AGAINST ALL OTHERS: September 2009

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Christopher Hitchens debates Jay Richards

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Confessions of a Former Christian

A former Christian looks back at what he used to believe and wonders how he could have been so naive.

Quran is plagiarism - Christopher Hitchens

Muslim converts and reverts, the Quran is a rip-off of the Bible, Torah and other pre-Islamic text. The Koran is just hearsay spread down the line from others. Muhammad's own early followers plagiarized large sections of the Bible and the Jewish Torah, even old Indian and Persian text to create the Quran. Noted Atheist Christopher Hitchens explains how the Koran text was basically stolen from the other religions and is really a mixed up and corrupted version of several. Before Islam, besides the pagan religion, which Muhammad worshiped early in his life, there was a large Christian and Jewish community in Saudi Arabia. Muhammad just took the Christian Bible and the Jewish Torah and plagiarized text from those books to create the Quran.

Why Christianity Fails 2 - Christopher Hitchens

This is part 2. Hitchens continues a methodical dissection of religion.

Why Christianity Fails 1 - Christopher Hitchens

Why Christianity Fails 1 - Christopher Hitchens by 43Alley.

Christopher Hitchens embarrasses Hannity in God debate

Another classic Hitchens moment.

Christopher Hitchens on Whether God is Loving

This is an excerpt from a panel discussion hosted by The Christian Book Expo of 2009. This is a brief exchange between Hitchens and Pastor Denison on free will and the problem of evil.

Christopher Hitchens on the Teleological Argument for God's Existence

This is an excerpt from a discussion panel hosted by The Christian Book Expo of 2009. Here, Hitchens dismantles teleological arguments—arguments from design or fine-tuning.

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Christopher Hitchens on Q TV

Writer, political commentator and author of 'God is not Great' sits down with host Jian Ghomeshi to kick around the idea of adding three new commandments to the ten commandments.

Richard Dawkins on CNN Connect the World

Richard Dawkins tore into religious comfort zones with his claim that God is a delusion, and it seems the British ethologist, evolutionary biologist and author will stop at nothing to provoke intelligent debate about the truth of our existence.

Richard Dawkins writings have inspired and angered many a reader and now hes back with more.

The fervent atheist and anti-creationist is often referred to as Charles Darwins rottweiler. Now, to celebrate Darwins bi-centenary, Dawkins has published a new book: The Greatest Show on Earth offers scientific evidence to back-up his own theory of evolution.

Aired September 23, 2009 on CNN

'Hell' as an invention of the church

John Shelby Spong, retired Episcopal bishop from Newark, N.J., talks about why Christianity must change its view of hell. Spong is one of the leading spokespersons for liberal Christianity.

Is it possible to disprove the existence of God?

by Sean Prophet

No, not in a logical sense--since it would be impossible to search the entire universe for non-evidence of God. Not to mention the difficulty of searching outside time and space, where many theists believe God resides. But logical inconclusiveness is not a valid argument against atheism. It is a classic example of the argument from ignorance. Sagan and Dawkins have both discussed this premise, using analogies like the "teapot in orbit around Mars" or the "invisible dragon in my garage." It is impossible to disprove the existence of either one of those claimed objects--but that doesn't mean either one exists.

Many believers also invoke the god-of-the-gaps argument to explain incomplete scientific knowledge. Especially when those gaps involve the origin of the universe or human beings.

These particular arguments really center around the burden of proof. Theists often assert that atheists have the burden of proof, while atheists claim the opposite. Scientists and atheists also refer to Occam's razor, as a way of cutting through outlandishly complex, contrived, or theologically convenient explanations for phenomena.

But in every area of life other than religion, people making positive truth claims always have the burden of proof. For example, if I claim there is $10,000 in my bank account, but can provide no evidence, the bank will not honor my check no matter how loudly I protest. If I claim I have a Ph.D. but cannot produce evidence from an institution, I will not get a job which requires a Ph.D. So how is it that churchgoing people so often say to each other things like "God wants me to move to Mississippi," or "God wants me to marry this person," etc.? When such claims are made, it leaves the person on the receiving end with two bad choices: Go along with what the person said as if it were from the "Lips of the Lord," or challenge the veracity of the person's faith or connection to god.

In the interest of decorum, there is a third and better alternative. Since there is no way to verify whether or not God spoke to a person, or what was said (even courts of law don't accept hearsay evidence), simply treat them as if they had said: "I want to move to Mississippi,' or "I desire to marry this person." Since the faithful are not likely to stop making these claims anytime soon, it is up to the rest of us to simply tastefully sidestep these forged mandates from 'on high.'

What really happens if you follow the Bible?

The Bible explains precisely what will happen if people actually started following its entirety:

You will be:

1.) Delivered up to councils and scourged.

2.) Brought before governors and kings.

3.) Your brother (if you have one) will deliver you up to be murdered.

4.) Your father will deliver you up to be murdered.

5.) Your children will deliver you up to be murdered.

6.) You will be hated by all mankind.

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Moral Arguments

From Iron Chariots Wiki

Morality arguments make the case that morality cannot exist without a divine author.

This usually follows the lines of:

Absolute morality exists
This morality must come from somewhere
Therefore, the maker of this absolute morality must be a deity

This argument presents a false dichotomy. The conclusion fallaciously implies that morality must either come from a deity or from nowhere. Since it cannot come from nowhere the false dichotomy leaves only one choice, the arguer's chosen deity. The argument itself provides no way of differentiating between one deity and another (e.g. the Christian God vs. Allah), and this choice is arbitrarily made by the arguer on the basis of personal conviction. The argument fails to explore any alternate hypotheses such as Utilitarianism or Kant's categorical imperative as possible alternative sources of an absolute morality. Absolute laws are known to exist in fields such as mathematics and logic and as such there are resonable grounds to suppose that an objective morality could be of the same nature.

