Divine Denial Of Service Attack on God?
October 28, 2009 12:23 pm Current Events, ReligionUm, good luck with that.
As you may already be aware, recently the Atheist Founation of Australia and the Global Atheist Convention websites were the target of a significant DDoS (Distributed Denial of Service) attack, which began on Monday 19 October.
This is a call to all non-believers and advocates for freedom of speech to join us in a global co-ordinated minute of prayer with the aim of inundating God (in this context, the Christian god, God, as distinct from the Greek god, Zeus, the Egyptian god, Ra etc etc) with so many useless prayers that it causes his divineness to go offline as as result of our own DDOS (’Divine’ Denial of Service).
The prayer minute will be at exactly 8pm (Eastern Standard Time) and 9am (Greenwich Mean Time) on Sunday 8 November 2009.
Oh! I see that it has already passed. So, how did that work out for you? Because, you know, God isn’t a collection of servers spitting out 404 errors.
You can’t take God offline. You can’t remove Him with posters. And really, why are you wasting so much effort battling something you don’t believe exists? Why pray to something you call nothing more than naive superstition?
Does my faith hurt you? Does it even effect you? Because your lack of faith doesn’t directly hurt me. Sure, I feel compassion for you. There is a great peace in knowing God. Maybe one day you will understand it, but it doesn’t hurt me if you never do.
So, really, why the all out campaign against God? Why wage such a war? Is it because you feel so threatened? Why do you fear something you don’t believe exists? What is the harm done to you if someone has faith? Are my prayers so offensive?
Or maybe, you don’t believe your own rhetoric. Maybe, you think by waging this war and winning converts that the conviction you feel deep in your soul will go away. That small seed of doubt that nags at you when the lights go out? You know, the little voice that haunts you just before you go to sleep? That’s God. Doubting Him does not make Him go away. All of your flawed arguments only serve to show how empty and hollow your solutions really are.
But if you must fight this war, do so with my blessing. You won’t win. Eternity is a long time to reflect on your position.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Those people are psychotic.
October 28th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
Unbelievable… I wonder if they even realize the irony of calling for mass prayer to the God they don’t believe exists?
October 28th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
Wouldn’t it be funny if God spoke to a few of ‘em during the ‘attack’?
“Excuse me. This is God. I knew you would be trying this, and had Heaven’s IT angel install a new server for each and every one of you. We call our servers “angels”.
I’ll be watching over you, even though you don’t believe in me. Why? Because one day, you’ll be in a car wreck. Or your mother will develop cancer. Or your child will go missing. And you’ll call on me. And I’ll answer. Because I am God.”
October 28th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
Im the creator of the group. I think you guys are missing the point. I do get the irony and inherent contradictions. Rather then repeat things go read the comments to learn a bit more. There is no attack on believers. In fact this satire is aimed at those who did similar to what you have done here, make some broad and unfounded assumptions.
Those people who just decided that it was a christian who committed the attack are suffering from a lack of critical thinking. The prayer could be seen as a punishment to them for being so naughty.
In the end given that most of the members do not believe in gods, the event is a victimless and pointless contradiction. So yes i do get that. Its kind of the point!
PS: You said -”There is a great peace in knowing God. Maybe one day you will understand it, but it doesn’t hurt me if you never do.”
Why do you assume a non-believer did not once feel exactly the same way. I know i did and most of my non-believing friends were also very religious at one time. For me none of the gods can match the joy and wonder of the natural world and the investigation therein. So i have some perspective that you may lack. Just something to consider. All the best. Take Care,
Dan
PPS: a quick definition of what atheism actually is – An atheist says that there is no reason to believe there is a god, that all the evidence in fact says otherwise, and given that a simple explanation is probably more accurate, let’s just assume there is no god. The onus is on the believer to prove why the believe in a god, and another hint, personal experience doesnt count.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
Another quick one as i just saw a comment that annoyed me.
DeWayne Says:
“Why? Because one day, you’ll be in a car wreck. Or your mother will develop cancer. Or your child will go missing.”
I lost my Mother to breast cancer DeWayne. I didnt feel the need to call on one of the gods. If my child went missing i would rely on my community, family and the police to aid me and i would be out looking instead of praying. Nothing fails more than prayer (hence my group). Look up the definition of ’straw man argument’ and also a non-believers response to the falsehood ‘there are no atheists in foxholes’. All the best.
