Contributing to wrong beliefs

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Jan 21, 2009 at 17:29

Hi , kman !

Thanks a lot for your friendly comments. I must tell you that I was not sure for a long time about how I should answer you. In a time of open Moslem aggression against us kafirs , I find any divisions among us harmful and counterproductive. Too much is at stake to squabble about minor issues. Yet, after a while I decided to disclose my mind. It is my firm intention and hope though that what I say below has not impaired in any way deep respect and friendship I feel towards you, other Christians, Jews and all those on whose extermination Islam - the common enemy of mankind- is bent.

>I don't get much in the way of direct replies from the Muslims either.<

Their replies are useless. Their argumentative value is null and void. Their recurrent core point is "Moslems are right, kafirs are wrong" Full stop! I have learnt that stupid trick quickly and thoroughly enough. A Moslem will never ever admit he is wrong and you - a kafir - are or can be right. He/she identifies themselves so much with Islam that they fear thus they might admit Islam's inferiority to other ideas - an unthinkable nightmare for the Moslem's blind and restricted eyes. So we are doomed to see these stupid Moslems over and over again turn up and repeat the propaganda lies and illogial and irrational fairy tales, quotes from the quran, the invocations of Allah, the prophet ...etc.etc. etc. .... to cover the blotted ar... of Islam and its followers. And when pressed hard, they will withdraw silently without changing their views or admitting a defeat. The rebuke only strengthens their revegefullness and self-righteousness. A Moslem can't stand an open and fair contest. Without terror his is a lost cause.

> They reply, but I have to hunt those replies down.<

And aren't you disapointed ?

I myself have stopped being so. I just don't expect a rational reply from a Moslem. I get none and so I am not disapointed. Anyway, "a rational Moslem" is a contradiction in terms, an oxymoron, isn't it ?

> I used to be of your persuasion on the "god" front until the "only" God stepped in and laid an ambush. I was an atheist long and strong until I had one of those "experiences" that he set me up for.<

Actually, I am not an atheist. Logical positivism has influenced me too much. I simply find the sentences dealing with "God" nonsensical. I mean both positive and negative sentences. They may look like normal sentences, yet they aren't. They lack sense which is defined as "the way /possibility to verify a sentence". It turns out that ALL theological sentences are in principle unverifiable and so unacceptable. But the highly paradoxical thing is that the negatives of these statements are equally unverifiable and nonsensical. So atheists are as wrong as their adversaries. Both can't see the sad truth- they are answering a nonsensical question.

"God" surely has a meaning as meaning is a property of words. Unfortunately, meanings don't produce existence. I can imagine "Jehova", the proud god of tautology who says with a serious countenance "I am who I am". Yet, when I use this remarkable word "god" in a statement, the statement turns out to suffer from a serious deficiency - the lack of sense. What Moses told about his adventures with Jehova sounds fine, yet no one could, can or will ever be able to verify the validity of them. And unhappily enough, jumping on the wild horse of belief, faith, religiosity -as required by ALL theologicl statements- doesn't heal the deficiency at all. On the contrary , it only aggravates and perpetuates it.

>I was told to read his "Word". I did so with no outside involvement of the human kind. I was astonished to find the Bible (New Testament first) saying what it did. I waited for the first lie to jump out and grab me. God reached me for a year and a half.<

I have also read the Bible. It's useful to know the Hebrew mythology and the tricks the priestly Levite caste has used to distort the ancient history to justify their own power and break any resistance to its dominant position. In spite of all the pious priestly "improvements" and distortions, the Bible still contains a valuable material on the brutal struggles and conflicts within the Jewish community - the conflict between the Levite caste and the royal power at first , the conflict between the central power and the local centrifugal forces (vilified as "idolaters", Jehova's enemies ) , the struggles inside the priestly caste itself and the royal house ... Wherever I read "Jehova" ordered this or that , it was obvious to me that distorted semantics was involved and the cunning priests stood behind that. I read : "The priests ordered and carried through this or that slaughter or purge to consolidate their own power at the expense of their numerous enemies". And it clarified much.

You can't seriously demand that a critical reader accepts at its face value all the tales and overstretched explanations the Bible abounds with, can yo? It's a historical book like any other. I read it as such. Its self-proclaimed sanctity and infallibility should be rather a warning against its contents than its asset and an incentive to believe in it.

And generally speaking, it's a well known fact of human history that nowhere as many lies and as much deception and swindle has been produced as in the name and under the cloak of the Almighty and the Supernatural and their alleged demands and interests.

Personally , I found the Bible a mediocre book. It seemed to me in some parts funny, but on the whole akward, unauthentic and pretentious. It's structure is arbitrary, incomplete. As a work of literature I would give a verse from Homer or a chapter from Aristotle for all the so called "Scripture". By the way, it is in the Scripture that I found the most absurd statement that I have come across : "yet in his disease he (King Asa) sought not to the LORD, but to the physicians." (King 2; 16 -12) What a sinner ! He disdained Jehova's "panacea" as administered by his miracle doctors (the Levite caste and their rituals) and prefered to consult a doctor! ;)

>Jesus Christ was and still is the real thing. I can't say much for a lot of those who think they know him, but there are a great number who really do. Try a New Testament some time & note how little Jesus talks about the irrelevant customs and culture of his day.<

Sorry, dear friend, I have had the opposite impression. Jesus was a product of his Hebrew environment and eucation through and through. He never read a line of Homer or Aristotle but could quote whole passages of the prophets and stump the cleverest Levite! But what sort of universality was it , i I may ask? He disliked the pigs so much as to drive them mad off the cliffs. The story tells volumes, doesn't it ? The Jews were told by Moses pigs were impure. Jesus showed them Moses had been "right". Let him try this here!