This argument also assumes that absolute morality exists yet does not provide any evidence to support this claim. It may well be that morality is, in fact, subjective; however, a person who attempts to effectively use this argument must first demonstrate that an objective morality actually exists in order to avoid a faulty (or undemonstrated) premise, which renders the argument unsound.

Only once objective morality has been established to be the case and all possible sources other than a deity are falsified can this argument be logically sound. Until then, the question of whether morality is subjective or objective, and if indeed objective, whether it comes from God or some other source, remains open.

Marilyn Manson Burns the Bible

Playing at the Braehead Arena 8th December 2007.

Marilyn Manson Speech about Violence and Blame (2/2)

Marilyn Manson Speech about Violence and Blame (1/2)

Marilyn Manson's amazing speech about violence and blame. Everyone should watch this.

Sunday, September 20, 2009

The Christian Questionnaire

The questions follow. Under no circumstances will “The LORD works in mysterious ways” or other arguments in that vein be acceptable. If a question does not apply to your particular sect, explain why.

Thank you!

If necessary, use this space to explain any unique or unusual beliefs your sect has about the nature of your god, heaven, hell, the Bible, the Holy Spirit/Ghost, Satan, or other theological matters.
Explain why your god’s only son had to die so we can go to magic happy land when we croak.
Did everyone who died before Jesus died go to Hell? Justify your answer.
If a Catholic, justify the Inquisition and other persecutions of “heretics” throughout the centuries, concentrating on why the Pelagianists, the Priscillianists, and the Manichaeans were persecuted; if a Protestant, justify the witch trials and the way that Protestants constantly hunted down native Americans until there were so few that the government could simply take their land; if a member of an Eastern Orthodox church, justify the persecutions of the Old Believers after the reforms of the seventeenth century.
Explain why your sect (whether Catholic, Protestant, or Eastern Orthodox) pursued, tortured, and killed people who were not Christian.
Explain why your sect (whether Catholic, Protestant, or Eastern Orthodox) pursued, tortured, and killed people who were not members of your particular sect.
Explain why I should believe that your god is all-good when the only real information we have about him is the Bible, which clearly describes him as both good and evil. (See Isaiah 30:32, Luke 14:26, Numbers 31:17-18, Matthew 10:34, Amos 3:6, Deuteronomy 18:8, Deuteronomy 20:16, Exodus 20:5, Exodus 32:27, Isaiah 45:7, Psalms 52:5, Luke 22:36, and Jeremiah 18:11 for a small sample of Biblical passages which describe Jehovah as having an evil morality at times).
Explain why, when racism is clearly wrong, Jesus was clearly a racist (see Mark 7:25-29). NOTE: under no circumstances will I believe that racism is morally acceptable.
Explain why, when discrimination against women is clearly wrong, the Bible clearly supports the oppression of women. Answering this question entails refuting 1 Cor 11 and 1 Tim 2:11-15. NOTE: under no circumstances will I believe that discrimination against women solely on the basis of sex is morally acceptable.
Explain why, when slavery is clearly wrong, the Bible clearly supports slavery. Answering this question entails refuting 1 Peter 2:18. NOTE: under no circumstances will I believe that slavery is an acceptable way to structure an economy.
Explain why children should submit to their parents’ decisions even when those decisions are clearly evil. Answering this question entails refuting Deuteronomy 21:18-21, Proverbs 13:24, and Hebrews 12:7-8.
Explain why, if your god loves us all, more than half of us are going to Hell after we die. Specifically, refute or explain the following words of Christ, as presented in the New Testament: “Many are called but few are chosen,” and “Straight is the gate, and narrow is the way that leadeth unto salvation, and few there be that find it.” If your god loves all of us, couldn’t he find a better way?
Explain what type of offense could possibly justify eternal, unbearable torture in Hell; if your sect does not believe in Hell, then refute every passage in the Old and New Testaments which describes Hell (such as 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 and Revelation 20:15). (Do not exceed 100 words.)
Explain how your god can be both just and merciful, when these terms apparently contradict each other.
Explain why possession by demons and/or other evil spirits was common during the time of Jesus, but hardly mentioned at all in the Old Testament, and apparently has been explained completely away today by things such as epilepsy and schizophrenia.
Explain why, if the personality resides in the soul, things like drugs and brain damage can affect someone’s personality.
If heaven is a place where everyone is perfectly happy, then explain how I could be happy in heaven if I had loved ones in Hell.
What is Heaven like?
What is Hell like?
Explain why original sin exists. Why should I be eternally tortured for something that a pair of naked fruit-munching simpletons did in a garden over six thousand years ago? If you believe that children are born stained because they were conceived sexually, explain why I would be punished for something my parents did by your merciful and just god. If this does not apply to your sect, explain why.
Explain why getting dunked in or sprinkled with water will prevent me from being eternally tortured for the actions of the naked fruit-munching simpletons mentioned in #19.
If your god did not want Adam and Eve to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, why did he put the tree in the garden of Eden (and at the center, no less)? Was it for shade? If so, why use something so dangerous as a shade tree? If the purpose of the tree was to tempt Adam and Eve, explain why it’s OK for your god to engage in a practice that our modern-day courts of law refer to as “entrapment.”
Explain why sex, potentially one of the most wonderful, beautiful things in human nature, is considered “bad” by your particular sect. If your sect does not consider sex to be “bad,” then refute Matthew 19:12, 1 Corinthians 7 (particularly verses 1 and 9), Galatians 5:17, 1 Thessalonians 4:3, James 1:14-15, Matthew 24:38, Luke 17:27, and Revelation 14:4.
Explain why, if Jesus was perfect, he thought that the end of the world was coming soon, when it has clearly not come yet. (See Matthew 16:27-28.)
Explain why some people (James, Peter, Paul, Thomas, etc.) should get convincing physical proof of miracles, while the rest of us are supposed to take these happenings on faith.
Why are the stories of the crucifixion and resurrection inconsistent?
If you are a Protestant or a member of an Eastern Orthodox church, explain why you are still using the Catholic Bible, which was formalized by a vote among (supposedly divinely inspired) cardinals and bishops in the fourth century CE, when you disagree with the idea that the Pope, who is higher in the Catholic hierarchy, is divinely inspired; if a Catholic, explain why your church accepts the canonical Bible while rejecting the Apocrypha. (Do not use the “divinely inspired” argument: Because I am not religious, I do not give it the credence that you do).
If your god is kind and gentle, why do some animals have to eat meat?
If your god is kind and gentle, why did he create parasites?
If your god wants us to worship him through our own free will, why does he threaten us with Hell? (The most common claim that Christians make involving God’s motivation for desiring worship is that he desires worship springing from the pure love of the worshipper. Doesn’t his threat of Hell mean that a large number of worshippers worship him out of purely selfish motives?)
