Jesus is a Hoax

Jesus is a hoax.  How can I say that? Pretty easily it turns out.  I can say that because I follow a chain of logic from a known fact.

Evolution is a fact.  Lots of people in America want to ignore this, and many choose to try and disprove it by using junk science and holding on to beliefs that were long ago discredited.  There are those who denounce and scream that it cannot be true because it removes the need for a God and His dogma, something they just know is right and true, despite the lack of any proof whatsoever.

You don’t get to vote on evolution…which a lot of evangelical Christians think they can do and make it go away. Evolution is real science and is not really a “theory” anymore, though the title ‘Theory of Evolution’ will remain because that’s the way science works.  The fundamentalist Christians attempts to discredit evolution and teach their phony alternatives, “Creation Science” or “Intelligent Design”, in schools is a total failure and it is recognized by most intelligent people as just religious doctrine posing as science.

Science moves forward on the basis of testable, repeatable, and reviewable evidence, religion however has no evidence behind it and depends wholly on the non-questioning faith of its adherents.  Any teacher who tries to teach faith-based dogma in a science class is clearly not suited to be a teacher. Our leadership in science and technology cannot be subservient to anyone’s religious persuasions.

Evolution today presents a major conundrum to Christianity and it’s dominate dogma of original sin and the blood atonement of Jesus.  Just believe in Jesus and your ‘sins’ are washed away.  Well that Jesus may or may not be reality.  We know that evolution could not produce a single parent couple through which we all descended; this is predictable from the way we know evolution works.  Additionally there is the DNA and archaeological evidence totally backing this up.

This is what gets the ball rolling.  These simple proofs that there was NO Adam and Eve is what gives lie to the whole Bible. If there is NO Adam and Eve, as described in the Bible and this is surely fact, then there is surely NO fall and the subsequent original sin, and it is original sin that the whole Christian shtick is based on.  If there were NO original sin then there is no need for redemption; if there is NO need for redemption then there is no need for Jesus, If there is no need for Jesus…what use is the story of a crucifixion and resurrection?  Besides lacking any contemporaneous proofs at all, the whole story reeks of Bronze Age myth.  Are we still to believe in gods that demand blood sacrifice?  Haven’t we grown past this medieval, dark ages reasoning?  I know I have.

Religions problems with science are many and varied. Evolution tells us the earth, biosphere, animals, and humans evolved in a certain way and on a schedule of sorts. It makes predictions of what is to be found and how things will work.  Genesis has stories that conflict with known science.  We know in fair detail how and when the universe came into being, how and when our earth came into existence, and how and when humans came to inhabit our planet.

If you claim to be an intelligent member of modern society do you still believe in magic and demons, witches, devils, imps, goblins, incubuses, succubus’s, wraiths, unicorns, etc.?  Christians do, and of course in the dark ages the churches killed people who they thought were witches or devils and such and those who denied some of the Bibles more egregious blunders.

The primal reason Evolution is giving Christians so much grief is of course that evolution says the Christian creation story is just flat wrong…it never happened that way and the first two chapters of Genesis are totally wrong…the story is not factual in any way.  We know how dinosaurs and other land animals, plants, insects, birds, fish, humans, etc. came into being and we know it was not by ex-nihilo creation by some Bronze Age god.

Evolution could not, did not, produce a single mother and father of all future humans, so there was no Adam and no Eve. And with this now known to be fact the Christians have to really rethink their beliefs and decide where they are to go from here on. There is no voting on this…we do not get to choose what we want to be reality.  What is real and true is truth, no matter what some goat herders wrote a few thousand years ago.

John Schneider, former teacher of theology at Calvin College in Michigan says it’s time to face facts:

“There was no historical Adam and Eve, no serpent, no apple, no fall that toppled man from a state of innocence. Evolution makes it pretty clear that in nature, and in the moral experience of human beings, there never was any such paradise to be lost. So Christians, I think, have a challenge, have a job on their hands to reformulate some of their tradition about human beginnings.”

. . funny pictures - Schrodinger:
see more Lolcats and funny pictures, and check out our Socially Awkward Penguin lolz!

Advertisements

About the word of me
Interested in family and friends,grandchildren, photography, darkrooms, history, archaeology, scuba diving, computers, software, fast cars, journalism, writing, travel, ecology, news, science, and probably most other subjects you could think of. Did I mention family and friends?? I require iced tea or cold brewed coffee and a internet connection to be fully functional. Sometimes there are just so many words in my head they spill out.

