Religious Rules of Ritual that Try to Be Logical But Fail Make Me Laugh (Funny)


I found this via the science channel Vsauce on YouTube and it made me laugh out loud. I just imagined everyone on every tenth floor synchronizing their watches to the exact moment the sun sets at that elevation. So funny.

 

You cannot trick God by taking the high speed elevator to the top!

 Like Santa, he'll know. He'll knows if you've been naughty or nice.
Which raises a few completely valid questions...
It this building simply too high for God to see what people are up to?
Is that why they need the reminder?
Is the elevator too fast for God? 
Perhaps that's why they need the reminder?
Maybe it's just a way to remind people that God, like Santa, is *always* watching them.
Even during elevator sex? Don't pretend like it doesn't happen.
If you ride the elevator up after Iftar, and get to a second sunset, does that mean you have to do a second Iftar?
Why not set a standard time for Iftar instead of just following the sun?
If we build a space elevator, what does the rule become when there are no longer any sunsets but the sun just hangs in the sky all night and all day?
Why didn't Allah, or God, or any of his prophets for that matter, inform us as to the exact practices when new technlogies are involved? 
Didn't he know?
Didn't he wants us to know?
If not, why not?
Or...
Could it be...
These are just silly man-made superstitions?

I'll let you be the judge of that.





Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Discussing the Historicity of Jesus with a Christian Agnostic

Image
Steven Jake, the author of the up and coming blog  TheChristian Agnostic , [1]  wrote a rather thorough response to my lengthy comment asking him about the state of the evidence regarding the historical Jesus. I am pleased he took the time to write a thorough response. I only feel that such a thorough response deserves my own more detailed response as my initial comment was merely that—a comment. So without further ado I will address some of Steven Jake’s comments and concerns. Initially Steven Jake (henceforth SJ) posted a quote from New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman claiming that there is an abundance of evidence for a historical Jesus. I merely contested this claim asking for what evidence we have that would be considered historically reliable. As I see it there is none. That doesn’t mean, however, I don’t think there  wasn’t  a historical Jesus, just that we cannot prove if there was or wasn’t and so I remain agnostic as to the historicity of Je...
Read more

Conflating Atheism and Agnosticism is a Mistake

Image
In a discussion over at Bud's blog Dead Logic , a reader asked a question I have been hearing more and more recently. It's a good question, so I thought I would do my part to try and answer it. Doesn't admitting to being an agnostic instead of an atheist FEEL like you're being wishy-washy, or not fully committing to your "belief"? ... I understand that it's only honest to say that we CAN'T be sure, but I sure do hate to show weakness (real or perceived) in an argument. Not at all.  Agnosticism deals with knowledge.  Atheism deals with belief.  The Agnostic position cannot assume whether a thing like a God could exist or not given the lack of sheer evidence for such a things existence. Therefore knowing with any given certainty just isn't possible. The agnostic then makes the claim that a definitive answer with regard to "knowing" of God's existence cannot be given either way. Atheism, however, can state with assurance t...
Read more