Forget “Ba Humbug” – Christopher Hitchens Proposes the “To Hell With All That” Amendment

[Note: this is a repost as I had to move this from where it was originally published long ago]

This comes to us from the “Well, I guess you gotta have goals” file:

Christopher Hitchens wrote:

“…My own wish is more ambitious: to write an anti-Christmas column that becomes fiercer every year while remaining, in essence, the same…”

Considering that he is an adherent of the anti-theist sect of atheism, this is not surprising.

Neither was I surprised that I agreed with his distaste of “identical tinny, maddening, repetitive ululations…cheap and mass-produced images and pictures, from snowmen to cribs to reindeer.” I too have had it up to here with virtual idolatry in the form of carven images and doxologies to trees, snow, and the rangifer tarandus tarundus who fly a calorically well endowed lacto-cookieholic around the globe. However, I would imagine that we agree for different reasons. For me, the tinsel obscures the reason for the season. Christopher Hitchens seems to think that people are celebrating holidays just to bother him personally, as if any public display of theism is meant to personally offend his atheist sensibilities.

Christopher Hitchens’ ambition included the following core:

“…The core objection, which I restate every December at about this time, is that for almost a whole month, the United States—a country constitutionally based on a separation between church and state—turns itself into the cultural and commercial equivalent of a one-party state.”

If I said it once, I said it one thousand times: some atheists think that they understand Thomas Jefferson better than Thomas Jefferson understood Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson, theist, deist or whateverist, attended Christian church services in the Capitol Building—something over which, today, the ACLU would connipt.

atheism-christopherhitchens-grinch-7222294

Do the math—that is all. True story: before I became a believer I too was angry every December and I too felt underrepresented. However, one day I grew up and realized that in a country where the overwhelming majority celebrates Christmas overrepresentation is to be expected and accepted (“grew up” is the term that I have long applied to myself in that situation). By the way: how many anti-Christmas atheists out there refuse to accept filthy lucre in the form of Christmas presents given them by their ignorant and superstitious friends, families and co-workers?

Christopher Hitchens likens Christmas in the USA to a totalitarian regime’s ubiquitous Dear Leader promulgations and displays. Yet, he gets the totalitarian upper hand by declaring, “can they not at least arrange to hold their ceremonies in private?” Yes, sir: how about in our basements, under a blanket with the lights out? Actually, many Christians around the world are forced to do just that.

Of interest may be that Christopher Hitchens, perhaps reading too much Richard Dawkins and not enough fact, referred to “monotheism, from Moses to Mormonism.” As it has been oft pointed out, although perhaps not oft enough, certain atheist expend much time and energy criticizing caricatures rather than criticizing that which proceeds forth from the horse’s mouth. Granted, this may be too much irrelevant information for an anti-theist but Mormonism is not monotheistic—it is henotheistic (Richard Dawkins committed the same misrepresentation).

Overall, I agree that rampant commercialization can be too much to bare but do grin and bare it or do as many of us do and change things within your personal abode. But to utilize that as a soap box for expressing prejudice is just about as old, tired, unwelcomed, been there-done that, and played out as cheesy-made in China-Christmas-décor.

See my Book review: J. P. Holding “Christmas is Pagan and Other Myths

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page.

Twitter: #ChristopherHitchens, #Atheism, #Christmas
Facebook: #ChristopherHitchens, #Atheism, #Christmas

Collin de Plancy

creation science

Islam’s magickian fallen angels Harut and Marut

The following tale of Islam’s fallen angels Harut and Marut is related in Allamah Al-Majlisi’s work Hayat al-Qulub (Life of the Hearts), Vol. 1, Stories of the Prophets (dating to the late 17th century AD).

The Quran’s surah 2:102 states:

Allah says: And they followed what the Shaitans [Satans] chanted of sorcery in the reign of Sulayman [King Solomon], and Sulayman was not an unbeliever, but the Shaitans disbelieved, they taught men sorcery and that was sent down to the two angels at Babel, Harut and Marut…men learned from these two, magic by which they might cause a separation between a man and his wife; and they cannot hurt with it any one except with Allah’s permission, and they learned what harmed them and did not profit them, and certainly they know that he who bought it should have no share of good in the hereafter and evil was the price for which they sold their souls, had they but known this.

