Screwballs of the month
January 2006
It’s
now been a full year since our first Screwball Awards feature (yes, we began
coincidentally in January 2005, at the start of a calendar year) and that means
this round we have a special feature: The Platinum Screwball Awards for the
screwiest screwballs of 2005. We’ll go over the details below, but for now
here’s the best from January 2006.
From the mailbag
Lots of screamers in the mailbox this round. Let’s begin with this fundy atheist who “replied” to my article at http://www.tektonics.org/af/eunicize.html
with all the latest scholarship. My comments from the article in bold; his
response (ahem) in italics.
With that said, does the verse indeed encourage castration? Hardly, even
on the surface -- what is made is a statement of fact and observation: some are
born this way; some have made themselves this way for men; some have made themselves that way for
spiritual purposes, and those who can accept this, let them do so
-- it is not saying, "Go
out and castrate yourself" or giving directions to the nearest medical
facility.
That is certianly [sic] what it says "those
who can accept this, let them do so"
Holding -- the idiot - refuses to read what is red lettered -- jezuz's words in their inerrant holey babble!
There is no opinion rendered either way.
Whoa! Who need an "opinion"
when you have jezuz' own words -- words that have
stood for 394 years in the KJV.
Oh, here we go, deep into the world of
apologetics -- listen up, pay close attention to JP:
However, looking more deeply
into the context, we see that this refers not exclusively to castration,
but to celibacy as well.
Bull Hockey JP! Sorry, that
dog doesn't hunt. Even your own Strong's shows that "castration is
castration is castration" throughout your xian
bible -- not celibacy, never celibacy. But, when one cuts his **** off, he will
probably be celibate. Good idea for catholic priests. JO, did you ever hear of
the castrati? The catholics took old Jezuz' words to heart and castrated young boys for
"the sake of heaven."
JP, you remind me of that great xian apologist -- George Castanza
who -- like you -- said ""Remember Jerry, it's not a lie if you
really believe it's true."
We know that the Jews were horrified by castration (cf. Josephus, Against
Apion 2.270-1; though eunuchs were
well-respected, and trusted, in some Ancient Near Eastern societies). Indeed,
how could someone have been "castrated" from their
mother's womb?
**mn JP, I though the
holey trinity could do anything -- like a virgin birth -- guess the holey ghast could deform a fetus. Personally it would be less
painful in the womb than later in life with my swinging nuts being cut off
"for the sake of heaven." Looks like jezuz was just being merciful in de-nutting
in the womb. Maybe jezuz was one of those ****
from birth -- no kids huh! This speculation is as valid as the crap coming out
of your mouth!
JP, you should quit while you are ahead. The new
testament and jezuz is fiction -- no more real
than "The Memoirs of the Tooth Fairy." That is why you are
employed full time in futile attempts to cover this crap up! Your premise of a jezuz
is rejected in its entirety.
Blah, blah, blah -- yada, yada,
yada! And you have said absolutely nothing!
Really you are really rather pathetic in your feeble attempts to force lies on
the public. They have been screwed for 2,000 years by the best -- the catholic
theocracy, the protestant clergy, theologians and missionaries. And when
literacy finally came to the people, xianity spawned
a generation of leeches (apologists) trying to repackage the lies and
force feed them to a gullible audience.
Sorry Jack (JP) , the game is over. People no
longer have to remain ignorant with blind faith -- jezuz intoxicated. People are using
their heads for something besides a hat rack; they are beginning to think
on their own for once. Your cover-ups (excuses) and lies no longer
work. You are irrelevant! You are history! You are a loser!
Nice
thorough rebuttal, and only slightly better than this one which also came in:
You bring up some decent points but
your whole critique of The Mythmaker is rather unconvincing. You hand pick portions of his argument while
leaving vast portions of the book untouched. For instance: his treatment of
Paul’s disputes with the
This also
came in from the lunacy fringe this month:
Sorry my friend your prose on Tom
Harpers Pagan Christ did nothing for me. I'm certainly no authority concerning
historical theology, but I have read many books regarding the Gnostic gospels
and some of Carl Jungs
writings. Prove to me that Jesus was a historical person? Prove to me that he
died on the cross and came to life the next day? Don't tell me its faith.
Really though thats all you
have is faith that it is true.
I was raised evangelical. I hated
every minute I was associated with this cult of Christianity. I find
evangelicals imperialists trying to take over the world, nothing different than
Nazi
The bottom line is that Haper called Christianity from under the carpet. He is
right on the money. I personaly believe everything he
said and so should you.
And another
as well from the “don’t bother me with scholarship” crowd:
You are a typical Christian web site
you argue with the "skeptics annotated bible" and can't
really use the bible to do so, if you notice to SAB uses the Bible it self
and draws from what is written in the bible, you try to explain it without
linking it to the bible, just your interpretation.
If you
could find some thing in the bible to prove your point that goes against a
Verse in the bible the SAB site had found, then that is a contradiction And
you can't even admit that there is any contradiction???????
You must go
past Sunday school and read the verses you don't hear in Sunday school, let me
give you an example:
Exodus 22:15 And he that smiteth
his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
And
another pearl of wisdom:
Exodus 22:17 And he that curseth his father, or mother, shall surely be put to
death.
Explain
that away, and please don't give me that
cultural difference jive, no matter how you cut it, you treat your children
better than that.
