Showing posts with label literalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label literalism. Show all posts

Thursday, December 11, 2008

George Bush bible comment shocked evangelicals

I've been debating with myself for quite some time this question: Is George Bush the dumbest person ever to have lived, or simply one of the worst people ever to have lived?

Bush Bible comment shocked evangelicals

Bush made the controversial statement during a Monday interview on ABC's Nightline. When asked whether he thinks the Bible is literally true, he replied, "Probably not. No, I'm not a literalist, but I think you can learn a lot from it."

...
Bush further stated in the interview, "I think that God created the Earth ... and I don't think it's incompatible with the scientific proof that there is evolution."
So, he's got that going for him. Since he's not so stupid as to believe the bible is literally true, or that evolution is "just a theory", then that makes him smarter than most fundamentalist Christians. However, that pushes him closer towards the "worst person ever to have lived" category.

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Good Old-fashioned Christian marriage


Perhaps I was too hasty earlier as I advocated equal rights for homosexuals to marry and have long-term, loving, committed relationships. Maybe instead of pushing "equality" and "tolerance", I should have pointed out some of the common-sense rules that govern Christian marriage. Christians, please choose which forms of marriage you would like to see enacted as constitutional mandates, so we can get back to governing "God's way": (h/t DailyKos)

A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)

B. Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)

C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)

D. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

E. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law. (Gen 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)

G. In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

And it goes without saying that as a good Christian, you should make sure that you don't serve lobster, crab, prawns, at your wedding reception- your god hates those too!

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

40 kick-ass versions of Jesus

Holytaco: awesome Jesus versions

To be fair, not all of them are awesome. Some are hilarious, some are disturbing. Probably only about 63% of them are truly "awesome". But, it's worth checking out anyway!

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

religionexplained.jpg (JPEG Image, 578x554 pixels)

I stumbled to the following image:
religionexplained.jpg (JPEG Image, 578x554 pixels)

http://www.the-atheist.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/religionexplained.jpg


Sometimes atheists are accused of being shrill, arrogant, blasphemous and rude when we criticize religion in terms like depicted above. That doesn't mean we're wrong, but it may turn some away from our message. However, I think it wins far more arguments and converts than it loses.

Hyperbole can be a useful tool in debates, especially when categorizing your opponent's arguments. Hyperbole has a way of simplifying the debate instantly. Once we refuse to respect conventions about blasphemy, "God" becomes a god, and then a target of ridicule.

But, it's more than that. Extreme characterization of the Christian beliefs like the one above can force Christians to examine their beliefs more closely. The reader who is shocked by the mockery implicit in the "imaginary man" reference to their god is forced to ask themselves, "in what way is that characterization wrong?" "In what ways do my beliefs differ from this idea of a capricious, malicious god?" The cumulative effect of these internal questions, even if subconsciously, can have a powerful effect, I believe. Even forcing them to ask themselves why atheists would believe this way about "God" can cause them to put themselves into our shoes and manufacture reasons for our disbelief.

This will never produce instantaneous results (other than offending the unsuspecting Christian), but I believe that it will have an effect. And always remember, "blasphemy is a victimless crime".

Tuesday, April 8, 2008

GamePolitics.com � Blog Archive � Game Industry Vet: Bible Has More Adult Content than Video Games

No kidding, has anybody really read that thing?

Game Industry Vet: Bible Has More Adult Content than Video Games

A veteran video game marketing exec claims that the Bible contains more mature-themed content than most games.

Bruce Everiss, whose resume includes stints at Imagine and Codemasters, writes in his Bruce on Games blog:

Despite what some ignorant politicians and journalists might tell you, video games are fairly bland when it comes to how “adult” their content is. In fact they are usually too bland to emotionally engage and would be far better if they moved a bit in the “adult” direction…

Another reason for the blandness is the dull censoring hand of the platform holders who are amazingly prudish.

The fact is that established old media have vastly more shocking content than video games… a prime example of a book that children are encouraged to read is the Bible.

Everiss used a website known as Bible Gateway to conduct searches and found a number of themes which would be considered racy if they appeared in a video game:

The King James version has “harlot” in it 48 times, “sodomite” 5 times, “fornicator” 5 times, “smite” 133 times, “kill” 208 times and “maim” 7 times. This is shocking, you have to wonder what any right minded parent is doing exposing their children to this stuff.

Interestingly enough, University of Michigan professor Brad Bushman, a leading critic of video game violence, also found links between Biblical violence and real-life aggression in a 2007 study.

Bushman is one Jack Thompson’s expert witnesses in a pending wrongful death lawsuit against Rockstar and other video game industry defendants in Alabama.

Tuesday, April 1, 2008

Thumbs up for hands-only CPR :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Health News

Thumbs up for hands-only CPR :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Health News

In a major change aimed at getting more bystanders to do CPR, the American Heart Association now says it's OK to skip the mouth-to-mouth resuscitation when performing CPR on adults having a heart attack.

New guidelines issued by the organization Monday encourage non-medical professionals to use hands-only CPR -- doing hard, fast chest compressions -- instead of a combination of chest thrusts and rescue breathing, as long recommended.

By making CPR less complicated, the aim is to get more people to try doing it in an emergency.

"Many times, people nearby don't help because they're afraid that they will hurt the victim and aren't confident in what they're doing," said Dr. Michael Sayre, lead author of the new recommendation. "We want people to know that they can help many victims just by calling 911 and doing chest compressions. Don't be afraid to try it."

The shift is supported by evidence from three large studies done last year that found survival rates weren't hurt when mouth-to-mouth wasn't used, the heart association said.

However, important to note, prayer remains a non-viable alternative. If someone around you is choking, please DO NOT pray for them, please DO SOMETHING instead.

Monday, March 31, 2008

Murder vs. faith-healing (or doing nothing)




The FFRF has a new press release with their perspective of the death of Madeline Kara Neumann from diabetic ketoacidosis while her parents did nothing while praying for her. I fully agree with their strongly-worded press release, and the authors seem to be putting up with the same sort of fractal wrongness that I talked about last week. These parents, their supporters, and frankly the Wisconsin Legislature, are wrong at such a fundamental level that they can't even understand why brights are so saddened and enraged by this.

What's even more appalling is the ambivalent reaction: "Ethicists say case unclear," reports the Wausau Daily Herald. The Herald quoted bioethicist Dr. Norman Fost of the University of Wisconsin Medical school warning that it's important not to be moralistic or pass judgment on parents who think they can heal a child through prayer: "They believe they're helping their child; they love their child, and they believe prayer has an effect."