It is related that ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim and Ayyashi have the following in their tafsirs (exegesis) narrated from Imam Muhammad al-Baqir: some discussions ensued between Allah and the angels because “the residents of the heavens began to find fault in the sins being committed by the dwellers of the earth” conversely Angels “have been created sinless…ever obedient” without “the power of sinning.”

Allah told the angels, “Select two beings from your community so that I may send them to the earth and give them the nature of human beings and put in them desire for eating, drinking, etc. and introduce yearnings in their minds like the children of Adam.” They were to be a test of their obedience and worship and are told to not commit the sin of shirk (associating anyone with Allah which would violate his perfect unity), not to commit adultery and to not drink wine.

Harut and Marut were selected and were sent to Earth “in the form of two handsome men” who touched down in Babylon. First, they see a very beautiful woman and discussed what to do about this temptation; deciding to walk away. However, they quickly stopped and “asked her to allow them to have sex with her.” Her reply was “My religion does not allow me to lie with you until you adopt my religion.”

763f70e143b2063f7cd7528297c20070-9212856

As it turns out, she worshipped “Allah” and yet, this Allah was an idol, “The angels looked at one another and exclaimed: Now two sins (instead of one) confront us viz., one of Polytheism and another adultery”: adultery actually implies that she was married and this “adultery” is later referred to by the angels as “illegal sex.” On top of it a third temptation was introduced as she tells them that part of the worship of the Allah idol is that they must drink wine.

Harut and Marut partake of the hooch and worship the idol but just as “they readied to lie with that woman” a beggar makes a sudden appearance. Cutting to the chase, the beggar concludes, “Surely you are evil fellows” and goes away. The woman tells Harut and Marut that the beggar is going off to “disgrace both you and me” and that they should murder him, “and then come back to me and do whatever you wish.”

Harut and Marut commit murder but the woman was gone and “suddenly their clothes had fallen down and they had become naked” at which time they felt shame and sorrow.

Allah tells them that he had only sent them to Earth for a while but even during this very limited amount of time they sinned on various levels on top of which “You did not feel ashamed before Me.” Yet, moreover, Allah relates that, after all, it was they “who were more than all others against the dwellers of the earth due to their disobedience and wanted that they should be punished.”

Allah also offers a bit of Islamic angelology by noting that he created angels with “such a nature which did not entertain any wish to commit sin and it was I who had protected you from disobeying Me.” Harut and Marut sinned because Allah lifted his protection and thus momentarily rearranged their very nature.

Allah allows them to pick their poison or rather, their punishment, “either a worldly punishment or the other worldly chastisement.” One of the figures that since they are on Earth anyhow, they might as well live it up, keep sinning “enjoy our desires fully” and then get punished later in “the Hereafter.” However, the other one figures that while “worldly punishment is limited” and will thus, “end some day” the “Hereafter is everlasting” and will be “much harsher which” he notes, “we do not prefer.”

Thus, they accept temporary worldly punishment and yet, continued to teach magick to humans “for a long time” to the point that they “perfected that teaching” and ended up being “hung upside down in the air and will remain like that until the Day of the Resurrection Day.” So, somewhere up in the sky you can see Harut and Marut hanging around. Note that since they teach magick they are often referred to as magickians (or, magicians as most people term it).

islamic2bfallen2bangel2bmagickians2bharut2band2bmarut2b-8025418

As per a report by Ayyashi, different version of the story was related by Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Ali when he was asked “about the red star that is Venus.” He relates the same basic story with the inclusion that another thing that angels were forbidden to do was to “never kill anybody wrongfully.”

Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Ali then stated that “This star (Venus) was” once “a very beautiful woman” who “had gone to one of those two angels for obtaining some kind of decision.” The angel fell in love with her and “told her that truth is with you…but only when you give me control over you. The woman promised to do so and fixed a time for them to meet. Then she went to the other angel. The same thing happened with him too and she gave him also the same promise and fixed a time for them to meet.”

