Saturday, March 5, 2011

Calvinistic Cartoons: Idol Makers

Eddie Eddings has posted this gem of a quote



I don't know why today's humanists and atheists fail to see this fact. When one says that God is unnecessary and places themselves as the final authority of their lives, what better term that "idolatry". Thanks, Eddie.

Calvinistic Cartoons: Idol Makers
Enhanced by Zemanta

Remembering Dwayne McDuffie | Marvel Heroes | Comic News | News | Marvel.com

Marvel has posted a great article on the life of Dwayne McDuffie in his honor. They published a few words from people who worked with him and knew him. One was from one of corroborators Gregory Wright. Wright recounts a behind the scenes incident that I had no idea about. Back in the early 1990's, Captain America had a sidekick named "Bucky" - who happened to be black. The writer Mark Gruenwald had no idea how offensive a term "Bucky" was for black people (at the time I didn't know the history either) and after speaking to McDuffie, Gruenwald changed the character's name to Battlestar. For the first time I now know why the change was made.

Gregory Wright said:

While we were both assistant editors, Dwayne quietly pointed out to me that my boss Mark Gruenwald had written something particularly racially offensive. He had created a new partner for the wannabe Captain America, USAgent. He was an African-American Bucky. At the time, I didn't quite get what the problem was, but Dwayne explained it to me, and said that this made him lose some respect for Mark. I explained that Mark couldn't have done this on purpose, and would be very upset at this mistake. Dwayne was dubious. Mark was far too intelligent to not know what he was doing. So I decided that Dwayne should speak to Mark.
Dwayne was not thrilled with this, as he was already that subversive guy to some. And this could get him in labeled something else. I told him Mark was different, and besides, he didn't think DAMAGE CONTROL was subversive. He loved it. Dwayne very calmly expressed his view to Mark, who was absolutely horrified. He had no idea that “Bucky” was an offensive term. He quizzed Dwayne for a while on the history of the offensive nature of the term and asked him to help him solve this problem in the most sensitive way possible. So the very next issue of CAPTAIN AMERICA that Mark wrote, Bucky became Battlestar. And Mark and Dwayne had a newfound respect for each other.



I also enjoyed reading the remarks from Reggie Hudlin. He and Wright had the most to say about who McDuffie was as a person and some of the trials he had to face and how he overcame them. From their recollections, I think his life would make an interesting book and movie.


More on Marvel.com: http://marvel.com/news/story/15329/remembering_dwayne_mcduffie#ixzz1Fi2g9H00


Remembering Dwayne McDuffie | Marvel Heroes | Comic News | News | Marvel.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, March 4, 2011

FacePalm of the Day - #64 - Debunking Christianity: Dr. Matt McCormick On the Goodness of God

John Loftus posted the following quote from Dr. Matt McCormick
In A Simple Paradox Concerning God’s Goodness he writes:
Has God committed morally wrong actions? If God is the almighty creator of the universe, then there are countless instances where there was an event that God was either directly or indirectly causally responsible for that we would ordinarily identify as morally wrong. Consider the class of actions or omissions that we would identify as morally wrong if a moral agent had been present and had committed them or allowed them to happen. A person drowns by herself near a dock on a lake where a life vest sits on the dock. If a person had been standing next to the life vest and saw her drowning in the lake, but refrained from tossing the life vest to her, we would think of that failure to act as morally abhorrent. There are countless other events like these where it does not appear that God did what we would ordinarily have identified as the morally obligatory act. Therefore, it would appear that God has committed (or by omission allowed to happen) countless morally wrong events.

Many of the comments on the post at Debunking Christianity.make the mistake that because God does not stop all disasters and suffering that he does nothing at all. McCormick does not make that mistaken argument but his example of the drowning girl and the life vest does not accurately describe reality. It ignores that God averts all kinds of suffering all kinds of ways at all times. If God didn't we would have all died a long time ago. None of us would be here to argue about the issues in the first place.

I think the issue comes down to what McCormick wrote:

There are countless other events like these where it does not appear that God did what we would ordinarily have identified as the morally obligatory act. Therefore, it would appear that God has committed (or by omission allowed to happen) countless morally wrong events.
It does not follow that God can have morally wrong events attributed to him because we can't confirm that God does not do what we would would define as morally obligatory. The argument presupposes that there is an objective moral standard that we and God should meet. I agree that there is an objective moral standard. We don't know the big picture. How do you know that God has not acted in the way that benefits the most number of people? You don't.  Therefore you cannot conclude that God has done anything immorally.



Debunking Christianity: Dr. Matt McCormick On the Goodness of God
Enhanced by Zemanta

Answering Muslims: Dearborn Mayor John O'Reilly: Rant Against Acts 17

I really like those viral videos that take the part of an old German movie where the subtitles are switched around that has the actor playing Hitler raving and going nuts over something. Sometimes they are funny but this one by Nabeel Qureshi and David Wood is just priceless.