However deluded the parents may be, the rest of us need not countenance or indulge that dangerous delusion.

Dean Zuleger, the administrator of the Village of Weston, was quoted by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel saying, "There is a general sense of grief and sadness. Because I know the family a bit, there is a great deal of concern for their well-being." The parents' well-being?

"Death draws out difficult issues" read a headline in the Journal Sentinel. While Madeline's drawn-out death, involving nausea, vomiting, excessive thirst, weight loss and weakness, is very difficult to read about, there is nothing difficult at all about deciding where the blame lies. "The prayer of faith will heal the sick," according to James 5:15. The fault lies in society's laudatory attitude toward a "holy book" which teaches superstition and faith-healing, whose passages are latched onto by bible literalists, and whose obedience to such injunctions has been given a pass in the criminal statutes of many states.



Hattip to Friendly Atheist for the update

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

'Police: Girl Dies After Parents Pray for Healing Instead of Seeking Medical Help'

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Biblically Correct Tours of Science Museums

Thanks to Dangerous Intersection for the tip on this ABC News Report about a group that offers tours of Denver area places like the zoo or the museum, but do so from a "biblical perspective". Which, of course, means "wrong and utterly mistaken perspective". As far as I can tell, this does little more than poison the well for these student's future education. This is the problem with homeschooling... at some point I believe it becomes child-abuse. I don't know quite where that point is, as I mentioned here, but it's certainly doing them a disservice. Here's a lesson:

"If you want to map out life through time, the fossil record is really great for doing that," he continued. "There's a really nice record of what happened on this planet from the first real life forms we know of about 3.4 billion years ago until today."

Out on the museum floor, Jack and Carter stopped the group in front of a window display that contains samples of sandstone that have ripples created by water and fossils of ancient life. Bill Jack asked his group, "How do they date the fossil? By the layer in which they find it. They date the layer by the fossil and the fossil by the layer," he said. "That's circular reasoning."

In the next moment he stepped past and turned his back to a display on radiometric dating, the method by which scientists determine the age of rocks through the rate of decay of their natural radioactivity.

When later asked why he skipped the display, Jack said simply, "We can't cover everything."

Inside the museum's expansive bone and fossil storage room, Johnson said, "They have no clue about how accurate it is … Now it's plus or minus a tenth of a percent."

How does +/- .1% equate to "no idea how accurate it is"? I guess they haven't covered statistics in their homeschooling yet. Ha, you've got to love the chief curator's response. "Regardless of what the tour guide is saying, some of those kids are going to start thinking for themselves," says Kirk Johnson, chief curator.

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Apologists Ask Churches to Step Up Response to Militant Atheism | Christianpost.com

Apologists Ask Churches to Step Up Response to Militant Atheism | Christianpost.com

The headline is not completely true. What's actually happening is that some well-known apologetics have realized that there is now a new lucrative opportunity to sell apologetic "research" in the wake of the new atheist movement.

"The arguments are not really new but the ferociousness" with which atheists are lobbing their attacks "are coming much stronger," Mark Mittelberg, primary author of Becoming a Contagious Christian, said in a teleconference on Tuesday.

The teleconference, hosted by Outreach Training, was for pastors who were interested in updating their churches' apologetics approaches amid an onslaught of pro-atheist books and movies in recent years. Books like Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion and Christopher Hitchens' God is Not Great have made best-selling lists. Meanwhile, movies like The Da Vinci Code, The Jesus Family Tomb and The Golden Compass have claimed widespread media attention.

These books and movies are not just posing challenges to the basic tenets of the Christian faith, according to Mittelberg, but they are also empowering attacks against Christianity.

Damn right we are! Did you catch that? We're "posing challenges to the basic tenets of the Christian faith".

Lee Strobel, author of the best-selling The Case for Christ, agreed with Mittelberg that many Christians are raised to believe in doctrine but are not adequately taught on why their faith is true or how to support their faith with evidence.

Could it be due to the total lack of "evidence"?

"A lot of Christians assume they are hanging on to a shred of faith – that they are clinging by their fingernails. They don't know that the truth is on our side," noted Mittelberg.

Ok, if the Christians don't even "know that the truth is on our side" then what are all the sermons about??

For churches with more limited resources, Strobel recommended subscribing to a satellite feed that would stream live broadcasts of his seminars straight to the church. His next scheduled one-day live training seminar, "Investigating Faith," will be held on March 8 at Word Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Northville, Mich. Churches will be able to view the presentation in real time through Church Communication Network.

Strobel also asked pastors to consider setting up seeker small groups. While Strobel's small group curriculum won't be available until this Fall, he recommended Garry Poole's Seeker Small Groups as a resource.

Oh, that's what it's all about- subscribing to a satellite feed or purchasing some new group curriculum to spread the apologetic brainwash...err... research. And then this from an older Christian Post article:

Churches are now finding a need to equip Christians with rebuttals and answers that go beyond an acceptance of the authority of Scripture. In response, Christian apologists are filling the void, teaching a language anchored in reason and science.

And if the Church wants to keep the younger generation, Christian leaders should start stressing evidence and proof, as one 17-year-old suggested.

"We've grown up in a place and a time where everything can be proven," Emily Koll, a member of Calvary Church, told the local newspaper. "And then, all of a sudden, with God, you have to take a leap of faith. We're not used to that. It's outside our comfort zone."
Maybe it's outside your comfort zone for a reason? There's a reason why everything else in your life can be proven, with the sole exception of religion!
"[I]f people look at science, they will find faith and they will find reason; the two cannot be incompatible and they have one author, namely God," said Midland theologian Norbert Dickman, who was scheduled to present what the Christian response should be to the rise of the atheist voice at an Illinois church on Tuesday.
Then why the relentless advance of science and retreat of religion? Why the religious opposition to scientific research and education of the youth with generally accepted scientific theories? Elsewhere, Dumbass D'Zousa points out to all the Christians who have never realized this before that
"[Christians] are going to meet arguments that cannot be settled simply by 'the Bible says this, the Bible says that' because the other person will promptly reply that they don't accept the authority of the Bible," D'Souza noted.
Huh, no shit?

Monday, February 18, 2008

A little slow, just plain dumb, stupid, stupider, and religious

The Dumbing Of America - washingtonpost.com

and

Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Susan Jacoby's The Age of American Unreason is apparently causing quite a stir, already. The New York Times article above was reprinted in my local paper this morning, and I found it quite interesting.