If
the bible is the true word of god then
we are all in a lot of trouble, Because this one hates all of
us so much that he leaves the bible for us, a ridicules nonsensical book about
murder, genocide, rape and eternal suffering. And we are supposed to
figure out what god ment, why would
he even write a book that so many people can't even agree on, that seems
very irresponsible.
If you
leave a baby sitter with your children, you love you children right? enough to atlas leave instructions for you baby sitter that
are CLEAR and UNDERSTOOD and certainly not open to interpretation.
Sound smart or
what???? Is your god so irresponsible he couldn't care less about the bible????????????????
Hey I know I am
god I will leave this book of nonsense to the sheeple
If they figure me out they come to heaven if not
eternal damnation.
I think I will
stick to a simple earth religion one that is much older and certainly much wiser.
There was
one Christian loony this round as well, from someone who tried to refute my
article on Satan not being found in Ezekiel and Isaiah by using the same midrashic techniques I noted were in error, and then by
screaming, but not by using any scholarly commentaries – get this as to why:
I am sorry that you feel that way. Although I am
not surprised that a critical analysis of Bible quotations are not good
enough for you.
You say it's "too tiresome" to refute my argument, but
actually it is impossible for you to refute it, even privately, or you would
have had some sort of objection in your email reply. I don't
think you would dare to allow anyone to see my Rebuttal in comparison to your
essay as it is a much better argument than the one you proposed and someone may
agree that you are indeed wrong in your 'analysis'.
My Rebuttal was not based on "loose attempts
at association", but I doubt you understood the connections
made. There are many many more evidences in
scripture that the fallen angels became humankind, and that view of "the
fall" is the only view that ties together the claims made throughout the
Bible.
To hold your view, much or all of the Bible is false, and it is apparent
that you dismiss much of it as just midrash, because
it is incomprehensible to you, and to label it as just midrash
is a convenient put-down that allows you to remain close-minded and assert that
you are right in the face of all evidence.
You have no overall understanding of the Bible, or you would not have
reached the erroneous conclusions you did in your essay, and that is why you do
not understand the material cited in my Rebuttal and view it as simply 'midrash'.
Your argument is seriously flawed and your conclusions rest solely on
the unproven assumption that the spirits within humankind have always been in
the physical state in which we find ourselves now. I would like to see
you write an essay proving that this mistaken assumption is true. As I
said, your erroneous conclusions were reached due to a misapprehension of the
nature of the original sin of humankind and the sin of the fallen angels of
scripture.
I suppose you think that all references to fallen angels throughout the
Bible are just pointless extra junk. There is a point to their inclusion,
and that point is so we may understand our original source and our original sin
- major points in the Bible.
I've studied the Bible thoroughly for a dozen years, and do not base my
conclusions on any other person's analysis, whatever their credentials. Most people, scholars included, are
hopelessly confused by the Bible.
It is appropriate that you call it a Chicken Challenge because you are
the Chicken who is afraid to really think and have no metaphorical
understanding. Your attempts at reasoning to refute the Bible text
("Satan is no salesman" - good one) are
pathetically infantile and conveniently ignore the Hebrew meanings of the words
translated "traffick" and
"merchandise" in Ezekiel 28. Your essay's conclusions show that
you're hopelessly confused, and another example of the
blind leading the blind.
Oh, and you might take a scholarly course in spelling - by the looks of
your essay, you could stand to brush up on it.
Seems Dan Brown has another
disciple. And then there was this one from the Feelgood
New Age Club:
I have just started reading your
very interesting article about
Mithras and the comparision
with Christ.
I just wanted to point out that Mithras was a
different myth in
different areas where he was recognised. Hence he was
believed to be
born of a rock at one time in one area but the myth changed over time
and in different regions. The Romans believed he was born of a virgin
as did the Perrsians. But, they also saw this as a
myth not an
actuality of events. It was not a literal event but an allegory myth
used to guide the behaviour of their people and lead
to gnosis.
Perhaps it is time for the Christians to look at whats
important in
the message of their religion. Christianity´s message
is not tied to
a historical event- so that if you believe it you´re
saved and if you
don´t you´re damned. The
message of christianity goes deeper than
that. All forms of spirituality are different paths up the same
mountain of truth. To judge and persecuute one
another over which
version of events we adhere to seems to defeat the whole purpose and
therefore bypass the message.
TRUTH IS UNIVERSAL =
And
finally:
There's no question that you're an
intelligent person, and perhaps
even a genius. I have two certified MENSA geniuses in my family, and
they are as crazy as you are. You make sophistry an art form. Too
bad you can't use your powers for good instead of evil, propagating
nonsense. The good guys could use a few people with your powers. I
just think you're on the wrong side, and if you could look inside and
overcome the obvious brainwashing that's affected your powers to
reason, you could do a lot to dispel the ignorance that's crippling
humanity.
Golden duh award winners
Babbling is my hobby
A reader
passed us this post from someone named “Tentayne” on
a forum that, if nothing else, alerts us that coherence is on the decline along
with critical thinking:
I really can't help but reply to this
post so here goes. I believe the true
problem with organized religion is due to the simple fact they are not
"divine" incarnations. Of course this means that they ARE created by
man.
And in so doing all of man's faults (and graces) are going to be ultimately
displayed somewhere or sometime. Alot of mention here
has been directed
towards the Catholic Church (and for good reason)... the long history of the
church has given ample opportunity for corruption on many levels. ANY
organisation is susceptible to humanistic
inconsistencies.