When Harut and Marut arrive at the place and time determined by the woman they realize that she had set them up and bowed their heads in shame. But then, on second thought, they realize that since they arrived at the appointment they might as well keep it and “Both asked the woman to allow them to have sex with her.”
The story then picks up as per above with the angels engaging in idolatry, drinking, murdering the beggar, etc. but adds that “she will not be pleased with them until they teach her the way of going up to the heaven.”

Another added element is that Harut and Marut “used to decide people’s disputes during the day and go up to the heaven at night.” Well, they did not teach the woman how to “go to the heaven” so she refused to engage them in carnal concupiscence which, of course, leads the angels to figure that making whoopie was worth showing her how to go to the heavens.
So, they show her the way but she refuses to fulfill her end of the bargain. Now, “In order to experiment she uttered the words taught by them and at once reached the heavens while the two stood wide-eyed. Allah turned the woman into the form of a star” so that explains how a brand new planet was inserted into the solar system with, apparently, no adverse reactions.

Now, Imam Al-Hasan al-‘Askari noted that Imam as-Sadiq noted that after the time of Nuh magick/sorcery became widespread and was employed toward deception. Allah sent two angels, in human form, to Muhammad so through him, people will have magick explained to them and be told by Allah forbade it, “So those two angels were teaching the people magic and the ways of making it ineffective.” But, as it turns out, this was all a big “test and trial for the slaves of Allah so that they may obey Allah and nullify magic by what they learn, but not indulge in magic themselves and not become ‘Kafir’ (unbelievers) by harming others through magic.” So, Allah’s angels are sent to show people how to use the very same magick that they are forbidden to use.

A further aspect of the test and trial is to get the people to believe that the magick teaching angels are actually equal to Allah, committing the condemning to hell sin of shirk, by having the angels murder and also bring people back to life people via magick which, it is noted is kufr which refers to blasphemy and unbelief. For some reason, it is specified that via the very magick taught to the by Allah’s angels “men learned” how “they might cause a separation between a man and his wife”—Honey, you know that I, like, love you and, like, only committed adultery because I was literally bewitched by magick taught to witches by Allah’s angels and stuff.”

Next, in a massive conspiracy theory style claim we are told that “the desirers of magic learned the magic of Satan which they had buried beneath the throne of Solomon (Sulayman) and attributed its magic to Sulayman.” And actually, benefits were obtained via the usage of charms / enchantments that were actually gotten from Harut and Marut.
Actually, it was a conspiracy theory as we are specifically told that via the charms / enchantments, “they started making conspiracies and mischief…separations between people” and “backbiting.” Of course, not surprisingly, people used chants and magick to harm others and “were learning only that which was destroying their religion…they were getting out of the religion of Allah due to that.” Due to this Allah approved teaching of magick by his angels, “evil was the price for which they sold their souls….they gave up their share from Paradise because they believed that there was no Allah, nor Hereafter, nor any life after death” so that backfired like a car with a banana in the tailpipe.

There were narrators of traditions (those who relate them) who told Imam Al-Hasan al-‘Askari of another variety of the story whereby Harut and Marut were actually sent to Earth along with other angels with the two “kept…chastised in Babylon.” So, apparently, we have a more general location from where to view them hanging in midair.

Based on a few quotations from the Qur’an such as surah 66:6, “They do not disobey Allah in what he commands them, and do as they are commanded” the conclusion is reached that it is concluded that “this is an evidence to prove that angels have never been sent on earth as leaders and rulers of men.” This seems to be an argument for Muhammad’s prophet status as it is note that “Rather Allah has sent His (human) Prophets.”

It is then noted that “on this ground of argument, Satan should also not have been an angel…He was also not an angel but was a jinn (genie)…he was from the jinn and at another place He says, And the jinn we created before from intensely hot fire. (15:27).” Interestingly, biblically Satan is not an angel but a Cherub. In any case, we are also told, “Angels are the Messenger of Allah. Just as the Messengers can never disbelieve, the angels too cannot” and yet, a previous statement was that Allah made an exception which allowed the angels disbelieve for tests and trials.

