Duped from Ethics Gradient.
They’ve started advertising the DVD version of that infernal, mendacious, highly offensive, wilfully ignorant and misleading waste of megabytes known as Expelled. Bay of Fundie has scratched the surface of their advertising and revealed some new information.
Now, given that this is the DVD release of Expelled, it makes me wonder what kind of special features they’ll include. Of course no one can know for sure, but I have something of a wish list:
– a complete timeline of all the steps taken & communication entered into to secure the participation of such people as Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers, including a full explanation for the stark deviation from the premise of the original film: it was originally presented to Myers & Dawkins as a documentary named “Crossroads”, detailing the intersection of religion & science, which it clearly did not turn out to be, either by name or nature
– full, uncut, unedited interviews with the above-named
– a full explanation from the film’s producers of PZ Myer’s own expulsion from a screening of Expelled by security staff before he’d entered the theatre, despite the fact that he’d registered to attend under his own name and hadn’t attempted any kind of subterfuge, as was alleged early on by the producers (as well as an explanation of how Richard Dawkins, arguably more recognisable than PZ Myers, was allowed to enter unmolested)
– behind-the-scenes segments showing such things as exactly who comprised the audience in Ben Stein’s opening, paranoid address to college “students”and a clear explanation of Adolf Hitler’s alleged use Darwin’s theory of evolution to justify his horrific experiments
– a demonstration that the producers of this film – and Ben Stein himself – actually understand what the theory of evolution says and, importantly, what it doesn’t say: Stein is on record stating that evolution can’t explain certain astronomical phenomena & processes, apparently ignorant of the fact that evolution only applies to terrestrial biological diversity
– an explanation of how “micro-evolution” differs from “macro-evolution”, followed by an explanation of how a lit match can’t start a bushfire
– an actual clear-cut, definitive definition of the theory of Intelligent Design, the predictions made by this theory and why this theory requires equal time in science classes (see below)
– results of any actual research into & testing of ID’s predictions, including such information as the identity or even intent of the “designer” and the reason for the many, glaring inefficiencies, inconsistencies and illogicalities in biological “designs” from all branches of life. This should be presented by one or a combination of (but not limited to) the following high-profile design proponents: Michael Behe, William Dembski, Casey Luskin, Phillip Johnston & we mustn’t (nor will we ever) forget Ben Stein.
– a full explanation of the “controversy” that Stein & co wish to be taught to children, as it appears that the only controversy regarding the veracity of evolutionary theory is the one Stein & his partners in this endeavour have manufactured
– actual, scientific rebuttals of (or even credible challenges to) any aspect or aspects of the theory of evolution – without resorting to paranoid conspiracy theories or sweeping, unsupportable statements about “Big Science”
– an explanation of Stein’s infamous remark from an interview on a Christian TV programme: “Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people.”
– an explanation of how Intelligent Design is not based on (or simply is) Biblical creationism & an explanation of the actions of the obviously religiously motivated members of the Dover, PA school board (and their supporters from the Discovery Institute, authors of the infamous and clearly religiously-based “Wedge Document”) which led to the famous trial of 2004
– a justification for singling out Darwinian evolution for special attention, while other fields such as Newtonian physics and Copernican astronomy each contradict Scripture in various ways but are (for the most part) left unmolested and uncontested by religionists
– one good reason why teaching children their parents’ religion shouldn’t just stay in Scripture classes, Sunday schools, churches and the family home and one good reason why it should be taught as fact alongside evidence-based science when, as is repeated often, religion & belief is a matter of faith, which by definition means “accepting a proposition without evidence”
…
Of course, it’s all wishful thinking on my part. But no more so than Stein & Co’s insistence that “Big Science” persecutes & expels religious professors for dissenting views, that “Darwinism” is a one-way street to concentration camps or, indeed, the insistence of many ID supporters that Big Religion played no part in attempting to usher Bible stories into science classes through the back door in violation of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution of the United States.
I eagerly await my hopes to be dashed.
P.S. I don't hate you, Lisa, I just hate your dessert preferences!
Alison, what I want to know is what I'm going to do when Pink Floyd break up. I mean, they lost Roger Waters years ago, Rick Wright just died and Dave Gilmour isn't getting any younger. Who the hell will I worship and build altars to and kill infloydels in the name of when there's no more Floyd?
