Ah, summer -- sun...sand...heat rash. And Screwballs. Yuk.

From the Mailbag

I wish to take this moment to remind readers that unless noted otherwise, I report these emails in their entirety. Just so you don't think I hid the other dozen paragraphs where they said something intelligent; like this one from the Department of Sound Bites:

The joke is on you. You can't see that christianity is copycat of myths from previous civilisations. Judaism/Chrisitianity/Islam - this holy trinity of bull----- are the cause of so much sufferings & bloodshed.

Then I got one from the guy who runs this site: http://www.logoslogic.info/ Here I did cut out his comments on a JW commentator, but the rest is as is:

In regards to J. P. Holding, you are obviously and foremost a die-hard Trinitarian. The problem with the trinity is that there simply is no such thing as a trinity. The trinity is 100% the product of, unconverted, human thinking that has been accepted and perpetuated by sincere, but sincerely wrong theologians and lay people alike. Yes, there is "God the Father" and yes, there is "God the firstborn Son," but there is no third person/being called the Holy Spirit. God is "Holy" and God is a "Spirit." God is the Holy Spirit.

God is not a Trinity! God is a Family

Oh boy. Another dum-dum reading the text in English and announcing his opinion. Then came this from the Order of the Universal Conspiracy:

Regardless of what you may say about Bushby and his books even an eminent missionary as Dr Albert Schweitzer was very disturbed that he ould not find any extrabiblical proof that "Jesus Christ" ever walked the face of the earth! I would therefore be glad if you could oblige. It is no use to try to use "Antiquities" by Josephus , since Bushby has in his posession a very early copy of this that escaped the cencorship of the churh! Quite a fiew other researhers attempted the same excersise without success.

Um...where's that smiley showing juice flying out of my nose....while I'm looking, here's this:

James James James, now sorry about being rude but your reply was typical garbage. I know your limits because I know Christianity is a lie, but I expected more from a PHD! All the saber rattling and huffing a and puffing you do on your web site and you can't give me a simple answer. Of course I'm not going to ask a question that you can answer, the game may not seem fair but it is, you're on the wrong side is all. Keep in mind that I'm not one of your simple minded followers, you have far more education than me but the education is only part of the answer. Without freedom of thought you might as well have dropped out of HS. Let this HS grad learn you a few things about philosophy. It's a general rule in philosophy that he who proposes must explain and defend. If someone says that "X exists," the burden is on him to provide a case for the existence of X. The burden is not on the one who denies that X exists. Your reply gave me a video idea, so I will be promoting your site to other atheists on YouTube using your response in my video, it should be a good laugh. I want nothing to do with your forums, I'm not here to convince anyone of anything, I don't care what you believe, I just want to make fun of you and use you for entertainment. Your web site may seem mighty to you, but it's really pathetic, I mean a grown man worshipping an invisible magic man in the clouds. Keep that chest puffed out, I'm sure it impresses many fools.

Also, from the Set the Rules Yourself Department:

Just one question, when did the global flood happen? According to my Christian sources it was around 2344 - 2343. What were other people in the world doing at this time? The Egyptians for instance kept on living, so did the Chinese. Jesus refers to the flood as if it is fact, so if the flood did not happen then that would at least call into question the accuracy of the Gospels and maybe even the existence of Jesus.It would destroy the Old Testament! I know that one of the first pyramids built was the step pyramid built by pharaoh Netcherike-Djoser in 2630 BC, 286 years before the alleged flood of Noah. There was no break in the Egyptian civilization, in fact Egyptian civilization goes back more than a 1,000 years before Christians say the world was created! I know that you can tap dance, I see it all over your site, but to me if God gets one thing wrong then it's all wrong. There is more than one thing wrong, but this is a big one and I think you should start here.

In short, I want a date for the flood. If you can't get me one that makes sense then you admit defeat. Also you might want to explain away the annual Nile flood. It was celebrated under a crescent moon every year by the Egyptians in a festival called the Arga-Noa or arc of the flood. We have proof of other local floods that resemble the Biblical one, but without proof of the Biblical worldwide flood the entire Bible is BS.

