Peer-Review, Creation Style
Slate provided a wonderful article yesterday on what the words “peer-reviewed” really mean according to the fundamentalist Christian organization Answers in Genesis (yes, the Creation Museum guys) upon the release of their so-called “academic journal,” Answers Research Journal.
Writer Bonnie Goldstein gains a copy of the review criteria for editors reviewing articles for submission and discovers a clearly biased view:
Here the goal is not to ensure that research meets academic standards of scientific inquiry, but rather to ensure that the scholar’s conclusions conform to a literal interpretation of the Bible.
See the criteria for yourself here.
In addition, editors and writers can submit “pen names” in case they are up for tenure and want to hide their creationist beliefs.
There’s a reason why creation scientists have to hide. They don’t have real science to back up their claims.
The chief trap that thinking people can fall into these days is entering a “scientific” argument with a creationist. The vast majority of their “facts” come from asshat organizations like the fundie-funded Discovery Institute, whose research is explicitly geared towards reaching the conclusions their financiers desire.
These people will give you the “studies have shown…” and “many scientists believe…” and it’s all DI/ID prepackaged talking points to mask religion as science.
In some ways, it’s a victory for science. The fact that Christers have to acknowledge that scientific proof is a requirement to gain the general population’s confidence means that simply shaking a bible and yelling “Repent!” won’t work on as broad a scale as it used to. The bad news is that now the scientific discussion pool among non-scientists has been polluted with debris from the theist lie factory.
I don’t know the endgame here. But as soon as the creationist talking points appear in any conversation, I’m out. Depriving them of oxygen is the only way to effectively delegitimize them.
Thanks for giving me a good laugh on a Friday morning. The criterion you quoted is priceless.
Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Galatians 5:26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.
Those Creationist are not Christains in my book. Why would it matter to a follower of Christ if a non believer does not have the same view of the creation of the Universe. As a Christian, I don’t care! What does it prove or disprove. Does Creationism teach us how to live together? What about the theory of Evolution?
I tell you this, the scriptures above are a true saying.
BFBF
Glad that you brought up that Galatians verse. If only more Christians could actually follow those words.
It is my educational opinion, that the world is in it’s hatred condition because of those claiming to be Christians. You may find it interesting that the good book said this will happen:
John 16:2 They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that “whosoever” killeth you will think that he doeth God service.
John 16:3 And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me.
Hitler, The Gulag, “Bush”, “Osama” etc..
BFBF
If there were more Jimmy Carter Christians than George W. Bush Christians, the country would be in much better shape. Imagine George with his toolbelt on, building houses for poor people. You can’t, can you? That guy doesn’t know Jesus from Ayn Rand.
You got that right brotha!
Unfortunately Maggie many Cristians do live by the bible.
Leviticus 18:23
If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
Just imagine! Homophobia ordained by god.
William Bogie,
Do you actually read the bible or just use specific quotes out of context for your cause?
What you quoted is not under the new covenant law, which is love!
John 8:3-12
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with [his] finger wrote on the ground, [as though he heard them not].
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard [it], being convicted by [their own] conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, [even] unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
Jesus Christ is the light! Killing an adulterer is Christianity. Thus sayeth the scripture.
Now with regard to Homophobia, I will say this.
Everyone has the right to claim whatever they believe. If a Homosexual claiming to be a Christian, wanted to have dinner with me and my family as a “Christian Brother”, I will say no. I a homosexual wants to have dinner with me and my family, I will say yes; and I will not try to convert him! Now if a Homosexaul needed safety from harm (Claiming to be a Christian or not), my door is always open. The following Scriptures explains my reasoning:
1 Corinthians 5:9-13
9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
Apostle Paul named several conditions not favored by God. But he said that one will have to leave the planet to not keep company with them. But did say that those who claim Jesus Christ but not are not trying to follow, don’t keep company. For example, if a man is married and trys to bring his mistress to my house, Ill will tell him to get the steppin and don’t come back, but if a homosexaul wanted to come for dinner, it’s all good. God will judge those outside the church, we are to judge those within, but with righteous judgment.
Now for a scripture which ratifies true Christianity, and debunks your comment:
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
God will Judge, Not man or woman!
It’s really funny how many quote from the “Old Testament” when trying critique Christians.
William, in all respect, unfortunatley I don’t think you know the bible, or are capable of quoting from it correctly without bias.
BFBF
Typing to fast ment to day the following:
Jesus Christ is the light! Killing an adulterer is “NOT” Christianity. Thus sayeth the scripture.
Just for kicks, here is a bible verse that opines on the issue of religious freedom
Deuteronomy 13:10
Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.
Keep the bible, I’ll take the US Constitution.
William Bogie,
What you are talking about is Judaism, not Christianty! Save it for those that practice Judaism. The constitution is from the bible, like it or not. you cannot point of any ancient text that is closer to our constitution.