And, by the way, you warring dessertists are missing the Truth of the Word: it's all about cake. Those who haven't seen the Divine Truth of my mother's home-made fruit cake shall have their souls poked with little pointy things for all eternity!
Not knowing about The Cake is no excuse anymore either: I've told you about The Truth Of The Cake now, so there's no choice but to submit, bow your heads and hand over the keys to your soul! The Cake knows all and sees all and tastes delicious with a cup of milky tea, bless its Fruity Goodness.
If you don't get the reference, you don't get it that the jokes on you, Erik…
Hank
I was waiting for you to mention fruitcake. That's just the type of liberal dessert fallacy I expect from you Australian freethinkers. You assume that fruitcake is "perfectly natural" but that is a false assumption my friend!!! There were no fruitcakes in the Garden of Eden. If God had wanted fruit to be soaked in sugar and technicolor artificial dyes, He would have created it that way. Now the fruitcake agenda is even trying to push its way into our public schools!!! You pretend that those little round tins are just "holiday gifts for teacher" but I know better!!!
I know that some of you liberal freethinkers believe that promiscuous cheesecake consumption is also OK, but that is another false belief the Devil plants in your minds. Cheesecake is a wonderful gift from God, but only within the sanction of a marriage with chocolate!!!
And don't be taken in by "dessert moderates" like Erich, who will tell you "everything is OK in small amounts." He would even tell you to stop before you have completely stuffed yourself with chocolate. WRONG!!! There is no such thing as "too much chocolate".
• Mobius 1
First of all I do not pass you off as anything. I see that you are a person who “thinks” he knows what the Bible says and then proves that he doesn’t by what is written.
I offer what you cannot argue against. You just skip from question to question once I disprove your argument. That is typical. As I have said, I have been down this road before.
As I have already shown you (obviously you do not read) the Bible does not say that the world is flat, in fact It says that the world is round. Secondly, witches, floating on water, center of the universe etc.? Obviously you have been reading about the Bible instead of reading the Bible Itself.
As to women (already been explained). Men and women are created equal in the eyes of God (read the Bible, Genesis 1). Because of sin, man has treated women as lower class citizens (not God’s fault).
Erich criticizes me for writing the same things but if he would read what you write then he would see that you keep bringing the same arguments even though they have already been defeated. Speak about being boring (you keep saying the same thing over and over again without any proof).
Here is the answer. Man is born into sin (everyone after Adam is born a sinner). Every part of our being is tainted by sin. We are the ones who sin (you try to blame God and Satan, do not want to take credit for your own bad choices) God created us with the purpose of having a relationship with Him, for our own benefit. We chose to break that relationship and we send ourselves to condemnation and punishment (action/consequence). Condemnation was never intended for humans but we chose it through disobedience. Again, you try to blame God for your own actions. He gave you free will and you seem to hate that.
You try to take the focus off your beloved Dawkins and place it on Christians (good liberal tactic). Dawkins is educated (never said that he wasn’t) but he is a ranting atheist (read what he writes without the rose colored glasses that you obviously have).
No one is superior or inferior to others (I do not know where you get this argument, obviously made it up because the Bible never says that).
You do not have to agree with me on worship (you can choose the wrong argument if you want). I gave the definition of worship and then showed how it is seen in practical life. I did not say anything about prayer or voices in your heard (again things you have made up and use them as arguing points, learn how to argue). Your response is like a child “no I don’t” here is the evidence to prove that you do “no I don’t” how do you know “because I just don’t”. Pointless argument on your part.
You never answered my question about what you spend your time, effort, energy, money etc. pursuing. Why not? I know why, because it will prove what I said is true!!!
According to evolution the plants will re-generate anyway (from nothing) so you destroy your own argument with that answer.
10,000 years? Must have been invisible people on an invisible world because there was nothing at that time.
God does not enjoy suffering but He did it for you and for me. Yet you choose to reject what He has done for you (very ungrateful on your part). He knew that many/most would reject Him but He did it anyway. Jesus was sinless so He could take on your sin (it makes total sense if you know how to think). Sin had to be paid for and there were 2 options 1) you die and suffer eternal punishment or 2) He dies in your place.
