…and this is a 
Wanna go to hell?
Category: Godlessness
Posted on: December 15, 2006 8:32 AM, by PZ Myers
Trade your soul for a DVD! All you have to do is post a video of yourself to youtube, stating that you deny the holy spirit, and you'll get a copy of The God Who Wasn't There. Why those magic words?
Whoever blasphemes against the holy spirit can never be forgiven.
Mark 3:29
More details on The Blasphemy Challenge are available online, and they have a trailer, even:
Some of the comments on that video are hilarious.
You know what I hate? Fanatic Christians? Know what I hate just as much? Fanatic Atheists. This 'challenge' is disrespectful on a level I can't even verbalize. It's juvenile and inane. What do you hope to accomplish by doing this? It's obvious the only purpose is to get a rise out of people. Disgusting.
Poor fellow. What he doesn't realize that there's nothing fanatical about this at all. Stating that I deny the holy spirit only means that I have made an unambiguous statement about what I believe. It does get a rise out of people, but the fault lies in them, not us; should I get outraged every time a Christian recites the Nicene creed? Isn't it more the case that a fanatical theist would get angry at people saying that they don't believe as he does?
Oh, and this one needs no comment, since the inanity is self-evident:
STOP THIS! Please, if you're thinking about blaspheming against the spirit, don't! It's no laughing matter, it's the worst thing you could ever do.
Who was Jesus Christ? Liar? Lunatic? Lord? Those are your options. Those 3. That's it. Liar? Yeah, right! He'd have to be a freakin' genius liar to fool everybody in the bible! Hahaha, puh-leeze! Lunatic? OMG! Hahaha! You're funny! That explains how He died for our sins then came back to life! Moron. He was Lord. Duh!
This one is also funny:
So athiests think their immortal soul is worth a free DVD. Intersting; sad, VERY sad, but interesting none the less.
Let's get all reverent about that all-important "immortal soul". What the complainers don't realize is that it doesn't exist, so it doesn't count: what this really represents is trading a few minutes of effort to make a 30-second video for a free DVD.
I already have the DVD, so I'll do this for free. I deny the holy spirit.
Comments
Holy spirit? What holy spirit? I don't see any holy spirit.
Oops! Now I have to go to hell.
Damn.
Posted by: Zeno | December 15, 2006 8:43 AM
The holy spirit exists, all right - as far as I'm concerned it's Armagnac.
Posted by: paulh | December 15, 2006 8:48 AM
I made my recording earlier this week. I had to install this crap-o web cam that I got for free when I first switched to DSL. The picture quality was bad and I think I screwed up the audio settings because you can barely hear me and the a/v is out of synch.
But despite all that, my denial was still good enough to generate Christian hate mail. Woohoo! I've joined the club.
Posted by: The Science Pundit | December 15, 2006 8:51 AM
heathen blasphemer! if any spirit were ever holy, it would have to be the MacAllan. we'll have to wage a holy war, now.
Posted by: Nomen Nescio | December 15, 2006 8:53 AM
Do they accept comments posted to a blog? (I deny the holy spirit!), because i don't want to appear on video.
Posted by: Alex | December 15, 2006 8:55 AM
paulh- Armagnac is a strong candidate but I think there's something to be said for marc de Bourgogne as well. (Wish I knew where to find some here in the Cleveland area, where the state monopoly on liquor distribution results in pathetic selections and prices.)
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | December 15, 2006 8:56 AM
It's a divide that's apparently impossible to get over. Atheists do not think their immortal soul is worth a DVD. Atheists think there is no such thing as an immortal soul. Would these Christians be offended if someone offered them a free DVD (not that it's free since you have to expend some effort) for making a video clip in which they said "I deny the effulgent blorbik"?
The problem is that they can't wrap their minds around people who honestly don't believe in the very existence of these things. Atheists must hate or repudiate or fear God, because no one can not believe in him. It's like saying "The Amish don't believe in cell phones or helicopters." Of course they do: they see them all the time. Or people saying "I don't believe in pre-marital sex." Of course they don't think it doesn't exist - they reject it.
That's the sense in which most of these religious interpret "I don't believe in God".
Posted by: The Ridger | December 15, 2006 9:04 AM
I deny the Holy Spirit. OK, funny, I have been an atheist for four years and never actually came right out and said it like that. But it's true. I deny the existence of any such thing as it is described in the Bible.
