Does Science Make Belief in God Obsolete?

Link. Thanks to Guy Harrison for this link.

William Lane Craig v. Louise Antony: "Is God Necessary for Morality?"

I think Dr. Antony's opening statement brilliantly and succinctly summarizes the best criticisms of Dr. Craig's position. It's a good debate.

GENESIS 1:28-2:4a, Be Fruitful And Multiply, Founder Effect and Genetic Diversity

This Article shows that even if the physical evidence didn't refute the special creation of the first humans, Adam and Eve, in Genesis 1:27, the problem of Genetic Diversity known as the "Founder Effect" would eventually lead to crippling genetic mutations or extinction.
The article also mentions some other characteristics of and similarities with Near Eastern (Southwest Asian) Myths and a little history of the Bible.

This article and its predecessors in the series are a collection of notes put together from sources that are represented by quick reference links to similar web pages to make it easy to get more information as quickly as possible. The original sources are listed at the end.

A LIST OF PREMISES AS ARTICLES REFUTING GENESIS 1-11 AND ROMANS 5 SO FAR
P1. The Interconnectedness of The Ancients - Demonstrates the robust ancient civilizations at the time and that Canaan, Israel and Judah were central to them. Discusses trade routes, seafaring, the link between whales and the Leviathans of Mythology and how long it would take to get from one civilization to another by sea.
P2. Genesis 1:1-25 Is An Amalgam of Near Eastern Creation Myths. Demonstrates the prior existence of key elements of the story of the creation of the Universe that appears in Genesis.
P3. Genesis 1:26-1:27, Creation of Humans in Near Eastern Myths And The Paleolithic Era. Demonstrates that the physical evidence contradicts the story of the making of the first humans in Genesis.
P4. GENESIS 1:28-2:4a, Be Fruitful And Multiply, Founder Effect and Genetic Diversity. This Article shows that even if the physical evidence didn't refute the special creation of the first humans, Adam and Eve, in Genesis 1:27, the problem of Genetic Diversity known as the "Founder Effect" would eventually lead to crippling genetic mutations or extinction.

The criteria for Folklore as described in Alan Dundees book "Holy Writ as Oral Lit" are "multiple existence and variation".

GENESIS 1:28-31
* In most Near Eastern myths, man is made to serve god, he doesn't have a special place in the earth, but Judaism is different. The Judaic God, in concept and in comparison to other Near Eastern Gods, is like a benefactor of Man, like Prometheus(1).

* Generally, Near Eastern Myths reflect the sophistication of the city-state, Kingdom, region or Empire they come from. They have many Gods each with a responsibility and organized in an hierarchy. Judaism, coming from a small nomadic tribe has a God that reflects their culture. Their religion is simple; One god, involved with their daily business like a small town preacher. When they lost their land and moved to Babylon, then lived under the Persians, and then Greece, Gods character and behavior changed remarkably over time marked by the development of his "hiddenness" and the theology of the Angels and Satan.

* God gives them vegetation for food, later (after the flood) God changes his mind and lets them eat meat. Being pastoral, its not good to eat all the profits.

28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
29 Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.

God told them to be fruitful and multiply, but the problem is, the population they should found would be less fit over time than the founders. Their DNA would degrade over time until after a few generations, they would exhibit defects such as color blindness, immune system deficiencies, dwarfism, and a whole host of other problems that would put them at a higher risk of extinction with every generation.

* Founder effect: "The term "founder effect" refers to the loss of genetic variation when a new colony is established by a very small number of individuals from a larger population"(2,3)

Though there are a very small number of mutations (genetic drift) in a new birth, a small breeding population will amplify that drift. The effect can be profound. Changes in few a people can be copied through subsequent generations(3a). One of the problems in inbred populations are immune system damage. Without wide genetic diversity, the immune system becomes less able to fight a wide variety of diseases(4). The overall result is that inbred populations are less fit than larger breeding populations. And in fact, historically in popular culture, the effects of inbreeding are the subject of jokes directed at populations such as those that live in the Appalachian mountains commonly known as "Hillbillies"(5,6). Some case studies in genetic diversity among small populations have been done. Two ironic cases are the Amish in Pennsylvania and the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in Colorado City, Arizona and Hildale, Utah.

In Eastern Pennsylvania there are a group of Christians that live communally preferring to keep themselves distinct according to their religious beliefs(7). The are called "The Amish". This community was founded by about 200 German Immigrants in the early 18th century, possibly 1744. Because of their preference to breed from among themselves, their genetic diversity has decreased over time leading to an extraordinarily high instance of inherited disorders such as dwarfism and extra fingers caused by genetic mutations.

In Colorado City, Arizona and Hildale, Utah, the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints was founded by John Y. Barlow and Joseph Smith Jessop. Because of their preference to interbreed, their population now lives with extraordinarily high incidence of mental retardation, encephalopathy, unusual facial features, brain malformation and epileptic seizures caused by unusually low amounts of fumarase in their cells(8).

The Pingelap Atoll is one of a group of three islands in the Pacific(9). After being struck by a typhoon it was reduced to a population of about 20. They have an unusually high incidence of colorblindness. 10% of the population are colorblind and 30% carry the Gene.

While the study and predictions of adequate numbers in a founder population is inconclusive, the estimates obviously depend on the quality of the initial set of genes. The numbers that I have seen for a viable population go from 50 to 10,000 individuals. A recent study of the genetic diversity in the founding of the Americas(10) shows the retention of genetic material of only about 70 individuals. Some of the genetic material was lost due to attrition (less breeding by a certain group) so the number was higher. According to Claude A. Piantadosi "the minimum founder population for a remote permanent space colony is likely to be on the order of 100 to 200 unrelated individuals."(11,12) That should bring new meaning to the phrase "Planned Parenthood". I suppose a plan to ensure the greatest amount of genetic diversity would have to be established to ensure the greatest likelihood of long term preservation of health.

If we say that Adam and eve lived and were perfect, then as we have traced our lineage back, we find the genetic "Adam" at about 60,000 BC and we find the "Mitochondrial Eve" at about 200,000 BCE. with 140,000 years between them, this contradicts the scenario in the bible. That puts us to the very beginnings of Homo Sapiens Sapiens, who definitely were not like us, and were living at the same time of the Neanderthals.

Stipulating Adam and Eve actually existed we should extend to them perfect Genes when they were made. Even with that, they could not escape genetic drift. We can see through experience and case studies that without perfect genes, a breeding population of more than two hundred would be needed to avoid the type of problems experienced by the Amish, the LDS, and the Pingelaps. Even with perfect genes, we know by extending the principles of inbreeding that any population derived from Adam and Eve would be less fit than they would otherwise. To posit a perpetual miracle is to increase the depth of contrary-to-fact speculation and makes an unlikely scenario even more unlikely. In any case, the problem presents itself again with the story of Noah.

30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so.
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

GENESIS 2:1-2:4a

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array.

* The ancients used principles of influence to try to enforce policy. They used Gods to legitimate their policies and their Kingship. Egyptian Pharoahs were variously linked to Gods, and The Epic of Gilgamesh has Gilgameshes name inserted in as the name of the Hero.

* The assertion that God rested on the seventh day is obviously a myth and an indicator that the writer was trying to legitimize this policy by associating it with God. "All his work" shouldn't be any effort at all for an all powerful being. He wouldn't need rest. Was he setting an example? What value does and example add to a mandate from God especially when there is a behavioral double standard for God and Humans?

* Being nomadic, and so prone to displacement, they needed something holy to keep up with the near eastern tradition, specifically Canaanite tradition, so they made a day holy. Holiness in Time rather than place. It allows for "Portable" worship.

* Genesis 2:4a is the end of the story and Genesis 2:4b starts the second one. Normally the biblical chapters correlate to the start and end of a story. In this case Stephen Langton(13) of Magna Carta fame, evidently decided to make this an exception or hadn't worked out the correlation between chapter and story yet.

* I've found two opinions on Genesis 2:4a. One says that it is like the book end to the first sentence. The second says that it was interjected by the redactor to introduce the second story(14). I hate to disagree with Richard Elliot Friedman, but it sure does look like a literary device that opens and closes the first story and it does seem to fit better, in my mind, than opening the second story, only to reverse the words in the next breath.

