TART Remarks

New website!

2007-04-26T14:06:00.000-07:00

Vol 2 No 14 – April 23, 2007

2007-04-24T06:50:00.001-07:00

Download
Theodicy

Klop liefs by wetenskap aan vir antwoorde
The Virginia Tech massacre drew attention yet again to that obscure branch of theology: theodicy – the futile attempt at defending God's goodness and justice in the face of the existence of evil. I present here an article, originally prepared for By, weekly insert to Die Burger, on the 2004 tsunami… it was never published.

Vol 2 No 13 – April 16, 2007

2007-04-24T06:41:00.000-07:00

Download
Kurt Vonnegut (1922-2007)

Guide me, o they great Jehovah
Professor Russel Botman was inaugurated last week as Rector of the University of Stellenbosch, South Africa. Botman is a theologian.
Should a theologian lead a university in the 21st century?
The one thing a university should represent above all else, is the fact that humans have only each other against the terror of existence. Any deviation from this code represents disaster.
Someone who sees fairies in the garden when none are evident should not lead young minds into the future.

Vol 2 No 12 – April 2, 2007

2007-04-24T06:39:00.000-07:00

Download
Menswaardigheid in die NG Kerk

Menswaardigheid in die NG Kerk
Kan dit wees dat die NGK se doodsteek juis sy miskenning van menswaardigheid is? Is daar ‘n rol vir ‘n “kerk” wat menswaardigheid misken?

Vol 2 No 11 – March 26, 2007

2007-04-24T06:35:00.000-07:00

Download
Disgust

Disgust
I am disgusted by God. And even more by the poor sods who tolerate God’s churlish tantrums for attention and praise.
The little old lady who shared my car briefly…
I am not disgusted by her. I have vast empathy with her. I am disgusted by the pathetic ideology that delivered her, with sore joints and feet, after a brief ride in my car, at the local Checkers, “where there aren’t so many blacks, you know… not that I’m a racist or anything”. Browbeaten by the abnormality of someone who regards not God, helping her for kindness’ sake.

Vol 2 No 10 - March 19, 2007

2007-03-25T08:23:00.000-07:00

Download
JC… PC through the ages!

A Picture Essay: Hail the arts… how JC remained PC over the ages
"At the heart of the Christian religion stands a Semite - Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus was not a Christian. He never heard of Christianity, and was never involved with Christianity, which formed slowly and falteringly over the four centuries after his death. Contemporary English-speaking Christians are not always aware that they talk of Jesus by extruding him from his original historical, ecological, political and religious context. Invariably, they refer to him with two anglicized Greek names, 'Jesus' and 'Christ', and thereby obscure the reality that he was a Galilean worshipper of Yahweh, the God of the Israelites. His original name was Yeshua, an Aramaic word meaning 'Yahweh saves'. Jesus was a Yahweh-proclaimer, not a Church-creator.”

Vol2 No9 - March 12, 2007

2007-03-12T08:39:00.000-07:00

Download

Change!

“Everywhere we look today, powerful new forces are reshaping the world that we thought we knew…”

Thus reflects International Marketing Strategist Rowan Gibson.[1]

Exclaims the renowned management infotainer Tom Peters: “Revolution? The word is not too strong. And it’s not the same thing as change. Change? Change! Yes, we’ve almost all, finally, embraced the notion that ‘change is the only constant.’ Well, sorry. Forget change! The word is feeble. Keep saying ‘revolution.’ If it doesn’t roll easily off your tongue, then I suggest you have a perception problem – and, more to the point, a business or a career problem. What we do. What we make. How we work. Each is the subject of nothing less than revolution.”[2]

Management guru Peter Drucker may have gone even further: “Every organisation has to prepare for the abandonment of everything it does.” Note “abandon”, not “change”!

In his essay, Rethinking Business, Gibson is fearless: “The organisation of the 21^st century cannot be changed through continuous improvement. It can only be created through radical change.”[3]

Distinguished Business Administration academic and presidential and governmental advisor Warren Bennis speaks regularly of successful leaders being “leaders of leaders” – individuals creating opportunity out of discontinuity. Professor of Strategic and International Management Gary Hamel speaks of a “hierarchy of imagination” – people who have “the future in their bones” according to Bennis.

Tomorrow, in deference to Gibson, will always be a moving target. And that means that, when we’ve finished rethinking the future, we have to start all over again.

The virus that is religion feeds on tradition. What is called for is a paradigm shift, not re-interpretation!

Dead Sea Scrolls expert James Charlesworth reflects: “Dogmatics has been important in Christian history to clarify and defend the faith. That should be acknowledged, but it does not mean that what was defined as Christian faith for St. Augustine must be operative and constricting for us today. I am convinced that Augustine would have been opposed to such a move. It is now clear that we have insights into Jesus’ time which Augustine did not know about, and that this new information, as well as the cultural climate at the end of the second millennium, necessitates finding new ways of expressing our understanding of Christian faith. Augustine struggled to shape faith – rather, the art of believing – for his time. Do we not have the same responsibility?”

“Fixing” won’t do. What is required of 21^st century religious leaders is a new start… perhaps the analogy of the risen Christ may be the object of reflection for church leaders and theologians and Bible scientists with a view to kill in order to re-create?

I am inspired by the history of the electronics giant Nokia – the mobile telephone manufacturer, among others:

From 1865-1917 Nokia was in the paper and power business. From 1918-1966 it was a cable company. In 1967 it entered the rubber industry – until 1991… and in 1992 it became the electronics, IT and telecommunications leader it is today.

Change? No way! Revolution!

“Forget change! The word is feeble. Keep saying ‘revolution.’ If it doesn’t roll easily off your tongue, then I suggest you have a perception problem – and, more to the point, a business or a career problem. What we do. What we make. How we work. Each is the subject of nothing less than revolution.”

Can theology rise to the challenge?

Or… do we not hear the Bible such at this time?

[1] Rowan Gibson, ed. 1997. Rethinking the Future. Nicholas Brearley Publishing. London.

[2] Tom Peters. 1994. The Tom Peters Seminar. Crazy times call for crazy organizations. Random House. New York. 8.

[3] 1997. 1-14.

Vol 2 No 8 - March 5, 2007

2007-03-04T09:39:00.000-08:00

I’m done talking.[1] I’ll be speaking[2] from now on.[3]

Download

I have often said – in fact, it is the marrow of my argument – that the rational achieves little, if anything, by engaging believers, but to afford a undeserving credibility to the God conjecture… and the God conjecture is not a legitimate alternative weltanschauung worthy of consideration and respect! It simply is not.

Without reconciliation with science religion is doomed to irrelevance by its pre-scientific origin. The politic pope John Paul II recognized this conundrum and indeed did reconcile religion and evolution in 1996 – quoting an “ontological discontinuity”.

Whenever a rational person engages a believer on equal terms, John Paul’s futile endeavour, as is clearly indicated by the efforts of Benedict XVI to undo the “merger”, is afforded credibility it does not deserve.

I’m done talking to godiots.

Godiots?

Yes. Godiots: Individuals convinced beyond a velleity of doubt that a supernatural deity controls human destiny, a conviction based on nothing more compelling than pre-historic oracles recorded in pre-scientific times.

I’ll be speaking from now on. Godiots may either listen, or they may choose not to listen. But I’m done talking!

I’m done talking to godiots. I’m done giving credibility to their invalid weltanschauung by engaging them on equal terms.

I’m done talking to godiots. I’ll be speaking from now on.

Arrogant?

Probably!

But not as arrogant as the believer who gazes at the night sky and declares her complete understanding of the origin of life and the universe and woman’s destiny within this maatschappy – in the face of progressive scientific explanation, in the face of the “deep and sacred”[4] pursuit of the voussoir of evolving insight…

Science does not have all the answers. But this fact does not indicate that religion has any answers at all. In deference to Darwin, it has often and confidently been asserted that man’s origin, for instance, can never be known… but ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. It is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.[5]

Human perspective was irrevocably translated when Darwin made it possible for intelligent people not to be religious. This dynamic was matured by Richard Dawkins who made it impossible for intelligent people to be religious.

Once chemistry was established as a discipline, alchemy was simply no longer an “alternative”. Once astronomy was established as a discipline, astrology was simply no longer an “alternative”. Once neurology was established as a discipline, phrenology was simply no longer an “alternative”. After Copernicus certainly a flat earth ceased to be an “alternative”.

Once Darwinism finally explained the redundancy of God, God was no longer an alternative. Darwinism represents, with deference to Sam Harris, a wholesale exchange of ignorance, at its most rococo, for genuine knowledge.

Says Richard Dawkins, “There has probably never been a more devastating rout of popular belief by clever reasoning than Charles Darwin’s destruction of the argument from design.”[6]

Darwin provided explanations of our existence that completely rejected supernatural agents.[7] Verily, verily, I say unto thee, whomsoever considers “God” as an “alternative” perspective on life and the universe, shall be cast into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.[8]

Shall we pussy-foot around the lunacy that is “belief in God”?

I, for one, will not!

When University of Texas, Austin, cosmologist Steven Weinberg recently admitted (to enthusiastic applause, even from his scientist audience) that he would miss religion once it was gone, Richard Dawkins hastened to indicate that Weinberg was inexplicably conciliatory and "scraping the barrel" to have something nice to say about religion. "I am utterly fed up with the respect we have been brainwashed into bestowing upon religion," Dawkins told the assembly. [9]

I completely concur.

What can possibly be discussed with millions upon millions of believers who still regard homosexuality a “sin” – a sin! – in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence that homosexuality is a biological given?

What can possibly be discussed with believers who content that spirits – both good and bad spirits – are all around us an influence people, even “possess” individuals?

What ludicrous folly is religion!

I, for one, do no longer talk to people who accept the God conjecture as a legitimate alternative weltanschauung worthy of consideration and respect. I’ll speak. People may either listen, or they may choose not to listen. But I’m done talking!

[1] An exchange of ideas via conversation.

[2] The utterance of intelligible speech; delivering an address.

[3] View Richard Dawkins speaking to the challenge of undermining the power of influence through harsh words.

[4] With deference to Michael Shermer: “What can be more soul shaking than peering through a 100-inch telescope at a distant galaxy, holding a 100-million-year-old fossil or a 500,000-year-old stone tool in one’s hand, standing before the immense chasm of space and time that is the Grand Canyon, or listening to a scientists who gazed upon the face of the universe’s creation and did not blink? That is deep and sacred science.”

[5] Charles Darwin. 1871. The Descent of Man (2^nd edition)

[6] Dawkins. Richard. 2006. The God Delusion. London. Bantam Press. 79.

[7] Suskind, Leonard. 2006. The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design. New York. Little, Brown. 17 (Quoted in Dawkins. 2006:118).

[8] Based broadly, quite incredulously broadly, I should say, on Mathew 25.xxx

[9] Michael Brooks and Helen Phillips. 18 November 2006. Beyond belief: In place of God. New Scientist. 2578: 8-11. Reporting on a symposium entitled "Beyond belief: Science, religion, reason and survival" ( in La Jolla, early November 2006) hosted by the Science Network, a science-promoting coalition of scientists and media professionals convening at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies.

Vol 2 No 7 - February 26, 2007

2007-02-25T10:40:00.000-08:00

Acetifying an innocuous idea

Download

Me nearest and dearest often describe me as being “music intolerant”.