I'm too stingy to go buy a webcam or whatever just to record a YouTube with, though, so that will have to do. I like this site better anyway. :)
Posted by: speedwell | December 15, 2006 9:09 AM
Hey! Don't you go dissin' the Effulgent Blorbik.
Posted by: PZ Myers | December 15, 2006 9:10 AM
Well, I'm not going to say it!
I'm an atheist who likes to hedge his bets.
Candyman....
Candyman...
Candyma.....
Posted by: Christian Burnham | December 15, 2006 9:14 AM
Hi, my name is cleek, (hi cleek!) and i deny the holy spirit.
well, kinda.... as noted above, how can you deny something that doesn't exist ? how's this: i deny that the "holy spirit" exists outside the imaginations of those who want to believe in it.
ashes to ashes. funk to funky.
Posted by: cleek | December 15, 2006 9:16 AM
The evangelicals cleave to what they like to call "systematic theology," which is a system of biblical exegesis (pronounced: Exit Jesus) that's concerned with finding loopholes in the sacred texts that will justify all kinds of patently unchristian behaviors. For a good example with respect to the subject chapter-and-verse, have a look here.
Posted by: Jim Wynne | December 15, 2006 9:17 AM
"Whoever blasphemes against the holy spirit can never be forgiven."
He said blasphemes.
So... the Holy Spirit is a stale fucking joke. And fuck off everyone who believes in something so much that they would stone another person to death for not believing. That was a bright idea. What psychotic sociopath came up with it? Fuck off Leviticus 24.
Leviticus 24
New American Standard Bible ©
11 The son of the Israelite woman blasphemed the Name and cursed. So they brought him to Moses. (Now his mother's name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan.)
12 They put him in custody so that the command of the LORD might be made clear to them.
13 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,
14 "Bring the one who has cursed outside the camp, and let all who heard him lay their hands on his head; then let all the congregation stone him.
15 "You shall speak to the sons of Israel, saying, 'If anyone curses his God, then he will bear his sin.
16 'Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.
Posted by: George | December 15, 2006 9:17 AM
I, too, deny the Holy Spirit as it's written in the bible.
I also deny the White Unicorn, Leprechauns, Sylphs, Gnomes, Trolls, and Bat Boy.
I feel better now. Did I just flip from Agnostic to Athiest?
Morph
Posted by: MorpheusPA | December 15, 2006 9:24 AM
Always cracks me up that the unequivocal "One God" of the old testament was magically multiplied by the later "christians" into an oddly unexplained "triune" phenomenon. Father, yeah. Son, ok, but you're pushing it. Holy ghost? C'mon people. God may be forgiving, but I'm willing to bet he can count.
My opinion is, if there's blaspheming going on, in the One God's eyes, it's the holy ghosters who are doing the most of it. No question.
Posted by: just call me sceptical | December 15, 2006 9:31 AM
(upping the ante)
I deny the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Muahahahaha...
Posted by: speedwell | December 15, 2006 9:32 AM
I deny the Holy Spirit, the human spirit, and all other spirits.
I also pity those who, for whatever psychopathology, believe in such primitive nonsense.
I believe that the only love in this world is the love we show each other.
I also believe I will have a donut.
Posted by: AC | December 15, 2006 9:35 AM
If you have to ask, then you're a filthy appeaser, and I'll have no truck with you. ;)
See, now this is interesting. Because I was raised Baptist, and I was taught that once you're saved there's no possible way to be unsaved. (Presumably not even by becoming atheist later on.) But here it clearly states that if you blaspheme the holy spirit you can never be forgiven, which to me sounds a lot like never being saved.
So if I, being saved, turn around and blaspheme the holy spirit, does that make me still saved or eternally unforgiven?
Oh, this is all so silly. At least the Daleks had an actual physical "god" to worship.
DO! NOT! BLAS! PHEME!
DO! NOT! BLAS! PHEME!
DO! NOT! BLAS! PHEME!
Posted by: Joshua | December 15, 2006 9:36 AM
Sordid details following:
I also deny the existence of God, the Holy Spirit, and the divinity (and possibly existence) of Jesus Christ...until sufficient evidence for their existence is provided to me. A little weaselly, perhaps, but never let it be said I'm prejudiced.