God was not responsible for sin (there you go trying to blame God for man’s actions). God did not create sin, He created free will (which you seem to hate) and man chose to sin. So again you show your ignorance by restating the same failed argument over and over again.
Show me the gaping holes in my arguments, please. You make the same ridiculous claims and I defeat them yet you continue on.
As to AO, I have explained that as well yet you continue on in your ignorant arguments.
Show me some bold face lies, you only bring empty words as usual.
I came on this site to point out some misinformation about the Bible. I corrected the mistake and then the attacks on me began. I have just defended the Scriptures and you hate that.
You may have heard it a hundred times before but you did not pay attention/listen to what was said (see the way you keep bringing up the same arguments that I have defeated).
You ignore what you cannot answer and just bring up new things or restate the same old defeated arguments.
[Admin's note: Numerous portions of this comment constitute "preaching." These paragraphs are attempts to announce what "God" thinks or what "God" wants, as though there is no alternative viewpoint as to what God "thinks" or "wants." In my opinion, such presentations are distracting to our discussions, which (though such comments might well be motivated by a commenter's religious beliefs) should be based on what commenter's themselves think. Such comments seem to invite an endless and unproductive back and forth focused on the authenticity of such claims. Further discussion of what is starkly presented as "God's" opinion, or any quotation to any passages from any religion's Sacred Literature, to the extent that those passages are intended to be unquestionable on any ground, are subject to pruning pursuant to the commenting guidelines regarding "preaching"].
• Hank
May I add that you guys mentioned the ranting atheist thing. I guess you so easily overlook the facts. As to worship I made the point take it or leave it (choose to be right or wrong). I have not denied rebuttals that were correct (can’t agree with something that is not true). As to evangelizing, I have already explained that one but you obviously continue to ignore the facts. If liberals, free thinkers, atheists all say the same thing then they put themselves in the same category (you do understand the action/consequence idea, don’t you?). I know that it bothers you that you cannot win so you start pouting and name calling, (children do that too).
See what Erich posted about fundamentalism and you will see that your categorization is wrong.
And you skip all the evidence presented, because it doesn't fit your biblical worldview. You use circular logic to 'defeat' any argument that is presented before you, therefore reinforcing your idea that you 'win'.
Here's how you've presented your 'arguments': I believe it because it's in the bible, which god inspired. God did it, therefore, it's true. Then you quote some bible verses and call it a day.
You write off all the research done by real scientists as inconsequential, write us off as liberal god-hating evil people, and therefore not able to speak on such matters, and write me off as just another ignorant atheist, who probably hasn't even picked up a bible.
I was a staunch believer, just as much as you. I followed the big 10, prayed to god every night, absolutely believed every story in the bible, that I was told.
Then, in a spur of the moment need to know every story, I picked up the bible I got back in 1990, and started reading. Every verse, every phrase started to have less and less of the luster that it was supposed to have.
I read, Erik. I read about the 42 kids getting ripped apart by the 2 bears, because they were being kids. I read about the unicorn, and read no other justifications for the horrible atrocities committed in the name of god.
I cross-referenced the evidence, as well. The facts went against the bible. Seeing as how I was also curious about how the world worked, and wanted to be a scientist, I knew I couldn't just toss out the facts. Something was amiss.
When I reached Revelations, I had basically renounced my faith. There was no way rational people could believe in this and still lead normal lives. I finished the book, shaken to the core. What was I going to believe now? Christianity, Islam, Judaism…pretty much every religion with a higher power was out. I'd done research on other religions as part of course work in college, and looking through them, they all had the same basic premise. God, afterlife, heaven and hell…all of it is crap.
I became horribly depressed. I had a null value, and I drifted through life, feeling nothing for the people who believed. This was before I heard about atheism in its true form, from real atheists, and not the caricatures that the church puts out.
So, in my first year of college, after all the classes of the first semester that I had done the research in, I had been persuaded by my friends to join an atheist club. Everyone there was…accepting. They understood the stresses of faithful life, because they went through it themselves.
I won't go into detail. The club was disbanded officially because the religious clubs on campus kept harassing us. So we met in secret, and I basically developed a place for my own life.
Atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in gods. That's all. What stems from there, though, is up to the person. If they want to do something with their lives, they can pick up humanist traits, so that other people can be seen as people, and the ones in need of assistance are given that help.
