Quantcast

«

»

Dec 10 2008

Baby-eaters of the world, unite!

Just an amusing bit of edible art…nothing more.

Edit: I wasn’t skeptical enough and didn’t check this out – evidently they’re made of clay and not marzipan. Still – if someone could make them out of marzipan, you might have a market! ;)

13 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Sparrowhawk

    Sorry to have to be the party pooper here, but according to a comment posted on the original blog, these are actually clay and are made by this woman: http://www.camilleallen.com/If you go to the “Artist” page it does say they’re clay, not candy. I admit it would be awesome to bring a bag of these to a Christmas party if they were candy…but they’re not :-(

  2. 2
    Zurahn

    Tsk tsk, Matt. Didn’t check your sources :P

  3. 3
    AtheistUnderMask

    What are you guy’s saying? Clay’s edible… kinda.:D

  4. 4
    Gizmo

    Damn, I was so ready to buy some as thats just awesome.

  5. 5
    Matt D.

    Well, crap. I was so eager to have something sweet (and I don’t even really like marzipan) that I simply wasn’t skeptical enough.Doh!

  6. 6
    Tom Foss

    Given some of the stuff I’ve seen on “Ace of Cakes” and the like, I wouldn’t be surprised if you could make similar stuff out of marzipan. Then again, they’d probably end up looking like a broom.

  7. 7
    arensb

    And here I thought you meant these guys.

  8. 8
    Michael LaPenna

    I’ve watched a few shows and your arguments seem to be contingent upon the assumption that all believers believe in God as a “man who lives in outer space.” But what of the Alan Watts concepts of God and Devil as metaphor or Joseph Campbell’s idea of God as a thought? Or, maybe God as eletromagnetism? It never seems to be discussed at all in these terms.Also to be clear on your point on salvation by grace: In the general Christian theology, salvation by grace means being truly repentant. if one were to accept Christ but be a scumbag at heart, your believe in Christ would mean absolute sh*t.Please reply at [email protected] and be well!

  9. 9
    arensb

    Michael LaPenna:But what of the Alan Watts concepts of God and Devil as metaphor or Joseph Campbell’s idea of God as a thought?I’m not familiar with either of those concepts. I’m sure Matt will be happy if you or any other theists who define “God” this way call in to the show. So would I, actually: there haven’t been a lot of calls lately by theists explaining what they believe and why.My first thought about the latter, though, is: if God is a thought, then who’s thinking it?Or, maybe God as eletromagnetism? It never seems to be discussed at all in these terms.Are there really people who worship electromagnetism? I’m told it’s a running joke among astronomers that any complicated problem can be hand-waved away by saying “it’s due to magnetic effects”, but I didn’t think anyone took that seriously.In the general Christian theology, salvation by grace means being truly repentant. if one were to accept Christ but be a scumbag at heart, your believe in Christ would mean absolute sh*t.That’s not the impression I get from reading Chick tracts, listening to Kent Hovind, and the church flyers I occasionally get on my door. Those tend to say “all you need to do is say this prayer”, with no mention of actually believing what you say.Having said this, my heart, like all other organs, is composed of cells, which in turn are composed of atoms. The protons and electrons interact in part using the electromagnetic force, and their nuclei are affected by the weak nuclear force, which is actually the electromagnetic force in another guise, AIUI. So there’s electromagnetism in my heart. And electromagnetism is God, as you postulated above. And God is Jesus, per standard trinity doctrine. So I have Jesus in my heart (as well as my spleen, pancreas, and toenails), so I’m set.

  10. 10
    maddogdelta

    @Michael LaPennaBut what of the Alan Watts concepts of God and Devil as metaphor or Joseph Campbell’s idea of God as a thought? Or, maybe God as eletromagnetism? It never seems to be discussed at all in these terms.2 rejoinders:1. When Matt (or anyone else) does his/her piece, usually they will preface what they are talking about. Specifying what the target is: For example, assumptions from Christians/Moslems regarding atheist morality, news items, general scams run by organized religons2. Whenever a caller calls in, Matt almost invariably will bring up the questions “What is it you believe, and why do you believe it?”When the latter occurs, it is usually a Christian who gives a variation of the “man in the sky” god.A god as metaphor or as thought goes right back to the notion that there is no evidence for any god, so we can use the concept of “god” metaphorically for lots of things. “god” as thought comes right back to “god” being a human creation.Personally, I think “god” is very useful as a punchline in jokes…”I sent 2 boats and a helicopter! What else were you asking for?” “No, he is Jesus. He thinks he’s Tiger Woods!”Regarding salvation, you still don’t have a point. How do we know whether the person is still a scumbag? If God is doing the forgiving, then God will know whether or not someone has truly repented. Which still leaves the immoral absurditity of the possibility of Hitler repenting and going to heaven, while 6-10 million of his victims not repenting and going to hell.// nobody on any of these shows is claiming that Hitler really repented, nor do (I think) any really care if he did or not.

  11. 11
    Martin

    http://www.abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=6436872&page=1The "Religious Right" to kill your baby

  12. 12
    BeamStalk

    http://homepages.tesco.net/~janefisk/discworld/discworld.htmBack to marzipan, the marzipan discworld cake for the win.

  13. 13
    Zurahn

    Or, maybe God as eletromagnetism? It never seems to be discussed at all in these terms.To paraphrase Matt from the show several times,”If you’re going to say ‘God is love’. Fine, I believe in that god, but why call it god?”Furthermore, if you’re going to equate god to electromagnetism, as soon as you attribute anything more than the exertion of force on masses through electric charge, you’re no longer sticking to your convoluted semantics.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite="" class=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>