‘Invention of Lying’: Anti-Christian
by S.T. KarnickAfter a couple of weeks of unsubstantiated rumors, it has been confirmed that the forthcoming film The Invention of Lying is indeed intended to satirize religion and religious believers.
New York Post critic Kyle Smith has seen the film and describes it as “a full-on attack on religion in general and Christianity in particular. It might be the most blatantly, one-sidedly atheist movie ever released by a major studio, in this case Warner Bros.”
Although the commercials and theatrical trailers have presented the film as a cute comedy and made no allusion at all to any religious angle, much less a concerted case for atheism, Smith reports that the basis of the film is its attack on religion:
Gervais delights in what a faith-based society would call blasphemy, setting up an imaginary world in which no one ever lies. Except his character, who spreads what Gervais obviously sees as the biggest lie of all: Belief in God.
Smith’s description of the film makes it clear that the protagonist’s behavior represents a simpleminded atheist’s idea of the meaning of religion:
There is a “Man in the Sky,” he says, who is looking down at all of us and is responsible for everything that happens. Yes, he explains to one woman, he gave your mom cancer — but he’s also responsible for curing her. The people aren’t happy that “The Man in the Sky” is behind all human suffering. “F— The Man in the Sky!” cries one citizen, and the crowd begins to get angry. A magazine cover exclaims, “Man in the Sky Kills 40,000 in Tsunami!” But Gervais’s character insists that whatever damage the Man in the Sky causes, he eventually makes up for it all in the end by providing a beautiful mansion for everyone after they die, at least for those who don’t commit three or more immoral acts, and by making it so that everyone can reunite with their loved ones in the next life.
Smith concludes by stating that the film is mean-spirited overall and that audiences are unlikely to be pleased by Gervais’s attack on their basic beliefs while critics will enjoy this latest attempt to epater la bourgeousie:
Gervais is an atheist, which is fine, but his mean-spiritedness (even before the atheism theme enters the movie, it’s sour and misanthropic) and the film’s reduction of all religion to an episode of crowd hysteria are not going to be warmly received. Except maybe by critics.
In a comment on Smith’s article, a reader quotes from Gervais’s long, poorly written, and unapologetic but highly defensive and spectacularly clichéd response to the building controversy on the film, published on the actor’s blog. Here’s Gervais’s post, with some responses of my own (in brackets):
A couple more web sites have picked up on a few Christians (not all – most Christians have a sense of humour) saying that The Invention of Lying is blasphemous.
Here are my seven deadly sins of jumping to conclusions:
1. No one has seen the film. [False--SK]
2. Even if the film suggests there is no God, it is a fictional world. [a truly pathetic evasion.] One of my favourite films is ‘It’s a wonderful life’ and at no time am I offended by the suggestion in this wonderful work of fiction that there is a God. [Nice but irrelevant.]
3. If the film was not set in a fictional world and suggested there is no God then that’s fine too, as it is anyone’s right not to believe in God. [and it's other people's right to criticize a filmmaker for what he chooses to put in his movies.]
4. By suggesting there is no God you are not singling out Christianity. [but you certainly are including Christianity, so Christians have a right to answer back.]
5. Not believing in God cannot be blasphemous. Blasphemy is acknowledging a God to insult or offend etc. [Gervais's atheism is not the complaint: characterizing God as Gervais allegedly does in the film is what people are concerned about, and it is definitely a case of blasphemy if the film is at all as described.]
6. Even if it was blasphemous, which it isn’t [false], then that’s OK too due to a little god I like called “freedom of speech.” [freedom of speech is not at issue. Blasphemy and contempt for other people's beliefs are the topic of discussion.] That said, I am not trying to offend anyone [but offending them all the same, while hiding behind a fig leaf of good intentions.]. That would be a waste of such a privilege.
7. I am an atheist, but this is not atheist propaganda [Well, if it looks like atheist propaganda, and it walks like atheist propaganda, and it quacks like atheist propaganda...]. When creating an imaginary world you have to make certain decisions. We decided also that there would be no surrealist art, no racism, no flattery, no fiction, no metaphor, and no supernatural. However, we decided that apart from that one “lying gene”, humans evolved with everything else as we have it today. Joy, hope, ambition, ruthlessness, greed, lust, anger, jealousy, sadness, and grief. It’s just a film [another pathetic evasion]. If any of the themes in it offend you or bore you, or just don’t make sense to you, you should put everything right when you make a film [How revoltingly arrogant and elitist. As if the only way to answer a person were to go back in time, pursue the same career they have taken up, and answer them in the same form. This is a truly astonishing insult to his potential audience.].
I really hope everyone enjoys the film [Even though he lives in the relatively unchurched UK, it's quite amazing that he can be so grotesquely ignorant as to have imagined that the great majority of his potential American audience would not find this movie idea offensive.].’ and keeps an open mind [regarding whether they like blasphemy? That is even more arrogant than the last sentence of his deadly sin number seven.]. I believe in peace on Earth, and good will to all men. [Not all harmful things are done with ill will. Gross negligence can be just as destructive, and merits an equal response.] I do as I would be done by, and believe that forgiveness is one of the greatest virtues [but of course he claims to have nothing in his film that requires forgiving.]. I just don’t believe I will be rewarded for it in heaven [It seems likely he's right about that much.]. That’s all.
It will be interesting to see whether audiences take to the film as more people find out what The Invention of Lying is all about. Telling your audience that their most profound beliefs are stupid and wrong seems a fine plan for eliciting positive reviews from elitist movie critics but a very bad way to lure people into movie theaters.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
281 Comments
Hmm… and I was going to see that movie… however, I might just wait and see how the critics and the masses rate it… if the critics give it "two thumbs up" then I will refrain from watching… that really should be my measure anyway… I am a Christian and it bugs me when people are meanspirited about ANY satire of anything… It bugged me when Colbert became mean spirited (I thought he was funny before) during the election… and I do have a sense of humor and I know there are flaws in the "organized" parts of the faith and I can laugh right along with… but again, it depends on if it is mean-spirited.
A film that does this with the progressive religion would offend him to the point of apoplexy, I suspect. Anybody want to volunteer? I'd pay $10.50 to see that.
looked good, had no idea about the agenda, and now i will definitely NOT go see it….glad i read this article
And by the way I'm agnostic but I am sick to death of people banging on Christianity. They seem to universally do it because they know they need to knock Christ out to get Marx in. That's bad for everybody and it makes me a defender of Christianity out of pure self-interest.
thanks for the information, i saw clips from it but really couldn't figure out what it was about.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Melissa L. Sutton and Big Hollywood. Big Hollywood said: ‘Invention of Lying’: Anti-Christian http://bit.ly/KBNlp [...]
I wasn't really sure what the plot of this was until reading the article, but now I'm interested in seeing the movie. Thanks for giving me some more info about it, and hopefully you'll grow a sense of humor someday.
take off Gervais
I'm a little confused – you're saying that Gervais has grossly misunderstood God, and you find that offensive? If his representation is that far off, then you have nothing to be offended about, and it will be apparent to everyone that Gervais is a moron. And if he's not so far off the mark, shouldn't you be worrying more about what's wrong with your understanding of God that Gervais appears so close to the truth?
Disclosure: I'm an atheist, but not a fan of Gervais.
James Okeefe needs to make a movie!!! A movie about a progressive society where a Christian is thrown in. If he did, I'd put in a few duckets for that! I mean investment duckets. Did you all go see American Carol!? That was our goofy all film, it was great… I wished it was more successful at the box office. At least buy it on DVD.
Who cares if it makes fun of religion? I am guessing it is making fun of blind faith which should be ridiculed. Take a deep breath, a true Conservative wouldn't give a shit.
A true social conservative should give a shit.
Anti-Christian bias is coming at us non-stop.
I'd like to invite Mr. Gervais to my church. I hope he enjoys it and keeps an open mind.
Well he's discussed religion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, and considered him a very intelligent and decent person (who happens to be wrong on an important issue, in his opinion). I imagine that takes a reasonable amount of open-mindedness. I'd also guess that Rowan Williams knows more about religion than anyone at your church, for what that's worth.
As a right-wing, very Conservative Atheist, all I can say and support is that the 1st Amendment protects both sides of this debate. Our Founding Fathers were Genius in there design of the Constitution.
We loved "American Carol." The whole family saw it and we still quote from the movie.
"That was my car…" Robert Davi was hilarious! Actually the whole film was really funny.
Ditto on everything you said.
Religious folks (unless of course, they are on jihad or something) do not creep me out at all, but there are a lot religious folks who think people like us are the anti-christ.
You sound like I used to. You've got a great attitude.
By the way, I'm now a Christian.
You and me both. I'm going out to the pond and squash some tadpoles barefoot. Now THAT'S a good time.
Meh- if his depiction of religion is as simple-minded as appears from the synopsis and quotes above then he's preaching to the ignorant. At the same time, the map is not the territory- if your sense of spirituality is offended, move along and let this guy make a fool out of himself because he's going after a rather childishly caricatured strawman. If you are offended because you feel your religion is under attack… well then I'd say you might be the one who has some soul-searching to do.
"it will be apparent to everyone that Gervais is a moron"
What a great world that would be and one in which everyone would know better than to believe things that are absurd ("You're the only girl in the world I've ever loved.") But that's not the world we live in. There's an old saying (misattributed to G K Chesterton): "The first effect of not believing in God is to believe in anything." And it's true.
I've never met a Christian who thinks atheists are anti-christs. And I know a LOT of Christians.
If you are a Christian why would you be surprised that there are atheists in the world? The New Testament explains that people will reject God and they occassionally become "mean-spirited " about it.
"I'd like to invite Mr. Gervais to my church. I hope he enjoys it and keeps an open mind. " Why? Do you think that he's a seeking the truth or justification for his rejection of God? I heard him on the Archbishop of Canterberry's Christmas program. He certainly did have questions but they really weren't very clever or original. Whether he accepts answers is not our problem.
If you mean turn the other cheek, you're right. If you mean "shut-up and stop talking about God or correct those who ignorantly mock God (freedom of speech)," then no, you're wrong. IMHO.
Just imagine – if he did the same type of film regarding Islamist religion – he'd be marked for death!
Dittos
Strangely I find the opposite – it's people who believe in God (though not necessarily the doctrinally pure God of the Christianity of your choice) who tend to believe in all manner of things, from ghosts to homeopathy to the law of averages. There are plenty of credulous agnostics as well (people who are 'in touch with their spirituality' but not members of an organized religion). Not too many atheists, in my experience, fall for such things. I'm being a little unfair, of course, as part of the 'qualification' for being an atheist is not being credulous.
I'm thankful for this post. It's ridiculous that freedom of speech is even mentioned. Of course he has the right to make whatever movie he wants. Atheists have been trotting out their God-of-the-Gaps argument for years, I'm not going to spend 10 bucks so I can be slapped in the face with it.
Never mind Islam, how about SOMEONE making a film trashing Scientology already (or even indirectly, ala Bowfinger, which was a decade ago)? You can't tell me they don't have it coming…
As a long time atheist I am as offended as any Christian at yet another assault on religion. Mr. Gervais will not be receiving any tribute from me.
Never learn religion from an atheist.
And hopefully you'll grow a brain someday.
For what its worth (having not seen the movie and basing my comments solely on the post) "the man in the sky" would seem to be singular, and therefore any construed attack against Christians is equally an attack on Jews and Muslims. Maybe the Islamists WILL go after him (although I hope not; at least for the time being we still believe in the first amendment in this country).
The key point is, barring criminal activity, the man is free to "publish" whatever kind of movie he wants to, and I am free to refrain from giving him money for it.
Oh who cares? It's a film that imagines a world where lying doesn't exist. It's not like it has any bearing on the real world whatsoever. If Mel Gibson and C.S. Lewis can make their Christian propaganda artworks (neither of which I have a problem with by the way), I don't see why Ricky Gervais or anyone else can't make their "atheist propaganda" artworks. In fact, I heard an interview on the BBC yesterday with Gervais and he was far from the mean-spirited Bill Maher-type he has been portrayed as in this thread, even when he was addressing this very subject.
Do you have a case of "fatwah envy"? So far as I can see – and even Mr. Karnick agrees above – the movie applies to all religions.
Who said that they couldn't?
So disappointed!! This movie was being filmed all around us in Lowell, MA, where I was working at the time, and I couldn't wait for it to be released. I like to see movies for inspiration and entertainment though, not to be made angry or depressed.