I know that as atheists, we often find ourselves seemingly defending education, science, and logic in a nation that couldn't care less. Or worse, pays them lip-service, all the while insisting that schools would be better or safer if we put prayer back, put god back, and plaster the ten commandments all over. I've noticed this attitude several places lately, usually in response to a school shooting. The most recent place I remember seeing it was over at Friendly atheist, citing this letter to the editor. Narika Kendrick opines (emphasis mine):

Just because you don’t believe in Jesus, who died for your sins and mine, don’t hold it against a politician who has done a heck of a job in the school system just because of your corrupted, immoral, individualistic outlook. By the way, the last time I checked, it’s people like you that cause Columbine or other school shootings to happen because you want prayer, the Ten Commandments, Christians and every other precious good out of the school system. That’s what’s wrong with America today. Be blessed and have a nice life. But leave the morally righteous people alone.

Ignoring the blatant grammatical errors, this attitude encapsulates what Susan Jacoby argues to be a climate of anti-intellectualism and anti-rationalism that holds sway over much of the populace. Atheists reading this will no doubt have their own experiences to bolster that claim. When (not "if") we win debates with the religious, their last line of defense often ends up along the lines of "Atheism is a religion too" or, "I have as much right to my opinion as you do, there's no proof that you're right."

The unique problem facing atheists is not that we lack facts, logic, reason, evidence etc...; clearly we have all of that in spades. The "debate" between belief or atheism has not really significantly changed in hundreds of years. All the arguments have been hashed out, posted on myriad internet sites and available to anyone who's curious. It's not that atheists are unapproachable, so unimaginably evil that we would drink the blood of anyone asking to know more about humanism or free-thought. The problem is that the religious are willfully choosing to ignore evidence contradicting their belief. They are wallowing in their own ignorance. From the Washington Times:
That leads us to the third and final factor behind the new American dumbness: not lack of knowledge per se but arrogance about that lack of knowledge. The problem is not just the things we do not know (consider the one in five American adults who, according to the National Science Foundation, thinks the sun revolves around the Earth); it's the alarming number of Americans who have smugly concluded that they do not need to know such things in the first place. Call this anti-rationalism -- a syndrome that is particularly dangerous to our public institutions and discourse. Not knowing a foreign language or the location of an important country is a manifestation of ignorance; denying that such knowledge matters is pure anti-rationalism. The toxic brew of anti-rationalism and ignorance hurts discussions of U.S. public policy on topics from health care to taxation.

Which is why atheists cannot stand by and leave religion alone. It's not just a difference of opinion, it the difference between truth and lies. And those of you who CHOOSE to believe in lies are trying to hijack the government of this country and force it back into the dark ages!

In the wake of the "New Atheists" and their books, the most common criticism has probably been that they are "elitist" or somehow intellectually snobbish. I fail to see this as a criticism however, and I fully agree with the sentiment. I don't know how much plainer I can say it, but if you believe in something that you don't have good reasons to believe in, expect to get made fun of and demeaned.
All this helps explain the popularity of the New Atheists -- Americans as a whole may not be getting too much religion, but a significant constituency must be getting fed up with being routinely marginalized, ignored and insulted. After all, unbelievers are concentrated at the higher end of the educational scale -- a recent Harris American poll shows that 31 percent of those with postgraduate education do not avow belief in God (compared with only 14 percent of those with a high school education or less). The percentage rises among professors and then again among professors at research universities, reaching 93 percent among members of the National Academy of Sciences. Unbelievers are to be found concentrated among those whose professional lives emphasize science or rationality and who also have developed a relatively high level of confidence in their own intellectual faculties. (from Alternet)
Granted, there's still a stray scientist or two who profess belief, but overall that's quite a statement. Facts, evidence, study, research, a thirst for knowledge all seem to almost inexorably lead to atheism. Repression, denial, anti-rationalism and anti-intellectualism are symptomatic of religion. I rather like Sam Harris' challenge to the religious to name one area in which we used to have a scientific explanation but now we have a generally accepted religious explanation that is better suited to explain the phenomenon.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

One fewer god...

I've always liked the atheist argument that everyone is an atheist with respect to most gods throughout human history, we atheists just believe in one fewer. I first saw this at Friendly Atheist, but since then I've Stumbled it a few more times, so I'm doing my part to spread it.

The thing that I especially like is the way this takes the argument out of the abstract and really confronts one with the fact that there are literally thousands of belief systems out there (if not more?). Most have fallen by the wayside, especially with the inexorable march of science as an explanatory force. There are a few pesky followers of various cults (e.g. cargo cults, Christianity, etc...) that refuse to go away in the face of overwhelming evidence disproving their most basic claims. Also, remember that the popularity of a given god has no correlation with the "truth" to be found within that religion/cult.

