Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 2, 2013 Super Moderator Posted October 2, 2013 This list is neither definitive nor exhaustive; I trust the good members of Ex-C will each do their part to complete it by adding their ideas in the comments. America is not, and never has been, a christian nation. The U.S. Constitution says so implicitly; the Treaty of Tripoli says so explicitly. Furthermore, although terms such as “god”, “divine providence”, and “creator”, might appear in some of our nation’s founding documents, neither the terms themselves, nor the context in which they are applied, imply reference to jesus, yahweh, the holy spirit, or any of the other gods mentioned in the bible. The Founding Fathers of our nation, most of whom embraced either deism or Freemasonry, not christianity, envisioned a secular society governed by a secular government. The majority of American citizens may claim to be christian, but that does not alter the fact that this is NOT a christian nation. You have the right to live in a society that allows you to live according to your beliefs. You do not, and should not, have the right to live in a society that compels others to live according to your beliefs. Intelligent design is NOT science. It proffers an idea that is neither testable nor falsifiable and therefore cannot even be considered a proper hypothesis, nor does any of its “research” follow the scientific method. Moreover, intelligent design has yet to produce a single shred of definitive evidence to support any of its claims, that hasn’t been thoroughly debunked; and it has yet to produce a single refutation of evolution through natural selection, that hasn’t been thoroughly debunked. Furthermore, the main proponents of intelligent design are not peer-reviewed scientists and researchers; they are convicted fraudsters, washed-up actors from ‘80s sitcoms, banana wielding charlatans, and a host of muck-savage YouTube trolls. You are no more under attack by the atheists/secular humanists in this country than the gays, abortion clinics, muslims, and wiccans are under attack by you. What you are currently experiencing is not persecution for righteousness’ sake; it is simply the initial blow-back of a growing minority of people who disagree with you and are finally gaining enough traction to stand up and call you out on your blatant shenanigans. Women were NOT created to be subservient to men. They were not designed to be baby factories and their place isn’t in the kitchen. As a matter of fact, both genders evolved simultaneously as complimentary reproductive counterparts. Since both genders contribute to the reproduction, and therefore, overall survival, of the species, both genders should be treated with equal respect and dignity. The burden of proof rests on the shoulders of the individual making the claim; however, the burden of disproof does NOT rest upon the shoulders of the individual rejecting the claim. Furthermore, rejecting the claim that god exists is NOT the same as making the claim that god does not exist, any more than proclaiming a defendant to be “not guilty” is the same as proclaiming a defendant to be “innocent”. The fact that school sponsored prayer is no longer allowed in public schools does not mean that your little brats cannot waste their time engaging in that particular exercise while on public school property. It simply means that school administrators cannot compel any of my little bastards to join in the endeavor. The same principle is applicable to bible reading. Therefore, when you claim that our public education system is getting worse because god is no longer allowed in school, you are being dishonest. Every single one of you needs to grow up. The bible is NOT a valid source of evidence for the existence of your god, or for the truth of your religion. The bible is nothing more than a collection of ancient writings. Despite great efforts, and advancements, in biblical studies, archaeology, anthropology, and other fields, the authorship of the bible has yet to be authenticated. Additionally, the source documents which the ancient writers referenced while producing their contributions to the bible have either been lost, or never existed. The oldest complete copy of the bible so far discovered dates to approximately 400CE, and in this particular copy, the gospel according to st. mark is 10,000 words SHORTER than the current version of mark’s gospel. Finally, for the first 1500 years of christianity, the only people who had access to the bible were the catholic clergy, a group which has repeatedly proven itself to be untrustworthy. The only source of your “truth” is only “true” because it claims itself to be “true”: this is a circle. Politicians constantly play your religious heart strings by throwing sideline issues at you such as gay marriage and abortion. They do this for two reasons: 1.) so that you will vote for them and allow them to continue controlling you, and 2.) so that you will remain blind, deaf, and ignorant of the issues that really do have a genuine impact on your life within this society, such as the economy, unemployment, education, etc. It is particularly easy for politicians to use religion as a mechanism of control because religious people are, generally, naïve and easy to manipulate. Accept the facts: abortion is legal and gays WILL have the right to marry in the not-too-distant future. If this bothers you, refer back to number 8. Patriotism is NOT the same as christianity, and christianity is NOT the same as republicanism. Your morality does NOT come from god. It may be reflected in whatever interpretation of christianity to which you currently adhere, but that is not the same as coming from god. Your morality has been informed by your upbringing, your genetic matrix, the experiences you have had throughout the course of your life, and any number of psychological factors such as your ability to empathize, sympathize, justify, and express a broad range of emotions. Furthermore, an innate and instinctive moral code evolved within humanity as a species as a result of the benefit that mutual and reciprocal acts of kindness, security, and generosity bestow upon the survival of any social species. That is why in many species of social animals such as monkeys and geese, acts of morality, such as the adoption of orphans, can be observed. When a jet-liner crashes and everyone on board dies except for one little baby, that is NOT a miracle; it is a tragedy. When a sick person is prayed for and then recovers, that is NOT a healing; it is a coincidence. When a missionary tells your church that in far-off Papua, New Guinea, god is working so mightily that people are being raised from the dead, that is NOT proof that you serve an awesome god; it is merely hearsay. When bad things happen to good people, that is NOT the lord moving in mysterious ways; it is the law of causality being demonstrated. It is both disingenuous and disrespectful to give god credit when a loved one comes through a successful surgery followed by a speedy recovery. To begin with, god did not perform the surgery, invent the technology that made the surgery possible, or envision the procedure that would ensure the success of the surgery; this was ALL done by medically trained professionals and/or scientifically trained engineers. Secondly, god did not design or implement any of the nurturing and rehabilitating techniques that contributed to the speed of the recovery; this was ALL done by highly skilled nurses and technicians. Render unto Science what is Science’s. The rest of us are not okay with you using public buses, trains, subways, and passenger jets as venues for aggressively proclaiming your faith. We are only slightly less irritated by you doing so on streets, sidewalks, and other public thoroughfares. Hitler and Stalin did not commit atrocities because they were atheists; atrocities were committed by their respective regimes because both men were given to the same vices, delusions, frailties, and corruptions that all men of absolute power must wrestle with. When you initiate a conversation about your religion and your counterlocuter angrily rejects the conversation, you are not being persecuted, nor is your religion being attacked. You are simply seeing the results of someone who is fed up with the hypocrisy, self-righteousness, delusion, and condemnation that is associated with your religion. 9
mwc Posted October 3, 2013 Posted October 3, 2013 A lot of ones on that list. Everything's tied for first. mwc 1
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 3, 2013 Author Super Moderator Posted October 3, 2013 A lot of ones on that list. Everything's tied for first. mwc Yeah, I should have explained that I did it that way to demonstrate that they were all equally important. Glad you picked up on that.
pratt Posted October 3, 2013 Posted October 3, 2013 i have fun reading this,,,,, most american christians would not know the history of non. christian founding fathers or the hsitory of the bible or church for that matter,,,,,
Lerk Posted October 5, 2013 Posted October 5, 2013 "Patriotism is NOT the same as christianity, and christianity is NOT the same as republicanism." I'm going to use this one! Actually, they're all good, but my fundie friends really need to hear this.