Having the right to live and beleive what you want is rooted in the NEW Testament. God is the Judge, not man.
BFBF
“It’s really funny how many quote from the “Old Testament” when trying critique Christians.”
Curious then why Christianity does not delete the entire Old testament from its sacred book. If it is irreleavent as you are claiming then the Old Testament should be discarded. If Christians do not want to be criticized for what is in THEIR holy book, especially when christians don’t accept it, then they should edit it.
Simply put Brotha, if it is in your holy book you can be criticized for it.
As for taking things out of context you do the same. The galatians quote you cited…when one reads the entire book one can see it is about Paul defending his position that circumcision is not needed in order to follow god. It is not about everyone getting a long nicely. Its spin.
“The constitution is from the bible, like it or not. you cannot point of any ancient text that is closer to our constitution.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
For your education I am citing a link to Democracy from wikipedia. In it you will see that democracy has its origins from people who predate Christianity and from lands that parcticed their own religions that had nothing to do with Judiaism or Christianity. Democracy is a good idea and not bibically inspired. I hope you are not like Sherri Shepard who believed the world to be flat and that there were no civilizations before the time of Jesus.
“Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.”
Here is one group that thinks that this is exactly what is happening right now.
http://www.godhatesfags.com/index.html
Shirley Phelps, daughter of Fred Phelps founder of God Hates Fags and pastor of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, would take issue with your assertion that all of Leviticus was overthrown by the “New Covenant”. She has explained that only the ceremonial law in Leviticus was made invalid and that the rest of Leviticus is still in tact.
Please spare us all the trite that “they aren’t really Christians” you nor anyone else have no authority to make that judgement. Especially since according to John 3:16 all one has to do is believe that Jesus is the son of god to be a christian.
Jesus Christ is the light! Killing an adulterer is “NOT” Christianity. Thus sayeth the scripture.”
Sorry, irrelevant. Your citation about Jesus stopping the stoning of a woman never mentions homosexulaity. Show me where in the bible the verse from Levitcus that I cited is no longer in effect.
William Bogie,
You wrote: “Curious then why Christianity does not delete the entire Old testament from its sacred book….”
1. Not that it will satisfy you, but the Old Testament is a record of why Jesus Christ came. In otherwords nobody in the old testament obeyed the words of the Lord until he came.
You wrote: “As for taking things out of context you do the same. The galatians quote you cited….”
2. Nothing was taking out of context. How can I take the Fruit of the spirit out of context? Paul is saying that Love and Peace, should be the spirit, ora, karma (or whatever you want to call it) of a person. Look at it again and try to live by it:
Galatians 5:22 But the “fruit of the Spirit” is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Galatians 5:26 Let us “NOT” be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.
But I guess you’d rather be desirous of VAIN glory, with you flagrancy of what you believe to be a Christian!
You Wrote: “For your education I am citing a link to Democracy from wikipedia. In it you will see that democracy has its origins from people who predate Christianity and from lands that parcticed their own religions”
3. The link you provided did not go into detail of what these so-called democracy practice as a rule of Law. Furthermore I never said anything about Democracy,but the constitution. Budist were not the drafters of the constitution, nor did the ideas of Budda influence them. Remember the quakers created the justice system here in America, and some of the had slave!
You Wrote: “Here is one group that thinks that this is exactly what is happening right now…..”
4. As I stated before, you have your bias and will use it to promte your cause. How can you take a scripture such a Hebrews 13:4, and use it for your cause against “godhatefags”. Read it again:
“Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.”
Paul is given us words to live by and if godhatesfags does not want to live by those words it is not a reflection of the New Testament CHRISTIAN doctrine! And you nor anyone else can make a correlation.
You wrote: “Sorry, irrelevant. Your citation about Jesus stopping the stoning of a woman never mentions homosexulaity. Show me where in the bible the verse from Levitcus that I cited is no longer in effect.”
5. The mercy of Jesus Christ is one example. “He without sin cast the first stone”, that meant homosexuality as well. They stated that the law said this and that; so Jesus Christ cleared it up with “HIS” own question, and shut everyone up. God is the Judge!
Now in conclusion, you have the attitude as if only religious people (Christians mostly) have issues with homosexuals. Well, your link to “Democracy”, being that it “ORIGINATED” in India (as it states) was not a good choice argument.
The Indian government does not practice so-called democracy with their on the book Penal Code “LAWS” such as “Section 377″, which states “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” is punishable with 10 years to life or a fine! It reads very clearly as follows:
“Unnatural Offences: Whoever VOLUNTARY has carnal intercourse against the “ORDER OF NATURE” with any “MAN”, woman or animal shall be punished with imprisonment for “LIFE”, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend ten years, and shall also be liable to a fine.”