2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work.
3 And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.
4a. This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.

End of the first creation story

That brings us to the second creation story.

QUICK REFERENCES
1. Prometheus
2. Founder Effect from wikipedia
3. Founder Effect from BookRags
3a. Genetic Overview
4. Inbreeding
5. Hillbilly
6. Hillbilly Jokes
7. Amish
8. Fumarase deficiency
9. Pingelap colorblindness
10. Peopling of the Americas
11. The Biology of Human Survival: Life and Death in Extreme Environments, Claude A. Piantadosi, Oxford University Press, USA; 1 edition (September 11, 2003) pg 246,
12. Google books- "The Biology of Human Survival: Life and Death in Extreme Environments" Online
13. Stephen Langton
14. The Bible with Sources Revealed Richard Elliot Friedman.

SOURCES
1. Human Prehistory and First Civilizations, The Teaching Company
2.
Understanding Genetics: DNA, Genes, and Their Real-World Applications, The Teaching Company
3. Religion in the Ancient Mediterranean World, The Teaching Company
4. The Bible With Sources Revealed Richard Elliot Friedman
5. The Book of Genesis, The Teaching Company
6. Great Figures of the Old Testament, The Teaching Company.
7. Alan Dundees Holy writ as oral lit
8. National Geographic Genographic Project

Tertullian's Paradox; Insufficiency of both Reason & Scripture; C.S. Lewis & John Calvin; Victor Reppert & Paul Manata

The less people know about some things the more they argue over them. And what do Victor Reppert (of the blog Dangerous Idea) and Paul Manata (of the blog Triablogue) actually "know" about the things they are discussing -- things that constitute some of the most heavily discussed and unresolved debates throughout centuries of Christian theology and philosophy?

In this case Paul (the Calvinist) and Vic (the C.S.Lewis-ian/Arminian) toss at each other grandiose concepts and words that have a core of incomprehensibility not only in and of themselves, but also in the different ways different thinkers have conceived of them relating to one another:

God / nature
omniscience / free will
predestination / free will
divine goodness / human goodness (or lack thereof w/ exception of "common grace")

Both Vic and Paul remain "certain" that any incomprehensibilities in each case accord with their religious/philosophical words and definitions to a far greater degree than the words and definitions of the other fellow's alternate system of explanation.

All of which reminded me of something Bernard Williams, a Christian philosopher, wrote in his essay, "Tertullian's Paradox":

"If the Christian faith is true, it must be partly incomprehensible. But if it is partly incomprehensible, it is difficult to see what it is for it to be true..."

He continued...

"It follows further... that it is difficult to characterise the difference between belief and unbelief [especially, I might add, in the sense of believing--or not believing--in philosophical & biblical explanatory systems propounded by other Christians--E.T.B.]."

Read on as I fan the flames and even explain how arguments from both Catholic and Protestant thinkers over the centuries, when combined, have helped create more agnostics...

There are (and have been) so many differences between Christians in matters of theology, philosophy, liturgy, spiritual regimes, buzz words, and other practices, that Christianity ought to be called "Christianities," a term preferred by some scholars. In fact a spectrum of systems exist for interpreting the Bible and for determining it's authority on various matters, and even further diversity exists in respect to interpreting the history of competing Christian dogmas and traditions over the centuries -- in order to determine what authority each holds -- and in order to "find God's will."

No doubt the hunt for "God's will" via interpreting holy books, dogmas, and traditions is endless and exhausting which explains why so many Christians feel relieved to leave such a hunt up to their pastor, or up to the Sunday School lessons their church receives in booklets sent from their parent institution, or up to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, or up to the living patriarchs of the Eastern Orthodox church, or up to the guy with the weird haircut hawking "holy hankies" on TV.

I know it's exhausting because I tried and sought and prayed and read and read and continue to read up on the topic. So let's pour more oil on the fire of Vic and Paul's dialogue, and start by asking them both why they aren't Catholic? It's the single biggest Christian Church in the world. Nearly as big as all Protestant denominations combined. And it has what it calls "apostolic authority" going back to an apostle whom Jesus himself picked as a rock of faith to whom things on heaven and earth would be loosed, and they say that apostle picked others, etc. And here's the kicker, Catholics continue to use every reasonable, rational and historical argument in order to deny something near and dear to every Protestant, the sufficiency and perspicacity of Scripture. Instead of such a belief, Catholics teach that...

SCRIPTURE ALONE IS INSUFFICIENT

...which is also one of the things that Francis Beckwith, president of the Evangelical Theological Society, concluded last year before converting to Catholicism and leaving the presidency of that Protestant organization. Judging by his conversion (as well as that of Cardinal Newman's during the Victorian era which stunned England) Catholic critiques of the Protestant belief in "Sola Scriptura," are handy at helping to raise questions in the minds of conservative Protestants. Arguments between Catholics and Protestants on this matter even resemble the ones between freethinkers and conservative Protestants over the question of biblical inerrancy, and may help some Protestants grow a bit more moderate, even a bit more agnostic. See these articles for instance:

Ecclesiastical Authority in Scripture and Apostolic Tradition
by James Roger Black, Ph.D. in "Ancient Religions of the Eastern Mediterranean"

The headings in Dr. Black's paper include:

"Scripture alone is not a sufficient guide to faith and practice...
"Scripture is not self-defining...
"Scripture is not self-authenticating...
"Scripture is not self-interpreting...

"The Reformation principle of 'sola scriptura' -- i.e., reliance on 'Scripture alone' -- is not taught in Scripture itself, was not held by the early Church...

"The commonly cited biblical proofs of sola scriptura do not actually teach what they are alleged to teach...

"Both Jesus and the Apostles made use of -- and even appealed to the authority of -- the oral traditions, deuterocanonical and extracanonical writings, and varying textual recensions of their day."

See Black's article for the examples he cites beneath each heading. And see Dave Armstrong's articles as well:

Quick Ten-Step Refutation of Sola Scriptura

The Perspicuity ("Clearness") of Scripture

The Old Testament, the Ancient Jews, and Sola Scriptura

Are All the Biblical Books "Self-Attesting" and Self-Evidently Inspired?

Or check out this book: Not by Scripture Alone: A Catholic Critique of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scriptura ed., Robert A. Sungenis

Naturally if "Sola Scriptura" fails then Protestant's will be forced to recognize or at least look into Catholic claims of divinely-directed growth of dogma and traditions, not to mention centuries of miraculous and visionary experiences.

And here's where it beomes PROTESTANTISM'S turn to aid in leading more people toward greater agnosticism. Protestants over the centuries have gone through each miraculous tale propounded by the Catholic church with a fine-tooth comb and found them wanting. On the miracles reported to have taken place in the early church Rev. Dr. Conyers Middleton (18th century British Anglican clergyman, Cambridge graduate and author) says, regarding the early church fathers who reported them:

"I have shown by many indisputable facts, that the ancient fathers, by whose authority that delusion was originally imposed (that miracles existed in the early church), and has ever since been supported, were extremely credulous and superstitious; possessed with strong prejudices and enthusiastic zeal, in favour, not only of Christianity in general, but of every particular doctrine, which a wild imagination could ingraft upon it; and scrupling no art or means, by which they might propagate the same principles. In short; they they were of a character, from which nothing could be expected, that was candid and impartial; nothing but what a weak or crafty understanding could supply, towards confirming those prejudices, with which they happened to be possessed; especially where religion was the subject, which above all other motives, strengthens every bias, and inflames every passion of the human mind." [Conyers Middleton (1749), A FREE INQUIRY INTO THE MIRACULOUS POWERS WHICH ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SUBSISTED IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH FROM THE EARLIEST AGES THROUGH SEVERAL SUCCESSIVE CENTURIES. Reprinted (1967). New York: Garland Publishing. Preface, pp. 21-22.]

Then in the 19th century one can read the Protestant theologian (and father of modern inerrancy), B. B. Warfield, to see how he debunked Catholic miracles and resurrection stories in his famous work, COUNTERFEIT MIRACLES. Which just goes to show, as Dr. Robert M. Price (an ex-fundamentalist Protestant), wrote, "The zeal and ingenuity of conservative evangelical scholars in dismantling the miracles of rival Christian groups (and exploding rival interpretations of Scripture used to support such miracles), is worthy of the most skeptical gospel critic."