Why would your god deliberately cause sinners to sin? (See Romans 9:15-23 and numerous parts of the book of Exodus where Jehovah says, “I will harden Pharaoh’s heart.”) Are these sinners still responsible for the sins which your god forces them, against their will, to commit? Justify your answer.
If Jesus did have to die, why did someone (specifically, Judas) have to be damned in order accomplish the death and resurrection of Jesus? (Jesus was at least a volunteer for the cross; I doubt that your god asked Judas if he was willing to go to Hell so that the resurrection could be accomplished.)
If Judas was willing to go to Hell for humanity (see #31), didn’t he make more of a sacrifice than Jesus, who spent only three hours in pain? Shouldn’t we then be worshipping Judas?
Why should we accept the words of the gospel writers as truth when they are known to be liars? (See Romans 3:7.)
Do you believe that your god is anti-homosexual? If so, explain why he would create homosexuals in the first place. If not, refute or explain away Leviticus 20:13 and Romans 1:26-27.
Explain why prayer is OK, but spell casting is not, when both amount to the same thing: requesting that a superior supernatural force to intercede in a way that would be impossible according to the normally accepted laws of physics.
According to the Gospels, from the Christian standpoint, Jesus was the most important person to ever live. From the Roman standpoint, Jesus was a huge pain in the ass because of his political activities. Explain why nothing was written about his life for over thirty years after his death, and nothing except the Gospels was written until the third century CE.
Explain why you believe a person whose life is so poorly documented (see #36) was even ever born.
Define the word “Christ,” including references to the pagan origins and meaning of the word.
Explain why Jesus, who was anti-Gentile (see Mark 7:25-29) and anti-sex (see Luke 14:26 and Matthew 19:12), would want to be anointed with oil in a pagan sexual rite after his death (see your definition for #38).
In light of Matthew 10:34, explain why Jesus is called “the Prince of Peace.”
The name “Jesus” has been anglicized. What was the original (Hebrew) name of Jesus? Where did you get this information? This is a bonus question.
Why is it that the life of Jesus was so similar to the lives of pagan Christs, particularly Herakles, Dionysios, and Asklepios?
If your god requires that people believe in him and follow his orders through their own free will, why do Christians push their views on public policy?
Explain why being a good Christian requires you to push your beliefs on others. If you do not believe that you have to push your views on others (no matter how much this annoys them), explain why you do not believe this despite the fact that the New Testament seems to suggest that you must do this to get to Heaven (for instance, in Matthew 28:19-20).
Explain why spreading the “truth of Christ” requires you to spread lies about other religions, such as the idea that Wiccans (so-called “white witches”) worship the Christian devil. (Incidentally, they don’t, and this rumor has been persistently spread by Christians since the second century CE).
At no point in the four Gospels did Jesus claim to be the son of your god. (He said “son of man” quite frequently, and at one point referred to himself as “a son of god,” but that was a common Hebrew expression at the time. Someone who was “a son of god” was a Jew. This reflected the Israelites’ belief that they were the chosen people of your god. See also Job 1:6). Why, then, do you believe that Jesus was divine? If you don’t believe that Jesus was divine, then why do you call yourself a Christian?
Given the fact that Jesus did not say anything original (the Golden Rule and the “turn the other cheek” idea were plagiarized from Buddhism; and the Beatitudes were common in the Jewish devotional literature at the time), why do you see Jesus as such a great thinker/philosopher/ethicist?
When Jesus said, “Resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also,” why do you suppose that most Christians fight for their rights? To put it another way, why don’t we, as a country whose population is 85% Christian, let the government abuse us?
Why are so many Christian holidays on the same day as Pagan holidays? Couldn’t the early Church fathers have converted pagans only by appealing to their reason and/or faith if Christianity really is the true religion?
Explain how your god can be “just and merciful” in light of Exodus 20:5.
Do you believe that the Old Testament should be accepted as part of Christian theology? If so, explain how you can worship such a cruel, sadistic asshole (see Numbers 31:17-18, Deuteronomy 20:16, Proverbs 20:30, Amos 3:6, Deuteronomy 13:8, Psalms 3:7, Psalms 52:5, etc.); if not, explain how you can believe that Jesus is the promised savior sent by your god without the messianic prophecies and the ruling rights of the line of David, both of which are in the Old Testament in books such as Isaiah, Zechariah, Daniel, Psalms, etc. (as opposed to, say, believing that Jesus was an irritating nut wandering around saying things that people didn’t like much).
Explain why your “just and merciful” god sent bears to kill forty-two children who called his prophet Elisha “baldhead.” (See 2 Kings 2:23-24).
If prostitution is wrong, why are there so many examples of it in Genesis? (For instance, Gen 19:8, where Lot offers his daughters to a mob so that his guests can avoid gang rape).
What is the sin that people committed that is so incredibly bad that your god had to become flesh and die to correct?
Are all members of other faiths bad? Are they all damned to Hell? Justify your answer with quotes from the Bible.
Are all atheists/agnostics/humanists/heathens bad? Are they all damned to Hell? Justify your answer with quotes from the Bible.
What was your motive in proselytizing to me?
Where is Heaven?
Where is Hell?
Why don’t animals go to heaven or hell when they die? What makes us so special?
Why does Satan try to get peoples’ souls?
Once Satan has someone’s soul, what does he do with it?
Is your god perfect? Justify your answer.
Where does our soul stay while we are alive?
Explain how you can believe in Satan when your faith is directly descended from the Jewish faith, when the Jews did not even believe in Satan until they absorbed the Egyptian god Set while they were captives in Egypt.
Why do evil people often prosper? Justify your answer.
Why do good people so often fail to prosper? Justify your answer.
When the end of the world comes, will your god raise our actual bodies, or just our souls? Explain.
Explain why your god lets airplanes with sinless infants on board crash.
What is sin, exactly?
If Jesus is perfect, justify the parable of the fig tree (Matthew 21:17-19, Mark 11:14-20).
Explain why Christians have harassed Wiccans (”white witches”) for almost two thousand years now, when the central rule of the Wiccan ethical system is “an it harm no one, do what thou wilt.”
Explain why Christians (yes, that includes all branches of Christianity) have spread the lie that Jews put Jesus to death when, in actuality, it was the Romans who put Jesus to death. (For a good example of New Testament anti-semetism, see 1 Thessalonians 2:15).
Explain why your god created humans as imperfect, then set his standards so high that no one could possibly live up to them, then punishes us for not living up to his standards. Doesn’t this also constitute “entrapment”?
If we are created in your god’s image and likeness (Gen 1:27), how can we also be imperfect?