Answering Muslims: Dearborn Mayor John O'Reilly: Rant Against Acts 17
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, March 3, 2011

The 'All Star Superman' Animated Movie: One of the Best [Review] - ComicsAlliance | Comics culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

This review  by Chris Sims is really good. I have an occasion to see All-Star Superman and I loved it. I haven't read the mini-series on which the movie was based but I want to read it now. I don't know if this movie is Dwayne McDuffie's final work to be produced, but it was released the day after he died.  It's based on a mini-series written by Grant Morrison. I also love the other things I've read that Morrison wrote.Some how McDuffie managed to summarize and condense a story that took a year to publish into about 75 minutes and still remain epic, fun, and thought-provoking..

The 'All Star Superman' Animated Movie: One of the Best [Review] - ComicsAlliance | Comics culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Enhanced by Zemanta

FacePalm of the Day #63 - Debunking Christianity: Is God Omnipotent or Not?


John Loftus has posted yet another argument trying to show that God cannot be omnipotent and good. My comments are going to be bolded. Let's see where he goes off the rails this time.

Why is it that believers say God can do anything until I suggest a scenario that they don't like? This is yet another reason why I think Christians are delusional. It's crystal clear that what they think God can do depends on whether a given scenario is something that they like or not. It's much like how they deal with unanswered prayer. They count the hits and discount the misses. And it's much like giving God the credit for the good that happens in life and blaming human beings (or the devil) for everything else. I don't get it. Is God omnipotent or not? Let me give just one scenario concerning earthquakes which cause massive amounts of suffering.


Unfortunately, he has a point about Americanized Christian culture. Fortunately, the Bible clearly does not allow this viewpoint, although many Christians think this way.

Several earthquakes have caused a great amount of carnage in recent years, including the one in the Indian Ocean in 2004 that caused a tsunami which killed over a quarter million people, countless numbers of animals, and devastated the environment. There have been earthquakes in Haiti last year, and in Pakistan and New Zealand this year already. We know that in the future there will be massive earthquakes in Los Angeles, along the San Andreas fault line, and also in Istanbul.


All true. I live in California. The San Andreas Faults is really close to me. I'm well-aware of it.

Now, could God have averted the ones in the past and continue doing so in the future? Yes or no? No fudging. No obfuscation. No red herrings. No sidestepping the question. No delusional dances. No gerrymandering around the question. Yes or no? I take it the answer will be a resounding yes. "Yes, praise Jesus, he can do this!"

Yes, God can and does do that. That is why I continue to live.

Now let's also agree that the more power a person has then the more he is morally obliged to help avert suffering.

Now hold on.  There it is. Here is where the argument fails: Who said that God is morally obliged to avert suffering,. How can God be omnipotent and yet be limited to how He should apply that power when? No. we don't need to grant that premise. There is no logical reason to accept that point.

If all it takes is a snap of one's fingers, or a signature on a piece of paper, to avert suffering then that person has a greater moral obligation to help avert suffering than a person who must die in the process of doing so. Agree?

I disagree. 

If a superman came upon a gang of thugs in Darfar who were pillaging a town, wantonly killing children, and repeatedly raping women, then does he have more of a moral obligation to help these innocents than a mere mortal who does not have the power to stop them and will surely die in the process? Again, Yes or no? No fudging. No obfuscation. No red herrings. No sidestepping the question. No delusional dances. No gerrymandering around the question. Yes or no? I take it the answer to this question will also be a resounding yes. "Yes, praise Jesus, God has more of a moral obligation than others to avert suffering because he has more power to do so!"

No. Equating Superman to God is really not looking at it correctly. The fictional Superman is just as valuable as any other human being and is obligated but because of the Moral standard God has established. God is not bound by the same standard.and we belong to Him. Superman belongs to the world. Superman serves the world. The world is supposed to serve God.

Put two and two together and there you have the problem. It's a serious one if you wish to continue believing in your delusion, and delusion it is. Why is it that an omnipotent God could not do a perpetual miracle by stopping plate tectonics from ever moving, especially if all it takes is a snap of his omnipotent "fingers"? Is he omnipotent, or not?

Loftus is putting two and two together and coming up with five.  He asks "Why is it that an omnipotent God could not do a perpetual miracle by stopping plate tectonics from ever moving?" Simple. Without plate tectonics we are all dead. Look at the science from Reason to Believe website.


How Could A Good God Allow Earthquakes?
Another Benefit for Life in Earthquakes


God has a reason for everything he does and does not do. Claiming to know better is one of the best examples of stupidity ever thought by the minds of men.

