Dr. Richard Carrier, an expert in ancient history, explains why he changed his mind about the existence of an historical Jesus.
Old Testament quote, emphasis mine (thanks to Mechon Mamre for the RaMBaM translation):
22 And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow, he shall be surely fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
23 But if any harm follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
25 burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
This clearly states that the fetus was not a life. In fact, it indicates that a miscarriage could be caused without causing harm. The loss of the fetus can be compensated by mere money. After that, if there is harm, it is life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, ….
First, let me be clear. I am not joking about this. I am being as serious as an atheist who believes that real sin lies only in harming others can be on the subject. For religious readers, if I have any, I hope this encourages thought and dialog. I welcome all serious responses regardless of whether we agree on the topic.
So, here are my points about why I believe abstinence is sinful from both a biblical standpoint and more importantly to me why abstinence only education and the encouragement of abstinence pledges and the like are inherently sinful.
Of course, the first day of suspension was for standing up to the bully. Both children got suspended. But, why did only the atheist get the lecture about respecting others? Why did only the atheist get an extra day of suspension? Wouldn’t it have been nice if the principal explained to the
Jesus freak preaching child that preaching in school is wrong? Wouldn’t it have been nice if the principal had explained a bit about respecting the choice not to believe? Oh well. At least mom got it right.
Thanks to arkcode for the image.*
I’m very glad to see this particular Dope leave office. While I would stop short of wishing him ill health, I must say that he has been a truly awful Pope/Dope, in my opinion.
Remember, this is the Dope who said that the indigenous peoples of the Americas had been silently longing for Christianity to come … and to enslave and slaughter them.
This is also the Dope who threatened to excommunicate women who were so religious that they wanted to be priests. Way to win points with your female followers. Dope.
And, of course, he believes gay marriage is insidious and dangerous. Dangerous? Really??!!? Dope!
The one downside is the very real possibility that Richard Dawkins is right about the Dope, that he will destroy the whole rotten edifice of the Catholic Church.
Last, but very far from least, let’s not forget that this is the same Dope who tried to cover up rampant pedophilia in the Catholic Church.
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Good-bye Dope Nazinger!
* Though I don’t support what ArkCode does, I hope and suspect that the author will not mind my use of this image in this way, especially with the link to his post underneath. Barry, if I am incorrect and you would like this removed, please post a comment and I will remove it as soon as I see your comment. Thanks.
Unfortunately, scientists are still in the position of having to respond to complete and utter bullshit. There are some good responses in here to why this is a real problem. Unfortunately, I bet there will be induhviduals who respond on this thread in defense of creationism. If you are about to do so, please make sure to at least watch the video first.
My favorite response in this particular video is the one regarding the human eye and jaw as they reflect on the incompetency of god and provide better evidence of unintelligent design than the other kind.
Congressman Paul Broun has publicly stated that he is deliberately failing to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States of America. As such, he should be forcibly removed from office for the failure to follow his oath of office. Here is a direct quote from this idiot who has proclaimed that the earth is 9,000 years old, and that evolution, the big bang theory, and embryology are lies straight from the pit of hell.
As you congressman, I hold the holy bible as being the major directions to me for how I vote in Washington DC. And, I’ll continue to do that.
Paul Broun’s act of legislating based on his personal religious beliefs is in direct contradiction to this famous quote.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ….
From the description on Amazon, this sounds as plausible as most mainstream religion and more plausible than some newer ones like Mormonism and Scientology. I probably won’t read this, but do find the description funny. Perhaps if I end up with a bit of extra time on my hands and need a good laugh, I’ll give it a try.
… oh … never mind. I found them.
Remember folks, if you do not believe in evolution, you do not believe in modern medicine.
This is almost as funny as The Onion … but from a completely different and unexpected source.
See: My Real Dad
Well, not actually Christ. But, some who actually read the bible are finding little or no support for the Republican budget created by Paul Ryan. They’re claiming that, while he claims to be a Christian, he is instead a follower of Ayn Rand, a renowned atheist. In fact, Ryan also claims to be a Randroid. So, how can one reconcile his Ayn Randian politics with his stated Christian beliefs? One can’t.