In the 20th century after the worldwide rise of Pentecostalism, the conservative Protestant, George W. Peters, dismantled stories of "resurrections" that allegedly took place in the 1970s during the Pentecostal revival in the Phillipines. His book was titled, INDONESIA REVIVAL: FOCUS ON TIMOR(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973), Chapter 4, "The Miracle Phenomena of the Revival," pp. 57-85. Other conservative Protestants have dismantled claims of miracles allegedly performed by Pentecostal televangelist Benny Hinn, including his claim, now withdrawn, that he had "raised someone to life."

This brings us to a Catholic book by Father Albert J. Hebert S.M., RAISED FROM THE DEAD: TRUE STORIES OF 400 RESURRECTION MIRACLES. Father Hebert claims many resurrection miracles have been performed by Roman Catholic saints. Naturally Protestants like Middleton, Warfield, and Peters are not going to simply allow Catholics to believe that their Church has a preponderance of resurrection miracles vouchsafed by God. They are going to question whether any such myriad of miracles ever took place, using every possible reason, rationalization or inkling of doubt in their minds.

But then one must ask how those same Protestants, so willing to employ every reason and rationalization at their disposal to deny Catholic miracles -- chalking them up to gullibility, blindness, folk tales, myths, legends, or the result of living in ignorant and superstitious times -- expect modern day people to believe every last miracle in the Bible instead?

On what historical grounds can the miracles of Protestantism's "enemy," the Catholic Church, be rejected without also rejecting or at least questioning heartily those found in the N.T.? If Father Hebert is correct then the miracles he enumerates serve as evidence of God's approval of the Roman Catholic Church's status as true church of God. And the miracles Father Hebert documents happened much more recently than those reported in the Gospels, and they are reported by people about whom we know more than is known about the Gospel writers. So what do we really know of the anonymous writers of the Gospels that assures us that they would not make use of whatever stories or pious legends were being spread about by others living in such a superstitious era?

Hence,
CATHOLICISM critiques the sufficiency of Scripture,
while
PROTESTANTISM critiques other Christian's beliefs in the movement of the spirit within their church (which was the Catholic church for centuries).

And that's but one reason why I remain agnostic concerning such matters. *smile* For a few others read,
If It Wasn't For Agnosticism I Would Know WHAT to Believe,
and,
Agnosticism: Reasons to Leave Christianity

Ed
( Edward T. Babinski )

"Loftus Entertains, Informs and Incites..."

Here's a review of my talk in Ft. Wayne. Link.

The Detestable Practice of Divinely Sanctioned Child Sacrifice in the Bible

Harry McCall is working on a post about child sacrifice that I'm anxiously waiting for. It's an issue that Christians want to hide under the rug. In the meantime let me prime the pump...

Child Sacrifice is Divinely Commanded in the Bible!

Exodus 22:29-30:

“You shall not delay to offer from the fullness of your harvest and from the outflow of your presses. The first-born of your sons you shall give to me. 30 You shall do likewise with your oxen and with your sheep: seven days it shall be with its dam; on the eighth day you shall give it to me.”

God admitted he did this in Ezekiel 20:25-26 where he purportedly said:

25 “Moreover I gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not have life; 26 and I defiled them through their very gifts in making them offer by fire all their first-born, that I might horrify them; I did it that they might know that I am the Lord.”

The context of the Exodus passage concerns offerings and sacrifices, and it says God requires that first born sons are to be literally sacrificed to him. Hence, unlike other passages where there is the possibility of redemption with a substitute sacrifice (cf. Exodus 13:13; 34:10-20), none is specifically stated here. The concept of "redemption" is an interesting one that goes hand in hand with child sacrifice, because animals were substituted for the firstborn. Yet that says nothing against the idea that a better sacrifice was the firstborn child himself, and many people in the Old Testament did just that. Circumcision was probably a substitutionary child sacrifice (Exodus 4:24).

Child sacrifice should be understood within the whole concept of human sacrifice as a whole, which pleased God (Leviticus 27:28). Human sacrifice was probably only considered evil when it was done in the name of a foreign god, and doing so was punishable by death precisely because it was offered to another deity (Leviticus 20:2; 18:21 Deuteronomy 12:31 18:10; II Kings 17:17 23:10; II Chronicles 28:3 33:4-10; Ps 106:38; Isaiah 57:5,6; Jeremiah 7:31 32:35 Ezekiel 16:20,21 20:26,31 23:37,39 Acts 7:43).

Child sacrifice was something that several Biblical people either did, or assisted others in doing so. Abraham was not morally repulsed by the command itself (Genesis 22). Then there is Jepthah who probably sacrificed his daughter because of a stupid vow (Judges 11); David (II Sam. 21:7-9); Solomon and his wives (I Kings 3:16); Ahab (I Kings 16:33-34); Ahaz (II Kings 16:2-3); Hoshea (II Kings 17:7); and Manasseh (II Kings 21:6, II Chronicles 33:6). It was a problem for King Josiah ( II King 23:10), for Jeremiah (Jeremiah 7:30-31; 19:3-5; 32:35), and Ezekiel (Ezekiel 16:20-21; 20:25-26, 30-31). The prophet Micah wonders if he should sacrifice his oldest son “as a sin offering” (6:6-8). Child sacrifice to foreign gods was so prevalent that it’s named as one of the major reasons why God sent the Babylonians to conquer Israel and forcibly take many of them as captives (II Kings 17:16-18).

We even read where the King of Moab sacrificed his son which caused the Israelites to retreat in defeat. Moab’s sacrifice created a great “wrath,” (ketzef), which was an external divine force to the warriors in the story, indicating that his sacrifice caused some divinity to act on behalf of Moab. (II Kings. 3:26-27).

In the New Testament God the Father sacrifices his only son (Jesus) as the central redemptive act of Christianity, and God still seeks to fulfill his lust for human sacrifice by burning humans forever in the lake of fire.

Sin, Genes, Sugars and Alcohol

This is a datum to support my assertion that Biological Bases for Behaviors are incorrectly interpreted as "Sin".

Genetic Variation Linked To Preference Sugary Food
It has long been recognized that Addiction to sugary foods are a predictor of alcoholism(1,3,4). Ethanol (alcohol that you can drink) is made from sugars and starch(6). Now a mechanism to account for the craving for sugar has been identified in the GLUT2 gene(2). While many "sins" can be attributed to poor choices, some sins that start with an inexplicable desire cannot. Various addictions are sustained by a "craving" that has yet to be explained in medical terms. It has traditionally been attributed to poor self-control or a lack of desire to behave properly.

While Cbsessive Compulsive Disorder does not fall into the substance abuse class of Sin, it does have the characteristic of lack of control for a desired behavior. Criminologists have theories on the lack of control for behavior and have identified that the desire for self control is separate from the capacity for self-control(5). One may desire not to steal, but one may be compelled to steal anyway.

While christians are quick to point out that God gave us free will to choose to obey his commands, they say that God won't influence us to follow his commands because it will "turn us into robots". However I have yet to see a christian explain why God doesn't have a problem building the DESIRE into us which, using thier principle, should make us a "robot" to sin. Since we have these desires built into us that cause some of us to do things that we wish we could stop, it refutes the concept of sin. Being a slave to sin, as I understand it, is a Calvinistic doctrine where predestination is a tenet. In my view, as I understand it, in this respect the Calvinistic view is the most logically consistant, however barbaric.


1. Does a Sweet Tooth Mean Alcoholism?
2. Genetic Variation Linked To Preference Sugary Food
3. Specificity of ethanol like effects elicited by serotonergic and noradrenergic mechanisms.
4. "Specificity of Ethanol..." Translated for the layman
5. Self-Restraint: A Study on the Capacity and Desire for Self-Control
6. From Cereal Corn To Alcohol

Ex-Preacher Says Good-bye to God

*ahem* That's me. All are welcome.

Fun With Fallacies: Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor

Which fallacies are the good cardinal guilty of and why?