Although I am certainly intolerant of people advocating a flat earth, phrenology, palmistry, astrology, magic and a sweet potato cure for AIDS, I am concerned about this ariose accusal… was it not I, on my way to restructure my student loan, in the early 80’s, who abandoned my pecuniary purpose of the day to see Pink Floyd’s The Wall? And see it again – four times that first day, and again, four times the next?

Music intolerant. Pur-leaze.

O, and I am also, of course, certainly, intolerant of people advocating the God-hypothesis as a legitimate alternative weltanschauung worthy of consideration and respect.

I warm too, to a “nice tune”, and to indicate my ability to rise above mere platitude on the topic of music, I hasten to add that I am able to prize philharmonic prestidigitation.

However… given half a chance I’ll slip Steve Hofmeyr’s Pampoen into the car stereo (I seldom, if ever, simply listen to music without also engaging in some other activity, such as driving) and I have been known to favour – to the absolute horror of my teenage daughters – a show (poorly attended, truth be known) by Lance James[1] at last year’s KKNK, to one my family enjoyed, at exponentially higher cost, by some character named after The Christ and a small lizard.[2]

But when my daughters introduced me to Bok van Blerk’s De la Rey late last year, I was hooked. Right away.

I have little affinity for Elizabeth’s islet and her people. To the best of my knowledge, such as I have, courtesy of a Broederbond high school history teacher with a career curtailed by his abject inability to wield ‘Liza’s lingo, the Kakies slipped glass slivers into the porridge in concentration camps they used to defeat the Boers in what ranks, to this day, as one of the most unfair wars on the regrettable report card of humankind.

But I did not, and I do not, need a rousing song to muster my ill feeling for the British – their regular trouncings on the rugby fields and cricket pitches of the world humours me sufficiently.

No, what grabbed me about De la Rey, was the catchy tune and the metre, the cadence, of “De la Rey De la Rey, sal jy die Boere kom lei, De la Rey De la Rey…”

It could, for all I care, jab at the idiocy of the KKK, or whatever… I like the tune and I love the round sound of “De la Rey De la Rey – lei – De la Rey De la Rey.”

I am inevitably reminded of one of my all-time favourite Monty Python skits – The Cheese Shop:

Customer: … I thought to myself, "a little fermented curd will do the trick", so, I curtailed my Walpoling activities, sallied forth, and infiltrated your place of purveyance to negotiate the vending of some cheesy comestibles!

Owner: Come again?

Customer: I want to buy some cheese.

Owner: Oh, I thought you were complaining about the bazouki player!

Customer: Oh, heaven forbid: I am one who delights in all manifestations of the Terpsichorean muse!

Owner: Sorry?

Customer: 'Ooo, Ah lahk a nice tuune, 'yer forced too!

Owner: So he can go on playing, can he?

Customer: Most certainly!

I suspected from the outset, and Van Blerk and his cadre confirmed as much, that it is all about a catchy tune – play it backwards even, and no message about the wholesale slaughter of political unpopular fellow nationals can be heard.

Says Sean Else, co-owner of the record company that produces Van Blerk, “It could have been about De Wet or De la Rey. Any of the great generals.”[3]

Adds partner Johan Vorster, “For me it’s about the melody. You can’t make Kemp rhyme. You can’t make Beyers rhyme. Much less some other surnames.”

“De la Rey – lei – De la Rey.”

Kemp, Schkemp; Beyers, Schmeyers – it simply can’t be done.

Asked Carte Blanche anchor Ruda Landman: “But you (Bok van Blerk) would go to a Boeremag[4] audience?”

Van Blerk: “If they pay me, yes. Why not?”

Why not, indeed?

A catchy tune. Money to be made. Publicity money cannot buy… a smiling, nay laughing artist, all the way to the bank.

And for me, personally – Steve Hofmeyr has competition… Pampoen and Die Blou Bul Liedjie[5] may never regain the prime spot on my car stereo: “De la Rey De la Rey, sal jy die Boere kom lei, De la Rey De la Rey…”

So, it’s all right then?

No. I’m afraid not. It’s not all right.

There are various socio-political arguments that acetify this innocuous song into something noxious. It is somewhat impossible to page through an Afrikaans publication at present and not see some opinion on “Bok van Blerk’s De la Rey.”[6]

I do not purport to contribute to this debate. I am almost completely ad idem (almost surely) with leading South African social commentator Max du Preez on De la Rey.

I think – and yes, I do realise that this was a somewhat long introduction to what is a rather concise point – that De la Rey is a compelling analogy on the presence of “God” in society at large.

“God” is a rather harmless idea in the minds of simple people who mostly can be convinced of just about anything: that the earth and the universe is but 6000 years old; that the dead somehow live forever after their initial demise… and so on and so forth.

But this “God” idea, in the minds of some believers, is manifested in war and oppression on an unprecedented scale – this selfsame insipid “God” can, and does, spurn the most horrible deeds.

It would be better to do away with this God hypothesis altogether – the loss of that warm fuzzy feeling of belonging a small price to pay for the eradication of all manner of atrocity perpetrated in the name of “God”. It’s a no-brainer, really. But, of course, it is never that easy, is it now?

“God” can not be undone. But “God” must be kept in check. Or rather, the people who harbour “God” in their minds should be kept in check.

“God” must go.

Although we can hardly hope for a society in which God is rejected (some 53% of Americans have recently indicated that they would not vote for an atheist presidential candidate[7]), we can at least stop behaving as if the God hypothesis is worthy of our collective respect.[8]

Ditto De la Rey.

Enjoy it. Hum it. Be entertained.

But be vigilant. Keep those baloney detectors switched on and calibrated.

De la Rey is a rousing popular Afrikaans song by a hitherto unknown artist that is seen by some to rally White against Black.

Who was Koos de la Rey?

[1] Rumoured to be the father of Country music in South Africa… certainly the senior Country statesman.

[2] Exceptionally talented South African artist Chris Chameleon.

[3] 18 February 2007. Carte Blanche. (South African Dstv actuality program.) Producer : A2 Productions. Presenter : Ruda Landman. Researcher : Wynand Grobler.

[4] A political right wing motley of aggrieved Whites shaking lilliputian fists at the colossal Black democratically elected African National Congress government.

[5] Songs by South African superstar Steve Hofmeyr, the latter a rousing song in honour of Hofmeyr’s beloved Rugby Franchise, The Blue Bulls of Pretoria.

[6] Even the renowned South African business weekly, Financial Mail, carried comment, by Rapport (the world’s largest Afrikaans weekly) editor Tim du Plessis – De la Rey rides again … looking at the emergence of a new Afrikaner.

[7] Charles Smith. February 25, 2007. Hilary, Obama se sepie. Rapport. 23.

[8] With acknowledgement to A.N. Wilson, Against Religion.

Vol.2 No.6 - February 19, 2007

2007-02-18T13:13:00.000-08:00

Like a thief in the night…

In writing this article, I am availing myself of the great liberty of eisegesis.

I recall my obfuscation, befuddlement and discombobulation, although I had not at the time the vocabulary to identify my youthful confusion and incomprehension in quite such definitive terms, when first my Afrikaans Language high school teacher, Broederbond membership card all but pinned to this beige safari suit lapel, announced that one may read into a text something not intended to be portrayed by an author… something even contrary to an author’s purport.

Mused the Apostle Peter in his second epistle (chapter three, and verse ten… although authorship is hotly contested): “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.”

Written, of course, before he became the Vicar of Christ and the founding champion of the Stool that to this very day carries his illustrious name and is occupied, currently, by one Josef Ratzinger – very much not a Semite. Before, too, he took up office as Keeper of the Pearly Gates.

Methinks this “thief in the night” analogy apposite to the beguiling banter employed by the faithful in desperate attempts to muster even a valeity of support and credibility, incredulous as it may be, for religious tenets.

Man, I’m having fun with this!

A former, Apartheid regime, South African Minister of Foreign Affairs, Roelof “Pik” Botha, had the misfortune this last Saturday, to have an article on “creationism and evolution” published in a leading Afrikaans magazine, By, the week-end edition insert to the daily Die Burger. Entitled Wees ons onkundigheid genadig (Have mercy on our ignorance), Botha suffered the ignominy of stating “The theory of evolution bestows on God infinitely more power than does creationism… and should there be a form of continued existence after death, I should look forward to it, for my life here on earth was pleasant.”

My initial reaction was one of incredulity and mystification. My tashe quivered with amusement as I read and I broke into a gentle chuckle.[1]

My subsequent reaction was one of botheration. What was it that irked me so?

Eventually I was piqued. So I called a senior journalist friend and suggested that the editor of By be drawn and quartered at midday, Monday, upon Church Square in Cape Town. My friend stilled me and suggested that the editor of By was in fact an extremely competent journalist and…

I know. Of course I know. Liza Albrecht has my complete respect as an editor. I think she represents the future of (Afrikaans) journalism.

What vexed me about Botha’s article? And was it even important enough to merit indignation?

I turned to the Internet. As I am wont to do. I posted Ondermynende joernalistiek (Undermining Journalism) on Kletskerk – a thread that attracted some 300 hits to date, and some 40 responses.

I am discomfited, huffy even, probably incensed, because Botha, either by design or unwittingly, sneaked in one for “The King”. Like… a thief in the night: surreptitiously, furtively; sneakily.

I think it irresponsible and frankly, disrespectful to readers, for an editor to publish an article by a renowned and widely respected, iconic even, individual from a nostalgic recent past, suggesting – even only suggesting – the possibility of divine intervention in the origin and development of life and the universe, and the possibility of eternal life beyond the grave.

It is, I maintain, as irresponsible as would be the publication of an article suggesting that a sweet potato diet could possibly – even only “possibly” – cure AIDS… Even if such AIDS article strongly addressed the magnitude of the pandemic and the absolute need for continued research and vigilance to counter and obliterate the disease.

“The average By reader” – religious to at least the extent of squirming at the idea of the nullity of “God” will doubtlessly have her conviction that the God conjecture is a quite legitimate alternative weltanschauung worthy of consideration and respect, fortified by the article. It simply is not a legitimate alternative![2]

Botha’s underhanded remarks remind me of a parable by Douglas Adams, as retold by Richard Dawkins in Lament for Douglas: “A man didn’t understand how televisions work, and was convinced that there must be lots of little men inside the box. manipulating images at high speed. An engineer explained to him about high frequency modulations of the electromagnetic spectrum, about transmitters and receivers, about amplifiers and cathode ray tubes, about scan lines moving across and down a phosphorescent screen. The man listened to the engineer with careful attention, nodding his head at every step of the argument. At the end he pronounced himself satisfied. He really did now understand how televisions work. ‘But I expect there are just a few little men in there, aren’t there?’"

It is unacceptable for a leading secular newspaper to have the God hypotheses and eternal life promoted in its pages.

It is demeaning. It is pseudoscientific. It is derisory. It is opprobrious.

It must be opposed by sentient people rising to the challenge of incessantly indicating the irrationality of the God hypothesis; calling foul without fail when its mendacious head shows above the trench of wanton otherworldliness.[3]

I am ad idem with Richard Dawkins: "I am utterly fed up with the respect we have been brainwashed into bestowing upon religion."[4]

[1] A reaction shared with Baron Gruner, the Austrian murderer who killed his wife in the Splugen Pass and came to the attention of Sherlock Holmes in one of Dr Watson’s renderings entitled The Adventure of the Illustrious Client. (As I have mentioned before, I am too having fun!)