Unfortunately, not having "come out" to virtually anyone who knows me personally, I won't be claiming my free video just yet. :/
Posted by: rrt | December 15, 2006 9:39 AM
Now I want to name my next DnD character "Effulgent Blorbik".
Posted by: King Aardvark | December 15, 2006 9:40 AM
You know what disturbs me? I am currently and athiest, but I was raised Catholic.
Despite my desire to run the inside of my head on rational lines, I still get a little dose of the old religious fear when I think about saying this.
So today, I'm going to keep saying it until another stupid, irrational bit of my brain that religious indoctrination built goes away.
I deny the Holy Spirit exists. -- still getting a frisson. Argh.
Posted by: Crosius | December 15, 2006 9:43 AM
So if I, being saved, turn around and blaspheme the holy spirit, does that make me still saved or eternally unforgiven?
Ah, but you see Joshua, if you did that then you were never really saved in the first place. Otherwise, you couldn't possibly have blasphemed. Convenient, eh?
This same reasoning was presented to me in all seriousness as the solution to the faith vs. works problem: You are indeed saved by faith, but good works follow from TRUE faith...so if you do bad works, you're hellbound because your faith was false.
Posted by: rrt | December 15, 2006 9:49 AM
This is true as you are being saved, having it done to you, not the other way around. Therefore it would be God violating his promise if he let you go even if you choose a different path.
It should be mentioned that most of the more knowledgeable scholars on this issue see this verse as a rejection of Jesus type thing and not a simple phrase to be said. Meaning if you don't accept Jesus it can't be overlooked or something to that effect.
In the end who can say what some dude 2000 years ago sitting in a dirt hut actually desired his meaning to be.
Posted by: GH | December 15, 2006 9:52 AM
A DVD? Faust got 24 years to make mayhem with mephistophile for his soul. AND he got to do Helen of Troy. She fitted him in between launching a thousand ships. And that's a lot of broken champagne bottles.
Posted by: Peter McGrath FCD | December 15, 2006 9:55 AM
I don't have the means of doing that on youtube but I do deny the spirit. I also deny that those other things that go bump in the night have a supernatural explanation. In other words there is not one bit of factual basis for such concerns.
Posted by: JamesR | December 15, 2006 10:02 AM
...
...
"I deny the holy spirit" is not something I'd say ... because it's not pointed enough. Godders need to be reminded, in every expression of unbelief, that THEIR particular flavor of religion is only one of many, and ALL of them are empty and baseless.
Saying "I don't believe in God" is a statement of specific renouncement for the Christian deity, which backhandedly reinforces belief on the part of the dimwits who cleave to it. The fact that you're talking about "God," naming him specifically, causes the statement to translate, in their buzzing little heads, to "God exists; it's just that I'm evil enough to hate him."
To me, the REAL statement of unbelief is not "I don't believe in," or "I renounce" but "There are no such things as ..." followed by "godS" - which is carefully plural to indicate the real context of the statement: that there are thousands of deities mentioned in world religious literature. ALL of them are unbelievable fictions.
The very fact that there are SO MANY OF THEM, and that their descriptions vary so wildly - White Shell Woman, Coyote, the Hero Twins, Zeus, Apollo, Ganesh, Huitzilopochtli, Allah, Dagda, Matsu, Anubis, God, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Big Magic Juju Guy - is one of the strongest bits of evidence that they're made-up, and don't exist.
That being said, I'll paraphrase: "I deny any and all holy spiritS."
...
Just in case my link above didn't take: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deities
Delicious side-note: The Wikipedia section on religions lists "Pastafarian."
...
...
Posted by: Hank Fox | December 15, 2006 10:06 AM
Very well - I deny that Laphroaig exists.
Posted by: Dr. Steve | December 15, 2006 10:07 AM
As a former Christian, I experienced what I believed to be the 'feelings of the Holy Ghost' many times. But as I learned more, I came to realise that feelings and experiences aren't good evidence. It was difficult for me to have the humility to accept that I was wrong when I attributed my feelings to some supernatural entity.
But I'm now quite happy to type the blood-curdling words: I deny that the Holy Ghost exists.
Fancy imagining that saying (or typing) that is the worst thing you could ever do. Worse than murdering someone. Having sex with someone is number three, in case you're keeping track.