Christian beliefs vs. atheist beliefs

Gods that Christians don't believe in Gods that atheists don't believe in
Aesir
Agasaya
Agdistis
Ah chuy kak
Ah cun can
Ah hulneb
Ah puch
Ahulane
Ahura mazda
Aine
Airmid
Aizen-myoo
Aji-suki-taka-hi-kone
Akea
Alberich
Ama-no-minaka-nushi
Ama-tsu-mara
Amaethon
Amaterasu
Amatsu
Amatsu-kami
Ame-no-mi-kumari
Ame-no-wakahiko
Amidaam-no-tanabata-hime
An
Anahita
Anat
Anath
Andhrimnir
Andraste
Andvari
Angrboda
Angus og
Ankt
Annapurna
Anouke
Anshar
Anu
Aphrodite
Apollo
Apsu
Apukohai
Arawn
Aray
Ares
Arianrhod
Artemis
Artio
Asclepius
Asherah
Ashur
Astarte
Astrild
Athena
Athirat
Athtart
Atla
Atlas
Audhumla
Ba'al hadad
Baal
Baal-hammon
Baalat
Babd catha
Bacchus
Badb
Baku
Balder
Balor
Balrama
Bast
Ba xian
Beg-tse
Bel
Belatu-cadros
Bellona
Belobog
Benten
Benzai-ten
Bergelmir
Berstuk
Bes
Beyla
Bhuvaneshwari
Bimbogami
Binzuru-sonja
Bishamon
Bixia yuanjin
Blodeuwedd
Borghild
Bosatsu
Bragi
Brahma
Bran
Branwen
Brighid
Brigit
Bris
Brono
Buddha
Bugid y aiba
Buluc chabtan
Burijas
Butsu
Bylgia
Camalus
Camaxtli
Camulus
Cariocienus
Caswallawn
Ceres
Ceridwen
Cernunnos
Cerridwen
Cerunnos
Chac
Chalchiuhtlicue
Charun
Chemosh
Cheng-huang
Chien-shin
Chimata-no-kami
Chup-kamui
Crnobog
Cupid
Cybele
Cyhiraeth
Dagda
Dagon
Dagon
Dagur
Daibosatsu
Daikoku
Dainichi
Damkina
Danu
Davlin
Dawn
Dazbog
Demeter
Dev
Dewi
Dhanwantari
Dhumavati
Diana
Diancecht
Di cang
Dionysus
Disen
Don
Donar
Dosojin
Dozoku-shin
Druantia
Durga
Dylan
Dziewona
Ea
Ebisu
Eir
Ekchuah
Ekibiogami
El
Elaine
El elyon
Elli
Emma-o
Enki
Enlil
Enyalius
Enyo
Eos
Epona
Ereskigal
Erra
Eshara
Eshmun
Farbauti
Faunus
Fenrir
Flidais
Flins
Flora
Forseti
Freya
Freyr
Frigg
Fudo
Fujin
Fukurokuju
Funadama
Futsu-nushi-no-kami
Gaia
Gama
Ganesha
Ganga
Garuda
Gauri
Geb
Gefion
Gekka-o
Geong si
Gerd
Giobhniu
Gu
Guan-di
Gun
Gwydion
Gwynn ap nudd
Hachiman
Hades
Hadur
Hai
Haniyasu-hiko
Haniyasu-hime
Hanuman
Hathor
Haulili
Haya-ji
Heimdall
Hel
Helios
Heng-o
Hephaestus
Hera
Hermes
Hermod
Hestia
Hiaka
Hiiakawawahilani
Hinakuluiau
Hiruko
Hod
Hoderi
Holler
Hoori
Hors
Horus
Hoso-no-kami
Hotei
Hsi-wang-mu
Huitzilopochtli
Hygeia
Ictinike
Ida-ten
Idun
Ika-zuchi-no-kami
Iki-ryo
Inanna
Inari
Indra
Inti
Irmin
Ishtar
Isis
Isora
Ixtab
Izanagi
Izanaki
Izanami
Janus
Jarilo
Jarovit
Jinushigami
Jizo
Jord
Jormungand
Juichimen
Juno
Jupiter
Jurojin
Juthrbog
Juturna
Kagutsuchi
Kalaipahoa
Kali
Kaluannuunohonionio
Kamado-gami
Kamapua'a
Kami-kaze
Kaminari
Kamohoali'i
Kamooalii
Kanaloa
Kanayama-hiko
Kanayama-hime
Kane
Kane-hekili
Kapo
Kapohoikahiola
Karewit
Kari
Kartikeya
Karttikeya
Kathirat
Kaupe
Kawa-no-kami
Kenro-ji-jin
Keoahikamakaua
Keuakepo
Khepri
Ki
Kiha
Kingu
Kinich ahau
Kishar
Kishi-bojin
Kishijoten
Kishimo-jin
Ko-no-hana
Kojin
Koleamoku
Korrawi
Koshin
Kothar
Koya-no-myoin
Krishna
Ku
Kuahana
Kukailimoku
Kukaoo
Kukulcan
Kukunochi-no-kami
Kuni-toko-tachi
Kura-okami
Kurma
Kuula
Kvasir
Laamaomao
Labraid
Lada
Lado
Laga
Laka
Lakakane
Lakshmi
Laran
Lares
Libintia
Lie
Liza
Llyr
Lofn
Loki
Lono
Lonomakua
Lotan
Lugh
Luna
Macha
Maeve
Magna mater
Magni
Mahulu
Maia
Manannan
Mani
Manua
Marduk
Margawse
Marisha-ten
Marowit
Mars
Maru
Marzanna
Matangi
Math ap mathowny
Matka gabia
Matka ziemia
Maui
Mawaya-no-kami
Maya
Mebd
Medb
Melqart
Menhit
Menthu
Mentu
Mercury
Mextli
Mider
Mikaboshi
Milu
Miming
Mimir
Minerva
Miro
Mithras
Mixcoatl
Miyazu-hime
Moaalii
Modi
Mokosh
Mokualii
Moloch
Monju-bosatsu
Mooaleo
Morrigan
Mot
Mummu
Murukan
Musubi-no-kami
Myrrdin
Nacon
Nai-no-kami
Naka-yama-tsu-mi
Nammu
Nanaja
Nanna
Nanse
Neith
Nemain
Nemesis
Nephthys
Neptune
Nergal
Niamh
Nikko-bosatsu
Ninazu
Ninhurzag
Ninigi-no-mikoto
Nintu
Ninurta
Njord
Nominosukune
Norns
Nott
Nut
Nyorai
Oanomochi
Odin
Ogoun
Ohkuninushi
Oho-yama
Ohonamochi
Ohyamatsumi
Okuni-nushi
Ops
Orgelmir
Oro
Osiris
Ostara
Ouli
Owatatsumi
Oyamatsumi
Pales
Pan
Papa
Parvati
Pele
Perperuna
Persephone
Perun
Phaethon
Phoebe
Phoebus apollo
Pilumnus
Pluto
Podaga
Poliahu
Pomona
Porewit
Poseidon
Proserpine
Puea
Qadeshtu
Quetzalcoatl
Radegast
Raiden
Ram
Rama
Ran
Re
Resef
Reshep
Resheph
Rhea
Rod
Rugiviet
Ryo-wo
Sabazius
Sae-no-kami
Saga
Sakhmet
Sambo-kojin
Samulayo
Sarasvati
Sarutahiko ohkami
Saturn
Segomo
Selene
Sengen
Septu
Seshat
Seth
Seti
Shachar
Shaka
Shakti
Shalim
Shamash
Shamayim
Shapsu
Shemesh
Shen yi
Shichi fujukin
Shinda
Shine-tsu-hiko
Shiva
Shoden
Shoki
Shu
Si-wang-mu
Siebog
Sif
Simargl
Sin
Sirona
Sita
Siwa
Sjofn
Skadi
Sleipnir
Sol
Stribog
Suijin
Suitengu
Sukuna-biko
Surya
Susanoh
Susanowa
Svantetit
Svarog
Svetovid
Svetovit
Syn
Takami-musubi
Takemikadzuchi
Taki-tsu-hiko
Tatsuta-hime
Tawaret
Tefnut
Tehwom
Tenjin
Teutates
Tezcatlipoca
Thanatos
The zorya
Thor
Tiamat
Tlaloc
Tonatiuh
Toyo-uke-bime
Toyouke-omikami
Triglav
Tsuki-yumi
Tu
Tu matauenga
Turris
Tyche
Tyr
Uba
Uga-jin
Uga-no-mitama
Ukanipo
Ukemochi
Ulaulekeahi
Uli
Ull
Utu
Uzume
Vali
Valkyries
Vamana
Vanir
Var
Veles
Venus
Vertumnus
Vesta
Vidar
Vishnu
Volturnus
Vulcan
Wakahiru-me
Wata-tsu-mi
Wepwawet
Wurukatte
Xipe
Xi wang-mu
Xochipilli
Xochiquetzal
Yabune
Yam
Yam-nahar
Yama-no-kami
Yamato
Yarikh
Ymir
Yu-huang
Yuki-onna
Yum kimil
