| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" |
| Date: |
31 Dec 2003 07:34:17 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
Andrew Arensburger wrote:
Dr. Jason Gastrich <news@jcsm.org> wrote:
The Bible is inerrant. Sure, there are some people who can doubt
parts of it. It's not difficult to doubt. However, there are
precious few that will even attempt to assert where it is in error.
Since theology is my area of expertise, I'm looking forward to
discussing the Bible and its inerrancy.
Great! Perhaps you can show us how to reconcile all the
various accounts of Easter (see http://www.ffrf.org/lfif/stone.html )
In particular, who went to the tomb? (Matt. 28:1, Mark 16:1,
Luke 24:10, John 20:1)
Was the tomb already open when they arrived (Mark 16:4, Luke
24:2, John 20:1) or not (Matt. 28:2) ? What did the messengers say?
Did the women tell what happened (Matt. 28:8, Luke 24:9, John 20:18)
or not (Mark 16:8)? And so on.
Can you give us a single coherent account of what happened,
that matches all of the accounts in the Bible?
Usually, when I ask this sort of question, I'm told that they
are different accounts told from different perspectives, and that
different eyewitnesses give different accounts of the same event. Fair
enough. But if the accounts are contradictory (e.g., if Mary told
people about the resurrection, then it can't also be true that she
never told anyone), then that means that at least one of the accounts
isn't 100% correct.
So since theology is your area of expertise, as you say, could
you please tell us how the Bible is inerrant in this case?
PS: I swear the tagline just came up randomly.
I've already addressed this in another thread. I can copy and paste my
answer later or you can find it.
I'll give you something I was working on last month. I've corrected and
explained 35 of FFRF's first 50 quiz questions from their web site. Enjoy.
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
1. What is the last of the Ten Commandments?
Answer: C
1.. Don't steal.
2.. Don't covet your neighbor's wife and property. --This is the final
commandment as listed in Exodus 20:2-17, the version often used by
Protestants and Catholics. However, these are not the "ten commandments."
(See below.) Notice the biblical sexism: women are the property of men.
3.. Don't boil a young goat in the milk of its mother. --Believe it or
not, this prohibition in Exodus 34:26 is the official tenth commandment,
from the only set of stone tablets that were called "the ten commandments."
There were three sets of commandments:
1) The first time Moses came down from Mount Sinai with commandments, he
merely recited a list (Exodus 20:2-17), which is the version most churches
today erroneously call the "Ten Commandments," although they were not
engraved on stone tablets and not called "the ten commandments."
2) The first set of stone tablets was given to Moses at a subsequent
trip up the mountain (Exodus 31:18). In this farcical story, Moses
petulantly destroyed those tablets when he saw the people worshipping the
golden calf (Exodus 32:19).
3) So he went back for a replacement. God told Moses: "Hew thee two
tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the
words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest." (Exodus 34:1) Here
is what was on the replacement tablets (from Exodus 34:14-26):
1) Thou shalt worship no other God. 2) Thou shalt make thee no molten
gods. 3) The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. 4) Six days thou
shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest. 5) Thou shalt observe
the feast of weeks. 6) Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear
before the Lord God. 7) Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with
leaven. 8) Neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left
until the morning. 9) The first of the firstfruits of thy land shalt thou
bring unto the house of the Lord thy God. 10) Thou shalt not seethe a kid in
his mother's milk.
Keep this in mind next time you are tempted to boil a goat. This list
differs, obviously, from the one in Exodus 20 (was God's memory faulty?),
but it is only this list that is called the "Ten Commandments": "And he
wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments."
(Exodus 34:28)
4.. Love your neighbor as yourself. --Even Jesus was unclear about the
exact set of commandments. In Matthew 19:18-19 he listed them as: 1) Thou
shalt do no murder 2) Thou shalt not commit adultery 3) Thou shalt not steal
4) Thou shalt not bear false witness 5) Honour thy father and thy mother 6)
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. For the Jews, loving your
"neighbor" meant loving your Jewish neighbors: it did not mean loving the
neighboring tribes or other outsiders, as the intolerant and bloody Old
Testament (and Christian) history proves.
Corrected and Explained:
* If you don't boil goats, then I wouldn't worry about this commandment. It
was meaningful to the ancient Jews, though.
* Jesus wasn't confused about the commandments. He simply listed a few. He
never claimed to be trying to recall or say all of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
2. What is the penalty for working on the Sabbath?
Answer: A
1.. You will be stoned to death. --Isn't this an excessively violent
punishment from a supposedly "Good Book?" What is the harm in working on the
Sabbath? It seems the only harm is to the ego of the Sovereign, who demands
respect with no respect to human needs.
"Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to
you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the Lord: whoseoever doeth work
therein shall be put to death. Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your
habitations upon the sabbath day." (Exodus 35:2) For the chilling
application of this law, see Numbers 15:32-36, where a man who picked up
sticks on the sabbath was stoned, "and he died; as the Lord commanded
Moses."
2.. Neither you nor your offspring to the 5th generation can enter the
tabernacle.
3.. You should sacrifice two unblemished she goats.
4.. You will be disinherited from the kingdom.
Corrected and Explained:
* This law was for the ancient Jews because God wanted them to worship Him
on the Sabbath and avoid work. It indicated how important it was to set
aside time for God. God surely hoped that His people would love and obey
Him without the need for punishment. However, like any parent knows,
sometimes consequences need to be announced, so that the children will obey.
* God is the giver and taker of life. If someone sins before a completely
holy God, then He can rightfully punish them. Incidentally, everyone sins
(possibly, daily), so we don't have the authority to tell the perfect judge
how to do His job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
3. What is God's name?
Answer: A
1.. Jealous. --This is a petty self-described insecurity from a supposedly
all-wise leader.
"For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is
Jealous, is a jealous God." (Exodus 34:14)
2.. Righteous.
3.. Holy. --Sometimes the name of God is described as "holy" (see Psalm
99:3), but the name itself is not "Holy." In Isaiah 29:23, the name of God
is given as "The Holy One of Jacob."
4.. Jehovah. --The name "Jehovah" is a Christian mistake. It was forbidden
to pronounce the name "YHWH" (Yahweh), and readers of the Hebrew scriptures
were supposed to say "Adonai" in its place. "In written texts the vowels of
Adonai were combined with the consonants YHWH to remind readers to pronounce
Adonai instead of Yahweh. The incorrect hybrid, 'Jehovah,' arose from
Christian misunderstanding in the late Middle Ages."(Harper's Bible
Dictionary)
Corrected and Explained:
* God has a great number of names. God knows that our worship and obedience
to Him will keep us safe and help us to be successful. So, like worshiping
Him, putting Him first has a therapeutic benefit to the obedient soul. He
knew that we needed Him an His jealousy (wanting us to worship Him above any
other) is in our best interest. Is there another god that is more worthy
than the Creator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
4. How should parents treat a stubborn and rebellious son?
Answer: D
1.. He should be beaten seven times with a whip made of horsehair.
2.. He should be stripped and humiliated at the gate of the city.
3.. He should be expelled from the family.
4.. He should be stoned to death. --This cruelly excessive Mosaic law was
actually enforced at one time by the Massachusetts colony and has been used
to justify child abuse and murder.
"If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the
voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have
chastened him, will not hearken unto them; Then shall his father and mother
lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of the city, and unto the
gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our
son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton,
and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones,
that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel
shall hear, and fear." (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
"And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to
death." (Exodus 21:17) "For every one that curseth his father or his mother
shall be surely put to death: he that cursed his father or his mother; his
blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9)
Corrected and Explained:
* Once again, this consequences was a deterrent to children who were
considering disobedience. He wanted them to respect their parents.
Disobeying parents that are obeying God can produce disastrous consequences.
* Do we have any biblical records of children being stoned by their parents?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
5. What happens if you are not a virgin on your wedding night?
Answer: D
1.. Your father must pay 100 shekels of silver to your husband.
2.. You can never approach the altar.
3.. You must dress in black and leave your husband for one year.
4.. You will be stoned to death. --This barbaric punishment is still being
followed in some parts of the Moslem world, which share some of the
teachings of the Hebrew bible. There is no such penalty, needless to say,
for a groom who is not a virgin. The fact that Christian women who have
engaged in premarital sex are not being stoned to death today shows that
even believers recognize cruelty and absurdity in their own "Good Book."
"If any man take a wife, and go in unto her . . . and say, I took this
woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid . . . and the tokens
of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the
damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall
stone her with stones that she die . . ." (Deuteronomy 22:13-21)
Corrected and Explained:
* This is an unfounded and absurd accusation. Why would the Muslim world
follow Jewish traditions or laws?
* This law was for the ancient Jews. This is why we don't see people
following it, today. Death wasn't God's first choice for these people.
Abstinence was His desire. Unfortunately, according to the way God has
acted in the past, severe consequences were sometimes necessary to deter
abominable behavior.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
6. What does the bible say about witches?
Answer: A
1.. Witches should be killed. --Tragically, tens of thousands, if not
millions, of innocent women in Europe and the American colonies were cruelly
accused, tortured and executed because of one single bible verse:
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." (Exodus 22:18)
"A man or a woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard,
shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood
shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:27)
2.. Witches are people possessed by demons and they are forever damned.