7 Responses to Jesus is a Hoax

  1. JustConcerned says:

    You say that “Science moves forward on the basis of testable, repeatable, and reviewable evidence, religion however has no evidence behind it and depends wholly on the non-questioning faith of its adherents.” First of all, your whole theory falls because evolution is not testable, repeatable, or reviewable. There are no labratories were scientists can gentically change a gorilla into a human. Its impossible. Also, if evolution takes place over millions of years, as scientists claim, where is the fossil evidence to supports this? No ‘transitional’ fossils have ever been found or recorded by any archelogists. Besides this, why would gorillas continue to exist if they all evolved into humans? Why would they bother evolving if some of them were going to stay gorillas? Also, if you had even done a minamal amount of research, you would know that many Christans HAVE questioned Creation and, after find NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER, for evolution, they have concluded that Intelligent Design is, in fact, true.

  2. the word of me says:

    Hello JustConcerned, thanks for responding.

    Ahhh…my man. You are just repeating the lies that you have been feed by creationist evangelical fundamentalists. It is you that needs to do research.

    Last things first…You write:
    “Also, if you had even done a minamal(sic) amount of research, you would know that many Christans(sic) HAVE questioned Creation and, after find NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER, for evolution, they have concluded that Intelligent Design is, in fact, true.”

    Intelligent Design is not a science of any kind. There has been no research or testing at all done in the name of ID. It is all word garbage spewed by places such as Answers in Genesis or the Discovery Institute. There has been no original research or work been done that has been subjected to peer review and published… It has no powers of explanation. In short ID is a non-existent chimera.

    You write:
    “First of all, your whole theory falls because evolution is not testable, repeatable, or reviewable. There are no labratories(sic) were scientists can gentically(sic) change a gorilla into a human. Its impossible.

    Yes, evolution is testable, repeatable, and reviewable. Think of the Flu viruses that change every year because we keep throwing poisons (vaccines) at them. There are many more examples, just ask a scientist, or keep up with the science columns in the news and science magazines. That argument has been dead for decades. Evolution never said we could change a gorilla into a human in a laboratory…but we do know that evolution can, over millions of years, and we know the mechanism by which it works.

    You write:
    “Also, if evolution takes place over millions of years, as scientists claim, where is the fossil evidence to supports this? No ‘transitional’ fossils have ever been found or recorded by any archelogists(sic).

    Many many transitional fossils have been found, and every year it seems, we find more. You might want to go to this page and review it for awhile:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

    You write:
    “Besides this, why would gorillas continue to exist if they all evolved into humans? Why would they bother evolving if some of them were going to stay gorillas?”

    “Humans did not evolve from present-day apes. Rather, humans and apes share a common ancestor that gave rise to both. This common ancestor, although not identical to modern apes, was almost certainly more apelike than humanlike in appearance and behavior. At some point — scientists estimate that between 5 and 8 million years ago — this species diverged into two distinct lineages, one of which were the hominids, or humanlike species, and the other ultimately evolved into the African great ape species living today.”
    From: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat03.html

    The ancestors of many Americans came from Europe…why are there still Europeans? 🙂

    Peace

  3. AnoNymous says:

    Okay, first of all, your assertions about the inherent nature of Christianity are flat wrong. Just because most of the noisy people are creationists doesn’t mean the rest of us are. My pastor earned a masters in biology before taking up his present calling, and I grew up believing that evolution DOES NOT disprove the creation story. No less respected and prominent Christian theologians than Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas supported a non-literal interpretation of the Genesis story of Adam and Eve, and moreover, the Genesis story itself is fraught with the implication that Adam and Eve, while they were spiritually the mother and father of humanity, were not the only Homo sapiens on the planet. When Cain left his mother and father to wander the earth, he had a wife. From where? From among the other humans of course (at least to my mind). As a Christian I refuse to just add words like, “God made a wife for Cain,” and as I believe that Genesis is God’s word, I am left to assume that He omitted for a reason the bit about how Cain had kids.