Why was it OK for the ancient Israelites to sacrifice animals to their god, while it is wrong for modern religions to sacrifice animals to their gods? Justify your answer.
Why would your god confuse people? (See 1 Sam 7:10 and Gen 11:9). Isn’t life confusing enough already?
Why would your god cause blindness, deafness, and dumbness? (See Ex 4:11)
Why would your god want to damn people by making them believe false things? (See 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12).
Should the book of Revelation be taken literally? If not, how should it be taken? Explain and justify your answer.
Would it be good for men to castrate themselves? Justify your answer, taking Matthew 19:12 into account.
What exactly is faith?
All of the various Christian sects ignore parts of the Bible, usually because those parts of the Bible are inconvenient. Explain which parts of the Bible your sect ignores, and explain why it is OK to ignore those parts of the Bible.
Why did your god allow Satan to do evil things to Job (Job 2:7 etc.)? Wouldn’t your god better spend his time punishing unbelievers?
If Jesus and his father are one (John 10:30), then why does Jesus have to pray (i.e. Matthew 26:39)?
Explain your belief in heaven in light of Job 7:9 and Ecclesiastes 9:5.
Christ giving himself up on the cross was a great gesture, true, but wouldn’t it have been more sensible for him to continue spreading his message until he died a less painful death? Answer this question in light of your answer to question #1.
What is your interpretation of the significance of the temptation of Christ by Satan in the desert (Matthew 4:5-8, Luke 4:5-9)?
In view of Matthew 6:5-6, shouldn’t prayer in public schools be discouraged? Support your answer with scripture quotes.
Do you feel that the last words of Christ before his death were significant? If so, why do the four gospels attribute three different sentences to Christ as his last? (Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34: “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?”; Luke 23:46: “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit”; John 19:30: “It is finished”).
Matthew and Mark say that the last words of Christ were, in Hebrew, El(o)i, El(o)i, lama sabachthani? This has traditionally been translated as, “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” However, a more accurate translation would be, “My El, My El, why has thou forsaken me?” El is the name of a specific pagan god. Why would Jesus call out to a pagan god at the moment of his death?
A commonly recited litany in many forms of Christianity is “The LORD is my shepherd.” (Psalm 23:1). Given the fact that the only reasons that people raise sheep are to rob them of their clothes and to kill them for meat, and the fact that sheep will often follow the shepherd to their destruction, do you think that this is any appropriate image for your god? Justify your answer.
Why is the theory of the big bang any more (or less) likely that the idea that your god created the universe? Justify your answer.
It is commonly asserted that the Christian god is everywhere at the same time, i.e. omnipresent. If hell is the absence of (or separation from) your god, how is this possible?
In the Genesis story, your god tells Adam and Eve that the day they eat from the tree of knowledge they will surely die (Gen 2:17). The devil tells them that they will not die, but that their eyes would be opened and they would know the difference between good and evil (Gen 3:5). Wasn’t Satan telling the truth here? Is your god a liar? Justify your answer in light of Jeremiah 20:7 and Ezekiel 14:9.
If Lucifer is not as powerful as your god, then he cannot possibly be omnipresent. How could he possibly get as many followers as you seem to think he has?
The Bible constantly describes your god as male. In view of the fact that your god supposedly created everything, and creation is very much a female function, isn’t this at least a little bit absurd? Justify your answer.
In light of the Trinity, angels, the Virgin Mary, etc., isn’t Christianity polytheistic? If the Trinity is three who are one, why the three names? Justify your answer.
Have you read the entire Bible? If not, how can you be devoted enough to try and convert me to a religion that you don’t know that much about? Isn’t knowing as much as possible about something necessary to understanding it? Isn’t understanding something necessary to being completely devoted to it?
Why is 2 Kings 19 exactly identical to Isaiah 37?
Is Jesus’s three days in Hell really an ultimate sacrifice, when more than half of humanity going to spend eternity there? (See #11)
If your sect considers the King James Bible to be the official and/or authoritative translation, justify this in light of the fact that when King James commissioned his translation to be poetic rather than accurate. How can you possibly use an inaccurate translation as your reference for what is/is not the word of your god? If your sect does not use the King James Bible, what translation do they use? Justify the use of that particular translation.
Assume that I do not believe that Jesus died for my sins, or that if he did, that necessarily means I will go to your heaven. Name one thing that Jesus ever did for me.
Before Mary was knocked up by the Holy Spirit/Ghost, she was never asked for her consent. (She was warned; see Luke 1:31). Mary was also asleep when your god knocked her up; this strongly suggests that he didn’t want her to protest. Does this mean that Mary was raped by your god? Do you think rape is wrong? Explain.
According to Luke, Mary knew that she was pregnant with the Messiah. Living in the times she lived in, she must have known the scripture; therefore, she must have known that he would have to suffer horribly during his life. Was it moral for Mary to carry her baby to term, or would it have been more humane for her to have an abortion? Explain.
If it was foretold that Jesus was to be crucified, and if he knew that this had been foretold and that it was necessary to the mechanism of the future redemption of sinners, and if he was the son of/identical with your god (and, therefore, presumably wanted sinners to be redeemed), why did he do everything he could to avoid being crucified? (See, for instance, Matthew 26:39).
If the Holy Spirit/Ghost is the father of Jesus (Luke 1:35), then why is the central figure of your trinity called “God the Father”?
Mary and Jehovah were never joined in wedlock. Does it bother you that Jesus is technically a bastard? How do you feel, in general, about sexual activity outside of marriage?
The original Hebrew word for the Holy Ghost/Spirit grammatically implies that the Holy Spirit/Ghost is female in gender. Isn’t this rather silly when you consider the fact that the Holy Ghost/Spirit is actually the father of Jesus (Luke 1:35)?
Matthew 28:11-15 contains an account of a conspiracy between the Jews and the Roman soldiers to spread the story that the disciples stole the body of Christ. How could Matthew have known about this, since no Jews or Romans would have admitted to it? If it was such a transparent conspiracy that an outsider could have seen it, why didn’t the other three gospels mention it? Why didn’t the Roman soldiers get into trouble?
Most Jews seem to believe that people are basically good people and can work to overcome their sinful tendencies. Most Christian sects, following the teaching of Psalms 51:5, 1 Kings 8:46, Ezekiel 18:4, Isaiah 59:2, and Psalm 143:2, believe that people are completely debased and hopelessly lost in sin, and that only your god can lift us out of this state if he decides to bestow his gift of grace on us. Isn’t this an incredibly negative view of people? Isn’t Judaism a more mature faith just for this reason?