Now... I believe that something has been missed during
all of this
discussion. That would be the Bible. As some of you may know, the bible as
we know it today(for the most part) was created by
Pope Gregory(6th or 7th
centuries I believe). In so doing the Catholic church(and
pope) at that time
created a commission that decided which "gospels" would be included
in this
so called bible... and guess what, the rest were ordered to be destroyed.
The bible as we know it today is probably the most important work of
CENSORSHIP ever known to mankind. Many historians have found robustly
factual inconsistencies between what we know of the first century and what
the bible claims. Many of these findings of course have only been found in
the last couple of centuries. IT IS NOT a coincidence that the "Gospel of
Thomas" has been unrecognized and generally deemed heretical by the
Catholic
Church. Although the collection of writings that were found that the Gospel
of Thomas is part of is not in first century Aramaic, but in Greek(as is any
and ALL of the oldest known copies of the Gospels... I know of absolutely
none in original first century Aramaic); it is this 'original condition'
that needs to be a point of "enlightentment"
in my opinion concerning the
"truth" of the current King James version of the bible(New Testament
of
course). The Church has had no chance to alter THESE writings... and as a
result, they DO contradict many of what is considered core teachings in the
limited to), the church's(and Bible's) exclusion of a 'divine feminine'
aspect(and no, the Virgin Mary doesn't quite fit the general idea here), the
Church's exclusion of female "priests"(there is ample evidence that
there
were female "priests", as well as disciples in the early Church), and
the
potentially organisationally damaging idea that the
"divine" is within all
of us and therefore the beginning of enlightenment(and not from any external
means... the Church, priesthood, or even Jesus Christ) to name just a few.
Additionally I find it ironic that the fundamentalist christians
and other
so called christian organisations
have at the very core of their religious
beliefs a document(Bible) that was compiled by
Catholics.
I don't mean to just discredit any "christian"
agenda or neo-ideal. I am not
"anti-christian" or anti-any particular
religion. I do have a problem with
blind interpretation and dogmatic conclusion... and no, "faith" is
not what
I mean here. Faith is important in my estimation to the human condition..
period... and has it's place. I have known many christians over the years
that actually understood what I would consider to be the "crux" of christian
theology without putting overt emphasis on the bible. An understanding of
love and tolerance that atually is the core of all of
the world's
religions... is just sometimes hard to discern.
"All paths can lead to the fount".... irregardless of being theist(mono and
poly), atheist or agnostic.
It is soley thru human "fault" that religion/spirituality
is forever doomed
in any organisational sense. Power corrupts.. plain n simple.
Enough said... this pagan/taoist/gnostic/agnostic
will continue to search
for enlightenment without "outside" interference, as well as
contemplate the
inconsistencies and intrigue associated with those that do not.
The apostles must have been taoists
LakeGeorgeMan wins Gold for this comment which
reflects the latest scholarship showing that the first Christians were not
Jews, and that the Romans didn’t see Christianity as a type of Judaism:
The Jews...the people who knew Paul
best, the people who trained him in the teachings of the Jewish scriptures,
didn't believe he spoke for their god. They rejected him and his exegesis and his authority.
Bible codes boring? Try these
Sherry Shriner of http://www.hiddencodes.com/ wins a Website Award for all
sorts of neat stuff. Such as:
* The Apostle Paul is the devil because her hebrew word-search puzzle says so. http://www.hiddencodes.com/apostle_paul.htm
*Turns out that not only Rock Music is of the Devil, but Country music as well.
http://www.hiddencodes.com/sherry/control.htm
And the motive force behind it is an
energy called “loosh”: To obtain loosh
people must be deceived, used, abused, manipulated,
and even killed in order to become this energy source which is a food
source for Luciferians who feed off of other peoples
emotions. It can come from deception or terror and
horror or any number of….Another way to create loosh
is through rock, rap, country, or any kind of music
and the musicians who create it are rewarded for it. For those who are in the Luciferian system they feed off the emotions their music
creates and how it affects those who listen to it. They get their loosh and Satanic rewards in that way.
Got brains?
A special
set of Gold Awards goes to Marshall Brain and his fans. Brain started a website
called “Why Does God Hate Amputees” (which we have a parody of on this site)
which included such pearls as these:
You already know that God is
imaginary. You see it every day. All that I am asking you to do is acknowledge
the truth at a conscious level so that you can become a normal human being.
If you are a Christian, you now have
a major problem: We have just proven that God did not write the Bible. You have
to solve this problem -- if men wrote the Bible rather than God, Christianity
is dead. So you do one of two things with these passages:
*You simply ignore the fact that God condones slavery in the Bible. You
continue to believe in God and the Bible anyway. If someone asks you about all
of the pro-slavery passages in the Bible, you change the subject. Or you accuse
the person of blasphemy.
*You try to come up with incredibly
convoluted explanations for the pro-slavery
passages in the Bible. You try to find some sort of bizarre rationalization to
explain away an all-loving God who openly advocates slavery in both the Old and
New Testaments.