leopardus Posted October 5, 2013 Posted October 5, 2013 Can't believe that I missed that bit in the Treaty of Tripoli until now. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
bornagainathiest Posted October 5, 2013 Posted October 5, 2013 Good work, Prof! This help? 1. The Bible (OT & NT together, as unified whole) has been formally held to be inerrant since the year 1978 A.D. That's just thirty-five short years ago. http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html Ok, individual Christians, certain cults, various sects and some denominations may have believed in the doctrine of Biblical-inerrancy from Roman times onwards, but today's manifestation of this belief in the US isn't a continuation of these beliefs. It's an upstart belief, crafted when Saturday Night Fever hit the charts. In fact, today's emphasis on Biblical-inerrancy is a very recent thing indeed - owing it's existence to the hard-core Christian reaction against the perceived threats of Darwinian Evolution, Naturalistic Science and Skepticism. So if any pastor, preacher or lay reader tells you that ALL Christians have ALWAYS taken scripture to be inerrant, they're either wrong or lying to you. Either way, don't listen to them or trust them. Thanks, BAA
bornagainathiest Posted October 5, 2013 Posted October 5, 2013 Good work, Prof! This help? 1. The Bible (OT & NT together, as unified whole) has been formally held to be inerrant since the year 1978 A.D. That's just thirty-five short years ago. http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html Ok, individual Christians, certain cults, various sects and some denominations may have believed in the doctrine of Biblical-inerrancy from Roman times onwards, but today's manifestation of this belief in the US isn't a continuation of these beliefs. It's an upstart belief, crafted when Saturday Night Fever hit the charts. In fact, today's emphasis on Biblical-inerrancy is a very recent thing indeed - owing it's existence to the hard-core Christian reaction against the perceived threats of Darwinian Evolution, Naturalistic Science and Skepticism. So if any pastor, preacher or lay reader tells you that ALL Christians have ALWAYS taken scripture to be inerrant, they're either wrong or lying to you. Either way, don't listen to them or trust them. Thanks, BAA Just to clarify a point that relates to the above... Mainline US Christian Fundamentalism sprang from this seed - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fundamentals So, the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy had it's true birth between the years 1910 and 1915, not in 1978. The reason I cite the Chicago Statement is that by then (sixty-three years later) those who wrote it would have been in possession of bona fide scientific evidence contradicting scripture - yet they stubbornly choose to deny the facts in favor of their faith. By '78 all twelve Apollo astronauts had walked on the Moon and brought back ample proof that it wasn't placed in the firmament by God on the fourth day of his creation - directly contradicting the innerancy of scripture. Fourteen years earlier the true age of the universe had been discovered by Penzias and Wilson ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background ) to be almost 14,000,000,000 years - not the 6,000 or so the Bible pegs it at. Again, science contradicts scripture. Inerrancy only works by deliberate denial! Thanks, BAA
Lilith666 Posted October 5, 2013 Posted October 5, 2013 Good work, Prof! This help? 1. The Bible (OT & NT together, as unified whole) has been formally held to be inerrant since the year 1978 A.D. That's just thirty-five short years ago. http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html Ok, individual Christians, certain cults, various sects and some denominations may have believed in the doctrine of Biblical-inerrancy from Roman times onwards, but today's manifestation of this belief in the US isn't a continuation of these beliefs. It's an upstart belief, crafted when Saturday Night Fever hit the charts. In fact, today's emphasis on Biblical-inerrancy is a very recent thing indeed - owing it's existence to the hard-core Christian reaction against the perceived threats of Darwinian Evolution, Naturalistic Science and Skepticism. So if any pastor, preacher or lay reader tells you that ALL Christians have ALWAYS taken scripture to be inerrant, they're either wrong or lying to you. Either way, don't listen to them or trust them. Thanks, BAA Just to clarify a point that relates to the above... Mainline US Christian Fundamentalism sprang from this seed - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fundamentals So, the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy had it's true birth between the years 1910 and 1915, not in 1978. The reason I cite the Chicago Statement is that by then (sixty-three years later) those who wrote it would have been in possession of bona fide scientific evidence contradicting scripture - yet they stubbornly choose to deny the facts in favor of their faith. By '78 all twelve Apollo astronauts had walked on the Moon and brought back ample proof that it wasn't placed in the firmament by God on the fourth day of his creation - directly contradicting the innerancy of scripture. Fourteen years earlier the true age of the universe had been discovered by Penzias and Wilson ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background ) to be almost 14,000,000,000 years - not the 6,000 or so the Bible pegs it at. Again, science contradicts scripture. Inerrancy only works by deliberate denial! Thanks, BAA How did the astronauts prove that the moon wasn't created on the fourth day? And where does the bible say that the earth is 6,000 years old? I never understood that second one.