You're completely misinterpreting the statement. While I can't speak for homeopathy and things of that sort, it should come as no surprise that many believing Christians or other religious people would believe in ghosts or other things of that sort as well. Why? Because believing in God is inherently of a spiritual nature, which usually implies belief in the existence of other spiritual beings (the devil, for instance). The "anything" nolo is referring to is these secularized religions which try to transfer people's faith from spiritual to earthly matters, like the usual "ologies" and "isms." And you'd better believe that atheists are just as gullible as the rest of us. For example, Robert Owen, the 19th-century utopian socialist (coincidence?) was a lifelong opponent of organized religion, particularly Christianity, once declaring that he would regard the crowning achievement of his life to be the eradication of religion. Yet by the end of his life, he was a follower of that vague quasi-religion called spirituality. He defended it on the grounds that it was a rational system, but in the end, he turned out to be as credulous, to use your term, as anyone else.
I don't mind if a filmmaker questions Christianity as long as it's not done in a malicious way. It's human nature to question. What we don't have to do is insult people with differing beliefs and from the reviews I've read of this film, I'd guess Gervais is saying that those who do believe in God are buying into the "big lie." Saying that people who believe in God are misguided, credulous– whatever, doesn't seem to be showing much respect for different points of view and that's why I have no interest in seeing his film.
I'm agnostic too, but the all out war against Christianity is so obvious and so hateful, that I too am a defender of Christianity.
Ha, ha. Pretty funny. An atheist discussing religion with an apostate. Intelligent and decent he may be, but not exactly a strong defense of your rhetoric.
It's interesting to note, too, that some of the staunchest Christians were raised in communist East Germany and Russia. For people living that life, the State is most definitely not enough.
Also, you are right about getting Christ out and Marx in. The Declaration of Independance states our rights are given to us by our Creator. I am not really sure if there is a Creator, but I would much rather have my rights given to me by a Creator then by our government, an entity that can then decide to take our rights away.
By definition, isn't all faith blind (and therefore "should be ridiculed"), or are you suggesting that some beliefs are worthy of ridicule, while others are not? If the latter, can I assume that those things that are above ridicule are things that you believe?
What does any of this have to do with that "true conservatives" would, or would not, give a shit about? It isn't a poltical issue.
Why would belief in God predispose someone to believe in random spirits? God, Satan, angels (which I almost mentioned, but deliberately avoided) etc. are documented 'facts'. The 'fact' that a cherub exists makes it precisely no more likely that a spirit not mentioned in the Bible does.
Congratulations, though, on finding a credulous atheist. Putting aside that an atheist who believes in spirituality isn't an atheist, yes there are many credulous atheists. They'll fall for frauds as will anyone else – I'd guess there has never been a human who hasn't fallen for something they would have been wiser to avoid. But, as I said before, in my experience atheists are less likely to fall for such things because they tend to be critical of things that seem unlikely.
On what grounds do you call him an apostate? The fact that you don't agree with his interpretation of the Bible? Or did he renounce Christianity and I just missed the news?
Anti-christs are people who try to persuade believers of a religion against those beliefs, usually for personal gain or just out of a desire to see people flounder. Atheists are just people who choose not to believe in God for reasons of their own, and, for the most part, don't care at all if others want to believe in God. There's a huge difference between the two, and most "religious folk" know it, honest. =)
While I'm mildly offended at what most "athiests" say about Christianity (since a lot of athiests I meet are more anti-God than simply not believing in a religion at all), I'm not surprised. I guess I'm just not at a point of caring anymore.
This is probably bad since I am a Christian, however this is how I feel. Honestly, I don't care one way or another if you accept Christ. I don't care about your soul, or where you're going when you die. I know where I'm going and honestly, that's good enough for me. If you're nice to me, then I'm nice to you. But if you go out of your way to rip into God or Christ, then I don't care what happens to you. Just do yourself a favor and make 110% sure that there's no God to answer to when you die, because eternity's an awfully long time to be wrong for.
I am offended, but not for myself. I'm offended for my Father in Heaven, who (whom? whatever) I believe is probably made very sad by this movie and others like it. It doesn't mean I'm going to rail against Gervais or anything like that, but it does mean I won't be seeing this movie, and I'll continue to tell people what I believe when the subject comes up.
Given the number of Christians who think that other Christians (e.g. the Pope, the President) are the anti-christ, I'm surprised at your experience. I'm happy you live among such well-adjusted Christians though.
Why is it atheisim is worn like a badge of honori don't find much that is happy about other then you don't think anything exists outside of what you think exists. Plus to me athiests are just depressing because they have no idea what happen's after we die so it's kinda depressing to me. Plus i don't know i guess refusing to think something doesn't exist cause you can't see it is rather closed minded
I don't see what good that would do. For the most part, Scientologists are just people who believe in a religion. While I think the tenets of the religion are a little strange, coming from my Christian beliefs, I wouldn't wish persecution or ridicule on anybody because of their spiritual beliefs. They're just people searching for the truth, just like the rest of us. Those who break the law, as it seems some of the leaders may be doing, should absolutely be prosecuted for it, just like those in any religion who break the law, but that's as far as it should go. Films trashing Scientology are just as bad as films trashing Christianity and Islam.
Regarding your scatological comments: considering the review of this film, it looks like Gervais, is obviously not a "true Conservative".
I'm not sure I want to "take a deep breath" anywhere near it.
Regarding your scatological comments: considering the review of this film, it looks like Gervais is obviously not a "true Conservative".
I'm not sure I want to "take a deep breath" anywhere near it.
Actually the original assertion is that atheists are more likely to, so if you'll agree that they're just as likely, I'm happy to settle for that.
What a brave little man the extra is… Be really brave and do a movie criticizing Allah, chump.
in my experience atheists are less likely to fall for such things because they tend to be critical of things that seem unlikely.
In my experience, atheists are more likely to to follow their own pre-disposed beliefs than listen to facts. Most of the atheists I've met are that way become of some hurt in their past or chip on their shoulder. The idea that atheists are more "critical of things" is a joke.
Smell?
I don't think atheists are the anti-christ…
It does seem a bit disingenuous for Gervais to write a screenplay that assumes religion is based entirely on lies, and then say it's an imaginary world so don't take it seriously. It's an imaginary world which is defined by the absence of lies, and if the absence of religion is a result of the absence of lies, then the implication is inescapable.
Personally, I'm convinced that the claims of christianity are untrue – BUT I still see a massive hole in Gervais' logic. By and large, religion is NOT created out of whole cloth by liars (some later cults may be, but they're the exception that proves the rule). Rather, religions start out as honest attempts to understand the world. Their claims may be superceded as we learn more, but the point is, they stem more from honest misunderstanding than from dishonesty. The absence of lies would not prevent religion – Gervais' fictional world ought to include religion within it, at least as an historical thing that people used to believe.
700 billion faith based (christian movies) and you can't even stand to see a SINGLE atheist movie released?
What are you gonna do Christians? you have many options from your religion's storied history you could:
a) Incinerate Ricky Gervais alive
b) Burn all of his family/friends as to root out ALL of the nonbelievers
c) Murder in cold blood the first born son of everyone in his town.
Don't give that crap about having the wrong "interpretation" or "Translation". Just go by the actual text i read in school. Yes we studied the bible at my Private school (same one George W. Bush went to)
As another Conservative Atheist I'm all for every religion around the world getting GRILLED. Those with rock-solid faith should welcome it to because if you truly have FAITH then no amount of needling can touch you while those with questionable faith will be weeded out of your church. Why is BLIND Faith such a noble quality anyway? have you ever actually THOUGHT about the precepts you hold so dear, Mr. AVG american CHRISTIAN. How anyone would want to associate with such a revoltingly repugnant group who've perpetrated such hideous acts on humanity is beyond me…
Bottomline: Either you believe in a world where magical shit happens all of the time or the world runs accordingly to the laws of physics and Science in general. Do you believe in God because Someone told you to? or somebody from authority SCARED you into believing? or is just a tradition you follow? Better explanation: Religion is a VIRUS of the human computer (brain) and very difficult to extricate. For those of you more enlightened, american, conservative-atheists: UNITE. I think we should call our party the "Know-Somethings"
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by a "true conservative". What you're describing seems more like the classical liberal; that is, the ability to recognize the validity of ideas other than your own. That's never really been a hallmark of conservatism.
Wow, any way to play the victim, apparently.
Your 7 "sins" are off base.
Question one – what do you mean by "characterizing God" and how can that act be offensive? If you mean that his saying that God is imaginary is offensive, then you need a thicker skin.
Question 2 – how is this really singling out Christians? Your 4th 'sin' says Christians have a right to object because of the God angle, but not once is it put out exactly how Christians in particular are demonized? Oh, that's right – they're not. Kyle Smith is looking to be a victim with his statement that the film is "a full-on attack on … Christianity in particular" – that is a lie.
Question 3 – how is this propaganda? Its entertainment, pure and simple. Was The Golden Compass propaganda? Was the Passion of the Christ propaganda? How about Kundun or Seven Years in Tibet? Sometimes a spade is a spade, and this film is just entertainment.
Seriously, if you don't like it don't watch it. It sounds like you haven't seen the film, so you really aren't in any position of authority to comment on its contents. Secondly – NO ONE IS CONSTANTLY BASHING CHRISTIANITY PEOPLE!! Cite me the list of ANYTHING out there with a solid anti-Christian theme and I will concede, but honestly, there isn't any campaign to oppress Christian ideology, and there likely never will be. Just because people who aren't Christian have found their voice doesn't mean that there's an attack on the religion – some of us are just fed up with having a constant presence of Christianity-based crap around us all the time. We ALL deserve a voice, which is the cornerstone of Democracy. Perhaps the Christian community should practice tolerance on this one, and turn the other cheek (especially the one with a tongue in it). Its just a movie – go get bent on something more worth your time, like fighting for the rights of others and feeding the world. THOSE are causes to get behind!
For those of us ancient ones who remember Oh God! With George Burns, John Denver and Terri Garr– that was truly a delightful film Back in the days when Hollywood did not need to dis the Judeo Christian tradtion. What we need is more Oh God's and less of this type of nihilistic insults. I still love the scene where John Denver and Terri Garr are talking and She asks him something like, so you think you talked to God? And Denver responds, somewhat frenetically, Well he says he's God. I suggest that the best revenge is for everyone to rent Oh God! And the sequel and stay home with microwave popcorn (which is the best.)
By being a Christian didn't you give up your right to a brain?
A liberal (politically) atheist sat down and had a nice chat with a liberal druid, oops I mean Christian.. and this proves what exactly? On what grounds do you conclude he knows more than anyone else at PerfectTommy's church about Christianity? because he agrees with YOUR interpretation of the Bible?
A liberal (politically) atheist sat down and had a nice chat with a liberal druid, oops I mean Christian.. and this proves what exactly? On what grounds do you conclude that Rowan Williams knows more than anyone else at PerfectTommy's church about Christianity? because he agrees with YOUR interpretation of the Bible?
Yeah maybe O'Keefe can put on some blackface (because he's so good at imagining how minorities dress), educate us on how nobody really needs especially the poor, need healthcare.
Wow, you Christians aren't even tolerant of each other, and you wonder why your faith is dying?
Wow, DJ. Did some Christian bully used to beat you up and take your lunch money? Quite a lot of pent up anger there, it seems.
There were so many rhetorical questions in your post it's really hard to choose, but if I could pick just one, I believe in God because there's no way to work backwards in time to the point of the appearance of matter from non-matter. The best "science" can do is postulate the Big Bang, which STARTS WITH a little ball of cosmic crap floating around. Until they can explain where the crap came from, I'll continue to believe in God.
Faith is really a pretty simple construct: the existence of design and order in every aspect of creation demands that the scientific method objectively applied would start out with the God hypothesis. Atheism is the opposite of science.
Evangelical Christians in this country are totally having a case of fatwah envy, you know if they could they'd round up all the non-believers.
"Cite me the list of ANYTHING out there with a solid anti-Christian theme and I will concede…"
Well, the Federal Ninth Circuit Court comes to mind, but that's just off the top of my head.
Incinerate Ricky Gervais alive, burn all of his family/friends as to root out ALL of the nonbelievers, murder in cold blood the first born son of everyone in his town.
