Lawless Avenues

An interesting week of Christian debate on the Zonkboard, and whether it intrigued you or scared you off it probably made you think. What will I take away from the week as a whole? Reaffirmed belief that the average person confuses God with religion. In much the same way we read that young black males now grow up in a society that presumes them guilty due to colour, honest Christians will largely pay the price for the sins of some others who have either sinned in the public eye, or are simply not really Christians.

GK Chesterton phrased it better than I could: You are free in our time to say that God does not exist; you are free to say that He exists and is evil; you are free to say that He would like to exist if He could. You may talk of God as a metaphor or mystification; you may water Him down with gallons of long words, or boil Him to the rags of metaphysics; and it is not merely that nobody punishes, but nobody protests. But if you speak of God as a fact, as a thing like a tiger, as a reason for changing one’s conduct, then the modern world will stop you somehow if it can. We are long past talking about whether an unbeliever should be punished for being irreverent. It is now thought irreverent to be a believer.

My major point of the week, and the one that could not be answered by either 'Agnostic' or House, was one of morality and decency. Although there is debate as to whether he said it or not there is a famous quote attributed to Dostoevsky: "If there is no God all things are permitted." The difficulty one would eventually have if one believes an inner decency exists in all of us is that society has proven not everybody believes in the same decency. What I find disgusting may be acceptable to you, or vice versa, which leaves us in one single place: Everything is acceptable when left to our own devices. This isn't morality at all, but moreso a justification theory that allows us to be guilt-free in our decision making. The truth is, without the Bible, man has never set limitations to what is moral or decent.

So how do you arrive at a moral law in the absence of God? With thanks to Ravi Zacharias I state: If the existence of God creates evil, as Agnostic argued, that would indicate there is also good. If there is good, there is moral law. If there is moral law, there must be a moral law giver. If there is no moral law giver, there is no evil. Feelings and inborn belief offer no moral law as the same inborn belief and feelings that prompt me to think murder is bad will justify it to others. The end result is, truly, an atheist or agnostic can have no real argument against God if their entire argument is based around the concept of God giving birth to evil. As Zacharias, again, noted: "The atheist is better at smelling rotten eggs than laying good ones."

I finish with one of my favourite quotes, courtesy of agnostic-turned-Christian journalist and author Malcolm Muggeridge, who I would believe to be an exceptional visionary of the 1970s and 1980s. I couldn't agree more.

It is difficult to resist the conclusion that 20th century-man has decided to abolish himself, tired of the struggle to be himself, he has created boredom out of his own affluence, impotence out of his own erotomania, vulnerability out of his own strength; he himself blows the trumpet that brings the walls of his own city crashing down until at last educating himself into imbecility, having drugged and polluted himself into stupefaction, he keels over a weary, battered, old brontosaurus and becomes extinct.

Flood

Curse my job, getting in the way of goofing off on the Zonk all day! Yet I've gone through the day's posts as well I could (some scrolled off) and responded below. I'd LOVE some responses!

Facts about the Bible for you to attempt disproving.

The Bible, in a section dated to have been written prior to 1,400BC, refers to a dinosaur, a brachiosaurus, and a kronosaurus. Not overly remarkable by itself until you realize science didn't discover and name these beasts until 1841, 1903, and 1901 respectively. How could the Bible be discussing these beasts so many years prior? "Because they were actually talking about an elephant and a crocodile!" Yes, a magical elephant that "lets hang his tail like a cedar" (ever seen an elephant tail?), and a crazy crocodile that lives in the ocean with skin so tough it can't be pierced by manmade tools!

1 Corinthians 15:41 - There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory. In an era prior to telescopes would stars not look the same to the naked eye? How could one know that all stars (and they knew there were a lot, Genesis compares stars in the sky to sand on the seashores) differ?

Job 28:25 - To establish a weight for the wind, And apportion the waters by measure. Hey, didn't science just establish wind had weight a few hundred years ago?

Leviticus 17:11 - ‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.’ In the year 1616 William Harvey "discovers" blood circulation is the key factor in life. A fact revealed right there in Leviticus well before 1616. Interesting.

Isaiah 40:22 - It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in. My favourite! Looks like us Bible folks knew the Earth wasn't flat well before you science dudes figured it out, contrary to your accusations on Monday. Circle in the original Hebrew in this example - "chuwg" - translates to "circuit" or "compass", indicating spherical, not flat. Incidentally Isaiah was written some 300 years prior to Aristotle's big discovery.

