March 14^th is officially Pi day due to the fact that the numerical representation of March 14^th is 314, the first three figures of the mathematical constant Pi which represents the ratio of the diameter to the circumference of a circle. The number is actually irrational. There is no closed form of the number it starts out 3.14159265…With all of our computer power we’ve never once found the number after the decimal point to repeat. It also happens to be Albert Einstein’s birthday.

In celebration of National Pi day, the Loft Cinema is playing the movie “Pi” at 7 PM. They’ll even have pie available at the snack bar as a special treat for this movie showing. Unfortunately, the movie competes with the Tucson Atheists’ “Drinking Godlessly” event being held close by at the Red Garter Saloon.

This weekend is going to be great, in spite of the weather. The Tucson Festival of Books will be on the University of Arizona Campus, Roy Zimmerman will be performing in town, and the Skeptics of Tucson meetings return to the regular Denny’s restaurant on Speedway. There is plenty to look forward to this weekend.

This year FreeThought Arizona will be at the book fair. Thanks to the dedicated work of the members, we’ll have booths 351 and 352 right in front of the library. The bestselling author Chris Mooney will join with our own local celebrities to sign books. We have freebies to hand out and plenty of literature that visitors can take away. Books, magazines, and pamphlets will be at the booth. Members of FreeThought Arizona will be there to answer questions and engage in conversation and there will be information on the FreeThought Arizona, Tucson Atheists, Skeptics of Tucson, The Secular Student Alliance at the U of A, and American Atheists—all part of the Tucson FreeThinking Community.

On Sunday at 7 PM after the book fair, the Unitarian Universalist Church of Tucson along with the Tucson FreeThinking community is sponsoring a concert by Roy Zimmerman. Tickets, which can be purchased at the door, are $15 for general admission and only $10 for students. He’s calling his tour the Wake Up Call and is sure to appeal to progressive thinkers with folk style songs in the same vein as Joni Mitchell and Tom Lehrer. In fact, Joni Mitchel says, “Roy’s lyrics move beyond poetry and achieve perfection” and Tom Lehrer himself says, “I congratulate Roy Zimmerman on reintroducing literacy to comedy songs. And the rhymes actually rhyme; they don’t just ‘rhyne.’” Progressive comedy and satire available here in Tucson without a two drink minimum, how can you miss that?

Finally, on Monday, the Skeptics of Tucson Meetup Group returns its meetings to the Denny’s on Speedway just west of Alvernon. This month we’ll have discussion on articles posted on the Doubtful News webpage. The meeting begins at 7 PM and ends at 9 but people show up early for light conversation prior to the meeting.

Here is a summary of the important links contained in this blog entry:

FreeThought Arizona (associated Meetup Group)

Roy Zimmerman

Skeptics of Tucson Meetup Group

 
By Jim Wilson:

For decades one of the few places a public figure can openly challenge religious belief is the wonderful world of stand-up comedy.  Here nothing is taboo and almost anything goes.  Humor and mockery are among the best ways to challenge the commonly held values and assumptions in society.  Comics are often some of our greatest exercisers of free speech in addition to being merely entertaining.I would like to present our readers this collection of some of my favorite irreverent stand-up bits about religion.  (Warning, these are not intended for children or the easily offended and some are NSFW).

1. Bill Hicks’ perfect response to an angry Christian: The end of this clip always makes me happy. I’m pleased to say I’ve used this response to a few believers myself.
2. Sarah Silverman says: Sell the Vatican Feed the World. Though it is technically not part of her standup show, this short by Sarah Silverman makes an excellent proposal for feeding the world, at the Pope’s expense, and provides some nice commentary on papal decadence.
3. Ricky Gervais on Noah’s Ark The former star of The Office, Extras, The Invention of Lying and many other projects, discusses the absurdity of Noah’s Ark.
4. Eddie Izzard: Jesus and the Dinosaurs. This takes on much of the Christian worldview.  My favorite part is when God asks Jesus about what he told his followers about wine.
5. Jamie Kilstein on Gay Marriage A wonderful rant on marriage equality and religious bigotry, also hilarious.  Nothing more needs to be said.
6. Julia Sweeney on the book of Revelation The former Saturday Night Live actress gives her thoughts on the rather psychedelic implications of the last book of the Bible.  This comes from her wonderful film Letting Go of God.
7. Bo Burnham’s Rant During his comedy central special, Bo Burnam breaks into this musical number.
8. Jim Jeffries: God Loves the Stupid Australian comic Jim Jeffries delivers a foul mouth dose of religion bashing, and explains the lack of Kangaroos in the Noah’s ark story.
9. David Cross: Heaven & Squagels The former Arrested Development and Mister Show star, discusses heaven and, as an added bonus, something called Squagels.
10. George Carlin: Religion is BS George Carlin at his best!

