The conversation was via my cell phone to my parents’ home phone, Christmas Day:

Dad: Did Santa visit you?

Me: Yep. Did Santa visit you?

Dad: Yes.

Me: Did he leave a lot of coal?

Notice, I left off the crucial phrase “in your stockings.” I think if I had said “coal in your stockings”, everything might have been a little clearer. I’m not entirely sure that I didn’t say it, but we’ll assume I didn’t.

Dad: What?

Mom: No, we didn’t get much gold.

Me: What?

Mom: We didn’t get much gold.

Me: I guess I need to spell it. I said did you get much coal, you know, C – O -…

Mom: …L – D. No, it hasn’t gotten cold yet. It’s cool, though. It’s supposed to get cold tomorrow.

Me: No, COAL. Did you get much COAL?

Mom: Oh. Well, I got a few things from Kohl’s.

Me: No, no! COAL. C – O -A -L!

True story.

I’ve seen a couple of Christian blogs that have linked to this post by Ricky Gervais, most recently by Carlos Whittaker on Ragamuffin Soul. Says Gervais…

Why don’t you believe in God? I get that question all the time. I always try to give a sensitive, reasoned answer. This is usually awkward, time consuming and pointless.

What seems to catch everyone’s attention is both Gervais’s popularity and his ingratiating approach to embracing atheism.

I used to believe in God. The Christian one that is.

I like the tone he uses. I like that there is an appeal to reason and – though there are a couple of things he says that might be considered mocking or condescending – Gervais stays away from the nastiness usually exhibited in this kind of atheism/Christian discussion. Like many atheists, Gervais is bright, articulate, and funny.

Like every atheist, he is also wrong in his conclusion.

None of that is what provokes me to this post. The real question is…what would I say to him? What could I say to others who read his post and agree? There’s this challenge from Gervais…

Why don’t I believe in God? No, no no, why do YOU believe in God?

What can I say to that?

My reply would be this:

Dear Ricky,

I don’t think you want my answer.

For one thing, you don’t know me. You know people like me, Christians who love God and try to love people and don’t do either one perfectly. You know me as part of the larger group of “People Who Say They Are Christians and Don’t Get Nasty With People Who Disagree.” On the other hand, if you knew me personally, you sound like someone who would be interested in why I believe in God. But you don’t know me, so it’s unreasonable to think you would care about what someone you don’t know or have never heard of thinks about such an important topic.

Okay, let’s suppose you know me, and you might really be interested in why I believe in God.

In that case, even if I told you, it wouldn’t change what you believe. That’s not meant to be condemning or condescending in any way. I’m not saying you’re closed-minded or stupid or egotistical or that you would object to reason.

But your stated reason for not believing in God – “I don’t believe in God because there is absolutely no scientific evidence for his existence and from what I’ve heard the very definition is a logical impossibility in this known universe” – tells me you never will.

Yes, there is evidence, evidence I’m sure you’ve examined and found circumstantial at best. Asking for scientific evidence is misleading. I think it would be more accurate to say that you don’t believe in God because you have no proof of his existence. Proof is the issue. Proof is what you won’t find. Proof…well, I’m no philosopher or high-intellectual, so I might have this wrong, but all we can do with anything is give evidence. Evidence is what witnesses produce. There’s plenty of that.

Proof can’t be produced by witnesses. In fact, the only place you will find proof is in the mind of the jury. If the evidence doesn’t convince me, it will never be proof. Evidence can always be explained away. It doesn’t matter whether it comes from science, religion or some other sphere of influence. There is no proof until I accept it as such.

Of course, as you so eloquently and accurately put it…

…believing in something doesn’t make it true. Hoping that something is true doesn’t make it true. The existence of God is not subjective. He either exists or he doesn’t. It’s not a matter of opinion. You can have your own opinions. But you can’t have your own facts.