Just a short note about your Egyptian Horus and Jesus comparison page. People are not saying that the Egyptian religion was copied EXACTLY! Religion evolves just as many stories do and as life itself does! Things are taken from older religions and added to new ones by the people that used to practice those ancient religions, so they will have similarities. That is all it is, similarities, you debunked nothing on that page. Christianity has many similarities to ancient religions. The sun sits at it's lowest point in the winter, a time of death to the Egyptians (winter), the sun sits at this low point on the horizon for 3 days before it starts rising again on Dec. 25. This is just a very small sample of the significance of 3 days and Dec. 25. There is a ton more, the Bible is full of astrology.

Your web site is pretty frustrating, just as most Christian literature is.

Hum. The pagan copycat thing seemed popular this past month:

I just read your article about the fish symbol not being of a pagan source. I find it strange that throughout the story you never once manage to answer the question. The fish is a symbol taken from ancient "pagan" religious use - by that I infer the use within the zodiac of Pisces. The time of "Christ" coincides not by chance with the House of Pisces, and that is where the symbol comes from. The rule of the House of Pisces has been in effect since before the beginning of the new calendar, and once the House of Aquarius is upon us you will see another "religion" spring forth an dominate the world.

This came from the Pedantic Humor Department:

Very entertaining site! I wonder how many readers "get" what you are trying to do. I'll bet there are more than a few who think you are being serious. I especially got a kick out of your "the bible really isn't hard to understand provided you are an expert in several ancient languages and have the requisite specialized knowledge to fully grasp it" argument. That was really cool and seriously funny! "God didn't make the bible hard to understand; most people are just too ignorant to grasp it."

It's gratifying to see more and more sites like this popping up around the Internet pointing out the absurdity of the convoluted arguments many apologists use to "prove" the truth and infallibility of the bible. Often, just as in your parody, the arguments end with the equivalent of, "See, it's all just so obvious and self-evident now that I've explained it all to you... even a caveman can understand it." Hey, maybe you can use that line in one of your upcoming parodies.

And this:

Interesting story! I think you are right that Gamaliel was a myth, but you make the same exact argument that is brought against Jesus of Nazareth.

Actually, the evidence against Jesus is a bit more that that of Gamaliel. I don't know if you are familiar with Egyptian mythology, but the story of Horus has striking parallels to the story of Jesus. The story of Mythra is also very much the same and both of these predate the story of Jesus of Nazareth.

One also from the Play-doh School of Theology:

God's attributes Wisdom/Logos never possessed their own self awareness or conversed with God Almighty prior to the NT times JP. Only the Pagan NT authors and Church fathers innovate this perverted idea, which later prepared the foundations of the doctrine of the Trinity.
This email, in its totality, also from the Sound Bite League:
"Clear writing doesn't need to be interpreted." --Brogan Clear Writing Seminars

I told them that I interpreted that to mean they were ignorant, and got this reply:

Congratulations, Mr. James Patrick Holding! You have received the ******* of the Year Award from the Society for Jesuit Theology. If you ever have questions about the interpretation of scripture, contact the Jesuits. The Jesuits are the genuine scholars of theological world. A pinhead like you wouldn't have the smarts to break your way out of a paper bag.

From a Mormon I told to read my article on the Trinity:

I did read your article and it reminds me of a court setting where the defense, as they always do, find ways to inject doubt. I do not trust in philosophic jargon and intellectual conclusions. This is the problem James. Your approach to refute the revelation Joseph Smith recieved pertaining to the godhead is not supported in scripture but your interpretation of it. Your conclusions are not grounded in revelation but intellectualism. You interpret metaphor and fact to your liking in order to advance or defend a particular position. You never make mention of the need for revelation to form opinion and belief. This is a huge breach James. You and others are fulfilling what Joseph stated. "Mainliners teach for doctrine the commandments of men, they have a form of Godliness but deny the power thereof? Mainliners deny the need for revelation, the resurrection, miracles, divine order, etc.

Modern churches do not follow the order as set forth by Christ. Where are apostles and prophets in modern Christianity? These were essential to the early church. Where do we find preacher/entertainers making careers out of competing for converts in the early chruch? And you defend weird anything goes crap? The confusion and incomprehensibility of the Nicene god opened the doors to entrepreneurs, heresy, and idolatry.