I hope you enjoy watching these as much as I have.

In Tucson in the spring, there is a concentration of social activities. We just had a new one on Sunday at the Shanty where we discussed the subject of Atheism and the spectrum that it represents. Atheism is actually simple. All it takes is a lack of belief in God or gods. There are aggressive Atheists and some that are quiet in their lack of belief. Most Atheists are Skeptics, but not all. Very few are Atheists because they are “mad at God” or believe in Satan, although we hear these charges often. To be an Atheist only requires a lack of belief. Richard Dawkins represents the spectrum of belief with a scale that measures from 1 through 7 where a 1 represents a total believer, a strong Theist and 7 represents a person who doesn’t leave any room for a god belief, a strong Atheist. Of course, on his scale a 4 would represent a person who gives God a probability of 50%. Most of the Atheists I know say that they are a 6 on the scale. They are a De Facto Atheist. The probability that God or gods exist is extremely low, almost zero in fact. Here is the entire scale from Wikipedia:

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God.
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. “I don’t know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.”
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. “I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.”
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. “God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equally-probable.”
5. Leaning towards Atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. “I do not know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be skeptical.”
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. “I don’t know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.”
7. Strong atheist. “I know there is no God.”

If I were to make up a histogram chart showing the number of people at each level, there would be a high concentration of 1’s and very few 7’s. It is more difficult to believe that something exists than to say positively that it doesn’t. Most Atheists I know are thoughtful, intelligent people. If you gave them convincing evidence of God or gods, they’d change their minds. Handing evidence to a non-believer is conceivably easier than handing “lack of evidence” to a committed believer. That’s just the breaks but as difficult as that may seem, take a walk in a Christian evangelist’s shoes when they try and convert Atheists to follow their beliefs. In the WikiHow article on converting an Atheist to Christianity they advise the evangelist that “…you may find the person you are trying to convert is better versed in the Bible than you, “ and “Remember that some aspects of God and his existence cannot be explained logically…”

On March 10^th the Tucson FreeThought Community (Freethought Arizona, Tucson Atheists and Skeptics of Tucson), will be hosting a performance by humorous singer/song writer Roy Zimmerman.  The performance will take place at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Tucson Located at 4831 E 22^nd Street.

Roy has been performing satirical folk music since the early eighties, as both a solo artist and a member of the Fore (a group who had the distinction of playing the national conventions of both major parties in 1996).  Roy’s music focuses on political and social issues, and his songs about religious topics have made him quite popular in the FreeThought Community.  Here are a few examples:

1.  Jerry Falwell’s God
2.  I want a Marriage like they had in the Bible
3.  Creation Science 101

Zimmerman’s lyrics often come from an admittedly liberal or progressive point of view and may alienate some more conservative listeners. However, Roy’s performances are fun, enjoyable and often hilarious. The Tucson FreeThought Community is proud to sponsor this fine entertainer along with other entertainers and speakers from a wide variety of view points.

Come and join us for this fun night of song with Roy Zimmer on March 10^th at the Unitarian Universalist Church.  Hope to see you there!

I’ve been sitting on this submission for a little while now for a couple of reasons. Jim Wilson gave it to me after one of our Desert AIR Podcast recording sessions. He makes valid points in the article but I was reluctant to post it due to the fact that I felt it was a personal rebuke of an offhand comment I had made. We were talking about Brother Jed’s pending visit to the campus of U of A and I joked that wouldn’t it be great if we could get one of those speech jamming devices. It was a joke of course not to be taken seriously but unfortunately sometimes jokes are taken more seriously than intended. Now, Jed is gone and by his own reports he doesn’t have any complaints about how he was treated by the Atheists at the University of Arizona.

Here’s Jim Wilson’s article:

Years ago I worked in a call center environment doing some of the most monotonous work the white collar service sector had to offer. I often found that most irritating calls were not those from people who were angry with the company but those of people whose phones caused me to hear an echo of my own voice while working with them.  The echo would quickly derail my train of thought and leave me fumbling for words.   Recently in Japan, scientists have taken experiences such as mine and turned them into a marketable device.  It’s a speech-jamming gun that causes unsuspecting loudmouths to hear an echo of their own words, delayed at .02 seconds.  The echo completely throws their brain for a loop, silencing their speech (More information on this device can be found here:  http://phys.org/news/2012-03-speechjammer-gun-quash-human-utterances.html).

