Counterpoint on Jesus' Existence

 

God Answers Prayers

Look at the picture on the right. I found it on Tumblr. It is an attempt to argue that prayer is pointless and ineffectual. Someone added some commentary below it to show how Christians prayed in the past and how those prayers failed. There are several problems with this based on some bad assumptions. Let's first look at what the Bible says about prayer and then look to see how we can see what is wrong with the supposed prayers.  One thing I would like to know is how does confrontingbabble-on know that people prayed prayers like this one? Problem is that people assume that God is obligated to answer your prayers the way you expect him to do. No where doe the Bible say that.

What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you? ² You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight. You do not have because you do not ask God. ³ When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures. - James 4:1-3

Instead

¹³ I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life. ¹⁴ This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. ¹⁵ And if we know that he hears us—whatever we ask—we know that we have what we asked of him. - 1 John 5:13-15

Prayer is not about changing God and making God do what you want. It's about communicating with God and allowing Him to change you. Therefore if you pray for something that is not in God's plan or according to God's will, the answer is an automatic "No".

confrontingbabble-on:

What that prayer was asking god for…

1913 prayer: "Dear God, please stop the government’s plan to collect income taxes…and prevent women from getting the vote…as this will surely destroy this great nation…For thy glory, Thy will be done…Amen"

February 3 – The 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution is ratified, authorizing the Federal government to impose and collect income taxes.
March 3 – The Woman Suffrage Parade of 1913 takes place in Washington, D.C. led by Inez Milholland on horseback.

No where does the Bible tells us that Women should not vote nor have a voice in government. Even if someone did pray this why would anyone think that God would want women not to work or vote? They didn't get that idea from God. As for social security taxes, Jesus told us we must pay our taxes.  I'm glad God said "No".

1940 prayer: "Dear Lord God, please stop women from showing their legs in public…as this will surely destroy this great nation…For thy glory, Thy will be done…Amen”

May 15 Women’s stockings made of nylon are first placed on sale across the U.S. Almost five million pairs are bought on this day

 Now where does the Bible tell us that about Women.  I'm glad God said "No."

1969 prayer: "Dear God, seriously, hear my prayer…please confound those so arrogant to presume to leave earth and go to the moon, as you confounded those who would build the mud brick ziggurat of Babel of around 6 floors high into the heavens…as this will surely destroy this great nation…For thy glory…Thy will be done…Amen”

July 24 – Apollo program: Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins return safely to Earth after the first landing on the Moon.

November 19 – Apollo program: Apollo 12 astronauts Pete Conrad and Alan Bean land at Oceanus Procellarum (“Ocean of Storms”), becoming the third and fourth humans to walk on the Moon.

November 24 – Apollo program: The Apollo 12 spacecraft splashes down safely in the Pacific Ocean, ending the second manned mission to the Moon.

  God's will was done. No reason to assume that God didn't want people to go to the moon.

2012 prayer: "Dear Jesus, please, please, please, I implore you…stop our leaders endorsing gay marriage…prevent those who would damage the fine work of the godly Boy Scouts…prevent that black Muslim being re-elected president…and stop weed being legalized…as all this will surely destroy this great nation…For thy glory, Thy will be done…Amen"

May 9 – Barack Obama becomes the first sitting U.S. President to announce support for gay marriage

October 18 - The Boy Scouts of America release documents containing over 15,000 pages relating to allegations of sexual abuse by over 1,200 scout leaders between 1965-1985

November 6 – 2012 elections - Barack Obama is reelected President of the United States, defeating Republican nominee Mitt Romney

Maine becomes the first state to legalize gay marriage via voter referendum. Maryland and Washington do the same. Minnesota also rejects a constitutional amendment which would have banned same-sex marriage.

Washington becomes the first state to legalize marijuana. Colorado does the same.

Why did God allow this? Especially because we know that God says in scripture that homosexuality is sin. Why would God allow it to become more and more accepted?

 ¹² In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, ¹³ while evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. - 2 Timothy 3:12,13

 

God's will is indeed done. 

Bad Exogesis - When Billboards Tell Lies

I recently came across a post on Tumblr in which many pictures of  billboards covered with verses in the Bible was posted. The verses are meant to be shocking in such a way that people will come to the conclusion that the Bible couldn't be from God. The verses are presented without context and just attributed to God although many of the verses is not quoting what God said. Let's look at each billboard one-at-a-time and see if we understand what the verses are actually saying. When I quote the Bible it will be from the NIV.

Psalm 137:9

⁸ Daughter Babylon, doomed to destruction,
    happy is the one who repays you
    according to what you have done to us.
⁹ Happy is the one who seizes your infants
    and dashes them against the rocks. - Psalm 137:8-9

I wonder why people don't seem to ever criticize the Bible in context. God is not commanding anyone to grab babies and bash their heads against rocks! When people make this argument I wonder if they really had bothered to read the chapter. The problem is the speaker is not God but a Jewish exile in Babylon who saw his world collapse around him and he wants God to end the exile and restore Jerusalem. He wanted his oppressors to pay. If you were in his possession you would probably want the same thing, but God is not talking or condoning this. We see here plain emotion - human emotion. The speaker wants revenge on the Edomites who were joyful at the disaster that befell Judah and vengeance on the Babylonians.