Believers have only one reasonable way to escape the clear implications of this serious problem for faith in what I call the omniscience escape clause: "My ways are not your ways," we read in Isaiah. "How do we know what an omniscient God might do?" an apologist chimes in with an implied, "We can't." The answer is obvious. We must be able to understand enough of God's ways to know that his ways are good and that he knows what he's doing. It's that simple. If God does not act as a loving person would do then all we can reasonably conclude is that God is not acting like a loving person would do. And if God does not respond in discernible loving ways when tragic events take place then it looks entirely as if tragic events happen randomly without his ever-watchful eye.


Loftus misses another option: Maybe we don't know what Love is. If you don't know what love is, how do you discern what loving is.  How do you not  know that God has actually don e what was the absolute best for us all, although it doesn't seem like it to us. This is where trust comes in. We trust God and don't rely just on what we think because what we think will change. That doesn't mean don't think, but look at the world the way God has given it to us to look at it.

So I put it to believers. If God is omnipotent then why does he not care? He could avert all earthquakes with a perpetual miracle quite easily. Why doesn't he do it? No fudging. No obfuscation. No red herrings. No sidestepping the question. No delusional dances. No gerrymandering around the question. Why doesn't he do it?

Who said God doesn't care? While God could have chosen to make this world in a way that earthquakes were not needed, He didn't. This is what God decided to do and how He decided to do it. Do we know why? No.  Do we need to know why?  No. Can we ask God? Yes. Will He answer? When He is ready for us to know we will know but the signs and evidence point to earthquakes being needed fro the life we have on earth..

Then when you've come up with your answers look at them. Think about them. Ask yourself if these answers make sense apart from what you read in an ancient superstitious set of texts written by pre-scientific agency detectors. Do they really make sense give the omnipotence of God?

Unfortunately, many Christians don't think about these issues.  I have thought about this a lot and the conclusion I've come to is that the Bible is right.  Even it means everyone of us is wrong, God is right.

I have no hopes that what I've just written can shake you from your delusion, because you are deluded. Doubt is the adult attitude. Grow up.

Maybe John Lofuts should really take stock and see where the delusion is.


5 If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you. 6 But when you ask, you must believe and not doubt, because the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. 7 That person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord. 8 Such a person is double-minded and unstable in all they do. - James 1:5-8


Debunking Christianity: Is God Omnipotent or Not?
Enhanced by Zemanta

Interview: Dr. Nabeel Qureshi on Islam - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten posted an interview of Dr. Nabeel Qureshi by Dr. Michael Licona. Dr. Qureshi talks about Islam and how he became a Christian, converting from Islam. Follow the link to hear the audio.

Interview: Dr. Nabeel Qureshi on Islam - Apologetics 315
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Excerpts From 20/20’s ‘Charlie Sheen: In His Own Words’ « : Crushable - Crushable gives you the celebrity news, style and scoop on the stuff you care about.

There has been much being published about Charlie Sheen. My question was did Sheen actually say these things? Unfortunately, it seems he did - on television?! He needs prayer. We need to pray for him instead of laughing at him no matter how much we might be tempted to mock. This could happen to anyone.


















Excerpts From 20/20’s ‘Charlie Sheen: In His Own Words’ « : Crushable - Crushable gives you the celebrity news, style and scoop on the stuff you care about.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Batman, 'The Daily Show', and the Fall of Western Civilization - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

I've been following Comics Alliance's coverage on the backlash on Batman choosing a Muslim young man to defend Paris under his patronage.  Yeah, I know it's fiction, they did such a  great job on mocking these racist people that I had to comment. I can't believe that these people think that all Muslims hate non-Muslims and practice Jihad. This is not true. I don't believe Islam has the truth but it's silly to think that they are all more evil or less good than anyone else. The Daily Show segment is awesome and shows just how stupid these people are.







Batman, 'The Daily Show', and the Fall of Western Civilization - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

Behind the Scenes at 'The Daily Show': My Day at the Fake News Headquarter



Enhanced by Zemanta

FacePalm of the Day #62 - Debunking Christianity: A New and Better Pascal's Wager: If God Asked You to Wager Before Being Born What Would You Choose?

John Loftus prompted another facepalm by posting the following quote:

Why didn't we get a choice in whether or not we would be born on earth? Wouldn't the reasonably good thing to do is to create us and then ask us if we would want to be born knowing the risks involved? God could have presented us with an informed choice to either be born or to be put out of existence forever, with heaven up for grabs if we wanted to take the risk. God would accurately inform us what the probabilities are to gain heaven should we be sent to earth as a babies somewhere. And we would know the probabilities that we might not be raised in the right Christian family and might therefore be sent to hell because of it. We would be fully informed persons about the risks involved. After all, this would be our lives! We're sentient conscious moral beings. Why wouldn't God give us a choice in the matter? It's unethical for him not to do so. It would be a Pascal's Wager in heaven before being created on earth. If I were given that choice I would simply say "No, count me out! Put me out of existence now." That would be the reasonable thing to do if I became informed about the odds. Only a fool would choose otherwise. And yet here I am without my choice who apparently will be condemned to hell.