Most of us have had times when we wished we had such a device to point at some obnoxious individual in our vicinity.  Maybe it’s someone who won’t stop chatting in a movie theater or family member who won’t stop going on about the playoffs.  Then again maybe it’s some full-time professional or semi-professional nuisance, like the professional conspiracy theorist, the lying politician, the dishonest salesman, or the racist bigots holding a rally down the street that you would like to point this device at.  Some people are simply jerks and morons who say horrible mean-spirited things.  Some may do it just for the attention, while others may truly be trying to promote their own nasty world view.  The Phelps family, which is famous for protesting the funerals of fallen American soldiers, think that “God hates America” for its tolerance of homosexuality is an excellent example.

The temptation to stifle their speech with a speech-jamming device or even government action, is very strong but it is the wrong approach.  We need to allow people to say whatever hate-filled, bigoted, and crazy moronic things they wish.  Silencing people only legitimizes their cause.  Many of the most hate-filled people out there fancy themselves as victims of persecution.  Doing anything to validate their claims will only make them stronger.  For example, I recently heard it argued that the Bible must be an accurate depiction of reality because it is banned in multiple countries.   This argument makes absolutely no sense but it is a great example of how silencing someone allows them to play the victim card.  In another example, countless people flocked to show support for the bigoted management of Chic-Fil-A after some cities threatened to forbid the restaurant chain from operating within their limits.  In short, silencing people turns them into martyrs to rally around.

It can also lead to the individuals or points of view that one is attempting to silence getting even more attention than they otherwise would.  Attempts to ban the Phelps from protesting in various locations inevitably results in the group getting free publicity and more of the attention they so desperately wanted in the first place.  This greatly parallels the phenomenon known as the “Streisand Effect” in which an individual or group’s attempt to suppress information leads to that information gaining greater circulation and publicity.  The phenomenon is named for Barbara Streisand who tried to prevent pictures of her home from circulating which ultimately led to a greater circulation of the photos.  More information on this can be found here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect.

Silencing ideas also makes these ideas more interesting to those who are unfamiliar with them.  As children many of us were fascinated with R-rated movies or gangster rap music because our parents forbade it.  Some developed an interest in doing illegal drugs largely because they are forbidden.  Removing the mystique that surrounds the forbidden makes it more mundane.  It also opens it up to criticism.  When racists and neo-Nazis are allowed to publicly share what they believe it allows the rest of us to respond by pointing out just how stupid and harmful such ideas really are.

Sometimes the jerks may actually have a point or two or contribute to the conversation.  I know a few people today who years ago would like to have silenced the speech of Atheists and yet they are now Atheists themselves.  Allowing one’s beliefs to be scrutinized by people who disagree makes it possible for one to purge incorrect ideas and to form a more accurate and mature worldview.  Sometimes the most irritating people do have a valid point or two which often makes them even more irritating.  Even the most despicable people may bring some useful insight to the conversation or at the very least they may serve as a useful example of what is wrong with their way of thinking.  Either way, the market place of ideas is enriched when more a diverse array of people participate in it.

Free speech is meaningless when we only apply it to those we agree with. That is why all ideas should be allowed to compete without the threat of being silenced or without government support or favoritism.   I support free speech at all levels of society. That is why I will resist the temptation to buy the Japanese speech jamming device.

By Jim Wilson

Spoiler Alert! The entry discusses in detail some important story elements of Joseph Heller’s acclaimed novel Catch-22.  Those who wish to read the book for themselves should tread no further!

Joseph Heller’s 1961 novel Catch-22 details the trials and tribulations of Captain John Yossarian, a U.S. Army bombardier stationed in Italy towards the end of World War Two.  The somewhat satirical book is widely regarded as being simultaneously funny and disturbing. It documents Yossarian’s numerous attempts to prolong his life by evading his duty to go on additional bombing missions.  He comes to regard the war as essentially already won and resents his commanding officer’s practice of putting the lives of  the 256th squadron in danger solely to advance reputation and ambition.  Heller himself was bombardier stationed in Italy during World War II who flew 60 missions.  He stated that the odds for his survival were not in his favor.  Much of the book was drawn from his own experiences, though he says he never had a bad officer and much of the book’s cynicism came from the Korean War and the Red Scare rather than World War II.