October 28th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Thank you Dan for your well thought out, polite response. Honestly, I’m not accustomed to that.
You assume that I never spent time doubting God. Actually, I grew up in a very legalistic church whose idea of God was quite vengeful and judgemental. I couldn’t believe in that god. I searched other faiths and even very fully explored the faith of unbelief. And for a time, it seemed very logical. Scientific even.
But all the logic and science in the world couldn’t answer why. It told me there must be a beginning, a catalyst to everything, but had no explanation for it.
be blessed in your journey of faith. Everyone eventually chooses one whether it is God or a seemingly logical explanation of why it can’t be.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:54 am
Hey Jennifer, why thanks.
Actually i find its a given that particularly christians doubt. It appears from my experience to almost be a rite of passage and a positive thing. Not so in other faiths. A friend had your experience and switched churches as he wanted more community involvement. I understand that too.
Now for the exploration of unbelief. Can you tell me more specifically what you explore, books you read etc. How broad was you exploration? I might also point out that you can still have a faith and not discount the scientific method. In fact i dont believe you can live in a modern society and deny the power of the method. Look around and pretty much everything you see has gone through this method to ensure it is effective. To deny it means you must doubt absolutely everything from technology to medicine to law. Everything. But as a westerner you have the luxury to think otherwise, to have an ‘opinion’. But it must be pointed out that everyone may be entitled to their own opinion, but everybody is not entitled to their own facts. Once i applied this reasoning to my faith it all fell like a deck of cards. And it was really not so bad as i expected. I find the naturalistic understanding of the world to be the most wonderful and joyous thing i have ever discovered. Im so so happy.
On your last point, the one that gets used all the time, regarding there must have been a beginning. Two quick answers there. Firstly, it really wasnt so long ago that we were adamant that the earth was flat. When new information arises (and it will for this too) you are left in a very uncomfortable position. Your gap just got filled with knowledge. And lets be honest here Jennifer, that is hardly the reason you are a christian right? More likely its because you were raised one. I doubt your churches spend much time considering the various strong thesis’ regarding how the universe began. And one of those ideas is that it may not have begun at that time. Either way you are left with the confusion of working out who created the creator who created the universe. And who created the creators creator etc. Despite that argument, we will learn the answers and like every other question about the universe and life, there has never, not even once, been a supernatural answer that has been roundly accepted. Not one in our amazing history. Hey it might be the first one but i wont be holding my breath. You can google regarding the current views on the universes beginning, it will either make you forget that line of thinking or give you a much better argument that the old chesnut ’science cant explain everything’.
Ok so my wife is waiting to watch Grand Designs (not intelligent design!!!), its a BBC show. All the best.
October 29th, 2009 at 8:49 am
Jennifer – A nice post. I appreciate the genuineness of your thoughts. No cleverness or condecending irony. Just a genuine, heart-felt response to yet another banal, passive-aggressive atheist´s idea of humor.
Dan (creator of “the group”) – At least you feign an effort to be cordial. Points for that. However, all you´ve managed to do is put on display the generic nature of your disdain, backed up by stale talking points (s.t.p.´s). We get it. Science. Investigation. As if just writing those words somehow backs up your assertions that being an atheist makes you more adept at understanding, learning and adhereing to the scientific method than a believer in the creation model. Silliness.
As are your suggestions (s.t.p´s all) that a) evidence points away from the existence of God – in which case, prove it. b) evolution is, by any stretch of the imagination, the simplest explaination (contradicted by evolutionists themselves with their intricate web of presupposition). c) the onus is on the believer to prove belief when what is clearly seen in nature and tested scientifically routinely falls in line with the creationist worldview (not so for the evolutionist who filters all data through his presupposed grid in failed attempt after failed attempt to discredit what is already understood – the cell theory, the law of biogenesis, etc).