I'll let you sit on those before I go on further. ;)

Agnostic: Rick - Your first two rebuttals are insane. God is pure and perfect(perhaps you dispute this?). He would never advocate violence even in self defence. Even mortal such as Gandi and the Dalai Lama do not advocate violence given their peoples situation.
Interesting. Look up the Zulu War and tell me again how Ghandi would never advocate violence, even in self defence. Ghandi: "If the Government only realized what reserve force is being wasted, they would make use of it and give Indians the opportunity of a thorough training for actual warfare." Perhaps your imaginary mind god is akin to a lemming, prepared to sit idly by while his enemies slaughter him and his followers. I'm glad you think this is a plausible means of living, seeing as thieves are so well known for their honour and are certainly likely to put their weapons down when they see you do the same...

Agnostic: On the topic of world peace - Again your argument or defence is certifiable non-sense. All gods advocate world peace. Is your god not perfect and pure? Jesus decided world peace wasn't important enough until he (god) comes back?
Excellent you're able to speak for all gods, including those you claim don't exist. Perhaps you confuse desire with real life? Of course Jesus and myself would love world peace. But wanting world peace doesn't mean it's ever going to happen. You truly believe that sitting back and 'taking it like a man' will encourage our enemies to disarm and join hands with us? Great story, man, but it's never going to happen. Your "god" would love you to die for your peacely desire. My God knows too much to expect that from me.

Agnostic: Every other religion in the world has millions of people believing there stuff is the real deal...just like you. You take it a step further by believing in a "translated" version.
I'm learning a bit more about you. Now I discover that you only believe things that were discovered or written originally in English. All translations musn't be trusted! All of them! It's simply not possible for something to go from one language to another intact. Your logic, it's impregnable! I know people believe many things. Strange things. Like trusting their own flawed logic to be a guide to what's moral and what's not. Doesn't make them right.

Agnostic: Re. George Bush. I'm just making a point at your expense. You said it yourself...if you believe ye shall receive. I'm merely implying that George Bush believes. In his mind he's just as worthy as you are. We may think differently...but Christians take his money just as they do yours.
A joke at my expense. Excellent! Why try to establish a logical, intelligent argument when you can resort to entertainment! BTW, Adolph Hitler's name started with the same letter as yours, thus I'm fairly sure you'll soon begin committing genocide. Har har! Hilarity ensues! Fail.

Agnostic: Does god accept homosexuality?
Nope. I suppose with your knowledge of all gods this is flawed?

Agnostic: Rick - I would stay away from Vegas if I were you. Jesus didn't like gambling for money and your mere presence there continues to make Vegas the world's leader gambling city profitable. Pray and you will be forgiven this time.
True, he didn't. I only posted this quote to note that I didn't gamble while I was there, and to establish that more times than I've been able to count you've come up with rash assumptions based off flawed observation. Or is the fact I stood near a slot machine "supporting" evidence of my apparent gambling addiction?

Agnostic: The problem with mankind is they are vulnerable to believing in anything that makes them feel better about themselves. The best part is you get to pay for it and enrich others. I could start a religion tomorrow and their would be suckers lined up at the door begging to give me money.
No argument here. Humans are largely a selfish, self-righteous people whose main concern is their immediate satisfaction of want. They also fall for the most ridiculous things. Like on one hand believing man is born with a blank slate for a mind, but simultaneously believing they have the innate ability to know precisely what is right and wrong, moral and immoral. FYI there are people just like you with an internal moral compass that establishes a different morality. Can you both be right? Or does your inner god trump theirs?

son of God: I support a third world child and go on trips to the third world to help stop suffering. What do you do? I've gone to help poor, held children in my arms, single moms trying to raise the kids, put food on tables and built hospitals. I've prayed for the sick and watched God move but He can do nothing with men who have hard hearts
Agnostic: SOG - I'm on a Board of Directors for a charitable organisation. I walk the walk.
Still would love to hear more about this, Agnostic. That said, one of you two - based solely on the statements above - is walking the walk, and it's not the guy sitting in a comfortable chair running a board. You've put SOG down quite a bit, can you say you're doing the same as he has? How are you truly making a difference? How can you justify your charity's worth by stating it's audited when MCI Worldcom and Enron both had the same justification? Yet all religions and church leaders steal money and offer no good?

House: Unlike Rick I can prove evolution, whereas Rick can only say "I don't want to', or 'you prove it's not true'. You see? I win.
Do so! Then update the Wikipedia entry because, right now, they still think it's a theory.

Faith Enough

As promised, my in-depth rebuttal to the discussion between House, Agnostic, and 'son of God' today. Please attempt to appreciate the research and analysis, and of course, reply as you wish on the zonk or to rickjessupATgmailDOTcom.