A religious person might try to
justify these sexist portions of the Bible by saying, "well, if you look
at the original Greek verb that Paul used, you can see that it is written in
the present infinitive. If Paul had meant for this passage to apply to us
today, he would have used the aorist infinitive. What does your common sense
tell you about this sort of explanation? It probably tells you that, regardless
of verb tense, the Bible's intent is obvious. It probably also tells you that
an all-knowing God, if he was going to write a book, would understand that when
you say, "women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed
to speak, but must be in submission," people are going to pick up on the
general gist of what you are saying, rather than nit-picking the verb tense.
Now it is easy to see that the Book
of Revelation is a work of pure fiction, possibly drug-induced.
If a presidential candidate were to stand up and say, "the alignment of
the planets indicates that in foreign policy, we should follow a path
that…," or if he/she were to end a speech with "Jupiter bless
America," we would not vote for this candidate...People who believe in the
Bible are in the same boat. Why would we listen to anyone who believes in
slavery, hates women and supports a God who is a flagrant baby-killer? Do we
want people like that holding public office, sitting on our courts, running our
corporations or teaching our children?
The Bible is clearly the work of primitive men, many of whom were insane.
Anyone with common sense can see that. Exodus 21:20-21 alone is enough to prove
it. When people insist that the Bible is the word of God, we should ignore them
and exclude them from public discourse. It's a free country, and people have a
right to their superstitions in the privacy of their own homes. But no one is
required to take them seriously in a public forum.
If you are curious, here is why
Christianity contains this bizarre ritual. It is not the case that an
all-powerful God in heaven demands this behavior. All of the rituals in
Christianity are completely man-made. Christianity is a snow ball that rolled
over a dozen pagan religions. As the snowball grew, it freely attached pagan
rituals in order to be more palatable to converts. The process is described
succinctly and accurately in the book "The Da
Vinci Code" by Dan Brown.
Marshall Brain is entertaining as he is, but for even more entertainment
(and more Gold recipients), here are comments from readers of his who saw our
parody:
Somehow we have to find the correct
Christian scholar, approved of by Tektoonics, and
only listen to him. We cannot simply read what God said in the Bible and
interpret it as normal English, like we would any other book. When God says
something, there is no way for a normal person to actually know what it means.
Only the "scholars" know.
By the time I had skimmed the 4th page and saw more mention of the 'linguistic
context' and 'scholarly study' of the Bible, I just thought: wow...so according
to this, only scholars should really be believing in God, because of course
only scholars really know the Word of God. We all know Jesus meant his words
for scholars. God talks to scholars. Regular people, especially 'fundy atheists', are just too dumb to understand God. How
perfect is God that his words are clear only to the most scholarly of us.
The whole thing reeks of arguing from authority -- "Believe it, cuz scholars say so; if you don't yer
IGNORANT!!"
The thing is, if humans are supposed to be the ones who solve poverty, who
needs God? And why would Jesus specifically promise in the Bible that God
solves poverty? See Matthew 6:25-30.
Well, it is God's word after all. Why would an all-knowing being say it if he
didn't mean it? But even if you ignore the "moving the mountain"
part, there is still the "nothing will be impossible for you" part.
There is no ambiguity or literary license in "nothing will be impossible for
you", and strangely they ignore that point. From there it goes on into
rationalization after rationalization.
Second, look at all the different
translations of the Bible. In all of them they seem to use the word
"slavery" instead of "indentured servitude." Why wouldn't
the translators use the correct word if that is what God meant?
Again, the rationalizations are piled on top of one another to try to explain
the beating of slaves, the sexism, the murder, etc. But they never actually
answer the questions.
And in that second link, it just seems Holding is bitter because Dan Barker
destroys him in every debate.
Why can't we all just leave all this goobly goop
behind and just focusing on trying to be kind to each other? If someone puts up
a debate about something, we should nod our heads, say, "If that works for
you, then that's fine." And walk on.
He also tries to make Mr. Brian look like an idiot who says things like
"Huh?" and "Wha?".
He's resorted to the same tactics that Mr. Brian uses, and now makes himself
look not-too-intelligent either. Besides, trying to make people look like
mindless idiots is a waste of time, no matter how it's done.
It's interesting to note that Mr brains
detractors cannot refute his book without attempting to ridicule and belittle
his work. This should make him very happy as it gfraphically
illustrates to any intellectual individual who has read both pieces that the
people of faith have only that to stand on. Faith.
"To believe in something for which there is no proof". And this of
course is ignorant.
any brains in that
ten-gallon hat?
Texe Marrs, one of those people we’d be better off without in
Christendom, plumbs the depths of paranoia with this commentary on a cover from
TV Guide:
Watch Those Hands! Actor
Jason Alexander ("George" in Seinfeld
TV series) performs a cabala ritual
in plain sight of a vast audience. To the
uninitiated and ignorant millions of people who read TV Guide and see this cover, Jason Alexander appears to be
merely hamming it up. Little do they know of the deeper occult meaning. For example, we find
Jason’s left and right hands giving the "El Diablo" satanic hand
sign. His arms—one pointing up, the other down—indicate the dualistic (marriage
of opposites, or reconciliation), cabalistic magical philosophy "As Above,
So Below" (The
devil goat Baphomet
performs the same sign). We also note the three
triangles presented by Jason’s legs and arms.