Posted by: fontor | December 15, 2006 10:11 AM
Any theist who would make videos of themselves saying a creed would also be an fanatic. I just don't see how this sort of thing helps. It just spreads the stereotype of atheists as assholes obsessed with religion. Whereas the whole point of most atheists, including myself, is that they don't find religion interesting.
Saying honestly "No, I don't believe in a god" when asked is one thing, but crap like this is as annoying as people saying uninvitedly that they've been born-again or something.
Posted by: Jonathan Badger | December 15, 2006 10:14 AM
The worst thing that you can do? Worse than eating a ham sandwich on a Friday? Noooooooo!!!
Posted by: Mena | December 15, 2006 10:15 AM
I've said it before and I'll say it again, and again probably:
I deny the Holy Spirit.
Oh, and if you see someone of YouTube wearing a ski mask and denying the Holy Spirit, it's me.
Posted by: AustinAtheist | December 15, 2006 10:17 AM
I don't have a camera! Nooooooo!
Posted by: A Teapot | December 15, 2006 10:18 AM
Nahhh, thats crap.Everyone 'saved' or 'not' behave basically the same way. We all make mistakes and seeing how most people are 'saved' in their childhood are we to believe they do nothing wrong ever again? Thats just BS.
Ted Haggard as case in point.
Posted by: GH | December 15, 2006 10:19 AM
While sipping on the holy spirit of a good single malt scotch, I cheerfully deny the Holy Spirit.
"The God Who Wasn't There" is a great DVD.
PZ, thanks for starting this thread.
Posted by: waldteufel | December 15, 2006 10:21 AM
I don't disagree, GH, but this person thought (and thinks) otherwise. They had a rude awakening recently...rather direct proof that Christians aren't inherently better...but it didn't sink in.
Jonathan: Can't I be an asshole obsessed with having theists recognize and respect my existence? That's not going to happen if I only speak when spoken to. (said the man afraid to tell his closest friends and family...)
Posted by: rrt | December 15, 2006 10:27 AM
Badger. That's just weird.
Alot of people hold onto their beliefs because of fear.
The videos show people with no fear to deny the existence of god.
Just making a simple statement. Imagine the power of one site with thousands of people
standing up for themselves.
It's empowering. If the fundies have a problem with it... tough.
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2006 10:27 AM
"Or people saying "I don't believe in pre-marital sex." Of course they don't think it doesn't exist - they reject it. That's the sense in which most of these religious interpret "I don't believe in God"."
This suggests that the history of theology and atheism among English speakers could have been different if 'I don't believe in...' was two distinct phrases, one that meant 'I believe 'X' does not exist' and one that meant 'I disapprove of/refuse to participate in 'X''.
(I have had several disconcerting conversations with sincerely passionate people about what they meant when they used an unclear phrase. The number of people who use imprecise language without being aware of what they are trying to communicate is...disturbing.)
Posted by: Christopher Gwyn | December 15, 2006 10:27 AM
Heh heh.
PZ said, "effulgent."
Heh.
PS: I deny, I deny, I deny the existence of God. Any God. All Gods. For I so love the world I refuse to crawl on my belly in the mud and grovel like a worm, but stand like a man ... er ... adult ... and marvel at what arose naturally.
Posted by: Mark | December 15, 2006 10:28 AM
Nomen Nescio - tell you what: if you could supply with a case of the 25-year old (cask strength) I'm sure I could give its merits serious consideration; never let it be said that I'm bigoted.
Posted by: paulh | December 15, 2006 10:31 AM
I deny the existence of any theistic gods, such as the Judeo-Christian one for instance, & all the schmuck associated with it, such as spirits, heaven & angels.
I don't think that a deistic god is very likely either, but its not totally ridiculuous. (And I don't mean that the Judeo-Christian god as portrayed is ridiculuous. Egotistical, vengeful, unjust, erratic, yes; in short, a total shit).
Now the sort of spirit I do believe in is a Canadian rye whisky, or a single malt Scotch.
Posted by: Richard Harris, FCD | December 15, 2006 10:31 AM
I strongly deny the holy spirit. I also deny Zeus, Odin, and every other ancient myth.