How do you, as an individual, feel about Psalm 51:5 and similar passages?
What does your sect teach about Psalm 51:5 (and 1 Kings 8:46, etc.), predestination, and similar matters?
Don’t you think that the idea that, no matter what we do, we can never be good and righteous without help from your god (Isaiah 64:6) fosters an unnatural and unhealthy dependency on him?
Revelation 22:16 says that Jesus is the “offspring of David.” Mary was not descended from David, but Joseph was. Doesn’t this mean that Jesus wasn’t the son of your god at all, but the (mortal and not divine) son of Joseph?
What would the correct thing to do be if your god gave you a command that was harmful and/or destructive to you? (A common argument, which has its source in Paul’s writings, states that because clay pots don’t complain about what the potter does with them, people shouldn’t complain about what their maker — supposedly, your god — does with them, but this completely ignores the vitally important argument that clay pots have no sense of self-awareness and cannot think or feel love, pain, anger, etc. If you want to make this argument, you have to deal with this difference.)
What (or who) does your sect believe the number 666 represents? Justify your answer.
If your god is “just and merciful,” why would he take Solomon’s kingdom away from Solomon’s son while not punishing Solomon, when it was Solomon himself who committed the sin of idolatry? What did Solomon’s son do to deserve punishment? (See 1 Kings 11:12).
Why is Solomon commonly considered to be the paragon of wisdom by many Christians, when he constantly sinned against your god (1 Kings 11:4-10, etc.)? Personally, if I had a god talking to me, I’d do what he said.
Don’t you think that an anti-sex position (see #22) is a rather silly position for your sect to take when the biblical book “Song of Solomon” is a piece of erotic poetry? (For instance, in Song of Solomon 8:2, the bride asks the bridegroom to “drink of spiced wine of the juice of the pomegranate.” The pomegranate was a symbol of the female genitalia, and the “spiced wine” represented menstrual blood.)
Does it bother you that the cross, supposedly a Christian symbol, was actually stolen from the Egyptians? Why or why not? (The Egyptian cross, the ankh, was a male-female symbol similar in concept to the yin-yang. When the Christians stole the ankh from the Egyptians, they removed the female symbol, or yoni, leaving only the masculine symbol — a subtle way of reinforcing the idea that women are lesser beings).
How do you explain that Christians are twice as likely to have sadomasochistic tendencies as non-christians?
What is the incredibly important doctrinal difference that requires the fighting between Catholics and Protestants in Ireland?
Even if your god did create the universe, why does he want to be worshipped? Is your god an egomaniac?
What are your beliefs concerning Wicca? (Wicca is sometimes referred to as “white witchcraft.”) How much do you know about Wicca?
What do you think the word “Satanist” means?
How do you explain the fact that the word “blood” occurs about 400 times in the Bible, depending upon the translation? Isn’t this a rather savage and barbaric way to write a book that is supposed to be at the center of an ethical system?
Throughout the Bible, your god commands his followers to wage merciless war on unbelievers (Luke 22:36, Deuteronomy 13:8, Exodus 20:23-25, Deuteronomy 20:16, Matthew 10:34, Numbers 31:17-18, etc). If you are one of his followers, why are you sitting at your desk writing instead of out waging merciless war on unbelievers?
Numbers 23:21 says that your god “has not seen wickedness in Israel.” If this is so, explain why your god burned Israelites for complaining (Num 11:1), why he sent a plague against them for eating the meat he had given them (Num 11:33), why he burned people for using incense (Num 16:35), why he sent a plague against the Israelites who accused Moses of wrongdoing (Num 16:44-49), and why he sent fiery snakes among the Israelites (Num 21:5). Is your god a liar, or was it just more convenient for him to lie at that particular place and time, or what?
What was it that was so bad about eating an apple that death had to result from that act?
What was it about humanity’s torturing and killing of your god’s only son that made your god so happy that he again promised eternal life to everyone who believed in him?
How do you explain the fact that Matthew and Luke give different genealogies for Jesus?
Matthew says that the prophecy given in Matthew 27:9 was given by Jeremiah. How do you explain that this prophecy was not given by Jeremiah at all, but by Zechariah (in Zech 11:12)?
Matthew says (in Matt 2:21) that Jesus dealt in Nazareth so that he could fulfill a prophecy stating that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene. Where is this prophecy in the Old Testament?
Matthew says that on the triumphant entry into Jerusalem, Jesus was riding on an ass and a colt (Matt 21:7) How do you explain that the original prophecy (Zech 9:9) stated that Jesus would be riding on only one ass, and the other gospel writers place Jesus only on one ass (Mark 11:7, Luke 19:35, and John 12:15)?
In Matthew 1:23, Matthew has the angel say that Jesus would be born of a virgin. However, the prophecy that Matthew is referring to, Isaiah 7:14, uses the Hebrew word almah, which simply refers to a “young woman.” It has nothing to do with sexual experience; the Hebrew word for “virgin” is bethulah. How do you explain this?
Isaiah 7:16 seems to say that before Jesus had reached the age of maturity, both of the Jewish countries would be destroyed. Where is the fulfillment of this prophecy in the New Testament?
Matthew 1:23 says that Jesus would be called “Immanuel,” which means “God with us.” Why does no one (not even Mary and Joseph, who would be expected to be familiar with this prophecy/command) call him “Immanuel” at any point in the New Testament?
How many inconsistencies in the Bible, other than those mentioned in this paper, do you know of? Cite chapter and verse for as many as you have room for.
If even the contemplation of sinning is a sin (i.e. “sinning in your heart”; see, for example, Matthew 5:28) and if Jesus was tempted by Satan in the desert (Matthew 4:5-8, Luke 4:5-9), how can you say that Jesus was without sin?
Does your sect believe that the existence of your god can be established through a formal proof? Why or why not?
Pick a famous argument for the existence of your god, then criticize that argument. (Assume I mean for you to use the academic definition of the word criticize).
Pick an argument against the existence of your god. If it is not a famous argument, copy it down here. Criticize this argument. (Assume I mean for you to use the academic definition of the word criticize).
What does your sect think of the government? Read Paul’s letter to the Romans, chapter 13. Now what do you think of the government? If necessary, reconcile the two views.
What is your definition of the word Christian?
Why do you think it is that the ancient Greeks, who had a very liberal sexual morality, had many fewer sex crimes (compared to the population) than the United States, which is 85% Christian?
If someone accepts Jesus, and is “saved,” but then turns away from Jesus, is that person still saved?
Where did your god come from?
What are the requirements for being saved? Some sects says that faith alone is enough; others say that faith without works is dead. The Bible supports both of these viewpoints. What does your sect think?
If I decide I like the answers to the above questions, where can I get in touch with you? (Give name, address, phone and email if available).
What is the name of your sect?
How is your sect organized?
How can I get in touch with a priest (minister, etc.) of your sect?