    Continuing with the first assertion, the verb “create,” as it was used in Genesis, was the same verb used in the Psalms to say “create in me a clean heart, oh God.” The psalmist was not literally attempting to ask the Lord to wipe the dirt out of his chest cavity; he was asking God to rededicate the function of his heart so that it would beat for God, that the psalmist would be living for God. The Hebrew verb “bara” was distinct from the idea of ‘creation’ present, for example, when the Israelites created a golden calf to worship. The sense of ‘creation’ used in Genesis is not the sense of actually molding and fashioning ex nihilo, but of rededicating the world to God’s order. Even the most literal reading of Genesis used by creationists admits that some form of matter must have existed, namely water. But in ancient Near Eastern cultures, water was also and more importantly used as a symbol for chaos, a chaos out of which God brought the order of the world. Before the Bible was translated, and before people started interpreting it for themselves, the Genesis narrative was not frequently considered a narrative of literal scientific material creation, as evidenced by the scholastic works of Aquinas and Augustine; but it has indeed always been a story of God establishing the order of civilization and of the beginning of God’s work of teaching his people, a story that has absolutely nothing to do with evolution or science at all.

    As a further tangential point, any Hebrew reading the Genesis story would recognize how audacious it is that the God of the Israelites would rest on the seventh day. In the ancient Near East, it was widely known that deities rested by carrying out all their normal functions, and could only do so in a temple. By claiming that God rested in the seventh day, without having built himself a temple, Genesis implies that the entire world was God’s temple, and that he sustains the entire world.

    I’m sure this is all more Christian theology than you care to hear. My point is that you really have no more understanding of faith than the people you decry.

    A further, non-theological point, though, is that even if humanity as a whole did not descend from any single pair of individuals, there is absolutely nothing in evolutionary theory which says that it would have been impossible for a pair of specially created human beings like Adam and Eve to have mingled with the preexisting population of humans and diffused their genes to become the real common ancestors of the Israelites, who have always been the primary focus of the Bible. Furthermore, evolutionary evidence show quite clearly that humanity has undergone population bottlenecks, so the idea of a common biological pair from whom we all descend is not anywhere near impossible, even given that we did not receive all our genes from them.

    I’d like to address another failure of reasoning that pervades your argument; that witches, goblins, demons, and the like do not exist. This is simply fallacious. Obviously, these things do all exist in the minds of those who believe in them. Postmodern philosophy especially claims that objective reality does not exist, and therefore, in the subjective realities of those who believe in demons, etc., those things do literally exist. More importantly, though, goblins, demons, witches, and the like exist because they influence the actions of those who believe in them. Things are as real as the things they influence, and the people influenced by these figments of imagination are themselves very real presences in the world.

    You may feel that an argument like this is splitting hairs, pure semantics. However, I would argue that this viewpoint is philosophically practical as well; as evidence, I would cite the case of Dr. Paul Farmer, who has had immense success treating patients in Haiti. Haitians very much believe in Voudou spirits and magic, and often, when one family member falls ill, they will blame the illness on wizards, or other forms of magical intervention. Dr. Farmer in these cases holds “sorcery consults,” wherein he explains to the individual the biological basis of the disease, assuring the patient that in this particular case, no magic was involved. Never does he try to dispel the Haitian individual’s belief in magic.

    A pair of quotes to hopefully illuminate the idea I’m trying to convey: first, from a Haitian woman, who, when asked about why, if an illness is caused by magic, she would still take the advice of Western medicine, who said, “Are you incapable of complexity?”; the second from Professor Dumbledore in the eighth Harry Potter movie, who said “Of course this is happening in your head. But why on earth should that mean it isn’t real?”

    As an aside, I would highly reading the biography of Dr. Farmer, “Mountains Beyond Mountains: The Quest of Dr. Paul Farmer,a Man Who Would Cure the World.” It’s an amazing story.

    Anyway, the previous argument leads me to my final note, about why we still need God. The ancient Greeks had a god for everything; for wine, for thunder, for earthquakes/the ocean (a connection I still fail to understand). All these god’s were meant to make order out of chaos, to give a rational basis for inexplicable phenomena. Science has indeed given us far better explanations for many of these (nowhere is this more evident than in the biology my pastor studied, as he often told us); but nevertheless, science has still left us with much to ponder.

    More than simply things to ponder, though, science has given us a few concrete examples of things that are necessarily unknowable within the boundaries of science. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, for example, says quite clearly that one cannot know perfectly the precise velocity and precise position of a particle at any given point in time. In fact, it is mathematically impossible to even assume that such a thing is knowable, let alone that any of us can know it. Another more concrete example is the matter within a black hole. When a wave function passes into a black hole, it (obviously) becomes trapped and we can no longer observe its state; and therefore, even when the information evaporates back out again, we will no longer have any ability to determine the state of that particular wave function before it entered the black hole.

