a transmission for Bob?

No, I think I'll let that blessing train pull out of the station, I don't like the way your god operates the train.

Anonymous said...

"Of course, the anecdote you just dribbled out isn't proof at all."

Actually it is proof of something... the archeology is REAL!

The suddenness of it all tends to disprove evolution.

And it certainly proves Sabbath was extant long before the Bible was written. Long long before...

And it does show the Sabbath i.e. "Sabattu" is intrinsically linked to the beginning of modern civilization.

It actually proves allot...

Mel said...

Did someone say that Satan created the dinosaurs?

Was that in one of Herb's or Ted's booklets?

Whatever You Ask.... said...

"I asked God to show me His will for that car. A week later, I have a working transmission, a rebuild kit for it, the original factory service manual, and the tranny was delivered to my house, all for $275! God did for me something which I had been unable to accomplish on my own."

I've never figured out why God gives someone a transmission for a car and yet won't help a young man screaming for God before somone cuts his head off or burns him a pit he had to dig with his own hands....

Byker Bob said...

Corky, I'm surprised that you didn't make this connection. One of my passions is the dying continent of Africa. I always felt that it was abominable for the Armstrongs and their imitators to exploit starving and diseased Africans by picturing their likenesses on the covers of their magazines, and yet do nothing to help alleviate their starvation, or their plight in general. Worse, they prohibited us from contributing to funds whose missions was to aid these totally helpless individuals!

I am no longer prohibited from having compassion for, or aiding the African people, and delight in contributing to a wonderful organization which digs wells so that the Africans can have non-polluted water to drink, shoes for them to help control parasitic infection, food, education, and best of all, the gospel of Jesus Christ so that they can learn to govern themselves in a loving, fair, and just way. My church (not an ACOG!) has a strong missionary program, in which members can spend a few weeks, months, or years in Africa or South America administering to disadvantaged people, and I may become involved in this sometime in the future.

So, your seemingly logical post missed the key link in the blessing chain. To tell the whole story, God provides transmissions for people who help feed and educate the starving.


Byker Bob said...

Whatever you ask:

God help us if any of us is subjected to the tortures you mentioned! I marvel at the exemplary courage and strength of belief which martyred saints have displayed throughout the ages!

Man has wrestled with the issue of free will from day one. The existence of free will not only means that incredible evil is one of the possible choices, but time or room for repentence is also provided, meaning that the evil can persist longer than most of us could stand or would deem logical.
Civilized and or Godly government attempts to deter, limit, or punish the evil, but in this current world evil will always remain an option, as will some incredibly good acts as well.


Anonymous said...

It is comical and yet terrifying what nonsense people believe in.

The Skeptic

Corky said...

So, your seemingly logical post missed the key link in the blessing chain. To tell the whole story, God provides transmissions for people who help feed and educate the starving.


Yeah, I knew there was something missing somewhere.

So, now we know, we have to EARN those blessings . . . ya know, that kinda sounds familiar, somehow.

Oh yeah, now I remember, it was that tithe thingy - well, since God is pouring out his blessings on you then I hope you are blessed with more than a transmission.

I didn't have any blessings poured out on me for all my contributions but I suppose that's the way it is for some folks. OTOH, maybe it was that I didn't expect any.

In my trip to the other world, I met some interesting people who only had a bowl of rice a couple of times a week and all the edible weed roots they could find.

Of course, I left them with all I had in the way of rations knowing that I would be hungry for a little while.

Didn't matter though, the VC killed them for having American rations - so much for a good heart.

Tkach's $wiss Banker said...

Corky said:

"I see that BykerBob is laboring under the impression that God finds transmissions for cars instead of food for the starving."

Yeah, I was wondering about this irony too.

Tkach's $wiss Banker said...

Byker Bob said...
Corky, I'm surprised that you didn't make this connection. One of my passions is the dying continent of Africa.

Does your church participate in the 'Transmissions for Tots' program ?

Russell Miller said...

"Actually it is proof of something... the archeology is REAL!"

Documentation, please. From real scientists. As detailed as possible. I will not do your research for you, but I'm willing to consider anything credible you dig up.

I won't hold my breath.

Mel said...

I have noticed that when people have a 'cult mentality' that they ascribe any good that happens in their lives to their following the cult's teachings, while spinning any bad things that happen into martyrdom or evil forces acting against the cult's purposes.

After I left the WCG, I attended a church which had people travelling, bringing packacages to clothe and feed the needy in a South American country.
It was a political mess there, and the people ended up with their heads chopped off and placed on spikes outside the perimeter of the village they had gone to help, as a warning.

I never, at the time, thought to ask if Jesus had given them automobile transmissions, though.

I guess that for them, the choo-choo-train to "choppy-choppy" had ended any need they might have had for automobile transmissions.

Byker Bob said...

The responses to my 7:17 post are fairly typical, and pretty much what I expected, and even from whom I expected them.

But, this ties in to the original post in that it is just too bad that, through free will or otherwise, false teachers can create such an oppressive religious system that causes people to hate, reject, and deny God. So, while I am no longer in alignment philosophically with atheists, I believe it's possible that God might be using this situation to further decimate what's left of the ACOGs.


Mel said...

Bob, I ascribe your 'response-pickle' partially to the fact that you feel the Holy Spirit wants you to use Gavin's blog as a venue to make "alter calls", while at the same time, this isn't really the place for that.

Russell Miller said...

BB, I think that would be cool. And once he's done with the COGs, he can decimate a few christians too.

Tkach's $wiss Banker said...

I clicked on link & skimmed pdf UCG booklet. The booklet is of no value because there is no scientific approach here. Science has a well established system for seeking truth which they ignore. Science needs to verify evidence; the UCG needs to carefully supply evidence not reasoning.

Have you heard these right wing religionists use the term "Neo Darwinists" to describe scientists? I didn't know there was a "reveval" in Darwinism. When did it ever fall out of favor?

Byker said...


Altar calls?

No, I don't see myself in that role at all. I see myself as defending the faith from time to time, and perhaps encouraging some of the people who were presented by WCG/HWA with a detestable working image of the members of the deity to take a second look at God, this time without using the Armstrong filters from our past.

And, believe me, I know how difficult an action that would be. There's quite a reservoir of natural revulsion in most of us. I'm nearly certain that when the very name "God" is suggested, for some, the first image that comes to mind is a mental portrait of HWA, sometimes inducing involuntary vomitus. My point is that we have to get past that to get the healing we all need.


Lee said...

Maybe if some UCG members were better examples to the Biblically ignorant worldly pagan people, some of these attacks wouldn't happen. Quite by accident, I have learned of some "converted" members who are living together. You know, the worldly Satanic practice where people of the opposite sex shack up.

It is absolutely happening in UCG. Now, how can we expect our "of the world" family and friends to take us seriously when we are just as worldly(or more so) as they? I mean when we are picking and choosing which teachings to zealously observe and which to zealously toss in the sewer, how is it that we deserve respect? Where do we get our specialness that allows us to confidently snub outsiders who don't get our sabbath/holy day/tithing doctrines when we are wallowing in the mire regarding everyday living issues.

I understand the topic here is the creationist ad, but UCG better get some priorities straight or we will have worse than this to contend with.

Anonymous said...

Those who may go to the scienceblogs website looking for a detailed critique of the UCG booklet as Myers promised will be disappointed. The UCG booklet is available for immediate download in pdf format, so everyone at scienceblogs has had the opportunity to see it. They have over 200 comments to the original post, and almost no one has commented on the content of the booklet. Plenty of hostility and hate, but no subtance. The discussion seems to center on the issue of how to make UCG waste postage.

Great advertisement for the evolutionist mindset!