...he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme why he thought it was dangerous to be governed by reason alone. He said that "supposedly faithless societies" ruled only by reason were like those created by Hitler and Stalin, ripe for "terror and oppression". Full Story

These are the ones I identified in the course of five minutes. Can you identify any others?

* Part to whole Comparison fallacy - If its true that societies created by Hitler and Stalin were "supposedly faithless", that doesn't mean that all "supposedly faithless" society are like Hitler and Stalins or that "supposedly faithless societies" necessarily will end up like Hitler and Stalins.

* Faulty Analogy - Hitler and Stalins societies had more going on in them than just being "supposedly faithless".

* Causal Oversimplification - Ignores qualifiers that made Hitlers and Stalins societies "ripe for terror and oppression".

* Unrepresentative Sample - Stipulating that the two examples are valid, two bad examples are not enough examples to show a trend that "supposedly faithless" societies are likely to be "ripe for terror and oppression".

* Special Pleading - Because not only "supposedly faithless societies" were ripe for "terror and oppression". I know that a few in the catholic church leadership over the centuries have quite a bit of blood on thier hands.

* Appeal to Consequences - Simply asserts that "supposedly faithless societies" are "ripe for terror and oppression" without saying why.

* Appeal to Emotion - Trying to evoke strong negative emotions in relation to a society ruled by "reason alone"

* Non-Sequitur - Because I don't think that any rational person would say that Hitler "governed by reason alone". In my view, Hitler was a little insane.

Faulty reasoning in leadership is scary.

Its also interesting to note that his motivation to respect atheists seems to be driven by his "concern about the increasing unpopularity of the Christian voice in public life".

Hone your skills over at the LSAT Logic in Everyday Life podcast.

Does Morality Come From the Bible?

Genesis 1:26-1:27, Creation of Humans in Near Eastern Myths And The Paleolithic Era

This article presents evidence to support the conclusion that Gods creation of Adam and Eve(1a) is a Near Eastern (Southwest Asian) myth. This conclusion is a premise in a linked argument spread out over a series of articles intended to debunk Genesis 1-11 and Romans 5.

This article is a collection of notes put together from sources that are represented by quick reference links to similar webpages to make it easy to get more information as quickly as possible. The original sources are listed at the end.

A LIST OF PREMISES AS ARTICLES REFUTING GENESIS 1-11 AND ROMANS 5 SO FAR
P1. The Interconnectedness of The Ancients - Demonstrates the robust ancient civilizations at the time and that Canaan, Israel and Judah were central to them. Discusses trade routes, seafaring, the link between whales and the Leviathans of Mythology and how long it would take to get from one civilization to another by sea.
P2. Genesis 1:1-25 Is An Amalgam of Near Eastern Creation Myths. Demonstrates the prior existence of key elements of the story of the creation of the Universe that appears in Genesis.
P3. Genesis 1:26-1:27, Creation of Humans in Near Eastern Myths And The Paleolithic Era. Demonstrates that the physical evidence contradicts the story of the making of the first humans in Genesis.

BACKGROUND
There are two versions of the Human Creation Story in Genesis(1b). The concept is the same but the details are different. That is consistent with the criteria for folklore(2) described in Alan Dundees book "Holy Writ as Oral Lit" which are "multiple existence and variation". The bible is full of stories with the same concept but different details. For example, compare Isaiah, Jeremiah and Micah. Here is a list of folklore characteristics I pulled down from a high school website.
* Generally part of the oral tradition of a group. Most stories are told rather than read
* Passed down from one generation to another
* Take on the characteristics of the time and place in which they are told, and the personality of the storyteller
* Speak to universal and timeless themes. The try to make sense of our existence, help humans cope with the world in which they live, or explain the origin of something.
* Often about the common person
* May contain supernatural elements
* Function to validate certain aspects of culture

Generally, myths are a subcategory of Folklore that contain supernatural or Religious components.

The famous Documentary Hypothesis(3) posits that the Torah (aka Pentateuch, first five books of the Old Testament) is a collection of writing from four sources over a period of about 500-600 hundred years. Genesis 1 is from "The Priestly" source(4) , and Genesis 2 is from "The Jawist" source(5) (Jawist being the German word for Yawist). Using this as our guide, that would make the first creation story from about 450 BCE and the second one from around 950 BCE. The characteristics of the Torah that support the Documentary Hypothesis are some of the same characteristics that are consistent with the definition of Folklore. Some bible scholars don't like the documentary hypothesis, but they seem to be in the minority, and I haven't seen any compelling arguments to refute it. In one of the courses I listened to the teacher try to pick apart the Documentary Hypothesis but he used "special pleading"and wasn't very convincing.

Both creation stories were incorporated into the Torah about 400 BCE(5) during the rule of the Persian Empire. There are many differences in the two stories. Some differences in the two stories reflect the time, place and theology that they were written in. The First story, written later, has a God removed from creation and does not play much of a role with Humans after the creation. It was supposedly written during the Persian Rule after the Babylonian Exile. The second story was written much earlier and reflects a God that is involved and an integral part of Human Lives. It was supposedly written 500 hundred years earlier when the Jews were relatively self-governing and self-reliant.

Four major differences in the two stories follow, but there are many others that are not covered here.
A. God is referred to by different names in each story. In the first story he is referred to as Elohim (“God”) and in the second story he is referred to as Yahweh (“LORD”) or Yahweh Elohim (“LORD God”).
B. The methods of creation are different. In the first story creation occurs by the spoken word and in the second story creation occurs by physical means (for example, God plants a garden).
C. The order of creation is different in the two stories. The first story follows the order in the Enuma Elish(6) and starts with vegetation and proceeds to animals on to humans, and the second story begins with the male human, then the vegetation in the Garden of Eden, and then the animal kingdom.
D. In the first story, the man and woman are created together, but in the second story, the male is created first, with the female made later from his rib.

Multiple existence and variation is the Criteria for Folklore

GENESIS 1:26-1:27
* Genesis 1-31 Closely follows the structure of the Enuma Elish in the creation of the world
* Genesis 1:26-27
-- Generally thought to be written much earlier, and attributed to the "Priestly" writer
-- Has evidence of polytheism (7). At the time of the writing of Genesis, the theology about Angels hadn't been developed (angels were an aspect of God and not separate beings)(8), neither had the trinity, or use of the "Royal We" by royalty to refer to themselves in the third person.
-- We can see from the Bible that the Early Jews struggled with Polytheism which is supported by Archeology.

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

* Humans having aspects of a God are common in myths whether its breath, blood, body or spit
- Hinduism has a God Purusha(9) ritually sacrificed himself to make the cosmos and humans out of pieces of himself.
- Enuma Elish has man being made from the blood of the God Kingu(10) and dirt.

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

God made a man and a woman. They were supposed to be the first and therefore alone. But we know from Paleontology that many different forms of hominids existed before our species Homo Sapiens Sapiens in the Paleolithic era(11). Therefore this claim does not fit the physical evidence.

Before you proceed any further, I highly recommend you visit
The Genographic Project, a joint Effort between National Geographic and IBM. It is a great quick and concise source of Human Ancestry information and serves as a complementary multimedia presentation for this article, looks nicer and is much more entertaining.

VERY GENERAL MILESTONES OF HUMAN ANCESTRY
Unlike our story in Genesis, the following has been derived from physical evidence retrieved by the hard, backbreaking, and mind-numbing work of millions of truth seekers over the course of more than a hundred years.

Talkorigins.org(12) is a good place to start for a quick reference to this type of information

In the Paleolithic era, climate changes caused Ice Ages which played a key part in Human migration. It caused the Sahara to expand and contract (12a), fossils and tools have been found in and around dried up lake beds in the Desert. So far three main forms of Hominid have been identified (of which Homo was the direct ancestor of Humanity), which belong to two broad groups.

* 2.4 - 1.5 million BCE:
- Homo Habilis(13), bipedal, made and used tools, butchered meat with tools, physically possible for speech but likely brain didn't support language, became dependent on technology, had greater social intelligence.

* 1.8 million BCE and 300,000 BCE:
- Homo Erectus(14) controlled fire, improves the tools, followed herds, migrated north with herds, hunted Big Game, adapted to Ice Age climate about 780,000 BCE
- First diaspora, Homo Erectus spread to Asia, Eurasia, and as they evolved crept into Europe (between 1.8m BCE and 800,000 BCE).

