A weedy florilegium

Hill County Rebellion: a short history of an incident involving a declaration of martial law by Governor E. J. Davis during Reconstruction in Texas.

During Reconstructionqv Governor E. J. Davisq and the Radical Republican-dominated Twelfth Legislature of 1870 attempted to control crime in the state. In October 1870 Davis threatened Hill County with martial law for its tolerance of criminals.
—Ricky Floyd Dobbs, Handbook of Texas Online

“Freethinkers” Of the Early Texas Hill Country: an essay highlighting a commune of German Freethinkers living in Texas during the mid-19^th century.

Between the years 1845 and 1860, a large contingent of German Freethinkers immigrated to the Texas Hill Country. Unlike the thousands of Adelsverein-sponsored German farmers immigrating to the United States and Texas to escape overpopulation and economic problems, the Freethinkers, being ardent advocates of democracy and freedom from religion, were fleeing primarily from political and religious tyranny. They came to the United States seeking freedom from dictatorial monarchies and clerics.
—Edwin E. Scharf, Freedom from Religion Foundation

There’s no direct connection that I know of. It’s just a funny and educational coincidence.

Bush just playing us with ‘troop withdrawal’ [MSNBC]

[Right now] I’m playing for October-November. [...] To get us in a position [in Iraq] where the presidential candidates will be comfortable about sustaining a presence.
—George W. Bush, quoted in Dead Certain by Robert Draper

So then what purpose do the benchmarks⁴ serve?

Related information:
1. Report Finds Little Progress On Iraq Goals [Washington Post]
2. Iraq falls short of goals: US report [The Age]
3. Pentagon disputes bleak GAO Iraq report [USA Today]
4. Critical GAO review starts series of reports on Iraq [USA Today]

The Creator of the Universe takes an interest in me, approves of me, loves me, and will reward me after death; my current beliefs, drawn from scripture, will remain the best statement of the truth until the end of the world; everyone who disagrees with me will spend an eternity in hell.
—Sam Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation

All the fat has been trimmed, all the obscurity diluted. Take away anymore, and you’ve got yourself a non-Christian. The frightening thing is that although this caricature is arguably strikingly simplified, there is still a large sum of weighty philosophical, moral and numerous other implications. Naturally, the Theologian will argue for what the dissenters mean by “Creator”; because the opposition never understands truly who or what the “Creator” is unless they themselves believe in Him. The belief ticket grants them access to that esoteric knowledge. At least with Scientology, you can buy your way up the ladder.

But can the Theologian downplay “interest,” “approval,” “love” and “reward” from their implications of arrogance? And without turning the discussion into a mess of unintelligible rhetoric and circular reasoning?

“the best statement of the truth” cannot be considered as a jab in the dark about what those Christians believe. But wait! The truth of what exactly? Moral truth? Scientific truth? Metaphysical truth? Maybe Sam Harris stepped into a poor generalization.

But certainly objection to that “truth” cannot twisted about; clearly, it is the case that those who object do in fact object! Unless, of course, they know not what they object, and if they did, bring on the ad hominem stir. Nonetheless, some must object, but not out of necessity. We know that dissent is a possibility for the Bible itself highlights the capability of doubt. The message depends necessarily on that it reaches new ears, those unknowing or those skeptical. So it prepares for doubt, with the likes of Thomas especially. So the believer and the Theologian must agree that some do doubt, and those carrying their disbelief genuinely do so with equal understanding to that of the believer and Theologian.

And be Hell a state of being or a place of existence, nonetheless it carries a heavy moral burden to do the “right thing as right sees right” or certain punishments, whatever they may be, will follow. The concept of rewards and punishments cannot be argued as an inaccurate observance of a first principle of the theology.

Articles & Essays

• Christopher Hitchen’s Teresa, Bright and Dark
• Sam Harris’ The Sacrifice of Reason
• Carl Sagan’s The Burden of Skepticism
• George Orwell’s Politics and the English Language
• Michael Shermer’s Rational Atheism
• Bertrand Russell’s Why I Am Not A Christian
• Lewis Carroll’s What the Tortoise Said to Achilles

Websites

• http://www.problemofevil.info
• http://www.askanatheist.org
• http://towelianism.wordpress.com
• http://www.fallacyfiles.org/

I am told God loves me — and yet the reality of darkness & coldness & emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul.
—Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu, Mother Teresa (1910-1997)

Either her doubts are irrelevant to the doctrine or her doubts disconfirm it, but they certainly do not substantiate it. If we cannot say her expressed and apparent disbelief is a good indication of whether or not she believed, then we are implicitly claiming that her faith existed in a vacuum. Therefore, not one person’s faith can be used to validate the doctrine nor should it be used validate another person’s faith. It’s puzzling that any Protestant or Roman Catholic should consider her faith (or lack thereof) as an empowerment to their own.

But to call her heroic or inspiring because of her revealed doubts? I recall doubt being a necessary consequent of faith, but I refer to a specific kind of doubt. For it is such that we all have doubts in a general sense, but religious doubt cannot be unless religious faith is at first present. It is quite clear to me that her religious faith had expired absolutely, if her words can be said to be representative of her thoughts.