[2] See Irreducible idiocy, TART Remarks, January 29, 2007.

[3] January 29, 2007.

[4] Michael Brooks and Helen Phillips. 18 November 2006. Beyond belief: In place of God. New Scientist. 2578: 8-11, reporting on a November 2006 La Jolla, California, symposium entitled "Beyond belief: Science, religion, reason and survival", hosted by the Science Network, a science-promoting coalition of scientists and media professionals convening at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies.

Vol 2 No 5 - February 12, 2007

2007-02-11T12:18:00.000-08:00

Download

Religious belief and societal health

This article is a somewhat adjusted version of Matthew Provonsha’s piece, New Study Reveals that Religion Does Not Lead to a Healthier Society, in Skeptic, Vol 12. No.3

It is commonly held that religion makes people more just, compassionate, and moral, but a 2005 study by Gregory S. Paul suggests that the data belie that assumption. In fact, at first glance it would seem, religion has the opposite effect. The extensive study, “Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religi-osity and Secularism in the Prosperous Demo-cracies,” published in the Journal of Religion and Society examines statistics from eighteen of the most developed democratic nations. It reveals clear correlations between various indicators of social strife and religiosity, showing that whether religion causes social strife or not, it certainly does not prevent it.

In South Africa, the Church is crying out against crime – the scourge of the young, otherwise robust democracy. The moderator of the Dutch Reformed Church, Dr Coenie Burger, and his counterpart of the Apostolic Faith Mission, Dr Isak Burger, often exclaim in unison that some 80% of South Africans identify with Christianity and that such am overwhelming unifying creed should be able to stem the wave of crime that threatens the very fibre of the South African “miracle”. Considering the number of traditional African religions represented by the balance of the population, one would expect that a nation with such an overwhelming religio-moral identity should be one where crime is the exception, rather than the rule.

Yet, alas, South Africa is riled by a crime wave that threatens to take the country apart. Could it possibly be that religion is part of the problem, and not part of the solution?

Paul writes that his study is a “first, brief look at an important subject that has been almost entirely neglected by social scientists… not an attempt to present a definitive study that establishes cause versus effect between religiosity, secularism and societal health.” However, the study does show a direct correlation between religiosity and dysfunctionality, which if nothing else, disproves the widespread belief that religiosity is beneficial, that secularism is detrimental, and that widespread acceptance of evolution is harmful.

Paul begins by explaining how far his findings diverge from common assumptions. He even quotes Benjamin Franklin and Dostoevsky to show how old these common-misconceptions are. Dostoevsky wrote, “if God does not exist, then everything is permissible.” Benjamin Franklin noted, “religion will be a powerful regulator of our actions, give us peace and tranquility within our minds, and render us benevolent, useful and beneficial to others.”

To this day, the belief that religiosity is socially beneficial is widespread in America, especially amongst politicians, as Paul notes: “The current [at that time] House majority leader T. DeLay contends that high crime rates and tragedies like the Columbine assault will continue as long schools teach children ‘that they are nothing but glorified apes who have evolutionized [sic] out of some primordial soup of mud.’” But this view is not exclusively Republican, Paul explains, or even conservative: “presidential candidate Al Gore supported teaching both creationism and evolution, his running mate Joe Lieberman asserted that belief in a creator is instrumental to ‘secure the moral future of our nation, and raise the quality of life for all our people,’ and presidential candidate John Kerry emphasized his religious values in the latter part of his campaign.” Surveys show that many Americans agree “their church-going nation is an exceptional, God blessed, ‘shining city on the hill’ that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly skeptical world. ”This assumption flies in the face of the actual statistical evidence that Paul examined.

The study focuses on the prosperous democracies, because “levels of religious and nonreligious belief and practice, and indicators of societal health and dysfunction, have been most extensively and reliably surveyed” in them. Also, “The cultural and economic similarity of the developed democracies minimizes the variability of factors outside those being examined.” With a database of 800 million people, this study is far more reliable than results based on smaller sample sizes used in other such studies. The data are also current and extensive, collected in the middle and latter half of the 1990s and early 2000s from the International Social Survey Programme, the UN Development Programme, the World Health Organization, Gallup, and other well-documented sources.

For this study’s purpose, “dysfunctionality” is defined by such indicators of poor societal health as homicide, suicide, low life expectancy, STD infection, abortion, early pregnancy, and high childhood mortality (under five-years old). Religiosity is measured by biblical literalism, frequency of prayer and service attendance, as well as absolute belief in a creator in terms of ardency, conservatism, and activities.

Paul’s results are presented in nine charts. The first compares acceptance of evolution with various indicators of religiosity. From this Paul concludes that, “The absence of exceptions to the negative correlation between absolute belief in a creator and acceptance of evolution, plus the lack of a significant religious revival in any developed democracy where evolution is popular, cast doubt on the thesis that societies can combine high rates of both religiosity and agreement with evolutionary science. Such an amalgamation may not be practical.” He adds: “When deciding between supernatural and natural causes is a matter of opinion large numbers are likely to opt for the latter,” and that, “Conversely, evolution will probably not enjoy strong majority support in the U.S. until religiosity declines markedly.”

All of the subsequent results that compare religiosity against dysfunctionality show a basic correlation between the two, though anomalies exist. Paul’s second figure (Figures 1 and 2 here) shows a positive correlation between religiosity and homicide rates.

The United States is a strong exception, experiencing far higher rates of homicide than even (strongly theistic) Portugal, while Portugal itself is beset by much more homicide than the secular developed democracies. Hardly a “shining city on a hill” to the rest of the world, Paul writes that, “The most theistic prosperous democracy, the U.S., is exceptional, but not in the manner Franklin predicted. The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developed democracies, sometimes spectacularly so, and almost always scores poorly.” This deviates immensely from what most Americans consider to be common wisdom: that religion is beneficial. “But in the other developed democracies religiosity continues to decline precipitously and avowed atheists often win high office, even as clergies warn about adverse societal consequences if a revival of creator belief does not occur.” Despite the best efforts of “pro-life” Americans, abortion rates are much higher in our Christian nation, and lowest in relatively secular ones such as Japan, France, and the Scandinavian countries (Figures 3 and 4). In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy, and abortion in the prosperous democracies (Figures 5 and 6). This would seem to indicate that there is a positive correlation between religiosity and dysfunctionality, but what does that mean?

The question is one of causation, and there is no clear answer. Whether religion leads directly to dysfunctionality, or religions merely flourish in dysfunctional societies, neither conclusion from this study flatters religion. The first tells us that religion is a hindrance to the development of moral character, and the second that religion hinders progress by distracting us from our troubles (with imaginary solutions to real problems). This study is complicated enough that I do not think that we can draw definitive negative conclusions about religion. But we can at least conclude, contrary to popular belief in this country, that it is not a given that religious societies are better, healthier, or more moral. What we can be clear about from this study is that highly religious societies can be dysfunctional, whereas by comparison secular societies in which evolution is largely accepted display real social cohesion and societal well-being. As is always the case in science, more data and additional research will help clarify our conclusions.

Correlational evidence is never conclusive, remarks Richard Dawkins[1], but data by Sam Harris, in his Letter to a Christian nation, are striking:

“While political party affiliation in the United States is not a perfect indicator of religiosity, it is no secret that the "red states" are primarily red because of the overwhelming political influence of conservative Christians. If there were a strong correlation between Christian conservatism and social health, we might expect to see some sign of it in red-state America. We don't. Of the 25 cities with the lowest rates of violent crime, 62 percent are in "blue" states and 38 percent are in "red" states. … Of the 22 states with the highest rates of murder, 17 are red.”

The broad trend, argues George Monbiot[2], looks clear: “the more secular, pro-evolution democracies have… come closest to achieving practical ‘cultures of life’.

[1] Richard Dawkins. 2006. The God Delusion. Batma Press. London. 229-230.

[2] George Monbiot. Better off without Him.The Guardian. October 11, 20

The possible correlation between religious belief and societal health is considered this week.

The ideological fanaticism of Richard Dawkins’s attack on belief is unreasonable to religion – and science, says Alister McGrath, calling Dawkins “England’s grumpiest atheist”.

Thousands of churches face closure, demolition or conversion in the next decade, leading to the demise of some branches of Christianity in Europe, according to experts.

In this winter of their discontents, nostalgia for Ronald Reagan has become for many conservatives a substitute for thinking. This mental paralysis -- gratitude decaying into idolatry -- is sterile: Neither the man nor his moment will recur. Conservatives should face the fact that Reaganism cannot define conservatism.

As a child, Ayaan Hirsi Ali fled violence in Somalia with her family. As an adult she fled Kenya to escape an arranged marriage. She left her adopted Holland after she was caught up in political turmoil and had her life threatened.

Jesus, with a copy of The Guardian, and Mo, reading Schopenhauer, sort out some cosmic plumbing problem… and there’s something on a Muslim “race”…

O, and there’s a remark about a haggard pastor.

Vol. 2 No. 4 – February 5, 2007

2007-02-04T23:50:00.000-08:00

Download

The poor man’s smart bombs

BAGHDAD, Sunday, Feb. 4 — A mammoth truck bomb obliterated a popular central Baghdad market on Saturday, ripping through scores of shops and flattening apartment buildings, killing at least 130 people and wounding more than 300 in the worst of a series of horrific attacks against Shiites in recent weeks.

An injured man was lifted onto a bed at a Baghdad hospital Saturday. The huge bomb struck shoppers in the largely Shiite enclave of Sadriya.

The attack was the work of a suicide bomber who detonated about one ton of explosives in the bustling Sadriya market, in a largely Shiite enclave at 5 p.m., as shoppers finished buying food for dinner and men sipped coffee at cafes nearby, the police said. It was the deadliest single bomb blast since the United States invasion almost four years ago.

The New York Times, At Least 130 Die as Blast Levels Baghdad Market , February 4, 2007

The attack was the work of a suicide bomber…

The suicide bombing phenomenon is the direct result of teaching children the dangerous nonsense that death is not the end, that life somehow continues after death, that a better life awaits the just in some god.

I am fagged out by the claim of religion’s apologists that 9/11, Gujarat, Beslan, Hai al-Amaal, to mention but a few recent examples of religious atrocity, are simply about power. Religion is not to blame, the vindicators hold – religion is good and just and salutary. Religion, so the whining goes, is merely exploited by unscrupulous political charlatans seeking personal power and wealth. I, for one, am delighted to learn that the problem is so mundane and trivial. This problem should be easily remedied. Simply destroy the hold these mountebanks hold over hapless, over credulous, naïve believers – ensure that the dullards are not exposed to exploitative religion abused to subjugate them.

It is elementary, my dear wowser: Had children of Islamic parents not been exposed to religious instruction, no measure of political messianism will have succeeded, and continue to succeed, in producing a line of extremist would-be suicide bombers beating down the door for the privilege to be detonated, for that passport to paradise with its concupiscence and its spizzerinctum – It’s religion, stupid![1] Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities.[2]

I know the research and the arguments… One of the worlds foremost authorities on the subject, Robert Pape [3] has created the first comprehensive database of every suicide terrorist attack in the world from 1980 until today. With striking clarity and precision, Pape uses this unprecedented research to debunk widely held misconceptions about the nature of suicide terrorism and provide a new lens that makes sense of the threat we face. (See box.)