Yeesh. People get upset over this and start complaining about it on the internet. Slow down and take a deeep breath
How anyone would want to associate with such a revoltingly repugnant group who've perpetrated such hideous acts on humanity is beyond me…
Well if you want to play that card, considering the wanton slaughter of believers by atheists in the last century (USSR, Romania & Cambodia to name a few) How anyone would want to associate with such a revoltingly repugnant group who've perpetrated such hideous acts on humanity is beyond me…
Bottomline: Either you believe in a world where magical shit happens all of the time or the world runs accordingly to the laws of physics and Science in general.
Depends on what world you believe in. I believe in the God who according to the scriptures made the world according to weight & measure (sorry, the verse for that escapes me at the moment), who also said "Speak to the Earth, and it shall teach thee." (Job). The same God that the founder of modern chemistry, Robert Boyle once described as "Not making the world the way He did unless He wanted us to understand it."
Dude, Atlas Shrugged was a marginally entertaining novel that had some good points in it but your lavish, fanatical devotion to Ayn Rand is too dogmatic for me.
Tempist in a teapot or Obama in a Rio. Relax people, blasphemy is in the eye of the beholder, I am more offended by Vegietales, or All Good Dogs Go To Heaven.
My only objection to the movie is the "(dis)honesty in advertising" element.
C'mon, Mr. Gervais. If you're a real man… if you're truly convicted about your atheist convictions (?), then grow some cajones and broadcast it to the world!
Tell us what your movie is about. Shout it from your own secular mountaintop.
Instead, you take the cowardly way out. You lie, and pretend, and deceive… and, because of all this dishonesty… you defraud your audience out of their money.
Once they've paid for the ticket, there's no un-doing it. Once they've plunked down the $10, it's too late; they have irreversibly supported their enemy.
Of course, you don't care. You just want their money. And, you'll laugh about how you duped 'em.
You're a gutless gelding.
Eagerly awaiting the New Hollywood!
As a missionary kid and former christian I can tell you for sure the infighting among these people is legendary. I'll always remember my parents telling me my devout catholic cousins weren't "real" christians…like them. I left the religion mostly due to this kind of stuff and also because no one actually empoyed their frontal lobes when thinking about their deity. He's kind of masochistic, which I think some people sorta' dig, so they believe in that construct. Gervais is probably making fun of this and the fact that deities in general are any construct we want to invent. Religious people do NOT have a sense of humor if they feel their beliefs are being attacked and I doubt they will go see the movie. But who really cares? I doubt the movie was actually made for them. There are a monstrous growing number of ex-name-your-religion types like myself out there who WIll go see it.
I concur.
I concur.
I agree with jic. He is able to make whatever film on whatever subject he wishes. The problem begins when he tries to pass it off as one thing (a piece-of-fluff comedy) when it is another thing entirely (an attack on religion disguised as a comedic piece-of-fluff). Nowhere in the trailer does it ever hint at it being the "anti-theist propaganda" it is.
I highly recommend all of Gervais' projects: The Office (UK and US), Extras, the podcasts, etc. He is quite brilliant. He is an unabashed atheist and can be quite arrogant in expressing his view. However, almost everything he does – while it may seem mean-spirited – is light-hearted and tongue in cheek (see Emmy award shoes from the past couple of years).
In short, let's not over react here.
Please tell me more St. Nico. I'm an Evangelical Christian who owns guns and studies Krav Maga and I'd love to be in one of them round-em-up posses you're talking about. I guess I'm just hanging around with the wrong crowd. Wait. I hang around with Evangelical Christians (and agnostics, and atheists, and Jews, and Hindus, etc.), and I've yet to hear a peep about this fatwah envy you've uncovered. I'm sure you're right. Just post their phone number or e-mail here. I want to join. I want to join.
Potential Member of Fatwah Enviers Annon.
[...] to convince me that I am too dumb for words. So I thought I'd pass along this little heads up : ) Article here. __________________ Shalom, jessi PCA Steelers fan exiled to Virginia *my bliggity, bloggity blog* [...]
"I don't see why Ricky Gervais or anyone else can't make their "atheist propaganda" artworks"
You might as well post that this thread is about Ricky Gervais not being able to go gluten free. No one's brought it up, bro. Oh, except you.
Seriously? If you believe in God, and believe he is good, but also acknowledge there's a lot of crap in the world today, doesn't that kind of run towards acknowledgement of evil spirits?
I don't want to get hung up on the precise definition of atheism, though I will argue that if you had asked Owen (or others of his ilk) about spirituality, they would have denied any anything like an actual belief in God. He himself rejected any talk of it on his deathbed. And while I used that as an example, because it was the first thing to come to mind, my main point was that atheists, contrary to your argument, are just as likely to put their faith in something as non-atheists, the difference being that their faith is in the world, while that of Christians is in God. Whether the individual case is something naturalistic like evolution or something political like numerology or socialism, it's the same old story in the end: people still contemplate perfection and redemption of mankind, only now they trust in the progressive evolution of the human race rather than its salvation through Christ (or another religious figure).
I know it's hard to do, but Christ was quite clear: love your enemies. That has to mean you care about their eternity, no?
But you're allowed to have sex with whomever and whatever you want! According to the Left, that's all the freedom you need.
(/sarcasm)
i felt the same way about the Passion of Christ…was i up in arms? no. Did i whine and moan? no?
Sorry Christian..everyone has a right to think and feel as they do. We ALL do not need the help of your invisible lord to make it through our daily lives. I dont push my beliefs on you so i would like some reciprocation.
But you're allowed to have sex with whomever (18 and up) you want! According to the Left, that's all the freedom you need.
(/sarcasm)
"Religious people do NOT have a sense of humor if they feel their beliefs are being attacked and I doubt they will go see the movie."
This surprises you…how? If you had something you strongly believed in, and centered your life around to some degree, and then someone came out and ridiculed it, something tells me you might not join in the laughter, either. Your inability to understand even this one point, let alone your other comments, leads me to suspect your entire life story is made up just so you can do a mock "expose" on what kind of people we Christians truly are.
"where magical sh*t happens"
This is one of the best strawman attacks I've ever seen. Good show.
By the way, the Bible is against magic, especially magical sh*t.
Rowan Williams…that's the guy who said some form of Sharia law should be introduced in Britain, right?
ACLU
Well, to give a possibility, I'm not sure we can blame the marketing on Gervias. He might have been willing to man up on his atheism, but the film makers almost never have a say in how a film is packaged and sold.
So any negative reaction is an over-reaction? Good to know.
The only over reactions I've seen are by folks like DJ White.
I was referring to those christians who said they had a sense of humor when it came to their faith. Don't feel special..no one has a sense of humor when it comes to what they believe in. And that's why I said I doubt the movie was made for them. And they can lose all the outrage.
Oh, but wait, christians LOVE to be outraged. It a badge of HONOR to be picked on by the unrepentant! As far as "exposing you for what you really are"…well, I think on this board you've all a done a pretty darn good job. You are really your best "advertising".
I think the "Stars" are working on getting that age limit reduced.
Its problematical at the moment but its early yet.
lighten up
"The first effect of not believing in God is to believe in anything." And it's true. Yes it is. Within in every living human being is something that drives him/her toward "faith" it's the X factor in the human…….That may play out in a BELIEF in God, Nothing, Monkeys, Cattle, Stones, Clouds, or the Sun, but it's there….. so if one says they are an atheist, then they are putting their faith in nothing, but they are still seeking a belief system.
That is the essence of mankind. Could it be it is because he is a spiritual creature after all??
The real problem with the premise is that greed, lust, etc. are in fact predicated on lies… lies you tell to yourself. For instance, that the momentary pleasure is worth destroying a relationship with your spouse, child, coworker… That making immoral choices in order to have power or stuff will not seriously damage your relationships with other people and with God. If there was no lying, then there would be no sin, because in truth God's ways are always the best from an eternal perspective and if we could simply choose them there wouldn't be a problem. But we want to believe the lies. And the ultimate lie is that we know better than God, and it would seem that is the one that Mr. Gervais is promoting.
I assume you mean't this reply for Old Tom who can respond to you
much better than I can. Please allow me to ask you a question,
should a loved one of yours have a debilitating sickness, fogive me, God fobid,
do you leave it to your Doctor, I assume on faith, alone or is a little outside help
asked for. I assume you are an agnostic or atheist or other non believer type?
No offense meant, just asking.
That's the whole reason why that line's in the Declaration of Independence — their whole argument rested on the government NOT being the highest authority. Not the British, not the new government that was about to be created… there's still Someone who outranks them.
Funny, I don't see that anywhere in the Bible.
You have your beliefs, Christians have theirs, stop being an ass to folks who actually have a moral compass. Go back to your Free Polanski rally.
As an Agnostic, I find Atheist to be the most inconsiderate and overall boorish lot of people on Earth. They suffer from terminal inconsolability, their religion of hate-all-religions, or as I call it the Religion of Denial, seems to be a self assuring superiority complex based solely on their inability to believe in what others believe. They can no more definitively prove that God does not exist than a religious person can prove that one does, but they remain certain they're right, proving their Atheism to be only another belief system, one that only reinforces their ignorance of and hatred for the majority of the people in the world who do believe. They become what they hate the most, preachers of denial, promoting disdain while claiming to follow a higher calling. Silly, isn't it?
Religion… Believing in God, isn't the problem… it's what man does in the name of god … that's the problem.
"Lord, I have nothing against You, but protect me from Your followers."
For comparison: If you're white, I ask that you go up to any black man, and say, "Sup, n__ga." After his reaction, ask about his sense of humor.
This is not a simple matter of a difference in "interpretation". He willingly and knowingly goes against much of what the bible, and even his church, teaches. Foundational blocks that were set down by God through the prophets of the old testament and Christ and the apostles of the new. Ideas Christians in the first 300 years of the religion were killed for.
June 23 2008 TimesOnLine
"The Archbishop of Nigeria accused the Western Church of apostasy last night and attacked the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, for leading it into error."
——–
He favors accommodating Sharia law, much of which certainly goes against biblical teachings. On his website is the entire lecture he gave last year. He lays out an argument for considering, and in some cases excusing, cultural differences with regards to the laws of his own country. On the one hand he claims not to advocate a separate system for Islamists, yet in his very own lecture he says "it might be possible to think in terms of… a scheme in which individuals retain the liberty to choose the jurisdiction under which they will seek to resolve certain carefully specified matters…".
From the TimesOnLine February 8, 2008:
"A senior Church of England clergyman called today for the resignation of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, over his remarks supporting Sharia in England.
The call, from a long-standing member of the Church's governing body, the General Synod, demonstrated the strength of the backlash Dr Williams that faces from within his own Church — as well as from political and other faith leaders.
The senior Synod member, who insisted on remaining anonymous, told The Times: "A lot of people will now have lost confidence in him. I am just so shocked, and cannot believe a man of his intelligence could be so gullible…"
—–
There are more examples. I find it ironic that you, being an atheist, would choose to defend a man in a position of religious authority something that you, by definition reject outright.
Once thing is for certain: The same papers that wouldn't print a cartoon of Muhammed for fear of offending Muslims will be hailing this movie.
There are two opposing viewpoints here. and while there may be some sarcasm, it is hardly intolerance.
I'm a small-L libertarian and a huge Gervais fan (funniest guy around nowadays). I'll be very surprised if the "Invention of Lying" is in fact mean-spirited. Maybe biting and witty, but most adults should be comfortable enough with their own faith to be able to stand a jab once in a while. Gervais isn't the mean type and is way more cerebral than, say, a Bill Maher or Stephen Colbert.
There are two opposing viewpoints here. While there may be some sarcasm, it is hardly intolerance.
Why are you all surprise about all these films coming out of Hollywood that attack christians? Hollywood HATES conservatives, christians, America, John Wayne, God, religion and they will NEVER EVER allow any conservative make a film to promote these ideals. Hollywood is a leftist mafia, they own all the money, resources, to fund any whacky idea they have dreamed of. There is NOTHING we can do about the crap they throw out onto the marketplace except we just don't patronize their lies. If you are a conservative and you want to send Hollywood a message, don't pay your money to see these films. Support films made by conservatives, every DVD you buy from a conservative filmmaker is a victory for conservatives out there. Conservatives don't get theatrical release because they don't get green lighted. Only Mel Gibson had his own money to produce and distribute and make the 600 million he made off THE PASSION.