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Godless and Free

Godless and Free by Pat Condell

Somebody pointed out to me recently that by focusing on what I don’t want, namely religion, I’m attracting more of it into my life, which I agree would be a very unfortunate irony if not for the fact that I’m focusing on what I do want, and that’s freedom, and lots of it.

You see, I make these videos not because I despise religion as humanity’s way of poking itself in the eye with a sharp stick for no reason, although obviously I do, but because I want to live in a free world full of free people who can say whatever they want to say and who can be whoever they want to be one thousand percent fo the time, and where nobody is allowed to shut them up because their crackpot religious beliefs have been offended.

I don’t care at all about theology, unless it threatens that freedom, and then I care about it the way I care about rabies or typhoid. So you could say that I’m not so much anti-religion as pro-freedom. Indeed if religion was pro-freedom, I wouldn’t have such a problem with it. But then if religion was pro-freedom it wouldn’t exist.

Because religion feeds on a broken spirit, and that’s why it tries to break your spirit the moment you come into contact with it.

Submit. Obey. Do not question.

Those words should be chiseled above the entrance of every church and every mosque. Because that’s the only message religion has, when it comes right down to it – Praise the lord, or else.

The pope spelled it out for American catholics when he told them, “Obedience to the doctrine of the church is the foundation of your faith.” That’s what he said. There was no mention of enlightenment or spirituality or any of these things, because he’s not in this business. He’s in the obedience business, the only business where the customer is always wrong.

Clergy are the only salesmen who don’t have to justify or prove any of the outrageous claims they make for the product they’re hustling, and this leaves them free to engage in the kind of open fraud which in any other walk of life would be a criminal offence.

For the level of investment they demand from us I believe we’re entitled to expect actual enlightenment and wisdom in return. Instead, what do we get? We get dogma, crude coercion, and endless empty pieties about the love of a god who clearly loves us the way a violent husband loves the woman sitting next to him with two black eyes. If we step out of line we pay in the most brutal way.

And it’s this crass violence at the heart of religion which I believe makes it truly evil, and also furnishes proof, as if proof were needed, that this is an entirely manmade phenomenon with nothing divine about it, otherwise it wouldn’t be so damned ugly.