Now what does “CARNAL INTERCOURSE” mean? In 1884 it was restricted to “ANAL SEX”, but by 1935 it “INCLUDED” oral sex.
Now this law is very difficult to apply to two a couple of the opposite sex, but for the Homosexual Couples it is easily inforced.
So much for your “origin” of Democracy. If you are a homosexual, go live there under that secular government and see what happens.
You will not find those laws here, because God is the Judge.
By the way, my source for India’s “Law 377″ was published in the February Issue of “international Humanist News”
BFBF
I find it sad that people don’t understand the Bible and/or take it out of context. If you want a verse, here’s a good one for all you ladies to read.
1 Timothy 2:11-14 (New International Version)
(NIV)
11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
Most people would read the bible and take it exactly how it is. That means that Hillary Clinton shouldn’t be President (I have my own ideas about that). When people read the Bible and quote it out of context as if they know what they are talking about, it makes them look foolish.
Furthermore, the understanding of the New Testament and Old Testament really has no importance to those who do not understand the Bible. To them it’s all the same. Which it is not. The New Testament is about the New Covenant, but people wouldn’t understand that.
Lastly, I would like to make a comment about the whole “creationist” and “evolutionist” theory.
Romans 1
19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
Well, you may say that I have a biased view due to the fact that I am a Believer of Christ, but if you just take a minute to look around, you might just have a revelation and realize that their must be a God or designer. If not, well, I’m sorry to say, but you’re “without excuse”. I don’t necessarily believe in “Evolution”, but I do believe in adaptation. We are beings of growth that adapt over long periods of time due to nutrition, climate, etc. But that doesn’t mean we came from Apes and Monkeys. It just means that God is a pretty darn smart creator!
End of Story.
Shawn,
I have one word for what you wrote; NICE!
But sometimes using doctrine extensively to nonbelievers is a waste of time. Romans 1:19-20 are the best verses for nonbelievers, because it clearly states that no matter where you were born (amazon for example) ” the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are MADE” so that everyone is without excuse.
Romans 1 (KJV)
1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
My Goal on this blog is to make sure that scripture is used correctly. I’m not trying to convert! I will not let anyone take bias shots at Christianity with shedding some light on it. If no one corrects them with sound truth and the doctrine as it is stated, then a reader will more than likely repeat these errors. What some don’t understand is that when they quote and or use a scripture vainly for thier own bias purpose, they are preaching false doctrine, and will be responsible for that, as you (I assume) and I beleive they will.
BFBF
I guess I get a little worked up on “Christian” bashers, but hey, what am I to do? Not defend my faith? After all, I am going to a Bible College to become a Pastor.
It is sad that people who are “Christians” aren’t leading that great of an example. I try to do my best, but there are times when I stumble and fall. And in those times that I fall there are people watching, keeping an eye out on me to bring me down saying that I am a hypocrite.
My goal here is not to “convert”, as you mentioned, my goal is to defend my faith and share the truth. I respect people’s opinion on God, doesn’t mean I’m going to agree with it. I just feel that people aren’t giving God a chance. If God is a God of Love then why not give Him a try. But if you don’t think God exists, then honestly try to find Him, give it a shot it’s not going to hurt you. I know that “Christians” in the past have done some really dumb things, but that’s not what it’s all about. It’s about the personal relationship that you have. Ten out of Ten times if you are Truly seeking the answer, God will reveal Himself to you. I stress the word TRULY.
I think a lot of people try to give God a chance, but give up too soon. I’ve heard too many stories of people giving up because they “didn’t” receive something from God (didn’t is in Quotations because He most likely did, we just missed it… so keep trying).
Regardless, I will be praying for everyone who reads this website and for everyone who has questions.
Shawn,
What I’m trying to show is that they are not “Bashing” Christians, but non-christians!
Jesus Christ said:
Luke 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?
You see what I’m saying? Then he goes further and says:
Luke 6:47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like.
So those that they are calling Christians, do not qualify according to the words of Jesus Christ.
Let’s sum it up:
Matthew 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Matthew 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Jesus Christ will call them out, and we should call them out too. Show a contrast!
BFBF
You and BFBF continue to quote scripture as if an atheist would possibly care what is in it. An atheist by definition does not believe in a supreme being, and thus any claims that a particular document contains the words of said supreme being are going to be ignored.
If I tell you that Osiris is the god of life, death, and fertility, and that you should listen closely to what he says in this ancient hieroglyph, you will not care. Because you don’t believe that Osiris exists, and thus you will disregard anything that purports to represent his opinion.
Simply take the above paragraph, insert “Jesus” for “Osiris” and you’ll understand what you sound like to an atheist.
Fuller Wiser,
You wrote: “You and BFBF continue to quote scripture as if an atheist would possibly care what is in it.”
