Skip to main content


By Carl S ~

Mary Shelley's novel, “Frankenstein,” is about Dr. Frankenstein and the man he created, and is well known. It‘s about a scientist bringing life into a corpse assembled from various body parts, using electrical forces. It is also a precautionary tale, since the creation becomes a monster, turns on his creator, kills innocent people, and must be destroyed. Perhaps the story is the origin of the “mad scientist” stereotype so beloved of, and exploited by, fiction writers and movie makers, which fed paranoia about the power of science to begin with. This story has been used as a warning for scientists not to “play God.” (Although it may be argued that the creator-god of the bible is insane.)

Let us consider Dr. Frankenstein’s method as a reflection of theologies. Religions construct their bodies of evidence from the salvaged body parts of dead religions. As EChamberlainMD stated, “Judaism borrowed from, modified and adopted the various religions it encountered in the Middle East and Egypt and created it's ‘one true god’ mess — the mess upon which Christianity is built.”

Let's go further back. On the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel is a mural depicting “Adam” as a fully formed inert body, with the breath of god infusing it with life. One observer of this painting said, “Hey wait a minute. Life, in nature, is inherent to an organism. It doesn’t come from outside itself.” What is represented in this painting is a god playing Dr. Frankenstein, not the other way around. But religions insist it’s the way life works. They claim that “souls” are “infused” into organisms at some point in time, “souls” existing outside of organisms. Indeed, they claim “supernatural” lives outside of material existences, which control and determine nature itself. Even entering and exiting bodies! (Good and evil. Think exorcism.) All of the creator-gods, eternal life, and resurrection myths derive from this belief. What is the resurrection of Jesus if not the re-animating of a dead body?

What are theologies really for, except to convince others that life exists independent of material substances, while yet acting on them? Rather than shocking the stopped heart into beating again, as EMT’s and MD’s do, theologians are more like magicians shocking dead immaterial bodies into the appearance of living systems. Theologians and other religious speakers refer us to the biblical bodies of the “walking dead via spirit-force re-animating the dead“ and the “living words of god“ spoken by ancient ignorant men who saw spirits everywhere. Such are the “voltages” used to reanimate the dead bodies of religions. Theologians keep their invisible bodies “alive” by re-animating those creations through fanciful, entertaining, pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-scientific, arguments.

Religious theologies thrive in confirmation-bias. Consider this as compared to psychological states of mind. To a paranoid person, evidence supports the mind-set of the paranoid. One cannot reason otherwise to that mind-set. Now imagine a support group composed of paranoids, reinforcing each others’ confirmations. Is not this akin to the mind-set of religious belief systems? (Was St. Paul‘s a “beautiful mind”?) It's no wonder you can't argue sense to nonsense; you can't go there - there's no “there” there to begin with. It’s because those humanly created spirits and their stories are just that; ergo, incapable of creating and entering real living organisms through some “spiritual osmosis.”

If you think about it, it‘s really weird that religions would invoke the Dr. Frankenstein tale as a warning against scientific, reality-based research and discovery, when they have their own “Dr. Frankensteins,” a.k.a. theologians, continuously trying to make invisible corpses into animated beings.

Caution: theological arguments don't make sense because they’re Frankensense.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo

Why I left the Canadian Reformed Church

By Chuck Eelhart ~ I was born into a believing family. The denomination is called Canadian Reformed Church . It is a Dutch Calvinistic Christian Church. My parents were Dutch immigrants to Canada in 1951. They had come from two slightly differing factions of the same Reformed faith in the Netherlands . Arriving unmarried in Canada they joined the slightly more conservative of the factions. It was a small group at first. Being far from Holland and strangers in a new country these young families found a strong bonding point in their church. Deutsch: Heidelberger Katechismus, Druck 1563 (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) I was born in 1955 the third of eventually 9 children. We lived in a small southern Ontario farming community of Fergus. Being young conservative and industrious the community of immigrants prospered. While they did mix and work in the community almost all of the social bonding was within the church group. Being of the first generation born here we had a foot in two

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not