Posted by: Ric | December 15, 2006 10:33 AM
I do not believe in God, a Father Almighty,
a Creator of heaven and earth,
nor in Jesus Christ, His alleged Son:
Who was, it is alleged, conceived of an imaginary Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried, and is alleged descended into an imaginary hell.
I do not believe He arose again from the dead.
Nor that He ascended into heaven
nor sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,
nor that He shall come to judge the living and the dead.
I do not believe in the Holy Spirit, the magical teachings of the holy *catholic church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
nor life everlasting.
Posted by: Evolving Squid | December 15, 2006 10:35 AM
I'm sorry PZ, but it is my considered legal opinion that any second-year law student could get you off and that you are not yet damned to hell.
Posted by: John Pieret | December 15, 2006 10:37 AM
Badger, this isn't people going up to you and saying it to your face. It isn't a mob of atheists invading a church and professing heresy. This is more a matter of atheists talking to each other, taking a step towards building a bit of a community...and a few theists charging in and complaining about it.
Posted by: PZ Myers | December 15, 2006 10:39 AM
Oh no Laphroig exits - well I've still got some left (and about 25 other single-malts: so there - I shall be enjoying Yule, without baby effing Yeshua or the "holy spirit" which does not exist (apart from the aforementioned Laphroig etc ...
Oh wait, that's holy spirits - PLURAl, isn't it?
Hmmm .....
Posted by: G. Tingey | December 15, 2006 10:45 AM
Despite my desire to run the inside of my head on rational lines, I still get a little dose of the old religious fear when I think about saying this.
ditto. superstition's a nasty affliction.
believers will probably say that's God way of saying 'Hi!'
i think it's just my way of wondering how i can be right, and all those millions of people can be so wrong. how can i be smarter than 95% of everyone else ? i.e. it's humility and not trusting myself completely.
Posted by: cleek | December 15, 2006 10:52 AM
Oh no Laphroig exits
and it makes all other Scotch taste like weak tea.
Posted by: cleek | December 15, 2006 10:54 AM
"Oh no Laphroig exits - well I've still got some left (and about 25 other single-malts: so there..."
G. Tingey
I move this discussion be reconvened over at G's crib.
Posted by: Jim in STL | December 15, 2006 11:01 AM
Glenrothes is pretty nice as is Lagavulin.
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2006 11:03 AM
I'm not so sure the first commenter you mention is a theist. He just thought it was rather juvenile and inane to bait theists. Which is as far as I can tell what the point of the "challenge" is. Where is this "community building" of which you speak?
Posted by: Jonathan Badger | December 15, 2006 11:05 AM
1: It's far less than 95%
2: The millions don't all believe the same thing
3: It has nothing to do with how smart one is or isn't.
Posted by: JimC | December 15, 2006 11:11 AM
It's a challenge to ATHEISTS to state their denial.
Geee... I dunno thousands of likeminded people coming together to state a shared belief.
I dunno how that could possible build a community... I mean blogs don't even do that.
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2006 11:19 AM
The only holy spirit I have is in a bottle that came from the Highlands of Scotland... oh, damn, I forgot, I drank it all.
Posted by: Brett | December 15, 2006 11:33 AM
But it's couched in terms that are particularly inflammatory -- deliberately spitting on one particular form of theism (Christianity). If they weren't hoping to offend people there would be no point to doing it that way.
Having people describe why and when they left their religion is interesting and constructive -- and indeed such articles have been discussed on blogs, including this one. That's a far cry from just roboticially repeating a statement designed to invoke offense.
Posted by: Jonathan Badger | December 15, 2006 11:35 AM
You're missing the point. It's affirming ones atheism in terms christians understand.
It's almost an atheist pledge. An unequivocal statement former christians can make as a shedding of their former beliefs.
Why should chrstianity get so much unquestioned respect anyway? Because they give atheists so much?
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2006 11:45 AM
1: It's far less than 95%
in the US at least, 95% is a pretty safe estimate. worldwide, yes, the number is much lower. but it's still a solid majority.
2: The millions don't all believe the same thing
but they believe in something, as opposed to nothing. it seems to me that believers in a supernatural overseeing entity, regardless of what they call that name, or how many chickens they believe they should sacrifice, have more in common with each other than those who deny the whole thing.
3: It has nothing to do with how smart one is or isn't.
maybe not how smart one is in general, no. but i really was referring to this specific question. clearly, smart people can be stupid about certain things (and vice versa). according to the tests i've taken, i'm pretty smart, but i absolutely suck at statistics (for example).
it's not easy for me to, essentially, forcefully declare that the vast majority of the people in the world are delusional without having that nagging voice ask "are you sure you're not the one who's delusional?"
Posted by: cleek | December 15, 2006 11:47 AM
s/regardless of what they call that name/regardless of what they call it/
Posted by: cleek | December 15, 2006 11:49 AM
As I understand it, to blaspheme the HS, one has to accept it as real and hold it in contempt. Thus atheists can't commit the unforgivable sin. We can still violate the MA anti-blasphemey law though, which only requires an expression of contempt for the HS but does not require that such contempt be genuine. As I recall, Randi or someone tried unsuccessfully to get them to enforce that law a while back so he could challenge it.
Posted by: Craig Pennington | December 15, 2006 11:52 AM
If you don't buy into something minus evidence you can't be delusional. Your not the one imagining things. Secondly it's not so great a majority as you think. Even in the USA it is suspected the number of functional atheists is much higher but it's not culturally acceptable to call oneself an atheist yet. Once acceptence is found watch the polls jump amazingly in this regard.
Posted by: JImC | December 15, 2006 11:52 AM
I'm Jewish, does my denial count? I'm not sure. What do you mean by the holy spirit anyway? Like God? Or Jesus? Jesus is just a dead jewish guy, I'm pretty sure of that. As for 'God', whatever the heck that means, nobody knows, do they? You can affirm or deny it as much as you like, bottom line is nobody knows for sure. Doesn't sound very likely, but then the universe isn't very likely either. Personally, I'd kinda like it if some super benevolent diety type thing existed, and we all went on to eternal joyous afterlife, that would be quite cool, no? Or at least cooler than dying I think. But who knows? Do I get my DVD?
Posted by: Godol | December 15, 2006 11:58 AM
Well, 1) making a pledge or an "almost pledge" is something that atheists could do very well without, IMHO. We can think for ourselves.
2) If an "almost pledge" is insisted upon, "I do not believe in the existence of god, or gods" is just as understandable -- just not as offensive.
There is no point to give *anyone* offense if you can avoid it. Sometimes you can't, of course -- I can't avoid offending fundies with my research if they find evolutionary studies offensive. But this "challenge" offends people needlessly.
Posted by: Jonathan Badger | December 15, 2006 12:02 PM
Well, 1) making a pledge or an "almost pledge" is something that atheists could do very well without, IMHO. We can think for ourselves.
2) If an "almost pledge" is insisted upon, "I do not believe in the existence of god, or gods" is just as understandable -- just not as offensive.
There is no point to give *anyone* offense if you can avoid it. Sometimes you can't, of course -- I can't avoid offending fundies with my research if they find evolutionary studies offensive. But this "challenge" offends people needlessly.
Posted by: Jonathan Badger | December 15, 2006 12:02 PM
"Who was Jesus Christ? Liar? Lunatic? Lord? Those are your options. Those 3. That's it. Liar? Yeah, right! He'd have to be a freakin' genius liar to fool everybody in the bible! Hahaha, puh-leeze! Lunatic? OMG! Hahaha! You're funny! That explains how He died for our sins then came back to life! Moron. He was Lord. Duh!"
And i wouldn't have believed it was possible to dumb down CS Lewis.
Posted by: CCP | December 15, 2006 12:04 PM
So people shouldn't be making movies like "The God Who Wasn't There"?
You may be placing to much emphasis on the idea of a "challenge".
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2006 12:07 PM
I'm an atheist. Always have been, always will be. I have no truck with any species of fictional sky (or other residence) fairy. I don't see much point to this YouTube excercise for a variety of reasons:
1) I'm in the UK/Europe. Atheism isn't as big an issue here. We can get elected. Let's be honest, this is about pissing god botherers off at christmas. Not necessarily a bad idea, but a tad sophomoric. Mind you, the outrage of the god squad is hilarious. Irrelevant, logically vapid, but hilarious.