Is suicide bombing now “debunked”? Reflects Michael Radu, a specialist in international terrorist groups and Co-chairman of the Foreign Policy Research Institute’s Center on Terrorism, Counter- terrorism, and Homeland Security, offers this view: “But with the exception of the LTTE’s [Sri Lankan Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam-LTTE, Marxists/ Hindus/ Tamil secessionists] acts, all other [suicide] terrorist acts were committed by Muslims, and of those, all except those by the PKK/Kadek in Turkey and Arafat’s Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades were committed by members of openly Islamist groups. The LTTE/PKK cases led some to dismiss the role of religion in the motivation of suicide terrorists, but on further analysis, the exception indeed proves the rule.”[4]

In July 2006, Al Qaeda released a recruitment video, encouraging Muslims to carry out new attacks similar to the July 7 bombings in London last year. Pape notes that the video is stunning in its absence of religious declamation.[5]

Also in July 2006, Robert Whalley, Former UK Home Office Director for Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence, chaired a meeting on suicide bombings where this perspicacious remark was made by Dr Samuel Grier, Dean, NATO Defense College, “Those most vulnerable for recruitment into the on-going suicide bombing epidemic were immature young people, those with psychological dysfunction, and those that had been coerced to join the fight. Islam played a role here, but only in the way it had been instrumentalised by extremist leaders to exploit the vulnerable.”[6]

Discussant Jonathan Paris, of St Antony’s College, stressed, at the same forum, that suicide bombings were not the result of socio-economic conditions or social exclusion. He believed that the root of the problem lay with the persuaders, the key leaders and often charismatic recruiters. The key to Muslim radicalisation, he said, could be found in the teachings of the Imams.

Sam Harris recalls a Palestinian suicide bomber who said that what drove him to kill Israelis was “the love of martyrdom… I didn’t want revenge for anything. I just wanted to be a martyr.”[7]

Nasra Hassan, Director, United Nations Information Service and Spokesperson United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, started her research on suicide bombings because she found it impossible, as a Muslim, to understand why people chose to blow themselves up in the name of Islam. Her work had therefore focused on suicide bombings by Muslims and she had, by July 2006, built up a database of approximately 400 Muslim suicide bomber profiles. Her research suggests that as a suicide bomber required a sponsoring group, such groups required a sponsoring community and a belief system that sustained them.[8]

Hassan eloquently describes the religious dynamic of the “Human Bomb” phenomenon when she recalls video footage of a planner kneeling with two young men and all placing their hands on a copy of the Koran. Then the planner says: “Are you ready? Tomorrow, you will be in Paradise.”[9]

In The End of Faith, Harris objects to all brands of the religious product. “Criticizing a person’s ideas about God and the afterlife is thought to be impolitic in a way that criticizing his ideas about physics or history is not,” he notes. ”And so it is that when a Muslim suicide bomber obliterates himself along with a score of innocents on a Jerusalem street, the role that faith played in his actions is invariably discounted.”[10]

Harris encourages us to think of communism and fascism as religion-like cults, making the case that intolerance is the sine qua non of every authoritarian regime. We should deplore the religious fanaticism of suicide bombers and the secular totalitarians equally.[11]

The absurd folderol that death is not the end of human life, but rather the beginning of some supreme life, especially a life supersaturated with unbridled sex and gross opulence, lies at the very base of the suicide bombing phenomenon. This… religion, this pernicious bane, this pestilent destructive force, this grotesque parody of thought, this egregious abuse of intelligence that is Islam, is at the back of the suicide bombing phenomenon.

72 virgins. A guerdon for flagitious male[12] deeds of terror.

72 virgins. Wide-eyed and bushy-tailed. Chaste as hidden pearls. Each sufficiently uninitiated in sexual enjoyment to accept her master’s every effort in subservient worship, “O, most honorable, most profound, most proficient, most practiced, most skilful, most virtuous stud.”[13]

The Prophet Muhammad, beguiled by the indefatigable Gabriel’s intermittent revelations, was apparently heard saying: “The smallest reward for the people of paradise is an abode where there are 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as the distance from Al-Jabiyyah (a Damascus suburb) to Sana'a (Yemen).”[14]

Islam knows full well, as do automobile manufacturers and makers of yogurt, that you’ve got ‘em for life if you promise ‘em sex – lots of it, and varied. Promise testosterone enriched teenagers an eternity in the embrace of 72 subservient wenches and they will, as a sea of blood and a mountain of body parts grimly bear witness, gladly blow themselves and unsuspecting passersby to smithereens, hard-on at the ready.

The specific Islam mutation of the nefarious religion virus is peculiarly annihilative in its own uniquely destructive way. Islam represents sui generis turpitude and indeed escapes exoteric aspersion only by being none more ridiculous and ruinous than analogous anserine beliefs – Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism or whatever ism it is whomever happens to believe is provoked of some ideogenous deity at any given point in time. Attrocities committed under the aegis of religion are well documented and no less abhorrent than Hai al-Amaal. Yet among the emphatically purblind idiotologies (sic) masquerading as belief systems, Islam, by reason of its particular martyrdom mandate, is a decidedly obtuse variant. Insufficient words and phrases exist to define this hubristic disgrace, this ridiculous nonsense impertinently presumptive of creed.

This damning charge against Islam is exacerbated by recent scholarly opinion that the sexual debauchery awaiting cathected martyrs in the Muslim hereafter, the unconditional copulation promised to the faithful, may be a false claim after all! Syriac words substituted for the Arabic, indicate that the amative maidens may mean nothing more than "white raisins" of "crystal clarity". It may well be that the context dictates that food and drink is being promised, and not unsullied maidens! It may well be that millions of people have been killed over the centuries so that the martyrs can enjoy “chilled raisins” (or drinks) in Paradise while the unfaithful and damned infidels have boiling drinks elsewhere.[15]

I can hear it already – the voices of the apologetics wailing in unison, “This is not what Islam is about; suicide is forbidden in Islam!”

Yeah. Right. This is not what Islam is about… but this is what happens in Islam’s milieu. Just about exclusively.

Now, before Christians recline on the soft platitude “we are certainly not like that”, let me hasten to add that shipping Billy-Ray from the shores of the Mississippi to the back streets of Baghdad on a wing and a prayer ain’t much different to strapping some dynamite to the lad’s torso and handing him a detonator.

Any religion, meme, totemism, philosophy or je ne sais quois that propagates the dangerous nonsense that death is not the end should be rejected with contempt. Said Albert Camus, “If there is a sin against life, it consists perhaps not so much in despairing of life as in hoping for another life and in eluding the implacable grandeur of this life.”

To tolerate religion because it is not the exclusive vehicle of evil, identifies religion as a vessel of evil and denies us the opportunity to eliminate at least one known crucible of evil.[16]

The solution is an obvious one: Although we can hardly hope for a society in which formal organized religion is rejected, we can at least stop behaving as if religion is worthy of our collective respect.[17]

[1] See Nathan Bond, It’s religion, stupid, LitNet Religious Literature, January 22, 2004.

[2] Attributed to Blaise Pascal (1623-1662).

[3] Robert Pape. 2005. Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. Random House.

[4] FRONTPAGEMAGAZINE.COM. October 9, 2003. Radical Islam and Suicide Bombers.

[5] Robert Pape. September 11, 2006. Chicago Tribune. 5 YEARS AFTER 9/11: The growth of suicide terrorism.

[6] Samuel Grier. July, 6, 2006. An IISS Forum in cooperation with the Wyndham Place Charlemagne Trust. (A discussion on suicide bombings held one day before the first anniversary of the July 7, 2005 terrorist attack in London that killed 56 people.)

[7] Richard Dawkins. 2006.The God Delusion. Bantam. London. 304-305.

[8] Nasra Hassan. July, 6, 2006. An IISS Forum in cooperation with the Wyndham Place Charlemagne Trust.

[9] Nasra Hassan. November 19, 2001. An Arsenal Of Believers: Talking to the "Human Bombs". The New Yorker.

[10] Susan Jacoby. September 12, 2004. A Review of The End of Faith. The Los Angeles Times.

[11] James McManus. October 31, 2004. A review of The End of Faith. The Chicago Tribune.

[12] Until Wafa Idris, then a 28-year-old Palestinian medical assistant, detonated herself on one of Jerusalem’s busiest streets, the privilege of exploding for Allah was a strictly male honour. But Islam is making grand strides towards gender equality – several Islamic Sheiks have confirmed that women are suitable candidates for explosive martyrdom… if, should the operation take longer than a day and a night, she is accompanied by a male relative.

[13] The eternal paradisial reward for female blow-ups remain uncertain at this time. Perpetual falling asleep in strong arms after long talks by candlelight suggests itself, but the sexuality of the “new Islamic woman” may be compromised by such timidity… a program of alternate gang-bangs and cunnilingus perhaps?

[14] From Hadith 2687, collected by Al-Tirmidhi (9^th century CE) and quoted in the Koranic commentary of Ibn Kathir (14^th century CE). Hadith is Arabic for Tradition and contain records of the Prophet’s attributed adages and actions.

[15] This interpretation is argued by Christoph Luxenberg in his 2001 book, Die Syro-Aramaische Lesart des Koran. (Cf. Ibn Warraq, Virgins? What virgins?, Special report: religion in the UK, The Guardian, January 12, 2002.)

[16] Nathan Bond. Ibid.

[17] With acknowledgement to A.N. Wilson, Against Religion.

Vol.2 No.3 - January 29, 2007

2007-01-28T09:11:00.000-08:00

Download

Irreducible idiocy

I have been berated of late by believers (Christians, mostly, as they are the subject of my invective) for statements to the effect that all believers are, at bottom, alike. In fact, I propose that believers are exactly alike.

It is apparently inconceivable, for certain believers unfortunate enough to be exposed to my vitriol, to be pared with, say, the reverend Jannie “you-are-healed-praise-the-Lord-the-funeral-is-next-Wednesday” Pelser[1]. It is manifestly inappropriate, I am told, to suggest that all believers can be grouped with, say, the Pope, or Bishop Akinola, or Jack van Impe. Certainly the supranumerous denominational and sectarian multifurcation would indicate my folly.

When I suggested that Benny Hinn and Karl Barth share a common foundational conviction, the response resembled a charismatic rendering of that great scholar’s exclamations amongst the noble ruins of the Kurfürsten Schloss in Bonn.

I am, so believers concur, quite out of order to ignore the many flavours of faith permeating the belief landscape of our day.

At bottom, however, it’s all vanilla. It’s God, stupid…[2]

I propose that to be a believer is to acknowledge the existence of a supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe.

I submit that such premise is irresponsible and incongruous. It represents irreducible idiocy.

“God” is indeed the premise of both "Benny Hinn" and "Karl Barth" although the manifestation of their respective “faith” is, of course, divergent.

Why, some believers are convinced that infants should be baptised; others are horrified by the idea. Some believers accept, beyond a valeity of doubt that they partake of the very flesh and drink the very blood of the risen Christ during a ceremony they call “mass”; others see the biscuit and the wine as purely symbolic.