Well I have heard it all. It is ok for an Atheist to use a Scripture to justify there rhetoric against a Christian is what you are saying. What I am doing, is clear; when a non-christian wants criticize a so-called Christian using scripture incorrectly, I will step in. Me stepping in will probably stop the criticism if those that post no that they don’t have an open forum to use and say what they want without rebuttal. Most Atheist can’t criticise a so-called Christian without quoting from the bible. When Athiest use scripture, they want the reader to view them as some kind of authority on the scriptures. It serves thier cause, but when Christians correct then using scripture, they don’t want to here it.
Don’t use scripture falsely and you will not here from me. But when you do, just come correct and then discuss it like a HUMAN.
BFBF
“But if you don’t think God exists, then honestly try to find Him…”
Why? Are you going to start looking for Osiris? Of course not, because YOU DON’T BELIEVE HE EXISTS.
I won’t need to look for him because I already have God. Atheists on the other hand Don’t. It’s probably because they don’t have the brain capacity to comprehend the existence of God. I’m not saying I know everything about God, but I do know that there is a God. I don’t believe in chance, I believe in God. There’s no way our human body can do what it can do by chance. There is no way that the universe could have existed by chance. There is no way that there can be no God. If there was no God, there would be a void, but then again there wouldn’t even be words to explain a void. It wouldn’t even be pitch black because color wouldn’t exist. It wouldn’t be empty because space wouldn’t exist. It’s be absolutely nothing.
God > Evolution
Assertion, the lot of it. You offer no evidence, only assertion. And speaking of brain capacity, why is yours filled to bursting with lies spewed from the Discovery Institute?
You are the sort of Christian that makes me feel bad for Jesus. At least he knew how to speak to people without resorting to schoolyard name-calling.
Fuller Wiser,
Are you saying Jesus Christ never existed? If so were is you scientific evidence.
How on earth did you come to that conclusion from my above statement? Why would I feel bad for Jesus if I didn’t believe he existed? Just because a man exists and says philosophically controversial things doesn’t make him a god. Same thing goes for Siddhartha (Buddha), Muhammad, Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, or anyone who presents a fresh philosophical perspective. The human drive to place our heroes on a pedastal and canonize them is what gets us into so much trouble.
Fuller Wiser,
You wrote: “Why? Are you going to start looking for Osiris? Of course not, because YOU DON’T BELIEVE HE EXISTS.”
Based on your question above after being ask to try to find God lead me to believe that you are not searching because you don’t believe he exist.
BFBF
Belief that a person named Jesus existed is very different than believing he was a deity. What’s unclear about that?
Calm down Brother. We war not against the flesh remember.
Osiris exists no more and no less than Y’Shua bar Ys’f a.ka. Jesus exists as the Christ - that is, what exists is the Christ-figure as an ancient cultural icon since the dawn of history.
Osiris is the Son of God, both man and God, who dies and is resurrected. By his resurrection he assures his worshippers of eternal life, as they remember him in a sacred meal of bread and alcoholic beverage - in his case, barley bread and beer; when the Greeks made it the remembrance of Dionysus in the Mysteries at Eleusis the mass became wheat bread and wine. This eucharist is illustrated on Greek vases you can see today.
Both God and man, Osiris is the Mediator. Egyptian records tell us that Osiris is the corn of wheat that falls into the ground and dies, and by resurrection to life asssures us all of life beyond the grave or pyramid.
In the Hymn to Isis, the Egyptians sang “O for a thousand tongues, to sing the great Redeemer’s praise.” This hymn transferred right over into Christianity, along with the eucharist etc.
The coffin of Osirus floated across the sea to Syria, washing ashore at Byblos. The adherents of Osirianism built there the main storehouse of books of the faith, and the name “Byblos” gives us our word “Bible.”
The dead Osiris was held in the arms of his consort Isis, and little statues identical to the modern Pieta were universal in Egyptian homes.
Osirianism spread to the island of Samothrake, and thence into Phrygia, now Turkey. It morphed into the worship of Attis as Osiris, and of Cybele as Isis.
Attis was born on December 25 (which Jesus wasn’t), and was crucified, then buried in a tomb sealed by a rock rolled to the entrance. After three days, on Easter morning, devotees rolled away the rock. Finding the tomb empty, they rejoiced, crying “He is risen!”
Worship of Attis and Cybele spread to Rome, and one of the Temples of Cybele is still there. It is in the foundations of St. Peter’s Basilica, which was built on top of it. The founding of Christianity on Phrygian religion is architectural as well as doctrinal.
It was “the old religion” when Paul arrived and established the Christian church at Galatia, which is in Phrygia.
In Rome, the word “Pappa,” a title of Attis, entered the Latin language and is today “Pappa” in Italian and “Pope” in English.