1 Timothy 2:12

 ¹¹ A woman^[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. ¹² I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;^[b] she must be quiet. ¹³ For Adam was formed first, then Eve. - 1 Timothy 2:11-13

Rather than rehash a lot of what I've already written, here is a more exhaustive post: An "Evil of Christianity"

 Deuteronomy 22:28-29

²⁸ If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, ²⁹ he shall pay her father fifty shekels^[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. - Deuteronomy 22:28-29

Yup, here is the go to scripture for those who want to say that God condones rape in the Bible. People who butcher the scripture in this way are ignorant to what is being commanded and why it's being commanded in that context. My brother-in-Christ, Mariano Grinbank wrote a wonderful blog post a few years ago that just shows this argument for the farce that it is. Read his essay at the following link: 

Atheism, the Bible, Rape and EvilBible.com, part 4 of 6

 Leviticus 25:44,45

⁴⁴ “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. ⁴⁵ You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. ⁴⁶ You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. - Leviticus 25:44-46

Here is a passage usually used as a proof text that the Bible condones slavery.  It doesn't. Rather than rehash the awesome points Mariano brings up in one of his brilliant articles, here is a link:

Does the Bible and its God Condone Slavery?

 Jeremiah 48:10

 ⁹ Put salt on Moab,
    for she will be laid waste^[f];
her towns will become desolate,
    with no one to live in them.

¹⁰ “A curse on anyone who is lax in doing the Lord’s work!
    A curse on anyone who keeps their sword from bloodshed!

¹¹ “Moab has been at rest from youth,
    like wine left on its dregs,
not poured from one jar to another—
    she has not gone into exile.
So she tastes as she did,
    and her aroma is unchanged.
¹² But days are coming,”
    declares the Lord,
“when I will send men who pour from pitchers,
    and they will pour her out;
they will empty her pitchers
    and smash her jars.
¹³ Then Moab will be ashamed of Chemosh,
    as Israel was ashamed
    when they trusted in Bethel. - Jeremiah 48:9-13

Obviously the passage is talking about war and judgement on Moab.  God is merciful. He gave the Moabites plenty of time to stop their idolatry but they did not. I think the violence of the passage is what the posters of the billboard were trying to use to provoke and emotional  response but in its historical context, it is appropriate because the judgement that was coming was going to be severe.

 Ezekiel 9:5

 Then I heard him call out in a loud voice, “Bring near those who are appointed to execute judgment on the city, each with a weapon in his hand.” ² And I saw six men coming from the direction of the upper gate, which faces north, each with a deadly weapon in his hand. With them was a man clothed in linen who had a writing kit at his side. They came in and stood beside the bronze altar.
³ Now the glory of the God of Israel went up from above the cherubim, where it had been, and moved to the threshold of the temple. Then the Lord called to the man clothed in linen who had the writing kit at his side ⁴ and said to him, “Go throughout the city of Jerusalem and put a mark on the foreheads of those who grieve and lament over all the detestable things that are done in it.”
⁵ As I listened, he said to the others, “Follow him through the city and kill, without showing pity or compassion. ⁶ Slaughter the old men, the young men and women, the mothers and children, but do not touch anyone who has the mark. Begin at my sanctuary.” So they began with the old men who were in front of the temple.
⁷ Then he said to them, “Defile the temple and fill the courts with the slain. Go!” So they went out and began killing throughout the city. ⁸ While they were killing and I was left alone, I fell facedown, crying out, “Alas, Sovereign Lord! Are you going to destroy the entire remnant of Israel in this outpouring of your wrath on Jerusalem?”
⁹ He answered me, “The sin of the people of Israel and Judah is exceedingly great; the land is full of bloodshed and the city is full of injustice. They say, ‘The Lord has forsaken the land; the Lord does not see.’ ¹⁰ So I will not look on them with pity or spare them, but I will bring down on their own heads what they have done.”
¹¹ Then the man in linen with the writing kit at his side brought back word, saying, “I have done as you commanded.” - Ezekiel 9

 Exodus 21: 7-8

⁷ “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. ⁸ If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself,^[a] he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. ⁹ If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. ¹⁰ If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. ¹¹ If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money. - Exodus 21:7-11

 Slavery? Really?? For Americans, slavery is a very touchy subject provoking all kinds of emotions like anger and guilt. But American Chattel Slavery and Slavery in Ancient Israel were not the same thing in the slightest. I would suggest reading Mariano's entire essay on slavery. Does the Bible and its God Condone Slavery?

 Ezekiel 21:31-32

³⁰ “‘Let the sword return to its sheath.
    In the place where you were created,
in the land of your ancestry,
    I will judge you.
³¹ I will pour out my wrath on you
    and breathe out my fiery anger against you;
I will deliver you into the hands of brutal men,
    men skilled in destruction.
³² You will be fuel for the fire,
    your blood will be shed in your land,
you will be remembered no more;
    for I the Lord have spoken.’” - Ezekiel 21:30-33

I think the problem is that people really don't look at their sins as being bad enough to deserve judgement and death. Yes, we are that bad. What ever joys and happiness we experience isn't because of what we deserve but because of God's mercy on us. This passage is about the judgement deserved about Jerusalem and God using the Babylonians to do it. And it happened just like night follows day in 586 BC.