Sybaris Posted October 5, 2013 Posted October 5, 2013 Good work, Prof! This help? 1. The Bible (OT & NT together, as unified whole) has been formally held to be inerrant since the year 1978 A.D. That's just thirty-five short years ago. http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html Ok, individual Christians, certain cults, various sects and some denominations may have believed in the doctrine of Biblical-inerrancy from Roman times onwards, but today's manifestation of this belief in the US isn't a continuation of these beliefs. It's an upstart belief, crafted when Saturday Night Fever hit the charts. In fact, today's emphasis on Biblical-inerrancy is a very recent thing indeed - owing it's existence to the hard-core Christian reaction against the perceived threats of Darwinian Evolution, Naturalistic Science and Skepticism. So if any pastor, preacher or lay reader tells you that ALL Christians have ALWAYS taken scripture to be inerrant, they're either wrong or lying to you. Either way, don't listen to them or trust them. Thanks, BAA Just to clarify a point that relates to the above... Mainline US Christian Fundamentalism sprang from this seed - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fundamentals So, the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy had it's true birth between the years 1910 and 1915, not in 1978. The reason I cite the Chicago Statement is that by then (sixty-three years later) those who wrote it would have been in possession of bona fide scientific evidence contradicting scripture - yet they stubbornly choose to deny the facts in favor of their faith. By '78 all twelve Apollo astronauts had walked on the Moon and brought back ample proof that it wasn't placed in the firmament by God on the fourth day of his creation - directly contradicting the innerancy of scripture. Fourteen years earlier the true age of the universe had been discovered by Penzias and Wilson ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background ) to be almost 14,000,000,000 years - not the 6,000 or so the Bible pegs it at. Again, science contradicts scripture. Inerrancy only works by deliberate denial! Thanks, BAA How did the astronauts prove that the moon wasn't created on the fourth day? And where does the bible say that the earth is 6,000 years old? I never understood that second one. YEC'rs calculate the age of the earth through the age of certain characters in the Bible
Vigile Posted October 6, 2013 Posted October 6, 2013 I'd add: You don't have a RIGHT to NOT be offended. Your own book tells you to pray in a closet, so why do you insist on doing it in stadiums, schools and congress? Your own leader tells you not to judge, so why do you insist on being the loudest, most judgmental pricks in any given venue? Offering to pray is not the same as offering a helping hand. A lie does not make someone a complete liar. No one, including you, deserves hell. To the rest of us, you are just as quirky and superstitious as the primitive cultures you think need saving. 2
Ravenstar Posted October 6, 2013 Posted October 6, 2013 "No One, Including YOU, Deserves Hell. That needs to be on billboards!!! Brilliant. 1
bornagainathiest Posted October 6, 2013 Posted October 6, 2013 How did the astronauts prove that the moon wasn't created on the fourth day? And where does the bible say that the earth is 6,000 years old? I never understood that second one. Hey Lilith! Sybaris is right. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology Back in the 17th century a certain Bishop Ussher chose to read the Bible literally. The ages of people listed in Biblical genealogies is also given, so it's just a matter of simple computation. Today's date + the elapsed time recorded in the Bible = the 'true' date of God's 6-day Creation! Oh and the Apollo astronauts didn't need to prove the Moon wasn't created on the fourth day... because there was already a great deal of evidence showing that it wasn't. But, by actually going there and bringing back Moon rocks that are BILLIONS (thanks Carl! ) of years old, we've given the YEC's no option but to deny the evidence. This... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon ...is what they deny as being real, factual and true. Thanks, BAA
Lerk Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 How did the astronauts prove that the moon wasn't created on the fourth day? And where does the bible say that the earth is 6,000 years old? I never understood that second one. YEC'rs calculate the age of the earth through the age of certain characters in the Bible They use genealogies to estimate, then "allow" as much as 10,000 years instead if just 6000 to be "generous". It's important to them to have the young earth because if evolution is real, there's no Adam and Eve, no first man and woman created from scratch. If Genesis is a myth, they can't believe any of it. And that's a good thing, because if I had been taught that Christianity allowed Genesis to be a myth, I may never have realized the whole thing was bogus!