Paul was not pleased to hear that his Christian converts in Phrygia still observed holidays (Christmas and Easter) of the “old religion,” and speaks with disapproval of this in Galatians 4:10.
Christianity was a step forward from that religion. The gentle Mary is a beautiful symbol of kindness and love, replacing Cybele who was cruel and vindictive.
The Christians adopted the practice of the procession along the Via Dolorosa, with Attis bearing his tree, but did not adopt the practice of voluntary self-castration by male worshippers as the Redeemer passed by on his way to his crucifixion, which Jesus called “making eunuchs of themselves”. And Christianity introduced the concept of forgiveness and love for enemies. Humanist thought was making religions more civilized as the centuries passed by.
People don’t want to look for God because they don’t want to be proven wrong. It’s just a matter of pride. It’s OK to look silly for a while as you search. If you don’t find the answer then you don’t have to search again. But I guarantee that if you do search full-heartedly you will find the answer. But it’s OK if you don’t. I won’t be complaining.
Mr. Fuller Wiser, the “Wiser” choice is faith.
I don’t “have” to do anything. I spent the bulk of my youth searching for God, and he never showed up. A thinking person takes that evidence and draws the obvious conclusion.
Those who are not in possession of a single shred of empirical fact can do nothing but make themselves look ridiculous by waving their emperor’s nonexistent clothing out in the wind, singing its praises. Assert all you want, there is nothing at all to suggest that you are not delusional.
Fuller Wiser,
I want you to think about the Black American, Caribean, South American and indigenous slaves, and ask yourself where would the slave masters and their descendents be if it were not for the promises of a Godly reward (later) to love those that want to harm and kill you.
I say, that if it were not for the promises of the New Testament, there would have been a lot of dead slave masters along with thier descendents up to the mid 1900’s. I say, because of Jesus Christ example of submitting to a higher power, is the reason it is not.
What reason do you think it is, intelligence?
Look at Islam, their hadiths tell them to kill the infidel (Humanist, Atheist etc.). But what does the New Testament teach?
I know what the old testament teaches (and eye for and eye).
Yes, those (non-believers) using Jesus Christ falsely have enslave and murdered maybe a billion people since 400 AD; but true Christianity has also saved millions!
It is not “INTELLIGENT” for a slave to have loved a murdering/raping slavemaster? So I argue it was the faith of the slave and their obedience in Jesus Christ all over the world (not intelligence) which manifested the love for a slave master.
Was God there in the life of the slave? I say yes!
Humanism and Atheism would not have produce the same results back then; I argue biblically that it was “non-christians” masking as Christians which produced the hatefull world we live in today, and that’s not delusional!
BFBF
What you speak of is a coping mechanism. Certainly religion has been used in that capacity for millennia. That is completely unrelated to whether its assertions are empirically provable as fact.
Fuller Wiser,
Don’t act like you were born an Atheist. You were taught, and accepted it. Same with Christianity.
If you are a male (because I don’t know), and are married, and your next door neighbor came over, raped your wife, invited friends over to join in, and then went back home to his wife “next door” and ate dinner. What would you do? Cope? That would not be intelligent.
BFBF
BFBF,
I have said REPEATEDLY that I was not born an atheist. Are you and your special friend even READING my comments? Or do you have a preplanned screed ready to cut and paste into every argument?
As to the remainder of your statement, you’re not making a lick of sense. One would think that the Christian response to such a situation would be turning the other cheek, but I’m not a Christian…
Fuller Wiser,
Nice way to duck the question. Coping mechanism? I don’t think so. Jesus Christ had everything to do with darker people around world at that time and now today.
Furthermore you used the term nonexistant. See your argument is about God, but Jesus Christ is an extension of HIM. Saying that God does not exist is to say that Jesus Christ and all the Prophets and Apostles were delusional.
Were they delusional. Please answer the question. Thanks!
BFBF
Yes, they were. Next question?
No Evidence?! That’s what I don’t understand. Doesn’t the word Existence mean anything? How can existence be without a creator? In order for something to exist there must be something to create it, unless it’s God.
And your comment about Jesus, do you know him? I would assume not. If you don’t believe in God then why would Jesus matter at all to you?
I speak of Jesus because I’ve read the gospels. Not the misogynist screeds of Paul or the mushroom-fueled delusions of John the Revelator, but the words in red. Jesus presented a hybrid of Judaism and Buddhism, and it is far more intelligent than anything most of his followers ever say.
Suggesting that nothing can exist without someONE to create it is the most circular logic ever. If everything comes from something, it is logical to assume that if a supreme being existed, they must have come from something. Which must have come from something. On and on, and chickens lay eggs which become chickens which lay eggs, ad infinitum.
You have no more idea where the universe came from than I do. Offer actual evidence, or there’s no point in continuing this conversation.