Zababa
Zana
Zedek
Zeus
Zirnitra
Zislbog
Zizilia
Zroya
Aesir
Agasaya
Agdistis
Ah chuy kak
Ah cun can
Ah hulneb
Ah puch
Ahulane
Ahura mazda
Aine
Airmid
Aizen-myoo
Aji-suki-taka-hi-kone
Akea
Alberich
Ama-no-minaka-nushi
Ama-tsu-mara
Amaethon
Amaterasu
Amatsu
Amatsu-kami
Ame-no-mi-kumari
Ame-no-wakahiko
Amidaam-no-tanabata-hime
An
Anahita
Anat
Anath
Andhrimnir
Andraste
Andvari
Angrboda
Angus og
Ankt
Annapurna
Anouke
Anshar
Anu
Aphrodite
Apollo
Apsu
Apukohai
Arawn
Aray
Ares
Arianrhod
Artemis
Artio
Asclepius
Asherah
Ashur
Astarte
Astrild
Athena
Athirat
Athtart
Atla
Atlas
Audhumla
Ba'al hadad
Baal
Baal-hammon
Baalat
Babd catha
Bacchus
Badb
Baku
Balder
Balor
Balrama
Bast
Ba xian
Beg-tse
Bel
Belatu-cadros
Bellona
Belobog
Benten
Benzai-ten
Bergelmir
Berstuk
Bes
Beyla
Bhuvaneshwari
Bimbogami
Binzuru-sonja
Bishamon
Bixia yuanjin
Blodeuwedd
Borghild
Bosatsu
Bragi
Brahma
Bran
Branwen
Brighid
Brigit
Bris
Brono
Buddha
Bugid y aiba
Buluc chabtan
Burijas
Butsu
Bylgia
Camalus
Camaxtli
Camulus
Cariocienus
Caswallawn
Ceres
Ceridwen
Cernunnos
Cerridwen
Cerunnos
Chac
Chalchiuhtlicue
Charun
Chemosh
Cheng-huang
Chien-shin
Chimata-no-kami
Chup-kamui
Crnobog
Cupid
Cybele
Cyhiraeth
Dagda
Dagon
Dagon
Dagur
Daibosatsu
Daikoku
Dainichi
Damkina
Danu
Davlin
Dawn
Dazbog
Demeter
Dev
Dewi
Dhanwantari
Dhumavati
Diana
Diancecht
Di cang
Dionysus
Disen
Don
Donar
Dosojin
Dozoku-shin
Druantia
Durga
Dylan
Dziewona
Ea
Ebisu
Eir
Ekchuah
Ekibiogami
El
Elaine
El elyon
Elli
Emma-o
Enki
Enlil
Enyalius
Enyo
Eos
Epona
Ereskigal
Erra
Eshara
Eshmun
Farbauti
Faunus
Fenrir
Flidais
Flins
Flora
Forseti
Freya
Freyr
Frigg
Fudo
Fujin
Fukurokuju
Funadama
Futsu-nushi-no-kami
Gaia
Gama
Ganesha
Ganga
Garuda
Gauri
Geb
Gefion
Gekka-o
Geong si
Gerd
Giobhniu
Gu
Guan-di
Gun
Gwydion
Gwynn ap nudd
Hachiman
Hades
Hadur
Hai
Haniyasu-hiko
Haniyasu-hime
Hanuman
Hathor
Haulili
Haya-ji
Heimdall
Hel
Helios
Heng-o
Hephaestus
Hera
Hermes
Hermod
Hestia
Hiaka
Hiiakawawahilani
Hinakuluiau
Hiruko
Hod
Hoderi
Holler
Hoori
Hors
Horus
Hoso-no-kami
Hotei
Hsi-wang-mu
Huitzilopochtli
Hygeia
Ictinike
Ida-ten
Idun
Ika-zuchi-no-kami
Iki-ryo
Inanna
Inari
Indra
Inti
Irmin
Ishtar
Isis
Isora
Ixtab
Izanagi
Izanaki
Izanami
Janus
Jarilo
Jarovit
Jinushigami
Jizo
Jord
Jormungand
Juichimen
Juno
Jupiter
Jurojin
Juthrbog
Juturna
Kagutsuchi
Kalaipahoa
Kali
Kaluannuunohonionio
Kamado-gami
Kamapua'a
Kami-kaze
Kaminari
Kamohoali'i
Kamooalii
Kanaloa
Kanayama-hiko
Kanayama-hime
Kane
Kane-hekili
Kapo
Kapohoikahiola
Karewit
Kari
Kartikeya
Karttikeya
Kathirat
Kaupe
Kawa-no-kami
Kenro-ji-jin
Keoahikamakaua
Keuakepo
Khepri
Ki
Kiha
Kingu
Kinich ahau
Kishar
Kishi-bojin
Kishijoten
Kishimo-jin
Ko-no-hana
Kojin
Koleamoku
Korrawi
Koshin
Kothar
Koya-no-myoin
Krishna
Ku
Kuahana
Kukailimoku
Kukaoo
Kukulcan
Kukunochi-no-kami
Kuni-toko-tachi
Kura-okami
Kurma
Kuula
Kvasir
Laamaomao
Labraid
Lada
Lado
Laga
Laka
Lakakane
Lakshmi
Laran
Lares
Libintia
Lie
Liza
Llyr
Lofn
Loki
Lono
Lonomakua
Lotan
Lugh
Luna
Macha
Maeve
Magna mater
Magni
Mahulu
Maia
Manannan
Mani
Manua
Marduk
Margawse
Marisha-ten
Marowit
Mars
Maru
Marzanna
Matangi
Math ap mathowny
Matka gabia
Matka ziemia
Maui
Mawaya-no-kami
Maya
Mebd
Medb
Melqart
Menhit
Menthu
Mentu
Mercury
Mextli
Mider
Mikaboshi
Milu
Miming
Mimir
Minerva
Miro
Mithras
Mixcoatl
Miyazu-hime
Moaalii
Modi
Mokosh
Mokualii
Moloch
Monju-bosatsu
Mooaleo
Morrigan
Mot
Mummu
Murukan
Musubi-no-kami
Myrrdin
Nacon
Nai-no-kami
Naka-yama-tsu-mi
Nammu
Nanaja
Nanna
Nanse
Neith
Nemain
Nemesis
Nephthys
Neptune
Nergal
Niamh
Nikko-bosatsu
Ninazu
Ninhurzag
Ninigi-no-mikoto
Nintu
Ninurta
Njord
Nominosukune
Norns
Nott
Nut
Nyorai
Oanomochi
Odin
Ogoun
Ohkuninushi
Oho-yama
Ohonamochi
Ohyamatsumi
Okuni-nushi
Ops
Orgelmir
Oro
Osiris
Ostara
Ouli
Owatatsumi
Oyamatsumi
Pales
Pan
Papa
Parvati
Pele
Perperuna
Persephone
Perun
Phaethon
Phoebe
Phoebus apollo
Pilumnus
Pluto
Podaga
Poliahu
Pomona
Porewit
Poseidon
Proserpine
Puea
Qadeshtu
Quetzalcoatl
Radegast
Raiden
Ram
Rama
Ran
Re
Resef
Reshep
Resheph
Rhea
Rod
Rugiviet
Ryo-wo
Sabazius
Sae-no-kami
Saga
Sakhmet
Sambo-kojin
Samulayo
Sarasvati
Sarutahiko ohkami
Saturn
Segomo
Selene
Sengen
Septu
Seshat
Seth
Seti
Shachar
Shaka
Shakti
Shalim
Shamash
Shamayim
Shapsu
Shemesh
Shen yi
Shichi fujukin
Shinda
Shine-tsu-hiko
Shiva
Shoden
Shoki
Shu
Si-wang-mu
Siebog
Sif
Simargl
Sin
Sirona
Sita
Siwa
Sjofn
Skadi
Sleipnir
Sol
Stribog
Suijin
Suitengu
Sukuna-biko
Surya
Susanoh
Susanowa
Svantetit
Svarog
Svetovid
Svetovit
Syn
Takami-musubi
Takemikadzuchi
Taki-tsu-hiko
Tatsuta-hime
Tawaret
Tefnut
Tehwom
Tenjin
Teutates
Tezcatlipoca
Thanatos
The zorya
Thor
Tiamat
Tlaloc
Tonatiuh
Toyo-uke-bime
Toyouke-omikami
Triglav
Tsuki-yumi
Tu
Tu matauenga
Turris
Tyche
Tyr
Uba
Uga-jin
Uga-no-mitama
Ukanipo
Ukemochi
Ulaulekeahi
Uli
Ull
Utu
Uzume
Vali
Valkyries
Vamana
Vanir
Var
Veles
Venus
Vertumnus
Vesta
Vidar
Vishnu
Volturnus
Vulcan
Wakahiru-me
Wata-tsu-mi
Wepwawet
Wurukatte
Xipe
Xi wang-mu
Xochipilli
Xochiquetzal
Yabune
Yam
Yam-nahar
Yama-no-kami
Yamato
Yarikh
Ymir
Yu-huang
Yuki-onna
Yum kimil
Zababa
Zana
Zedek
Zeus
Zirnitra
Zislbog
Zizilia
Zroya
Yahweh

Friday, February 8, 2008

Mormons Dismayed by Harsh Spotlight - WSJ.com

Mormons Dismayed by Harsh Spotlight - WSJ.com

This whole presidential campaign has been especially interesting to me, as a former (recovering?) Mormon. To see the way Mormons are portrayed in the media, to read the commentary from other religious and secular sources, and to consider my own thoughts and feelings has been a unique experience for me.

As a child and adolescent, I remember being taught in church the standard "party line" for questions like "are Mormons Christian?", "does your dad have lots of wives", etc.... At the time, I thought that the way we were perceived by mainstream Christians was silly-- after all, shouldn't we as Mormons have the right to self-identify as Christians? Doesn't professing belief in the divinity of Christ count? If the church outlawed polygamy a hundred years ago, why are we still getting this question? We were taught, both implicitly and explicitly, that the reason for these questions was essentially jealousy or other latent ill will because we were the "one true religion". All of these false churches were banding together against us because we had the revealed truth! It was so obvious!

Once in college, I devoured philosophy courses. I realized that the doubts that I had were not unique to me, that there was nothing wrong with pursuing metaphysical questions. When you're a Mormon, questioning is mildly discouraged. Questioning too much might lead you to false prophets, away from the truth. That mindset never really sat quite right with me, but I was always told to pray about it, listen for a "still, small voice" that would tell me God's will. Mormons place a great deal of emphasis on the concept that prophecy is not dead, that God personally, literally, speaks. Only, I never heard anything. I assumed that I was unworthy, that the very existence of my doubts had blocked me from being receptive to the voice of God. It wasn't until I started reading more of the philosophy of religion that I realized it was both normal and healthy to question the existence of god. Atheism was a viable alternative. Not only viable, it was the only option that made sense to me. The thing that I loved about philosophy was that nobody was telling me the answers. There were no "answers". There was a process of thought. Nobody was promoting atheism, or theism, or one religion over another; there was only an insistence that you had to have good reasons for whatever you believed. Your beliefs had to have intellectual consistency.

For me, there was no turning back. I tasted freedom, and reason was my new standard. It still is.

It wasn't until this year that I started thinking again about the issues that Mormonism raises, due primarily to Mitt Romney's campaign. Only now, I got to see the commentary from the outside, as a non-Mormon. What a difference! Then I read the front page article- above the fold no less- from today's Wall Street Journal. What a perfect catalyst for this post, which I had been considering writing for some time. Most Christians today seem to have a bit of a persecution complex (see also Bill Donohue), but Mormons have it worse than most. They've still got it in the back of their mind that the founder of their church was martyred and they were forced to flee to Utah in search of religious freedom (read: polygamy). Add to this the conviction that they are the "peculiar people" and that Satan is actively trying to keep people from their religion because of its truth, and one develops quite a heady mix of persecution complex.