Hollywood will not allow conservative filmmakers like myself play in their sandbox so we have to create our own sandbox where No Liberals Need Apply and all this is about is funding in the private sector. We conservatives get the investments to make films that praise America, God, our Judeo-Christian ideas will make a killing out there. You don't think so, go asked Mel Gibson he showed us all how to do it and get all the free publicity you can't pay for. The Hollywood intolerant leftist will attack you when you make a film that exposes the hypocrisy of the leftist agenda. Make all the villains in your films liberal, attack their holy religion and their sacraments. They will help you become rich and famous by giving you all the free PR they can throw out at you.
All the conservatives on this site and those that come here and read these post, if you are serious about supporting films made by conservatives. You can google my name and find my film, read about it and purchase it, if you want to see some chance in what you want to see. I offer all of you out there a small independent alternative to the crap coming out of Hollywood. We are also donating some of our profits to the disabled vets memorial. We conservatives give back to the country that allow us to make the films we want to make. The liberals have close all avenues for us to get our product directly to you. Today we have the internet, it is a slow and long process but I am making sales. Help me to help all of you see the kind of films you want to see, the kind of films Hollywood use to make in the Golden age..
It means that I don't have any hatred toward them, which I don't. And I don't wish any harm to come to them, and while I would rather that they finally come around, I'm not losing sleep over what ultimately happens to them, either. These are people that actually do wish Christians harm, and I think I'm clearly valid in betting that they would rather see us wiped off the earth than actually live with us. These are also people who are clearly beyond listening to anything that I or anybody else could say to appeal to them. Basically I think it would take an act of God to turn them around, therefore I leave it in His hands.
Really, who cares? I'm tired of all religious types being offended. It's a movie. Get over it.
Well, that wasn't very funny at all.
It's a bit hard to read, too. I'm not criticizing objectivism, mind you–just Ayn Rand's refusal to edit things down.
I'm trying to figure out what you could mean by "it's what man does in the name of God" comment. This should be good for a laugh, though.
I am a Christian and I don't believe in ghosts, homeopathy, astrology, or any of that other new age crap. Most Christians don't believe that crap either.
Of course it does. Nobody said it didn't. I am seriously tired of people thinking that every time someone complains about something, they're thinking 'this person shouldn't be speaking out at all'. As a Catholic I fully understand in some atheist's right to free speech and all that, but complaining about a mean spirited movie does not mean I think he shouldn't have been allowed to make the film at all. I have never said that and nobody else on this thread has said that.
Glad I don't live in jesusland!
- Oh, my belief is so frail that if you question it I'll BLOODY WELL SHOOT YOU, you non-belifeving bastard!
Brotherly love indeed, IDiots and creotards!
Hmmm… I'm an atheist, and the thing I most regret about atheism is the number of leftists in my corner. And as you mentioned above, the progressives (up to and including communism) are pretty much demi-religions. I don't see why atheists gravitate to the left; it makes no sense. Science isn't on their side, for sure.
I love Christians and I hate to see their feelings hurt, but I think the premise of the film is quite funny. I also don't believe anyone's rights are being violated here. At least, there's enough advance publicity that no one would go see it unawares.
Hollywood hates John Wayne??? Let's see, I thought Hollywood MADE John Wayne! Wake up and stop ranting.
I feel exactly the same way. And I know it's terrible and all, but that's why I don't evangelize or 'witness' to anyone anymore (well, I never really did) because they'll just get offended for a variety of reasons (some will be offended because you think they need salvation when they claim to already be saved, for example) and I don't want to start fights with anyone over that. So I just stopped caring.
That's a low blow. Do you really think morality only exists in those who believe in God? And that only a Christian or other religious person could be outraged about Polanski's crimes? You're a great advertisement for Christianity, lol.
It'a kind of like what Dennis Miller says about Sarah Palin. She hacks off all the right people so that right there is reason one to support her.
Paul, I most regret how easily my fellow atheists go over to the truly dark side, the politically left side. It makes no sense to me. They claim to be skeptical as all hell, yet they take at face value every utterance of The One.
Where are these movies? I haven't seen them in any theater. Are they mainstream at all? I think that's where at least part of the argument is – these 700 billion religious movies (and I highly doubt this number – care to provide a reference?) certainly don't seem to be mainstream at all – not in chain theaters and not on TV either. I bet that a great deal of them go straight to DVD with minimal promotion. The only widely released Christian films I can think of are 'The Passion of the Christ' and 'Fireproof'. Yet how many more widely released mainstream films mock Christianity like this one? Many, many more.
That's the most bogus argumet of all. People routinely ask me, "What happened between you and God?"
Uhhh, nothing. Similarly, I've had no interaction with Santa or the Easter Bunny.
That's the most bogus argument of all. People routinely ask me, "What happened between you and God?"
Uhhh, nothing. Similarly, I've had no interaction with Santa or the Easter Bunny.
aslater, I think you're exactly right. We are more or less "programmed" genetically to believe in belief. That's why we owe it to ourselves to defeat our biology and tell the preacherman to kiss where we can't and get on with the business of living. This religion thing is, to me, admitting that one is defeated by his psychological and emotional needs. A child could see through the Holy Bible, the Koran or Torah and how not-credible they are.
I hope being that stupid hurts like hell. Idiot.
I enjoyed the extensive writing style in the book. But then people claim that I'm long winded when speaking. And it takes me an hour to write an email sometimes.
But that's not to say there couldn't have been a thousand fewer words.
I leave it to my doctor. If he wants to pray, I hope I don't see him doing it, LOL. You'd think that, if prayer was in the least efficacious, it would've been proven so by a double-blind study by this, the two thousand and ninth year of our Lord.
Your are confused, or being deliberately obtuse. Perhaps you are just lying. It's clear that I am replying to your *original* assertation that atheists are less "gullible".
As you previously stated:
Not too many atheists, in my experience, fall for such things
Your arrogance is matched only by your condescension.
Right on, my conservative brother in not-Christ!!!
The Hollywood that made and loved John Wayne is DEAD, DEAD, DEAD! The leftist malcontents that run this dump called Hollywood has attacked John Wayne since the day he died. They attack everything this country stands for. They won't allow any other point of view in their system to make films.
You won't find a young conservative Kevin Smith type who is pro-life and pro Bush get green lighted on an 80 million dollar film. How many young black conservative Americans are directing 80 million dollar films out there? You won't find any start up or unknown filmmakers out there getting funded by the people who preach tolerance. When the leftist are in charge you have to goose step in their ideology to get work if you don't you get blackballed that is a way of life in today's HOLLYWOOD. The leftist malcontents can't stand or handle any competition in films with different points of view or were you awake during the release of THE PASSION? Mel FUNDED both the production and distribution of that film and conservatives gave HOLLYWOOD the finger and the film grossed 600 million and not one buck went to pay tribute to any of the leftist mob that runs this town. We just need to see some films that expose the religion of liberalism and we need to piss on them as they have done on us. The we can sit back and watch the lefts reaction and see if they can take it. They love to give it and they are good at giving it. Lets see how they are at taking it…. hows that for a rant!
The reason I said what I did was that Mr. Gervais (who I loved in The Office and Extras) asked people to come to his movie (which would cost money and time), to enjoy it and to keep an open mind. I was simply returning the favor. Though I know he will never see these posts, I do like the guy and pray that he comes to know the love of God.
Keep not thou silence, O God: hold not thy peace, and be not still, O God.
For, lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head.
They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones.
They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.
For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:
…
Who said, Let us take to ourselves the houses of God in possession.
O my God, make them like a wheel; as the stubble before the wind.
As the fire burneth a wood, and as the flame setteth the mountains on fire;
So persecute them with thy tempest, and make them afraid with thy storm.
Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek thy name, O LORD.
Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish:
That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.
Christ did say that, but he also said…
Luke 9: 1-5 Then he called his twelve disciples together… sent them to preach the kingdom of God… and said… whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them.
Christians again! Safe Target Gervais. Now be a big, brave star and make a movie that attacks Mohammed and Islam.
never promised you a rose garden
Hollywood strikes again.
Lets see, I'm too dumb to, well I'll give them that to a point,
To know what to do with my money socially
I'm too dumb to know whom to vote for.
I'm too dumb to understand justice is not served in the Polanski arrest.
I'm too dumb to understand the insurance companies are the bad guys.
I'm too dumb to understand there is no good or bad morality.
I'm too dumb to see there is no God.
All in the last few days.
I guess I am just too dumb to find that ticket booth
I'm a "true conservative", and also a Christian (that may surprise a few of you who have read my other posts…OK, I shade towards the liberal side in my theology, but still…). You're kind of right in that I really don't care all that much that the film was made. If I'm correct in my beliefs, I wouldn't trade places with Gervais (or you, for that matter) for anything this world has to offer. If Gervais is right, none of us will ever know. In either case I'll die secure in my belief and he'll die crying and clawing at the bedsheets.
Whatever Gervais has to say about Christianity is covered by freedom of speech…and, if you'll excuse the expression, "God Bless America" for it. But I feel no inclination to see the film.
He isn't that ignorant. He's been talking about this movie in interviews for a long time, and I've never seen the religious angle mentioned, not once. It's clear that he knows that part is commercial suicide. However, I understand that it's a low-budget movie (IMDb says around $4M), so an unimpressive opening weekend in the $8-12M range would bring it into instant profitability, hence the 'bait & switch' nature of the trailers. I don't care about Gervais and his religious views in general, but this is extremely cynical and I hope the movie flops hard for that reason alone.
And speaking of the God Delusion — Ricky Gervaise and JENNIFER GARNER?!?
Hmmm… God is not someone who can be studied, I think. A lot of trouble with Christians over the years has been people treating God like their own personal Genie. Paraphrasing C.S. Lewis: "He is not a tame God"
We just watched "Oh God!" and Oh God Book II" this week with our 9 year-old daughter. She loved them.
that's weird since he played a ghost in a previous movie.
Oh, you know, the little things… like 9/11, suicide bombings at public dining areas, beheading innocents, things like that, as opposed to the compassionate acts of charity and kindness that most engage in.
But you probably never see any of that…
Matthew 5: 43-48 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
"and pray for those who persecute you" doesn't let me or you off the hook. Prayer is an action verb.
Only a tiny fraction of the atheist world tries to prove God doesn't exist. If there is a God, it is the God of the Deists, which means there might as well not be one at all. I think most of us claim for a fact that the Holy Bible, the Koran and the Torah are pretty much 100% false. IMHO, anyone who's fooled by these "sacred" texts is someone hoping to be fooled. There is no personal God who intervenes in earthly events.
You're exactly right, but they're not afraid of offending the Islamists. They're afraid of what the Islamists will do to them, in real and physical terms.
What? LMAO, is this on point?
So, Gervais is entirely within his rights to make a movie mocking faith, but it's objectionable for it to be marketted solely as a fluff-comedy. That none of the anti-religious sentiment shows itself anywhere in the marketting particularly if a significant portion of the movie's premise is that faith cannot exist in a world without lies, then that should be hinted at somewhere in the marketting. To do otherwise, is to promote the movie as something other than it is.
I'm glad you don't live out here in the heartland, too. If your lovely sentiment is any indication of your general attitude toward life, we're well quit of you.
What I object to about evangelical atheism is that these people don't appear to be interested in converting me or "saving" me from my mistaken faith. They appear to be content merely to mock me.
Hollywood MADE John Wayne!
Not this Hollywood.
Gervais. We found another Michael Moore, but without the documentary tag.
Which is the same reason they feel safe going after other religions — the ones whose followers are not inclined to hunt down and murder unbelievers who have blasphemed against their particular god or system of belief.
I wouldn't necessarily say this is "enough advance publicity". My husband and I had planned to see the movie tonight. I just read this article to him and he said, "Wow, the trailer doesn't make it look like that at all." I imagine there will be a decent opening weekend and then ticket sales will drop off dramatically once people start talking about it.
The fiction of Philip Pullman, perhaps?
Ha, ha. Pretty funny. An atheist discussing religion with an apostate. Intelligent and decent he may be, but not exactly a strong defender of Christianity or a defense of your rhetoric.
I don't expect you to give this much credence.
I have a relative, 81 years old that was given 9 month to live. He had a severe
tumor in his stomach. of course the family and others prayed for him.