John Loftus is forgetting the scripture he claims to know. He seems to think that God capriciously puts people in situations where they could possibly end up in hell. This is exactly opposite from what the Bible says.

22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. 23 For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.

24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’[b] As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’[c]

29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.” - Acts 17:22-31


God tells us that he has placed us all in the circumstances where we can best find him, but does not promise that we will all find him. This explains how people who are not raised in Christian families can still find Jesus. I also always amazed by the attitude that says that we have opinions and rights that God should respect. Why? He made us. He is control. We don't know nearly as much as he does. Why should he listen to anything we have to say? We don't even know what we need or even how to pray. Compared to him we are not equals but more like unconscious clay. And he is the potter.

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”[f]

16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[g] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? - Romans 9:14-24


Debunking Christianity: A New and Better Pascal's Wager: If God Asked You to Wager Before Being Born What Would You Choose?
Enhanced by Zemanta

The Philosophy of Ayn Rand Refuted - apologetics - blip.tv

Here is a lecture rebutting Ayn Rand's philosophy by John Robbins.




The Philosophy of Ayn Rand Refuted - apologetics - blip.tv
Enhanced by Zemanta

Dealing with Bible Contradictions MP3 - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted audio and PDF of a series by Lenny Esposito on alleged. Bible Contradictions. Follow the link to Brian Auten's blog to get the resources.The lectures deal with the following video:





Dealing With Contradictions





Dealing with Bible Contradictions MP3 - Apologetics 315
Enhanced by Zemanta

Debunking Christianity: Were the "Dark Ages" Really Dark?

John Loftus posted the following article regarding a picture he posted. My comments are in bold. I've got to admit that the graphic is not new, I've seen it before on the Internet. It's not offensive just fails to take historical fact into account.

I'm being taken to task for publishing a graph depicting the Medieval Ages as the "Dark Ages" leaving a huge gaping hole in Western history, which can be seen here. What some people failed to realize is the title to the post in which Augustinian Platonism shares a large part of the blame (no, it is not totally to blame). Augustine like Plato before him placed a much greater value on the heavenly world (the realm of the eternal "forms" or ideas) over the empirical earthly world.

Sure, that makes just as much sense as assuming that the material reality that we experience is all there is.

Christians in earlier centuries therefore destroyed many ancient manuscripts--science manuscripts--which were preserved by the Muslims. Who needs earthly wisdom? Paul basically said it was worthless. When people like Aquinas re-discovered these ancient texts it brought on a new awareness of what the ancients taught and helped bring in the Enlightenment.

Paul was not saying that earthly wisdom that was worthless is the same as science. He was talking about the kind of wisdom that says there is no God and that we are the standard or reality. Or you know the "wisdom" that says that we don't need God to explain the world? Yup, that kind of "wisdom". I'd like to know where does Paul say that science is worthless? Easy Answer: He didn't.

I remember visiting The Art Institute of Chicago and seeing a dramatic change in the art of the 1500's. Artists were now painting pictures of real people, and even ("aghast*) a bowl of fruit on a table! This came after they had thrown off the shackles of Augustinianism. This is undeniable.

Since when should Augustine (even great as he was) be considered a higher authority than the Bible. He didn't have things completely right. Who does? No one is perfect but Jesus and that is why we should follow him and no one else.

And yes, it was mainly the French philosophes who labeled these centuries the "Dark Ages." That was probably due to several reasons. Of Sir Isaac Newton it was said by Alexander Pope:
Nature and nature's laws lay hid in Night;
God said, 'Let Newton be!' and all was light.
Prior to Newton the previous centuries were considered the "Dark Ages" by comparison, and that too is undeniable.

Do you know what else is undeniable. Newton was a Bible-believing Christian who loved Jesus and served him. Hmmmmmm. Curious. It was the fact that he believed there was a creator who made an understandable universe that lead him to his discoveries in Mathematics and Physics. Same thing with Galileo and Copernicus.

The French philosophes also thought the atrocities committed by the church in the previous centuries, like the Crusades, Inquisitions, and witch-hunts, were a very dark period in Western history, and I agree. Superstition like that reigned. If I was being brought into the light with a new awareness of the writings of the ancients, which helped Newton to write his Principia, I would describe it that way too, for all the same legitimate reasons.