 Numbers 25:4

1While Israel was staying in Shittim, the men began to indulge in sexual immorality with Moabite women, 2who invited them to the sacrifices to their gods. The people ate the sacrificial meal and bowed down before these gods. 3So Israel yoked themselves to the Baal of Peor. And the Lord’s anger burned against them.

4The Lord said to Moses, “Take all the leaders of these people, kill them and expose them in broad daylight before the Lord, so that the Lord’s fierce anger may turn away from Israel.”

5So Moses said to Israel’s judges, “Each of you must put to death those of your people who have yoked themselves to the Baal of Peor.”

6Then an Israelite man brought into the camp a Midianite woman right before the eyes of Moses and the whole assembly of Israel while they were weeping at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 7When Phinehas son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, the priest, saw this, he left the assembly, took a spear in his hand 8and followed the Israelite into the tent. He drove the spear into both of them, right through the Israelite man and into the woman’s stomach. Then the plague against the Israelites was stopped; 9but those who died in the plague numbered 24,000. - Numbers 25:1-9

Just because you are one of  God's chosen people doesn't mean that you are exempt from judgement. The verse is about the leaders who lead Israel into idolatry and away from God who had just so recently delivered them from Egypt and provided everything for them. I mean think about it: How could they not be judged so harshly after all of that Don't forget they also received mercy because God did not annihilate them all!

FacePalm of the Day #128 - Debunking Christianity: Christians are morally compromised

John Loftus posted a video clip from a debate in which Dan Barker debated Dinish D'Souza. Loftus seems to think that Barker was able to show that Christians are inconsistent because we would condemn evil acts committed by people but don't condemn God in the Bible. I'm amazed that Loftus would post this considering that he and Barker both lost their debated to D'Souza.




Barker makes some serious mistakes in his reasoning. First let's just agree that it's wrong to break into a person's home and destroy all they have and kill their children and then blame the devil for his actions. However, Barker goes off the rails when he tries to argue that God is just like such a person because of all that happened to Job and then God said:

3 Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil. And he still maintains his integrity, though you incited me against him to ruin him without any reason.” Job 2:3

I am familiar with Dan Barker, and have never been particularly impressed with his exegetical skills. This is a great case in point.God is not saying that He didn't have a reason to put Job through all Job went through. God is not saying "Devil, I'm only allowing this because you told me to do it."   God is in control of these scenarios. Yes, the Devil is given as the agent for all of these catastrophes the befell Job but he isn't the one in charge. For example:

 ⁴ “Skin for skin!” Satan replied. “A man will give all he has for his own life. ⁵ But now stretch out your hand and strike his flesh and bones, and he will surely curse you to your face.”
 ⁶ The LORD said to Satan, “Very well, then, he is in your hands; but you must spare his life.”- John 2:4-6

Look the devil clearly says that God is in control and God then tells him that Job is in his hands but that he's limited. The Devil may be like "a roaring lion roaming to and fro seeking whom he may devour" but he  is on God's leash!. I know that the next question this bring up troubles some. Why would a good God allow a perfect and upright man to go through so much disaster and heartbreak. The story challenges the presuppositions on which the very question rests. Recall that throughout the book, Job was accused of sin by his three friends because they don't think for a second that God would allow Job to suffer like that unless it was a punishment for sin. God chastised the men.

⁷ After the LORD had said these things to Job, he said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “I am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken the truth about me, as my servant Job has. ⁸ So now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and sacrifice a burnt offering for yourselves. My servant Job will pray for you, and I will accept his prayer and not deal with you according to your folly. You have not spoken the truth about me, as my servant Job has.” ⁹ So Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite did what the LORD told them; and the LORD accepted Job’s prayer.- Job 42:7-9

What we learn is that bad and terrible things can happen to you, through no fault of your own, but God has something good in mind for you even if He sends the calamities.  Like Job can hold on to our faith in God:

¹⁴ Why do I put myself in jeopardy
   and take my life in my hands?
¹⁵ Though he slay me, yet will I hope in him;
   I will surely^[a] defend my ways to his face.
¹⁶ Indeed, this will turn out for my deliverance,
   for no godless person would dare come before him! - Job 13:14-16

 And I love this scripture:

²⁵ I know that my redeemer lives,
   and that in the end he will stand on the earth.
²⁶ And after my skin has been destroyed,
   yet in my flesh I will see God;
²⁷ I myself will see him
   with my own eyes—I, and not another.
   How my heart yearns within me!  - Job 19:25-27

Who says that there is no resurrection in the Old Testament? It's right there - plain as day - before Moses! The suffering that Job lived through helped him to see the world a lot differently than most people.

In our suffering we get to know God better. We learn more about Him and ourselves. Although the devil might mean it to destroy you, God will turn it for our deliverance. 