Catch-22 is the obscure military rule that obstructs Yossarian from getting out of flying the increasingly growing number of required missions. Catch-22 is now widely used to describe a no win situation. It stipulates that, “a concern for one’s safety in the face of dangers that are real and immediate is the process of a rational mind” and those who possess a rational mind are not crazy and must fly their missions.  Only the insane were excused from service and since asking to be relieved was a sign of sanity, this made it impossible to be relieved from duty;  ” If he flew them he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to he was sane and had to.”

Of course, no such rule officially ever existed, but because Yossarian’s commanding officer acted as though such a rule did exist, it became very real in practice.  Colonel Cathcart, Yossarian’s commanding officer,  throughout the book continues raising the number of missions each individual is expected to fly before they can go home.  He led his men to believe that each increase would be the last but it was always followed by another.  Yossarian believed the colonel’s dishonesty and willingness to put lives at unnecessary risk, not to mention the residents of the cities being bombed, was driven by personal ambitions and had little to do with advancing the war effort.  Indeed, Yossarian tells another member of his squadron:

“The enemy is anybody who’s going to get you killed, no matter which side he’s on, and that includes Colonel Cathcart. And don’t you forget that, because the longer you remember it, the longer you might live.”

Eventually, Yossarian publicly refuses to fly more missions and captures the attention of Cathcart himself.  Cathcart vehemently hates Yossarian and would very much like to have Yossarian court marshaled but realizes that  Yossarian would get exactly what he wants–to be relieved of flying missions.  Eventually Cathcart and his sidekick, Colonel Korn, decide to make Yossarian an offer.  He can get out of flying more missions on one condition. Colonel Korn’s one condition is, “Like us”. Korn further elaborates the terms of the deal:

“Like us. Join us.  Be our pal. Say nice things about us here and back in the States.  Become one of the boys. Now that isn’t asking too much is it?”

All Yossarian has to do to get out of his missions is publicly speak in favor of Cathcart and Korn. Korn points out that after Yossarian does this it will be much easier for them to coerce the rest of Yossarian’s friends into flying more missions and states that they may even use him as an example. Everything about the idea repulses Yossarian but he considers doing it anyway.  In exchange for this agreement, Yossarian is promised not only freedom from his military duties but a comfortable life as “one of the boys” in Cathcart’s well connected circle of military cronies.

There is a similar Catch-22 found in the Christian faith.   Cathcart and Korn’s offer to free Yossarian from clear and present danger in exchange for compulsory praise is very much like what the Christians think their God offers us non-believers.  We are happy that there is no evidence that the God of the Bible exists. God is depicted in both Testaments of the Bible as a petty, murderous, sexist, capricious, bigoted, genocidal monster. My lack of belief means that he is also not able to put me in the Catch-22 where I am forced to like (no, love) him or be subjected forever to eternal torture.  Any being that would arrange for us to be subjected to complete and utter torment forever unless we submit to ourselves to his complete authority and talk ourselves into liking it, is undeserving of admiration or respect.  Furthermore, such an offer would be a far worse Catch-22 than anything described in Heller’s book.

It has been a busy week! Brother Jed just finished his first week of evangelizing on the University Of Arizona Mall. The newly formed Secular Student Alliance at the University of Arizona had a rough start but finished well. On Monday on the way to the Alumni Plaza, a box dropped off of the hand cart that was transporting the table and supplies. The box that dropped off contained all of “Brother Jed” Bingo cards printed up for the occasion. All 850 cards disappeared out of existence along with a box of highlighters and some twirly helicopter toys but it turned out OK because the weather made the first day a very short. More cards needed to be printed up AND there was Skeptics of Tucson meeting on superstition that night. Both were accomplished and Tuesday turned out to be a better day. Wednesday, Ash Wednesday, was an even better day still and included some expected and unexpected excitement. A student group planned on taking the stage from Brother Jed and performing the Harlem Shake. Brother Jed caught word of the plan and had a counter plan. Everyone’s plans were working out when, in all the excitement, a young man dressed in a Penguin suit fell on the grassy hillside and Brother Jed fell on top of him. No one was hurt and everyone involved including Jed and the Penguin chalked it up as an accident. Some people that weren’t involved and some that weren’t there might claim otherwise, however. Some claim that the kids should be ashamed of themselves for pushing over a 70 year old man and some claim that Jed “tackled” the Penguin. Brother Jed believes that the Penguin fell first and pulled him down. In any case, the show must go on. Preaching and heckling continued throughout the rest of the day on Wednesday and on Thursday and Friday as well.