That is correct. What is equally true is that evidence doesn’t establish the facts. Science doesn’t establish the facts. Both – like religion – can only point to or away from them.

Do I exist? There is much evidence that would point to my existence. Is there any proof? If you don’t accept the evidence, even if I were to show up on your doorstep with documentation, witnesses and a big plate of cookies, it wouldn’t be proof.

The bottom line is this. I believe in God for the same reason you don’t – I’ve examined the evidence and I believe it points in a certain direction.

Yes, that leads me to the conclusion that there is eternal separation and punishment for those that reject God. This is not a happy conclusion for me. I find no pleasure in this fact. I am not shouting for “death to the infidels.” On the contrary, as a reasonable person, I am concerned and distressed at this outcome for people like you. Yes, for you.

I feel sad that this type of concern could come across as mean-spirited or judgmental, but I know that others have used these same arguments in a mean-spirited and judgmental way, so I think I get it.

Sincerely,

Tim

Blogging is work. Not hard work like digging ditches or building a building. But it takes no small amount of effort. Mainly I’m thinking of the actual physical part of typing out words. There is also the mental part of determining what to write.

That’s my explanation for why I don’t post more often to this blog. I have found out – like many other people – how time-intensive regular blogging can be.

So, I started another branch of the blog.

Actually, I’ve taken some of the content from this blog and I’ve created a new place for it. You can now find the sermon series I have been posting in the “Learn” category of this blog at its brand new home – NUMB3RS.SarcasticMonkeys.com. It makes sense for the series to have its own place. Now it does.

In the meantime, I’m trying to determine what content I really want to blog about here on the S-M Home. Most of the content I produce is found elsewhere. SO…for both of you that check in on this blog…thank you and I haven’t forgot you.

As a side note, I’m considering changing the look of this blog again. If I can’t produce content, at least I can make the old stuff look different.

Now head on over to the NUMB3RS blog. I’ve just posted the next chapter.

Let’s get this out of the way at the top – I’m not mad at anyone.

This post is not a rant or flaming link-bait to get things off my chest. In fact, I will not link to any of the stories I mention in this post, though I will quote liberally from them. (If you really want to read what everyone else has to say about this, I would suggest the Google.) I think this is a somewhat-interesting story, about corporations that have no idea that I exist, yet they want to try to extract as much cash out of me as possible. It goes like this…

There is a disagreement between Dish Network and Fox Networks over fees. That much can be verified without dispute. Let me break that down. Only four things do we know for sure, because everyone agrees that these are true:

1. There is a disagreement.
2. This disagreement is between Dish Network and Fox Networks.
3. This disagreement centers on the fees that Dish pays to Fox in order to carry the Fox programming. This includes FX, National Geographic channel, and 19 regional sports channels.
4. Because of this disagreement, these Fox channels are no longer being carried by Dish.

Dish and Fox disagree about everything else related to this disagreement. Each says the other is to blame. They don’t even agree on who dropped whom. Dish says Fox pulled their channels. Fox says Dish dropped them. It amounts to the same thing – the end result being that Dish customers no longer have access to these channels.

Dish says Fox is being greedy and asking for a 50% increase in fees. Fox says that’s not true, that Dish is being the greedy one, trying to pad their billion-dollar profits.

Fox has a zippy little website – GetWhatIPaidFor.com – that gives their side of the fight.

Dish has countered with a host of web addresses, including WeOfferedFoxAFairDeal.com, FoxShakedownDISH.com, FoxRefused.com, HowMuchMoreCanWeTake.com, DISHWillContinueToFightForCustomers.com, ForceFedChannels.com, and JoinTheFightAgainstFox.com.

The spin from Dish is “Dish Network is Fighting for You!”, casting Fox as the Big, Bad, Evil Meanie, and themselves as the heroes that have come to save the day.

Fox has gone with a more subdued and defensive posture, choosing to use “Myth vs. Fact” articles to state their position.