Gods path is straight and narrow and few will find and take it. Engineering minsiters have and continue to broaden the lane.

We need a "head stuck up rear end" smiley...for this too:

Hey Hey JPH, Your Christian bull**** is as boring as **** to all of us members of the Mensa Atheists group. You couldn't qualify for Mensa if you were breathing pure oxygen and were plugged into an electric socket.

Likewise, from the Department of Thorough Answers Under a Haystack:

Hello JPH, You get an 'A' for effort for your apologist efforts.

As Ernest Becker has pointed out in his several excellent books, you have joined billions of other Homo sapiens on this planet in being in denial of your own death. I learned more about human nature from reading Ernest Becker than I ever learned from 16 years in a Christian educational system.

Becker's work has been confirmed by empirical research that's been conducted since his untimely death. A number of Becker scholars have conducted empirical research confirming the potency of death salience in motivating human behavior. Several of these studies were mentioned in the award-winning documentary Flight From Death.

You, along with all of your Christian friends and relatives (along with Muslims, Hindus, and Jews) are in denial of your own death. Through the medium of language (see Becker's Birth and Death of Meaning), people can concoct seeming "realities" that have no basis in reality. However, as a coping mechanism, these tactics are VERY POWERFUL.

It is perfectly understandable that you refuse to believe in the reality of your own death. Finding a coping mechanism helps you cope with life.

The July 2007 John Loftus Collection

John Loftus is getting smarter. He's learning that if he opens his mouth on subjects I know about and he doesn't, he'll win Screwball Awards virtually automatically. Or maybe he's just not trying as hard, since he's ineligible for Platinum (having already won one by default for his huge lie this year). Nevertheless he still managed to speak out of turn and win Gold for comments like these:

Let's say it was claimed that Hannibal was raised from the dead, okay?

How many Christians would believe this?

There are lots of ancient figures in the superstitious past where it was claimed they were born of a virgin and raised from the dead.

At least I'm consistent. I deny any of them did.

I dunno, DJ. Did anyone suffer or even die for "Hannibalism"? And who do you have in mind for "born of a virgin and raised from the dead"? Mithra? Sounds like he's accepting a brainwashing from Acharya these days. I sure hope so -- I could kick him even higher into the stratosphere if he does. He also wins for this comment:

Have you read my book? Sheesh. Why would Geisler, and James Sennett recommend it to others then, along with Daniel Dennett and Dan Barker. Why does Prometheus Book want to publish it?

However, it is Loftus-slave-for-Life Matthew Green who wins the most Gold, as he criticizes this article in his blarg:


He rails about how stupid *I* am in the article, but fails to notice that the article was by one of my guest writers, Eric Vestrup! How appropos that he also said this to a poster:

Don't you ever post any comments on my blog ever again! They will be deleted, period. As far as I am concerned-John Loftus is more of a man than you could ever hope to be!

Well, Loftus does lie like a man, that's for sure!

The Kooky Skeptic Collection

Odd and End Awards to Collected Indistinguishable Skeptics...start with stuart shepherd, who says:

I think that Jesus would disagree that "Most of the people were illiterate " Look through the following list of Scriptures.
Matthew 12:3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; Matthew 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless? Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, Matthew 21:16 And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise? Matthew 21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Matthew 22:31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him?
This list of Scriptures is just from Matthew. I could of had a bigger list if I used the other gospels. But in each Scripture, Jesus assumes that his Jewish audience can read. Perhaps Gentiles can't read...but Jews have always been literate. Their mothers wouldn't allow them to grow up without knowing how to read.

Right, Jesus' assumptions that the Pharisees, Sadducees, high priests, and scribes, as well as a reference to whoever reads Daniel, clearly shows that the average Jew was literate. I better check yer historical sources, I think this guy's got it all figured out.

Amnouy wins Gold for various comments, but these took the sake:

Imagine a sphere and flatten it. That is a flat sphere. Not a difficult concept, surely!
In the big picture there is no reason why you should trust anything. Why do you feel the need for something to trust? What do microbes trust? In what way, in principle, are you different from microbes, apart from greater intelligence?