The Secular Students Alliance of the University of Arizona manned the table, passed out prizes, distributed, and collected Bingo cards all week. They plan on continuing throughout the coming week. After Brother Jed leaves, someone that played Brother Jed Bingo will receive a board game called “Blasphemy” (a $100 value). Brother Jed is a great recruiter for the Secular Student Alliance, a group that is meant to provide community for the non-religious students on campus. The FaceBook page for the new group indicates that there are now over 100 members. The founder and current president of the group announced that regular meetings will begin on Wednesdays at 7 PM on the campus at a place that has yet to be determined. She also indicated that there will be other activities including social events and community service activities. If the logistics can be worked out, her group will be hosting Roy Zimmerman on the campus for some funny songs about ignorance, war, and greed on the 10^th of March.

Tucson Atheists and FreeThought Arizona are sponsors for the SSA of the U of A.

FreeThought Arizona will be having lectures on Sunday, the 17^th at the UMC DuVal Auditorium starting at 10 AM. The first lecture by Dr. Jay Quade, a professor at the U of A, will be on, “Evolution in Honor of Darwin Day” which was on the 12^th of February. The remaining lectures will start at 1 PM. Roy Speckhardt, the Executive Director of the AHA (American Humanist Association), will speak on, “Building a Non-theist Rights Movement” followed by Maggie Ardiente, the Development Director of the AHA, will speak on “An Update from the American Humanist Association.

The Tucson Atheists will be having their monthly meeting at the Denny’s near the corner of Alvernon and 22^nd at 7 PM on Monday the 18^th. The subject of the meeting will be: Is Modern Science due to Judeo-Christian Influence?

Of course, you can still catch Brother Jed and play Brother Jed Bingo throughout the upcoming week. His last planned day at the university is Friday, the 22^nd.

By Jim Wilson.

Greetings.  It is the return of Brother Jed Smock, the colorful college minister, an inadvertent promoter of Atheism.  Jed is back in town and will be preaching on the University of Arizona campus from February 11^th through the 22^nd .  His over-the-top, cartoonish style will surely capture a sizable crowd.

Jed Smock’s Campus Ministries consist of colorful open air preaching that usually does not change much from year to year. He typically includes tales of his adventures in the American counter-culture of the sixties complete with wild stories of sex and drugs and then his conversion to a self-loathing sexually hung-up Christian.  His style is highly confrontational and he is known to say things like, “I don’t know how the whorehouses in this town stay open — all of you sorority girls are giving it away for free!” or “A masturbator today is a homosexual tomorrow.” He will freely call the people he speaks to “homos,” “fags,” “sodomites,” “drunks,” or “fornicators.”

He spends plenty of time demonizing liberals, homosexuals, fans of rock music, those who engage in premarital sex, feminists, and those who reject traditional gender roles–all of which are apparently destined for hell.  The usually young college students frequently mock him and some of his act is self-parody.  For example, during one Sex Ed with Brother Jed segment he warned the males in his audience that after they get married and finally engage in sex for the first time, to be careful not to mistake their wives anus for her vagina. One student responded with “what if I do and she likes it?”  On another occasion, he stated “you seem to have a fixation with my anus” after being called an “a##hole.”

Brother Jed is the best recruiter for the local freethinking community. If he is the poster child for Christianity the Atheist community looks better in comparison.  His presentation does everything to highlight the ridiculous, superstitious, bigoted, hateful, and reactionary baggage that other Christians sweep under the carpet.  He makes Christianity the object of ridicule it deserves to be and does so in a way that is wonderfully over the top.  He is often accused of being a parody and many of us have to question the intelligence of the church members who finance his travels around the country.

His visits often mark the year’s highest recruitment times for local Atheist and Skeptics groups. Many  milk the opportunity by hosting Brother Jed Bingo.  In these games, listeners are given bingo cards with words on it that regularly appear in his narrative and those who fill their cards out first win a prize.  My copy from last year features such phrases as “Penis,” “Squirt-squirt,” “Whiskey,” “Sexual Frenzy,” “Freaks,” “Get Laid,” and “Oral Sex.”  Ironically, he thinks it’s the young people he talks to who are supposedly obsessed with sex.