The god of the desert is transparently a false god. He’s a puppet who speaks with the voice of ignorant men who are afraid of knowledge and afraid of freedom and who therefore need desperately to control the thoughts of others for their own miserable survival.

They need us to believe that we’re less than we are, and to diminish ourselves in our own minds, to feel small and helpless, in need of salvation. So what do they tell us? They tell us that strength and virtue lie in submission. Yes, of course they do. With our faces in the dust we are invincible, isn’t that right?

And of course we live forever, either in eternal bliss or in eternal torment, but that’s entirely up to us. Eternal bliss requires that you wear a straitjacket of blind faith, not permanently, just from now until you die, whereas living a joyful, humane, compassionate, but godless life will get you horribly tortured for all eternity.

Fear is religion’s currency of choice. It’s the lowest of human emotions because it’s the most crippling emotion and this is why it’s religion’s currency of choice. It’s pretty obvious when you think about it, but hey, don’t strain yourselves.

But actually it’s religion that has everything to fear because it depends on maintaining the illusion, maintaining the spell, and hoping that nobody manages to burst its artificial bubble of faith, and this is exactly why it wages such determined war on our basic freedoms of thought and speech.

But it’s losing this war, because every day more and more of us are waking up to the damage that this nonsense is doing to our world. We can see our societies being twisted out of shape, being injected with false values that pander to bigotry and superstition, and we’ve realized that this god of the desert has outstayed his welcome and become a liability, and quite frankly he needs us a lot more than we need him.

Because we’ve moved on from the desert, and we’ve discovered a few things about the world, and the universe, and our place in it, and we’re no longer afraid of the thunder and the lightning. Our world is no longer populated by demons and hobgoblins, and we no longer need to be led around by the nose for the benefit of clergy.

And they know this, just as they know that their god’s very existence depends entirely on our belief – belief without evidence and belief that defies reason – and when that belief disappears, as one day it certainly will, this ridiculous god will disappear with it, instantly and forever.

He won’t be able to vent his wrath or visit retribution on anyone, because he won’t exist. He’ll evaporate quicker than common sense in a creation museum, and his vast army of controlling parasitical clergy will find themselves briefly, cartoon-like in mid air, before dropping like fleas into a bucket.

That’s what I’m looking forward to, and that’s what I’m focused on, and it’s why I make these videos, because I think we’re better than this. And I know we’ve got the power to withdraw our belief, and our consent, and put a stop to this nonsense.

All we need is the courage.

Peace and freedom. Let’s not forget the freedom.

Homosexuality and the Church

The clergy abuse scandal has prompted frank discussion of homosexuality, a topic that has traditionally been taboo within the Catholic Church. Evidence suggests there are a significant number of gay men in the priesthood, and many homosexuals among the laity. The question of how the church should respond to gays within its ranks has been much debated. Here is a selection of viewpoints from the Globe.

Christopher Schiavone

My Life As A Gay Priest

A former priest in the Boston Archdiocese speaks out about secrecy, scandal, and being gay in the church.

Donald Cozzens

The Clergy's Buried Truths

The predominance of male teenage victims raises anew a thorny issue -- the presence of significant numbers of homosexually oriented men in the priesthood.

Chuck Colbert

The Spectrum of Belief

As the clergy abuse scandal has grown, the topic of gay priests, gay men, and lesbians in the life of the Catholic Church is suddenly front and center.

Eileen McNamara

For Church, a False Issue

It is not the existence of gay priests but the reticence of Catholicism to address sexuality that has led the church into its current crisis.

M. Thomas Shaw and Bud Cederholm

Affirming Gay and Lesbian Priests

We recognize that faith communities have the right to ordain whomever they choose, but we reject the exclusion of any person from holy orders on the basis of sexual orientation.

Carolyn's Story

"He broke my connection to all that is holy."

Carolyn recalls that all she ever wanted in life was to serve in the church. Her pastor's betrayal robbed her of that and stole her spirituality. When her pastor's overtures began, Carolyn was in her early 30s and had been a member of a Lutheran congregation for ten years. Nearing completion of seminary, she was seeking a direction for her life. She was active in her congregation and the minister of youth; she looked to her pastor as her mentor and supervisor.

One Ash Wednesday, Carolyn was in tears, full of doubts about her faith. Her husband suggested that she contact the pastor for guidance. The pastor told her that she was in crisis and offered to rearrange his schedule to provide a counseling session at her home. After the first session, the pastor told Carolyn that he "thinks of her as a man thinks of a woman" and hugged her.

Despite her misgivings about this incident, because of his position in the church Carolyn trusted him and benefitted from the spiritual guidance. As they continued to meet, the pastor told Carolyn that they were "spiritual lovers" and mentioned St. Francis and St. Claire, knowing they were her favorite saints. On another occasion, he kissed her on the lips in his office, but said it was a mistake and would never happen again. He told her he was concerned about her marriage. Carolyn recalls he used a particular Bible story to encourage her to forsake her children and husband and follow him.

One day in counseling he raped her. Afterwards, he said, "I knew you wanted that. We need to keep this secret because it would ruin the church." The pastor told Carolyn that God had put her on earth for him, and used the language of incarnational theology to make this point. He sexualized the liturgy and Bible stories.

"If this was any other man, I would have known it was not right," said Carolyn. "But church is supposed to be a sanctuary. I couldn't make sense of what was happening. He broke my connection to all that is holy."

Carolyn said all she had ever wanted was to serve the church and teach her children to love God, but all that has been taken away from her. She and her family left the church where the abuse occurred, and have tried since to join other congregations but without success. Her children want nothing to do with organized religion and have doubts about God.

"What hurts me the most is that this wasn't just physical rape," she said. "It was spiritual rape."

Many Women Targeted by Faith Leaders, Survey Says

By Jacqueline L. Salmon

Washington Post Staff Writer

One in every 33 women who attend worship services regularly has been the target of sexual advances by a religious leader, a survey released Wednesday says.