R. S. Martin Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Now to get those seventeen pearls of wisdom displayed where the Christies will actually see them. 1
★ Citsonga ★ Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Great list! I would only change a couple things. When a sick person is prayed for and then recovers, that is NOT a healing; it is a coincidence. Here I would change "healing" to "miracle." If someone recovers, then that actually is a healing, but it's not a miracle because there was no divine component to it. Hitler and Stalin did not commit atrocities because they were atheists; atrocities were committed by their respective regimes because both men were given to the same vices, delusions, frailties, and corruptions that all men of absolute power must wrestle with. Here I would add that we don't have confirmation that Hitler was actually an atheist. He was raised Catholic and never officially rejected the Church and the Church didn't reject him. He even claimed to have God on his side multiple times.
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 7, 2013 Author Super Moderator Posted October 7, 2013 Citsonga, I originally had "miracle" instead of "healing", but I had also used "miracle" in reference to the passenger jet and didn't want to be repetitive. As far as Hitler was concerned, I'm personally convinced he wasn't an atheist. The list was written to be understood by christians in the context of their perverse world view; as such, I think both of the points you make are accurate from the freethinkers perspective, but christians would view both statements the same no matter how they are written. Also, I have yet to give credit to BAA. As usual, your posts have been informative, insightful, and well documented. Your contributions are most noteworthy. Lastly, Vigile, your ability to pack so much meaning into each of your points is without equal.
Lilith666 Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 How did the astronauts prove that the moon wasn't created on the fourth day? And where does the bible say that the earth is 6,000 years old? I never understood that second one. Hey Lilith! Sybaris is right. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology Back in the 17th century a certain Bishop Ussher chose to read the Bible literally. The ages of people listed in Biblical genealogies is also given, so it's just a matter of simple computation. Today's date + the elapsed time recorded in the Bible = the 'true' date of God's 6-day Creation! Oh and the Apollo astronauts didn't need to prove the Moon wasn't created on the fourth day... because there was already a great deal of evidence showing that it wasn't. But, by actually going there and bringing back Moon rocks that are BILLIONS (thanks Carl! ) of years old, we've given the YEC's no option but to deny the evidence. This... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon ...is what they deny as being real, factual and true. Thanks, BAA Hi BAA, thanks for the explanation.
★ Citsonga ★ Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Citsonga, I originally had "miracle" instead of "healing", but I had also used "miracle" in reference to the passenger jet and didn't want to be repetitive. As far as Hitler was concerned, I'm personally convinced he wasn't an atheist. The list was written to be understood by christians in the context of their perverse world view; as such, I think both of the points you make are accurate from the freethinkers perspective, but christians would view both statements the same no matter how they are written. I thought the point of this exercise was to point out where they are mistaken. If not, then what's the point of the list? Their use of Hitler as an example of an atheist is false if he wasn't an atheist (not to mention the fact that no single person should ever be used to represent a whole group of people, especially when that individual is clearly an extremist).
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 8, 2013 Author Super Moderator Posted October 8, 2013 I thought the point of this exercise was to point out where they are mistaken. If not, then what's the point of the list? Their use of Hitler as an example of an atheist is false if he wasn't an atheist (not to mention the fact that no single person should ever be used to represent a whole group of people, especially when that individual is clearly an extremist). You are correct that the point of this exercise is to point out where they are mistaken. Their use of Hitler as an atheist is probably false, however, to my knowledge, the question of Hitler's personal beliefs has not been definitively settled, though in my view, the evidence points to him not being an atheist. None the less, until the question is answered, christians will still claim that he was an atheist and use him as a case against atheism. That said, I don't think we are genuinely in disagreement; we may just be seeing different sides of the same coin. I do believe the point you make that no single person should ever be used to represent a whole group of people, expecially when that individual is clearly an extremtist makes a fine addition to the list.
Recommended Posts