    These things that science deems unknowable affect us every day. Perhaps not the black-hole stuff, but certainly the things involving Heisenberg uncertainty, quantum randomness. A single electron’s randomly altered position can stop a protein from binding, cause an enzyme not to act, cause a mutation in the genome that results in a new species. Likewise, on the larger scale, a weather system that begins a flood just one minute early could cause the premature collapse of a bridge, a collapse which could either prevent or cause the premature death of the next Hannibal, Hitler, Newton, Tesla, or Da Vinci. So much of what goes on in the world is deliberately and rightly attributed by scientific rationality to pure randomness.

    In order for us to understand how this randomness is able to affect the world, we can pretend that there is some abstract process labelled the random event generator that just keeps cranking out existence; or we can believe that the random event generator is in fact a larger version of the most random event generator in existence, a conscious being or soul. These are the only way two ways I can think of to rationally fit observed chaos into an objective worldview, and either way, we are left with the rational and orderly world subjected to processes and systems far beyond the scope of science. I, as a faithful Christian, simply choose to hope that, maybe, I exist as something more than an admittedly grand and random machine; and that perhaps there is something more to the rest of reality as well.

    • the word of me says:

      How far are you willing to go when scientists start disproving things about your religion?

      There are many things in the Bible that are now relegated to mythical status by science. We know that magic is not true, snakes don’t talk or walk, unicorns are not real, people do not come back to life after 3 days in the grave, virgins don’t give birth.

      We also know that floods never covered the whole earth and that people (many millions) were already living ALL over the earth (had been for thousands of years) when the Bible says that God came down from heaven and scattered the human language. We know that Moses was probably not real, and the Pentateuch was written by at least 3 or 4 people around 600-500 BC

      We know that the Exodus is just a pious myth. There is not one bit of archaeological evidence to support it, despite over a hundred years looking by many many archaeologists, and the Egyptians never record anything like half the population leaving at one time, nor is there any evidence that the plagues of Moses happened. (no evidence of a flood there either).

      Archaeologists have spent decade after decade excavating and pouring over the cities mentioned in the Bible that Joshua was supposed to have conquered and found no evidence that the cities were populated at the supposed times of their conquest.

      And then there are the sacrificial alters and the burning of sheep/goats as sacrifice to God…He tells the people how to sacrifice animals to Him…He enjoys the smell of burning flesh…and then He tells the Hebrews how long to segregate women when they have their time of the month/period…this so-called God is nothing more then men making it up as they go.

      The Old Testament is made up by common Hebrew men. There is little truth in it.

      Then there is the New Testament with 4 Gospel’s written by nobody knows who. We know 1/2 of Paul’s letters were not actually written by him. He makes up ‘Original Sin’ which is a big mistake because now we know that Adam and Eve never existed, therefore ‘Original Sin’ never happened. He never meet Jesus though they both lived at the same time.

      At least 5 different studies were undertaken to prove or disprove prayer and they all failed to show prayer worked…despite Jesus telling us it would work.

      And now in the past year we find that we may all have some Neanderthal blood/genes in our bodies…meaning we mated with them OVER 25,000 years ago and we are the last in line of the Homo species…we are descended from great apes.

      • AnoNymous says:

        Did you listen to a word I said? Or did you post a knee-jerk reaction to a Christian posting on your site?

        As a Northern European I am a proud carrier of some of the genes of our Neanderthal brethren from approximately 25,000 years ago. I think the world would have been boring if there hadn’t been people living all across the globe speaking many different languages during the time when the Tower of Babel was supposed to have happened. I fully agree that evidence for most of the Exodus story is paltry at best. I refuse to pretend that floods literally covered the entire planet. I can’t deny that unicorns are not physically real, that snakes do not talk, that the Pentateuch was written by several different individuals, and so on and so on.

        But first of all, you are wrong to say that we can prove that Adam and Eve did not exist. I hope I don’t have to tell you that the spontaneous appearance of two more people among a vast preexisting genetic pool would not have left an evolutionary trail. It is absolutely ridiculous to say that we can genetically prove or disprove the existence of two particular individuals from 10,000 or whatever years ago. That’s what I meant about Cain’s wife; she was born among the other people you and I both agree existed.

        Second of all, you are wrong to say that the factual inaccuracies of the Old Testament have any bearing on their spiritual significance. I don’t care, frankly, whether any part of the Old Testament literally happened. I think it’s true, because it’s a set of stories meant to reinforce general principles about how we are supposed to live our lives.