And it's not like I didn't seek help from the church, either. During my depression, I sought help from my pastor, the supporting staff, all of them. None of them could stop the light of reason from shining through. The kindness shown from the atheists I met for outshines the 'help' I got from my old churchmates.
What makes you think your hollow arguments have any effect, other than a cheap laugh?
Mobius
To prove my point see the unicorn argument that you brought up. You chose a passage and ran with it saying that the Bible teaches about unicorns. I explained what the Hebrew word was and why the KJV translated it the way that it did. I gave you real evidence that disproved your claim. Never did you admit that you were wrong but instead you went on to other arguments that I had already disproved. That is the way it has worked every time.
• Mobius 1 Says:
Again, you avoid the fact that I have brought evidence from outside the Bible that proves the Bible yet you refuse to admit it (sticking your fingers in your ears and saying la la la).
You have quoted Bible verses (so you can but I can’t, can we say double standard).
You have written against God, I do not have to call you anything (you have drawn the line in the sand and stepped on the side of the God hater).
I hope you have picked up a Bible (I would encourage you to study It for what It is, instead of having your preconceived ideas guide you, or someone else’s understanding).
I think I see the problem, you believed in “every story in the bible, that I was told”. Yes but did you study the Scriptures for yourself? Did you dig into what is there or just hear a bunch of “sermons” about the Bible? By the way, no one can keep the Big 10 (that is the whole point, they were given to show us our inadequacy, forcing us to depend on Jesus Christ’s help, if we could do it on our own then we would not need Him).
42 kids being ripped apart? What is the context? Maybe if you try to explain it to me you will read the context and actually study the situation. I tried to read the Bible and understood none of It until someone taught me how to study (not just try to explain or understand everything from our 20th and 21st Cent mindset.
As to the unicorn, we have already been over this (read my responses for a change).
What are the “horrible atrocities” that you speak of? Show them to me. Let’s reason together and see where maybe you are mistaken. Why are you not open to studying the subject with someone who is trained in studying the Scriptures?
Quick note, it is Revelation (no s) there is only 1 revelation of Jesus Christ. Minor details like that make all the difference in understanding the Scriptures (I have noticed that you do not pay attention to details).
Do you not understand Revelation? It is very simple to understand. Read the entire book to get the outline, then chapter by chapter to see the theme, then paragraph by paragraph, then verse by verse. It takes work but it is possible.
So you are the almighty one who denounces an afterlife. Just because you do not believe it does not make it true. Atheism gives you hope? Have you studied the philosophies of atheism? There is no hope, we are an accident, life has no meaning, do what you want (eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die). There is nothing new under the sun. People thought like that in ancient times (you guys have not invented anything new).
So you basically joined the religion of atheism. You have that right, still makes you religious. Then you became a missionary for them (and you chastise me for evangelizing). Then you were persecuted and went underground, how religious of you.
So you had a bad experience in church and you have a chip on your shoulder against all Christians. I assure you that we are not all like what you have experienced (that is a big assumption on your part). Again, I help people who want to receive help. I share the message with all and work with those who want help.
Erik, what you don't seem to understand is that few of us grew up in a cultural void, even those who were raised in nonbelieving households. Because the number of atheists is small, and was smaller still when our parents and grandparents were raising families, the likelihood that an atheist is a former believer (of some kind, usually Christian) is very, very high. In fact, what you'll find more often than not is that atheists were either very devout, or tried very hard to believe. Because of these things, your exhortations to read the bible, your insistence that it holds things other religious texts don't, your assumptions that we have never been exposed to the "good news" are being aimed towards the wrong people. We've read it. We've searched multiple faiths, not wanting to let go of faith entirely, and may know what it's like to feel as strongly about them as you do about yours. We've sometimes tried and tried to work our way around the apologetics that would allow us to completely accept the "good news", without success.
Elsewhere, you had suggested to me that I should read the bible, and I would come to agree with your point. Well, Erik, back in the 80's and 90's, I sang with my church choir and rang handbells in the bell choir. I was on the Hymnal Selection Committee. I was in the Women's Guild, and went on retreat every year. I was Recording Secretary for the church's nursery school, and taught vacation bible school during the summer. And to top it off, every Monday morning was bible study.