Todd Pence, the atheist dweeb who posted a 1-star review of The Impossible Faith (even though he had never read it) wins Gold for this waaah waaaahh Amazon review of Geisler and Turek's I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist:

The spate of positive reviews about this book from self-proclaimed atheists who declare it the most persuasive argument for Christianity they've ever read leads me to only one of two conclusions. Either these reviewers are only claiming to be atheists or doubters, or they are naive and uninformed non-believers who have not had much experience with apologetic legerdemain. For "I Don't Have Faith To Be An Atheist" is nothing more than a recycling of all the tired old apologetic "evidences" for Christianity that we've seen offered up by Josh McDowell and others. That along with the familiar bait-and-switch tactic of arguing for the existence of God in the abstract as if such an argument established the mythical God described in the Bible.

The authors spend chapter after chapter postulating the necessity of a supreme being and creator with such mind-bending, half-nonsensical ideals such as "everything that began must have been caused," all this metaphysical meandering obscuring the fact that such arguments validate the existence of Allah, or Zeus just as effectively as they do the Bible God.

To enumerate the numerous fallacies which fill the volume would take far more space than is available here. The familiar group of supposed historical references to Jesus outside the Bible are cited (Tacitus, Pliny the Edler, etc.) - all men who were born after the supposed death of Jesus and whose references to him, even if their legitimacy wasn't heavily disputed, prove nothing as to the truth of the claims of the religion (although Christians cling to these names desperately like pieces of driftwood). The authors even uphold the doctrine of Messianic Prophecy in the face of the self-evident fact that the New Testament writers simply plucked choice phrases out of context from the Hebrew scriptures and fashioned them into their narrative as pretended prophecies. (Thomas Paine wrote the definitive study of this subject over two hundred years ago.)

Really, a sufficient response to this work requires but one rhetorical question: "Aren't you a little old to have an imaginary friend?"

Geisler offers the following hypothetical situation early in his book. "Suppose you were to die today and found yourself standing before God, who asked you `Why should I let you into my heaven?' What would your response be?"

Here is what mine would be:

"God, all throughout my life I listened to a number of people made certain claims about you. They claimed that you cursed the entire human race because their first ancestors ate a piece of fruit. They claimed that you drowned all the people on the earth, except for one family whom you packed in a relatively small boat with all the members of the animal species. They claimed that all the different languages of the world came about because you wanted to stop some pre-industrial people from building a tower. They claimed that you sent bears to devour a group of children for making fun of a man's baldness. They claimed that you ordered your chosen people on genocidal campaigns of slaughter, plunder, rapine and slave-taking against those you deemed to be their enemies (usually because they worshipped you under a different name). They claimed you ordered all the Amalekites (including women and children) massacred for a 400-year-old offense. They claimed you exterminated 70,000 Isrealites for the unspeakable crime of being counted in a census. They claimed that for a time you lived within a little box, and that when one of your followers tried to steady the box to keep it from falling off the back of the oxen that were carrying it, you showed your gratitude by striking him dead. They claimed that you condemn all human souls after their deaths to eternal torment unless they fail to gratify your vanity by professing belief in you. They claimed that those wishing to demonstrate such fidelity to you could do so by accepting the sacrifice of your only begotten son, an innocent who was killed to satisfy your own requirement that there can be no redemption of sin without bloodshed."

"God, I am proud to say that, whenever I heard one of these outrageous lies and slanders against your name, I always vehemently denied them."

Maudman wins for various comments, such as:

The Bible is a collection of books that certain people think is important and for different reasons holy or otherwise. . But as to what is said is something you choose to believe was actually said and done. No My self also the bible is the word of God. But the entire truth of it isn't to me knowledge but something I seek to understand. But whose bible mine or yours? Ours has more books than yours. Also the the translations vary with the venacular, whose is right.

whayse1 wins for this statement:

The ancient documents rule, to which Greenleaf appeals, was written with legal documents in mind, not ancient historical and/or religious documents

And Jimmy Higgins wins for this startling conclusion:

So you admit, you need to be taking a lot context into the story to get to your conclusion, that it isn't right off the bat obvious.

It's amazing that somebody can get it without actually getting it.

Finally, a screwball shout-out to all the skeptic dim bulbs in the a TWeb thread arguing over the meaning of the word "empirical" and insisting that a written document or archaeological artifact counts as "empirical evidence".