Fuller Wiser,
You Wrote: “I speak of Jesus because I’ve read the gospels. Not the misogynist screeds of Paul or the mushroom-fueled delusions of John the Revelator, but the words in red.”
I will give you a chance to think about what you said. Because I have a correlation of what Jesus Christ taught and Paul. This is what I mean about nonchristians saying things they can’t back up.
Show me what you are talking about regarding your statement, but be ready for the word of Jesus and Paul.
You wrote: “Jesus presented a hybrid of Judaism and Buddhism, and it is far more intelligent than anything most of his followers ever say.”
Please give the reader more than one example. Let’s see what you are talking about.
I find it funny that you “read the words of Jesus Christ” but then you say “You and BFBF continue to quote scripture as if an atheist would possibly care what is in it.”
That’s funny!
BFBF
I only brought up the Bible because your special friend Shawn was speaking as if atheists would find god if they only looked for him. And as I mentioned above (which none of you ever bothered to read), I spent a good portion of my youth seeking god, only to find a myth and no small amount of racism and a Judeo-centric lens on history. One of the ways I sought him/her/it was by reading the bible, which, while historically and philosophically interesting, offers nothing more than assertions. Thus it goes on my shelf next to other books on philosophy and history.
My point remains that debating chapter and verse is an utter waste of time if one party in the debate does not believe that the words are the inspired word of a supreme being. The verses you cite above would be very powerful if I actually believed they came from the magic sky fairy, but I don’t. Human beings can write whatever they want to write, and it doesn’t make it so.
Incidentally, a quick browse through any basic book on Buddhist thought will show that many of the moral ideas Jesus promoted were preached by Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha) over one hundred years before JC’s old man knocked Mary up against her will. The trade routes between India and the Middle East brought ideas as well as commerce, and it would be hardly surprising for Jesus to have picked up philosophical tidbits in his youth. That’s what makes Christianity historically interesting, the merging of Jewish legalistic traditions with Asian mysticism.
Fuller Wiser,
I will not let you bait me to anger with you nasty mind and mouth. And as far as you trying to sound historically educated, you fail. Jesus Christ and others under the “LAW” at that time would have been murdered.
Deuteronomy 13:6-10
13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
Nice try though
BFBF
BFBF,
You really are on crack. You perceive someone pointing out your ignorance of history as having a “nasty mouth”? Read up on the Essenes and other sects that lived near Jesus, and were tolerated by the Roman authorities. The Jews had not controlled their own land for quite some time by then.
Get your facts straight, unless that “baits you to anger.” Facts are not welcome by those whose information doesn’t arise from them.
Kindly forgive an old and uncaffienated commentator for a slip of the keys. The sects I refer to are gnostic, not Essene. The point remains.
Peter, Paul, all the disciples have writings in the Bible for a reason. If it weren’t for them we’d probably wouldn’t have a Church. To say the Gospels is all we need would not be sufficient that’s why the other epistles/letters are there for a reason. If you trust the words of Jesus then why can you not trust the words of Paul, who Jesus trusted. But then again, Jesus to you wouldn’t be the Son of God because you don’t believe in God. So it really makes no difference for you to even care what Jesus says. Jesus owns all. Jesus is King.
Heres a book that I recommend to you:
Lee Strobel’s
The Case for a Creator
Read up on it a bit, it may clear a few things up. Enjoy! and God bless!
Better idea:
Read Christopher Hitchens’ God Is Not Great. It will really clear things up.
William Bogie,
In my opinion, hitchens is loud and uses comedy. He’s a very witty guy with his British accent making him more appealling. He brings nothing but comedy. Nothing!
BFBF
Hitchens is much less consistent than someone like Sam Harris or Dawkins. Hitch’s ideas on foreign policy are ludicrous, and he’s drunk on TV half the time. I read his book on Orwell, and he missed the point half the time. I wouldn’t recommend him as the best example of atheist intellectualism.
Lee Strobel’s Case For A Creator is an extended interview with Discovery Institute employees and their enablers. It contains as much science as an episode of Davey & Goliath.
Book-worship (bibiolatry) is a Proetstant fallacy. The church did well enough for 1500 years before the silly doctrine of *sola scriptura* was coined.
If Jesus had said “In this rock I will write my book” then the fundies might have a better case.
The church is the custodian of the “truth,” by fivine and apostolic appointment. The major traditions maintain the Succession, which validates their status as the bearers of apostolic Christianity. These are the Orthodox, the Romans, the Anglicans and the Swedish Lutherans.
The canon of the Bible was not established until 325 AD, the era of Augustine. That was the moment when Christian orthodoxy lost its way, failing to heed Pelagius, who taught a form of Humanism. Today’s Christianity uses Jesus as its poster boy but in reality is Augustinianism, a mixture of Phrygian religion with Judaism and the Zoroastrianism transmitted through the Essenes.