The Bible can't be blamed for the atrocities and evil perpetrated by the Church. Those thing happened because people didn't follow the Bible.

I do understand that the church made many strides during that period of history in science, literature, and so forth. And so the huge drop-off represented by the graph is not indicative of that period of time. But I have been persuaded that it was a dark period of history, even if not completely dark.

And here we have Loftus backing away from slightly from the unfounded assumption he and the image makes. That during the Middle Ages in Europe they would have been further along had they not been Christian. According to this logic, why not embrace Islam if you think the Muslims made more scientific discoveries and were more advanced? Very flawed. Loftus wouldn't want to make such an equivocation. It's silly but we must ask why would you not if you think Christianity was the problem with Europe in the Middle Ages? It had way more to do with politics than what the Bible says. That was the problem.

Of course, anyone who thinks otherwise can volunteer to go back in time to that period and see what you think. Good luck with that! I'll stay in my own century thank you. ;-)

For further reading on the origins of science there is no better place to look than Richard Carrier's chapter in The Christian Delusion.

I'm not sure why anyone would think that to believe the Bible means turning your back on science. I agree that people do that, but it's not by necessity. If that is what you think that is what being a Christian is, you are doing it wrong and you have nothing in the Bible to stand on in doing it.

Debunking Christianity: Were the "Dark Ages" Really Dark?
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

History of Rosewood, Florida

I got the following text in E-mail today. According to this, the movie Rosewood fit the historical record pretty closely.

Founding of Rosewood


Rosewood was established around 1870 in Levy County, Florida on a road leading to Cedar Key and the Gulf of Mexico. It took its name from the abundant red cedar that grew in the area. It prospered as the Florida Railroad established a small depot to handle the transport of cedar wood to the pencil factory in Cedar Key and the transportation of timber, turpentine rosin, citrus, vegetables, and cotton. In 1890 the cedar depleted and many of the white families moved to Sumner, three (3) miles west of Rosewood and worked at the newfound saw mill established by Cummer and Sons. By 1900 Rosewood had a black majority of citizens.

Rosewood Massacre


On the morning of January 1, 1923 Fannie Coleman Taylor of Sumner Florida, claimed she was assaulted by a black man. Although she was not seriously injured and was able to describe what happened she allegedly remained unconscious for several hours due to the shock of the incident. No one disputed her account and no questions were asked. It was assumed she was reporting the incident accurately.
Sarah Carrier a black woman from Rosewood, who did the laundry for Fannie Taylor and was present on the morning of the incident, claimed the man that assaulted Fannie Taylor was her white lover. It was believed the two lovers quarreled and he abused Fannie and left. However, in 1923 no one questioned Fannie Taylor's account and no one asked Sarah Carrier about the incident. The black community claimed Fannie Taylor was only protecting herself from scandal.

A posse was summoned and tracking dogs were ordered by James Taylor, Fannie Taylor’s husband and the foreman at Cummer and Sons saw mill. The local white community became aroused at the alleged abuse of a white woman by a black man, which was an unpardonable sin against black men back then to look at a white woman. James Taylor summoned help from Levy County and neighboring Alachua County, who was ending a staged Klu Klux Klan rally leading up to January 1, 1923, on the court house square in downtown Gainesville, where a large number of KKK members had been rallying and marching in opposition of justice for black people.

A telegraph sent to Gainesville in regards to Fannie Taylor’s allegations provoked four to five hundred Klansmen that headed to Sumner at the appeal of James Taylor. With reaping tension displayed they willingly accepted the invitation and came to Sumner with a vengeance to participate at any cost necessary. They arrived enraged and combed the woods behind the Taylor’s home looking for a suspect. Suspicion soon fell on Jesse Hunter an allegedly black man who had allegedly had recently escaped from a convict road gang. No proof of the escape was ever provided.

The posse confronted Sam Carter at his home and Carter allegedly admitted to helping Hunter escape. Allegedly the posse forced Carter to take them to the place where he last saw Hunter. Carter allegedly took the posse to where he parted ways with Hunter. When no trace of Hunter could be found the posse turned into an out of control lynch mob and tortured Carter, riddled him with bullets and hung him from a tree.
The posse continued their hunt in Rosewood. They found Aaron Carrier, cousin and friend, to Sam Carter, in bed at his Sarah Carrier’s house, yanked him out of bed, tied a rope around his neck and dragged him behind a Model “T” from Rosewood to Sumner. They tortured him, beat him with gun butts and kicked him until he lost consciousness before shooting him.