3.. Witches can be saved if they are exorcised.
4.. Witches are part of the mythology of idolatrous tribes.
Corrected and Explained:
When reading the Bible, it's important to ask this question: "To whom was
the author writing?" Not every verse of the Bible is for 21st century
Americans. Not every verse of the Bible is even to non-Jews. The Bible is
a book full of different kinds of writings. It contains poetry, historical
narrative, didactic treatise, etc. Therefore, we cannot simply say that
this command is for us and appropriate for implementation, now.
God hates evil and people that practice witchcraft are going against God by
trying to use demonic power. This was and still is detestable to God. In
the Old Testament, He didn't want His chosen people to be witches.
Therefore, He commanded a very severe consequence for this kind of
disobedience and rebellion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
7. Which of these foods does the bible expressly permit you to eat? (The
others are "abominations.")
Answer: C
1.. Pork. --"And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be
clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you." (Leviticus
11:7)
2.. Shellfish. --"And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and
in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which
is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you . . . ye shall not
eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcasses in abomination."
(Leviticus 11:10-11)
3.. Locusts. --Since ham and lobster are verboten to bible believers, how
about some barbecued grasshopper or steamed locust for dinner?
"Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald
locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper
after his kind." (Leviticus 11:22) "And the same John [the Baptist] had his
raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat
was locusts and wild honey." (Matthew 3:4)
4.. Rabbit. --"And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not
the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the hare . . . he is unclean unto
you." (Leviticus 11:5-6) Notice that the biblical writers erroneously
thought rabbits chew the cud.
Corrected and Explained:
* First, this was a dietary law for the Jews. Asserting that "ham and
lobster are verboten to 'bible' believers" is false and wrong. It is making
a false assumption to try and prove a biased viewpoint.
* In the 21st century, we consider "chewing the cud" regurgitating partially
digested materials and chewing on it (like cows do). This is called
"rumination". However, this isn't necessarily the same meaning and
definition of this Hebrew word ("gerah") that the ancient Israelites had.
* Rabbits practice "refection". They chew on their dung which consists of
partially digested food and partially undigested food. Therefore, there is
a similarity even between our current understanding of "chewing the cud" and
an ancient understanding of it. They both chew undigested food. At any
rate, the Israelites didn't use different words for rumination and
refection, so "cud" had to suffice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
8. When the Israelites conquered the Midianites, what part of the spoils of
war was given to the priest as "the Lord's tribute"?
Answer: D
1.. 50 sheep. --It was actually 675 of the 675,000 sheep. (See Numbers
31:37)
2.. 30,000 asses. --It was actually 61 of the 61,000 asses. (See Numbers
31:39)
3.. 32,000 cows. --It was actually 72 of the 72,000 beeves. (See Numbers
31:38)
4.. 32 virgins. --Of the 32,000 virgins that were kept alive as "booty"
for God's warriors, 32 young captives were handed to the priest. The bible
brutally sanctifies war crimes against girls and women that continue to this
day. Who could possibly respect a dictator who behaves like this?
"And the booty, being the rest of the prey which the men of war had
caught, was 675,000 sheep, And 72,000 beeves, And 61,000 asses, And 32,000
persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him . . . of
which the Lord's tribute was 32 persons. And Moses gave the tribute, which
was the Lord's heave offering, unto Eleazar the priest, as the Lord
commanded Moses." (Numbers 31:32-41)
Corrected and Explained:
* The ancient Israelites were a nomadic people. They wandered the desert,
fought in some wars, etc. Therefore, they didn't have any sort of welfare
system or rehabilitation program for pagan women and children that survived
a war. Keeping some of the undefiled women with them was a blessing to the
women because it ensured their survival. If they didn't allow these women
to join them, they would have quickly died in the desert.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
9. What is the origin of the "mighty men" giants known as nephilim?
Answer: A
1.. They were the offspring of God's angels and young women. --Can't God
maintain better control over his libidinous troops? This is scandal in high
places.
"And it came to pass . . . That the sons of God saw the daughters of men
that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. . . .
There were giants [nephilim] in the earth in those days; and also after
that, when the sons of God came into the daughters of men, and they bare
children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of
renown." (Genesis 6:1-4)
This is obviously mythical. The "sons of God" were angels: "the
expression clearly refers to divine beings." (Harper's Bible Dictionary) The
word nephilim "could mean 'fallen ones' and allude to stories in related
cultures of rebellious giants defeated by the gods in olden times (cf. Isa.