And what did Job get out of all of this:

 ¹ Then Job replied to the LORD:
 ² “I know that you can do all things;
   no purpose of yours can be thwarted.
³ You asked, ‘Who is this that obscures my plans without knowledge?’
   Surely I spoke of things I did not understand,
   things too wonderful for me to know.
 ⁴ “You said, ‘Listen now, and I will speak;
   I will question you,
   and you shall answer me.’
⁵ My ears had heard of you
   but now my eyes have seen you.
⁶ Therefore I despise myself
   and repent in dust and ashes.” Job 42:1-6

Job understood God better. It wasn't God saying "I'm bigger. I'm boss". God wasn't bragging. God wasn't pushing him Job into the ground and grounding him into powder. God was explaining who He and who Job is. - who and what we are.  It's not bragging if it's true....and it is.


Debunking Christianity: Christians are morally compromised

Related articles

• The book of Job (walkinstep.wordpress.com)
• Joy Comes in the Morning (brokenbelievers.com)
• where does the sin consciousness come from ? (briancoatney.com)

Debunking Christianity: Atheists and Sex Offenders

Well wonders never cease! Finally, John Loftus has again posted a blog post containing a video I can get behind! Namely it's purely stupid to say that Atheists should be shunned and discriminated against and punished in society like registered sex offenders. Only someone horribly short-sighted could ignore the fact that there have been atheists that have been a blessing to humanity.





I give the credit to God. It doesn't matter if a man or woman recognizes God or not when it comes to God choosing to them to bless humanity. This has been true and will continue to be true. To these people mentioned in the video I admire the skills and talents God gave them to bless all of us.

16 Don’t be deceived, my dear brothers and sisters. 17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows. 18 He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created. - James 1:16-18

\ Thank God!!!! Debunking Christianity: Atheists and Sex Offenders

Objective Morality

You may know that there is a disagreement on whether or not Morality is objective. This depends on what we mean by "morality". The truth is that many people just assume everyone they talk to understand what "morality" is without qualification or extrapolation, however I have found this not to be the case. While some people do try to define it such a way to define "morality" to avoid the idea of an objective morality couched in a consciousness outside of humanity. Ryan Anderson has recently issued the following challenge:

I'll take it you can't demonstrate that morals exist objectively.
But, you should make sure you differentiate between a "moral fact" as in "something that exists objectively, metaphysically in the absence of any consciousnesses" and "moral fact" as in "something we all (mostly) agree to". Good luck (chuckle...)

The problem is that we need to define terms. I would argue that there is no morality in the absence of any consciousness. When Christian theists say morality is objective, that is not what we mean. Objective Morality is independent of the human consciousness. It is objective with respect to those who live under it. It is true no matter the opinion of those living under it. As long as those who live under it decide what is right and wrong, then you have question as to what is right or wrong and who has the right to determine that. A "moral fact" dependent solely on what we agree on means nothing because we can't all agree - and never will. How do you know you are right and those you disagree with are wrong?

Without an objective standard, how do you know tell? Anderson is trying the old Atheist tactic to get out of the force of the moral argument for the existence of God by arguing that a morality that God is not subjected to is no absolute standard and morality without a consciousness is a logical contradiction. However this argument is truly silly. In order for morality to be objective for human being it merely has to be true independently of us. That morality is the standard by which we will be judged against by our maker whether or not we agree to be judged by that standard. That morality is based on God's character and by which He says.  If we base morality on what most of us agree on then it's only relative with respect to one another.

Often times attempt to define morality apart from God lead to basing it one of four ideas or utilitarianism or some combination of them:
a. Beneficience
b. Non-Maleficience
c. Respect for Autonomy
d. Justice.

The problem is that even the most ardent skeptic admits his or her own finitude and being prone to making mistakes. Given this inescapable conclusion, why would anyone think they know what is best for any given person in any given situation? Or how would we know what justice is when often times we are merely blinded by our own self-interest?  The "respect for autonomy" part really amuses me because where does it end and what does it mean? Does it end when one person's autonomy is misused to hurt others? Who decides when that is? What happens when you disagree?

It is an example of extreme hubris to think that just because we can't think of any reason why God would allow reality to work out as it has that there isn't a reason.  That is arguing in the gaps of your ignorance. God is not subjected to Morality. How can you be limited by what you have decreed? There is no dilemma. here. IF there is a God then Morality is grounded in his consciousness. Without God, there is no consciousness in which to explain what Morality is or where it comes from. All we have is our own predilections and preferences without God. And who's to say yours are better than mine when we disagree? The fact that we will disagree on some points is a given.

Here is the bottom line: when I, as a Christian theist, argue that there exists a objective morality, based on God, I am not saying that God is limited or subjected to that standard. This is not saying that God can or does anything against that standard. God follows those standards because they are based on who God is. Anytime it seems like God has commanded anything that goes against that standard, one of two things is true: either we didn't understand the command or we don't understand the standard as well as we like to pretend we do. In addition, we need to keep in mind that the Bible is God's revelation of that standard. And looking into it there is more than enough about that standard that I would not have come up with on my own. And neither would you. I will discuss this more in an upcoming post about a study that suggests that when people think they are following God's commands, they are really only doing what they want to do.