> He's very strong on truth, integrity, and love of the real kind.<

I don't doubt his nobility and good intentions. I doubt what you call "truth". He knew how to tell good and captivating parables and enthrall his listeners with images from the current Hebre mythology. Yet, his philosophical views are of dubious quality. It's all too irrational, too arbitrary, too hasty. As Nietzsche remarked : He died too early. He had too little time to think his doctrine to the end and remove its inherent deficits. He was noble enugh to admit his mistakes. I am sure on the cross he saw he was wrong. That's why he shouted " Father, why hast thou forsaken me? ". I respect him for that sincerity.

> He displayed great power, too, for those who need a few pyrotechnics to get their attention. Bypass the "church" culture & give it an honest look of your own. The real believers eventually find the real clusters despite the legions of hypocrites and pretenders in all of the "churches".<

I my opinion, if he had been what he later claimed to be he might have easily foreseen what his teachings were going to lead to. If so, the bad effect betrays an imperfect master.

>I found the man/God to be everything he claimed to be but it requires an honest effort. If a person doen't want a truth that may point him inan uncomfortable direction then there are numerous ways to escape. The vast majority choose to escape, and will be shown their choice when humanity has taken its last lethal step.<

If I may be harsh, for a moment, Jesus' teachings and fidelity to them didn't save neither the Western nor the Eastern Roman Empires. They will not save anybody , if what is humanly and rationally necessary is not done with all vigour possible. Christianty produced too many theologians and monks and too few soldiers.

> I did the church thing as a youth because "mom" said it was the right thing. I took a look at all religions for awhile and then opted out. I thought it was all baloney for 13 years.

> Every human being bails on their own moral belief (religious or non-) eventually & that is where God has them by the throat. We all cheat on our own belief at some point.<

I think at the very bottom our beliefs are irrational. I remember reading Max Weber's very good passages on that. What is rational are the consequeces of our beliefs, their consistency with our deeds. If beliefs can be changed, it its on the basis of their consequences that this must be done. I reject Christianity because I see it leads to many negative consequences.

> It should be more than evident by now, that there is no system of government that will prevail when man takes it over. The U.S. was man's last great chance. It worked very well until man decided to take the helm of a government that was set up by deeply godly people. I don't call them perfect because there has only been one perfect human - the Christ. Those "godly" people knew who was in control, and as long as the people of the U.S. stayed with it, so did the nation. We lost it, though, as some are ignorantly fond of saying.<

The US has been founded on two contradictry principles. The religious ideas of the Puritans and the spirit of Enlightenment. I am afraid that the contradiction has never been overcome and to satisfy both the parties the best of the two principles had to be sacrificed for a bad compromise. The result is an America oscillating between the Medieval Religiosity and pseudo- "Enlightenment" allied to its very opposite - religious irrationalism.

> Islam won't be defeated by people who haven't enough of a base to die for their beliefs.<

Islam won't be defated as long as its inherent destructive forces are not turned against it. Moslems must exterminate Moslems first to facilitate our task. For the time being all is being done to consolidate and uphold the harmful and unnatural Moslem unity. Moslems are united not only in common war on the dangerous kafir. But they are united in common contempt against the servile and conciliatory kafir as well. They see the kafirs have lost their self-preservation instinct and their senses accomodating their own executioners.

> The Creator sent prophets who stated as much. "The door is narrow and few will walk through it." Islam will prevail for awhile. As the Revelation from John said, though, God will step in when man has demonstrated his total failure one last time.

As the Moslem murderers were storming the gates of the Hagia Sophia on 29.05.1453 the Christians inside were in blind faith repeating the same words as you do, dear friend. Yet, no sword of the Lord appeared to stop the beastly janissaries, no angel from the allegedly infinite hosts of Jehova stepped down to save the Grecian virgins, children and elderly. Until the present day God hasn't moved his finger to regain what was built to honour and praise Him - the most splendid Temple for the Christian God erected for a millenium... Strange fellow, this Hebrew god from Mount Sinai. When you can do without him, he imposes his rule upon you par force or par promesse. But when you need him most ... il reste introuvable (he remains hidden).

If we can't do things which are necessary to save us and our civilization from sure destruction at the hand of the Moslem beast and the Western traitorous politicians, then no Jehova, no Christ, no Heavely Father, no Mary will ever help us. It is what history teaches and it is very unwise and dangerous to disregard what dear Clio -the Muse of History - has to say.

>Sorry to get off topic, but it is the only valid topic that will hold against the evil that inevitably comes of wrong beliefs.<

Why off the topic? It pertains to it closely.

Plato thought the same as you and I agree totally with you, although I am prone to believe that religion can contribute unwittingly to "wrong beliefs" as well.

With most friendly regards,

Ianus/Jan

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".