I, for one, am not a Christian. But, as was Jesus Christ, I am a liberal. So, just as Jesus Christ would be, I am appalled by Republican politics. Anyway, here’s a couple of good clips from the Colbert Report about the Ryan budget.
I was recently surprised. I had what I thought were two original thoughts about Noah’s Ark. I googled both and found that I was far from the first to think of either, of course. But, there is a sub-thought to my second thought that does appear to be somewhat original.
What would you say upon meeting God at your death? For me, I’d do my best to get in one good shot. Before I get zapped for all eternity, I want to at least try to give God, whichever god I come to first, a punch in the nose.
But, I doubt if I could say anything much better than what Adam Brown says in this video.
I’m hearing a lot from atheist friends who don’t want to be offensive. They are upset by the tactics being used by some atheist organizations today. I have an alternate take on things.
Here are a couple of ads that show the kinds of things to which many on both sides of the fence seem to object.
To me, it’s obvious that the bible is offensive. I’m surprised that believers would agree. But, there you have it. Way to go Pennsylvania for declaring 2012 to be the Year of the Bible. It seems to be spreading the word about the offensive nature of the Bad Book beautifully, albeit with a bit of help from American Atheists and the Pennsylvania Nonbelievers.
Folks, the only thing on this sign that is not in the Bible is the graphic representation of the literal words in the book. If a simple graphic depicting what slavery means is offensive, then so is the concept and the book that condones it.
Again and again and again, our morals do not come from the Bible.
Thank God I’m an atheist!
Here’s a scene from the TV show ‘The West Wing’ explaining why the Bible should not be taken literally. I’ve also received nearly identical text via email. I believe the email came first.
Yup, snopes confirms that the email came first. Still, it’s somewhat more powerful to see it in a video, even though some of the great text of the email was missed. Specifically, the bit about whether one in the U.S. may own a Canadian is missing.
I’ve titled this post Misanthropia because I believe that I have every bit as much chance of making these improvements as I do of creating a true Utopia, i.e. none.
Still, I’m going to label each suggestion either plausible or implausible. The plausible changes will be the ones I expect never to have implemented because the Koch brothers and other multi-gazillionaires own all of our politicians and control the whole system by which they are put in place. However, I expect that I would be able to convince most of the so-called 99% that these changes would be good. The implausible are the ones I feel strongly enough about to post despite the extreme likelihood that they are so radical that I couldn’t even convince a significant percentage of the so-called 99%.
Each of the following suggestions or cluster of suggestions are meant to be taken individually. I believe each on its own could help make the U.S. a better country. That said, even were all of these suggestions implemented tomorrow, I do not expect that it would fix all of our problems. I’m not that smart.
Warning: This post contains Vitriol ™ *
I’m getting a bit tired of being told that some guy 2,000 years ago died for me. So, I’m stating publicly and in no uncertain terms:
No one died for me! Certainly no one died to absolve me of my sins!
This concept of putting all of one’s sins on a goat or a sheep or two turtledoves and then killing the animal or birds has a long and stupid tradition in the Old Testament. It is continued in the New Testament with the killing of the Lamb of God. I will admit that at least in the New Testament, the scapegoating ended there. That’s a good thing. But, it doesn’t change the fact that the entire concept of scapegoating is monumentally idiotic.
Let there be stuff? I don’t think that’s a very satisfying answer. This one is much better.
This lecture is entitled ‘A Universe From Nothing’ by Lawrence Krauss. It is rather lengthy, but amusing throughout and not too technical for a lay audience, such as myself. The introduction is by Richard Dawkins, who if I remember correctly, at some point calls Lawrence Krauss the Woody Allen of physics. It’s a fairly apt description, and a high compliment IMHO.
I highly recommend this. If you’re thinking it’s not worth the time, just replace a couple of reruns of older TV shows with an hour of this. It’s better for your brain anyway and just as entertaining.
Love thy neighbor? Not exactly.
Love thy enemy? Not exactly.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you? Not exactly.
If you haven’t heard, Jessica Ahlquist, a 16 year old girl in Cranston, RI objected to a prayer banner in a public school. The courts agreed that it was unconstitutional and ordered it taken down. Listen to this woman read the messages of love from her religious schoolmates posted on twitter and facebook.