Related articles

• Moralist abandons morality (whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com)
• On Jerry Coyne and godless morality (thegospeloferik.wordpress.com)
• Is God Necessary for Morality? (Kagan vs Craig 2009) (martinspribble.com)
• Ought We Abandon Morality? Ctd (andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com)

FacePalm of the Day #107 Debunking Christianity: Genesis 3-Thank "God" for the Snake

Zach Dills has posted an article on Debunking Christianity in when he attempts to cast Genesis 3 in an opposite manner from what the text actually says. This is a failure of reading comprehension at its best. FacePalm worthy for sue, but let's examine his article further to see where it falls down. My comments are in red.

Genesis 3 is a very important chapter in the bible. It has helped shape and re-shape Christian views on human nature, the state of the world and the relationship between good and evil. It has affected and influenced philosophers, theologians, writers, politicians, historians, artists and the average person on the street. When I examine Genesis 3 I see a story that has been paramount in underwriting the conflict between faith and free thought, which has raged throughout history. This story serves as a precedent for religion’s continuous attempts to suppress reason among its followers and for its attack on anyone brave enough to examine their god and their faith through the lens of rational thought.

Dills makes a fundamental assertion that he as not shown any evidence for: he assumes that there is conflict between faith and free thought.  The rest of the article tries to cast the story in the light of God not wanting humanity to freely think for itself. This is a presupposition about God's character that is not supported by the text. 




Genesis 3 says:

Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God say. ‘You shall not eat from any tree in the garden’?” The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, nor shall you touch it, or you shall die.’” But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not die; for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate…Then the Lord God said, “See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden (Gen 3:1-7, 22-23)

So in this story God creates humans without sin but also without knowledge of good and evil. Humans carry with them a sort of infantile innocence allowing them to be “sinless” simply by being ignorant.

This is a bold assertion and Dills offers no reason why anyone should accept his reasoning.

The one command God gives these naive creatures is to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil lest they die.(1)

Where does the Bible say Adam and Eve were naive. Is being sinless equal to being naive. Does that mean in order to be good you have to be ignorant? I don't think that is what the story suggests at all. 

Adam and Eve appear fine with this command and neither of them seems to give the tree much thought until the serpent comes along. It is the serpent that gets Eve to question God’s command and see the value of what he was withholding from them. The serpent assures her she will not die but rather that her eyes will be opened and knowing good and evil she will become like God. Eve then displays one of the most wonderful qualities of humanity; curiosity. She shows the desire to know more about the world around us and thereby better ourselves. Eve uses her senses to examine the tree and finds that the fruit would be good both as a source of food and to make one wise and so like any good scientist she tests it, she eats the fruit. And sure enough, just as the serpent had said, her eyes were opened and she became more aware of the world around her then she had previously been. She then shares with Adam teaching him what she had learned. Then God comes along looking for Adam and Eve. When he finds them he discovers that they have disobeyed him and then speaking to the other gods or himself says that humans have become like “one of us, knowing good and evil” and so he kicks them out of the garden to prevent them from also eating of the tree of life, which would allow them to live forever.

So let me get this one straight: Zach Dills thinks that humanity is better off - death, violence, lying, stealing, depression, oppression, war, famines, and all the kinds of evil  we whine and complain about? I mean Dills know that had Adam not sinned we wouldn't be in the messes we are now? Doesn't seem so. There  are several things he doesn't get right in his summary of the event and he gets them wrong because of his presuppositions. 

1. The serpent used the same argument on Eve that he uses on us today: Trying to get us to question if God really said what we know He says. The serpent could not get Eve to question God's existence as he does people today so he went after what God says.

2. It wasn't curiosity that made Eve eat the fruit. She ate it because she believed what the serpent told her. She was deceived. Adam on the other hand  knew exactly what he was doing - disobeying God.

3. Dills points out one of  the Old Testament texts that points to the Trinity. In Genesis 1, God said Let US make man in our own image.  In Genesis 3, God said man has become like “one of us, knowing good and evil”.

When examining this story and how it is usually taught to people in church what amazes me the most is the very thing that is never even acknowledged, which is the simple fact that everything the serpent said was true while what God said was in fact a lie.

This isn't a new argument. Let's see Dills blunder his way through it.

When Adam and Eve ate the fruit they did not die as God had threatened but rather just as the serpent said their eyes were opened and they became like God as God himself admitted saying they “have become like one of us, knowing good and evil.”

The serpent lied because he left out that there would be nothing but misery as a direct consequence of  her and her husband sin. If you are going to take the text seriously, then you have to believe that when the creation was called "good" this meant that it was perfect. No decay. No Second Law of Thermodynamics. No death. Had they remained sinless, Neither Adam or Eve would ever die. God didn't tell Adam that if he ate the fruit he would drop dead at that moment. God said Adam would "surly die". And Adam did. No just Adam we will all surely die and that wasn't the original intention. Not to mention God's wondrous love and mercy. What if Adam had stayed in the Garden and at the fruit of the Tree of Life? We would be forever stuck in our decaying bodies sentenced to sin forever with no way out.  Yup, that sounds like a better alternative alright.

I do not understand why this plain fact is so openly ignored? Not only did Adam and Eve not die after eating the fruit but according to Genesis 5:5 Adam lived for nine hundred and twelve years, so much for the trustworthiness of God.


Duh! Had he never sinned, Adam would never had died!  I thought Dills said he used to be a Christian.