The study, by Baylor University researchers, found that the problem is so pervasive that it almost certainly involves a wide range of denominations, religious traditions and leaders.

"It certainly is prevalent, and clearly the problem is more than simply a few charismatic leaders preying on vulnerable followers," said Diana Garland, dean of Baylor's School of Social Work, who co-authored the study.

It found that more than two-thirds of the offenders were married to someone else at the time of the advance.

Carolyn Waterstradt, 42, a graduate student who lives in the Midwest, said she was coerced into a sexual relationship with a married minister in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America for 18 months. He had been her pastor for a decade, she said, and told her the relationship was ordained by God.

"I believed him because I was looking for direction and for help," said Waterstradt, who ended the relationship years ago and entered therapy. The pastor was removed from the clergy.

Waterstradt said she has suffered lasting psychological and spiritual consequences from the relationship, including depression and a deep distrust of organized religion. "It's very difficult for me to walk into a church," she said.

A growing number of denominations are moving to do something about such problems, particularly since the Catholic Church's highly publicized sex scandal involving its clergy.

At least 36 denominations have policies that identify sexual relations between adult congregants and clergy as misconduct, subject to discipline.

The Rabbinical Assembly, the international association of Conservative rabbis, uses investigating panels to look into complaints against rabbis. It notes that the "power imbalance between clergy and those to whom they minister makes it clear that sexual contacts in these situations are by definition non-consensual."

In the United Church of Christ, ministers must attend a workshop on clergy sexual abuse every three years, and those seeking jobs in the ministry must have their names checked against government sex offender lists, said the Rev. J. Bennett Guess, spokesman for the 1.2 million-member denomination.

Locally, the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia requires clergy members, other employees and volunteers to receive training in prevention of adult sexual misconduct and prevention of child abuse, spokesman Henry Burt said.

The diocese "takes very seriously its obligation to make its churches and institutions safe places for children and adults to grow in their faith in the church," Burt said.

Lawmakers are also taking note. Clergy sexual misconduct is illegal in Minnesota and Texas. Texas law, for example, defines clergy sexual behavior as sexual assault if the religious leader "causes the other person to submit or participate by exploiting the other person's emotional dependency on the clergyman in the clergyman's professional character as spiritual adviser."

For its study, Baylor used the 2008 General Social Survey, a nationally representative sample of 3,559 respondents, to estimate the prevalence of clergy sexual misconduct. Women older than 18 who attended worship services at least once a month were asked in the survey whether they had received "sexual advances or propositions" from a religious leader.

The study found that close to one in 10 respondents -- male and female -- reported having known about clergy sexual misconduct occurring in a congregation they had attended.

Researchers say they don't know whether the incidence of clergy sexual misconduct had changed over the years. Nor do they know whether sexual wrongdoing by clergy is more, or less, frequent than in other well-respected professions.

But, Garland said, "when you put it with a spiritual leader or moral leader, you've really added a power that we typically don't think about in secular society -- which is that this person speaks for God and interprets God for people. And that really adds a power."

Friday, September 18, 2009

Christopher Hitchens debates John Lennox 7/7

Christopher Hitchens debates John Lennox 6/7

Christopher Hitchens debates John Lennox 5/7

Christopher Hitchens debates John Lennox 4/7

Christopher Hitchens debates John Lennox 3/7

Christopher Hitchens debates John Lennox 2/7

Christopher Hitchens debates John Lennox 1/7

"Is God Great?" A debate: Christopher Hitchens vs John Lennox (preview)

Leading atheist and acclaimed journalist, Christopher Hitchens, goes head to head with Christian apologist and Oxford Professor, John Lennox in March 2009 at Birmingham, Alabama's Samford University to debate the question "Is God Great?"

Hitchens, who made his opinion clear on this topic in 2007 with his book "God is not Great," maintains not only that God fails to be great, but denies his existence entirely. Professor Lennox, a convinced Christian and scientist, respectfully disagrees. This event features a unique blend of both planned remarks and fast-paced dialogue that tackles these issues in a refreshing and informative light. It is sure to offer insights to all.

John Lennox is Professor in Mathematics at the University of Oxford and Fellow in Mathematics and Philosophy of Science at Green Templeton College, University of Oxford. Prof. Lennox has debated atheists ranging from Victor Stenger to Richard Dawkins and is the author of "God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?"

Christopher Hitchens is a British-American bestselling author, journalist, and literary critic who has served as a columnist for several prominent publications, some of which include Vanity Fair, The Nation, and The Atlantic. He is one of the world's most influential and outspoken atheists.

You can't prove God doesn't exist

From Iron Chariots Wiki

It is not uncommon to hear statements like, "You can't prove God doesn't exist," from apologists when they are challenged to support the claim that God exists. Such statements are an attempt to shift the burden of proof, a kind of logical fallacy.

Statements like this — which is a special case of the more general claim, "You can't prove a negative" — are based on the premise that belief in God is justified until sufficient evidence is presented to refute such existence. While this response may be considered sound under a world view which accepts the premise, this is simply a form of compartmentalization. If we were to apply that premise to all claims, we'd be unable to develop any useful picture of reality, since every claim would then have to be accepted as true (until it is disproved — a burden which is especially difficult when dealing with supernatural claims).

To put it more bluntly, no sane human being would seriously claim that because we have not disproved the existence of leprechauns or unicorns, they must therefore exist (or must be assumed to exist).

More tellingly, though, apologists typically only apply this premise to questions that address their particular religion — and nothing else. The same Christian, for example, who argues, "You can't prove God doesn't exist," would almost certainly reject such an attempt to shift the burden of proof if it was attempted by, say, a Hindu: "You can't prove Vishnu doesn't exist!" This compartmentalization is a form of special pleading.

A somewhat famous counter-argument was posed by Bertrand Russell when he said the following:

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."