14:12)." (Harper's)
Some suggest this is why Paul admonished Christian women to keep their
heads covered in church, so as not to sexually tempt the angels: "For this
cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels." (I
Corinthians 11:10)
2.. They were the result of an earlier, botched creation.
3.. They were monsters from the evil nation of Nephi.
4.. They were part of the "blessing of Abraham" that ensured military
victory to God's chosen people.
Corrected and Explained:
* The evil, fallen angels had intercourse with human women. While God is
sovereign, He also allows a number of things to happen because people have a
free will. Unfortunately, people often make poor choices.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
10. What happened to Korah and his family, Israelites who thought they could
talk directly with God without a human intermediary?
Answer: C
1.. They became priests.
2.. They were expelled from the nation of Israel.
3.. The earth opened and swallowed them up. --See Numbers 16:1-50 for the
whole story, in context, of God killing 15,000 of his own people for daring
to question the authority of Moses:
"And the Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, Separate
yourselves from among this congregation, that I may consume them in a moment
... . ." (Numbers 16:20-21) ". . . And it came to pass, as he had made an end
of speaking all these words, that the ground clave asunder that was under
them: And the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up, and their
houses, and all the men that appertained unto Korah, and all their goods.
They, and all that appertained to them, went down alive into the pit, and
the earth closed upon them: and they perished from among the congregation .
... . and there came out a fire from the Lord, and consumed the two hundred
and fifty men that offered incense. . . ." (Numbers 16:31-35)
But it gets worse! Some who thought this was pretty harsh treatment were
killed by a plague:
"But on the morrow all the congregation of the children of Israel
murmured against Moses and against Aaron, saying, Ye have killed the people
of the Lord. . . . And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Get you up from
among this congregation, that I may consume them as in a moment. And they
fell upon their faces . . . for there is wrath gone out from the Lord; the
plague is begun. . . . Now they that died in the plague were fourteen
thousand and seven hundred, beside them that died about the matter of
Korah." (Numbers 16:41-49)
Is this kind of leadership worthy of admiration? For documentation of
numerous mass murders commanded, condoned, and committed by the god of the
bible, see the reading list at the end of this quiz.
4.. They were stripped of all their belongings, houses, and livestock.
Corrected and Explained:
* This wasn't a simple dispute between Korah and Moses. These 250 leaders
of the congregation gathered against Moses and Aaron. They wanted the
priesthood and tabernacle jobs to be extended to them and other non-Levites.
This was wrong and an abomination to God. He had already given these
positions to the priests and Levites. Therefore, these wicked dissenters
and potential usurpers were judged with their lives.
* God judges the Israelites for complaining.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
11. According to the bible, who created evil?
Answer: C
1.. Adam.
2.. Eve.
3.. God. --Now we know who is to blame.
"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I
the Lord do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)
The word "create" above is bara, the same word used in Genesis 1:1. The
word "evil" is ra, such as in Genesis 2:9, "the tree of knowledge of good
and evil." Some versions, such as the NIV, have unjustifiably softened the
implications of this verse by translating ra as "disaster" or "calamity,"
although ra is used repeatedly throughout scripture to refer to moral evil.
(See Isaiah 7:14-15: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and
shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may
know to refuse the evil [ra], and choose the good.") But even if the
"disaster" interpretation were allowable, the verse still depicts God as a
troublemaker.
4.. Satan.
Corrected and Explained:
* This Hebrew word that is translated as "evil" in the KJV can also be
translated "calamity", "bad," and "affliction". God is the judge of all.
He judges sinners with suffering and even death. This verse is simply
referring to God's ability to judge sinners with hardships and affliction.
* This verse does not indicate that God created evil, in the creation week
(or at any other time), when He created all things.
* God is so sovereign that when He allows something to happen, it has been
said that He did it. This doesn't necessarily mean that He did it, though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
12. According to the bible, what is God not able to do?
Answer: C
1.. Save the very worst sinners from hell.
2.. Make a rock so huge he can't lift it.
3.. Repel chariots of iron. So much for omnipotence.
"And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the
mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because
they had chariots of iron." (Judges 1:19)
4.. Make people tell lies. --"Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a
lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath
spoken evil concerning thee." (I Kings 22:23) "And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie." (II
Thessalonians 2:11)
Corrected and Explained:
* This verse indicates that Judah could not drive out the inhabitants of the
valley. Incidentally, Judah simply perceived that they could not drive out
these people. God had already given them the land and told them that they
would be victorious in battle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
13. According to the bible, where does God live?
Answer: B
1.. On a throne in the seventh heaven.
2.. In darkness. --How can the "God of light" live in darkness?