2) How do I "deny" something that is an abject work of fiction? I deny Darth Vader and all his Dark Side works. So fucking what! I deny the holy spirit and every possible god conceived of throughout history including the FSM, IPU, GGA and Playboy Bunny. I'm not even too happy about non interventionist deist deities, Occam rulez. Big whoop. As Hank Fox accurately says, pissing about with these lunatic scriptures grants them an importance they don't have and certainly don't deserve. This is why I am not interested in being "unbaptised" or any such thing (unless of course the church in question is dishonestly using my infant baptism as part of some spurious statistics). It's a total waste of time that falsely credits these fictional phantasms and fantasies with some vague credence.
3) I already have the DVD.
4) There are better ways to wind up the god squadders, if such is your desire.
Now who thinks that #3 is the IMPORTANT reason ;-)
Louis
Posted by: Louis | December 15, 2006 12:17 PM
Doesn't atheism apply specifically to god and or gods?
Yes we tend to agree that god is a fictional character.
However no one is praying to Hamlet. This is about religion not fiction.
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2006 12:28 PM
This is like the opposite of the magic Left Behind-ish words. I'd have to look it up, but it's along the lines of "I believe Jesus is the son of God who died for my sins and was resurrected." Say that 3 times while looking into a mirror and you're saved. Just killed a room full of schoolchildren? Doesn't matter. You were the 20th hijacker? No problem. You've found God's loophole, hahahahahah!
Unless, I guess you say these other magic words, the ones that make you go to hell. What happens if you say the bad magic words, followed by the good magic words? Does God's head explode?
Posted by: Stacy | December 15, 2006 12:31 PM
"This is more a matter of atheists talking to each other, taking a step towards building a bit of a community..."
Yep this would be a good video for children to see. I can clearly remember when I was a boy, being deathly afraid of the Bible in our house (I refused to even open it), because I assumed it held magical powers to take over people's minds. My mind couldn't come up with any other explanation for belief.
Posted by: Mondo | December 15, 2006 12:43 PM
I refuse to deny this holy spirit. The Balvenie will not put up with your insolence, PZ.
Posted by: The Disgruntled Chemist | December 15, 2006 12:54 PM
Louis is my hero.
I find this whole YouTube/DVD stunt interesting. I have made a bit of hay over the years tweaking alleged atheists by saying, "great! Let's blaspheme!" That usually pulls the rug out from under most claims of absolute atheism.
I'm with Louis, though. DVD giveaways aside, I view this as "negative" in that it doesn't necessarily advance anything. As a non-theistic example, if I reject brussels sprouts, I'm not embracing something else, as such. I'd put more stock in something like "green beans are the perfect food," or equivalent. More to the point, I'd say something like "I accept the concept of infinity, and all that it implies."
Just the same, pretty gutsy stunt, and I'm amazed that the religious hordes aren't flooding the comments with Bible quotes and finger wagging.
Posted by: Ethan | December 15, 2006 1:03 PM
Oh I hope they have good scotch at the company x-mas party tonight.
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2006 1:04 PM
I have to say, I do really like the music from The God Delusion. Worth selling your soul for some of that electronic gospel!
Posted by: slashnull | December 15, 2006 1:22 PM
Jonathan:
I understand this is echoing in part the old argument, so recently rehashed, between differing camps of atheists. So I'll try to be brief. I will happily grant that I'd prefer to speak my denial towards all gods and supernatural...um...things. But as has been pointed out by steve_c, this is not the point of the challenge. Actually, I think the real point is to sell DVDs...but it's not the purpose I'm attaching to it, and you seem to not recognize it at all. Indeed, you say:
But this "challenge" offends people needlessly.
No need? I take it you're satisfied with the state of public recognition, respect, understanding and acceptance of atheism, then? Because I am not. And I do not believe that being a good, quiet, inoffensive little atheist who stays in the closet is going to change that. I should be out organizing parades.
Posted by: rrt | December 15, 2006 1:22 PM
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | December 15, 2006 1:33 PM
I also deny the Xian Holy Spook, I mean Holy Ghost, er, Holy Spirit.
More seriously, it seems to be an odd choice of unforgivable sin. Why that and not something else?