Some believers…

At bottom, however, it’s all vanilla. It’s God, stupid… ordinary, garden variety gods and demons stuff: The pus-filled core of the boil.

The God conjecture is not a legitimate alternative weltanschauung worthy of consideration and respect! It simply is not.

Says Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg, “It's a consequence of the experience of science. As you learn more and more about the universe, you find you can understand more and more without any reference to supernatural intervention, so you lose interest in that possibility. Most scientists I know don't care enough about religion even to call themselves atheists. And that, I think, is one of the great things about science – that it has made it possible for people not to be religious.”[3]

Says Richard Dawkins, “There has probably never been a more devastating rout of popular belief by clever reasoning than Charles Darwin’s destruction of the argument from design.”[4]

Darwin provided explanations of our existence that completely rejected supernatural agents.[5] Verily, verily, I say unto thee, whomsoever considers “God” as an “alternative” perspective on life and the universe, shall be cast into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.[6]

Shall we pussy-foot around the lunacy that is belief in God?

I, for one, will not!

Fundamentalism, as Harris so vividly points out, is only a problem because the fundamentals of the ideology is a problem. God is that very fundamental. No individual can expect to be taken seriously when insisting upon a supernatural entity (in whatever manifestation – from ubiquitous curmudgeon to suffused energy) regulating life and the universe. Respecting such folly fuels inevitable fundamentalism; tolerating such silliness puts us squarely in harm’s way.

I wish to be clear on this point: If you believe in “God”, even if you are sufficiently perceptive to reject a creation, a virgin birth, a resurrection, an ascension, a second coming and eternal life, your very belief in “God” still fuels the idiocy of those from whom you wish to distance yourself. Your belief in “God” renders you culpable as an accessory after the fact. There simply is no basis whatsoever anymore to entertain the God hypothesis as an alternative perspective on life and the universe.

Sentient people should rise to the challenge of incessantly indicating the irrationality of the God hypothesis; calling foul without fail when its mendacious head shows above the trench of wanton otherworldliness.

Contents

Publisher’s Note

Editor’s Note

Irreducible Idiocy

Nobel Winner Assails Religious Intolerance In L.A. Visit

Soldiers Of The Cross

Spirituality And Neurology

Muslims Defend Catholic Stance In Gay Row

Challenging Nature: The Clash Of Science And Spirituality At The New Frontiers Of Life

The Sound Of Thorns Crackling In A Fire

[1] The reverend Jannie Pelser is a minister of the Dutch Reformed Church congregation Rant en Dal in Gauteng, South Africa, who firmly established himself on the T. B. Joshua faith healing bandwagon and stated categorically that he was convinced that Joshua was not a false prophet (Beeld, June 28, 2001) and called attempts to discredit Joshua an evil plot (Beeld, May 21, 2001). See TART Remarks, January 22, 2007 - The poisonous fruits of the “Spirit”.

[2] "It's the economy, stupid!" was the Clinton-Gore campaign slogan in 1992. There was a mild recession because of the transition from a wartime (Cold War) economy to a peacetime economy. The slogan was designed to focus their minds on an obvious fact…

[3] Quoted in Natalie Angier. Confessions of a Lonely Atheist. New York Times Magazine. January 14, 2001.

[4] Dawkins. Richard. 2006. The God Delusion. London. Bantam Press. 79.

[5] Suskind, Leonard. 2006. The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design. New York. Little, Brown. 17 (Quoted in Dawkins. 2006:118).

[6] Based broadly, quite incredulously broadly, I should say, on Mathew 25.xxx

Vol. 2 No. 2 – January 22, 2007

2007-01-22T04:56:00.000-08:00

Download here

Publisher’s note

Sometimes, when I consider religion, I can but snigger. Really! A believer extolling the virtues of a Choo Thomas book, or enraptured by doctor Isak Burger’s in depth analysis of happenings minutes after death.

Sometimes, when I consider religion, I can but shake my head in incredulous wonder. Really! Aunty Anna, of Hertzogville, a little community in the South African outback, hoping – I kid you not – that her husband, deceased of some three years, will be resurrected unto her. Not at the “final trumpet”, but in the immediate term, to resume their life together.

Sometimes, when I consider religion, I am enraged. Really! A family is rescued from the precipice of catastrophe when the husband and father is saved by emergency surgery to remove a tumour alledgedly cured by some faith healer years ago.

What untold damage religion has wrought on human dignity. It has reduced individuals to mindless slaves feeding on the waste of fallacy.

It is time for organised religion to be held to account. Thus is my challenge in this week’s leading article: The poisonous fruits of the “Spirit”.

Nathan Bond

Editor’s Note

The Democrats have, methinks, at least an equal chance of winning the White House in 2008. Former presidents Carter and Clinton are rallying what is available from Bush’s Iraqi fallout on the Christian right, and… well, “others” – small and medium-size, black and white Baptist organizations into a robust coalition that would serve as a counterweight to the conservative Southern Baptist Convention.

Why? Because you can’t have the White House if you don’t have an imaginary friend, that’s why!

In the August 28, 2006 issue of TART Remarks, I considered Barack Obama for the White House?, and quoted from a national survey conducted by researchers in the University of Minnesota's department of sociology, the results of which appeared in the April issue of the American Sociological Review, indicating that Atheists are America’s most distrusted minority.

TART Remarks of November 6, 2006 carried an article from the San Francisco Chronicle, Democrats get religion, saying “Left-leaning politicians have a come-to-Jesus moment, bringing their faith out of the closet to challenge conservatives' claimed moral hegemony. The religious right may have to make room for the religious left.”

If ya don’t have a place to pray, the American people won’t give ya a place to stay – for “the next four years”, that is.

This week, in what promises to be regular similar articles, I publish an insert from The Washington Post on the efforts of Carter and Clinton. May the farce be with them.

I touch on the fate of Driss Ksikes, editor of Morocco’s Nichane magazine, who received a suspended sentence recently after a guilty verdict of defaming Islam, and damaging morality – through humour.

Sean B. Carroll’s excellent The Making of the Fittest: DNA and the Ultimate Forensic Record of Evolution, is reviewed by Discover senior editor Josie Glausiusz… and, as usual, Jesus and Mo have some comment worth considering. TART is, after all, about religion, what not.

Nathan Bond

Contents

Publisher’s note

Editor’s note

The poisonous fruits of the “spirit”

Morocco's serious humor gap

Modern pagans honor zeus in athens

Carter, clinton seek to bring together moderate baptists

The making of the fittest: dna and the ultimate forensic record of evolution, by Sean B. Carroll

The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Vol. 2 No. 1 – January 15, 2007

2007-01-15T08:42:00.000-08:00

Download

Publisher's Note

The traditional holiday season in South Africa over December and January represents reading time for me, personally.

The novels I never seem to find time to read; everything that I have saved for soonest reading from the Web, from correspondents… the holidays are glorious!

I’ve read Dennett. I’ve read Dawkins. I’ve read Harris.

I’ve re-read two volumes: Emma Gilbey’s The Lady – The Life and Times of Winnie Mandela (Vintage: 1994), and Harvey Tyson’s quite brilliant Editors Under Fire (Random House: 1993)… wondering, musing about the dearth of guts – pure, unadulterated bloody guts – the paucity of straight talking!

And then, as I despaired, South African poet and journalist Antjie Krog spoke at the Suidoosterfees Arts Festival in Cape Town on Saturday! Fearlessly, she spoke! And among other things, mentioned that the tolerant must eventually accept their complicity in the dynamic of the intolerant!

Journalist Johannes de Villiers also addressed the issue of intolerance this week-end, in By: Kan jy onverdraagsaamheid verdra? (Can you tolerate intolerance?) “We’re not all like that”, Christian theologians apparantly wailed at a recent conference on fundamentalism, reports De Villiers. Intolerance. It is a subject that haunts me… that I have addressed in Tolerance… intolerance: How much? How long? (TART Remarks, August 21, 2006.)

My mind’s desire for 2007 is that we shall respect the young. That we shall have the courage to cultivate, among children and the youth, a spirit of free-thinking that may revolusionize our world!

Is such a desire even permitted?

It must be!

I recall the memory of Katharine Tait, Bertrand Russell’s daughter by his second wife, Dora Winifred Black, “I cannot recall ever being told to sit down and be quiet. Believing in freedom for children, (my parents) lived by their belief, even when it was not convenient.”

Contents

Publisher’s note

Editor’s note

Suffer little children… sanctioned child abuse!

Faith, hope & sanity: a few jokes about religion before it kills us

Dublin imam takes on the fanatics

Heaven's above - or perhaps below

Moral minds: how nature designed our universal sense of right and wrong

The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Vol. 1 No. 20 – Christmas 2006

2006-12-17T10:05:00.000-08:00

Download

Publisher's Note

It’s been a great year!
Personally, I have enjoyed, as I have enjoyed most all of my adult life, the intellectual stimulation of debate with many people…
And the birth of TART Remarks represents, frankly, a high point for me personally. Beware the man with access to technology and something to say!
Is the very great liberty of personal remarks permitted at this time of merriment?
Perhaps.
I must thank a number of people, at the risk of not naming a few that should be named. But here goes…
George Claassen has done more to help me calibrate my baloney detector than anybody that has ever crossed my path. Science savvy and armed with a ready turn of phrase George has zero tolerance with nonsense and remains the nemesis of snake oil sellers!
Ben du Toit is a true friend. Nuff zed.
Jaco Gericke… Jaco Gericke will eventually be known as one of the world’s great Bible scientists.
My friends, known by assumed and real names – ordinary men and women, many of whom I have never even met: Leo West, George Ferreira, André Bartlett, Blouwildebees, Plaaswolfie, evolvefish, Godzilla, Stefan, Sidney, Estian, Theo…
All of those thinkers who are never too busy to take a call, or to reply to an e-mail or sms: Phillip Tobias, Sakkie Spangenberg, Van Zyl Slabbert, Willie van Aardt, Irma Kroese, Christo Lombaard, Hansie Wolmarans, Hennie Viviers, Julian Müller, Jurie le Roux…
(I know, you’re thinking I’m name dropping… exactly what Madiba said the other day.)
Jurie van den Heever and Leon Retief: Always ready to take time to explain when I do not understand. Which is often.
Karl de Pauw for his indefatigable efforts to keep me informed with notes and articles from magazines and sources I have often not even known existed.
Elsabé Brits for sharing her notes with me, her feelings – indispensable in formulating a broad picture.
Jean Oosthuizen, a brave journalist with broad shoulders…
Johannes de Villiers. Always at the ready.
Alida van der Westhuizen – when I am unable to locate a Media24 article or report…
I am engulfed by the Christmas spirit!

Editor's Note

It’s Noel. There – I‘ve given it away. It says so right there on the cover.
Let’s have a chuckle and a laugh. Let’s escape, for a moment, through the back door of merriment, the demands of everyday life.
The leading article this week comes from my book Pun Intended – and do please re-read the advertisement for the book: A new pun is featured.
A number of Christmas quotes dot the pages of this Christmas issue: some funny, some wise and some bordering on crudity. (I’m not completely engulfed by the Christmas spirit!)
There’s an article on our propensity, or lack thereof, for attending church.
And there’s an article on Intelligent Design… yep! The IDiots are at it again. In fact, they’re simply still at it. If ever there was a reason to doubt evolution it is to be found in the improbability of skin evolving to the thickness of that covering Intelligent Designers. Not enough time, see.
O, Jesus and Mo have something to say. About Christmas.
See y’all in 2007! Unless it is announced that the Pope is gay. Say what?

Contents

Publisher’s note

Editor’s note

A Christmas Carol?

Grandparents linked with church-going

Intelligent Design: The God Lab

Tolle lege, tolle lege

The sound of thorns crackling in the fire

Vol. 1 No. 19 – December 11, 2006

2006-12-11T08:03:00.000-08:00

Download

Publisher's Note

Quite a week, it was! On the religious front, that is.

In South Africa the annual 16-day Campaign Against Violence Against Women and Children ended December 10.

The Reverend Elsje Büchner, pastor of the Dutch Reformed (NG) congregation of Lux Mundi and member of the algemene sinodale moderatuur (general synodical executive church-council), pontificated in the matter… and was rewarded for her trouble, courtesy of TART reader George Ferreira, with the iron fist of reason in the solar plexus. (See box.)

It is rumoured that NG gays wishing to be married under South Africa’s proud new Civil Unions Bill may be referred to the Reformerende Kerk – a “gay-friendly” church (the terminology spawned by preposterous doctrines is flabbergasting) “reaching out to the gay community, since none of the mainline churches are willing to accept their gay members unconditionally.”

Apparently, NG theologian Adrio König, on December 10, declared on the Afrikaans radio station RSG that it would be “safer and better” for the church to maintain a “fundamentalist” approach – as opposed to a “liberal” approach.

Verily, it is well nigh impossible for an intelligent individual to be a member of the NG Church – to be a member of any church, in fact.

The University of Stellenbosch appointed theologian Professor Russel Botman rector.

I regard Botman as a man of supreme integrity. But Botman is a believer – a theologian…

Should someone who believes in God, a creation, and life everlasting run a university in the 21^st century? Should an alchemist, an astrologer, a phrenologist, an AIDS dissident, a chiromancer? I think not.

I am of the opinion that any salient specialist subjecting to the supernatural risks an anomaly that will almost certainly subvert the best endeavours.

How should a specialist be judged admitting thus:

I consult a supernatural entity regularly for insight on managing challenging issues and are advised on the best course of action through innuendo and suggestion that may be described as a sequential mental process in which one thought leads to another by association.

Such consultations are sometimes unilateral and take the form of entreaties, petitions, adoration, contrition and thanksgiving, without response from the supernatural.

I am convinced beyond a valeity of doubt that such consultations will ineluctably result not only in the revelation of optimal strategies, but also in the provision of incomparable tactical insight and the mental and physical strength to facilitate successful implementation.

I furthermore am convinced that such continued consultations will result in my immortality subsequent to my death.

Would I have such a specialist run my investment portfolio? I think not. Would I have such a specialist run my health care regime? I think not. Would I have such a specialist run my company? I think not.

Editor's Note

Belief in “god” supposes belief in “Creation”.

I have long harboured this conviction and when I considered the informal poll in the matter of belief in creation (and the virgin birth) on the Kerkbode website, I was struck again by the inevitable folly that is spawned by belief in “god”.

The church, Christianity, will not abandon the concept of “god” – therefore it must accept all that flows from that single conception… and be forever relegated to mythology.

I consider, in this issue, the fact that specific non-negotiable beliefs disqualify Christians from holding particular offices and positions of influence.

Professor Sakkie Spangenberg wrote a comprehensive report on The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins. Although this book, and comment on it, has been featured on several occasions in past TART issues, this review is an important one from a theological perspective and is published in its entirety – in Afrikaans.

Contents

Publisher’s note

Editor’s note

A belief in “god” triggers many, many beliefs…

Religion for a captive audience, paid for by taxes

The God Delusion reviewed by Professor I J J Spangenberg

The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Vol. 1 No. 18 – December 4, 2006

2006-12-02T13:47:00.000-08:00

Download

Publisher’s note

Dr Fritz Gaum, erstwhile editor of the Kerkbode – official mouthpiece of the Dutch Reformed Church, and father of gay DRC Reverend Laurie, writes in the latest By of his understanding of homosexuality and the Bible, before and after learning of his son’s sexual orientation.

“I am sorry. At that time (referring to an article critical of homosexuality) I was all too certain that I knew, when in fact I did not know”, Gaum reflects with shattering honesty.

He continues, reflectively, “What do I know now?”

It is men like Gaum who has the power to change paradigms. This much I concede in an open letter to him.

Completely unrelated, and halfway across the globe, Benedict XVI visited the famous Blue Mosque and turned towards Mecca in an apparent gesture of ostensible “non-ill will” to Islam… and scarcely was the holy butt swung round or it was officially declared that the pope did not “pray”, he simply “meditated”.

Religion. Respect? Ridicule!

But then again, there are men like Fritz Gaum. May the expectation of rational input not be disappointed.

TART reader and In-depth Reporter (Science) of Die Burger, Ms Elsabé Brits, has embarked on a estimable campaign. Elsabé wants to produce A1 posters for insertion into newspapers to bring science to children. Posters on the new look solar system; cosmic evolution and the Big Bang; dark energy and dark matter; black holes…

This is an expensive endeavour and potential contributors and sponsors are invited to contact TART Remarks with a view to help reify Elsabé’s dream. My company, BOLD Communication, will certainly contribute by offering professional communications solutions to the project.

Editor’s Note

I am an avid reader of and contributor to the Internet forum Kletskerk (literally Chat Church) – where contributors may express no holes barred opinion from God to masturbation. It is a result of the Dutch Reformed Church’s declared “Season of listening” and for all my criticism of religion, and the DRC in particular, I have always saluted this effort even if I had been known to suggest that little “listening” in fact occurs.

During this last week many comments on the influence of the Holy Spirit were posted. It got me thinking.

What is the real role of the Holy Spirit in a world where religious diversity often results in bloodshed, torture and horrendous deaths? And why the enormous religious diversity in the first place?

Contents
Publisher’s note
Editor’s note
Letters to the editor
Out of sight insight – the holy spirit debunked
Pope calls divisions among christians 'scandal to the world'
Case: dennis grace v. Freedom from religion foundation, 06-157
Settlement leaves largest questions unanswered
Religion and righteousness
The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Click here to order a free copy of Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 18 – December 4, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 17 - November 27, 2006

2006-11-26T08:32:00.000-08:00

Download

Publisher’s note

TART reader and In-depth Reporter (Science) of Die Burger Elsabé Brits called on Thursday to tell of her experience at the opening of the South African Jewish Museum in Cape Town exhibition “Of Hominids and Humankind” – in honour of the life and work of the renowned South African scholar Phillip Tobias.

“How to square science and religion”, mused Tobias, and then added that he had been seeking that answer for 61 years and expected to go to his grave without discovering it.

Indeed. Science and religion are incompatible. (See Tart Remarks, November 20, 2006.)

The subject will receive attention this week again, on November 28, when Professor Wentzel van Huyssteen of Princeton will talk about his book Alone in the World? Human Uniqueness in Science and Theology, the record of his Gifford lectures. Enquiries and bookings can be made on +27-21-686-1269 or at christianspirit@xsinet.co.za.

What role can theology play in the quest for human understanding? What role religion?

I have been struck this week by the reaction to my online challenge to Christians: What do Christians believe?

The matter is addressed in this issue, in the leading article Our firm foundation...

Methinks that if Christians are unable, or unwilling, to identify their beliefs, and to defend same, they can hardly expect to contribute to the moral and social structure.

Editor’s Note

I have spend a considerable amount of time this week reading and commenting on the thread 'n Uitdaging aan Christene (A challenge to Christians), on the Online forum Kletskerk. It is a thread of my design and origin and proposes that Christianity is identified by ten elementary beliefs which are non-negotiable for the creed.

The reaction was rather astounding. I have had numerous discussions and correspondence on the matter, and I report in some detail on my experiences and insights in this issue of TART Remarks.

Pulitzer Prize winner Natalie Angier has authored a new book. Ms Angier is a clear thinker and able writer and communicates her “God Problem” effectively and efficiently. The book, and Ms Angier’s argument is covered in Tolle Lege this week.

Jesus and Mo, of late joined by Moses, remains one of my favourite cartoon strips. In The sound of thorns crackling in a fire the cadre muses about Allah’s ability or not… to secure Cat Stevens concert tickets.

Contents

Publisher’s note
Editor’s note
Our firm foundation…
Faith's last gasp
The gospel according to Jim Wallis
The canon: a whirligig tour of the beautiful basics of science by Natalie Angier
The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Click here to order a free copy of Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 17 – November 27, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 16 - November 20, 2006

2006-11-18T08:33:00.000-08:00

Download

The Marine Reserves' Toys for Tots program, reports the Los Angeles Times, has turned down 4,000 talking Jesus dolls offered by one2believe, a division of the Valencia-based Beverly Hills Teddy Bear Co., to have been distributed to needy children this festive season.

The button-activated, bearded Jesus, dressed in hand-sewn cloth outfits and sandals, recites Scripture such as "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again" and "Love your neighbor as yourself." All for $20. Retail. One just can’t discount The Message, can one?

The charity balked because of the doll’s religious nature.

Michael La Roe, director of business development for the snubbed donor companies, said the charity's decision left him "… surprised and disappointed. I believe as a churchgoing person, anyone can benefit from hearing the words of the Bible."

Bill Grein, vice president of Marine Toys for Tots Foundation, in Quantico, Va. countered that as a government entity, Marines "don't profess one religion over another... We can't take a chance on sending a talking Jesus doll to a Jewish family or a Muslim family."

Strong arguments both!

But methinks…

Jews, Muslims, Agnostics… Atheists even, have to put up with George Jesus-in-my-heart Bush reporting on his divine injunctions virtually without end.

There ain’t no button to halt the ptolemaic amalgam of orphic averments from the White House as its First Resident inveigles, wheedles and cajoles his way through the vacuous skulls of the American faithful.

Sam Harris notes that Mr. Bush listens to the voice of “god” regularly – something the American people relish… and, in any event, if Evangelical clergy can speak the words of life, why not a $20 doll?

O-O-O-o-o-oy!

This week, on Kletskerk, a forum for discussing things religious, a contributor promoted, in the strongest possible terms, that subjection to the Holy Spirit “as a Person” (?!) will inure against misunderstanding.

Gagging a Jesus doll? Not gagging a Jesus medium (so-called for they are neither rare, nor well done)?

Truly, the Lord moves in mysterious ways.

Contents

Publisher’s note
Editor’s note
Science and religion
Beyond belief: in place of god
God vs. Science
The Bookshelf talks with Michael Shermer
The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Click here to order a free copy of Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 16 – November 20, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 15 - November 13, 2006

2006-11-12T01:20:00.000-08:00

Download

Publisher's Note
I was engaged this week in email debates on several fronts following my castigation of the By reviewers mentioned here in the previous issue – Gerrit Brand (Belydende ateïsme op sy beste) and Johannes de Villiers (Dawkins, hou jou by jou lees).