        As to your particular example of segregating women who were having their period, I don’t think I, personally, would expect a woman to do a bunch of heavy work tending sheep at the same time as she has to deal with a bleeding uterus. The story of Job, in which a bunch of his “friends” try to tell him that he brought all his misfortune upon himself, is another one of God/Jesus’ parables, a parable telling us to buck up and endure hardship. That’s a message that is true, and if you believe otherwise, then you have clearly never talked to people born in pioneer families who made a living out of 48 acres of bare woods. (No, I’m not Mormon, I just happen to agree with their pioneer rhetoric. Since I have grown up among people who lived it.)

        Before I move to your claims about the New Testament, I should attend to the two biggest claims against the Old Testament: Exodus and the flood.

        The Egyptians never recorded a mass migration out of Egypt. But they did certainly record a massive migration *into* Egypt. According to the Jewish calendar, Joseph was purchased at the end of the Second Intermediate Period; as we know from tales of Methsuelah and other 900-year-olds in similar records, this time frame is general. At best.

        The Second Intermediate period was, however, started when an Asiatic people known as the Hyksos overran much of the Nile delta and wrested it from Egyptian control (the Second Intermediate is also occasionally referred to as the Hyksos period for this reason.) As an aside, the name Hyksos from ancient Egyptian means “foreign rulers,” but its Arabic translation means “shepherd kings.”

        Now, as I’m sure you see where I’m going with this, I must admit that the historian Josephus does indeed claim that the Hyksos were in fact the sons of Jacob. I feel no need to make that claim. Regardless, Egyptian historians are all in agreement that the Second Intermediate was a time when the primary lineage of pharoahs lost control of much of lower Egypt, and thus had little authority to keep accurate records.

        Historians/archaeologists/anthropolgists are uncertain of the real origins of the Hyksos. Some claim that they were multi-racial; others (like Josephus) that they were a distinct ethnicity. According to the Encyclopedia of Military History, they ruled Lower Egypt by the fifteenth dynasty and were expelled (or at least the rulers expelled) by the seventeenth dynasty. It is pointless to claim that this historic fact does not at least superficially resemble the story of the Israelites, and it is still more pointless to try to say that some slave (meaning Joseph), amid this period of political turmoil could not have sucked up to one of the Hyksos warlords who styled himself as “pharoah,” first by claiming to be an interpreter of dreams, and then by proving himself to be a competent right-hand administrator. It is especially pointless given that the Hyksos, as a people, were far more meritocratic than the dynastic pharoahs of Egypt. As to where the Hyksos would have been expelled to, I think it’s clear that they would’ve settled in the same place as the Israelites, in Canaan, the place from which they had come in the first place.

        (This is why I personally like the multi-racial Hyksos hypothesis, since it would make so much more sense, then, why Joseph would have expressed solidarity with other Asiatic peoples, perhaps including his own original tribe, and taken in refugees during a famine. [What a moron I must be, to try to make sense of nonsense.])

        As to Noah’s flood, we have both agreed that it wasn’t global. The only logical idea, then, for a literalist, is that it was local, that “the world” (not, “the planet”) meant “the locally known world.” Localized floods of anywhere near a similar scale are, of course, equally unlikely; but one thing that is not impossible or unlikely is a factual basis for the story of Atlantis. (I almost feel like apologizing for this one, because it’s use by me implies more than I mean. But I’m not really sorry since my claims are modest.)

        The Santorini eruption caused a tsunami that ultimately ended the flourishing Minoan civilization. It devastated Crete, disrupted Egyptian farming, utterly destroyed the Minoan settlement we now call Akrotiri, and probably sparked a nuclear winter in China. Such “floods,” have the propensity to inspire legends, like Atlantis. This would be made even more legendary if such tsunamis were paired with heavy rains (or in the case of a desert, with any rain) that starts a flash flood. To an old man in a boat being swept out to sea, it would certainly appear that the entire world was flooding over, and until the tsunami subsided and the boat reached a shore, it would be fairly well impossible to tell otherwise.

        I don’t base my faith in Noah’s flood on shoddy reasoning like this. I base it on the fact that the most blown-up legend can have a grain of truth in strange but natural coincidental circumstances. I know that if I had only been trying to convince you, I really shouldn’t have invoked Atlantis, and for the record, I don’t think Atlantis was any more literal than the flood. But I invoked Atlantis because I stand by and will defend my idea that literature such as these can be ‘true’ as a best interpretation by humans of a natural coincidence, and that the Noah story in particular serves to make a point that we should trust God not to wipe out humanity, despite any set of strange, ridiculous, or genuinely cataclysmic circumstances.