* 500,000 - 250,000 BCE:
- Homo Erectus larger brain size, better developed Broca's Area(14a) needed for speech, , rudimentary communication with sounds and gestures, butchers animals, migrated as far as Europe, lived among ice sheets and glaciers, tools and fossils found in Ubeidiya(14b) in Israel from 1.4m BCE, followed the herds, lived near lakes and rivers, 500,000 BCE drove large prey such as bison over cliffs, used spears, cooperated among themselves.

* 300,000 - 30,000 BCE:
- Leslie Aiello and Robin Dunbar theorize that language ability appeared in humans 250,000 BCE(15,16)
- Neanderthals(17) more sophisticated than Homo Erectus developed more or less in parallel with Homo Sapiens, improves tools lived 230,000 and 30,000 years ago, lived alongside Homo Sapiens, might have had language, certainly rudimentary communication, obviously able to survive in warmer temperatures additionally they adapted well to the extreme cold of the Ice Age using northernmost settlements in summer, made composite tools which have more than one part, but eventually died off by 40,000 BCE leaving only Homo Sapiens
- The earliest indications of rituals and/or religious behavior are found among Neanderthals(18).
-- Neanderthals buried their dead carefully with food and implements and removed the brains from human skulls. This practice suggests cannibalism, probably to gain the skills and virtues of the deceased. Neanderthals also preserved skulls and bones of cave bears on platforms or shelves in their caves.

* 200,000 - 100,000 BCE:
- Homo Sapiens Sapiens(19) - Modern forms of Homo Sapiens first appear about 195,000 years ago in Africa.
- Three groups or major grades of archaic forms have been identified
-- Early archaic Homo Sapiens closer to Homo Erectus, heavily built, 200,000 BCE. Molecular Biology mitochondrial DNA points to humans evolving in tropical Sub-Sahara Africa and is a potentially reliable link between modern and ancestral humans, "Mitochondrial Eve"(20) points to a population which we all have in common in Africa.
-- Late archaic Homo Sapiens, mosaic of different features found on surviving skulls, small bands of different creatures numbering in the thousands, more modern date to 100,000 BCE
-- Anatomically modern widely distributed at least 115,000 BCE in east and southern Africa

* 100,000 - 40,000 BCE:
* The Great Diaspora(21)
- Ecological background affects, appearance of new hunting kits south of the Sahara ~100k years ago.
- Evolution of modern humans had run its course from 100-70,000 BCE ago in east and southern Africa, far earlier than Europe and Asia, Neanderthals flourished in Europe, and southwest Asia,
- In 70,000 BCE estimate of worlds human population is around 2,000(21).
- With the serendipitous mutation of the FOXP2(22) gene, Humans acquired modern language abilities and were capable of sophisticated communications(23), facts concepts and ideas, emotions, reason, planning, adapting, dramatic changes in cognitive ability.
- Two theories of the dispersion of humans. 1. out of Africa Hypothesis(24), 2. multi-regional (recently refuted)(25), DNA examination shows that Neanderthals and humans are incompatible and cannot interbreed(26).
- DNA, blood groups and enzymes show that , there is a primary split between Africans and non-Africans, Eurasians-SW Asians.
- It appears that all humans have a common male ancestor who has been named "Adam".
From the National Geographic Genographic project(27)
"Adam--60,000 ya
--"Adam" is the common male ancestor of every living man. he lived in Africa some 60,000 ya, which means that all humans lived in Africa until at least that time.
-- Unlike his biblical namesake, this Adam was no the only man alive in his era. Rather , he is unique because his descendants are the only ones to survive to the present day.
-- It is important to note that Adam does not literally represent the first human. he is the coalescensce point of all the genetic diversity found in the world's disparate peoples. Adam had human ancestors as well, but we have not remaining genetic evidence of them. The changes to the Y chromosome that we follow back through the generations to identify Adam end in the commonality of that shared ancestor. (genographic project)"
-- As the climate in the Sahara changed by becoming wetter, and dryer in a periodic cycle, animals and people moved in and out of it. Before 100,000 years ago the Sahara had many shallow lakes and semi-arid grasslands. When the Sahara dried up, everything moved out to the edges.
-- Sometime between 100,000 and 60,000 years ago humans moved out of Africa. They would have followed any of several migration options, including through the Nile Valley, across the Red Sea, and along the northern coast. Fossils in the Qafzeh Cave(28) and other places in Israel show that Homo Sapiens Sapiens and Neanderthal lived alongside each other for thousands of years.
-- During the height of the last glaciation the geography of southeast Asia was different than it is today. Sea levels were 300 feet lower than they are now. There is good evidence for seafaring after 50,000 BCE(29). The distance between land was shorter.
- Remains of early human beings from the Upper Paleolithic era show a religious life similar to that of Neanderthals.
-- Mousterian material culture of the Middle Paleolithic appears throughout the Mediterranean basin.
-- Human beings from this era (like the Neanderthals) share a concern with proper treatment of the dead.
-- During this era, the dead were buried carefully, usually with the feet pulled up into a contracted position.
-- Burials were often in the cave where the group lived or in another cave nearby.
-- The body was typically buried under a stone slab with ornaments, stone tools, food, and weapons.
- About 40,000 years ago, with the appearance of the Cro-Magnon culture, tool kits started becoming markedly more sophisticated, using a wider variety of raw materials such as bone and antler, and containing new implements for making clothing, engraving and sculpting. Fine artwork, in the form of decorated tools, beads, ivory carvings of humans and animals, clay figurines, musical instruments, and spectacular cave paintings appeared over the next 20,000 years.

* 30,000–10,000 BCE:
- In The Upper Paleolithic era There were major changes in how humans behaved.
-- Early Homo Sapiens in Europe carved antlers, painted the walls of caves and molded clay figures.
-- They made exaggerated clay female figurines that appear to be associated with fertility rites.
-- Old Stone Age religious rituals appear to be intended to maintain harmony between the living and dead.
-- The end of the Old Stone Age is marked by a revolution in material culture and substantial climate changes.
-- The end of the Paleolithic era leads to changes in religious activities to address changes in how people lived.

* 10,000 BCE:
- the estimated world population was 1-10 million.(30)

KEY POINTS
Adam and Eve are Near Eastern (Southwest Asia) Creation Myths because
- Signs of human intelligence and non-specific pagan "religion" start with the Neanderthals. They include tool making, origin of speech and language and a pagan belief in the supernatural. Experts start talking about rudimentary communication about 500,000 years ago, burying the dead about 100,000 years ago, evidence of Cro-Magnon religion in cave paintings 45,000 years ago,
- Physical evidence for Evolution from one of three forms of hominids in sub-Saharan Africa, the expansion and contraction of the Sahara as the catalyst for migration, Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, the first diaspora, Neanderthals, Homo Sapiens second diaspora, and the out of Africa theory
- Micro biology and genetics advances converge on an origin in sub-Saharan Africa around 60,000 BCE
- Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens Sapiens co-existed and were not genetically compatible,
- Human Founder populations (and in general) need more than two individuals (discussion deferred to the next article).
- Stories of Man made from dirt appear earlier than the Torah in Southwest Asia and all over the world (discussion deferred to the next article).

Adam and Eve don't fit.

My speculation (which is not a necessary component of this argument, but which I am willing to commit to) follows.

Since communication and intelligence evolved slowly with the different species that would wind up being human, and the Human FOXP2 gene mutation facilitated higher order communication, and the evolving ability to think in the abstract, and humans were reduced to small groups in the same area until they scattered about 60,000 years ago, I think it is highly likely that folklore that is shared world wide, such as gods making humans from the ground, originated with prehistoric humans in sub-Saharan Africa.

Simple forms of reasoning are reasoning from sign, analogy and correlation. Even house pets can manage that. I imagine, though prehistoric humans couldn't verbalize it, they had a concept of "other minds". They had themselves as a point of reference, saw others that seemed to be like themselves, realized that something was in control of that other body. Likewise, it must be the same with everything. So something must be in control of storms, flooding, fire, rock slides, the sun, the moon, etc. In a word, something they can't see is in control. If people are more powerful than the Deer, then surely whatever controls the storms is more powerful than people.