In the latest By, contributor Charles Wallace, writing from England, speaks to the discomfort of theologians and believers when confronted with the clarion thinking of leading scientists and philosophers and researchers – people such as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett and Sam Harris. Science, writes Wallace, is loosing patience with religion’s disputable claims served up as fact. And certainly leading thinkers are increasingly appalled by the apparent protection religion enjoys – demands even! – when pronouncing on current issues with reference to myth, oracles and ancient rites and writs. Particularly disquieting is the dreadful theology that is served up to the faithful in a desperate attempt to conserve a fundamentalist approach to, among others, homosexuality, protection against HIV infection, and even the future of nations in the Middle East!

My sparring partners demanded a more “reasonable” (read “tolerant”, and read also, again, TART Remarks of August 21 – Tolerance… intolerance: How much? How long?) approach from me. (I stated that religion, albeit a fact of life, is bunk, and that “god”, real as it may seem to the great unwashed, is, in the very words of one of the reviewed authors, a “delusion” – a dangerous delusion, I added. As I am also arguing in the leading article this week: Why fight religion?)

I challenged the correspondent, “Shall we, in the name of reasonableness, also consider a flat earth (as opposed to, well, a more rounded vision), phrenology (as opposed to neurology), chemistry (as opposed to alchemy), astrology (as opposed to astronomy), magic and miracles (as opposed to natural laws), and, all ye gods forbid, “Intelligent Design” (as opposed to Natural Selection)?”

“Yes!”, came the reply.

“In principle”, was the reply qualified.

In reasonableness, this particular correspondent did reject Intelligent Design as a feasible option… yet allowed for the “fact” that debunked ID was no reason to accept that there was not “in fact” an “Intelligent Designer” after all.

Ya, well, no, fine.

I rest my case.

Publisher’s note
Editor’s note
Why fight religion?
Democrats win bigger share of religious vote
For Georgetown 'Apostles,' A Rowhouse Rebellion
In one week: counsel, soaring hope, war protest
Six impossible things before breakfast: the evolutionary origins of belief
The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Click here to order a free copy of Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 15 – November 13, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 14 - November 6, 2006

2006-11-07T07:50:00.000-08:00

To be a Christian should be more than “doing (so-called) Christ-like things”. It is important that we, all of us humans, strive primarily to avoid doing things that may harm others. And harm nature. It is imperative that we attempt (at least mostly) to do things that may benefit others. And nature.

Humanitarians live by this creed. Rotarians do. Lions do – the club members, not necessarily the predators.

So I think that “being a Christian” should be something different, something additional, something other than “being a decent person” – I regard myself as a decent person, but I am certainly no Christian.

The descriptive English word “gay” has forever lost it’s original meaning. So has the insulting “queer”.

So, can “Christian” still be used to identify someone who, say, no longer accepts that the Christ has physically risen? Or of someone unsure of the Virgin Birth? Or of creation?

Publisher’s note
Editor’s note
What is a Christian?
Democrats get religion
They have seen the light, and it is green
This is no attempt to force-feed religion to children
Gay episcopal bishop says communities of faith may be at crossroads
War & Peace - Michael Shermer
The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Click here to order a free copy of
Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 14 – November 6, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 13 - October 30, 2006

2006-10-29T06:41:00.000-08:00

The New Scientist magazine recently posed the question “Imagine Earth without people” (issue 2573, 12 October 2006, 36-41): “Humans are undoubtedly the most dominant species the Earth has ever known. In just a few thousand years we have swallowed up more than a third of the planet's land for our cities, farmland and pastures. By some estimates, we now commandeer 40 per cent of all its productivity. And we're leaving quite a mess behind: ploughed-up prairies, razed forests, drained aquifers, nuclear waste, chemical pollution, invasive species, mass extinctions and now the looming spectre of climate change. If they could, the other species we share Earth with would surely vote us off the planet.”

What place for Homo sapiens sapiens on this accommodating little blue-green planet, third from the sun?

Are we special? The crown of the creative endeavours of some “god”? And are we to live forever? Given that we have the self-styled notion of “too wonderful to perish”?

In this issue the notion of “eternal life” is discussed. And I include an essay by Bertrand Russell, indicating the probable status of humans in the universe.

And, I venture with my own, modern version – an attempted pastiche – of Russell’s original.

Contents

Publisher’s Note

Editor’s Note

Eternal life

The theologian's nightmare, by Bertrand Russell

The theologian's nightmare, by Nathan Bond

Bigotry in the name of God and religion

Clash of cricket and religion: Pakistan's faith sparks unholy row

Apocalypse soon

Muslim leader blames women for sex attacks

Click here to order a free copy of
Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 13 – October 30, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 12 - October 23, 2006

2006-10-22T08:50:00.000-07:00

Gays in the assembly before “god” is the subject considered this week. I intended, reflecting on the leading article, that one should best address both scientific and theological aspects in the matter. Yet, as the article progressed, I became progressively aware of the absolute folly of Biblical consideration on the “gay issue”.

Bible scientists are virtually united in denying that the Bible addresses homosexuality as it is manifested in modern day life.

And even if the Bible had something to say about the matter, could it reasonably be considered to counter the overwhelming scientific evidence that homosexuality has a biological foundation; that homosexuality is but a biological variation?

The leading article evolved into two articles: one considering the status of gays in the church; one simply listing a selection of scientific sources indicating the biological basis of homosexuality.

I revisit the latest book by Richard Dawkins – The God Delusion – featured in the September 25 issue, and publish links to the latest reviews, as well as a link to view a debate, on the folly of religion, between Dawkins and Stephen Colbert.

Contents

Publisher’s note

Editor’s note

Pink prayer

Here’s the thing!

Evangelicals ally with Democrats on environment

Conflation of church and state

Richard Dawkins: read about him; see him

Is God dead? Atheism finds a market in U.S.

The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Click here to order a free copy of

Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 12 – October 23, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 11 - October 16, 2006

2006-10-15T05:41:00.000-07:00

Much of this issue is devoted to opinion about Sam Harris’ new book, Letter to a Christian Nation. I admire Harris for his unmitigated pronouncements on religion. Yet I remain critical of his apparent ajar backdoor on eastern mysticism.

The leading article, on the probable origin of religion, is a topic of great interest to me. The Origin of Religion is by no measure of means conclusive, and serves to draw attention to the process by which us humans create and destroy our gods. I am reminded of John Lennon’s words:

Imagine there’s no heaven.
It’s easy if you try.
No hell below us,
above us, only sky…

Contents

Publisher’s note

Editor’s note

The origin of religion

Michigan backs teaching evolution in science class

GOP raises religion in court race, calling democrat an atheist

Letter to a Christian Nation, by Sam Harris

- Statement by the author
- Review
- Time to let go of God (The New York Observer)
- Taking on Christians' gospel truth (San Francisco Chronicle)
- Quotes, selected by the author

The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Click here to order a free copy of

Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 11 – October 16, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 10 – October 9, 2006

2006-10-08T04:58:00.000-07:00

The Pope’s intended Limbo trumpery is the framework for a leading article on dogma generally – how is dogma set; and how maintained? And how discarded?

Tart considers the vision of the new leader of world Methodism – looking East and to Africa to reclaim the Church’s mission.

A divisive debate about whether military chaplains should be allowed to pray "in Jesus' name" before a religiously mixed audience is resolved before a House-Senate conference committee. Or not.

The influence of Evangelical Christianity over American voters appears to be waning. In 2004, white evangelical or born-again Christians made up a quarter of the electorate, and 78 percent of them voted Republican, according to exit polls. But some pollsters believe that evangelical support for the GOP peaked two years ago and that what has been called the "God gap" in politics is shrinking.

But considering the status of Limbo – how can religion be taken seriously?

How?!

Contents

Publisher’s note

Editor’s note

Risum teneatis, amici?

Travelling in search of radical holiness

Not separate, but ecumenical

GOP's hold on evangelicals weakening

The great satan vs the axis of evil

The sound of thorns crackling in a fire

Click here to order a free copy of

Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 10 – October 9, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 9 – October 2, 2006

2006-09-30T01:48:00.000-07:00

Jesus Camp, a documentary feature film on religious experiences of evangelical Christian children, was released in Los Angeles last week. My supreme objections to exposing children to religion is a matter of public record, and this latest outrage is, well, outrageous. Camp founder Pastor Becky Fischer proudly compares her work to the indoctrination of young boys by extremist Muslims in Pakistan and elsewhere.

TART Remarks covers this story – without further comment, but to identify this behaviour as molestation, and proposes that the actions of the Christians involved in making and distributing and promoting films such as Jesus Camp indicate the corrosive influence of religion on young, receptive minds better than objectors to religion can ever hope to do.

A new U.S. poll found that receptiveness to religion really can help a candidate, and the party seen to be receptive to religion. Forty-four percent of those polled said they were more worried by public officials who don't pay enough attention to religion; 46 percent expressed more concern about public officials who are too close to religious leaders.

In the August 28 edition of TART Remarks the political acceptance of “atheists” in the United States was considered in an article on the Illinois Democrat, Senator Barack Obama. That article clearly indicated that atheists are America’s most distrusted minority – as is blatantly evident from a national survey conducted by researchers in the University of Minnesota's department of sociology, the results of which appeared in the April issue of the American Sociological Review.

Roman Catholic and Christian Orthodox leaders are focusing on writing a text that would serve as a basis to "seek the restoration of full communion" and close the nearly 1,000-year-old rift between the Catholic and the Orthodox. It astounds to note that while the Abrahamic religions are bent on obliterating each other, Christians are still attempting – after 1,000 years! – to “close the rift”. The mind boggles.

Another week…

Contents

Publisher’s Note

Editor’s Note

An Abstract On Origin And Evolution

Bridging The Divide

Receptiveness To Religion Really Can Help A Candidate

God's Boot Camp?

Escaping Illusion?

Paradise Lost

Click here to order a free copy of

Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 9 – October 2, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 8 - September 25, 2006

2006-09-24T11:48:00.000-07:00

Original Sin, the dogma, is preposterous. It ranks with predestination on the scale of ridiculous ideas. Professor Sakkie Spangenberg’s inaugural lecture, CAN A MAJOR RELIGION CHANGE? Reading Genesis 1-3 in the Twenty-First Century, had me revisit this doctrine and its influence on the human psyche. Original Sin is the raison d’être of Christianity – without Original Sin, Christianity collapses. Therefore, the title of this week’s main article is Original Sin(e qua non). Platitudinal, perhaps; descriptive nonetheless.

Richard Dawkins has a new book out – The God Delusion. In the course of his work, this tenacious evolutionary theorist has long asserted that belief in God is both irrational and profoundly harmful to society. In this book he tackles the subject head on, exposing both religion's faulty logic and the widespread suffering it causes.

He says, in the opening chapter, “The metaphorical or pantheistic God of the physicists is light years away from the interventionist, miracle wreaking, thought-reading, sin-punishing, prayer-answering God of the Bible, of priests, mullahs and rabbis, and of ordinary language. Deliberately to confuse the two is, in my opinion, an act of intellectual high treason.”

Joan Bakewell’s review of The God Delusion, from The Guardian – Judgment day – is featured in the Tolle lege section this week.

Contents

Publisher’s Note

Editor’s Note

Original Sin(e qua non)

NBC Draws Protests From Conservatives

Anglican Conservatives To Snub Female

The God Delusion, By Richard Dawkins

God And Allah Were Arguing, But Buddha Just Smiled

Click here to order a free copy of

Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 8 – September 25, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 7 - September 18, 2006

2006-09-17T08:18:00.000-07:00

“Three passions, simple but overwhelming strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge, and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind. These passions, like great winds, have blown me hither and thither, in a wayward course, over a deep ocean of anguish, reaching to the very verge of despair.”

