“I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.”
~ Susan B. Anthony
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
thought of the day.404
The Myth of One Man, One Woman
Christians who like to thump the bible as proof that their God designed marriage to be between one man and one woman either don’t know their holy book very well or are simply being less than truthful. Abraham had multiple wives, a concubine and a slave girl. Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines. Jacob had two wives and two concubines. Abijah had 14 wives. Gideon had many wives and a concubine as did Jesus’ ancestor, David, who received some of his wives in a tawdry trafficking act as the Christian God gave him Saul’s wives — and yes, that’s wives with an s. And who could forget Solomon who enjoyed the company of 700 wives and 300 concubines.
The Christian God actually sanctioned the practice of taking multiple wives...“if a man takes a second wife, he must continue to give his first wife the same amount of food and clothes. If he doesn’t he must set her free.” How divine of him to command their feeding or release!
Instead of condemning the practice of taking multiple wives, the Christian God simply commanded sons not to “disgrace” their father by having intercourse with their mother ”or any of his other wives.” Yes, that’s wives with an s again.
Perhaps the most tender command concerning the sanctity of marriage is found in Deuteronomy: “When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.” Lucky girl!
2S 12:7-8, Gn 25:6 1 Ch 1:322 Ch 11:21 Gn 32:222 Ch 13:21 Ex 21:10-11Jg 8:30-311 Ch 3:1-9 Lv 18:7-81K 11:3 Dt 21:10-14 KJV
Christians who like to thump the bible as proof that their God designed marriage to be between one man and one woman either don’t know their holy book very well or are simply being less than truthful. Abraham had multiple wives, a concubine and a slave girl. Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines. Jacob had two wives and two concubines. Abijah had 14 wives. Gideon had many wives and a concubine as did Jesus’ ancestor, David, who received some of his wives in a tawdry trafficking act as the Christian God gave him Saul’s wives — and yes, that’s wives with an s. And who could forget Solomon who enjoyed the company of 700 wives and 300 concubines.
The Christian God actually sanctioned the practice of taking multiple wives...“if a man takes a second wife, he must continue to give his first wife the same amount of food and clothes. If he doesn’t he must set her free.” How divine of him to command their feeding or release!
Instead of condemning the practice of taking multiple wives, the Christian God simply commanded sons not to “disgrace” their father by having intercourse with their mother ”or any of his other wives.” Yes, that’s wives with an s again.
Perhaps the most tender command concerning the sanctity of marriage is found in Deuteronomy: “When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.” Lucky girl!
2S 12:7-8, Gn 25:6 1 Ch 1:322 Ch 11:21 Gn 32:222 Ch 13:21 Ex 21:10-11Jg 8:30-311 Ch 3:1-9 Lv 18:7-81K 11:3 Dt 21:10-14 KJV
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
thought of the day.402
“We” are clearly more than our bodies. If we lose our limbs for instance, “we” are not diminished in any mental capacity. So it is natural to think “we” (our mind) is in control of our body. “We” decide this or that and the body obeys the command. It is sobering to realize it is just the opposite. The non-thinking body actually controls us (the mind). For example, when we made breakfast this morning it was not because our mind “told” our body to do so but because our body (low blood sugar) “told” our mind to do so. “We” (our mind) simply thought we were calling the shots. If we are cold or hot it is our body that demands to be warmed or cooled before our mind is conscious of it. Even during the process of reasoning, brain functions precede “our” formulating a thought. It seems the body is the master and “we” the slave.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
thought of the day.401
“If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in thought or deed, I will gladly change. I seek the truth, which never yet hurt anybody. It is only persistence in self-delusion and ignorance which does harm.”
~ Marcus Aurelius
~ Marcus Aurelius
Thursday, February 18, 2010
thought of the day.400
Tertullian, said it is “shameful” to reason that the Son of God was born, “monstrously absurd” to think he died and “manifestly impossible” to believe he rose again... Yet he “happily” acted the fool and swallowed it all — hook, line and sinker. Such reasoning prowess!... How did this esteemed Church Father manage to dress himself?
“I find no other means to prove myself to be impudent with success, and happily a fool, than by my contempt of shame, - as, for instance, I maintain that the Son of God was born. Why am I not ashamed of maintaining such a thing? Why, but because it is itself a shameful thing. I maintain that the Son of God died. Well, that is wholly credible, because it is monstrously absurd. I maintain that after having been buried he rose again; and that I take to be mainly true, because it was manifestly impossible.”