Now, Erik, there is a great deal of irony here. You see, not only are you assuming that the people here are ignorant of Christian teachings when they are not, but you're also certain that reading the bible will convince them when it was often what led them towards disbelief in the first place.
I had done a pretty good job of keeping my faith all the way up until bible study. It was the first time I was introduced to the explanations for inconsistencies and inaccuracies. Until then, I hadn't known that there were so many that explanations were needed. This opened the floodgates, and before long I had too much information to suspend my disbelief any longer.
I tried delving into other faiths as well, reading up on the teachings of Buddha, trying to make heads or tails of the Baghavad Gita, and talking to people whose beliefs were strong, but everything pointed to the same things as the bible did – wishful thinking and speculation by fallible human beings. In fact, the comparisons only strengthened the evidence that no religions and none of their gods had any basis in reality.
My experience is not unique, Erik. Atheists aren't cave-dwellers. We've spent a good deal of time searching, gathering information, hoping to find meaning that co-exists with truth. We've done more than just crack the cover of the bible. It's not likely that it's changed much since the last time we read it, so there will be nothing new in it to convince us. Nor have the arguments changed, because there haven't been any events of biblical proportions since the book was written that would serve as evidence – and so the same ones are repeated. So what you're doing, telling us to read a book we've already read and presenting arguments we've already heard, will go nowhere in convincing us. It's really just that simple.
Forget the pigeon-baiting, Mobius old chap, it's like talking to a brick wall.
But at least a brick wall has the decency to shush.
I vote we let our pigeon shift the goalposts, knock over as many pieces as he wants and continue to CrAP all over the board & claim victory: I for one refuse to play anymore.
[cue even more pigeon CrAP; more flappy evangelising; more stark ignorance of what's plainly visible; more coos of victory; perhaps a few more assertions that we're all exactly the same and we're all going to hell; cue Hank yawning himself into a fucking coma]
Vicki:
There was nothing BUT fruit in the Garden of Eden. Fruit caused The Fall and the subsequent Saviouring!
Cheesecake is an abomination! It's fundie chocolatists like you that have caused all the bake-sale wars in history. If everyone just realised the Truth of Fruit Cake and abandoned their false chocolatey idols, there would be no more war, suffering or irreperably stained white blouses!
Boy are your views skewed. I'll get back to you after work.
Hank:
Fruit yes, but not fruitCAKE. Use logic!!!
Erik asks: "What are the “horrible atrocities” that you speak of?"
Well, we've already talked about one: the massacre of the Midianites civilians – all the men, women who had had sex (and their unborn babies, presumably) all the male children. – slaughtered. All the virgin girls enslaved.
Erik, if you had read about this incident in a history of the Islamic world, with the Arabic word for God used in place of Jehovah, you would have no trouble recognizing it for what it is: an atrocity. The only reason you don't think it's an atrocity is because God ordered it, and He had his reasons. Sorry, "just following orders" is not longer an excuse for war crimes.
The reason why this incident is so disturbing is that things like this are *still* happening today, in Darfur, and quite recently in the Balkans. And the perpetrators still think of themselves as perfectly justified.
Oh dear, Vicki. Poor, depraved illogical a-fruitcake-ist. Fruit necessarily leads TO fruitcake! That IS logic! Repent now before you end up in Satan's wood-fired pizza oven (he never uses cheese as a topping – he is abhorrent!!!!!)!
—
And Vicki, genocide is never genocide when the good guys do it. If GOD told Moses' Hebrew stormtroopers to kill ALL the Midianites and take any surviving virgins as their whoreslaves, then that reason alone is enough reason that it was a Good Thing and the Right Thing.
*vomit*
[cue Biblical justification for genocide OR a sermon on how it was just a metaphor OR a lesson about how the Midianites were so evil and nasty they deserved a holocaust]
• Alison
You are 4% of the world’s pop claims to be atheists, 16% nothing and 80% believe in some sort of god.
I have never said that you have not been exposed (most have and they chose not to believe, as the Bible claims will happen).
I suggest that people “study” the Bible (big difference between reading and studying). Seems like you had lots of good works (as you know good works do not make you a Christian).
I never said that you are ignorant of Christian teaching. I have pointed out the ignorant arguments about the Bible that many have made (please understand the difference).