I could continue, but it´s not my blog. Just had to say something. Not intended to be cruel or even mean-spirited. Just pointing out the fact that you have presented no information to back up any of your s.t.p´s. Best if you could show some evidence. Prove your position. Give us some of that scientific data that will win us over to believing that a totally random explosion of non-existant elements in a non-existant realm created a swirly twirly vacuum that, inspite of the absloute chaos such a situation would cause, all-of-a-sudden-in-existance energies and substances could come together and form complex inorganic objects that would one day be inhabited by spontaneously generated lifeforms that would, in spite of the impossibility of the odds, and through a perfect combination of mutation and natural selection in the most hostile environment possible to imagine, evolve into what we see around us on earth today.
Do tell.
October 29th, 2009 at 11:39 am
“I might also point out that you can still have a faith and not discount the scientific method. In fact i dont believe you can live in a modern society and deny the power of the method.”
Dan-
That’s a great point that many people miss out on completely. Science and faith are NOT mutually exclusive, as many seem to think. Some of the most brilliant scientists are devout Christians or Jews.
I happen to agree with you concerning the beauty of the natural world. The divergence in our views is that I see this as creation, divinely engineered, that sings praises to its Creator. The connection between all things living serves as the Artist’s signature as far as I’m concerned. Galileo, Newton, and many others viewed the world and its workings in this same way, and saw their work as worship to the Creator.
I don’t think I’m alone here saying that if you don’t believe in a higher power, that’s all fine and dandy. My belief is that He created us as creatures of free will that can and will believe anything we damned well please – including a belief in Him. Frankly, I’m glad that we have the freedom to believe or not. What a shame that some would want to artificially take away that freedom – not speaking of you, obviously.
October 29th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
We’re all a bit more similar than one might think at first look. Well, assuming there are no agnostics in the conversation.
Whether you believe in a Divine being (of any stripe) or absolutely deny the possibility of the above, that position requires faith. There is no concrete proof either way.
Yes, both religious and atheists scientists take facts and interpret them through the filter of their own beliefs and declare them evidence for their own viewpoint, but it is a silly practice.
One can neither prove, nor disprove the existence of the Divine. That being the case, I came down on the side of caution of Pascal’s Gambit. Since then, I’ve developed faith through life experiences that have brought me closer to God.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
I was all hyped up to point out the faith required with either belief, but Aaron beat me too it.
As he said, one can neither prove, nor disprove the existence of the Divine. It is a matter of faith. The thing that puzzles me is why those who don’t believe feel they have to change my, or other believers, outlook. They don’t “win” anything by it. So why does it bug some of them so – that we believe? I know why believers try to change the non believers outlook. We do want them to share in something we find satisfies a deep indefinable need. We (or at least I) want them to have that too. At least, that’s my best explanation.
October 29th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
Mike, all the facts (or stp’s as you say) regarding evolution on Earth can be found in Dawkins latest book. Dont mean that to be dismissive but i let the actual experts speak for themselves. Dawkins has done a great job in directing these facts to people like yourself. Its a book aimed directly to you. So enjoy. I certainly dont feel any requirement to be an expert in all subjects. That would be silly. I let the experts do what they do best, provide their evidence and let it be scrutinized. If they are proven wrong, the strength of the method is that it allows for improvements. So my response to your questions is that i can let this theory stand up for itself. My personal opinion doesnt matter. I have read other people saying the same kind of thing you are saying. So far i have noticed that the theory stands as strong as ever. The wonderful thing is that you or anyone else can publish papers for scrutinization by other experts and it will either meet the standards and be applied or it will be rejected. Its subjective free. Thats its strength. And the same thing is occuring with how the universe came to be as well. I always keep an eye open for new information that comes to light. Its interesting to note that if for example the christian god continues not to reveal himself it will be the scientists who may indeed one day prove you right. But it will still be the scientific method that is used as its the strongest one we have. Given at present not even christians can agree on any single important biblical point im not sure how you determine who is right and who isnt? And of course that kind of ruins Pascals Wager (which one of the thousand or so christian groups is the right one), not to mention the thousands of other possible gods we could choose, depending upon where you were brought up obviously. Shive for example is a lot scarier than any other god i have come across. All i will add is that using the title evolutionists is irrelevant. It is the current agreed theory (theory in the scientific term) that stands as our best understanding, belief aside. Given you dont trust the method then its really quite pointless asking for evidence. If we move forward say 10 years and lets say some evidence comes to light that leads us to establish a theory on the origin of the universe (remember theory is differently applied in science). I think its fair to say that you will unlikely accept it anyway. As you believe that our best method is flawed. By the way, your funny take on some straw man idea of how the univers began, that wasnt a “passive-aggressive theist´s idea of humor” was it? Just checking.