        As to your assertions about the New Testament, I’m not certain what the authorship of either the Pauline epistles or the Gospels have to do with my faith in Jesus Christ. My religion is not based upon any given traditions about its writing. It is not based upon the spiritual “wonderfulness” of the personalities of humans like Paul, nor is it based upon correct attribution of its texts. My faith is based upon the simple (and perhaps simple-minded) hope that by looking to an example of suffering love like that of Jesus Christ, our lives can be changed and our priorities put in their places.

        Just as I don’t care whether the Old Testament actually happened, I don’t care whether the interpretations of those who wrote the New Testament were factually accurate. In fact, I think the story is better knowing that the “demons” He cast out were nothing more than psychological disorders or debilitating emotional trauma. That fact would imply that what we are called to do as His shepherds is to reach out to those who need a kind word or a helping hand.

        The perfect example of this, in my mind, is of the gentile (non-Jewish) woman who asked Jesus to heal her daughter. The Gospels say that Jesus rebuked her with the words “It is not fair to take the children’s food and give it to the dogs,” implying rather insultingly that she was a dog, and that the Israelites were the children. This exchange makes no sense in the context of Jesus’ love, except when you know that in the Hellenistic Jewish culture of the day, it was frequent for men to get into public arguments in the streets. Jesus’ engagement of a woman in this way was an act of humility, and in fact implied that she had every bit as much right to speak her mind as a man would.

        Sure enough, Jesus, having seen fire in her eyes, is responded to with the words of “Yes, Lord, but even the dogs eat the crumbs from the master’s table.” In that culture, such a response from a woman would be worth abuse. Jesus should, by cultural standards, defend his own honor. Instead, he agrees with her, and tells her that her daughter is healed.

        My faith does not rest upon correct authorship of texts like these, nor does it rest upon their historicity. My faith rests upon the idea that they are good examples of how we ought to live our lives, today; and it rests upon the idea that inspiring and inspired fiction contains truth. Until you can prove otherwise, I find no reason to abandon the faith of my fathers, no more than did Ingrid the Haughty (another example of a historically questionable, but nevertheless mildly inspiring story.)

        I probably should’ve said this earlier, but my pastor has always told me that the Bible is not truth. “In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…” That passage doesn’t say so explicitly, but it suggests to me that the words that can be said in a book could not be the true Word, for the only true Word is God. My faith is built upon the idea that these words lead us to a knowledge of how God wishes the world would choose to operate.

        I also believe fully that there is every bit as much historical truth present within these words as there is within any of the other epics told by ancient people, from Beowulf, to the Odyssey and Iliad, to the Aeneid. In fact, I believe there might be a bit more so. I believe God planned things that way deliberately in order to help us realize that in a world of free will it is in fact impossible to be completely unbiased, a fact scientifically attested every time witnesses try to describe a crime or crime scene.

        One final word on unicorns (or demons, same thing really.)
        If you ever decide to work at a mental hospital, and if one of the patients ever tells you to shut the door so that the demons can’t get them, I hope you have the human decency to shut the door. The demons in his head may not be ‘real,’ but his head is very real, and that means the demons in his head might as well be real from his perspective. Morally, when we deal with the mental patient, we all should try to treat them as if they were real, because to the mental patient, they are real. All too real. And that means that really, they might as well be real for us too.

  4. the word of me says:

    Hello AnoNymous, thanks for writing.

    Yeah, I guess I did post a knee jerk reaction. I’ve been kinda’ busy and did not give your reply the attention it deserved. I don’t normally do that…I apologize.

    According to the religious people I have talked to, the ‘Tower of Babel’ happened around a few hundred years after the Noachian flood, and the ‘Flood’ happened around 23 to 2400 BC, so that would place the ‘Tower’ thing somewhere around 2,000 +- BC.

    The best figures I could find put the earth’s population at around 15 million in 3,000 BC, 27 million in 2,000 BC, and 38 million in 1500 BC. We know that humans lived ALL over the earth (except Antarctica) by at least 15,000 years ago. Europe and Asia and Australia have been populated since, at least, 30,000 +- years ago, and Africa for more than 500,000 +- years when counting the pre-humans

    So it seems you actually agree with most of what I believe.

    The story of the Exodus and Joshua’s conquests, according to modern archaeological evidence, is purely pious fiction, as there is NO evidence at all that supports them. The same goes for the ‘Flood’

    You write:
    “But first of all, you are wrong to say that we can prove that Adam and Eve did not exist. I hope I don’t have to tell you that the spontaneous appearance of two more people among a vast preexisting genetic pool would not have left an evolutionary trail. It is absolutely ridiculous to say that we can genetically prove or disprove the existence of two particular individuals from 10,000 or whatever years ago…”

    I guess I worded the part about Adam and Eve wrong…Perhaps a better way to phrase it would be…Adam and Eve as described in the Bible never happened. Now for the reasoning/facts behind this statement.