Additionally, one is told they came from their parent, but where did the first parent come from? Where do other things come from? Well if the plants grow up from the ground, and water comes from the ground, practically everything comes from the ground, then it should be no great intellectual leap to reason that people came from the ground too.

That brings us to Genesis 2 and the making of Adam.....
To Be Continued

/////////////////////////////////////////
Quick Reference to material in the sources. For the Quick References, Wikipedia is used liberally because while academics don't consider Wikipedia definitive or acceptable as a source they do consider it generally good enough for quick reference. Please do not confuse quick references with the sources. The sources are where the majority of information came from.

Sources
1. Human Prehistory and First Civilizations, The Teaching Company
2. Story of Human Language
3. Great World Religions: Hinduism (2nd Edition), The Teaching Company
4. Religion in the Ancient Mediterranean World, The Teaching Company
5. The Bible With Sources Revealed

6. The Book of Genesis, The Teaching Company
7. Great Figures of the Old Testament, The Teaching Company.
8. "Holy Writ As Oral Lit", Alan Dundees.
9. National Geographic Genographic Project

Quick References on the web
1a. Adam and Eve
1b. Creation according to Genesis
2. Folklore
3. Documentary Hypothesis
4. Priestly Source
5. Jawist

6. Enuma Elish Text online
7. Evidence of Polytheism
8. Angels Jewish Theology
9. Purusha
10. Kingu

11. Paleolithic
12 . Talkorigins.org
12a. Sahara Pump Theory
13. HomoHabilis
14. Homo Erectus
14a. Broca's Area in Homo Erectus
14b. Ubeidiya, Israel
15. Early human language

16. Neanderthal Speaks
18. Paleolithic Burials
19. Homo Sapiens Sapiens
20. Mitochondrial Eve

21. Humans nearly wiped out 70,000 years a ago
22. FOXP2
23. Origin of language
24. Out of Africa Hypothesis
25. New Research Proves Single Origin Of Humans In Africa

26. Neanderthals not an ancestor
27. Genographic Project
28. Qafzeh
29. Earliest seafarers
30. U.S. Census Bureau Historical Estimate of World Population

Churchgoing Declining in Britain

According to a recent report in the London Times Online there will be fewer regular churchgoers in the UK within a generation than there are mosque-goers or even Hindus.

This is really quite a bit of fresh air to me. Along with recent studies suggesting that the fasting growing religion in the US is no religion, the trends may mean that soon this blog will be obsolete. Then again, the US has significant and strong differences from the UK. Specifically, church attendance in the US has always been much higher than in the UK, and there is no taboo about politics mixing with religion in the US as there is in the UK.

That being said, the American statistics are still pretty depressing. According the Barna group:

# 4% believe everyone is God. (2007)
# 69% believe that God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, perfect creator that rules the world today. (2007)
# 8% believe that God is the total realization of personal, human potential. (2007)
# 3% believe that there are many gods, each with different power and authority. (2007)
# 7% believe that God is a state of higher consciousness that a person may reach. (2007)
# 3% believe that there is no such thing as God. (2007)

Still, over 30% of the population does not believe in the Christian God -- including some people who I'm sure self-label as Christian.

Now the 4% who believe everyone is God ... who do you think they are?

I'll Be Speaking for the Freethought Association in Ft. Wayne, Indiana

This coming Wednesday, May 14th, at 7 PM, I'll be doing a presentation on my book for the budding Ft. Wayne Freethought Association at the Allen County Public Library, 900 Library Plaza. If you live within driving distance I'd love to meet with you. It's to be held in Meeting Room B. The Ft. Wayne News-Sentinel did an interview with me and it will be printed on Monday or Tuesday. This is the city I was born and raised. This will mark the first time I step forward and come out as an atheist in my own area since I live within driving distance myself. Now the shit hits the fan.

Another One Bites the Dust: This Time An Epicopalian Priest

Link. Is it just me or is this a new trend? Thanks to the Secular Outpost for this.

Expelled Exposed Site

Flunked Not Expelled: What Ben Stein Isn't Telling You About ID.

Bart D. Ehrman vs. N. T. Wright on "Is Our Pain God's Problem?"

Link. You'll have to start from the bottom up to see the flow of things. Thanks to Ed Babinski that surfer of all surfers for this!

Contest Entries For a Free Copy of My Book

Just go here, click on the names to the right to read and to rate their deconversion stories. The winner gets a free autographed copy of my book.

Who's Ignorant?

Inevitably we here at DC run up against a wall with some Christians and it is frustrating to us, and to them. It's hard to even know where to begin sometimes. I've written on this topic so many times before but here I am again with a different angle.

The charge made back and forth is that the other side is ignorant. Let me cut through this deep water.

To answer the accusation from my side, I admit I'm ignorant. That's right. I am ignorant. What am I ignorant about? Most things! Again, let me state this loudly and clearly. I am ignorant about most things. In comparison to that which I do know, I am ignorant about almost everything. I only claim to know a small sliver of things in the totality of that which can be known. I'm not joking when I say this, either. I really am. Okay so far?

But I don’t believe in the Bible. I don’t believe in God. I don’t believe in the church.

How dare I say that when I’ve just admitted I don’t know most things? Easy. Based on what I know I don’t believe. Can I do any differently? No! I can only believe that which I can believe. Have I studied these things out enough to have an informed opinion on the matter? I think so, but what difference does it make to me personally if I have never studied these things out at all and I still don’t believe? Most people who don't believe in the Christian faith have not studied the issues out in any depth at all, just like most Christians who believe. The bottom line is that I don’t believe.

Let me use a couple of examples to make a point. If you tell someone he should believe in Leprechauns, a totally ignorant person can simply say “I don’t believe you.” It doesn’t take any amount of knowledge at all to reject a strange and outlandish claim like this. The believer making the claim can say the nonbelieving guy is ignorant all he wants to, but ignorance isn’t his problem. His problem is that the claim is too strange to believe. Strange claims must have some solid evidence for them. If as a believer you do not produce the needed evidence for such a strange claim, then it will do your case no good to call the nonbeliever ignorant. That’s the bastion of last resort when all else has failed.

Just think for the moment if a scientist is trying to convince other scientists of a new theory, and he’s having no luck. They don’t accept it. What good does it do for him to call the others ignorant? The problem is his. He has not established his case.

So, when a believer calls me ignorant because he or she has not provided me what I need to believe, then the ignorance is not mine. It's an ignorance that fails to take seriously his or her role in providing the needed evidence to believe. Such a believer is ignorant for thinking that this is my problem. Even though I am ignorant about so many things, this particular problem is not mine at all.

I have repeatedly said agnosticism ("I don't know") is the default position. That best describes me. I just don't think Christians understand how far removed it is to affirm a full blown Christianity when moving off the default position and how small of a step it is to move in the direction of atheism. Even if atheism is not the case, I would first and foremost be an agnostic. But to affirm the Bible as the inerrant word of God, as one extreme, is so far removed from a reasonable faith that it just seems incredible for me that any thinking person can believe it. I know something about that claim, and I do deny it vehemently. Such a claim is ignorant on the par of the Holocaust deniers. But why do so many people believe? The very short answer is that they were taught to believe and that they are afraid to question their beliefs.

View Online Book - "Folklore In The Old Testament Vol. I"

You can view Vol. I of Sir James George Frazer's famous book from the links below. You can find Vol II there as well if you poke around a little.

Here is a link to some information from my beloved Wikipedia about the book which contains some links to more information about Sir James Frazer.

These links are to the website where the book is located.
You have several options to view it.

1. View it online, which is slow and I don't recommend it
* Internet Archive
2. Or download the book and the software to read it at the following links.
* The software download page. Download it and install it.
* The ftp site where you download the book. The file is called "FolkLoreInTheTestamentVolI.djvu". Right click on it and click "save as" to download it. Then when its finished, you should be able double click it and have the DJVU reader software display it.

The book is almost one hundred years old, but around here, old books mean a lot don't they?

Sir Frazer's theories haven't borne themselves out and have seen their share of criticism, but generally his research and published data seems to have stood the test of time.