One last option is related via a footnote to the text above which notes that while Sunnis have this basic tale within their traditions, some Sunni and Shi’ah scholars have, as noted above, denied the validity of the very concept of angels acting out in such a manner. To, sort of, soften the blow some have asserted that Harut and Marut were actually sent to teach the difference between magick and miracle and that they did not commit sin.

Other variants are that they remained on earth for a long time and then went back to the heavens and that they were not actually angles but Babylonian residents who were simply called angles due to being virtuous.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter
page
, on my Facebook page, on my Google+ page and/or the “Share/Save” button below the tags.

VIDEO: Dr. Drew show: psycho tranny Zoey Tur threatens Ben Shapiro with violence

computers

Atheists: “No God, No Reason, Just Whining”

Superstar atheists are motivated by anger —
and boohoo victimhood

On rare occasion True Freethinker reproduces articles written by others in the vast sea of the WWW.

Following is the entirety of the article, “Atheists: No God, no reason, just whining. Superstar atheists are motivated by anger — and boohoo victimhood” written by Charlotte Allen and published in the Los Angeles Times, Opinion, May 17, 2009.

Following is the Los Angeles Times article:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I can’t stand atheists — but it’s not because they don’t believe in God. It’s because they’re crashing bores.

Other people, most recently the British cultural critic Terry Eagleton in his new book, “Faith, Reason, and Revolution,” take to task such superstar nonbelievers as Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins (“The God Delusion”) and political journalist Christopher Hitchens (“God Is Not Great”) for indulging in a philosophically primitive opposition of faith and reason that assumes that if science can’t prove something, it doesn’t exist.

My problem with atheists is their tiresome — and way old — insistence that they are being oppressed and their fixation with the fine points of Christianity. What — did their Sunday school teachers flog their behinds with a Bible when they were kids?

Read Dawkins, or Hitchens, or the works of fellow atheists Sam Harris (“The End of Faith”) and Daniel Dennett (“Breaking the Spell”), or visit an atheist website or blog (there are zillions of them, bearing such titles as “God Is for Suckers,” “God Is Imaginary” and “God Is Pretend”), and your eyes will glaze over as you peruse — again and again — the obsessively tiny range of topics around which atheists circle like water in a drain.

First off, there’s atheist victimology: Boohoo, everybody hates us ‘cuz we don’t believe in God. Although a recent Pew Forum survey on religion found that 16% of Americans describe themselves as religiously unaffiliated, only 1.6% call themselves atheists, with another 2.4% weighing in as agnostics (a group despised as wishy-washy by atheists). You or I might attribute the low numbers to atheists’ failure to win converts to their unbelief, but atheists say the problem is persecution so relentless that it drives tens of millions of God-deniers into a closet of feigned faith, like gays before Stonewall.

In his online “Atheist Manifesto,” Harris writes that “no person, whatever his or her qualifications, can seek public office in the United States without pretending to be certain that … God exists.” The evidence? Antique clauses in the constitutions of six — count ’em — states barring atheists from office.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled such provisions unenforceable nearly 50 years ago, but that doesn’t stop atheists from bewailing that they have to hide their Godlessness from friends, relatives, employers and potential dates. One representative of the pity-poor-me school of atheism, Kathleen Goodman, writing in January for the Chronicle of Higher Education, went so far as to promote affirmative action for atheists on college campuses: specially designated, college-subsidized “safe spaces” for them to express their views.

Maybe atheists wouldn’t be so unpopular if they stopped beating the drum until the hide splits on their second-favorite topic: How stupid people are who believe in God. This is a favorite Dawkins theme. In a recent interview with Trina Hoaks, Dawkins described religious believers as follows: “They feel uneducated, which they are; often rather stupid, which they are; inferior, which they are; and paranoid about pointy-headed intellectuals from the East Coast looking down on them, which, with some justification, they do.” Thanks, Richard!