Plus some
more nuttiness from Marrs’ site, so you know this is
not unusual:
The "El Diablo" hand sign often is con-fused with the deaf's signing of the phrase, "I love you." While
at first this appears an odd resemblance, we register an "ahh, I get it!" emotion when we discover that the
person who invented, or created, the hand sign system for the deaf, Helen Keller, was herself an occultist and Theosophist. Did
Keller purposely design the deaf's "I love
you" sign to be such a remarkable imitation of the classic sign of Satan?
Was Keller saying, basically, "I love you, Devil?"
Why apostasy is bad for your brain
Derek Sansone, who showed up as “Monk” on TWeb
lately, earned a Lifetime Achievement Gold for his attempt to validate the
Christ-myth by arguing, “So what?” again and again, as well as for comments
like these:
Why should I thank Jesus for being crusified? I didn't do anything.
What's the big deal over his death? What did he really sacrifice?
But I did not choose to
be born. So even if I violate his precepts, it isn't my fault. If it is my
fault, just provide a clear connection to this fault moment. Just demonstrate
where this fault actually took place. And if you say that
my choices are faults or “bad”, how can I be blamed when it is by external
inputs that I abstract these values and choose according to them. And of course
I don’t initiate this process, nor do I cause these events that I observe. I
simply watch, abstract and learn.
I have hurt people. But I
was seeking a pleasurable end in the process. So hurting someone is just part
of my pleasure pursuit. Plus hurt is a very subjective term, don't ya think?
Plus these
choice gems from Sansone’s debate with Paul Manta:
"logic
is based on me"
"what is logic, why is it such a big deal”
"...it's this human convention"
"who cares about a presupposition"
"laws of logic, where are they? Write them down, there they are, they're
material"
It’s so much more sophisticated and convincing than that stupid kalam cosmological stuff
Autoartist
on TWeb wins Gold for this compelling disproof of theism:
The Pen Argument:
God is loving, but of course disciplines, for another thread :)
God wants us to glorify Him
God sent his son to die on the cross for my sins
Jesus rose from the grave so that humans might have everlasting life with
Him in Heaven
God’s desire is that we might come to Him through the belief upon Jesus
dieing on the cross and being raised.
God is the creator of physics
If all this is true, and I humble ask (for Christians sake, I don’t’ want to be
arrogant towards God):
Dear God stop this pen from hitting the ground (suspend it in air) and then I
will believe.
Would not God do that?
Why doesn’t He?
We read, and of course Christians testify He is a personal God so no the Bible
isn’t enough, nor is archeology, nor is testimony of other believers, for me to
continue to believe.
So lets grab our pens, or markers, or pencils.
Worst of all, alarm clocks are of the devil!
JoLonda
wins Gold for a variety of very screwy statements, such as:
It is popular for Christian Youth
Leaders to spend their planning and ministry times as an endeavor to cater and
sympathize to their youthful charges supposedly having special needs while
experiencing this special time in their lives. However,
the concept of "Teenage" years is not found in Scripture, as children
were put directly into adulthood at puberty by means of a designed schedule.
Day to day, or rather usually week
to week, success today in "Youth Ministry" is
measured by the amount of positive feedback from parents, the approval of youth
themselves, and by the number of event participants. Of course,
anecdotal longetudinal examples of sterling successes
from any particular Youth Program are always trotted out to justify that
program's methods and content, but so called "successes" can be
pointed to in any Youth Program, whether secular or religious. These modern parameters of success are not found in
Scripture.
Titus 2:6-7 "Young Men likewise
exhort to be sober minded. In all things shewing
thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity."
This is a clear direction of reproof to Bouncy Little Youth Leaders. People cannot do good works while bouncing around, and God
knows this. "Activities" to occupy and entertain the youth, even to
"Inspire" them, is not the pattern here.
Prov. 30:17 "The eye that mocketh at his
father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the ravens
of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it."
Nothing could be clearer for correction today with mouthy, argumentive
youth. Church Youth events should portray graphic
pictures of this verse to illiustrate how God sees
rebellious youth. It is the job of a Youth Leader to find one of the
youth with artistic talent to do the graphics.
Do we give it to the judge or to the atheist?
A special
Gold Award in close goes to the people over in
Silver duh award winners
Knock, Knock anyone home in that
rather empty brain of yours, or have all the little synapses and neurons gone
on vacation? No one, most of all
Master Sheepdog, ever qualified the term inerrancy to indicate it conformed to
the
Plus the Award for Hypocritical Preoccupation, for this:
just what is the Christian god's great preoccupation with sex? Even in matters
that have no social ramifications, like masturbation, he gets bent out of
shape. And in one case, that of Onan, where there is
a social component, god kills Onan
because he practiced contraception. Contraception, by the way, that prevented
him from impregnating his brothers wife, which was
ordered by his father. And, this was an order that was at odds with what
god thought about such a thing, which he later expressed in Leviticus 18:16
"Do not have sexual relations with your brother's wife." Then there's
the matter of consensual homosexual acts. Why should god care where you put
what and why? As long as enough people are pumpin'
out kids to stay ahead of the mortality rate what difference does it make?
What I also found interesting is god's opinion that only one's marital partner
has conjugal rights over one's body. AND more astounding yet, god thinks "It is good for a man not to touch a woman."
(It's listed below.)
Sex is a big thing with the Christian god, even private sex. Good thing god isn't around now barking out orders or he
would be telling us what to watch on TV and how: Ozzy
and Harriet on 12 inch B&W screens, and only between the hours of six and
nine PM........IF YOU'VE BEEN GOOD!