    Archaeology, paleoanthropology, and DNA science have independently come to the consensus that the human species Homo-sapiens has walked the earth for about 200,000 years. DNA science also says there were never just 2 individual humans…we came from a population of at least hundreds. DNA also says that the 8 humans who supposedly survived the supposed world-wide flood never happened either.

    Another thing to consider in all of this is that we share some DNA with Neanderthals…so we mated with them over 25,000 years ago. Before us and the Neanderthals there were Homo-habilis, Homo-erectus, Homo-heidelbergensis, and a few more whose names don’t come readily to mind…we are now the last surviving ‘Homo’ species on earth, but we can trace our lineage back many many hundreds of thousands of years

    Add all this together with the knowledge that the world/universe is billions of years old…not 6 or 10 thousand and the Biblical story just falls apart. It is ALL myth. We did NOT descend from two people 6,000 or 10,000 years ago. The Hebrews were writing this fiction around the time of the Exile in Babylon around 600 +- BC. They knew NOTHING about the beginnings of the earth and/or humanity…they wrote a pious fiction that is nowadays falling apart because of modern scientific inquiry

    So, what do we have now?? We have a fictitious story of the beginning of the earth, the universe, and mankind that is demonstrably false…this can only mean one thing…The whole Bible and the whole religion is built on a human fiction. Do you think a REAL God is going to let this (face it) crappy story to be circulated as fact when He would KNOW that later peoples would be able to deconstruct the fiction as easily as the Santa Claus myth?

    I have come to the point where I KNOW that the Christian story is as false as every other religion on earth…now or in long-ago history. Almost everything in the Bible can legitimately questioned…and real fault can be found…enough to fatally destroy it. The only thing keeping it going is people that deny the facts and the truth.

    You write:
    “Second of all, you are wrong to say that the factual inaccuracies of the Old Testament have any bearing on their spiritual significance. I don’t care, frankly, whether any part of the Old Testament literally happened. I think it’s true, because it’s a set of stories meant to reinforce general principles about how we are supposed to live our lives.”

    Well if you want to base your life on the fictitious writings of Hebrews who are trying to keep their own religion alive in the face of terrible tragedies 2500 years ago…that’s fine by me, but don’t try to tell me that a real God exists, because I know better.

    The Old Testament laws are not the be-all, end-all of laws. They had some really stupid beliefs. There is no way on earth I could believe the laws to be found in Leviticus are godly pronouncements. The ‘Golden Rule’ which just about every culture that ever existed on earth had…covers everything.

    You write:
    “As to your particular example of segregating women who were having their period, I don’t think I, personally, would expect a woman to do a bunch of heavy work tending sheep at the same time as she has to deal with a bleeding uterus.”

    Women today don’t seem to have much of a problem with their periods. However what I meant to emphasize was that here is a “God”

    You write:
    “…The story of Job, in which a bunch of his “friends” try to tell him that he brought all his misfortune upon himself, is another one of God/Jesus’ parables, a parable telling us to buck up and endure hardship. That’s a message that is true, and if you believe otherwise, then you have clearly never talked to people born in pioneer families who made a living out of 48 acres of bare woods…”

    Isn’t the story of Job where God makes a bet with Satan and gives Satan free reign to do anything to Job short of killing him? That is the most god-awful scariest story ever told. Your god, whom you trust, unleashes a*purely evil* being lose on you, without your knowledge or any explanation, and your wife and children are killed, your lifetimes work and security is taken from you and you have nothing and no explanation. It doesn’t matter one damn bit that his god gives him back more than he had, …This is all the proof anyone needs to bust the ‘God is love’ fiction.

    Thankfully though it is just another fiction.

    You write:
    “Before I move to your claims about the New Testament, I should attend to the two biggest claims against the Old Testament: Exodus and the flood.
    The Egyptians never recorded a mass migration out of Egypt. But they did certainly record a massive migration *into* Egypt. According to the Jewish calendar, Joseph was purchased at the end of the Second Intermediate Period; as we know from tales of Methsuelah and other 900-year-olds in similar records, this time frame is general. At best.”