Platinum Preview Collection

Now for shoo-in Platinum Nominees. stevec, still the best candidate for TWeb n00b, wins again:

Read your bible. Open it up in .pdf form and do a search on the word "thousand". Read each passage that it shows up in and tell me how many times it is a repetition of an earlier passage, almost word for word, but from different gospels. Do the same with "circumcision". It's repeated so many times it's laughable, and mostly the paragraphs it shows up in are duplicates of other paragraphs from other gospels. It's the simplest form of brainwashing there is. Repetitive subliminal messaging.

Minnesota shores up his campaign for TWeb vet:

Other than a brief mention of Jesus at the age of twelve, nothing else is said about Jesus from between age of infant to mature adult, about 30 years. Obviously his life was stuff worthy of record---witness the recounting of the incident in the temple at twelve---but for this exception the record is blank. And this is the Son Of God no less! One would expect that a child whose virgin birth was foretold by an angel and who was visited by magi would be the subject of quite a bit of on-going reporting. But virtually nothing, and for 30 years!!!! Here we have the most important person to have set foot on Earth and no one was chosen/ made(?) to keep track of his formative years. Was the son of god (or as god himself) doing nothing of note for all these years? Kind of hard to believe Jesus was just like everyone else for these thirty years and then all of a sudden come into his own to preform miracles and what not. What is odd is that the Bible sometime goes into a lot of extraneous and irrelevant issues, which would seem to indicate even minor details are worth noting, but then has relatively little to say about thee most important subject of the book. I would think that if anything was worth preserving for all time it would be the life and times of the world's savior, and not Paul's change of travel plans as outlined in Second Corinthians or a set of rules for the Christian household (Colossians 3), some of which are not only now ignored but considered to be indefensible.

And come to think of it, the almost complete silence in the Bible about these years certainly does suggest a possible cover up: the India excursion perhaps???

Christian nominees come to the fore, starting with Rupert Pupkin, per his view on those like me who use apologetics:

I have never had any interaction of any kind with JP Holding - I have only heard of him second hand - but I would be more than happy to tell him to his face that his view is directly contrary to scripture and irrational to boot, from what I have heard of it. I am more than happy to debate the subject with him on TWeb. I am currently engaged in a debate over hermeneutics which touches on some of these issues, but it would be my pleasure to debate anyone on this subject say late August, early September, when the dust from the current debate has settled....

But if you can contact JP Holding, and invite him to debate this subject with me, please by all means do. Then we might see which position is really taught in God's Word. I can assure you, I have studied these subjects extensively (see my web page for my educational background) - including doing a subject in Christian apologetics run by someone who is a prominent evidentialist apologist in my country, and who has published quite a few books on evidence for the resurrection etc - and gone to a lot of trouble to read and listen to those who hold JP Holding's kind of view, and it has convinced me all the more that their view is profoundly un-Biblical and philosophically and evidentially ludicrous.

I think this illustrates something very important. This is why you cannot trust apologists, whether for or against universalism or any other doctrine. People with vested interests always see what they want to see. Symeon doens't want Gregory of Nyssa to be a universalist, so he finds an ambiguous passage and bases his claim on that, ignoring everything else Gregory wrote. Exponents of universalism do the same thing in reverse. THIS IS WHY I HATE APOLOGETICS. Kierkegaard was right; the second Judas Iscariot was the first person who decided to defend Christianity by means of apologetics.

kjv_james414 impressed for Platinum with this post on Joshua the Pirate:

Just want to get some feedback

Did Joshua have one leg? Notice the singular tense in the following verses. Jos 1:1Now after the death of Moses the servant of the LORD it came to pass, that the LORD spake unto Joshua the son of Nun, Moses' minister, saying,

Jos 1:2Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel.

Jos 1:3Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses.

Jos 5:15And the captain of the LORD'S host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so.

Now notice what is said to Moses, All plural

Exo 3:5And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.

Exo 12:11And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD'S passover.

This is not fact but is something to think about. Joshua was an amazing man but if he only had one leg, than he was REALLY AMAZING.