~ Tertullian
“I find no other means to prove myself to be impudent with success, and happily a fool, than by my contempt of shame, - as, for instance, I maintain that the Son of God was born. Why am I not ashamed of maintaining such a thing? Why, but because it is itself a shameful thing. I maintain that the Son of God died. Well, that is wholly credible, because it is monstrously absurd. I maintain that after having been buried he rose again; and that I take to be mainly true, because it was manifestly impossible.”
~ Tertullian
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
thought of the day.397
Studying my bible this morning I come across a gem in Mark that made me laugh. Seems a cloud suddenly appears which covers the disciples with a shadow. Then a voice comes out of the cloud, “This is my own dear Son — listen to him!” Sorry, but that is just so Monty Python. I’m afraid to keep reading. The next chapter will surely tell of a giant boot coming out of the cloud to squish the disobedient.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
thought of the day.396
“The four Gospels that eventually made it into the New Testament...are all anonymous, written in the third person about Jesus and his companions. None of them contains a first-person narrative ("One day, when Jesus and I went into Capernaum..."), or claims to be written by an eyewitness or companion of an eyewitness. Why then do we call them Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Because sometime in the second century, when proto-orthodox Christians recognized the need for apostolic authorities, they attributed these books to apostles (Matthew and John) and close companions of apostles (Mark, the secretary of Peter; and Luke, the traveling companion of Paul). Most scholars today have abandoned these identifications, and recognize that the books were written by otherwise unknown but relatively well-educated Greek-speaking (and writing) Christians during the second half of the first century.”
~ Bart Ehrman "Lost Christianities"
~ Bart Ehrman "Lost Christianities"
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
thought of the day.395
“One of the most frightening things in the Western world, and in this country in particular, is the number of people who believe in things that are scientifically false. If someone tells me that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, in my opinion he should see a psychiatrist.”
~ Francis Crick, Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology, 1962
~ Francis Crick, Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology, 1962
Sunday, February 7, 2010
thought of the day.394
3 Problems with Jesus’ Sacrifice
1. HELL
According to Christian doctrine, Jesus died to save humanity from hell. Of course he created hell, so to praise him for this is like praising a fireman for saving children from a house he set ablaze.
2. DEATH
An all-knowing and all-powerful eternal being cannot die, has nothing to fear and knows his “death” is not really death at all. To say “Jesus died for our sins” is quite misleading.
3. SACRIFICE
What exactly did Jesus sacrifice? Not his life and certainly not his comfort — he moved from the outhouse of earth to the penthouse of heaven. It wasn’t even an extraordinary act. What good parent would not do the same for their child? What good spouse would not do the same for their partner? What good friend and neighbor would not do the same to save his friends and neighbors from eternal suffering?
Jesus is not only a myth but a rather poor one at that.
1. HELL
According to Christian doctrine, Jesus died to save humanity from hell. Of course he created hell, so to praise him for this is like praising a fireman for saving children from a house he set ablaze.
2. DEATH
An all-knowing and all-powerful eternal being cannot die, has nothing to fear and knows his “death” is not really death at all. To say “Jesus died for our sins” is quite misleading.
3. SACRIFICE
What exactly did Jesus sacrifice? Not his life and certainly not his comfort — he moved from the outhouse of earth to the penthouse of heaven. It wasn’t even an extraordinary act. What good parent would not do the same for their child? What good spouse would not do the same for their partner? What good friend and neighbor would not do the same to save his friends and neighbors from eternal suffering?
Jesus is not only a myth but a rather poor one at that.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
thought of the day.393
HATE AND IGNORANCE ALERT
Paraphrasing: “Homosexual behavior should be made illegal. Employers should be able to refuse to hire homosexuals. The military should refuse to allow homosexuals to serve their country. All homosexuals must undergo therapy to change their sexual preference or be imprisoned until they do so.”
~ Christian talk show host, Bryan Fisher, Focal Point, February, 2010
Paraphrasing: “Homosexual behavior should be made illegal. Employers should be able to refuse to hire homosexuals. The military should refuse to allow homosexuals to serve their country. All homosexuals must undergo therapy to change their sexual preference or be imprisoned until they do so.”
~ Christian talk show host, Bryan Fisher, Focal Point, February, 2010
Friday, February 5, 2010
thought of the day.392
“Elements that were common in Pagan mystery religions include much of the religious content of Christianity. All elements of Jesus' life such as the events around his birth and death and ministry were also said of other god-men of the time. Peripheral elements such as there being twelve disciples were similarly present in other more ancient religions and sometimes with an astonishing amount of duplication. First century critics of Christianity voiced these accusations that Christianity was nothing but another copy of common religions, they are not new accusations.