Dennett likes to call atheists “the Brights,” in contrast to everybody else, who obviously aren’t so bright. In a 2006 essay describing his brush with death after a heart operation, Dennett wrote these thoughts about his religious friends who told him they were praying for his recovery: “Thanks, I appreciate it, but did you also sacrifice a goat?” With friends like Daniel Dennett, you don’t need enemies.

Then there’s P.Z. Myers, biology professor at the University of Minnesota’s Morris campus, whose blog, Pharyngula, is supposedly about Myers’ field, evolutionary biology, but is actually about his fanatical propensity to label religious believers as “idiots,” “morons,” “loony” or “imbecilic” in nearly every post. The university deactivated its link to Myers’ blog in July after he posted a photo of a consecrated host from a Mass that he had pierced with a rusty nail and thrown into the garbage (“I hope Jesus’ tetanus shots are up to date”) in an effort to prove that Catholicism is bunk — or something.

Myers’ blog exemplifies atheists’ frenzied fascination with Christianity and the Bible. Atheist website after atheist website insists that Jesus either didn’t exist or “was a jerk” (in the words of one blogger) because he didn’t eliminate smallpox or world poverty. At the American Atheists website, a writer complains that God “set up” Adam and Eve, knowing in advance that they would eat the forbidden fruit. A blogger on A Is for Atheist has been going through the Bible chapter by chapter and verse by verse in order to prove its “insanity” (he or she had gotten up to the Book of Joshua when I last looked).

Another topic that atheists beat like the hammer on the anvil in the old Anacin commercials is Darwinism versus creationism. Maybe Darwin-o-mania stems from the fact that this year marks the bicentennial of Charles Darwin’s birth in 1809, but haven’t atheists heard that many religious people (including the late Pope John Paul II) don’t have a problem with evolution but, rather, regard it as God’s way of letting his living creation unfold? Furthermore, even if human nature as we know it is a matter of lucky adaptations, how exactly does that disprove the existence of God?

And then there’s the question of why atheists are so intent on trying to prove that God not only doesn’t exist but is evil to boot. Dawkins, writing in “The God Delusion,” accuses the deity of being a “petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak” as well as a “misogynistic, homophobic, racist … bully.” If there is no God — and you’d be way beyond stupid to think differently — why does it matter whether he’s good or evil?

The problem with atheists — and what makes them such excruciating snoozes — is that few of them are interested in making serious metaphysical or epistemological arguments against God’s existence, or in taking on the serious arguments that theologians have made attempting to reconcile, say, God’s omniscience with free will or God’s goodness with human suffering. Atheists seem to assume that the whole idea of God is a ridiculous absurdity, the “flying spaghetti monster” of atheists’ typically lame jokes. They think that lobbing a few Gaza-style rockets accusing God of failing to create a world more to their liking (“If there’s a God, why aren’t I rich?” “If there’s a God, why didn’t he give me two heads so I could sleep with one head while I get some work done with the other?”) will suffice to knock down the entire edifice of belief.

What primarily seems to motivate atheists isn’t rationalism but anger — anger that the world isn’t perfect, that someone forced them to go to church as children, that the Bible contains apparent contradictions, that human beings can be hypocrites and commit crimes in the name of faith. The vitriol is extraordinary. Hitchens thinks that “religion spoils everything.” Dawkins contends that raising one’s offspring in one’s religion constitutes child abuse. Harris argues that it “may be ethical to kill people” on the basis of their beliefs. The perennial atheist litigant Michael Newdow sued (unsuccessfully) to bar President Obama from uttering the words “so help me God” when he took his oath of office.

What atheists don’t seem to realize is that even for believers, faith is never easy in this world of injustice, pain and delusion. Even for believers, God exists just beyond the scrim of the senses. So, atheists, how about losing the tired sarcasm and boring self-pity and engaging believers seriously?

Video and article: Apple CEO Tim Cook joins the homosexual movement

Apple CEO Tim Cook’s recent announcement that he chooses a homosexual lifestyle brings up again, the issue of homosexuality as a worldview. There is a difference between, on the one hand, the homosexual next door who just wants to love someone of the same gender and have everyone mind their business and personages such as Tim Cook who feel the need to announce to the entire planet that he is gay and makes it a part of his tech business…and yours.