As I said studying the Bible for what it is, that is much different than reading looking for what you want to see.
Please show me some mistakes in the Bible (that is what you guys claim day and night yet you bring nothing in the form of evidence, if you do bring something then it is easily explained, see the unicorn argument).
Who said atheists were cave-dwellers? I have seen the way you guys “research” the Bible (run to what others say and then regurgitate it). Go to the Bible and study the passage in context, research the cultural context, research the original language (there are tools for that even if you do not know the original languages).
[Admin's note: The final sentence of this comment constituted "preaching." It was thus deleted. As used at this site, "preaching" is an attempt to announce what "God" thinks or what "God" wants, as though there is no alternative viewpoint as to what God "thinks" or "wants." Such presentations are distracting to these discussions, which (though such comments might well be motivated by a commentator's religious beliefs) should be based on what commentators themselves think. Preaching invites an endless and unproductive back and forth focused on the authenticity of such claims–whether "God" really thinks or desires "X." Further discussion of what is starkly presented as "God's" opinion, or any quotation to any passages from any religion's Sacred Literature, to the extent that those passages are intended to be unquestionable on any ground, are subject to pruning pursuant to the commenting guidelines regarding "preaching"].
• Vicki Baker
You wrote “Well, we’ve already talked about one: the massacre of the Midianites civilians – all the men, women who had had sex (and their unborn babies, presumably) all the male children. – slaughtered. All the virgin girls enslaved.”
I think you are a little confused. Are you speaking of the Midianites or the Canaanites? In Numbers God sends Israel to wage war against the Midianites because of their (the Midianites) actions. Also look at what the Midianite women did to the Israelites (please study the context of the situation. It is the same with the Canaanites, they were evil (offering up their babies as sacrifices, murdering, sexual immorality, rape, incest etc.). In other words you are blaming God for punishing the guilty. Strange, I guess you want the victims to be victimized twice, one by the perpetrator and again by not having the guilty punished.
If you will read the entire context and cross reference it then you will see that God tells them why they are to do it.
Erik-
Read Numbers 25 and 31 again, with an open mind. Now imagine that you are an Israelite warrior. Moses has just given you a lecture about how the Midianites seduced you into worshipping idols, and caused a plaque among the Israelites (of course similar explanations are offered for every other genocide in history – blaming the victims for causing disease or poisoning wells is very popular).
Moses gives the order to kill all the women and male children. Really place yourself inside the scene now. The victims would have to have been killed by stabbing, strangling, or bashing brains out with a club or rock – no bullets or poison gas back then. Can you imagine the smell of blood, and of urine and feces as the victims lose control of their bladder and bowels – either after death or before, through sheer terror. Imagine the screams of the women as they watch their children die, the cries of children as they watch their mothers die. What goes through your mind as you raise your sword to kill a small boy crouched by the side of his dead mother? Are you filled with righteous indignation at the crimes of the Midianites? Are you filled with joy to be doing the Lord's will? Do you let yourself go numb and try not to think about what you're doing? Does the thought cross your mind that maybe Moses got Yahweh's instructions wrong?
You don't have to answer – this is not meant to be a "gotcha." Just promise me you'll think about it- really think about what happened that day.
This may be too hard, but you might also imagine yourself reading this in the Koran, with the names changed. What would be your reaction?
• Vicki Baker
I see you are trying to explain away what is written in black and white. Leading people to worship idols leads them to reject God and brings terrible consequences (slavery to sin, death, wasted lives, etc). The warriors had seen it first hand, seen God’s plague destroying them (even the innocent, they suffer because of the sins of others). You are trying to add what is not there. What had the women done? Look at the sexual sin in chapter 25. Sexual sin destroys in a terrible way (and the innocent suffer). These are the women (in 25) who knowingly led the men of Israel into sin (the guilty being punished is not wrong). I would advise you to read chapters 22-25 in order to see the diabolic plans of the Medianites. Do not just look for what you want to see. Look at all that was happening. You are trying to make the guilty look innocent and become the victims here (notice YOU are doing it). By the way those same women (with their children) were the ones joining themselves with the Israelite men (many of them to be frank). The virgins were spared because they were not guilty of sleeping with the Israelite men. Look at the facts in the context.