Don't be a Dupe!

2005 was a very difficult year for my sister. She was facing a tremendous struggle as she strove to beat drug addiction, the falling out of a relationship, and as usual, unruly bouts of Type-I diabetes. On her way home from work one evening, she saw a well-lit neon sign from the road that read, “Psychic Readings starting at $10.” She stopped and went inside the old, creaky house that had the sign. Sis made it home that day minus $63. A few days pass by and she’s in and out of the house a little more than normal, so on one particular trip out the door, I decide to ask her where she’s headed.

Now crossing brains with her erudite, outspoken atheist brother is not what she has in mind, so she puts off giving a clear answer. “I gotta run an errand. Be back.” This went on for several more days when finally, she burst in the door, sniffling, and with tears in her eyes. I followed her upstairs, and after some prolonged hesitation, she shared with me a tidbit of what had happened—she was duped by the same “madam” charlatan psychic she had begun visiting several days earlier.

Shaking my head in anger, just as I was about to say something chopping and derogatory, she cut me off. With her head still facing the ground in shame, using the side of an index finger to wipe away a stray tear running down her cheek, she said, “I know, I know. I should have known better.” “How much did you lose?” I asked. She said, “$65.” But sis and I know each other too damn well. “Why don’t you tell me how much you really lost?” I said. With gritted teeth, a quivering lip, and embarrassment written all over her face, she said very slowly, “ssssssssix hundred and ninety-two dollars.” I stood there, contemplating how I would reply as I gathered a few more details of how it happened.

This fat-forearmed, spirit-frolicking fraud, this wart-necked, lying lard-ass, toad of a woman found a trusting, vulnerable girl to exploit—and exploit she did! The moment sis entered the room, she was bombarded with, “My, my, the negative energy surrounding you is strong!” From there, it went to “Ah, I see now…a curse has been put upon you by a man and a woman you know.” With some further dressing up, it went from there to the main-course like you knew it would: “I need some money to buy sacred items from Jerusalem so we can begin the ritual and end the curse.” A little butter here, a touch of garlic there, a little dressing down below, and the sale was made! A naïve, unsuspecting person had been stripped of what limited livelihood she had, not realizing the whole scheme was bogus until it was too late. But as much as I’d like to, I can’t really be mad at the psychic! You don’t blame the croc for being a good ambush predator and snatching up the deer that comes to drink from the water’s edge, do you? No, you blame the innocent-but-clueless deer!

I wasn’t the kindest that day. The “I told you so” mentality had me consumed, so much so that I couldn’t resist the urge to say: “Little Miss Bimbo Baggins got taken for a ride, did she? I bet she doesn’t hate the skeptics quite as much now, does she? You got what you deserved, honey!” Before I could say anything else, she looked up at me, and with tears in her eyes and quivering cheeks, screamed, “I’m a trusting person, ok!”

Sis always was a trusting person. She goes through life assuming (a) that people are generally telling the truth and “wouldn’t lie,” (b) that people usually have her best interest at heart, and (c) that the spirits and powers that be are “up there,” looking out for her wellbeing down here. Well, sis got played, and she learned a valuable lesson (I think). But she did deserve to get flimflammed. That’s what happens to “trusting” people.

And hell knows, sis isn’t alone. Many people are taken in Nigeria banking scams, or “get rich quick,” pay-before-you-play programs, like those “work from home” schemes that show a picture on their websites of a young, handsome man sitting in his Porsche, parked out in front a multimillion dollar mansion as his wife sips away at a margarita next to a sparkling-blue, 24-foot, in-ground, swimming pool. Hey, we’ve all been tempted to click on such links occasionally (Come on, now! Don’t deny it!) But just like all that clairvoyant crapola, it’s bullshit made to suck in three classes of pathetic people: the greedy, the gullible, and the stupid. Now the owners of these sites and the perpetrators of these scams, they are the smart ones! They make some pretty mean money in their filthy profession too. And who are their victims?

The elderly are big suckers. They spend their days thinking the world is still a place where the milkman rolls up his sleeves and lays a carton of milk on the doorstep, saying, “G’morning, maam!” before leaving. Then, there are the sheltered suckers. These dupes consist of the young, like children or sheltered people, who’ve lived privileged lives. Some broken-English-speaking, sly fellow, with a ponytail and a yin-yan necklace actually convinces these morons to send their credit card numbers to him in an email to “commid de sum of $2,900,000,000 US doller tu u acount” when in reality, they’re just going to take what’s available in the dupe’s account and get lost on a beach in Maui. And they’ll be saying to themselves, “Stupid Amelwican! Hehehehe!” all the way there!

That just leaves the religious dupes like dear old sis. The religious are the biggest dupes of all. How do you know if you’re a religious dupe? Well, for starters, if you buy prayer shawls or anointing oil from Pastor Hagee’s church, you’re a dupe. If you sit close to the TV during a religious telecast, laying your hands on it in hopes of being healed of whatever ails you, you’re a dupe. If you pray to God to save your child’s life, and God lets your child die, but you keep on praying to him anyways, hoping he will help you through the difficult period of grief to follow, you’re a dupe. If you travel to Lourdes, France to see the famous Lourdes Basilica because 66 healings have been officially recognized by the Catholic Church, or perhaps just because you seek an encounter with The Virgin Mary, yes, (say it with me now) you’re a friggin’ dupe! You get the idea. But religious dupes are even more “duped” than other dupes.

Greedy dupes have their egg-in-face moments and get taken, but from the sting of being played the fool comes a valuable lesson on how not to get taken again! The same lesson is learned by the wet-behind-the-ears chump who started off too innocent and too sheltered in life to know any better. And chances are, even the elderly will learn to be more cautious after being victims of heartless scams. But religious dupes, they are another matter. They never learn because in religion, there’s often no obvious victim. It’s not clear to the believer that they’ve been had, and this motivates the faithful to continue to play that endless, trial-and-error game of “Wheel o’ Prayer.”

When heartfelt prayers fail, the religious dupe keeps on praying. When his business takes a dive financially, the religious dupe keeps on tithing. When Aunt Olga dies of breast cancer, despite the efforts of the “healing ministry” of the local church, the faithful keep on going with the bullheadedness of a flea-ridden mutt, getting zapped by an electric fence. The religious dupe is too stubborn to learn from his or her mistakes and give up what obviously doesn’t work. They choose to persist in the mentally calamitous execution of their insanity—they choose to persist in doing the same things over and over again while expecting to get different results. That’s the textbook definition of insanity, friend! The net result is, the religious dupe rarely ever learns from even the most painful and heartrending of mistakes. Perhaps stubbornness is an unlisted fruit of the Spirit?

Now no one wants to be a dupe, but keeping from becoming one demands that we retain a healthy level of skepticism about absolutely everything—and with skepticism comes another dirty word to some—cynicism. A healthy level of cynicism is necessary too. Even if being a pessimistic, troubleshooting skeptic isn’t your thing, you’d better learn the trick of the trade fast! Yes, people will lie to you about anything, directly or indirectly. No, people very often do not have your best interest at heart. They have their own interests at heart. And no, if the spirits and powers that be are “up there” at all, they certainly aren’t watching out for us down below (or they are, but are doing a terribly suck-ass job of it!)

Using cynical street-smarts, what should our attitude be towards religion of all kinds, including the Christian religion? Christianity is a faith that is 2,000 years old, hailing from a time when men believed in miracles and gods that rise from the dead; knowing what we know of human nature and the all-too-human tendencies to lie, exaggerate, and fall prey to the ignorance of the times in which we live, how can we view the religion as anything but a stupendous fraud of frauds? The handwriting is on the wall! Don’t be religious! Don’t be a dupe!

(JH)

This is Some Funny Shit...Worship All Gods!

How to Get a Free Autographed Copy of My Book

See link. Andrew Atkinson said this about it:

To me your book is obviously the best single volume in criticism of Christianity on the market. It is just a no contest; I mean really, what even is a close runner up can you think of? There are many good books on Atheism, but there are none that compare to yours when it comes to criticizing Christianity. When people ask me about what books they should read on Christianity, I just tell them to wait for your book, since it is by far the best. The only one that I can think of that is even in the same ball park is Martins Case Against Christianity. But it is a bit too academic for most normal people. Your book is much more accessible, it covers a lot more arguments, it has the best chapter on the problem of evil you can find, it is more interesting to read, it refutes more apologetic arguments then any other book, it addresses more central issues, and you point out all the chinks in the intellectual Christian armor like a champ.