Today’s American fundies are idolaters, worshipping words in a book instead of the Man. When Jesus returns he will be mightily P.O.’d at the fundies, and will more likely say “Take me to the Humanists - they are living what I wanted people to live and doing what I tried to teach people to do.” And if Jesus dares to preach from his heart instead of from an open Bible the fundies will crucify him all over again.
Okay! I’ll read it! I hope it’s funny at least.
Brotha -
I have to say my conversation with you has been most illuminating. I have learned a lot from my discussions with you and I thank you. Let me tell you what I learned.
You worship a god who, at one time, sanctioned:
1. The murder of homosexuals (Leviticus 20:30)
2. The taking of Slaves (Leviticus 25:44-46)
3. The murder of non-believers (Deuteronomy 13:10)
This is a fact which cannot be denied. You will try of course but in your posts you have already admitted it so it will be to no avail.
When I criticized Leviticus 20:30 you wrote that that verse was from the Old Covenant of god and when I criticized Deuteronomy 13:10 you said essentially the same thing also stating that these verses were part of Judaism and not part of Christianity. You then went on to write that the New Covenant was of love and cited the story that Jesus prevented a mob from stoning an adulteress saying “He who hast no sin cast the first stone”.
When I pointed out that the story was about adultery and not homosexuality, it was not because I missed the point of the story. I understood it. I was confirmed as an Episcopalian at 12. People should not judge one another. What I was getting at was that there was no verse which rescinded god’s prohibition on homosexuality. I wanted to make sure that you believed that the point of the story was that god wanted to judge ALL sins and not just adultery. This you confirmed.
Because you did not offer a bible verse pointing to a retraction of god’s prohibition of homosexuality and because in your own post you stated that you would not dine with a homosexual “as a Christian Brother” I conclude that the prohibition against homosexuality still stands. I acknowledge that you would dine with a homosexual in a manner different than as “a Christian Brother”. You said it and I believe you meant it. How the dining experience differs between a “Christian Brother” and one who is not a “Christian Bother” perplexes me. Not that it matters, the point is that you would choose to treat someone differently because he or she is a homosexual. You said and you meant it.
When I asked why a Christian Bible would keep the books associated with the Old Covenant you answered that the Old Covenant was kept to explain why Jesus needed to come. You further opined that people were not doing what they were supposed to do. You also stated that this would not interest me. You could not have been more wrong. The Old Covenant is kept because it is, supposedly, a history of what happened. I am always interested in history.
Your explanation clearly concedes that there is a connection between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant and that the god you worship was the author of both. Had the Old Covenant been written by another god entirely and had nothing to do with the New Covenant there would be no need to keep it. Therefore you worship a god who has sanctioned things you find reprehensible: murder and slavery.
No here is another problem you have: The Doctrine of Infallibility. You believe that god is infallible and therefore cannot make mistakes. You believe that everything god says or does is right and that man should follow his/her/its every word. If this is so, then one who follows this god must acknowledge that, at one time at least, the murder of homosexuals and non-believers and the institution of slavery were good. To say otherwise would be to say that god ordered the Israelites to do immoral things. You yourself would have to accept this doctrine unless you were willing to say that god was flawed, makes mistakes and errors in judgment, which is particularly scary since, according to the New Covenant, he is now the only arbiter of justice.
I have no Doctrine of Infallibility in my belief system so I am free to pick from a philosophy what I think is good and reject that which I think is immoral. That way I can accept the good idea of democracy that existed in ancient India while rejecting the horrible homophobia you cited, reminiscent of the barbarism of Leviticus.
This is a fair criticism of the god you worship based on the bible and your explanations. Whether this god is the god of Judaism, Christianity or Islam and if it exists at all it has said some terrible things and there is no denying that.
William Bogie,
Thanks for your response. I enjoyed it! Now let me be clear:
You Wrote: “You worship a god who, at one time, sanctioned:
1. The murder of homosexuals (Leviticus 20:30)
2. The taking of Slaves (Leviticus 25:44-46)
3. The murder of non-believers (Deuteronomy 13:10)”
Yes and I LOVE Him! Next:
You Wrote: “When I criticized Leviticus 20:30 you wrote that that verse was from the Old Covenant of god and when I criticized Deuteronomy 13:10 you said essentially the same thing also stating that these verses were part of Judaism and not part of Christianity.”
And I was correct! Next:
You wrote: “What I was getting at was that there was no verse which rescinded god’s prohibition on homosexuality.”
Yeah, and there is not verse which rescinded God’s prohibition on “ADULTERY” either. So what’s your point!