Anyway, here are some of the Bible passages I came across that
illustrate god's obsession with human sex.
John Loftus earns the Humility in Spades Award for promoting his newly
revised book (the one we trashed some time ago):
I was a Christian apologist with
several master's degrees set for the express purpose of defending Christianity
from intellectual attacks. . . . Now I turn that same intellectual muscle into
questioning the things I formerly defended.
. . . I took the Graduate Record Exam (G.R.E.) that all college graduate take upon applying for higher-level master's degree
programs. I scored close to a 90 percentile ranking when it came to
"Analytical Skills". This guages your
ability to analyze and think . . . . I have taught high school teachers how to
think. I have taught detectives and aspiring lawyers all how to think.
I guess you'd have to agree that I am at least above average when it comes to
thinking skills among present day Americans who are entertained by junk on TV,
and cannot comprehend a mildly complex argument. Therefore, most Christian people
in America who read my book, will not know what to do with my arguments.One major reason why I have become an atheist,(sic) is because even though I am above average as a
thinker I could not answer the questions that I was encountering myself, so I became
a doubter precisely because that's where the unanswerable questions led me. I
couldn't answer them, and I'm above average, so those who are below average
should be warned.
The funny
thing is, when I say stuff like this, Brooks Trubee
starts a website about me.
Love-Warrior
grabs the Divine Moderation Award for thinking the Holy Spirit helps him post:
I don't remember it, but I'm sure
glad I got convicted by the Spirit and decided to delete it
Zipperhead
gets the Don’t Bug Me with Contextual Scholarship Award for this gem:
Nonsense. The words translated "hate" denote
the same state of mind that our "modern" definitions for
"hate" do. What you just said amounts to nothing more than a flat out
denial of what Scripture says in many places.
A poster at
truth-dig.com wins the Epistemic Nihilism Award for the following:
The entirety of atheism is contained
in this response. Atheism is not a philosophy; it is not even a view of the
world; it is simply a refusal to deny the obvious.
Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make when in the
presence of religious dogma.
Rationalist
wins the Tempermental Rebellion Award for the
following:
Creating something
doesn't grant one authority over it. You can create a house, a company, a work of
art and not have automatic authority to do whatever you wish to it.
Nobody has granted God any such authority, nor is it really provably in our
best interests to do so; God's whims being as
capricious as they are. The only form of authority God can excercise is through use of force.
Now if he would agree to some form of contract with
us, I'm sure we could arrange to grant a being of his power and abilities some
sort of useful position based on our common good. Barring that, he has
no legitimate authority.
Richard
Dawkins wins the "Middle Eastern Savages are so barbaric and stupid.
I'm going to apply lead-based powder to my face to make me look pretty for the
ball" Enlightened Person Award
for some comments this past month, summed up by a friendly source as follows:
He explores the state of the three Abrahamic religions in the world today, from the political
influence of rich and powerful Christian fundamentalist institutions in America
to the deadly clash of Judaism, Christianity and Islam in the Middle East. He describes the
A chap at “nogreaterjoy.org” wins the Excellence in Discipline Award
for this advice on rearing children:
Two things. First, please DO regulate their environment and associations. Over the
years as our children were growing up, Deb and I offended about every family
member and some of our friends by being “overprotective” of the innocent
charges God sent into our care. We guarded them from any suspect company and
thoughtfully planned their associations. We have not
trusted, “good Christian families.” We have not participated in churches where
the children were separated from us. After church, we watched them and
their associations. When kids stop running around in
circles, screaming, and start talking, or drawing aside, you’ve likely got the
beginning of troubles brewing. Keep the little ones standing right
beside you after church. They
should always sit with you, never with their friends. If they go out to the bathroom, go with
them. Never allow them to spend the night with
friends or cousins. Slumber parties are sin
parties. Never allow them to listen to music
through headphones. Three-minute
phone conversations, no chat rooms, no surfing the web for any reason.
Parents should make it physically impossible for them to even access the web. We didn’t allow our children to spend time in their bedrooms
unless they were working on a project or reading. Bedroom doors were always kept open, except for two minutes while
dressing
Jorgen wins the Aimlessness in Textual Criticism Award
with the revelation that there is no such thing as an original manuscript:
One problem with the 'copyist error'
defence (which the
He shares
this award with “Pitchforkpat”, a new fundy atheist on TWeb who thinks
that textual-critical decisions are decided merely by counting manuscripts.
Penn and
Teller (the magicians) win the Out of Order Award for producing a video on the
Bible, and for comments like these:
Hearing that so many other Messiahs
were walking around is weird, huh. It was a plague of Messiahs. Monty Python's 'The
Life of Brian' was more historically accurate than Mel Gibson's 'The Passion of the Christ'."
A website
award goes to
http://libertariandefender.blogspot.com/2005/09/strong-atheists-case-against-christian.html
for using
the same old same old and thinking it is new.
Another
website award to
http://www.balaams-ass.com/journal/homemake/cslewis.htm
for
making CS Lewis into a closet tool of Satan.