Levy County Sherriff Bob Walker aborted the shooting when he yelled, “Don’t, I’ll finish the “N” off. The magic “N” word saved Carrier’s life. The posse returned to Rosewood to hunt for Sylvester Carrier. Sheriff Walker threw Aaron Carrier in his Model “T” taking him to Gainesville, Alachua County jail and begged Sheriff James Ramsey to hide Carrier from the public and his family until tempers settled down and suggested he get medical help for him. Sheriff Ramsey brought in two local black doctors, Dr. Parker and Dr. Ayers to treat Carrier for six months unknowingly to the public and his family.
Fuming with anger because they had not found the attacker James Taylor sent Sylvester Carrier a message “We are coming to get you” the night of January 2nd, all hell broke loose in Rosewood when the mob returned with guns for a showdown, “to kill or be killed” because they were dissatisfied with the lack of success they anticipated. The mob formed a "party of citizens" to discuss how to investigate and accomplish their mission to find and silence Sylvester Carrier, who had become a lightning rod for their anger. Unbeknownst to the posse Sylvester Carrier took heed to the threats and made contact with his Levy County friends who bravely traveled to Rosewood to help avert the planned ambush of its citizens.

After dark the posse traveled to Rosewood prepared to kill or be killed. It had come down to Sylvester Carrier’s recruited men or the mob. The posse, intoxicated with moonshine and ignorance was met head-on with resistance and several were killed or injured, however, not accurately reported in the “all white” 1923 newspapers. When the gun battle ended the posse that was able to return to Sumner, did return, leaving behind their guns. Others lay dead and wounded in Sarah Carrier’s yard.

When the massacre ended that morning before dawn Sylvester Carrier’s friends returned to their homes as they came, quietly “the back way” and went to work at Sumner saw mill and other places of employment the next day as if nothing happened. They never spoke openly about the Rosewood Massacre.
The posse started firing upon arrival. Henry Andrews, an Otter Creek resident and C. Poly Wilkerson, a Sumner merchant were killed by Sylvester Carrier when they kicked in the door of his mother’s home, who they shot and killed through a window as she was walking through the house to quiet the children. Someone stationed in the house screamed, “Oh my God, Aunt Sarah’s been shot and Sylvester yelled, “SHOOT EVERYBODY, SHOOT!”

The posse realized too late they were encircled by resisting black men hiding in the dark pumping hails of lead to protect the Rosewood citizens, women and children, barricaded in the Carrier’s home. Hails of gun fire came from under the house, from behind the house and behind the barn. Hours later, the fight ended in a blood bath that surprised the surviving posse as they mosey back to Sumner in disbelief, pain, and shame.
The broken posse returned to Sumner to regroup and wait for Sheriff Walker, who they refused to listen to earlier, bring them an update. However, gun shots being fired in the air at Rosewood kept the posse at bay until the Sheriff was able to finalize the escape route for the Rosewood citizens. For sure guns belonging to the posse, dead and injured, were left in Rosewood and unaccounted for in Sumner. The sound of shots being fired in Rosewood signified that there was still life in Rosewood and the posse was not in a hurry to return risking more lives in defense of Fannie Taylor's horrific lies.

James Taylor sent the posse to Rosewood to participate in the attack on Rosewood citizens although he never left Sumner surviving all physical harm. The posse now sought Sheriff Bob Walker to inquire about Rosewood’s state of affairs but the Sheriff was too busy negotiating with the Cedar Key train conductors, the Bryce Brothers, on how to move the citizens out of Rosewood safely.

January 3rd, when the shotgun firing ceased some Rosewood citizens escaped into the swamp land under the cover of fear, hiding out and waiting for the train to come and bring them to safety. Other citizens hiding in Sarah Carrier’s house knew they had to leave their Rosewood homes before the posse returned, therefore, they fled to store merchant John Wright’s home unannounced as instructed by Sheriff Bob Walker. John Wright was in total shock to see his store customers arrived at his home seeking refuge. They were instructed to wait there in hiding until they heard back from the Sheriff who was traveling back and forth to Cedar Key, Sumner, and Rosewood in an effort to move them safely out of Rosewood on the 4 AM early morning train conducted by the Bryce Brothers from Bryceville, Fla.

Lexie Gordon sent her children to John Wright’s home for safekeeping although she was left in her home too ill to flee. When the posse returned to Rosewood days later to make an assessment of the damages they revengefully shot and killed her. Gordon’s home and other Rosewood homes were burglarized before burning them down.

James Carrier, an animal trapper, who had suffered a stroke a few years earlier was the husband to Amma Carrier, the father of Aaron Carrier, and brother-in-law to Sarah Carrier, was ordered to dig his own grave and was shot and killed because he knew nothing about what was happening in Rosewood when he returned from his animal traps deep down in the woods.

On Sunday morning the posse returned and one by one angrily burned the last remaking structures belonging to the black community. The homes were burned because they did not want the public to know the real truth, “more than two whites were killed.” Therefore, they burned the evidence, bodies and all. “Until the Lion tells his own story, the tale of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.”