The Samaritan Strategy For Skeptics

Atheists, skeptics and freethinkers lack their own kind of Samaritan Strategy...

To people who were aware of Colonel Doner's book, The Samaritan Strategy, which I bought hot of the press in 1988, here is a 1988 summation of it's goals and uses:

The following is from the Origin of the Samaritan Project;

Chesapeake, Virginia — Earlier this year, with great fanfare, Christian Coalition executive director Ralph Reed announced the formation of the Samaritan Project. Ostensibly formed to bring Christian social relief to the inner city, the project, just like the Christian Coalition, was conceived years ago to advance the radical religious right's agenda.

When Pat Robertson ran unsuccessfully for president in 1988, Florida physician, Dr. Max Karrer, coordinated Americans for Robertson in that state. At the end of the campaign, the Florida organization was so solid that Karrer and others decided to keep it going, naming the group the Conservative Christian Coalition.

About the same time, a book by political strategist Colonel V. Doner was published by a subsidiary of the Thomas Nelson Co. The book drafted "a new agenda for Christian activism." Doner wrote, "What would a Christian conservative coalition [emphasis added] in power really do about the economy, national defense, nuclear war, hunger, poverty, AIDS, etc?"

Doner rejected the religious right's efforts to capture the White House. Instead, he described a bold new plan to bring the Christian Right into the next century. His 1988 book is called The Samaritan Strategy.

Then, exactly one year later, Pat Robertson launched the Christian Coalition with Ralph Reed at the helm. The Conservative Christian Coalition in Florida became part of the fledgling organization.

The Christian Coalition and the Samaritan Project appear to mirror Colonel Doner's "Christian conservative coalition" and The Samaritan Strategy. Much of the Christian Coalition and Samaritan Project game plan appears in Doner's book. So, it seems reasonable that these movements will play them-selves out in a similar fashion. Doner failed to respond to a request for an interview from the Freedom Writer.

While strong on social action, Doner's Samaritan Strategy advocates the same moral agenda as the Christian Coalition. For example, although Doner takes a sympathetic approach to people with AIDS, he refers to homosexuality as a sin, and calls for gays to be converted to Christianity, thus "liberating" them from homosexuality.

Doner assails abortion in his 1988 book, particularly the procedure widely known today as "partial birth abortion." Now, for the first time, this procedure is close to being outlawed.

"Pornography is not just poor literature," Doner wrote, "It is the fuel for almost unlimited sexual exploitation, sexism, homosexuality, and the rape and molestation of thousands of children." He adds that "soft core" pornography leads to violence, and calls for its elimination.

In conclusion, Doner wrote, "The Samaritan Strategy is the only method that will lead us to the results we desire...we need to urge Christian activists to volunteer their time in the community, meeting its real needs. In ten years, by the beginning of the twenty-first century, it will be Christians who are looked to in the local community for leadership and guidance."

What I'm thinking is that atheists, skeptics and freethinkers can easily adopt this strategy of their own. If we did we could help people and at the same time change perceptions of who we are as people. Is there an atheist organization that sends help to people hurt in areas of our world? I know skeptics give to help, most often through the government the United Way, and Red Cross organizations. But with skeptics being the second largest denomination with a lot of them holding a great deal of money, what about an atheist charity organization complete with volunteers in the name of atheism? That would be a Samaritan strategy for skeptics. It would show people we do care and that we do give, and it would also help to change people's perceptions of us. Can this be done?

I'm looking for suggestions and people who might want to help. I've got ideas of my own on this.

National Day of Reason May 1st

See the link. Here are some ways to celebrate it...

Use a Bible as a door stop.
Use a Bible to make a Paper Mache bust of Darwin.
Listen to a skeptical podcast.
Read a chapter or two in a critical thinking textbook.
Enroll in a class on some aspect of science.
Tell someone who does not know, that you’re a skeptic.
Call up all your closest friends and relatives to tell them you’re a skeptic.
Write a letter to the editor about Ben Stein’s movie Expelled.
Become a member in a skeptical group or organization.
Go street witnessing with a copy of Origin of the Species in your hands.
Picket a church with a sign that says: “Smile, there is no Hell.”

Religious Mental Instability and the Will of God

Please God, Help Me!
One of the things I’ve noticed after 30 years as a Christian and a minister is the number of mentally ill people who desperately depend on the Biblical promises and myths to give their life meaning. When my high school psychology class visited the state metal hospital, I remember seeing many of the patients with Bibles and one patient grabbing hold of my arm and telling how wonderful Jesus had been to him. Before I graduated, I knew a boy name Rusty J. who, as a Baptist, would have wide mood swings from one month, trying to save every student in the school, to the next month cussing like a drunken sailor and picking fights.

Mentally instable people who are charismatic cult leaders have caused true believers to murder as well as commit mass suicide. A example of the former was the 1969 murders of 7 people in by the Charles Manson “family” based on his reading of the book of Revelation mixed with the Beatle’s song Helter Skelter to create a theology Manson construed to being the end times with an apocalyptic race war that the murders were intended to precipitate leaving Manson and his “family” to lead the new world order.

But the Bibles has given the mentally ill illusions of messianic grandeur, be it Jim Jones founder of the Peoples Temple who (full of drugs and Biblical ideals) lead 913 people including 276 child into his view of Heaven where all the believers would be waiting after everyone left this evil world with strychnine laced Kool-Aid.

Then there is the mental messianic figure of David Koresh whose 1993 understanding of Daniel and Revelation drawn from his theology rooted in Branch Davidian Biblical hermeneutics convinced 76 people (17 of which were held under the age of 12) were either forced to stay (the children) or stayed freely in a Biblical apocalyptic and prophetic end to history in Waco, Texas.

In 1997 a San Diego, Calf. Heaven's Gate Cult lead by Marshall Applewhite got ready to ride to Heaven in a space ship coming to get them behind the Comet Hale-Boop since, Applewood claimed that it was the “Last Chance to Evacuate Planet Earth Before It Is Recycled”. They purified themselves in the food they ate and six male members had even castrated themselves (Matt. 19: 12). Wikipedia states: “In preparing to kill themselves, members of the group drank citrus juices to ritually cleanse their bodies of impurities. The suicide was accomplished by ingestion of Phenobarbital mixed with vodka, along with plastic bags secured around their heads to induce asphyxiation. They were found lying neatly in their own bunk beds, with their faces and torsos covered by a square, purple cloth. Each member carried five dollars in quarters in their pockets. All 39 were dressed in identical black shirts and sweat pants, brand new black-and-white Nike tennis shoes, and armband patches reading "Heaven's Gate Away Team." The suicides were conducted in shifts, and the remaining members of the group cleaned up after each prior group's death.”

While group suicide cults have often held the news headlines, personal religious mental illness has left its mark too. Such was the case of a 1982 high school valedictorian Andrea Yates, who, in June 2001 killed all five of her children by drowning the in a bathtub explained her “Christian action” to her jail psychiatrist, "It was the seventh deadly sin. My children weren't righteous. They stumbled because I was evil. The way I was raising them, they could never be saved. They were doomed to perish in the fires of hell."(Wikipedia)

Just to night on the new here in South Carolina, a Florence 18 year old high school youth “Schallenberger was arrested April 19. Authorities say he bought materials to make several bombs and had written a journal detailing his plans to attack Chesterfield High School. The teen faces several state and federal charges, including attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction. That charge carries a possible life sentence if he is convicted.” (The Greenville News). When asked why he was planning to kill his classmates, he said so he could go to Heaven, stand before Jesus at the judgment at which time he would kill Jesus also.

While the Bible can inspired everything form Holy Rollers to Mountain Snakes Handlers to Faith Healers to Satan Worshipers, it has a very profound affect on the mentally unstable. It is at just such a juncture that the freedom to worship as one’s conscience dictates can mean the difference between life and death, not only for the cults true believer, but for innocence adults and children as well.