A day or two after the Doctor had made his assessment of his condition
he started feeling better, eating solid foods and up and around like
all was well. He went to the Doctor for another MRI and the tumor was gone.
Misdiagnosis from the doctor or outside intervention from GOD. With pictures to prove it I choose the latter. Should you ever need outside help please feel free.
I have faith the sun will come up tomorrow. You know why? Because I have SEEN it do that very same thing every day of my life.
Am I suggesting that some beliefs are worthy of ridicule? Absolutely!!!!
If you believe you will have 72 virgins in the afterlife for killing an infidel, you are an idiot.
If you believe the earth is only 6000 years old, you are a moron. (sorry Huckabee, you seem like a nice guy)
A "true conservative" doesn't try to force his beliefs nor does he get offended by opinions that question the validity of believing in something that is un-provable.
What ever happened to Laissez-faire?
I really think that most atheists are more ignorant than most Christians, and this film only confirms that belief. I have met so so many atheists who knew -nothing- about religion, even going so far as to -insist- that Christianity is "unitheistic" and that Jesus only thought He was the Son of God because He "wandered in the desert for 40 days without eating! That'll mess you up!"
The theological forum had a role switch debate where all the theists argued that there was no God, and all of the atheists were supposed to argue that there was a God. The theists were OK, but repeated the same few arguments over and over; the atheists told a few jokes about creationists and then asked a few questions to confirm there was no God. When asked why they were so unprepared, they replied that "there are no logical arguments for God." A five year old with Google could tell them that's wrong! They might not agree with the conclusions, but there are arguments! Believe it or not, Christianity did not become the dominate religion for over 2000 years because everyone is ignorant and they never thought about why evil existed- some of the best philosophical arguments come from the tradition of apologetics. Occam's Razor, anyone?
I -have- met some nice, smart atheists, ones who have real reasons for their belief. And I have met some astoundingly ignorant Christians too (I have had so many Catholics tell me they aren't Christian, I have a permanent imprint of a palm on my face.) But I think that, over all, religion requires a much deeper sort of thinking than unbelief, because it has to address the problem of evil etc.
It drives me up the wall that people like Gervais can't be bothered to spend an hour so they can mock -actual beliefs- rather than their own strawmen.
Notice you didn't really answer my last remark, but oh well.
I 'm no english instructor, but I have a certain affinity for the language, I hope to use english properly myself someday. But Mr Whois quaint use of vulgarisms, so easily, to assist in making his point
pretty much tells me I can dismiss it without further consideration. No offense Mr. Whois, I'm sure your next remark will be enlightening. Tho that may be just blind faith on my part.
atheists are less likely to fall for such things because they tend to be critical of things that seem unlikely
Right. That's why atheists never play the lottery, and don't believe in "Hope and Change". Atheists are just as gullible and likely to believe in twisted, bizarre, and unlikely scenarios as non-atheists. Just ask Polanski.
Sorry to offend your delicate sensibilities. It seems to me that someone who proclaims an affinity for the English language would allow for certain colloquialisms in lieu of the much less effective euphemisms that so commonly bore a debate. As such, giving a shit has a certain…..I don't know what.
Ahahahahaha!!!! Oh, you're so funny and clever, I think I'm going to die laughing! And your name is so brilliant too! Hahahahahahaaaaaa!!!!!
Fair point. I guess I want my conservatives to be more libertarian, although I am a huge proponent of tradition and nationalistic pride. My libertarianism ends at the border debate. Being a citizen means something to me.
Wow, DJ. Did some Christian bully used to beat you up and take your lunch money? Quite a lot of pent up anger there, it seems.
There were so many rhetorical questions in your post it's really hard to choose, but if I could pick just one, I believe in God because there's no way intellectually to work backwards in time to the point of the appearance of matter from non-matter. The best "science" can do is postulate the Big Bang, which STARTS WITH a little ball of cosmic crap floating around. Until they can explain where the crap came from, I'll continue to believe in God.
Faith is really a pretty simple construct: the existence of design and order in every aspect of creation demands that the scientific method objectively applied would start out with the God hypothesis. Atheism is the opposite of science.
<edit>
Oh, and by the way, as a Calvinist I kind of favor option 'b', which we like to refer to as "the good old days".
Wow, DJ. Did some Christian bully used to beat you up and take your lunch money? Quite a lot of pent up anger there, it seems.
There were so many rhetorical questions in your post it's really hard to choose, but if I could pick just one, I believe in God because there's no way intellectually to work backwards in time to the point of the appearance of matter from non-matter without the assumption of energy plus directed force. The best "science" can do is postulate the Big Bang, which STARTS WITH a little ball of cosmic crap floating around. Until they can explain where the crap came from, I'll continue to believe in God.
Faith is really a pretty simple construct: the existence of design and order in every aspect of creation demands that the scientific method objectively applied would start out with the God hypothesis. Atheism is the opposite of science.
<edit>
Oh, and by the way, as a Calvinist I kind of favor option 'b', which we like to refer to as "the good old days".
[...] the ones that are the most elegant and spare in their approach. And yet I’ve already found one attack that criticizes the film for that very thing (among many other [...]
Jesus H. Christ, where to start?
Umm, I'm sure there are some idiotic atheists, but dumb masses, computed as a percentage of the respective totals, show Christians ahead by a mile.
Don't jerk that knee just yet. I think that response was personally targetted at ben gleck him/herself and not atheists in general. Anyone who blanket-accuses all practitioners of a religion of having no brain must not have much of a moral compass IMO. Admittedly, I don't know what No_Big was thinking when they wrote it, so maybe you're right. But I'd hold off on the reaction until you know for sure.
Not that I think personal attacks are great, but the Golden Rule says to treat others as you want to be treated and ben gleck was clearly being personally insulting.
All faith is worthy of ridicule, regardless of origin.
Your are confused, or being deliberately obtuse. Perhaps you are just lying. It's clear that I am replying to your *original* assertation that atheists are less "gullible". That is why I quoted you.
As you previously stated:
Not too many atheists, in my experience, fall for such things
Your arrogance is matched only by your condescension.
So very, very true. From the review, it doesn't seem that Gervais is mocking Christianity, he's mocking the atheist conception of Christianity, which is beyond caricature. Of course, the statement "there are no logical arguments for God" is stupid in its very construction – "logic" is nothing more than a tool, an instrument. Depending on your starting assumptions, you can use "logic" and "reason" to take you most any place.
For example: if you deny the existence of God (or any power above and beyond man, thus making morality an impossibility), if you believe in hard-line Darwinian evolution, and that race is a matter of evolution, then you can reason your way into arguing that certain races are genetically, evolutionarily, inferior and should be eliminated.
See? Anywhere you want to go. Your starting assumptions, your *beliefs*, are key in determining "what's rational." Usually, when people say something or some argument is or isn't "rational" or "logical," it's a lazy shortcut from the perspective of a watered-down version of Christianity (that is, the Western version of Christianity). So, it isn't "logical" to "hurt others." Really doesn't mean squat in the larger picture.
the sinner,
Patrick
i agree. i can just imagine the marketing sessions on this one. they must have sat around horrified for a few moments trying to imagine the result of honesty. the only way they could sell this thing was to leave out any reference to the bias during the trailers and to, well, lie…kinda ironic?
Atheists have murdered billions.
100% false? You obviously know nothing about history or archeology.
But keep on believin' !
Ah, I see. This is a nifty variant of the either/or fallacy, I guess. Instead of limiting to two possible choices you have three that you claim are the only options, except they're not.
How about d: Don't see the movie and/or grumble like, oh, pretty much what the Christians here been doing regarding this film.
Oh, and I'm really unimpressed by your utter audacity in blasting Christians. I mean, it seems to be the ultimate safe religion to slag. You guys harp on something Christians have done in the past, but do not do anymore and pretend that by speaking against them you are somehow brave because they might magically decide to repeat the past… except deep down, you know they won't. Faux moral preening.
Probably will point to any film where someone… prayed.
No, it's what man does in the name of what they think is the One True Way to do things.
The level of blind bias and harsh adjectives compelled me to write a rebutal to this posters interpretation of Ricky Gervais' 7 deadly sins.
http://www.volconvo.com/forums/blog.php?b=142
Although I am not a believer, I do not like to see Christianity ridiculed, for a number of reasons. I suppose in a free country you must be prepared to live with it. However, the jokes, the scenes described and the whole premise sound heavyhanded and didactic to me. Haven´t we been there before? If the filmmakers want to go that way, fine, but it better be clever and witty and this doesn´t sound promising.
God doesn't exist, and it's about time that filmmakers start acknowledging it. As for this movie being well reviewed by critics…definitely not the case. If anything it's getting mediocre reviews. I had decided on waiting until this movie came to DVD and renting it, but now I'll be seeing it as soon as possible. The religous right in this country needs to get it through their head that not only are all religions protected constitutionally, so is the right to not practice religion and to say whatever we want about yours. I personally don't care whether you think it's a mean spirited attack. Let god strike me down if I'm saying something that offends him. Oh wait, that'll never happen because he doesn't exist.
[...] course. In order to understand that it might not be a good idea to rally around a child rapist, bash religion in a religious country or trash capitalism in a [...]
[...] Some are now calling it the most blatantly, one-sidedly atheist movie ever released by a major studio. Sounds like a must [...]
Saw the film last night. It was written by an atheist so in a world with no lies it's only logical that they would write that there is no religion. Why is that so offensive? Is it any more offensive than a Christian movie by definition saying that Islam is a lie? He even showed the joy that the belief in an afterlife gave his dieing mother. Do you object to that?
Gervais also highlighted some of the negative results of a belief in God such as waiting people waiting to be told what to think and accepting mediocrity in this life due to the promise of better to come after death. You may not agree that they are results of being religious but Gervais does and he is now successful enough to voice those views to a large audience.
Blind Faith/Christianity had 2000 years to make the world a better place, they call It the Dark Ages for a reason.
.
Its only been the past 100 years, after we set aside Blind Faith and replaced it with the Scientific Method, we have seen has improvement in things like health, long life, infant mortality.
The Common Man now has unlimited acess to critical information, books,history, and education, more power to the people ( Martin Luther anyone?), more medicine to kill the Mindvirus called Religion.
100+ years ago 30% of children died before adulthood… I wonder how many sincere prayers went unanswered?
How many prayers unanswered when our forefathers visited the local dentist to pull his teeth???
Would you rather pray that ZombieJesus numbs your mouth before the dentist pulls your teeth, or would you rather have him use a numbing agent that is a result of Science?
good riddance to Christianity, it had 2000 years, time to grow up and realize its all a Mind Virus, desperately employing survival-mechanisms by convincing you BLASPHEMY is hazardous and somehow Wrong..
we are watching the beginnings of the death of religion ( only to be replaced by newer religions I am sure, like the new UFO Religion, we see emerging).
oh yea, as a former fundamentalist christian pastor, I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit.
Free at last.
.
Yet there were those undeniable commotions. Obviously Philo simply did not appreciate their significance and thus ignored them. Christianity remained small for several centuries after Jesus' death,so it wouldn't be a surprise that Philo ignored it as irrelevant. It was initially a religion of the poor, of slaves, and of women. Until Constantine, no one who was anyone was a Christian.
Other ancient historians nevertheless did comment on Jesus an his followers. That they did at all is remarkable. Most ancient historians occupied themselves not with contemporary events but with the past (just like historians today!), and it is extremely rare to find contemporary accounts of ancient events. Julius Caesar's account of the Roman civil war is a glaring example which proves the rule. Most ancient events weren't recorded on any document until centuries after they happened. And those works of antiquity which survive today, do so only because some monk thought they were worth keeping and copied them to parchment in the middle ages.
I note that your example of "faith" is based on an observable event. If you can SEE something happening, then it's not really about faith. In other words, you're assigning a statistical probability to the likelihood the a particular event, that you have observed in the past, will continue to occur.
By that token, you should argue that you have faith that you will able to tie your shoes because you've done it before. If this is what you think faith is, then I submit you're the last person who should making fun of anyone's beliefs because you don't appear to even understand the concept of faith (it's not scientific matter so, by definition, "proof" is irrelevant.
I still don't understand: what does taking offense have to do with political ideology, anyway?
As for forcing their beliefs – where is that happening in this issue? Mr Karnick is not asserting that the film be censored in any way, or that Mr Gervais be made to believe. He's a) pointing out that Mr Gervais does not appear to be able to defend his statements, and b) questioning the business sense of making a movie that insults the beliefs of many of the folks who live in the target market. Seems a pretty conservative argument to me.