All the actual sayings and teachings of Jesus were also not new, and much of the time speeches attributed to Jesus are more like collections of Jewish and Pagan sayings. Even distinctive texts like the Sermon on the Mount are not unique. If we remove all the content that Jesus could not have heard and repeated himself, there is nothing else left. If we remove the supernatural elements of Christianity that are copies of already existing thought and religion, there is nothing left which is unique! Even much of the sayings of subsequent Christians is not unique; Jesus appears to not have taught anyone anything that was not already present in the common culture of the time. This shows us that not only did Christianity follow on, as expected, from previous thought in history but that we do not even need to believe in God or supernatural events in order to account for the history of Christianity. Stephen Hodge very usefully lists many of the similarities found in the Dead Sea Scrolls to the teachings and organisation of Jewish Christianity. He also concludes that these Jewish documents make the teachings and appearance of Jewish Christianity less revolutionary.”
~ Vexen Crabtree, "History of literalism"
All the actual sayings and teachings of Jesus were also not new, and much of the time speeches attributed to Jesus are more like collections of Jewish and Pagan sayings. Even distinctive texts like the Sermon on the Mount are not unique. If we remove all the content that Jesus could not have heard and repeated himself, there is nothing else left. If we remove the supernatural elements of Christianity that are copies of already existing thought and religion, there is nothing left which is unique! Even much of the sayings of subsequent Christians is not unique; Jesus appears to not have taught anyone anything that was not already present in the common culture of the time. This shows us that not only did Christianity follow on, as expected, from previous thought in history but that we do not even need to believe in God or supernatural events in order to account for the history of Christianity. Stephen Hodge very usefully lists many of the similarities found in the Dead Sea Scrolls to the teachings and organisation of Jewish Christianity. He also concludes that these Jewish documents make the teachings and appearance of Jewish Christianity less revolutionary.”
~ Vexen Crabtree, "History of literalism"
Thursday, February 4, 2010
thought of the day.391
One of the many poorly conceived thoughts found in the bible concerns the commanding of respect for parents. Respect can’t be commanded, only earned. Commanding respect for an abusive parent is immoral and destructive.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
thought of the day.390
'If God does not exist, everything is permitted' so say many Christians. Really? Maybe they know themselves and are admitting that without the fear of divine punishment or hope of divine reward they would be immoral, law-breaking hooligans. Does that mean all the atheists who manage to be good neighbors and citizens are just better people?
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
thought of the day.389
Jesus was not a flesh and blood person but a creation of writers. Almost every single aspect of the Jesus character’s story is found in the Old Testament, from the birth announcement heralded by angels to the grand exit into the clouds. We see the inspiration for the stories of gifts of gold and myrrh, slaughter of innocents, walking on water, calming the wind, transforming food, healing the blind, raising the dead, feeding the multitude, curing the leper, helping the officers, betrayal, zombies! and on and on.
Monday, February 1, 2010
thought of the day.388
Ricky Gervais speaking about his godless movie, The Invention of Lying:
"One reviewer said that ‘I don’t know why Ricky Gervais feels the need to shove his atheism down our throat’. I thought, woah, well this is one film that dares to presume the lack of God, whereas every other film I’ve ever seen presumes a God. There are door-to-door Bible salesmen. It’s taught in schools as fact. Children are indoctrinated with it from the age of four. And I’m the one shoving the ideas! Surely, we can have a discussion about it?
It seems a little bit unfair. And I don’t think it is atheist propaganda, in a world where no one has ever had the ability to lie, as an atheist, to suggest I believe that religion was started by man. And I put that in a film. I’d be a hypocrite to say anything else."
"One reviewer said that ‘I don’t know why Ricky Gervais feels the need to shove his atheism down our throat’. I thought, woah, well this is one film that dares to presume the lack of God, whereas every other film I’ve ever seen presumes a God. There are door-to-door Bible salesmen. It’s taught in schools as fact. Children are indoctrinated with it from the age of four. And I’m the one shoving the ideas! Surely, we can have a discussion about it?
It seems a little bit unfair. And I don’t think it is atheist propaganda, in a world where no one has ever had the ability to lie, as an atheist, to suggest I believe that religion was started by man. And I put that in a film. I’d be a hypocrite to say anything else."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