The Rant and Rave Collection

This is the place for your incoherent rants! Start with BurntOffering:

Satan is an Angel; and belongs to GOD; but what you didnt know is that Satan is a FeMale Spirit, Angel, and Espoused Wife of Jesus Christ, because S/He is a Daughter of God. It's as though Jesus is the President and Satan is the President of Vice i.e., Vice President. Satan was given the Job to Deceive the whole world, remain silent until the Last Hour and then Rise to remind us of what We Forgot. Like Jesus, Satan knows exactly what GOD said which is why when She was sent to Tempt him; Satan appeared to him as a Dark, Mysterious Woman since that's the only thing this Son of God, Son of Man, and perfectly good, virgin, unmarried man had not had yet. When Jesus died on the cross; it left a big hole in her heart. Jesus cast her into a Bed, gave Her space to Repent and made them the Synogogoes of Satan's, because Satan is now in the possesses the body of a real Christian woman. Remember GOD is a God of the Living, and She has repented, been reborn, and now ready to take Her seat on the throne. Right next to the King of Kings; Lord of Lord and Her Hubsband.

Then there's johannes, who could fill pages with his ravings, but we only have room for this:

The tree of knowledge.

What is this tree of knowledge in the midst of the garden that God forbid us to eat from?

The tree of knowledge is your eyes.

If you measure your face from your chin, to the top of your head, you will find that your eyes are situated exactly in the middle of your face (the garden in Eden)

Therefore the tree in the midst of the garden is your eye, the tree of knowledge. Gen.2: 17.

I am sure that everybody will agree that all knowledge enters through the windows of your eyes. Also death enters through the same window. See Jerm 9: 21.

Therefore; the bible says you will die if you eat of the tree of sight.

We will explain later what the tree of life is.

Let us now see what the bible says about this tree.

Gen 3: 6 when the woman SAW that the tree was good for food and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired, to make one WISE/GIVE KNOWLEDGE, she took the fruit…

It can't be clearer than this - do you agree? - Do you understand?

For the first time in the existence of the creation God now reveals this mystery of the tree of knowledge although it is actually very simple to understand. Church has never had the slightest clue what this tree is and ignored it like all the other things they don't understand.

Verse 6 continued … she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat and gave also unto her husband with her (the spirit in her) and he did eat.

You can now understand that the husband has no choice as to eat what his wife gives him to eat it is logic.

The tree = the eye and the tree bears the fruit.

I say: The fruit of the tree is in your eyes sight

Your eyes bears the fruit that you eat

Your eyes bears the fruit of death

Your eyes bears the fruit of knowledge

Further: The fruit of the eye is pleasant

Gen. 3:6The fruit of the eye makes you wise

The fruit of the eye is good for food

The fruit of the eye brings death

The fruit of the eye brings desire

The fruit of the eye brings knowledge

If you had no eyes you would not die. IT IS BECAUSE you have eyes that you die.

You might now say; this is nonsense because why would God want to kill me?

Read further and you will understand.

No, actually, we won't....

Tladatsi's rant is short, but as coherent as the above:

All he said to his servants was wait here with the donkeys while the boy and I go to the mountain top and we'll be right back. He did not say that the boy would come back alive. In the ANE, as in the modern, there is no greater shame/dishonor than to leave the dead exposed. The clear implication was that Abraham would bring the burnt body of the sacrificed Isaac back down the mountain. There are innumerable references in the Bible to the absolute importance on not leaving the dead exposed. For example, In 2 Sam 21it records that Saul's bones were brought back from Phillistia and buried long after his death. Deu 21:22-23demands that even one put to death for a crime be buried before sunset.



http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ -- Platinum qualifier.



Lykos at the SheezyArt forum.




http://www.secretsofsurvival.com/ -- Platinum qualifier.

http://martinzender.com/ -- Most outspoken Bible scholar? How about world's most outspoken pinhead?

"Beckys_Mom" on the "Unexplained Mysteries" forum, who believes Jesus went to India and that the Bible is a complete myth and that Christianity is stupid while pretending to be "respectful" of their beliefs.

Institutional award: Apparently, someone is suing God: http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56680 -- Platinum qualifier.

Professor Ward Churchill, for linking 9/11 victims to Nazis -- Platinum qualifier.



http://www.jesusfamilies.org/ -- Platinum qualifier.



This thread: http://fulfilledprophecy.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=28899