I don’t know who is to blame. Both companies are doing okay financially, from what I can tell. There are thousands and thousands of companies that have to fight these corporate battles daily. Most of them I don’t care about. I wouldn’t care about this one, except for one thing – I’m a Dish subscriber. I have been for five years.

Until recently, I was receiving two of the nineteen sports channels that were just dropped from Dish, Fox Sports Florida and Sun Sports. I was grandfathered into the Top 200 package from Dish. (Fortunately, that’s the only thing I’ve been grandfathered into.) The Top 120 package does not have the two regional sports channels, and costs 39.99. The Top 120+ costs 44.99. The difference for those five dollars? The two regional sports channels. Then for another 10 dollars, you jump to the Top 200.

So, 120 channels costs $39.99 and 122 channels costs $44.99, what do those two channels cost each customer? In case you can’t follow the math, those two channels are costing the customer – me – $5.

As I said, I don’t care who is right and who is wrong in this fight. Probably both have valid concerns and probably both are being ridiculous about some things. The bottom line is – I’m paying $5 more than I should be, because that $5 is getting me nothing.

Dish is currently making other channels available in an attempt to appease their dissatisfied customers. “We know these channels are important to you which is why during the FOX Sports lock-out, we’re pleased to bring you 20 additional sports channels at no cost.” Here’s the thing – it’s not really 20 additional channels, because several of them, such as the NFL, NHL, and NBA channels, I already get. The rest of the 20 are regional sports channels, which are blacked-out in many instances for various reasons.

Part of the current corporate strategy is to use Facebook and Twitter to win friends and influence your customers. On all of the sites, including their social feeds, their strategy has included the push for customers to rain down buckets of hate on Fox. “Call, email!”

Simple question – Dish, Fox…why should I try to solve your problems? If you want me to negotiate on your behalf, I’ll be expecting a consultant’s fee. Otherwise, get to the table and work it out!

Here is the Twitter conversation I’ve been having with Dish:

ME: Dear @DishNetwork – no, I will not call/email anyone on your behalf. Please solve your own problems…and send my refund while you’re at it.

DISH: @TimMcDaniel If you would like us to look into the refund be submitted send us a tweet. *M

ME: @dishnetwork looks like I’m paying at least $5 too much for regional sports I’m not getting. (A 922 would ease the pain

DISH: @TimMcDaniel We are not offering credits or free equipment because we hope to have this resolved quickly. Do you get the free previews? *JH

ME: @dishnetwork I’m not paying for free previews. They wouldn’t be free, would they? I’m paying for channels I’m not getting.

ME: @dishnetwork When you resolve, then I’ll pay. For now, you’re taking money for services not delivered.

DISH: @TimMcDaniel Customers sign an agreement that states programming is subject to change. Working to reach a fair deal with FOX! *JH

ME: @dishnetwork nice. Difference between my package and one $5 less is those regional fox sports channels. My subscription is subject to change

DISH: @TimMcDaniel I can help you temporarily downgrade your programming if you’d like! *JH

ME: @dishnetwork Thanks. You’ve already done that.

While I don’t know the details of this fee disagreement between Dish and Fox, and I don’t know how unreasonable Fox is being in this matter, I do know that Dish is coming off as being as slimy and despicable as any politician. Blame and finger-pointing don’t build credibility.

A perfect example of this is this quote from Dish’s website – “While FOX is spending money on scare tactics, DISH Network is negotiating in good faith.” Um…yeah. Maybe. And employing many scare tactics of your own. And refusing to refund money you are taking under false pretenses.

I love this quote from TVPredictions.com – “At this point, there would appear to be no winners or losers in the battle over whether Dish should provide additional compensation to Fox to carry the channels. (Their old fee agreement expired on September 30.) The one exception, of course: the Dish viewers who can’t watch some of their favorite channels; they are clear losers.”

All in all, this is contempt for me. The customer. The Dish viewer. At least for now.