Vicki: You read me wrong about chocolate. Chocolate calls to me every waking hour. For me, I will have nothing to do with that false dessert god: fruit cake. Now back to chocolate. You see? It's always on my mind. And I've already confessed the extent to which chocolate pulls my strings. http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/01/08/is-it…
And see here, too. http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/04/24/choco…
But there's no reason to have fights about pie versus chocolate. After all, there is chocolate pie.
Erik, my boy, you can't just explain away everything with words like that.
Wholesale slaughter isn't justified by deceiving of a few people, or half a population, or whatever.
What god ordered was genocide, which is reprehensibly WRONG, no matter who orders it.
If any highly publicized atheist were to ask for the slaughter of all religious people, we'd rightfully pass him off as a nutcase.
When a religious person does it, we get thousands of people saying that it's a good idea, stopped only by the laws of the land. Fred Phelps, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, just to name a few, blame all of societies ills on atheists, homosexuals, feminists, and basically everyone who isn't like them.
Why the hell are people like that given any word on any official policies? People get killed, in the name of religion, far more often, and far more gleefully, than atheists who kill.
Don't, for the last time, bring up Stalin or Hitler, because Hitler was Catholic, and Stalin had a cult of personality fascist regime. Atheism did not drive his murder, because atheists fell to his regime as well.
I expect a giant load of bollocks answer from you.
Well, I don't know if Erik has truly left the building or not. For the record, when asked to contemplate what it would look, smell, and sound like when a group of armed men kill unarmed women, children, and babies, he wasn't up to the challenge of taking the Bible literally. Even if you take the morally indefensible position that all those women, children, and babies were evil and guilty and deserved to die, how can you deny the actual killing was a messy, sordid business? In fact, the elaborate purification ritual that follows the massacre hints that even Moses and his warriors were a bit grossed out and feeling in need of purification.
The justification of the Midianite massacre requires an incredibly tight circle of reasoning so that no doubt can creep in. God is perfect and just, and so wouldn't demand the execution of innocent people, ergo, all those women, children and babies deserved to die. But don't think too hard about what it might look and feel like to kill a guilty evil toddler, because the guilty might start looking innocent if you do that. And don't think too hard about the fact that the justification for the massacre reads like the justification for almost every other massacre, pogrom, genocide or lynching in history.
Those of us who have read the Bible know that later on, in the age of the prophets, these same tribespeople who massacred the Midianites began groping for more universal ideas of justice. Later still a man named Jesus challenged them to stop feeling self-righteous for keeping to the law, and embrace even more demanding standards of compassion. Erik's moral reasoning apparently remains stuck at the stage of tribalism and blood vendetta.
Erik wrote:—"I tried to read the Bible and understood none of It until someone taught me how to study (not just try to explain or understand everything from our 20th and 21st Cent mindset."
Ah. So someone had to interpret it for you. That makes it really clear. When it doesn't make sense (common sense?) then you need a Master to spin it right for you so it does. Square pegs will fit in round holes if you just tweak it so…
Not to be totally dismissive, though, you are correct, it does require a certain background knowledge to really understand some of what is in the bible—but that just validates the fact that it has been added to, amended, interpreted, re-presented, tweaked, fiddled, and messed with by humans over the last 1800 years, which implies strongly that the same thing had been going on all along—prophecies rewritten to conform to current events, the ones that didn't work out deleted, stuff forgotten. The fact that KJV misinterprets the word for unicorn suggests that other translations erred, too, and erred earlier, and got it wrong earlier.
In short, it is a flawed document. Hardly holy. Historically suspect. When we argue with you about translation errors and you come back and explain those errors even while acknowledging them AS ERRORS, you somehow manage to not make the larger connection that the errors—if they are errors—probably pre-date all post Yeshua translations.
In other words, not the word of god. Unless you choose to believe it is. But it is the belief that makes it so, not the document itself.
Erich: well because of your devotion to chocolate I suppose I must absolve you of the charge of dessert heresy. It's quite disappointing really because I had the wood and marshmallow skewers all ready for your burning at the stake. Of course I always eat toasted marshmallows with chocolate in the divine dessert known as S"MORE. The S'MORE of course was invented by God's Chosen People (USA! USA! USA!). Now I will have to go after Hank, a heathen Australian who probably has never eaten a S"MORE in his life.