Abiola_Lapite's photos More of Abiola_Lapite's photos

« Australia Surprises | Main | Why Japan Annexed Korea »

June 05, 2006



Almost 2000 years ago the Romans demonstrated that Believers versus Lions match ups were usually pretty one sided. This appears to still be the case.


Maybe God punished him for his presumption, for it is written 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.' (Matthew 4:1-11).


There's the old joke... a man is out for a hike by himself when he falls off a cliff; he's clinging by one hand to the rock, the only thing keeping him from plummeting to his death. He yells out "Is there anybody there to save me??" and suddenly the clouds part, thunder booms and lightning flashes, and a big booming voice comes out "I am the LORD your Savior... Let go of the cliff, my son, and I will save you." The man pauses for a few seconds and then yells "Is there anybody else??"

As for Matthew 4:1-11 I believe this was also put forth jokingly as an explanation for why that blind prayer study released a couple months ago actually showed slightly worse outcomes for those "prayed for" than control subjects.


So what was his superstition? Believing God doesn't exist? Anyway, he got his answer - God has a cruel sense of humor.

Steve Edwards

Chalk another one up for the Darwin Awards.

gene berman

I know it's hard to resist knocking the religious/believing aspect of this guy's delusion but he's not (or wasn't) religious--he was just a nut. Exactly the same thing would have happened if his delusion had been of a different kind, f'rinstance, if he'd entertained the notion that he had the power to hypnotize such lower creatures by staring into their eyes. What is the humor--or any attraction--in mocking the deluded?

It shouldn't have to be pointed out that, no matter that many atheists regard all believers as suffering from or clinging to a delusion, the overwhelming preponderance of their (believers') number behave no more foolishly in most practical matters than do atheists. That is to say, that though they profess to believe their god will watch over them, they do not deliberately make that job harder by taking foolish risks. Even among primitive cults who practice the handling of venomous snakes as part of their religious ritual (certain SW Injuns and hill-country fundamentalist sects), it's long been observed that they try to make the deity's work just a mite easier by goading the snakes to strike (and expend venom) repeatedly--or sometimes by "milking" them.

Times do change; not too many years ago, it would have been considered boorish or ill-bred to laugh at the misfortunes of the insane.


"Times do change; not too many years ago, it would have been considered boorish or ill-bred to laugh at the misfortunes of the insane."

Though it's still considered okay to call Native Americans "Injuns"??

gene berman

You sure got me there, Andy. I'll plead "no contest" and throw myself on the mercy of some body empanelled specifically to weigh matters involving moral equivalence.

I certainly should have known better. Just no telling what some of the extremely "sensitive"
will find offensive.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Notes for Readers