Next:
You Wrote: “Because you did not offer a bible verse pointing to a retraction of god’s prohibition of homosexuality and because in your own post you stated that you would not dine with a homosexual “as a Christian Brother” I conclude that the prohibition against homosexuality still stands. I acknowledge that you would dine with a homosexual in a manner different than as “a Christian Brother”. You said it and I believe you meant it. How the dining experience differs between a “Christian Brother” and one who is not a “Christian Bother” perplexes me.”
The quoted scripture to my answer also perplexed you as well, as it is elementary in thought; but I know that happens. The manner will not be different, as I aslo gave you an example of not dining with an adulturer. You should not be perplexed friend! Next:
You wrote: “Had the Old Covenant been written by another god entirely and had nothing to do with the New Covenant there would be no need to keep it. Therefore you worship a god who has sanctioned things you find reprehensible: murder and slavery.”
Yes I do, and I’m happy I was born in these times. But the SECULAR god’s and Atheist are not so clean, not by a long shot campare to God! Next:
You Wrote: “If this is so, then one who follows this god must acknowledge that, at one time at least, the murder of homosexuals and non-believers and the institution of slavery were good. To say otherwise would be to say that god ordered the Israelites to do immoral things. You yourself would have to accept this doctrine unless you were willing to say that god was flawed, makes mistakes and errors in judgment, which is particularly scary since, according to the New Covenant, he is now the only arbiter of justice.”
Now I see were you’re coming from. But, God is not FLAWED in my opinion! Me believing that God will punished whom he said he will, does not make me evil mindinded at all. When I see a homosexual, I don’t think in my head “God help him”! I don’t care because I’m not saved from punishment myself for being who I am; according to the bible I live in “Hope” of being saved. I have to admit that I get heated when the strong take advantage of the weak, I have to say that I want God to strike them down! That is my flaw my weakness, and something I war with everyday. I see your point believe me, and if what I believe today (Jesus Christ), instructed me to kill or harm others, I would not be a Christian at all! But it does not which is my point, and God will judge whom he wants. Not I! So following him will be much better “FOR ME”, than not. Trust me!
BFBF
BFBF-
I give you credit for acknowledging my point at the end. I am glad that you say that you would not be a Christian if the religion instructed you to harm others. Shawn on the other hand has stated that if god instructed him to kill he would, even if it were members of his own family.
So what we agree on is this:
-At one time it was good to kill homosexuals and non believers because god said so.
-At one time it was good to take slaves of non-Jews because said so.
-There is s New Covenant which says that god will do all the judging so man cannot kill homosexuals or non-believers. It is for god to judge.
So the moral dilema I see is this: You have to accept that the taking of slaves and the killing of homosexuals and non-believers was good. This is inconsistent with “love thy neioghbor as thyself.” Reconciling the two is impossible.
I know what God has done, I read it. Should God be allowed to have all those people killed? OF COURSE! If God wants to do something, He can! He can do anything we want, whether we believe it to be moral or not. God is a God of Love, Fairness, and Justice. Whether we believe that the killing of many (Noah’s time) or whatever other example you may have, He is still Fair, Just, and Love. I am not going to question His Authority and His Power. Who are WE to say that God should and should not do this? The ultimate end of his actions was for the Good as a whole. WE are not able to understand the idea of killing thousands of people as “Good” Because WE are not God. If God can create something this HUGE (Planet, Stars, People, Universe, etc…) then I’m pretty sure He knows what He is doing.
Yes, killing many “Innocent” people would be wrong, but if God did it then I have NO problem with that. Who are We to question Him?! For all I know, God can send Jesus back tonight and MILLIONS upon MILLIONS would go to Hell. It’s HIS call. He’s Just, Fair, and Love. He can do as He pleases.
I cannot believe that God could make a “mistake”. If He could make mistakes He would not be God. By Partial definition of our Dictionaries God is Perfect and I believe that He is. He is perfect without sin. WE are not! We are inferior to God. We are mere humans with the brain capacity of a rock compared to God. He KNOWS what He is doing. He KNOWS everything.
All I’m saying is WE as people shouldn’t judge or question God’s authority and actions. Let God be God and we’ll be us, Supposed Worshippers of God and Children of God (Our TRUE identity).
Oh, and by the way — GOD LOVES YOU!
Thank you for proving my point. You accept that slavery and murder, when ordained by god, are good.
It’s just a shame.
I worship a God who deserves worship. The creator of YOU, ME, and ALL.
Assertion, assertion, assertion. Look that word up, you do it a lot.
I accept anything ordained by God good. Even the death of me or my family. I will not question.
Please think. PLEASE.
You really should take a class on circular logic. Think about this sort of pattern:
“I love god because he is good.”
“How do you know he is good?”
“Because he says so.”
“How do you know that what his followers tell you he says is true?”
“Because they say it is.”
“