No, he did not merely come out as that would best be done to friends and family. Rather, he has joined the homosexual movement and expressed that homosexuality forms the very core of his being as he expressed it in philosophical and even theological terms.

Frankly, it is most likely that even those with problems with homosexuality are not so concerned about the homosexual next door as they are with those who join the activist movement; those who are not content to come out of the closet but also want to kick in your door in order to metaphorically enter your home via every media format there is. This is one of the special privileges of homosexuals, by the way; gross overrepresentation in the media and representations that are always positive.

In his article, “Tim Cook Speaks Up,” Business Week, October 30, 2014 AD, Tim Cook wrote that even though “Throughout my professional life, I’ve tried to maintain a basic level of privacy” he has now decided to make the most intimate details of his private life the business of the entire planet.

He appeals, for inspiration, to the Baptist minister Dr. Martin Luther King to the effect of King’s statement “Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?’” This sets the springboard for Cook becoming an activist within the homosexual movement. As CNN Money puts it in referring to, “Tim Cook’s push for LGBT equality.” He decided to give up on this, most telling, part of his privacy because it “has been holding me back from doing something more important” which is to become an activist.

He notes that “Plenty of colleagues at Apple know I’m gay” even before his worldwide announcement and yet, “it doesn’t seem to make a difference in the way they treat me.” Indeed, that is because at that time, he was the homosexual next door. But how will people treat him now? Well, is there condemnation from the media? Of course, not; they applaud his every word. Is the public at large—even those nasty white Anglo-Saxon conservative Christian republicans—calling for him to be fired or for him to resign or for the boycotting of Apple? No, of course, not! That is why, despite what you hear from the biased media; the majority is not that intolerant.

We have all heard of businesses who are suffering, at the hands of the media and legal systems, for not performing services for same sex marriage. But just what happened when a New Mexican homosexual hair dresser refused service to Governor Susana Martinez due to her political views opposing same sex marriage? Nothing, nothing at all.

Tim Cook elucidates thusly, “So let me be clear: I’m proud to be gay, and I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me.” What someone has to ask him is who is this unnamed god whom he preaches? Is he now the high priest of a new religion? Thus far, we only know two things about this god; it approves of pride and gifts people with homosexuality—a form of predestination and lack of free will choice.
Of one thing we can be certain it is not Allah / Islam / the Qur’an’s god since Allah condemns homosexuality, it is not the god of Baha’ism’s Baha’u’llah as that god also condemns homosexuality (learn more about Islam here and Baha’ism here).

This is really the focus on the point of referring to him as having joined the homosexual movement. Homosexuals such as Tim Cook take an attraction to persons of the same gender and turn it into a worldview complete with philosophy and theology. They take pride in being gay and it forms the very core of their being, their identity and becomes their life’s purpose.
Do not underestimate the incredible power of the homosexual movement for it not only gets homosexuals to form a worldview around same sex attraction but even gets non-homosexuals to join the movement. Thereafter any and all important issues are interpreted and decided upon via the lenses of the homosexual worldview; what is tolerant and intolerant, what is right and wrong, what political party should I support, which theology and holy book is true, etc., etc., etc. all of these questions, and more, are decided upon solely based on whether or not the views, politics and theology approves of homosexuality or not.

Tim Cook also appeals to the worst possible justification for homosexuality’s acceptance and that is…homosexuality’s acceptance. He wrote, “The world has changed so much since I was a kid. America is moving toward marriage equality…made our culture more tolerant.” But when he appeals to the cultural trends de jour he is placing himself at the whims of the cultural zeitgeist. The issue is that if that zeitgeist shifts over towards intolerance to homosexuality then he would have to say, “Oh well, here we go again!”

He also states “I don’t consider myself an activist” but whether or not he considers himself to be an activist is irrelevant as he just became one of the world’s most influential activists.

He ends by stating, “We pave the sunlit path toward justice together, brick by brick. This is my brick” much like the bricks made to build the Tower of Babel.

Enterthe5t4rz

Homosexuals