When everyone's ready to start tearing away at another religion give me the heads-up, I can certainly help with that one. As Mark Lanegan and his Screaming Trees once noted: "Whose God is the one with the witness?"

Agnostic: Matthew had hate issues...Think not that I [Jesus] have come to send peace on earth: I come not to send peace, but a sword." (Matthew 10:34)
Taken out of context it sure sounds like Jesus is coming to destroy. But reading it within the surrounding verses it becomes obvious that this verse refers to to attacks that would be brought against Jesus' followers, and serves as a warning that a time to defend oneself and one's faith would come.

Agnostic: Luke was worse...gay and violent...and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." (Luke 22:36)
Not sure how Luke is gay and violent recanting a story, but if the issue is that Jesus instructed them to lift swords and prepare for battle I'd invite you to suggest how better to prepare for a pending battle with the Romans.

Agnostic: Would the real son of God say this..."All that ever came before me [Jesus] are thieves and robbers..." (John 10:08)????
In reference to the false prophets that preceded him. I assume you read it as "all that have stood before me", where you should be reading it more literally.

Agnostic: "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive." (Matthew 21:22). I tried asking for world peace and yet the prayer has not been answered. Rick - Help me! Save the poor Tibetans..Jesus loves all??
This one's easy - you don't believe. ;) Or did you miss that word there in the middle of the sentence? That said, the Bible would teach world peace isn't possible until God returns with judgement. You sure you want it?

Agnostic: "Verily I [Jesus] say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things [the end of the world] be fulfilled." (Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:32) . Man these guys were on some drugs (or was it the water to wine thing?). The generation did pass. Maybe Jesus meant in 5 million years the earth will blow up?
Again, you misread by reading only a line. Read the sentences surrounding it and it becomes obvious he doesn't speak of "this" generation as in the one he stands in, but the generation present when continuing and mounting persecution of Christians takes place, natural disasters occur with greater frequency, and other such signs. If this sounds like current day, well.. now's a good time to start getting literal. ;)

House: The poor Tibetans are more religious than any christian, yet they are scorned. makes no sense.
Seems a pretty blanket statement, but if I was to take your word for it, that still wouldn't be an argument to disagree with. Religion is death, and those who spend their time engaged in brainless ritual are doing nothing to further their cause with God.

Agnostic: Rick - Open your eyes. I'm proving to you that the Bible is self-contradicting and that your faith is drastically flawed. Keep giveing your 10%. The only god Christians figure heads beleive in is MONEY!!!!
So far you've proven nothing of the sort. Actually, you've proven one thing - that you've not read a book you claim to hate, nor do you even begin to understand it. Ending with a blanket statement similar to House's Tibetan one is another good example of a lack of knowledge or research. While I would grant you there have been bad Christian leaders who misused funds trusted to them, there have been many Christian leaders who've done more for this world and others than you could hope to.

Agnostic: Yes, the Bible is false. Read my previous extracts from the Bible. If god is pure he would not beleive in slavery and violence. These are in the Bible.
Interesting. Already touched on you having proved nothing. But I ask you - what makes you think God would not believe in violence? Do you have a basis for this system of thought? Does it trouble you that - and grant me for a moment that God exists - he would condone violence in some situations? Does it disturb you that your desire for some Utopian peaceful all-loving world is non-existent folly and completely unrealistic?

House: You make no sense because you make no sense. Faith is irrevalent.
So you would argue you also have no faith? No faith that your belief that God doesn't exist is true? Faith that our world was created by gaseous serendipity out of nothingness? That trees, animals, humans, and planets all arose out of a random explosion? Sounds like something that requires a lot more faith than belief in an omnipotent God to me.

Agnostic: G.B is a Christian. He too has a relationship with your same Jesus. Perverse I tell you.
The age-old " is a Christian, and he's bad, and thus you are bad." Grade 1 deductive logic. If you love chocolate, and Jeffrey Dahmer loves chocolate, does that make you a murderer? I'm loving these little discussions but it's moments like this that should make you question your own ability for logic, because claiming God doesn't exist because you think George Bush is bad is the single dumbest thing you've said in two weeks of zonk discussions.

House: It's funny that the bible said something that supports it's own beliefs... yeah that's a real stretch.
The Bible says many things, and the greatest minds over hundreds of years have done everything they could to find holes in it. Nobody's succeeded. If you can't believe the Bible I'm afraid to tell you that by any standards of research, analysis, or intelligence there isn't a single thing you can believe in. Every theory, law, or rule of our time couldn't stand up to what the Bible has and remain infallible.

House: neither. The writers that came after are the ones you need to ask about.
Aha.. the Bible can't be right because it was written after Jesus died. Let's ignore for a moment that the Bible couldn't be written until he did, because his death was fulfillment of his teachings. BUT! Let's do note that Paul, writer of 13 books, was an Apostle of Jesus and walked with him through his ministry (after, of course, he had finished murdering Christians...) How many biographies of historical figures you take for granted - I like to use Julius Caesar as an example here - were written inside that person's lifetime? Not many. By historical standards of research and accepted biography you can't discount Jesus and believe in anyone else, because I can't think of a single other historical figure from prior to - say - the year 1,000 that was reported on anywhere near their lifetime. So if you stick to this argument can you believe in anything or anyone that existed in history?

House: no him?
Interesting you chose to resort to pointing ouT SOG's grammatical error, but decided to ignore your own. I've taken the time to list them here purely as a lesson about, well.. glass houses.. it's in the Bible, you probably don't believe it:
ragarding, anotehr, agostic, geame, 'noit wrttin', murdedr, wroong, maka, irrevalent, beleive, becauise, foward, arguements, you'rs, dispise.

I've Been Away

Saturday was Jeff's (my brother-in-law) 40th birthday, a notorious milestone that warranted a good party. Kim planned a surprise dinner at Lee, the tapas restaurant located next door to superstar chef Susur Lee's flagship restaurant, Susur. I'd heard many things over the years from friends and family, and notably Kip and Shazia, about the quality of Susur's food so I was excited to try it. The waiter convinced our party of 10 that it was ideal to simply fill him in on some "must have" items, and relay any allergies, and allow him to bring us food until we were full. The format I love - many small plates of things to try, and it comes out when it's ready, not when you want it to be ready. I love restaurants with bad attitudes.. haha! I got to try:

Tomato beet salad with blue cheese, horseradish dressing, brown sugar cane, and basil; Chickpea sweet onion fritter with ginger mango, and minted yoghurt; Singaporean style slaw; Citrus crispy shrimp with grapefruit and yuzu sauce; Caramelized black cod with Cantonese preserves, and miso mustard; Four Satay (chicken, shrimp, pork, and beef) with mint chutney, peanut sauce, and kung pao sauce; Curried lamb chop with chili mint, fried banana and pineapple; Slow braised beef with sour cream, potato leek puree, and crispy shallots; and Duck confit roll spiced nuts, oven-dried pineapple, and goat cheese. Dessert was a unique rice pudding of some sort. The whole meal was good, but I sadly acknowledge that it ranks a bit below other "famous chef" restaurants I've attended such as Emeril ("New Orleans Fish House"), Bobby Flay ("Mesa Grill"), and Wolfgang Puck's ("Postrio").

We missed the evening's entertainment at Yuk-Yuk's, but from the sounds of it, we missed nothing. I love good comedy, but I'm told this wasn't good comedy. Oh well!

Something Fine

Perusing my 3,376 unread Gmail messages tonight I came across one of the many sales pitches, this one by the Shoe Company. I've used their web coupons before to pick up some shoes and was thus encouraged to open it. Click the image to the left there to see the awesome deal. You can imagine I'm saddened to have opened this after stores closed as my first instinct was to run to the car - in pyjamas, no less - to get some new shoes and earn my free snack size chocolate bar! While quantities last, of course! More details in store, so perhaps I shouldn't get so worked up until I've read the fine print.

So last night was my first VAR Camp, a new format of event I've launched for Ingram targeting their newer accounts and offering a more informal setup than normal. See, tech shows tend to be like this - vendors pay you money to stand in front of resellers for 30 to 60 minutes, droning on through PowerPoint decks about their many SKUs and why they're the best at it. Meanwhile, the audience (and I) die a little inside and long for the free lunch. Last year attendance began to suffer for it and I thus pitched this new format - more casual, laid-back, conversational, and having the attendees drive the content with questions and responses to points. I brought our old friend Alex in as an expert on corporate networking and he actually did his bit seated with the gang at the front of the room, and it worked great! People learned a lot, they enjoyed themselves, and didn't appear to be beaten by PowerPoint to the point of repulsion. Probably didn't hurt that my friends at Cameron's Brewing dropped off a little Auburn and Cream Ale to enjoy.

So the good news - Rob installed new blog software, complete with multiple authors, working comments, and spam blocking! The bad news? I've got to figure out a way to force the layout to conform before I can launch it, but it's not much longer before we'll get to sit through the posts of each other rather than just me. ;)

New podcast is up!