These words of Bertrand Russell (recorded in the prologue to his Autobiography) have been reverberating in my mind ever since I first read them – in 1980 – as a young student about to endeavour to think for the first time.

It was with truly eschatological fear that I witnessed the unfolding events around Benedict’s Mohammed reference this week.

That the current “representative of ‘god’ on earth” can evoke tension extraordinaire by pronouncing unflatteringly on “the last prophet of ‘allah’ on earth” translates into dehumanising idiocy.

An overreaction?

Hardly.

Recall, if you will, the Danish “cartoon crisis” of 2005. Dozens lost their lives in the ensuing protests.

Enough said.

Religion must go.

But what then about human contentment… about human happiness?

In this issue, the claims of religious belief systems in dealing with reality are compared with a scientific paradigm… in search of happiness.

Contents

Publisher’s note

Editor’s note

In pusuit of happiness

Papal fallibility

Meet the new evangelicals

The Messiah Myth: The Near Eastern Roots Of Jesus And David

Benedict XVI cartoons

Click here to order a free copy of
Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 7 – September 18, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 6 - September 11, 2006

2006-09-10T13:09:00.000-07:00

Today all the world will remember this day, five years ago. TART Remarks publishes two perspectives, from the Los Angeles Times, on life after 9/11. The first considers “vibrant prayer movements catalyzed by 9/11”; the other looks at how Muslim Americans portray their faith in public after 9/11.

Intelligent Design, that informal intellectual settlement haphazardly constructed of the flotsam of Creationism, has reared its ugly head in South Africa, and, especially, in the Afrikaans language. ID was dealt a mortal blow in South Africa this last week with the eminent Professor Emeritus Phillip V. Tobias distancing himself unequivocally from those parts of Die Groot Avontuur (a recent ID apology in Afrikaans) which support ID.

The social benefits of teaching evolution in schools are considered in a review of a recent paper published in the South African Journal of Science.

Two book reviews from The Guardian are included: Dying to Win: Why Suicide Terrorists Do It, by Robert A Pape, and Tim Willocks's fundamentalist bloodfest, The Religion.

Contents

Publisher’s Note

Editor’s Note

Intelligent Design… Intelligently Debunked

The Social Benefits Of Teaching Evolution

Fundamentally Speaking

Ordure, Ordure

Post-9/11, More Are Putting Faith In Power Of Prayer

A Post-9/11 Identity Shift

Intelligent Design Cartoons

Click here to order a free copy of
Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 6 – September 11, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 5 - September 4, 2006

2006-09-10T12:58:00.000-07:00

Having addressed the existence of "god" in the previous issue, TART Remarks considers theology beyond "god" in this edition. It is more than a hundred years since Nietzsche declared that "God is dead", and yet…

With Intelligent Design aggressively promoted, the book by Human Genome Project head Francis Collins that attempts to demonstrate a harmony between science and evangelical Christianity, is considered. I can think of no better candidate to review this book than neuroscientist Sam Harris.

We report on the succession issue surrounding superstar evangelist Chuck Smith (the elder) and his son and touch on yet another poll in the United States that indicates how Americans currently see the Church and State issue.

Finally, an essay from The Guardian, on the problems of being a Muslim in contemporary Britain, is featured in the regular Humour slot.

Contents

Publisher’s Note

Editor’s Note

Can Theology Survive God?

The Language Of Ignorance

Religion… Even In The Movies

Father, Son And Holy Rift

Left And Christian Right Take Lumps In Poll

Back To School. Back To Reading, Writing, Arithmetic And Religion

How To Be An 'Ordinary, Decent' Muslim

Click here to order a free copy of
Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 5 – September 4, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 4 - August 28, 2006

2006-08-27T13:48:00.000-07:00

Does "god" exist? This is the issue under consideration this week. I have spent many hours working through volumnous notes collected over numerous years. So much more need be said. But the leading article this week is at bottom an honest attempt to better understand… Homo sapiens sapiens.

Dr. Jaco Gericke, of the University of Pretoria, contributes a refutation of Anselm's Ontological Argument. I am elated to publish something from Gericke's pen as I regard him as one of the world's most promising theologians. Perhaps this statement may be quoted in his honour at some distant future date, when all had been said about what is expected to be a fulgurant career.

The Illinois Democrat, Senator Barack Obama, is tipped to be the first member of a minority to win the White House. A specific American prejudice is briefly examined in this issue.

Having considered the case for and against "god", I publish a "Cartoon Essay" on the influence of "god" – and no better candidate presents himself than the "Leader of the Free World", George W Bush.

There is the usual snippets from around the world: religious influence on society. This week Hezbollah, the Episcopalians, the Rev. Jerry Falwell and stem cell research are noted.

TART Remarks has received it's first correspondence and publishes two letters, one from UNISA's Professor Spangenberg and another anonymously.

I invite readers to share with me. I am touched, and certainly impressed, by the reaction to TART Remarks. Next week, subsequent to the processing of specific information, TART Remarks will be delivered to more than 4,000 individuals globally. For a fifth issue, methinks that is not too shabby!

Contents

"I AM", or "He is not": does "god" exist?

A refutation of anselm's ontological argument

Barack Obama for the White House?

Hezbollah's successes should not blind British Muslims to its real aim

Episcopalians contemplate divided future

Rev. Falwell decries stem cell research

Stem cell bill worries Abbott

A cartoon essay – "god" in action

Click here to order a free copy of
Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 4 – August 28, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 3 - August 21, 2006

2006-08-20T10:27:00.000-07:00

The protest of Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) activists at the International Aids Conference in Toronto, Canada, is an object lesson for rational people to avoid lethargy and to take a stance against nonsense. Does faith have the same effect on the human condition than garlic, lemon and beetroot have on HIV/AIDS? Does protest against irrationality include protest against faith? Nutrition is important – is faith? There are certain benefits that simply cannot accrue from nutrition alone; does the same go for faith? TART considers this issue in Tolerance.

The Afrikaans press continues to dumb down its readers: Intelligent Design crops up in its pages regularly in a futile attempt to confirm an Intelligent Designer (“God”) at the helm of nature and humanity. The latest offering, by Die Groot Gedagte author, Gideon Joubert, is considered in “Intelligunt Dezine”… raising the dead at Die Burger.

Censorship, that bane of human freedom, is also alive and well and wearing the latest in designer clothing – all the more to be able to exist surreptitiously among us. (Is it not strange how complete butt nakedness can assume the appearance of designer wear?) What may we ordinary beings read, and see, and know – be exposed to… and what not, according to editors? Sensuur in ‘n goedkoop aandpak evaluates this issue.

I continue to be surprised at the reaction to TART Remarks. When comments range from “this poor lost soul has clearly never read the Bible” to “I respect his brutal, narking honesty” one feels justified in thinking that one may be doing the odd right thing, and do it right.

Nathan Bond

Contents

Tolerance

“Intelligunt Dezine”… raising the dead at Die Burger

Sensuur in ‘n goedkoop aandpak

Hungry for fresh recruits, cult-like Islamic groups know just when to pounce

Mainstream middle of the road

Welkom, baie welkom, meer as welkom

Our new Solar System

Misdaad in Suid Afrika

It's a god's life, having a chocolate bar named after you

Cinderella’s coach found!

Click here to order a free copy of
Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 3 – August 21, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 2 - August 14, 2006

2006-08-18T10:46:00.000-07:00

Die invloed van die Geloofsbestel op die Afrikaanse Pers het die afgelope week duidelik geword: George Claassen, Die Burger se wetenskapredakteur, sowel as ombudsman, en een van drie adjunk redakteurs, is summier ingelig dat hy voortaan nie meer wetenskapredakteur sal wees nie.

Ek monitor die Afrikaanse pers al sedert 2002 om berigte te identifiseer wat 'n hand op die blaas verhouding met godsdiens aandui.In hierdie uitgawe berig ek omvattend oor my bevindinge.

Die voortslepende geweld in die Midde-Ooste is beswaarlik nuuswaardig – nes die feit dat die son elke oggend opkom beswaarlik nuuswaardig is. Die verhouding tussen die Verenigde State van Amerika en die staat Israel is egter 'n ding wat my aandag hou. Ek publiseer 'n opstel hieroor wat ek reeds in Februarie 2004 geskryf het – the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Fundamentalisme gedy: Verlede week het ene dr. Bernard Ficker van Somerset-Wes 'n lesersbrief in By geskryf waarin hy beweer dat ons huidige weeklikse siklus van sewe dae die gevolg is van die sewe-daagse skeppingsweek van God.

Ek is oorweldig deur die reaksie wat ek op TART Remarks ontvang het oor die afgelope week!Baie dankie aan almal wat geskryf het, en wat gebel het. Hierdie tydskrif bestaan al lank in my agterkop en dis lekker om dit nou 'te sien".

Nathan Bond

Contents

Die Afrikaanse pers en godsdiens

The United States and Israel – a peculiar relationship

Die sewedagweek: Die gevolg van die Skepping?

The End of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason by Sam Harris

Religion-Related Fraud Getting Worse

Another movie to rile Christians

The Scientific Method - Creationist Method cartoon

Click here to order a free copy of
Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 2 – August 14, 2006

Vol. 1 No. 1 - August 7, 2006

2006-08-18T10:40:00.000-07:00

The immediate past saw many theological influences on the psyche of all the world and his wife.
Twee teologiedosente van die NG Kerk, proff. Jurie le Roux en Julian Müller, van die Fakulteit Teologie aan die Universiteit van Pretoria, wat van leerdwaling aangekla is, is op 28 Julie deur ’n kommissie van die Ring van Pretoria-Oos onskuldig bevind.

Die debat oor wetenskap en geloof gedy in die Kaapse media: Die wetenskapredakteur van Die Burger, dr. George Claassen, het Leon Rousseau se boek, Die Groot Avontuur: Wondere Van Die Lewe Op Aarde, op 17 Julie geresenseer. Dit het gelei tot 'n hewige debat op die koerant se brieweblad. Die adjunk-redakteur van Die Burger, dr. Leopold Scholtz, het Sake van die Dag ook aan die tema gewy.

Rapport, sowel as Die Burger het berig oor ‘n 72-jarige predikant van George en ‘n kreasionis van Riversdal wat "Noag se ark" iewers op 'n berg in Armenië gaan soek – op die gesag van navorsing van prof. William Shea, emiritus-hoogleraar aan die Andrews-universiteit in Michigan.

Ek verwys ook na ‘n resensie van Kurt Vonnegut se 1963-novelle Cat's cradle – ‘n persoonlike gunsteling en ‘n boek wat ek weer sal lees as een van die laaste dinge wat ek sou doen as ek net 24 uur het om te leef. (Ek sal ook na John Lennon se Imagine luister.)

Nathan Bond

Contents

Tukkie-teoloë vrygespreek

Die wetenskap- en geloofdebat

Beriggewing in die Afrikaanse pers bevorder goedgelowigheid

Cat's Cradle

An engineer, a physicist, a mathematician, and a theologian...

Click here to order a free copy of
Tart Remarks, Vol. 1 No. 1 – August 7, 2006