Finally, an
award to the unknown person or persons who searched this site using the phrase:
“britney spears fully naked”
Bronze duh award winners
Vincejohn:
No he didnt
look like a middle eastern dark Jew because God the
Father was His actual Father. Mary was just the mother. So no DNA of an earthly
man was ever passed through. I have seen Jesus on His throne. He has a strong
chiseled face like a young Marlon Brando. Fair colored hair up to his colar and no
beard. His eyes are endless and terrifying to behold. I was brought to
my knees and totally speechless. This was a true vision while in a lot of
trouble and meditating in prayer when I was brought before His throne. I have
seen God the Son face to face Jan 1999.
wiseman
I would think that god would have
judged people individually based on how they lived their lives and then decide
upon that. If god truly is wise then he would do as I
do.
SWEVEN
I don't think a god exists. And if
it exists, we should destroy it.
We must put an end to that mental slavery known as religion.
Captin Woehrle
Also, if god knows
everything, he knows what he will do in the "future" (in any
dimension, not necessary the time dimension). He must have known that from the
very start of his own existence. Thus god's actions are predestined. God is
tied by faith, he has no free will. If god has no free will god is not
omnipotent. Another way to put it is that to be able to make plans and
decisions one must act over time. If god stands above time he can not do that
and has no free will. Indeed, if god stands above all dimensions god is
dimensionless - a singularity, nothing, void!
Besides there can exist no free wills at all if god is almighty. If you had a
free will, god wouldn't know what you would do tomorrow and wouldn't be
omnipotent.
Let's say that everything must be created, and that was done by an omnipotent
god. A god which stands above time, space, moral and existence, which is self
containing and in it self has it's own cause. This entity can surely be
replaced by the known world. The world stands above time, space, moral,
existence, is self containing and in it has it's own
meaning. Most theists agree that god has a nature. Then we must raise the
question, who created god's nature? If we just accept
that god has a nature and exists without a cause, why not say that the known
world just is and that the laws of physics are what they are, without a cause?
My thesis is that people who claim
to believe in god do not really do so. They just wish to believe in god. They
somehow feel that their lives are meaningless without god, so they choose to
close their eyes to evidence against the existence of god.
chickenhawkx3
You must be very
careful when you use Josephus to "prove" that Yeshua
ben Yosef was the
CHRIST....Josephus wrote nothing of the sort! He merely makes mention of a
'wise man' who was condemned, crucified and there were 'reports' of his still
being alive....no mention of any resurrection, ascent into heaven etc, etc, etc
- all these are later abstractions.
Couple that with what SOME scholars claim are mistranslations in Tacitus' 'Annales' - Tacitus NEVER mentions the word 'Christus'
(Christ)....he writes 'Christos' - a person know to
him, by name.
I teach ancient history. The trouble with it - all history for that matter – as
Dr Goebbles, Hitler’s Minister for Propaganda and
Enlightenment wrote, if a lie is repeated long enough and frequently enough, it
becomes accepted as fact.
None whatsoever in the Roman records (well preserved and
extensive) of that time...no mention of Jesus, miracles, his apostles, the
crucifixion. Certainly nothing that is not ‘tainted’ (such as the Testamonium Flavianum of Flavius
Josephus or Cornelius Tacitus’ supposed reference to
‘Christus’). Nothing from
chroniclers. No mention in private papers of prominent individuals of
that time.
So the Josephus account is, at best, hearsay. He's simply reporting on what
other people told him they believed. He knew full well that this Jesus couldn't
possibly be the real Messiah, as he was an observant Jew.
Furthermore, since the passage has obviously been tampered with, and since
copies weren't discovered until almost 1,000 years after they were supposedly
written, it is a form of evidence that wouldn't even be considered for
admission in a court of law or any other. The people who are overly attached to
it are the ones who will take anything they see as validation of their
religion's figurehead, regardless of whether it's meaningful or not.
And finally, you have great Christian copyists like Eusebius, who proudly
boasted of discarding any sources unfavorable to the beliefs of the emerging
Christian church, and of embellishing anything favorable to make it more so.
Many sources were unknown before the time of Eusebius, and only became known
through Eusebius's own writings. Hmmmmm...wonder why.
Zarathustra on the Garden of Eden:
My mistake, yet it does little to
change my argument. God set a reward for the consumption; Their
death. Hence the fruit became tempting.
XaositectCrayon
Zoroastriumism is the best argument for Christianity
apparently... (and quite possibly up to 2000 years
before the world was created) someone prophesized Jesus Christ.... His name was
Zorothursta
is it the discordianism in me that makes me want to call him Zorothruster?
just a little joke... for all I know I could be wrong
here just read in Zoroastriumism (am I even spelling
it right) that a man of virgin birth would be born to help contribute to most
against an evil god (>.> well... the new testiment
did replace the old testiment).
Dienekes
on the
Crusades:
The first war started with a letter
from Constantinople to
Needless to say when an entire army came to Constantinople instead of 300
knights the Emperor went into histerics especially
since the leader of this army was Bohemund (I believe
it was this guy, I have a tendency to get my Normans confused) a Norman and
rival of the Emperor.
After this both the Pope and Constantine
started the propaganda of the evil Islams who would
eat babies and so forth, however it is not as well known that the Muslim people
were not blind to the gathering of the army and were starting relatively the
same rumors about the "evil Franks" (there
word for Eastern Europeans)
Mistervader
The
contradictory Gospels? Any proof that they existed? Those writers never mentioned
them...