Whatever happened to "Laissez-faire"? Are you serious? Laissez-faire is an economic maxim that essentially asserts that government intervention in the economy should be minimized or eliminated. It's not a statement that anything goes, all the time, in every arena. A "true conservative" such as yourself, should have known that. In fact, based on this bizarre interpretation, I'm left wondering if true conservatives believe that there should be a justice system, or if we should just let everything slide.
For someone proud of his unshakeable rationality, you really need to work on your reading comprehension. This is simply about truth in advertising. No one is saying anyone should be shot for his beliefs or for questioning those of others.
Which is what people reasonably refer to as a lie! The irony is so thick you could just reach out and give it a great big hug.
Why do the smart guys in the room always change the subject? There isn't anything in this article about rights but about using deception to separate moviegoers from their money. Hell, the advertising even fooled you, since until now you didn't have a strong interest in the movie.
Basically the point is if you were in a world where God didn't exist… God still would "exist", because he would be invented. The power associated with inventing such a lie, along with its special traits of never being falsified, make it such a strong meme that it is inevitable as long as lying is possible. I think that's smart, and if you're going to take offense with any parallels you draw between Gervais' fictional God and your "real" God, you should look at what that means to the whole God question. Yes, the moral is that "God would be the ultimate lie," but it's not just as simple as that. I don't know see it and think about it. Or don't. I don't care.
Amen, because, you know, if it weren't for Christianity, we'd have had pain free dentistry 2000 years ago!
The professed "atheist", Gervais, really believes in God. But unlike Christians, he hates God. That is why he has spent a great deal of his time creating a blasphemous movie. It will be a flop, and he knows it. But if he can shake the faith of even one believer and lead him from the One he hates, Gervais will think it was all worth it.
As an athiest I am annoyed that too many religious people hold a superior attitude to athiests about morals, etc. I am proud that I have developed my own moral values–for instance, I am opposed to abortion except in rare cases–not because I'm a Christian, but because terminating innocent human life is immoral–my decision. However, I have no problem with people of religious faith just so long as they do not try to change me. Nearly everyone I know is Christian, Jewish, agnostic, athiest and they are all fine people no matter how they got there. I may believe like Gervais, but that doesn't mean I will demean others for their beliefs and do not think I would enjoy such 'entertainment.'
Well, umm, not 100% false, just "pretty much 100% false," as I claimed in my original remark. I mean, we can all agree there was dirt, as it says in the Bible. The drunken savages had to have something on which to stand while confabulating, and, as it turns out, dirt was it.
The stuff to which I refer, though, are the parts of the Bible which offer up religious insights. Those are the patently absurd parts. Philo of Alexandria was alive when Jesus was allegedly born, and was alive well after Jesus was resurrected. He was a historian, and was in a geographical location where he couildn't possibly have missed the commotions Jesus caused. Yet, of the (at least) 850,000 words offered up by Ol' Philo, there was not one about Jesus.
Just saw the movie. What a waste of time and money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are not mentioning the ethnicity of those who are perpetrating this fraud.
Why is that?
If atheists are so convinced of how right they are, why make movies about it? Why form atheist organizations?
If convinced something's a myth, most people will ignore it. For example, where are the anti-unicorn organizations? The movies protesting and impugning Greek mythology? The answer is obvious….
and it also points, in glaring contrast, to the atheist's perceived 'need' to make a point of not believing in God…. perhaps because, when facing the person in the mirror, the atheist doubts his own disbelief more than he doubts God.
For the most part I agree, but the darkness within Islam needs to be expelled through a fundamental inner questioning. THERE is no way that will happen unless we educate them and have them question their religious beliefs the same way modern christians and jews do.
Without that DOUBT, they will continue to commit atrocities in Allah's name.
on the other hand, all religions should be able to accept scrutiny. If your belief can't accept scrutiny than it is obviously not very strong.
I think you are misguided in a lot of ways about God and morality and our founding principles, but I don't think you are anywhere near an antichrist.
1) Without God morality is an opinion.
2) Our founding principles are useless without God. If our freedoms are not granted by God, they are granted by men, and can be taken away by men. (as has happened all over the world in atheist utopias.)
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
If the Creator didn't grant you those unalienable rights, than who grants them? Remember WITHOUT GOD MORALITY IS AN OPINION. As soon as we drop the creator from our unalienable rights, someone with an opinion that it's not morally good for us to pursue life, liberty and happiness, can take that away.
We're seeing the effects of this today, with the progressive deconstruction of the founding documents. They were written by men, therefore they are opinion. It necessary to change the language to match today's "moral" dilemmas.
3) The first amendment protects the right to freely exercise religious belief. Are you admitting that Atheism is a religious belief?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Religion is stupid, I'm tired of being sensitive to people who believe in magic.
Me Too!
If people can proselytize their religion, as many in the country do, what's wrong with an atheist communicating his opposition to religion? It makes Christians look weak-minded when they immediately label it as "propaganda" and "blasphemy" or what have you. It would look much better if they actually had a meaningful debate about the film's premise.
Why not take Gervais head on, and have a real discussion about the issues he brings to the table? For instance, his joke about how God gives cancer and cures it. Let's talk about that! Does an all-powerful God allow people do get cancer? If so, why? What philosophical implications does this kind of belief have?
Who knows, maybe you'll end up finding some common ground with the guy.
to counter your cambodia/ussr comments:
These people did not kill BECAUSE they were atheists. In fact, its pretty silly to call people like Pol Pot or Stalin atheists. The STATE became GOD, and the people were asked to put their BLIND FAITH behind it. They were told that, if they just did what "big brother" told them to do, they would be rewarded. SOUND FAMILIAR??? So, I am a free-thinking atheist, who rejects Blind Faith, and I IN NO WAY "associate" myself with people like Stalin. You're argument is shallow in that respect.
Now, on the other hand, there have been many wars based on religion and religion alone. I'm going to kill you because you don't believe so and so is the prophet. I'm going to burn you because you don't recognize Christ as savior. I mean, honestly, this list could go on forever….
[...] new Ricky Gervais movie, The Invention of Lying, is a BIG FLOP! Hmmm … I wonder [...]
I saw this movie and I think calling it "anti-christian" is wrong. The movie takes place in an alternate universe. It is a comedy and it does make satirical references to Christianity. It didn't feel "political" at all to me. In fact, I saw it as a PRO-FAITH message. The movie is pretty funny but the pacing is a bit slow and it doesn't really get totally tied together with a coherent point of view… but just because there are comedic references to religion doesn't make it anti-religion.
Wow, awesome! I wasn't going to see this film originally. It looked amusing but not worth seeing in the theater but wow… a mainstream atheist movie? Count me in! It's about time we've had one and I look forward to more as they become more common and people become more rational and ditch superstitious nonsense.
And YOU'LL note that saying SPECIFIC words in ALL-CAPITALS is MUCH MORE SHALLOW then any part of my arguement.
These people did not kill BECAUSE they were atheists.
They killed because people wouldn't tote the atheist line. Ask the Eastern Orthodox Church.
In fact, its pretty silly to call people like Pol Pot or Stalin atheists.
Not really. Atheism enforced at gunpoint was one of the first priorities. They just understood that you needed to come up with a half-way replacement. The fact that they ordered all the old status of saints & Bibles destroyed? Not ringing a bell?
These people did not kill BECAUSE they were atheists.The STATE became GOD, and the people were asked to put their BLIND FAITH behind it. They were told that, if they just did what "big brother" told them to do, they would be rewarded. SOUND FAMILIAR??? So, I am a free-thinking atheist, who rejects Blind Faith, and I IN NO WAY "associate" myself with people like Stalin. You're argument is shallow in that respect.
As Christians, we will see more and more of this kind of material.
I hope we respond with the grace that the gospel affords.
While some are indeed ant-Christian, we ought not become anti-the-anti-Christians.
I believe in open, honest discussion/debate. The hate-filled ad hominem attacks and stereotypes are disturbing.
And YOU'LL note that saying SPECIFIC words in ALL-CAPITALS is MUCH MORE SHALLOW then any part of my arguement.
These people did not kill BECAUSE they were atheists.
They killed people who wouldn't tote the atheist line. Ask the Eastern Orthodox Church, or the "re-education camps"
In fact, its pretty silly to call people like Pol Pot or Stalin atheists.
Not really. Atheism enforced at gunpoint was one of the first priorities. They just understood that you needed to come up with a half-way replacement. The fact that they ordered all the old status of saints & Bibles destroyed? Not ringing a bell?
These people did not kill BECAUSE they were atheists.The STATE became GOD, and the people were asked to put their BLIND FAITH behind it. They were told that, if they just did what "big brother" told them to do, they would be rewarded. SOUND FAMILIAR??? So, I am a free-thinking atheist, who rejects Blind Faith, and I IN NO WAY "associate" myself with people like Stalin. You're argument is shallow in that respect.
They slaughtered millions for refusing to tote there atheist line. It's hard to make someone bend to your new idea for culture if the old God is still floating around in the collective memory. Who knows? People might look at the story of Christ & redemption and chose to follow him, instead of the state.
So, I am a free-thinking atheist, who rejects Blind Faith, and I IN NO WAY "associate" myself with people like Stalin. You're argument is shallow in that respect
Because I know so many believers who look at things like the Inquisition & the Salem Witch Trials and go "Yup. We got things done really well that time."
Now, on the other hand, there have been many wars based on religion and religion alone. I'm going to kill you because you don't believe so and so is the prophet. I'm going to burn you because you don't recognize Christ as savior. I mean, honestly, this list could go on forever….
"If there was no lying, then there would be no sin"
This is flawed logic. I could commit adultery quite easily without lying. My hypothetical wife might find out about the affair sooner than she would otherwise because I'd be unable to lie about it, but the inability to lie in no way would hinder my ability to sleep with a woman who isn't my hypothetical wife.
Keep in mind I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with adultery, I'm simply saying you can commit adultery without lying.
I agree with everything you've said here, but it's a bit odd to include Stephen Colbert.
He's not an atheist or even an agnostic. He's a practicing Catholic. He even teaches Sunday school.
And I'm not talking about Stephen Colbert the "character", I'm talking about the actual man in his real life.
Why do you think the target is Christianity specifically? Because you're Christian? Don't be so vain. (pride is a cardinal sin after all)
Gervais, from what I can tell, is attacking the concept of monotheistic religion. That covers Christians, Jews, Muslims, Zoroastrians, etc.
How can this film "confirm" your beliefs if you haven't even SEEN it yet? That's like me saying Passion of the Christ is a terrible and exploitative film just cause some atheist friends of mine told me so. I've never seen it. You say Gervais can't be bothered to spend an hour of religious study so he can mock actual beliefs instead of strawmen. This is somewhat ironic of you to say since you're doing exactly the same thing. You're judging a straw man version of this movie without having bothered to spend an hour or two watching it first.
And please, don' t accuse people of being ignorant when you say blatantly ignorant things such as Christianity being the dominant religion for over 2000 years. It took quite some time before it became the world's most subscribed religion. It's more like somewhere between 1000-1500 years, though this is only a slightly less ignorant guess. I'm splitting hairs, perhaps, but you look a bit silly when you say something like this and then calls others ignorant.
If Christians are so convinced of how right they are, why make movies about it? Why form Christian organizations?
You do good to the better tenets of your faith and I applaud you for it. We need more Christians, and atheists, like you.
As oppossed to when thousand year old churches were converted to "Temples of reason" when Buddhist temples were ransacked & destroyed, when the classical Christian culture of the Ukraine was "liquidated."
If you want to say "It's Christianity that makes people go on bloody rampages" or say "It's what made the Crusades possible." then it's a fair point to say "Atheism is what made Stalin so ruthless" or "Pol Pot was only that bloody because of disbelief."
Now, on the other hand, there have been many wars based on religion and religion alone. I'm going to kill you because you don't believe so and so is the prophet. I'm going to burn you because you don't recognize Christ as savior. I mean, honestly, this list could go on forever….
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v171/cnaron/Red...
Statism will always be bad, whether it's wearing a cross or a hammer & sickle.
Does this mean I "hate" atheists? Not at all. I just have always hated those with a sickening sense of moral self-righteousness, Christian deist Buddhist Hindu agnostic atheist.