Posted by: Loren Petrich | December 15, 2006 1:35 PM
Joshua wrote...."See, now this is interesting. Because I was raised Baptist, and I was taught that once you're saved there's no possible way to be unsaved. (Presumably, not even by becoming atheist later on.) "
I'm a fellow, ex-baptist, who back in my early teens posed a similar question to our pastor. His pathetic answer was "a true Christian would never blaspheme the holy spirit in the first place ". Being a precocious youngster, of course I pressed him...."Well what if you got really mad at God and did something like that? Then would you go to hell? or What if you just tripped over your words and blashemed accidentally?". He stuck to his premise and said a true Christian could never do that.
I'm thinking, what the hell? When you're saved, does some switch get reset not allowing you to blaspheme the holy ghost? Is it something I just cannot ever do, like disappear or fly? Not long after that, I came to the obvious explanation that he probably didn't know himself and was just covering for contradictory theology. The bozo didn't like me much anyway. Maybe because there were other questions like, how did the penquins get on the ark, why couldn't God beat iron chariots etc. etc. followed by equally inane responses by our local holy man. The moron eventually told my parents my questions were getting a bit out of line.
Nevertheless, years later, I chucked the whole claptrap of contradictory bravo sierra and now the only spirits I believe in come from our local ABC store.
Posted by: paleotn | December 15, 2006 1:51 PM
I have accepted the challenge! As I said in my blog entry about it "I fear not for my immortal soul for I believe not that I have one."
As for a holy spirit, I believe I'll have some Laphroaig.
Posted by: Tim Foreman | December 15, 2006 1:51 PM
STOP THIS! Please, if you're thinking about blaspheming against the Force, don't! It's no laughing matter, it's the worst thing you could ever do.
Who was Luke Skywalker? Liar? Lunatic? Jedi? Those are your options. Those 3. That's it. Liar? Yeah, right! He'd have to be a freakin' genius liar to fool everybody in the Rebel Alliance! Hahaha, puh-leeze! Lunatic? OMG! Hahaha! You're funny! That explains how He defeated Vader, and convinced him to turn on the Emperor ! Moron. He was JEDI. Duh!
Posted by: llewelly | December 15, 2006 1:54 PM
If I deny the Balrog, will they send me a copy of the Lord of the Rings trilogy on DVD too? How about KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN! Wouldn't mind the complete Star Trek movie series. Oh, and a pony.......
(FWIW, I deny the existence of a cam to shoot the video, so even though I deny the fictitious spirit I deny myself the ability to snag the DVD)
Posted by: AlanW | December 15, 2006 1:58 PM
I deny Xenu, does that count? In all actuality I like this challenge because every day I get told by Christians that I am evil because I don't believe in their imaginary friend, but they expect us to treat their belief as somehow above reproach. So, of course, I deny the holy spirit. I'm just cheap and don't have a webcam, so I'll just have netflix send me the DVD.
Posted by: Galphanore | December 15, 2006 2:13 PM
Crosius: You're an agnostic. Welcome to the club.
Godol: Bingo.
llewelly: Great! That's how to argue against an "argument" that's based on questionable premises and a lack of evidence. I need to remember that. :-)
Posted by: David Marjanović | December 15, 2006 2:43 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiaHilTlpCM
I liked this one.
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2006 2:46 PM
I can think of some good reasons for this stunt.
1) It's a bit o' fun.
2) It's a statement that we exist and everyone had better get used to us. We're here and queer, like.
3) Anyone who gets wound up about it probably deserves it. They probably need their worldview shaken up a bit. I don't believe (there's that word again) in mollycoddling those who make themselves easy targets.
4) Christianists (notice the "ist" suffix) aren't going to afford us "courtesy" just because we extend it to them. I'm reminded of this lesson from high school on the Cherokees (or perhaps it was another southeastern USA tribe) who adopted a rather Western mode of society in the late 1700s and early 1800s to appease the white men. It didn't work, they got herded onto reservations like all the other Indians.
Of course, I don't have a webcam, nor do I want one. Couldn't I just borrow my brother's microphone?
Posted by: Rey Fox | December 15, 2006 3:07 PM
I deny the existence of the Lords of Kobol. Can I get a copy of the BSG season 3 DVDs now?
Posted by: stogoe | December 15, 2006 3:07 PM
I don't seem to be oppressed. And I don't hide my atheism. And even if I were, I wouldn't see how winding up theists by mocking their taboos is going to help. That's only going to confirm their stereotype of us as people who have a "negative religion" similar to Satanists.