In spite of this, there was always the sentiment within the church that they were making headway. The church was growing rapidly, both home and abroad, which only fed the conviction that people were finding the truth irresistable. That's the context behind the article in the Wall Street Journal- that's why Mormons are so surprised now to find that people still don't like them. *gasp* Mormon beliefs are still mistrusted within and without Christianity, and rightly so.

Mr. Romney's candidacy revived old lines of attack and mockery of some of the church's unusual practices, such as secret ceremonies, the wearing of special undergarments, and the baptizing the dead in the belief that it will help them join family members in heaven.

The only thing that I don't understand is why Mormon beliefs are ridiculed within Christianity, but Christian beliefs are not held up to the same level of ridicule in society at large.

I apologize, but I can't remember the radio show I was listening to, but the host had a brilliant bit of satire. It was several weeks ago, and he was trying to argue that the religion of a candidate ought not be a part of the equation for determining who you are going to vote for. He was deadpanning that "yes, those Mormons are so ridiculous for believing that an angel came to Earth with golden plates, revealing a new religion. All good Christians know that it really happened when a new star appeared in the sky and a virgin gave birth to the literal son of god. All good Christians know that they literally are eating the flesh and drinking the blood of this god-man when they take communion. They know that the universe was created in six days, and two of every animal in the world rode on a boat at the same time. And of course, all good Muslims know about the 72 virgins awaiting martyrs..." Again, I can't remember the exact source, but if someone remembers, please post it in the comments.

None of these beliefs make any damn sense given what a rational person can observe about the world around them. This is what I came to realize about all religions. The more I thought about them, the less sense they made. Once I stopped accepting the dogma I was fed, the scales fell from my eyes and I was able to think. This is why I make fun of you if you believe in unbelievable things. This is why I occasionally toy with the thought of moving to northern Europe, where things are a little more sane. This is why I'm outraged when you say you want to put prayer back in the schools, or change the constitution, or limit stem cell research, or any of thousands of things that you do that hurt other people or take away their rights without any good reason. This is why I'm an atheist.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

The Raw Story | Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in 'God's standards'

I'm sure you've seen this or heard about this by now, but in case you haven't:

The Raw Story | Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in 'God's standards'

"I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution," Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. "But I believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that's what we need to do -- to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view."
Contrast this with the constitution (from http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1)

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Hear that, Huckleberry!?!?!?!?! That's my constitution that you are threatening! And what parts of God's law do you want to amend the constitution to include? All excerpts below from Evil Bible.

Can we own slaves? Leviticus 25:45 “Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy … and they shall be your possession… they shall be your bondmen forever.” Genesis 9:25 “And he [Noah] said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.” Exodus 21:2 & 7 “If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing… And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.” Joel 3:8 “And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hand of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people far off: for the Lord hath spoken it.” Luke 12:47-48 [Jesus speaking] “And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.” Colossians 3:22

“Servants, obey in all things your masters.” So obviously the Biblical God thinks slavery is right, right? Just look at these: Isaiah 58:6 “Undo the heavy burdens... let the oppressed go free, ... break every yoke.” Matthew 23:10 “Neither be ye called Masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.” (Also see Exodus 22:21 & 21:16) Let it be known here that pro-slavery Bible verses were cited by many churches in the South during the Civil War, and were used by some theologians in the Dutch Reformed Church to justify apartheid in South Africa. There are more pro-slavery verses than cited here. I simply do not have the room to post all of them.

Should we pray in public? 1 Kings 2:22, 54 & 9:3 shows the Lord is joyed by public prayer and listens intently. Matthew 6:5-6 condemn public prayer and command people keep it a secret.

Should we circumcise males? Genesis 17:10 “This is my covenant which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee: Every man and child among you shall be circumcised. Clearly this demands circumcision, yet Galatians 5:2 says “Behold, I Paul, say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.”

Do women have rights? Genesis 3:16 “And thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” 1 Timothy 2:12 says a woman must not teach, remain silent and must be subjugated to her man. 1 Corinthians 14:34 & 1 Peter 3:6 both say that women have limited rights and are under control of their men. Judges 4:4, 14-15, 5:7, Acts 2:18 & 21:9 all tell of powerful women who were not subjugated by men and were not punished for their authority of men.


So, Mr. Huckleberry Hound, which of these bat-shit insane, stupid, ass-backwards, neanderthal ideals should we amend our constitution to include?!?! Or is it just going to be the typical Christian Coalition stuff: banning abortion, eliminating stem cell research, stripping homosexual of any rights, getting rid of that pesky "evolution" in biology classes and so on?

THIS IS WHY ATHEISTS ARE SO FUCKING ANGRY!

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

Sermon Alive

I'm not really sure if this is true or a VERY clever parody. I guess I have to lean towards true. Apparently, the idea is to post a daily devotional or sermon.

Some choice tidbits from Sermon Alive:

Nevermind, I can't pick a few. I'm thinking about skewering the daily devotion on an ongoing basis, but let's just start with today's, OK?


FAITHFULNESS

A faithful man will be richly blessed, but one eager to get rich will not go unpunished. - Proverbs 28:20

In the Promised Land, we learn that obedience is the only thing that matters. We are called to execute, and leave outcome to God. Sometimes that outcome is very positive, yielding a return. In other cases, we may not yield a corresponding return. We may even get a negative outcome. The difference is that we know that we have been faithful to what God has called us to and we yield results to God. God often blesses obedience beyond what we deserve. If God brings wealth to your life, it should come as a by-product of obedience, not an end in itself.

God may call each of us to be obedient to situations that may not yield immediate, positive results. It is in these times that our faith must be obedience-based versus outcome-based. What if Jesus had considered the immediate ramifications of whether he would go to the cross? Based on the immediate outcome, the decision would have been an easy one. Who wants to die on a cross? However, for Him there was a higher purpose in that obedience. We are called to this same kind of obedience. This means putting our own flesh on the line daily, dying to our own self-will.

This is what it means to be a faithful man. Pray that God will make you a faithful man today.

Question yourself:

  • Am I willing to be obedience in any circumstances?
  • Why have faith in God’s promises resulting in total obedience irregardless of any circumstances?
So what I'm learning from this is if we work hard at obeying god's will, then sometimes we get stuff and sometimes we don't. However, if we are very lucky we might actually have to put "our own flesh on the line daily". And I just can't get enough of the questions to ask yourself:
"Am I willing to be obedience in any circumstances?"
"Why have faith in God's promises resulting in total obedience irregardless of any circumstances?"