Sevivon1913
i know i'm right.......because i read at the time and concluded it. i
didnt deem it necessary to remember it
(on the supposed
lack of evidence for the Empty Tomb):
"the lack of evidence IS MY PROOF it didnt
happen"
"i assure you, nick, i
have studied many hours on all points i
speak.........i study for days/weeks - then
conclude........then i forget what convinced
me......but know i was right"
"historical method doesnt apply to christian theology"
gnosticmary
In the Old Testament, in the books
of Moses, the stipulations for divorce are laid out. But
in the above Jesus clearly states that these rules in the OT are not of God but of Moses,
and gives the reason that Moses laid down these laws, in
contradiction to the Law of God.
Jesus in many other cases also shows that the laws of
the OT and/or
the interpretations of them by supposed Godly men are
in contradiction to the Laws of God.
So why did men then, and continue to this day, hold these contradictions
erroneously up as the infallible Word of God?
I say it is because by doing so, by claiming that these things are of God, they
can hide the evil that dwells in their own hearts. As Jesus said, their hearts
are hardened to the ways of God.
Jesus said to love your enemies, to turn the other cheek, to not cast a stone
against a brother unless you yourself are without sin, to give your cloak to one who steals your shirt, to not worry about
those who may do harm to your body.
Yet in most religions men create a 'god' that condones the evilness of men, the
hatred and judgment, the wars and killing, that men desire to do. Few in
humanity can comprehend a world where men are not evil, where they do not seek
for themselves and so they create a god and a
I say that not only did Moses adjust the Law of God to
accommodate the evilness in man's heart, but so did other keepers of OT scripture. The end result
being a OT
god created in the image of evil man.
Jude3b
According to the Bible "The
disciples were first called Christians in
Shamgar
It is time to expose the heresy of
"Christian" Zionist who are instigating war
in the
Bull calf
Modern television is
indicative of the mind of Judaism, since it is wholly owned (with the exception
of Rupert Murdock) by Jews.
Steven Carr
Many peole
think that because awful crimes fill them with horror, then awful crimes should
be prevented.
God says that because awful crimes fill people with
horror, then awful crimes should not be prevented, because God wants horror
filled people.
Ezekiel 20:26 I let them become defiled through their gifts—the sacrifice of
every firstborn —that I might fill them with horror so they would know that I
am the LORD.'
If it is necessary to allow a few children to be sacrificed, so that others may
turn to the LORD, who are we to ban this rather unusual method of evangelism?
2005 platinum screwball award winners
And now the
moment you’ve been waiting for, the best of the worst, shall we say. By
consensus these were chosen first by myself selecting a group of the best from
each of five categories, and then by vote for the best of each group on TWeb.
Mailbag category
Doctor
Doom-dumb
There is a time for everything. Now is
your time. From this day forward you can expect that your life will fall apart
and your faith will be destoyed. Such is the fate of
those who build their house on sand. But that is not your crime, only your
weakness. The offense: vilifying truth in exchange for lies. Do not be
deceived: you will reap what you sow. Since you are
planting the seeds of ridicule and falsehood, you will shortly be exposed to
the very same. Groveling before your false 'god' will not help you. Note this
day upon your calender. You have no idea what you are
dealing with.
You are an idiot.
Have you returned the money you stole yet?
Website category
http://www.wiolawapress.com/black.htm
The Jesuits are giant lizards!
Atheist category
Jim Eisele on Theistic Atheists:
You think that you want to go to heaven when you die.
Well, so does an atheist. Who’s to say that an atheism god doesn’t exist?
Confused Christian category
MichaelCadry's Fundy Astronomy
In the latter years it is written, "And Michael shall stand up for
the children of your (Daniel's ancestors and Israel's children and children's
children and further), people and there SHALL BE a time of TROUBLE SUCH AS
NEVER was even to a nation at that same time, and at THAT TIME shall thy people
be delivered, everyone who is found written in the BOOK. And many of the dead
shall awake, some to everlasting life and some to SHAME and CONTEMPT. And they
that be WISE shall SHINE like the Brightness of heaven
(the firmament) and they that turn many to righteousness SHALL BE AS THE STARS
forever and ever." When our spiritual energy inside our earthly body
leaves our dead body behind, we go to heaven, for those who are so blessed, and
we inhabit the stars with our energy and we can move at the speed of light, but
not with wings. Just by God's saying so. And we are a
ball of energy among many balls of energy that inhabit each star. And this is
heaven, where there are many mansions, and I (Jesus) go to prepare a place for
you (Venus). I (Jesus) am the bright and morning star (Venus) and even as I
received it from my Father, so I give it to those who honour
me.
You Preterists have SO MUCH TO LEARN!! YOU are so FAR
from the Lord that you are just Satan's Parasites, confused by him so much that
you are ready to die for your false beliefs and you are not one iota of being
closer to God than anybody in the earth.
Religious non-christian category
LDSTrue on Mormon
internal witness hermeneutics.
(In response to
someone saying that the original languages dictate the meaning of a passage and
that exegesis is
needed to understand them: )
Revelation from the Holy Ghost is my Rock (besides Jesus of course) and
REVELATION is my FOUNDATION and not your “sound exegetical method. I would not
trade my old friend The Holy Ghost (aka HG) in for a
ton of your method! No make that 10 to the millionth power. No make that 10 to
the …!
(When told,Jesus didn't
speak English, and neither did Matthew write in English, he replied:)
I know, but the Holy Ghost DOES!!! (aka
HG) (aka my Old
Friend)!!!!!!!!!!