Now the reason anyone ever believes this god again after such an obvious lie is strange indeed but they do and throughout the bible this god persists in fighting against humanity’s purist of knowledge constantly calling them to forego their own reason and trust solely in him. This god seems intent on preventing humanity from growing in knowledge trying rather to reestablish humanity’s infantile mind so as to obtain humanity’s absolute submission and their continuous worship and sacrifice.

Now that's just plain slander! And slander of one's creator.  Tsk. Tsk. Every discovery. Evey bit of knowledge we have about the universe and how it works comes from the one who made it. He put the desire in us to learn and to find out. He the earth and everything contained in it under our feet. Adam gave it up. Jesus took it back.  And denying God the worship God deserves, not just because of what God has done but for who God is, is stupid. No one else deserves humanity's absolute submission and sacrifice. All that God asks for in terms of sacrifice is our lives lived for God's glory. Fair deal. .

So why does the serpent get such a bad rap?

Because our first parents believed his lie and damned us to hell.  Oops, was that rhetorical?

Why, if you ask any normal person about the story will they say that the serpent lied when in fact he was correct?

Go to a funeral and then ask the dead person's family if the serpent was right? Or better yet the next time something terrible happens and you want to bring up the "Problem of Evil" to argue against the existence of God, don't forget to thank the serpent. 

The serpent told the truth whereas God lied and yet the serpent is the one cursed and God continues on in history unblemished despite his clear sin.

When a parent tells his child not to run across the street, is he sinning? If the parent punishes the child for disobeying such a command is it a sin? If you think it is,  it explains much as to what is wrong with society.

Robert G. Ingersoll, a great American orator and writer from the 19th century, astutely notes this and praises the virtue of the serpent. “If the account given in Genesis is really true, ought we not, after all, thank this serpent? He was the first schoolmaster, the first advocate of learning, the first enemy of ignorance, the first to whisper in human ears the sacred word liberty, the creator of ambition, the author modesty, of inquiry, of doubt, of investigation, of progress, and of civilization.” I couldn’t agree more.

I disagree. It is only through obedience to God that we have correct ambitions, gain knowledge, gain wisdom, gain understanding, liberty,  and true fulfillment.  Otherwise you are  wasting your life, chasing the wind. 

The serpent has my admiration for where God says “trust me” the serpent said “don’t trust me rather see for yourself”; where God says “listen to me” the serpent says “listen to reason”; and where God says, “fear me” the serpent says, “fear ignorance.”

And where did the serpent say that? The text says that the serpent said:

“Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” 

“You will not certainly die.” 

But we do certainly die just like Eve and Adam. 

“For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” 

And do we really know everything about good and evil. We know evil in the sense that we can't stop doing evil. 

When God demanded faith (ignorance) the best for us the serpent offered reason (knowledge) death and Eve wisely foolishly listened to the serpent. Truly, what parent desires their baby to remain a baby forever?

God doesn't want us to remain immature or ignorant.

Should not a parent nurture and teach their children so that they may one day stand upon their own two feet, make their own decisions and live a good life?
  
God does exactly that. That is what the Holy Spirit does - lead and guide us to make good decisions and do right.  If that is what you want then you want Jesus. 

Yet this god would have none of that rather he would have us all be intellectually barren and living in diapers for all of eternity.

Really?

¹⁶ All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, ¹⁷ so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. - 2 Timothy 3:16,17

Looks like the Bible disagrees.

We live in a day when religious fundamentalism seems to be growing worldwide at the expense of rationality and sound education.

Evidence?

Dogmas and creeds are regaining the place they had lost as the dominate force in creating and controlling people’s morals, politics and over-all worldview.

Thank the serpent for the need to control people's morals, politics, and worldviews.  People do all kinds of evil. We all sin in word, thought, and deed. No amount of control we try to implement is enough fix this. Sin is so terrible and pervasive God had to deal with it.

Reason is once again being viewed with hostility and suspicious in favor of mindless doctrines and ridiculous interpretations of archaic scriptures.

Dills knows a lot about "ridiculous interpretations" just see the one he offered here. 

Doubt is again a sin and faith is THE virtue.

Because faith is moving on what you know to me true. No one in the Bible was ever asked to move on blind faith. IT was trust based on relationship with God. In light of that doubt is snubbing your nose at one who has cultivated a relationship with you - your creator himself.

We are told one should have faith; faith in God, faith in you country and faith in your own unexamined beliefs.

Not by God. The Bible tells us to have faith in God and to examine our beliefs.

Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test? - 2 Corinthians 13:5

Sadly this unexamined faith endangers the world as it allows people to maintain their pathetic feelings of superiority over those who do not share their same unexamined beliefs.

Besides not examining your beliefs is a sin and outside of God's commands.

¹¹ Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. - Acts 17:11

Be like the Bereans!

Unfortunately, the fight against fundamentalism is one that is amazingly difficult. Fundamentalism has the advantage of being able to spread itself through birth, bribery, fear, laziness, coercion and violence whereas reason must rely solely on education.

 Funny, atheism is much the same way.  Given that most atheists can't seem to represents what Christians believe accurately, they don't understand what it is they say they rejects. through the same kind of lies that the serpent  fed Eve that day she became a sinner.