Rosewood Aftermath


On February 12th, 1923 a special grand jury was empanelled to investigate the massacre. After twenty-five white and allegedly eight black witnesses testified the jurors reported that they could find no evidence on which to base any indictments.

The Black community of Rosewood never returned. Many left for other cities and counties losing touch with each other never sharing the Rosewood story with family members. And a number changed their names including Aaron and Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier, Rosewood’s historians and school teacher. She was born Mahulda Gussie Brown May 5, 1894, in Archer, Alachua County, Florida. She married Aaron Carrier December 19, 1917. After the Rosewood tragedy they moved more than fifteen times escaping accumulated fear. They changed their name to Aaron and Mahulda G. Carroll. They even changed their birth dates.
Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier/Carroll lived in fear until death April 25, 1948, Tampa, Florida at the Clara Frye hospital. Her name is listed “Mahulda G. Carroll” on her headstone.

The Real Rosewood Website owner, Lizzie Polly Robinson Brown Jenkins’, mother strongly encouraged her to preserve Rosewood history never forgetting her Rosewood sister, Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier/Carroll’s suffrage. At present, Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier-Carroll is remembered and featured in the 2000 Great Floridians Magazine. Her name is included in the script on the Rosewood Historic Marker. Her name and a photo of the historic marker is listed in the third edition of the Florida Black Heritage Trail. Carrier is also featured in a book, Alachua County Florida, marketed online by Florida Magazine. Jenkins’ Rosewood reconstructive research is dedicated to the Rosewood survivors and descendants in memory of Rosewood culture.

January 1, 2000, a plaque bearing Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier’s name hangs on the porch of the Archer Train Depot, the same depot Carrier exited January 4, 1923, driven by the Bryce Brothers.
Rosewood, a small majority black town in Levy County was destroyed by a vigilante posse in 1923. May 4, 1994. The Florida Legislature agreed to compensate the massacre’s survivors and descendants. Compensation disbursed to Aaron Carrier proven in-laws and Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier sister, Theresa Brown Robinson and brother, Richard Brown, sister-in-laws Queenie Jones Brown Monroe and Marie Brown Randle each received $3,333.33. Carrier niece Arbeaulah “Helen” Brown Porter Warmack and nephew Addison P. Brown, Jr., each received $1,616.16. Carrier nieces Elizabeth Crawford Mulligan and Bernice Crawford, niece-in-law Mabel Thomas Crawford and nephew Charlie Crawford each received $833.33, for a collective total of $19,900.96 paid to Aaron and Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier family from the state of Florida compensation fund.

Ten years from the date of the signing of the Rosewood bill by Governor Lawton Chiles, Governor Jeb Bush dedicated a Historic Marker in Rosewood May 4, 2004, in memory of the Rosewood citizens. This is a historic compilation of Jenkins at work preserving Rosewood history, a promise she has lived up to in honor of her mother’s principles and recorded family history. This summary of Rosewood’s history is not research, it’s resource.

Their land was confiscated under tax sales and not until 1994 did the state or any public entity offer an apology or make any compensation.



Enhanced by Zemanta

Is there a Connection Between Jesus and Perseus?

I actually like the story of Perseus. He manages to save a damsel in distress, save his Mother, and kill the Medusa. Nice guy. There is an internet meme going around trying to assert that Perseus was the model for what Christians say Jesus is,. Just how much like Jesus is Perseus? Not at all. Here is a list of how much Perseus is not like Jesus. using the standard points that are claimed to be common between Jesus and Perseus. I'm going to add my comments in italics,



According to the critic here, Perseus:

1)  Had a god for a father. 
Yes, his father was Zeus


2)  Had a human virgin for a mother.
In some versions, this is true, though the details hardly match those of Mary.  According to the legend, his mother was Danae, son of Acrisius.  An oracle told Acrisius that his grandson would kill him, so he shut Danae in a bronze room or tower.  Zeus came through the roof and sent a shower of gold into Danae's lap, which grew into Perseus.


5)  Had his birth announced by a heavenly display.
I'm finding no reference to this for Perseus  

Neither could I.

6)  Had his birth announced by celestial music.
I'm finding no reference to this for Perseus (or for Jesus, for that matter).

Neither could I.

7)  Was born about DEC-25
I can't find any sources giving any birth date for Perseus.  And once again, Jesus wasn't born on Dec 25

8)  Had an attempt on his life by a tyrant when he was still an infant.
Again, true.  Again, not really comparable to Jesus.  When Perseus' grandfather, Acrisius, found out that he existed, he locked Perseus and his mother in a trunk and set it adrift in the sea.

However it does sound like Moses. They must have stolen it, Moses came first.