Jefferson equated the birth and death of Jesus being in the same category of Minerva being born out of the brain of Jupiter. I guess being reasonable makes someone "mean spirited". I guess it doesn't take two sets of DNA to make a baby, but what does science know?
Jefferson was a deist, but he most certainly would not set up taboos because someone said something he didn't like.
One thing about Hollywood I cant stand and being an atheist is the liberal attitude of "DON'T PICK ON ME".
Really? If you want to live in a "DONT PICK ON ME" country, go live as a non-Shiite in Iran of any label. Go live there as a Christian, Jew or atheist or gay, then come back here and complain about being "picked on". Taboos are the quickest way to fascism. North Korea says, "Don't pick on the state". Iran says, "Don't pick on Allah".
In this country we CAN criticize and blaspheme each other and without it none of us, left or right would have a voice. I would rather live with arrows than live in silence.
One thing about Hollywood I cant stand and being an atheist is the liberal attitude of "DON'T PICK ON ME".
Really? If you want to live in a "DONT PICK ON ME" country, go live as a non-Shiite in Iran of any label. Go live there as a Christian, Jew or atheist or gay, then come back here and complain about being "picked on". Taboos are the quickest way to fascism. North Korea says, "Don't pick on the state". Iran says, "Don't pick on Allah".
In this country we CAN criticize and blaspheme each other and without it none of us, left or right would have a voice. I would rather live with arrows than live in silence.
Saying that disembodied beings don't exist is no more anti-Christian than saying Micky Mouse isn't real is anti-Disney. You can believe it all you want, but that is still a different issue than providing evidence for the claims you make. You can claim the earth is flat, but that doesn't mean it is.
Skeptic, "Santa isn't real"
Believer, "WHY DO YOU HATE ME!"
Skeptic, "I don't hate you, you simple have no evidence for what you claim".
Believer, "YOU HATE ME!"
Saying that disembodied beings don't exist is no more anti-Christian than saying Micky Mouse isn't real is anti-Disney. You can believe it all you want, but that is still a different issue than providing evidence for the claims you make. You can claim the earth is flat, but that doesn't mean it is.
I can no more hate God than I can Allah or Micky Mouse. What I do hate, even when not talking about deities or religion, is any utterance that is backed up with the demand that it not be questioned.
"Question with boldness even the existence of God, for if there be one, surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear" Thomas Jefferson. But who cares, what did he ever do?
Should the Christians and Jews living in Iran ignore the fact that they believe Allah is a myth?
The only difference between you and I is that I believe in one less myth than you do.
"Why do you quote the bible if you don't believe it"? Is 101 ignorance from an intellectual standpoint.
Why? Because you have idiots going around claiming that the earth is 5 to 10k years old when THE REALITY is that it is BILLIONS of years old. You have idiots claiming that adult females "POOF" fully grown come magically out of a man's rib. DESPITE the fact that we know that humans grow from babies to adults over a 2 decade period.
Just like you would call someone rightfully an idiot for claiming that blowing up buses will get them a magical harem. "Those who believe in absurdities will commit atrocities" Voltaire.
You wouldn't want an Allah/Koran based biology class, and you shouldn't want anyone dumbed down because of personally held myth.
You can have your beliefs, but for you to expect them not to be challenged is as absurd as the nutty Muslim who murdered a film maker who questioned the treatment of Islamic women. What makes your belief immune from scrutiny? If you want to know why people should question everything and HOW humans have become more civil I would suggest you read "Infidel" by Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
I don't deserve special taboo status, but neither do you or your claims.
I find it funny that people who claim not to care use veiled threats of hell.
I am sure of the non-existence of your fictional super hero. Why? Because brains are material, brains hold our thoughts, brains exist and we have physical evidence for brains. YOU have no evidence anymore than a Muslim does for their claims of beings with no body or brain floating around in the cosmos "somewhere", "everywhere" and "nowhere"…….
I am sure when I die the same thing will exist as before I was born. You are simply deluded by thoughts of your placebo. Try reality, it is much more refreshing.
Our consciousness is an emergent evolutionary property, not a pre-existing fictional myth. Not of your label or any other. Muslims got it wrong, Hindus got it wrong, and YOU got it wrong, just like the ancient Egyptians got it wrong thinking the sun was a being. I am sorry you don't want to face that. Popular myth does not constitute reality by proxy of proclamation of a naked assertion, otherwise the earth would be flat.
What if someone does? Are you going to act like a screaming crybaby because someone wont bow to your dictator?
I get the image of a midget standing spread eagle in front of the Terminator shouting, "Don't pick on him, you might hurt him".
What could I possibly do or say about the all powerful Christian or Muslim god ? Is daddy that insecure he needs YOU to punch me, that he cant punch me himself? Your god needs a bodyguard?
Picking on disembodied magical invisible friends in the sky, call them Allah or whatever is like picking on pink unicorns, how can you hurt something that doesn't exist?
BTW, someone has made a movie criticizing the treatment of women in Islam. He got a knife in his chest for his efforts. If this is the "love" this "peaceful" religion wants to sell, murdering someone is not the way to advertise.
I don't bow to dictators. I won't bow to the Christian, or Muslim or any believer just because they threaten me with their fiction. Dictators are Chumps! If you don't view your god as a dictator don't threaten people with him.
Yes religion is created by liars. Just like a child believes in Santa and lies to other children. They may not believe that their lie is a lie, but it is a lie. But others don't care if it is a lie, just like an adult knowingly lies to a child and tells them Santa is real.
It was always a lie and untrue that the earth was flat. You are demonizing the word "lie" when it is being used in a very pragmatic sense, not an emotional one. I am sure that people are capable of believing what they claim, but not all claims are true, no matter the popularity of the claim.
QUOTE:"I find Atheist to be the most inconsiderate and overall boorish lot of people on Earth. "
Yea, we may be "boorish" BUT name me one atheist who has blown anything up, like say a bus or abortion clinic? A tongue lashing about naked assertions is all you will get from atheists. That is more than I can say for believers who want to play capture the flag with OUR planet.
Silly us pointing out that the earth is billions of years old and wasn't made in 6 days. Silly us condemning suicide bombers who think they will do Allah's will through murder. Silly us pointing out that it takes TWO sets of DNA to manifest into a zygote.
THIS IS A CALL TO ARMS MY FELLOW ATHEISTS! SPREAD THE COOTIES! BARBEQUE KITTENS, ……..NEVER POINT OUT REALITY…………THEY CANT HANDLE IT!
Now if you''ll excuse me, I have to go sacrifice a goat and howl at the moon, after all I am "boorish".
And that is where I think my country lacks a backbone. The Islamic god Allah is a bully and a coward if it needs his fans to murder for him, and would deserve as much worship as Kim Jong ILL. If Islam wants to wallow in the age of witch hunts like Christianity once did, it should be left in the past like all barbarities. If fans of Allah don't want others claiming Allah is Hitler, then they need to clean their own house from the nuts who think murder is a lagit political tool.
What is depressing to me is that we know what DNA IS, we know what meteors are and still people want to make up fictional super heros. THAT to me is depressing.
Atheism is not a badge of honor anymore than being bald or being a cockroach is a badge of honor. Atheism is merely the sounds of reasonable people pointing out the absurd. You may have once believed in Santa, but are you still depressed because you know he isn't real? Are you any less alive because you don't believe in Isis?
Depressing to me is having all this modern knowledge with a majority of the world's population still clinging to ancient superstitions of all labels. What is hopeful to me is that we can(our species) if we chose, give up on outdated myth. That will free us up to focus on REAL problems like hunger, disease, crime and war and pollution.
That would be nice if that were the case, but our thoughts manifest into actions so BELIEF does matter.
If we are going to put it in better terms I would say something like, " It's not what someone believes that is the problem, it is their unreasonable demand that it not be questioned".
We don't have to "believe" in gravity. We don't pray to gravity. We don't have to believe in mitosis. These are provable facts beyond our personal bias.
No one in their right mind is going to test gravity by jumping off a building without any type of aid. But tell them that an invisible super hero they cant replicate in a lab exists and they will drink Kool Aid, or blow a bus up or shoot a doctor, or be convinced that they will get a cosmic ride behind a comet if they kill themselves.
The same credulity that has North Koreans worshiping a man is the same credulity that leads people to believe in virgin births or the sun being a thinking being. Belief without question is faith, belief with question is falsifiable and testable and does not require "faith".
"The sun is a burning ball of gas" is fact.
"I can fart a Lamborghini out of my ass" is a naked assertion and only a fool would buy that just because they like Lamborghinis.
QUOTE:"Plus i don't know i guess refusing to think something doesn't exist cause you can't see it is rather closed minded "
You cant see Allah so therefor you are closed minded because you don't believe in Allah. You can't see Vishnu so you are closed minded for not believing in Vishnu. You cant see Santa so you are closed minded because you don't believe in Santa.
Do not give me this bullshit argument. There are lots of things you don't believe and there IS a reason you don't believe them. That doesn't make you or me closed minded. If demanding evidence is unreasonable then the earth is flat because I say so and anyone who says it is a globe is a dick!
YOU, "Santa is real"
Skeptic, "No he isn't"
YOU, "WHY ARE YOU SO CLOSE MINDED?"
If everything is true by default just because others claim it then every sentence ever uttered by every human in history would be true just because they claimed it. THAT would be absurd to take such a view and foolish.
It is because of attitudes like that, even outside the issue of religion, people fall for stupid crap like 3 card Montys, used cars and loan scams. P.T. Barnum said, "There is a sucker born every minute" AND HE IS RIGHT, because people like you make it easy to be fooled. Religion is merely the last taboo that needs to be broken before we can mature as a species.
Why do atheists run around the country filing lawsuits and constantly obsess about a Being in which they do not believe? Bore, bore, bore. Get over yourself.
Laissez-faire – a philosophy or practice characterized by a usually deliberate abstention from direction or interference especially with individual freedom of choice
What's bizarre is that you don't seem to comprehend the evils of collectivism or group-think. Faith in a book because millions of others have the same said faith is a bit strange, no? The level of sensitivity is also a bit strange.
I have faith that you will again misunderstand my point and try to avail your lack of understanding by attacking what I said tangentially.
Faith- (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof
I have no actual proof that you will respond as I stated. Just faith.
You've made what I believe is called a category error. Mickey Mouse is obviously a created, fictional character, and his creator never intended he be accepted as more than that. So your argument is either based on the assumption that the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob was invented by a human author or authors and was originally intended to be understood to be a fictional being, or you're hard at work erecting straw men to knock down.
Additionally, claiming that disembodied beings do not exist is by definition anti-Christian, since Christianity asserts the opposite. Taking "anti-Christian" to be a pejorative term rather than merely a descriptive one is a contextual interpretation that you are free to make, but in either case, your opening statement is still false for this reason.
This comment from Sarah Nicole is truly blasphemy!!!!! Worse than anything because she pretends to be a Christian!
God knows everything and is not made sad by a Ricky Gervais movie. How dare you imply that God is so pathetic. You might as well be an atheist, as it is clear you have no respect for the lord.
You only own guns because you are a sociopath. SOme of us own guns to defend ourselves, like myself, for instance, but you are clearly a psycho.
Newsflash: it's only a movie. If you think (sight unseen) that it's offensive, don't see it. Nobody is forcing you to.
I feel sorry for you if your faith is so insecure that it's threatened by the mere existence of some silly move that no-one will remember 6 months from now.
Yes, this movie clearly attacks Islam and Moghammed, so how's about you admit that he's big an brave? Or just admit that you're an idiot.
[...] New York Post critic Kyle Smith has seen the film and describes it as “a full-on attack on religion in general and Christianity in particular. It might be the most blatantly, one-sidedly atheist movie ever released by a major studio, in this case Warner Bros.” Read more [...]
Idiot? That's rather mature of you.
You fail to understand my point. My point is that it the movie DOESN'T clearly attack the Christian god or Christian religion specifically. It attacks the concept of god and religion. This is equally blasphemous to Christians, Muslims, and Jews alike.
I just saw this movie tonight and it was HILARIOUS. Absolutely laugh out loud funny. It's not even remotely propaganda. I think people need to see it before they condemn it as atheist propaganda. I think you'll be surprised. It isn't promoting the idea that God or religion is a lie, just a lie in this particular fictional world. In the world in this film everything is face-value. If you don't see it, it doesn't exist. It really doesn't have any correlation to the real world, where we have beliefs and faith and imagination and other things that go beyond what's right in front of us. All of this outrage is much ado about nothing.