There is a dark side in all this.  He drags his teenage daughters around the country with him. They are as brainwashed as he is.  These virginal girls make sex-negative presentations as part of his ministry and open themselves up to rude questioning from the audience that no-one should have to endure.  I remember listeners asking one of his daughters if she had ever masturbated or experienced an orgasm.  As would be expected of someone raised in a sex-negative environment the answer was no.  Needless to say, it saddens me to see people that young subjected to the ridicule their father brings on himself and it saddens me more to see this man instilling these girls with his repulsive beliefs and attitudes.  The idea that young people filled with hormones should be told to feel dirty, sinful, or ashamed every time they experience perfectly normal sexual feelings is repulsive.  Frightening children with threats of hell, damnation and eternal torture is very much a form of psychological abuse.

Brother Jed’s theology is highly idiosyncratic and much of it is rejected by many self-identified Christians.  His God, for example, is not the all-powerful or all-knowing one most Christians worship but one that is largely reacting to human’s free will actions he apparently has little or no control over.  Jed’s idea of a God who is lacking in these areas and presumably not completely competent actually makes much more sense than the God most Christians worship.  He also has stated numerous times that he no longer sins at all, a notion that most Christians consider impossible.

Brother Jed is definitely a trip and it is refreshing if not disturbing to see a Christian so out and open about all the horrible things that many of them actually believe.  He is the author of the book Who Will Rise Up: A Call to Confrontational Evangelism and is the basis for the short film Battle of the Sects.  Here in Arizona he has many unconvinced followers called Jed Heads, and I consider myself one of them.

Click HERE to see him in action at the University in 2008.

Jim Wilson has a few questions:

Did God give us Free Will? No. There is no reason to think so because there is no evidence to suggest that God ever existed but the existence of free will is still in question. For all practical purposes, it seems that we have it and we must act as though it exists. On the other hand, it could be that all of our behaviors and thought processes are the result of chemical reactions that we have no way of controlling.

The existence of free will depends on the definition of the term. After all, we may have free will in the sense that we are free to make decisions ourselves but, at the same time, we may lack it in the sense that actual decision making process is dictated by immutable physical laws.

Many religious people use free will as an explanation for why the world is messy. They argue that God wants us to voluntarily choose Him. They say our failure to do this has introduced sin into the world along with tapeworms, hurricanes, and tornadoes. Of course, this argument flies in the fact of the claim that God is all-knowing, all-benevolent, and all-powerful. All-knowing assumes prescience and all-powerful assumes total control of everything that happens. If God has a plan, no human activity can effectively alter the plan.

If, however, God is lacking in the infinite knowledge depart, or the infinite powers department, then free will maybe a little more plausible. But that makes God a little less great which may be just fine for some believers. The Judeo-Christian then must ask, “What did God know and when did he know it?” Additionally, it gives rise to countless other questions, such as:

Did God not create Satan? Could God not destroy Satan at this very moment? Did God not knowingly allow Satan to introduce evil into the world? Did God not knowingly begin the chain of events that led to evil being introduced into the world? Could God not have removed evil from the world at any time if he wanted to? If so, wouldn’t that make God ultimately responsible for the existence of evil in the world? Did God know that the world would become such brutal and inhospitable place for humans as a result of Adam eating the fruit? Was this part of this God’s plan or the result of a miscalculation on God’s part? Did God intentionally set Adam and eve up for failure? Were Adam and Eve simply tools used by God to introduce sin into the world? Could God have tweaked Adam and Eve’s personalities such that they could have avoided the whole incident, but chose not to? Was the talking snake actually an agent of God’s will, or the result of some sort of error in his judgment? Why should Adam’s descendants be punished for Adam’s actions? Was it God’s intention that humans should be a permanently ignorant?

Some believers argue that the world we live in is far from the human ideal because this allows humans to be virtuous rather than acting as something akin to robots. This leads me to ask:

Was Adam’s fall necessary for humans to be virtuous? Were Adam and Eve capable of being virtuous before their fall? Given this, is it possible to be virtuous in Heaven? Is there free will or sin in heaven?

Other Christians argue that Satan, rather than God is ultimately responsible for the evil that exist in today’s world. That is too convenient.

There are ambiguities within the Judeo-Christian world-view and areas that are potentially problematic for believers. Different believers will have different answers for these questions but the Bible says, “Prove all things: hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).

These are my thoughts on free will and my latest set of questions for the faithful.