    Regarding the Exodus story (which wasn’t written by Moses), and is generally considered fiction, because there is absolutely NO archaeological evidence whatsoever to support it. A group of people over a million strong travelling the Sinai for 40 years would leave tremendous archaeological evidence…NOTHING has ever been found. This in itself disproves the story.

    The Noachian flood has been universally denied by main-line geologists for hundreds of years. The doubts about this Biblical myth started in the late 1600’s or early 1700’s. A link given here will lead you to a paper written by Davis A. Young, an *evangelical Christian* geologist from Calvin College.
    http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p82.htm There is little doubt that Noah’s world-wide flood never happened.

    There IS evidence that a really huge flood happened in the Babylonian area around 2900 BC and some geologists place the size at around 200 miles wide and 400 miles long. The timeline is relatively close to the ‘Epic of Gilgamesh’ story, but way way before the Biblical story was written. I suspect some plagiarizing was going on.

    Some Christians point to the plethora of ‘Flood’ stories from ancient peoples, but they don’t line up in time and there are usually huge differences in the happenings. Ancient civilizations were, of necessity, located near water sources. These sources ALL flooded from time to time, and given humans predilection for exaggeration over time I doubt the real truth is told. And all civilizations do not have flood myths.

    At the peak of the last ice age, sea levels were as much as 350 feet lower than when the ice age ended. There is a big inventory of ancient buildings underwater now because of the rise in sea levels…sounds like flood story material to me.

    I am well aware of the Hyksos and also of the ‘Sea People’, but I think their existences’ are well explained by the Egyptologists and they in no way prove an Exodus or as much as half the Egyptian population of the time up and leaving suddenly. Also think about the 10 plagues that Moses and god were supposed to have brought down upon the land…read the part in the Bible and explain to me HOW any civilization would have survived and absolutely no real archaeological (or historical writings) evidence been found…NOTHING.

    “Thera didn’t just alter the cultural make up of Europe, it has kept adventurers and treasure hunters busy too.

    When the Greek philosopher Plato described the lost city of Atlantis over a thousand years after the volcanic eruption, he may have been referring to Thera folklore passed down in Greece over many generations and exaggerated like a game of broken telephone.
    The eruption has also been loosely linked with the Biblical story of Moses and the exodus from Egypt. The effects of Thera’s eruption could have explained many of the plagues described in the Old Testament, including the days of darkness and polluting of the rivers, according to some theories.”
    http://www.livescience.com/4846-eruption-thera-changed-world.html

    Remember that the Old Testament is Christianities, and the New Testament writings, entrée to a God, a God they can point to and say, “See our god is the one that the Hebrews encountered and interacted with over a thousand years ago (they thought), so OUR God is real.”

    It’s late and I’m a little tired, so I will post this and answer the rest a little later.

    • AnoNymous says:

      I can certainly understand being busy. I myself have work that needs doing, and my procrastination with these posts is perhaps a painfully truthful reflection of my priorities in life. If I’m being unreasonable in expecting you to draw this out, please tell me now; and if not, I thank you. It’s impossibly hard to have a decent debate about anything relating to religion, and I can’t help but jump at the hope of being able to. This post is just a clarification on my end of one of your points.

      I wasn’t trying to imply that the Exodus was proven by the existence of the Hyksos. I’m simply saying that the history has enough uncertainty about that particular period so as to not definitively prove or disprove the story one way or the other, even as it was literally given (compensating, I do concede, for the obvious numerical flaws, which in oral or once-oral literature I would always question anyway.) Whenever an argument is based on the absolute certainty of its claims, then it is only as sound as the doubts are unsound, and the fact, if so, that the Exodus *might* have happened in some form does indeed make unsound the argument that it *can’t* have happened.

      On a bit of a tangent, as of the early 1900s Sinai merchants were selling tamarisk resin, which collects on the ground beneath the tamarisk trees once much more common throughout the Sinai. This manna does indeed taste much like honey. The merchants, perhaps, were referencing the existing story when they called their stuff manna, but the Sinai is also known as a major stop for migratory birds, such as quail, which do often arrive exhausted and which would indeed have been easy to catch. In no way is this alone enough, certainly, to feed an army of the size described; but between this, other proposed desert food sources (lichens like those used on the Eurasian steppe, or locusts as mentioned elsewhere in the Bible), and the fact that the Sinai once had many more trees, I think it’s safe to say that there would have been enough manna (a term occasionally proposed to be a cognate of Egyptian mennu, meaning food) to support some tribe of Hebrew ‘shepherd kings” migrating from Hyksos Egypt.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: