god-proof.com

I once heard a mainstream American preacher blame the Nazi genocide of the Jews in World War 2 on atheists and the theory of evolution. Since then, I’ve seen this view echoed in numerous Christian websites and apparently there are lectures on this topic at the Creationist Museum. This pisses me off.

It is simply illogical to blame science, evolution or atheists for this terrible chapter in history. Here’s why…

The Nazis blamed the Jews for corrupting Germany, they believed there was an international Zionist conspiracy, and the Jews were held responsible for Germany’s defeat in the First World War. Of course, there was absolutely NO EVIDENCE for any of this, and I challenge anyone to produce some.

Now, one of the dictionary definitions of faith is; ‘belief without any proof or evidence’. In this respect, the Nazi idea that Jews were evil conspirators is a belief that lacks evidence – the holocaust was an evil act of faith.

Another system of thought that promotes faith without evidence is of course religion. Yes, that’s right I’m comparing religion to the Nazis, controversial for sure, but it’s the same thing as blaming evolutionists for the holocaust!

The second point I want to raise is this: Long before Darwin was born, people had selectively bred certain animals to produce desirable results. Dogs are a prime example of this. Today we have breeds for guarding, herding and breeds that sit comfortably on the lap. Dogs that performed the best were selected for breeding and their desirable qualities passed on. Dogs that were unfit were not allowed to breed. This is unnatural selection and it has been practiced since the dawn of the agricultural revolution several thousand years ago.

So, although ancient humans lacked a theory of genetic transference, they were still acutely aware of the power of selective breeding. The Nazi Eugenics program, which sought to produce a superior master race and destroy the so-called ‘inferior’ races, could have proceeded without Darwin’s work.

It is my humble opinion that if we would all aspired to find evidence for our beliefs, then the world would be a much happier place to live in.

Artwork Copyright Derek Chatwood

It has been 202 years since the birth of Darwin, and 152 years after the publication of his epoch making ‘Origin of the Species.’ Despite being recognized as the most influential theory of modern times and being accepted almost universally by scientists the world over, much opposition remains from Christians and Creationists to the very idea of evolution. “I am not descended from a monkey,” is a commonly heard refrain from the Darwin Doubters. In this article I shall briefly examine some of the overwhelming supporting evidence that allows us to say unequivocally that evolution is fact!

1. Anatomy. Comparing the physical qualities of living creatures, for example their skeletal systems, shows that humans have remarkable similarities with other mammals (we have five digits on the end of our extremities, a spinal column, sockets in the skull for two eyes etc). From this evidence alone anatomists could construct a family tree of living species, and as it happens, humans are most similar anatomically to the apes. This suggests that these species are related to each other somehow as Darwin predicted.

2. DNA. Darwin knew that humans and apes were related, but he lived before the discovery of DNA which would later provide dramatic evidence in support of his theory. Chimp and human DNA are a 98% match. How do we know? Heat up some human DNA to around 85 degrees Celsius and the double helix breaks apart. Let things cool down and each single helix will re-bond, because, like a hand and a glove the two sides match each other.

What happens if we add some chimp and human DNA together? Well, the chimp DNA continues to seek a bond with the human DNA (all DNA has the same A,C,G, T lettering which makes bonding possible). However, because of differences in the genetic sequence the bond is not so strong. Because the bond is not as good the hybrid DNA will break apart at a slightly lesser temperature than before. Now, if you tried mixing human DNA with rabbit DNA, the bond would be significantly weaker (we are not close relations with the rabbits), and the hybrid breaks apart at a much lower temperature. Experiments like this allow us to see that we humans are indeed most closely related genetically to chimps – a result which matches the expectation from anatomy!

3. Paleontology. Preserved fossils give us a great insight into the previous history of a given species and allow us to see evolution at work. These specimens can be anatomically compared with each other and placed on a family tree. Thanks to Radiometric dating techniques we can calculate the approximate age of rocks and therefore the fossils within them. Although specimens of ancient humans and chimps are rare, they do exist, and from them we can build up a picture of how humans and apes are related. The fossil record fits snugly with Darwin’s theory, and combined with DNA evidence we can say with certainty that the common ancestors of humans and chimps lived 5.5 million years ago.

Of course, in this article I have only painted the briefest of sketches of the scientific evidence that supports the theory of evolution. I hope that the Darwin doubters will be made aware of the overwhelming supporting evidence of evolution that comes from many diverse scientific disciples:  Anatomy, animal breeding, bacteriology, biology, biochemistry, embryology, geology, genetics, taxonomy, zoology to name a few.

Actually, I feel it is a great shame that I have to write this piece on the advent of Darwin’s birthday. Despite the evidence, the creationists continue to insist on their own perverted vision of the ‘truth’ and I wouldn’t have to write this article if their views were not so prevalent. I hope that more and more people can come to understand the world, the inherent beauty of evolution, and will be able to wean themselves off their superstitious fables so that we can achieve a brighter future.

Happy birthday Darwin!

Christians everywhere have, for the past two millennia, been staring up at the skies patiently waiting for the return of their savior. But maybe it’s about time they all faced facts – Jesus isn’t coming back!

Jesus says quite conspicuously in the Gospel of Mark “I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Kingdom of God.” (Mk 9:1, see also Mk 13.30) Taken literally, as the writer no doubt intended, Jesus is predicting that some of his followers would still be alive and kicking when he returned to usher in the kingdom of god. Jesus said he would return in a matter of months or years.

The fact is however, that we have no ancient old apostles walking around, so either Jesus lied or he made a mistake – either way he was a false prophet.

It is interesting that Paul, one of the first Christian missionaries who lived circa 5 – 67 AD, was also expecting Jesus to return within his own lifetime. In his letters in the New Testament Paul continually refers to the approaching kingdom. He says that the ‘time is short’ or the ‘world in its present form is passing away.’ Clearly he believes the end is nigh.

In fact he so evidently believes that the return of the savior is so imminent that his followers need not get married. He says “because of the current crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife.” (1 Corinthians 7: 26-27) For the Apostle Paul there was simply no point in getting married because, as he saw it, Jesus was just around the corner. He evidently believes Jesus will return within the lifetimes of his converts.

Jesus not returning caused no end of embarrassment to the early Christians. Despite the very literal understanding that Jesus would return imminently, Christians were forced to re-write their understanding of this event. Today it is common to hear Christians say things such as ‘the kingdom has come already, it’s in our hearts.’ Be that as it may, this is not what Jesus and Paul taught and believed. It’s an attempt to answer the embarrassing fact that Jesus is running late and will never return because Jesus is not a god.

This is an extract from the book ‘The Christ Conundrum: The Skeptic’s Guide to Jesus’

“When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining.” The gospel of John (John 19:23) contains this interesting incident of the Roman soldiers sharing up Jesus’ clothing. After divvying up the clothes the underwear remains, John gives us a description of this item “this garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom.” The soldiers do not want to tear up Jesus’ underpants and agree among themselves to draw lots to see who would gain possession. If we imagine Jesus as a humble man from the backwaters of the Galilee then his clothes couldn’t be worth much and after his previous beating the clothes would have been covered in blood and sweat – why then do the Roman troops want the clothes?

Like so many tales within the gospels, even the slightest details are inspired by the Jewish scriptures. Indeed every detail of Jesus’ last moments are given deeper meaning, even in the case of his underwear. John makes it clear that the soldiers want Jesus’ clothes to fulfil prophecy from psalm twenty two, “They divided my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing.” (Psalm 22:18)

The psalms are a collection of one hundred and fifty sacred poems that express various tenets of Judaism which according to Jewish tradition were composed by King David himself. Psalm twenty two elsewhere bears a striking resemblance to the death of Jesus, beginning with the line “My god, my god why have you forsaken me?” Are these similarities evidence that Jesus fulfilled the prophecies as many Christians assume, or are they evidence that the gospel writers pinched aspects of Jesus life from earlier texts?

In a previous chapter we have already noted how reliant the gospel writers were on the Old Testament, they used it to find information about the life of Jesus because they believed his life was predicted in it. In this case John has found inspiration from a psalm and applied it to the final moments of Jesus’ life - he weaves the story of the soldiers wanting Jesus’ clothing in order to ‘fulfil’ this psalm.

We must therefore be wary of the historicity of this incident, would Roman soldiers really want blood-soaked underwear, and for what purpose? This story is so absurd it is best explained as an invention. If we accept the truth of the matter then we have to be even more careful about what the rest of the gospels are telling us of the death of Jesus. The events leading to his death are literally packed with theological interpretations which make finding the historical truth behind why he died even more difficult.

According to some among the Christian faith, the bible is inerrant – or in other words, from Genesis to Revelation there is not a single error in the bible. This they believe is because the scriptures are inspired directly by god and are therefore perfect. Nonsense.

Before the days of printing, texts had to be copied by hand – a laborious process that was prone to error, and indeed we can see plenty of spelling mistakes in the plethora of old texts that survive today. Things weren’t helped at all by the fact that ancient texts lacked punctuation and spaces between words. This can lead to problems; try for example to decipher this: godisnowhere.

Assuming that god really did inspire the bible, then which of the nearly 6000 surviving Greek manuscripts is closest to his original intent? The differences between these manuscripts are immense, there are an estimated 200,000 – 400,000 variances between them; everything from spelling mistakes to purposeful additions to the words.

The original Number of the Beast was 616, not 666. The bible is prone to errors.

Here is an example of a theologically motivated ‘correction’. In the modern NIV bible, the Epistle to the Hebrews (2:8-9) describes Jesus dying ‘by the grace of god.’ But upon closer inspection of the earliest manuscripts Jesus died ‘apart from god.’ In other words, in older texts, even god had deserted Jesus when he died on the cross. Meanwhile, there is a wealth of evidence the supports the older reading of this book. Origen (185 – 254 ce), an early Christian scholar, mentions that within his lifetime, the script did indeed mention Jesus dying without god.

Alas, it seems that at some stage a scribe, who had the arduous task of copying this book by hand, was confronted with this oddity (‘how could Jesus die without god? He was god. Surely this was a mistake!’) so he took the opportunity to rewrite the text according to his own theological beliefs. Thus in the original Greek ‘Chorus Theou’ (apart from god) became ‘Chariti Theou’ (by the grace of god), a small scribal change with a profoundly different meaning.

Origen complains about these scribes: “The differences among the manuscripts have become great, either through the negligence of some copyists or through the perverse audacity of others; they either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions as they please.”

Thus, even in the earliest stages of Christianity there were already many manuscripts, with many errors, so how are we supposed to know which one is correct? We don’t have the original texts of the New Testament. We don’t even have the copies of the copies of the copies of the originals. So, assuming for a minute that god did indeed inspire the originals then these are now lost to us. The bible is not inerrant. It is a product of the human mind, and as such, is open to errors.

Anyone interested in this subject is recommended to read ‘Whose Word is it?’ by Bart Ehrman, from where the above examples are taken from.

An Islamic magical text

In the past I was known as something of an intrepid traveler, and during my ten years living in Asia I was quite surprised to learn how widespread was the practice of magic in strongly Islamic nations. I had supposed that witchcraft and magic were prohibited by Islam so I had to investigate this further.

The Maldives often boasts that they are a 100% Islamic country but when I was living there I found quite a large number of people who talked about ‘Fanditha’, the local brand of magic which included everything from charms, medicine and even some rather gruesome black magic spells. Islam came to the Maldives sometime in the 13^th century and the former Buddhists seemed to have accepted this new religion with gusto. But as with the uptake of any new religion the old ways did not immediately die out. Rather than being forced out by the new religion Fanditha seems to have adapted to fit the new religion.

To illustrate this point I shall give the example of a friend, who just for fun, decided to see a Fanditha man. He was told by the gnarly old man that someone had put a curse on him and to break it he had to collect water from 7 different mosques and after there was to be a ritual involving reading verses from the Quran and the curse would be lifted. It seems from this example that Fanditha nowadays operates under the guise of Islam. In other words Fanditha is only accepted because it attempts to work alongside Islam – even though Islam itself frowns upon witchcraft and magic.

To a certain extent all new religions absorb something of the native cultures – in many old churches in the UK it is possible to see stone carvings of the Green Man which was most likely a pagan deity that survived when Christianity took over. Of course Christianity does not allow worship of other gods but in order not to alienate the former pagans these old gods were incorporated into the new religion; sometimes they became saints, sometimes demons. So I suppose that Fanditha is a product of the same process, of the old merging with the new.

But Islamic magic is not confined to the Maldives. During my time in Indonesia I observed that some people used to go to the Dukun, something like a shaman. In one case some friends were wondering what such an ugly girl (their words not mine) was doing with a handsome, rich, young man and it was rumoured that she had visited a Dukun and performed a love spell on the man. Although, as a skeptic, I very much doubt the effectiveness of magical spells there was no doubt that this was considered by my Indonesian friends as a valid explanation for this odd couple being together.

Both the Maldives and Indonesia are Islamic countries, but both had examples of traditional magic that was not merely surviving but actually flourishing. Although most educated people prefer to keep their distance from magic, there is nevertheless a strong prevalent view among the lower sections of society in both countries that magic actually works. Additionally they believe magic can be used in everyday matters.

When new religions take over, the old ones do not die. And this observation leads me to conclude that religion is contrived and man made.

If you haven’t seen this documentary before and you have an interest in the seedier side of Christian evangelism then you should check out the video posted below. It’s the story of Marjoe who was the youngest ordained minister who even performed wedding ceremonies at the age of 4! Marjoe is the whistle-blower for Evangelism and in this documentary he allows a film crew to document him behind the scenes as he shows off all of the tricks of the trade – and how to rake in the money from gullible Christians!

Was he right to do this?

That depends on your point of view. But what is shocking about the video is that young Marjoe’s parents forced him to be a minister simply to make money and even used to physically abuse him, so you can hardly blame him for blowing the cover on the whole racket. And the video, despite being made in 1977, is still relevant today, after all there are many big name evangelists who are fleecing their flocks of hard earned cash. Benny Hinn for example even requested donations to finance his own personal jet and his ministry brings in millions of dollars each year.

These guys make their money by preying on the ignorant and gullible. Religion is a big earner, and this documentary is certainly an eye opener.

Did Jesus like a drink?

1. Jesus had a reputation as a pisshead

The gospel of Matthew records this: “The Son of Man[aka Jesus] came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and “sinners.”‘ (Matthew 11:19) Many of Jesus’ contemporaries fasted, for example the followers of John the Baptist and the Pharisees, and this passage shows their contempt for a man who was not so fond of abstinence. This passage likely records a historical reality. In other words Jesus had a reputation for drinking alcohol when the others were fasting.

2. Jesus’ own family thought that he was mad

“When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, ‘He is out of his mind.’” (Mark 3:21)The would-be messiah was disdainful towards his family and throughout the gospels Jesus is portrayed as having a less than harmonious family life. Famously he could not even perform miracles in his hometown. Historians suggest that the emerging Catholic Church taking root outside of Palestine had to compete with the remaining Jewish Christians and they had drastic differences in belief. The Jewish Christians did not for example revere Jesus as a divinity. By claiming that Jesus’ family thought their famous son was insane the Catholic Church was actually aiming to downplay the influence of the Jewish Christians.

3. Jesus was a political revolutionary

There is a train of thought that the historical Jesus was more of a political activist than a religious holy man. Among his twelve disciples was Judas Iscariot and Simon the Zealot. The Sicarri (from whence Judas got his surname) were a sect of Jewish assassins and the Zealots were a bunch of rebels who opposed Roman rule through military force. This might explain why at least one of Jesus’ followers was armed: “With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.” (Matthew 26:51)

4. Jesus cured blindness by spitting in the eyes

“He took the blind man by the hand and led him outside the village. When he had spit on the man’s eyes and put his hands on him, Jesus asked, “Do you see anything?” (Mark 8:23) Of course in the old days there was no understanding of modern science and spit was considered to have healing properties. Jesus was not alone among the ancients for spitting in eyes to heal the blind. The Roman Emperor Vespasian also healed a blind man by spitting in his eyes according to his chronicler Tacitus. (Tacitus, The Histories 4.81)

5. Jesus’ brother took over after Jesus died

James was the brother of Jesus. Paul tells us: “I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas [aka Peter] and stayed with him fifteen days. I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother.” (Galatians 1:18-19) So James was in Jerusalem around 50ce when Paul visited, and the impression given elsewhere is that James was the leader of the movement. In the Book of Acts for example when everyone is arguing whether new converts needed to be circumcised or not, it is James who presides over the meeting and offers his judgement. (see acts 15:13-20) So why isn’t James as well known as his counterpart Peter? Why did the church want to forget James? Read the Christ Conundrum to find out.

Sleep paralysis or evil demon at work?

One night several years ago I was awake and lying in bed, I was staring towards the door of my room when I became dreadfully aware of a benign presence somewhere close. No sooner had I come to this realisation when I witnessed an eerie light emerge through the door. The thing flashed over and landed on top of my chest. I could breathe. Couldn’t move. I was terrified! I tried to scream but nothing came from my mouth – I was literally paralysed with fear. Things got even worse when this evil entity actually entered into my body!!!

That incident shook me up quite well so that for the next couple of nights I feared going to bed. But being by nature a curious and sceptically minded person I began researching what had happened to me. Had I been possessed by a demon (because that’s what it felt like) or was it merely a dreadful lucid nightmare?

My research quickly led me to a phenomenon known as sleep paralysis – a sleeping disorder that is relatively common. Apparently the frightening aspects of my experience were common to many who had experienced sleep paralysis: there is a feeling of danger, a sensation of something evil and the inability to move the body. And it seems that this type of dream is common to many cultures, a quick look at the relevant Wikipedia article shows that there is a wealth of traditional folklore surrounding the condition. In China for example this dream is known as gu? y? sh?n, translated as ‘ghost pressing on body.’

As I was living in Indonesia at the time it was quite interesting to observe how some of the locals interpreted my experience. In my office there was a large number of Christians. When I told them about the dream there was a unanimous agreement that I had suffered from demonic possession. Had I not been more scientifically minded I might have had to agree with them – after all that thing was so real that in the absence of scientific understanding I might have concluded that demons were responsible. Christians studying the bible would be acutely aware that Jesus was himself an exorcist, so in the Christian worldview it is entirely possible and plausible for demons to inhabit the bodies of the living. And with their biblical education it was entirely logical for my colleagues to assume that I had been possessed by a demonic creature.

Science is the light that chases away superstitions and fables, and it was science that gave me the answers to why I was experiencing this type of dream. There was no nefarious demon draining my breath. Instead the current understanding of sleep paralysis is that the hormones which tell your physical body to relax during sleep (so that you do not act out your dreams) were still present while I was semi-conscious. My mind was half-awake but my body was unmovable. Thus my dream seemed all the more real and terrifying.

Even more intriguing is the phenomenon of Electro Magnetic Fields (EMF) and its influence on the brain. Researchers have found that areas of a house said to be ‘haunted’ actually have fluctuating EMFs. The EMFs interfere with normal brain chemistry to produce feelings that there is something else present in the room. Though some believers have stated that it is the ghosts that cause the EMF fluctuations, scientists such as Michael Persinger have been able to artificially produce sensations of other worldly beings by exposing the brain to fluctuating magnetic fields. Persinger is perhaps most famous for his ‘God Helmet’ which can artificially cause the wearer to experience supernatural phenomenon, and even feel the presence of god.

The human brain is a powerful supercomputer, used to filter through vast amounts of information and interpret it all. Its complex chemistry can be effected by outside forces, through use of drugs for example, and reality can therefore become twisted. Though I am no neural surgeon my basic understanding of how the brain works allowed me properly interpret my horrific experience.

Thanks to science I was able to understand and cope with a traumatic experience. I did not need the services of an exorcist, and I did not need to pray to Jesus. And science allowed me to communicate this to others. A friend of mine told me about an eerie experience that he had. He and his flatmate experienced exactly the same dream in the course of one night. In the morning they compared notes and concluded that they had been abducted by aliens! But I suppose if the earth’s natural magnetic field fluctuates (which I am assured it does), and sleep paralysis is common, then this is the most reasonable explanation for my friend’s apparent abduction. Indeed one commonly cited explanation of alien abductions is sleep paralysis.

I am certain that science will continue to explore the murky regions of the brain and will continue to pull the monsters out from under our beds.

Who do you suppose is the most influential person of the last century? You might pick some famous world leader, Churchill perhaps, who helped shaped post World War 2 Europe. You might choose a famous scientist, Einstein for example. But for me I would have to say the bearer of this title is none other than Gavrilo Princip.

Now you will be forgiven for not knowing who this person is. Before I explain my choice I would first go into detail about the life of Gavrilo so that it is easier to see how an unknown person could possibly have such exalted status in my mind.

Is this the most influential man of recent history?

Gavrilo Princip was born in Bosnia in 1894, the son of a simple postman. His parents had 9 children but because they lived in squalor 6 of them died while still young. Due to the poverty of his household Gavrilo suffered from poor health and grew up to be small in stature. He also suffered a lot of rejection in his life; his parents were unable to look after him and so sent him off to live with an older brother. Later he would be expelled from school because he had taken part in a political protest against the ruling authorities. He would not be allowed to join the First Belgrade Gymnasium either because he was not bright enough to pass the entrance exam. Later, he tried to join the Serbian guerrilla forces but he was rejected from this because of his small stature.

This was the last straw. It was argued later that this final rejection was “one of the primary personal motives which pushed him to do something exceptionally brave in order to prove to others that he was their equal.” So having associated himself with an underground terrorist organization he and several others went out and assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife. If anyone is familiar with the history of the First World War they will know that this was the spark that ignited the terrible slaughter.

This dreadful war claimed the lives of millions and it completely reshaped the face of the world. Two empires, the Ottoman and the Austro-Hungarian, collapsed as a direct result of this war. Harsh repercussions were placed on Germany who were made to pay out enormous sums of money and materials, which ultimately crippled its post-war economy causing massive inflation and political unrest. In this climate extremist leaders rose to the forefront. Hitler, promising to redeem Germany from the treachery of the Versailles treaty and blaming the Jews for stabbing German troops in the back, would take the world into its second war. From the ashes of the Second World War a new world order would arise – America became a super power, as did its ideological rival the Soviet Union, and for the rest of the century there was a very real threat of nuclear war.

Additionally the creation of the state of Israel was a result of the war, when the British Empire turned its former protectorate of Palestine into a homeland for the suffering Jews who had survived the tragedy of the holocaust. The repercussions of this are still being played out in the Middle East.

Just one man, whose name only claims a small by-line in the annuals of world history, had such a massive impact on the world today. What would have happened if things panned out differently? What if Gavrrillo had found acceptance in the gymnasium? Would 911 have happened if Gavrillo died at birth? If he had eaten a healthy diet, would there be wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

I don’t know. But that doesn’t stop the feeling of wonder at the way the waves of history work. Even the smallest actions can have massive and unpredictable results- the butterfly’s wings and all that. It’s fascinating to think that your decision to drink tea or coffee one day might have terrible implications for the rest of humanity.