As we saw God demanded faith and relied on threats whereas the serpent demanded nothing and offered only information.

If someone tells you something is bad for you and it warns you that it will kill you, how is that a threat? How is it the truth when you are told that that an action will make you as knowledgeable about God and all you get out of it is a cycle of sin terminated in death and no way out. Of course the serpent didn't ask for anything in return because he got what he waned - our downfall.

So let us stand up against the faith of fundamentalism and evangelicalism by following the brave example of Eve.

You mean damning ourselves and all of our children? Too late. 

Let us continually take the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil through the process of education and learn to think for ourselves.

Notice how the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil didn't lead to education or Adam thinking for himself. He didn't develop quantum mechanics. Invent the wheel.  Or map the universe. He did learn how to sin and rebel against his creator.  Fear. Death. Doubt. And Disbelief. Yup, good times.

Let us not waste the gift the serpent pointed us to by ceasing to examine and test the world around us so that we can make it a better place.

It was that "gift" from the serpent that makes it necessary for the world to be made better place.  It had been perfect.

It’s time to stop starring at the sky waiting for a god that’s not coming and time to start looking one another in the eye, learning from one another and working together for a better future. And if knowledge makes us like the gods then I say let us dare to be gods.



We don't have to wait for a god to come to save us. Jesus already came and saved us if you put your faith in Him. Knowledge does not make us like the gods.  We were already created in the image of God. Funny how the lies the serpent gave Eve becomes even more and more insidious the closer I look at it.

(1)I’ve always wondered; if Adam and Eve did not have the knowledge of good and evil how could they “know” that it was wrong to disobey God?

FYI: One can put superscripts in blog post The tags you want  are "^{" and "}. Works like a charm.  As for knowing it was wrong to disobey God, they know the same way you knew each and every time you disobeyed your parents. No one skates on ignorance. For every sin we unknowingly commit, there are many we voluntarily commit.

Written by Zach Dills



Debunking Christianity: Genesis 3-Thank "God" for the Snake

Related articles

• How did Satan get Eve to eat the fruit (wiki.answers.com)
• Who was the serpent in the Garden of Eden and please justify the answer (wiki.answers.com)
• Satan is a Drug Dealer... Reflections on Genesis 2:25-3:7 (benwhite29.wordpress.com)
• It's Not Just More Than Words (manacled.wordpress.com)
• Name the Lie. Insert the Truth. (brokenheartedboldness.wordpress.com)

High Five of the Day - An Answer from the Grave

Dr. Claude Mariottini has turned what could have easily been a facepalm into a high five! John Loftus posted the following on his blog:

Read and respond to two similar stories, one by Antony Flew, and the other by Carl Sagan. They both have to do with the OTF:

Antony Flew, in his classic Parable of the Invisible Gardener, asks this question:

At last the Sceptic despairs, "But what remains of your original assertion? Just how does what you call an invisible, intangible, eternally elusive gardener differ from an imaginary gardener or even from no gardener at all?"...What would have to occur or to have occurred to constitute for you a disproof of the love of, or the existence of, God?

Carl Sagan wrote about The Dragon In My Garage and asked:

Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists?

Well, what of it?

Debunking Christianity: Two Questions From the Grave, by Antony Flew and Carl Sagan

Before, I provide the link to Dr. Mariottini, I feel the need to point out that both Sagan and Flew have died and now know beyond any shadow of doubt if God exists or not. How do you think it worked out for them? Second, I fail to see how their statements relate to OTF given that the God of the Bible is neither elusive nor imperceptible. The God of the Bible has gone out of His way to provide a means of relating to us! As for Mariottini's answer, I think it's genius. Not only does he focus on Flew's work, and cites what he references, (because the answer simultaneously works for Sagan), but he points out the Flew himself answered his own question before he died! Take a look at Dr. Mariottini's post!

An Answer from the Grave

Related articles

• Carl Sagan: The Frailty of Knowledge (milkandcookies.com)
• Carl Sagan: Scaling Heaven (milkandcookies.com)
• The miseducation of Carl Sagan (malbell.wordpress.com)
• Carl Sagan: The Great Demotions (milkandcookies.com)
• HAARP - Holes in Heaven (smpa.wordpress.com)

FacePalm of the Day #94 - Debunking Christianity: For the Love of God: Or Hell as a Tool for Secular Morality

It's been a while since TGBaker has posted on Debunking Christianity. Today, I was reminded of why that is a good thing.  He again makes some serious errors that make me think that he does not understand what the Bible says.

I developed this ditty from a Facebook spat with a friend of mine who is a Christian Philosopher, Dr. James F. Sennett. I had never really thought about this area before. But I think it produces another problem with the omni-attributes of a proposed god.



I sure hope the TGBaker keeps corresponding with Dr. Sennett because God may use the discussions to bring TGBaker into right relationship with God. It would be an answered prayer.

Does God love something because it is good? Or is it good because God loves it? If God does or loves something because it is good, then the good looks to something that is more sovereign than God to which he must conform to be good. If God were to oppose these standards called good then God would not be god since he lacks omni-benevolence. So God's omniscience is limited by the good. If on the other hand what is good is simply what God loves and commands ( the Divine Command Theory), then the good is simply whatever is the whim of God (such as killing all the babies in the Canaanite genocide). If there are no standards apart from God other than what he wants or commands then apart from him there is no good.