I don't know how to "be obedience." Can someone please diagram the last sentence for me? I know "irregardless" is not a word, but I'm not sure what the subject of the sentence is? I'm going to take a stab at translating the question into one you might be able to read: "Come up with some reasons why you should have blind faith in god and blindly obey his various edicts, even when they contradict each other, despite any and all evidence to the contrary".

Other things that you can learn if you sign up for the daily devotional:
  • how to sort out which of the many voices in your head is god's
  • "You need more battles that will give you the opportunity to learn the art of spiritual warfare. Do not fear these battles that are before you. God has already given you the victory if you choose complete dependence and obedience to Him. Then you will become one of God’s greatest warriors, skilled in spiritual warfare."
I hear it now.... "ninjas for Christ"

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

Evolution and the race for President

Reason Magazine has a wonderful new article up by Ronald Bailey about why we should care what the various presidential candidates believe about evolution. He covers what most of the candidates have said about evolution so you can get an idea of who thinks what. He ends the article with this summation for why you should care what the candidates think:

A larger question is whether a candidate's belief about the validity of evolutionary biology has anything to say about his or her ability to evaluate evidence. A January 4, 2008, editorial by Science editor Donald Kennedy correctly argues, "The candidates should be asked hard questions about science policy, including questions about how those positions reflect belief. What is your view about stem cell research, and does it relate to a view of the time at which human life begins? Have you examined the scientific evidence regarding the age of Earth? Can the process of organic evolution lead to the production of new species, and how? Are you able to look at data on past climates in search of inferences about the future of climate change?" Kennedy concludes, "I don't need them to describe their faith; that's their business and not mine. But I do care about their scientific knowledge and how it will inform their leadership."

Since science and technology policy issues are only going to become more important as the 21st century unfolds, we should all care how scientific knowledge informs a president's leadership.
How do you fit this in with your prioritization of which candidate to support? As I argued here, once I find out you are a religious literalist, I can't take you seriously anymore.
Sadly, we do have a need to know as much as we can about the candidate's particular religious beliefs. If you believe that a 2000 year-old Jewish zombie is someday coming back, I want to know that about a candidate before I vote for them. If you believe that 72 virgins await martyrs in some idyllic paradise (although presumably not so idyllic for the virgins), then I have a right to question your basic sanity. All hyperbole aside, I need to know if your particular supernatural beliefs are going to influence your policies.

I was telling my wife the other night that I'm not so concerned about all the minutiae involved in the debate, but it's getting to the point that if you are religious I think that, in many ways, is mutually exclusive with being a reasonable, logical person. If you believe that the earth is only 6,000 years old, we don't have that much more to talk about. We're obviously not going to agree on environmental policy if you think the whole earth was created in 7 days. I can't listen to your position on taxes, or health care, or education, much less your ideas about more religiously charged topics like abortion, gay rights, stem cells, or even foreign policy. We're pretty much done at that point, and I can't take you seriously anymore. Can you see where I'm coming from? The inmates are out of the asylum and are running for president, unfortunately they all have a god-complex.

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Survey: Most Americans Believe in Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ | Christianpost.com

Survey: Most Americans Believe in Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ | Christianpost.com

I'm pretty sure that sampling 1,005 adults by a "christian polling organization" is going to return these kinds of results, but here goes. Highlights:

  • Respondents were apparently asked whether they believed that the following stories were "factually accurate" or "meant to teach principles"
    • Virgin-birth of Christ
    • Christ turning water into wine
    • Christ feeding the multitudes with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish
    • Noah's ark & the flood
    • Serpent (devil) tempting Eve to eat the forbidden fruit
    • Samson's strength being derived from his hair & loss of strength after Delilah cut it.

Once again, I am nearly speechless. As I was explaining here, if you are a biblical literalist, we don't really have anything to discuss. It takes such a willful disregard for facts, biology, even the laws of physics as we know them, that a discussion between us is bound to be unproductive. I think I could almost grant you that biblical stories are meant to be allegorical and a way to teach morality if it weren't for all the incest, genocide, torture, slavery, murder, etc... in the "good book".
However, if there is truly 75% of the American population that literally believes that Jeebus was born from a virgin I might really have to abandon this country. I'm moving to Norway. Luckily, I'm quite certain that the Christian anti-science bias and ignorance of scientific method extends to the area of statistical analysis and polling science.

Teach the Bible in Schools...Please! : The Antipath

Teach the Bible in Schools...Please! : The Antipath

Hilarious!! Full text below:

Teach the Bible in Schools…Please!

Since this issue hasn’t gone away yet, I just wanted to register my opinion that the Bible should be taught in public schools. I’d love that. In fact, just to help facilitate this, I thought I’d do a favor to any local school board weighing the issue and come up with a course curriculum for them.

The History of the Bible - Course Curriculum:

First quarter: Students will study the historic context of the old testament, including slavery, the inferiority of women, etc., and develop an understanding of how these social attitudes are mirrored by the main character, God, in his rules regarding exactly how slaves should be treated and how best to own your women. Exercises will include female students shutting up and baking pies for the male students, while male students create a deity and decide whether or not that deity approves of the pre-established pie-baking and shutting-up system.

Second quarter: Students will study the historic context of the new testament, including reviewing the history of the gospels; namely the men who wrote them and how they could have done so having never knew Jesus. Discussion will include an exercise known as the “telephone game”.

Third quarter: Students will study the creation of the modern-day bible by the Roman Empire. Topics will include the merging of Christian holidays with Pagan traditions and other marketing techniques employed in the selling of Christianity to the empire’s subjects, as well as a lesson on the books that the Romans omitted from the bible because they didn’t fit with the rest. Discussion will include students presenting ideas on how the Romans might have decided for God which books were His word and which were fiction, as well as ideas on what the Roman’s previous god Saturn might have thought about this process.

Fourth quarter: Students will study the various translations of the bible and learn to draw relationships between the results of translation and the goals of the translators. Discussion will include a review of substantial differences in various translations and students will compare key passages and how they appear in the Hebrew, King James, Good News, Esperanto and Klingon versions of the bible.

Goal: Students will come away from this class with the understanding that the Bible was never handed down from man from the ether, but rather a collection of books written by men, edited by other men, translated by more men and interpreted by even more men, with vastly divergent results. For their final exam they will be asked to write three page essay on why a flawless and perfect being might choose such a retarded method for communicating such important ideas when such direct methods as sky-writing and speaking through flaming shrubbery would be readily available.

Bring it on, baby!

Planet Atheism

Planet Atheism - aggregating blogs by non-believers and freethinkers