There is no pro-unicorn church to argue against, nor any militant followers of Zeus to combat. Atheist organisations are set up to provide a counterargument to the Church (of whatever religion). I don't have a "need" to make a point of not believing in G*d, but I sure as anything want to make the point to people who insist on telling me about their religious beliefs.
"the atheist doubts his own disbelief more than he doubts God."
Oh, please, find me one atheist who feels this way! We are atheists for a reason, and if we secretly believed in G*d we wouldn't be atheists now, would we?!
The people pretending that Gervais is too afraid to similarly attack Islam should pay attention to the fact that the "man in the sky" story that his character comes up with in the movie is generic enough to apply equally to Allah as to Yahweh. In other words, it's your own ego that's making you think he's only attacking YOUR religion when he's actually making a generic swipe at all big three monotheistic religions. Making an analogy about a person claiming a god exists, that this god created the universe, and that this god punishes and rewards in the afterlife for actions taken in this life is a concept that still doesn't narrow down whether you're talking about Islam, Christianity, or Judaism.
The only downside I saw (and it's a really really big one, unfortunately) has nothing to do with the fact that the movie attacks religion (a good thing to do), and everything to do with the fact that it makes a huge jump from "everyone tells the truth" to "nobody keeps their mouths shut." You hear people make statements where it doesn't make sense why they're even speaking at all. Even if I'm being honest and telling the truth, I'm not walking around sharing my inner monologue with everybody, "Oh look a flower. I have only 5 minutes to get to work. Is that smoke smell coming from my car or someone else's? Sure is windy today. I wonder what I'll have for lunch later?…. etc'" But a lot of the time that's how the people in this movie talk and it just seems like a stupid way to stretch the premise beyond what it was supposed to be. The movie claims it's proposing a world where people don't lie, but it portrays a world where not only can't people lie, but people can't even refrain from speaking at all.
"1) Without God morality is an opinion."
And? Are you asserting that morality is NOT an opinion, and thus that God must exist? That's totally baseless.
"2) Our founding principles are useless without God. If our freedoms are not granted by God, they are granted by men, and can be taken away by men. (as has happened all over the world in atheist utopias.)"
And in much of the religious world as well. By the way… there really *aren't* any "atheist utopias." Except maybe Norway, but they're perfectly fine. In fact, their standards of living and health are much better than ours.
"As soon as we drop the creator from our unalienable rights, someone with an opinion that it's not morally good for us to pursue life, liberty and happiness, can take that away."
If someone can take a right away, it was never inalienable.
"3) The first amendment protects the right to freely exercise religious belief. Are you admitting that Atheism is a religious belief?"
Atheism is a position on the question of religion, and the Supreme Court considers it equally protected. It is not a religious "belief" any more than your "religious belief" that there is no Easter bunny.
What is WITH you Christians and your fatwa envy? Why do you people ALWAYS point this out? It's like you wish you had that kind of rule in your own religion. But no… that would be *GASP* immoral!
"For the most part, Scientologists are just people who believe in a religion."
No. They are not. They are the victims of a cult that sucks them in, steals their money, scrambles their brains, and cuts them off from their families. Scientology is not a religion. It's a dangerous criminal organization.
"I like to see movies for inspiration and entertainment though, not to be made angry or depressed. "
You can't be "made" angry or depressed. Your emotional reactions are yours and yours alone. Don't blame someone else for how you react.
It is a hilarious movie, and, I must say, right on about Christianity. (Conservatism isn't about Christianity, anyway, after all.)
But regardless, let me just say that the film, in it's presentation, if not it's content, does also show some positive sides of religion. Before God was invented, people just told each other the brutal truth ("You're fat.") and were unable to see past superficial attributes like that to see people for their heart. After God, people began to do that.
Also, I must take issue with your response to his response, for example this:
"One of my favourite films is ‘It’s a wonderful life’ and at no time am I offended by the suggestion in this wonderful work of fiction that there is a God. [Nice but irrelevant.]"
How is that irrelevent when he is an atheist and the movie presents ideas counter to his views?
All of the responses to him are about how his movie is blasphemy for (allegedly) mischaracterizing God. (Which even if he did mischaracterize God, why would you attack him for it and accuse him of contempt. And furthermore, why do some Christians have (quote on quote) "contempt" for atheist's religious views?) Anyway, the idea of a God who causes stuff to happen is an idea shared by many. For example, after God saved that pilot who crashed in the Hudson River a few Christian columnists wrote about how God helped save him. That's what the Big Man in the Sky does in the movie.
I lived in the Middle East for several years, during which time there was extreme anger, riots and even killings over a cartoon in a European newspaper portraying the Muslim prophet in an unfavorable light (actually portraying him visually at all is offensive to Muslims). From my Christian perspective, I felt that the reaction was nearly proof that the Muslim "religion" was simply a religion, not based on any personal connection with God. I'm firm in my relationship with God, and it doesn't matter to me or offend me when others don't believe as I do or even mock what I believe. Who cares? They have the right to their beliefs and even have the right to proselytize, as do I. I think someone should make a comedy to promote Christianity and show, comically, how ridiculous atheists beliefs are. But it better be funny, as I'm sure this movie is.
And I forgot to add, that in my opinion, the Christian reaction of being offended when someone says God doesn't exist is proof to me that their belief is not based on a personal relationship with God. It's like someone saying that your wife or husband doesn't exist and you've just made them up in your head. You're going to be offended by this? You know the truth and the other person is a moron. There's no reason to be offended. Just let it go.
Christians, please explain exactly how the movie is a caricature of your religion? How is your conception of "god" any different? A being in the sky/ether/heaven/whatever watches what you are doing and if you are a good boys and girls, you get a mansion and get to hang out with the man in the sky/ether/heaven/whatever.
If you are bad little folk, you go to the bad place and get roasted like a chicken at a Southern BBQ joint. Hmmm, sounds, vaguely familiar…
I saw the movie today with my Christian GF (I'm an atheist) and we were both howling with laughter. It was a very funny movie! Religion is every bit the sham as depicted in the movie.
1) Absolutely I am. If Morality is an opinion then you have no right to say beastiality is an abomination. You have no moral absolutes to call rape, pedophilia, honor killing, "wrong".
After all; (quoting a favorite saying from relativists) "Different strokes, for different folks."
Is that proof alone that God must exist?
No. But the excessess of Godless Dystopia's certainly is.
2) No. You are right. Atheist Utopias are a figment of my imagination. THAT was my point. Without God they ALWAYS become Dystopia's.
I don't know much about Norway, I have heard that their birth replacement rates, like most western godless countries is so low, that the "native" population will be dead in 80 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Basic_demograph...
"If someone takes a right away, it was never inalienable."
Absolutely relativistic statement.
* If a robber holds you up, he is not only robbing you of your money, but also your dignity and WILL.
Would you argue, because the robber has momentarily taken away your freedom of choice that free will (choice) doesn't exist?
3) Atheism IS religion. Look at some of the statements atheist leaders have made. They bow at the alter of "reason". (which eerily enough, usually ends up throwing reason out the window).
Look at how thin evolutionary science is. They recently found a hand, and a partial skull in the ground, dated it, and then IMAGINED IT.
From just that HAND AND PARTIAL SKULL, they can tell:
A) What that creature looked like.
B) How much fur that creature had.
C) It's approximate position in the evolutionary ladder.
D) It's behaviors.
Evolutionary science, is NOT Science. Science is repeatable. You put chemical X into chemical Y and get reaction Z. A scientist a million miles away can come up with the same results without seeing yours.
With evolutionary science, if two scientists are not using the same textbooks, they won't come up with the same results.
Look at how Dinosaurs have "changed" over the past 100 years. The fact is, THEY ARE ALL WRONG. It's all science of fiction, because they don't actually know.
OK, you're a complete imbecile and not even worth my time. Your entire argument for absolute morality is that there are things you consider gross, so there MUST be some absolute right and wrong. Sorry. No. The fact that you find something repulsive does not imply an objective morality.
Oh poor Christianity, its so faulty and easy to make fun. Or more to the point Christians; the religion itself is quite wholesome, it's a shame it's followers are so fucking retarded.
I did not really know what this movie was about when we went to see it last night. It was the most offensive movie I had ever seen toward Christianity. I was so disgusted we left the theatre. It made me so angry that I will no longer watch movies with any of the actors that were in this. Terrible. Don't waste your hard earned money or time going to see this total CRAP of a movie.
Let me summarize: Gervais satirizes the corruption of organized religion. Religious types, as usual, assert that the film simultaneously doesn't represent their beliefs, AND is clearly attacking the beliefs it's not representing. Isn't that a little… curious?
Making mock of people who use religion to justify rules that are personally to their advantage with no actual spiritual basis is not the same as making fun of people who genuinely believe in God and try to live a moral life.
This angry article is written by someone who didn't even see the movie! "…characterizing God as Gervais allegedly does in the film…" – You're attacking something based on someone else's suggestion that it MIGHT be offensive to your belief system. At least go see it first before complaining.
you forgot to mention that the movie did in fact have racist innuendo (refer to the dui scene, cops says " im glad you guys aren't black…would have had to shoot…")and also the bar scene ( "i always wanted a black friend" its obvious this was a world where people were judged by how they looked and not whats inside)
the only black character in this movie that i can remember (just saw it 5 mins ago) was his landlord who issued a verbal eviction with one days notice.
"I like to see movies for inspiration and entertainment though, not to be made angry or depressed. "
You can't be "made" angry or depressed. Your emotional reactions are yours and yours alone. Don't blame someone else for how you react.
ok so maybe he chose the wrong word but his point rings clear all the same. he doesn't want to watch something that would evoke reactions of anger.
Wow, God gave you mind-reading capabilities, too?
There are lots of atheists who have confronted the problem of evil and seek to address it. For a starter reading list, try Sam Harris, Mark Twain, Bertrand Russell, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Albert Camus, Richard Dawkins, Ayn Rand (I think she came to all the wrong conclusions, but I think most atheists disagree with her on most things) ,,,,
Much of Hollywood, including Gervais, are cowards who want "Christian" money and draw "Christians" in with the whole bait-and-switch routine. What they don't realize is that if they want to continue to receive more of their so-called "god" (money), they need to better understand what the Christian market is capable of: stripping them of their false idol by not seeing movies that are based on atheist beliefs/secularism.
It wasn't too long ago when Hollywood realized there was a market for Biblical epics; not that the melodrama of those movies were particularly appealing, but Hollywood is out-of-touch believing that their so-called progressive/relativistic movies touch on the pulse of America.
Hollywood is free to utilize the First Amendment and put out whatever crap they wish, but ultimately, their money god won't be there for them when they need it most, unlike our Creator.
Life without Faith is meaningless, and Faith without works is dead.
i would just like to make this clear. Your all stupid. This movie is a comedy. another good comedy is the show Family Guy and they bash god to a whole new extreme. Im christian, and its people lie you guys that make me want to give up religion because i never want to turn idiots like you.
Love,
the only person here who thinks before he speaks
Religion is all bullshit people. We need to get over our need for superstitious horeshit.
I do not care what this movie said about religion… I just wished they had advertised it truthfully so that I wouldn't watch it thinking its going to be something fun>>> If you're across the street shouting at me (coursing me) I do not care but if you come put your fist in my face I'll fight back. and this is exactly what this movie did trying to put it in my face.
Also for everyone one who say this movie is attack on Christianity, It is not. this is an attack on the Believe in GOD.
Sorry for any grammar mistakes. English is my second language.
Three words too long.
I just watched this movie tonight, I had no idea about the anti-religious views until I watched it, and I was NOT pleased! I thought it was going to be a cute, funny comedy but instead my family and I ended up being quite upset and felt like we were being made fun of for being Christian!
The whole movie really upset me, especially the part where the actor was made to resemble Jesus, after telling everyone about the man in the sky. And since the main actor is supposedly the "first man in the world to tell a lie", it's obvious what the writer was getting at! That really offended me! I would not recommend this movie to anyone, and I will NEVER watch it again!
This movie was digusting. It hides behind a comedy in the preview and then the movie is a full on Atheist telling us that God does not exist and then take the bible out of context for his own agenda. At least Mel Gibson showed the movie in the previews.
You must be logged in to post a comment.