I will let the other readers here decide whether i am pretending to be nice or not. Personally i find your method of response to be quite rude so please understand if i dont start a back and forth with you. I dont see the point. My take based purely on your response is that there would be nothing that would ever make you change your mind. I have always lived my life with an open mind, but not so open that my brains fall out of course. It is why i love learning. I read theists responses as well as scientists. Two years ago i had not picked up a non-fiction book let alone a science one. So i would suggest if you want a debate go read Dawkins book and start a blog. I will read it. Seeya
Aaron, as you may have read above, its actually entirely true that scientists apply belief. They will personally believe in a thesis, an idea but once it becomes a theory it becomes an agreed understanding of our collective best knowledge. At that point beliefs are irrelevant to the strength of the theory. See above.
And finally, a definition of atheist in particular – “A ‘lack’ of belief in the existence of God or gods.”
Not a belief, a lack in a belief.
Im assuming you guys do not believe in the Hindu gods, or the aboriginal gods, or the Muslim god or any of the other current gods billion of people believe in, let alone all those in the past. This means you are also atheist regarding those gods. I just go one god extra now.
Not sure i will return here guys. I have no interest in changing peoples minds or debating anyone. Jennifer was just interested enough in the group i set up to post about it and i just wanted to respond given im responsible for it. Take care.
October 30th, 2009 at 12:51 am
“Nothing fails more than prayer”.
Unless it is a lack of prayer, which, if everything is left to chance, would fail at least as much.
And, to clear things up, no-one ever said prayer had to be mutually exclusive of action.
And, I still think it would be funny if God answered you.
October 30th, 2009 at 5:33 am
Hey Dan – It´s ok if you´re not interested in a back and forth. I just didn´t want you to walk away carrying some of the misconceptions I see you have based on your response.
A. Facts and talking points are not remotely equal. I referred to what you offered as the latter in order to set up an opportunity for you to reply with facts, based on investigation using the scientific method to back up your assertions; one´s that, using your own words “get[s] used all the time.”
B. I don´t expect you to be an expert on the subject in order to offer evidence (Dawkins’ or your own) to back up your generalizations with more specific information when asked. If I was asking Dawkins (who I have read and heard in dabate a number of times) to back up a statement he made I wouldn´t expect even him to just say “go read my book.” I would expect him to offer evidence for a particular statement he was making.
C. God has revealed himself in various ways according to the Bible (how christians determine who is right and who isnt within the christian faith). Generally: In His creation and in man´s own conscience. Specifically: in dreams, visions, directly, by writing, personally, through men, through prophets, and through His Son.
D. The title evolutionist is extremely relevant. My point being, more and more scientists place evolutionism before actual, good science that adheres totally to the scientific method. And there is an effort within the scientific community to exclude those (and their works) who do not conform to that standard. And I am referring only to research that I have read and am familiar with (i.e. I am not a proponent of the Intelligent Design movement – as a matter of fact, know next to nothing about it).
E. I trust the Scientific Method implicitly, and do not believe it flawed in any way when it is applied; which is exactly why it disturbs me to see it trampled over as it has been by those promoting a biased evolutionary agenda under the guise of science.
If you do chose to return and see this. I do have a blog where I have discussed this subject with others in detail, as well as other forums I´ve been active in. If you´re ever interested in just having a debate about any particulars of the scientific method, evolution, creation or even the God of the Bible, just click on my name at the top of this comment and it´ll take you to a blog I recently started and you can contact me there.
I´m really a pretty harmless guy. I just don´t like assumptions
Cheers.
(and thank you Jennifer for allowing me to take up so much space here)
October 30th, 2009 at 10:11 am
[...] Jennifer finds an oddity on Facebook (yeah, how unlikely is that?): As you may already be aware, recently the Atheist Founation of Australia and the Global Atheist Convention websites were the target of a significant DDoS (Distributed Denial of Service) attack, which began on Monday 19 October. [...]
October 30th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Hey Dan, I have only one question for you. If the Universe was created by the Big Bang, then what caused the bang in the first place?
See, just because Dawkin’s presents all kinds of evidence to support evolution, doesn’t mean that God didn’t create evolution in the first place.
As far as I’m concerned, the more that is discovered about evolution, physics, and the world around us the more it proves God exists and that his design is much more subtle and complex than anyone can ever imagine.
November 3rd, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Thanks, Jen, for bringing Sunday Around the Dinner Table to your blog! It’s good to stretch the mind.
To all, particularly Dan: why do we need to quantify or qualify? Where is the mystery and the wonder? How about if there aren’t any objectifiable answers? If we are able to exhaustively define, describe, or disprove God, does that validate (or verify) or nullify Him? Hardly. I think that’s really the point. If we could get our brain around who He is, He wouldn’t be God. I kind of like the mystery–feels secure to me. It’s not a matter of religion or absence of religion. It’s a matter of one person (God) revealing Himself (and yes, Dan, He does reveal Himself to those who honestly look for Him) to other persons. If I miss Him, it’s me missing Him, not the other way around. And I can imagine Him right now chuckling over our inane attempts at grasping with our brains the One who created the human brain!
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Oops im back here again. Just want to quickly reply to Mimi. I noticed that once again nobody wants to answer the issue of multiple gods and the problem of personal experience as some kind of objective truth.
As for Instincts message, i did answer that above.
Mimi, its sometimes referred to as Unweaving the rainbow. I once not long ago thought the real mystery was in the supernatural. All i can tell you is that i have since, as an experiment and challenge initially, put my time and attention on the natural world we all live in and i have never ever felt such wonder, joy and contentment. I was a christian just so you realise. Since then i read all kinds of topics from philosophy, genetics, biology, psychology, futurism, bio-ethics, skepticism, bible from historical perspective, neuro-science, the list goes on. This from a guy who never read a non-fiction book for 35 years!
As for a god or gods revealing themself. I was thinking about this in the shower, or more precisely thinking how to explain it in my own head. Personal revelations are honestly and meaningfully experienced every minute throughout the world. Now here is the bit i hope you stop and think about for a while. Each experience will just happen to fit their own cultural upringing, climate and personal belief system. Amazing hey. The one single contributing factor to all these experiences is the brain. Now for me, knowing this fact, I am not content to hide the fact that this cannot work. I am left with a few decisions to make. First i ignore the fact that (for one of billions of examples mind you) in Delhi right now a person is experiencing the love and mercy of Ganesha just as powerfully as you are in your home town except for you it happens to be Jesus or the christian God, right? So you can ignore this fact, which is easy if you are surrounded and validated by family and friends who believe in the same god.
The second option is to simply discount these other cultures experiences as not being ‘real’ or perhaps tricked experiences. There is an obvious danger in that. You are stuck with a terrible burdon of proof, one that you cannot provide given your experience was also personal, just like theirs. We are stuck back at it being your cultural viewpoint. A special calling? Ok, i will accept that, just explain why you are different from that Indian chap who also feels that calling, that knowing. But what makes you or him so special? Luck perhaps? Born in the right state? Near the christian church that of the thousands or break offs, just happens to be the true one? Ummm, ok!
A third option is to do what i did. Find out for yourself by reading what people who have dedicated their lives to understanding the same thing have found out. What does, for example, a brain scientist say about religious experiences. Where in the brain does it trigger, is it the same part of the brain as other cultures experiences etc. Find out what a philosopher has to say on the subject, like Paredolia for one small example (i have literally hundreds of them now). In other words, our strength as a species is in our ability to share information. It doesnt hurt to share, right? Or does it.
So here is the honest truth. Some things were truly a shock to me, but the shock did not last long and some of those things i thought so vital, so ‘true’ and so dear to me no longer do, and i am not a lesser person for discarding some of them. In fact i feel more free, more moral and socially consious than ever before.
Lastly, you could happily stick with the fundamental assumptions you were taught and get validated over and over again, and still be a happy, loving, content wonderful person. But then again i could say the same for every other follower of every current god or gods (there are lots, why does that point get routinely ignored?) out there, including those like my good self who dont believe in one less god than yourself. I have demonstrated to myself a willingness to (rigourously)challenge my beliefs and experiences despite the perceived risk. And it is far from over. Let the dominoes fall where they may. Seeya