9)  Met with a violent death.
Depends on which version you read.  In many versions, Perseus battles Dionysus.  In some version, Dionysus slays Perseus.  In others, Perseus slays Dionysus.  In others, they slay each other.  In others, neither is slain.  Even in those in which he dies, the story doesn't match Jesus at all.

 Although I would say Dionysus was demonic like the Devil, the Greeks did not see it that way. None of the Gospels don't match such convolution at all. 

10)  rose again from the dead.
Not in any version.

This is one of the main points.  Jesus died but he didn't stay dead. Perseus did.  I picked the images on this post because it was on the cross that Jesus won his greatest victory and juxtapose it with Perseus' greatest moment. Ask yourself what good is it to you if Perseus' story is true. What does it matter to you if Medusa was killed. But what about Jesus? Because of his victory, those who put their faith in Jesus we can have victory over sin and death. Jesus wins this one just like He always does.

UPDATE
Ryan Anderson wrote a comment prompting an update to this post. He claims that there is a reference to Perseus being resurrected and that it is likely that the Gospel writers were inspired by the Perseus myth.

Only one writer of the Gospels was a Gentile. There is no reason at all to think that Perseus inspired the Gospels in any way. Sure would like to see you prove otherwise, Ryan. In what ways are the Gospel accounts of Jesus similar to Perseus?

I looked up the reference you mentioned in "Proitos and Danae". I did find a reference in a book on page 300 entitled "Python: a study of Delphic myth and its origins" By Joseph Eddy Fontenrose. It's actually in Google Books at this link Fontenrose wrote that Persus came back from the darkness with the help of Hermes and Athena. He equates this resurrection. How is this Resurrection? Perseus did not die and return to life. Instead, he was on his quest so long that people thought he died. The writers of the Gospels said Jesus actually physically died and then rose again. This isn't the same thing.

I found another reference to Resurrection and Perseus. It is found at this link. The author makes a reference to Perseus' name meaning "breaker". The author ties this to Perseus freeing Andromeda from the chains she was bound to and calling them the chains of death - thus deriving resurrection as being freed from death. Of course to get this some serious gymnastics were used through Hebrew and Greek that can't be substantiated. For example Romans 16:3 is given as a reference where the Greek form Perses, or Perseus can be found and its alleged that it's related to the Hebrew word "peretz". When one looks at what Romans 16:3 says:

Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too. - Romans 16:3

I see nothing in the verse that says what the author says it does. I think that more and destroys the author's argument that Perseus' experience has anything to do with resurrection.

There is another link I have seen at the link at Hero's Journey. However, it does not help make the case of proving that Perseus was resurrected.

If Ryan Anderson,or anyone, is willing to make an argument proving that the Gospel account comes from Perseus life, I'd like to see it. Any takers?


Links:
Pre-Christian Sources:
Apollodorus on Perseus (2nd century B.C.)
Ovid, "Perseus And Atlas" (Late 1st century B.C. or early 1st century A.D.)


Sources
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blgrk_heroes05.htm
http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/JesusPerseus.html
http://www.gods-heros-myth.com/godpages/perseus.html
Enhanced by Zemanta

The Dunamis Word: Calling The Community From Death To Life

Back in the day we called the part of the service where people declare personally what God has done for them "Testimonies". In my church today we call them "Praise Report" because people have forgotten what a Testimony to God's grace and goodness looks like. On his blog, Elder Burnett has posted videos of two women who know what a testimony is supposed to b - not just told but lived out. Who says that God no longer intervenes in people's lives. Not them. Or me.









The Dunamis Word: Calling The Community From Death To Life
Enhanced by Zemanta

Ten Presuppositions of Science - Apologetics 315

Here is a post from Brian Auten listing 10 basic presuppositions of science. These are assumptions that many people take for grant it. I don't think that all of them are necessarily true but I think many people believe it.

Here is a list of some of the presuppositions of science:

(1) the existence of a theory-independent, external world;
(2) the orderly nature of the external world;
(3) the knowability of the external world;
(4) the existence of truth;
(5) the laws of logic;
(6) the reliability of our cognitive and sensory faculties to serve as truth gatherers and as a source of justified true beliefs in our intellectual environment;
(7) the adequacy of language to describe the world;
(8) the existence of values used in science (e.g., "test theories fairly and report test results honestly");
(9) the uniformity of nature and induction;
(10) the existence of numbers.1

The one presupposition that I can't fully agree with is number 6 because sin greatly diminishes our cognitive abilities to understand truth. And given that our sensory faculties are woefully inadequate because all of our senses can be fooled or give false information  - relying on them 100% to determine truth is extremely problematic.

Ten Presuppositions of Science - Apologetics 315
Enhanced by Zemanta