The Bible clearly says that God love us. It says that we are evil. Therefore the line of reasoning is flawed from the beginning.  There is no standard that is apart from God and there is no good apart from Him. If we do anything "good" it is because of God's grace and God's restraining of our evil. 

The former idea that there is a good apart from god means that humanity should follow that standard and obey God only if he is compliant to that standard. The latter view which state that the good is simply God's whim is obeyed only because of the threat of punishment or damnation. This dilemma is called the Euthyphro dilemma and has been left to us by Socrates.

Who said that there is good apart from God. TGBaker presupposes this and offers no proof for it being true. On the other hand, morality is not based on God's whim. God's nature does not change. Basing our morality on God is truly objective because God is perfect and unchanging. God's standard is not a moving target.

Sam Harris has offered us a beginning means whereby to ground well-being in empirical science. I would like to call his tool Hell. Harris asks us to imagine a world with as much suffering, as intense suffering as possible, with as many people suffering and all of that for as long as can be imagined. Let's call this "Hell." It sounds like the Christian tradition and might be a good thing to rescue from them. Harris present the empirically based obvious. we would all agree that any movement from that designated measurement is a movement toward well-being, less suffering and more contentment. Obviously there are comparisons and considerations along the way to the antithesis of our Hell but our path will by that of human improvement. Our goal will be that of a paradise or heaven where well-being like physical health will be maximized.

Here is the problem with Harris' ideas: Hell is not just a plane of existence of maximum and intense suffering!  Hell is torment because of total separation from God. We were created to be in relationship with God. That is what the goal of religion is. That is what we search our lives for. People try to fill that void in their lives, often unconsciously. It doesn't matter how much pain is avoided in life because without that fulfillment in God, one can never be whole.

¹⁸ I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. ¹⁹ For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. ²⁰ For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope ²¹ that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

 ²² We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. ²³ Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. ²⁴ For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? ²⁵ But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.

 ²⁶ In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. ²⁷ And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God.

 ²⁸ And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. ²⁹ For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. ³⁰ And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.- Romans 8:18-30

With the removal of god from the mix the Euthypho dilemma becomes manageable. The idea of a transcendent good which God (much less any other being) is removed. An empirically based "landscape" of evidence and information for reasoning humanity to a better course is opened up as a field of promise. The fear of compliance of a tyrant that threatens eternal suffering is dethroned and replaced with a view toward paradise.

Removing God from the mix, make the dilemma unanswerable. Humanity is unable to reason adequately about what is right and wrong. And who can perfectly keep the standard that they know is right let alone what they don't understand? Jesus was clear. Entertaining the thought of sins like lust, coveting, and hatred are just as bad as adultery, stealing, and murder. This is because entertaining the thought may lead to actually performing the act. Be honest. Our hearts are filled with lusts and greed - sometimes beyond our control. Even when we seek to do good, as we understand it, evil is always present. How do you expect to get free?  Can you free yourself? Nope. God isn't a tyrant that threatens eternal suffering. God is a liberator from sin and death to which you are enslaved. Hell is not a possible destination - it is a foregone conclusion without Jesus.

Debunking Christianity: For the Love of God: Or Hell as a Tool for Secular Morality

Related articles

• Biblical Christianity vs. Secular Humanism (whateverstateiam.com)
• David Marshall and My Refutation of His Work (arizonaatheist.blogspot.com)
• Beware of Christian Hell (atheistrev.com)
• Hell Lecture with Mike Licona and Jeremy Evans (zaknafein81.wordpress.com)
• MORALS: GOD vs man (jstfishinman.wordpress.com)

The BOBA Digest: Dan Barker and the Confusing Author | True Freethinker

Image by Matti Á. via FlickrSome of my favorite posts from Mariano Grinbank is when he addresses the nonsense of Dan Barker. Mariano is addressing the following argument:

His latest talking point is to best expressed via a syllogism:

1) The Bible states that “God is not the author of confusion.”
2) The Bible has caused a lot of confusion.
3) Therefore, God is not the Bible’s author.

As much as on the surface this syllogism appears airtight; there are various fallacies packages within.

Mariano then goes through and systematically deconstructs Barker's argument. It is a thing of beauty. Follow the link to read Mariano's post.

The BOBA Digest: Dan Barker and the Confusing Author | True Freethinker

Can Atheists Live Without God? by Norman Geisler MP3 - Apologetics 315

This week Brian Auten posted a lecture about Athesism by Dr. Norman Geisler. Definitely worth listening to.

Can Atheists Live Without God? by Norman Geisler MP3 - Apologetics 315

Related articles

• The New Atheism by Norman L. Geisler (Essential apologetics) (rodiagnusdei.wordpress.com)
• Norman Geisler on Extreme Calvinism and Blaming God For Evil (counteringcalvinism.wordpress.com)
• books that influenced my life and theology (jude3project.org)
• being an apologist: part one (jude3project.org)
• book review: defending the faith (jude3project.org)