"Then spake Solomon, the Lord said that he would dwell in the thick
darkness." (I Kings 8:12. Repeated in II Chronicles 6:1) "And he made
darkness pavilions round about him, dark waters, and thick clouds of the
skies." (II Samuel 22:12) "He made darkness his secret place; his pavilion
round about him were dark waters and thick clouds of the skies." (Psalm
18:11) "The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice . . . clouds and darkness
are round about him." (Psalm 97:1-2)
This contradicts I John 1:5: "God is light, and in him is no darkness at
all . . . If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship
with one another."
3.. Above the clouds.
4.. On a planet between the sun and the stars. --The Mormon religion, in
fact, considers God to be a natural being living on a planet.
Corrected and Explained:
* The Lord is everywhere. Therefore, He dwells everywhere He wishes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
14. According to biblical biology, what is a bat?
Answer: A
1.. A bird. --Biblical biology rates an 'F.' Bats are mammals, not birds.
This is another good reason to keep bibles out of science classes.
"And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls;
they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the
ossifrage, and the ospray, And the vulture . . . And the stork, the heron
after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat." (Leviticus 11:13-19, where
"fowl" is oph. Repeated in Deuteronomy 14:11-20, calling the same list
"birds" [tsippor] and "fowls" [oph])
2.. A mammal. --The biblical writers did not understand the classification
of animals, and the concept of "mammal" is absent from their writings. The
bible was clearly not inspired by an all-knowing god.
3.. An insect.
4.. A mythical creature.
Corrected and Explained:
* As far as eating laws were concerned, the bat was considered an unclean
bird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
15. According to biblical anatomy, where does thinking happen?
Answer: A
1.. In the heart. --Biblical anatomy also rates an 'F.' The heart is an
organ that pumps blood--it does not process thoughts, although the biblical
writers erroneously thought it did. The word "brain" appears nowhere in the
bible.
"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that
every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."
(Genesis 6:5) "As he thinketh in his heart, so is he." (Proverbs 23:7) "And
Jesus, perceiving the thought of their heart, took a child, and set him by
him." (Luke 9:47) "For the word of God is quick, and powerful . . . and is a
discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." (Hebrews 4:12) See also
Deuteronomy 15:9, Judges 5:15, I Chronicles 29:18, Esther 6:6, Job 17:11,
Psalm 10:6, Psalm 33:11, Jeremiah 23:20, Isaiah 10:7, Daniel 2:30, Acts
8:22.
The word "heart" in the bible was not used in the modern sense of
"emotion" because it is depicted as having thoughts, intentions, and
imaginations. The emotions were usually considered to be in the kidneys (see
below).
2.. In the brain. --Tellingly, the word "brain" appears nowhere in the
Bible. The bible was clearly not inspired by an all-knowing god.
3.. In the kidneys. --In biblical times, the kidneys ("reins") were the
seat of the emotions. "Reins" was used roughly then as "heart" is sometimes
used today: "Thus my heart was grieved, and I was pricked in my reins."
(Psalm 73:21) "Yea, my reins shall rejoice, when thy lips speak right
things. Let not my heart envy sinners." (Proverbs 23:16-17) "I the Lord
search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his
ways." (Jeremiah 17:10) "All the churches will know that I am he which
searcheth the reins and hearts." (Revelation 2:23)
4.. In the lungs.
Corrected and Explained:
* These verses were not giving a scientific discourse. They were indicating
that God saw their heart or intentions. Humans see appearances and cannot
see motives, intentions, thoughts, etc. God does, though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
16. How did Gideon demonstrate his family values?
Answer: C
1.. He lived with a young boy named Jether.
2.. He and his wife Ophrah had three sons who became spiritual leaders.
3.. He fathered 71 sons through many wives plus a mistress in
Shechem. --So much for monogamy and fidelity. Is this how the hotel-bible
Gideon Society expects us to demonstrate family values?
"And Gideon had threescore and ten sons of his body begotten: for he had
many wives. And his concubine that was in Shechem, she also bare him a son,
whose name he called Abimelech." (Judges 8:30-31)
Did Gideon not have any daughters? Perhaps daughters were just too
insignificant to mention.
4.. He remained single, becoming the inspiration for St. Paul.
Corrected and Explained:
* The number of his sons is correct. Incidentally, these verses do not
praise him for his multiple wives or concubine.
* Many women and daughters are mentioned in the Bible. Therefore, they
surely are not insignificant.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
17. After Jephthah was victorious in battle, what sacrifice did he burn on
the altar, as he had vowed to the Lord?
Answer: D
1.. Himself.
2.. His livestock.
3.. Two unspotted lambs.
4.. His virgin daughter. --Another example of family values from the "Good
Book." Jephthah's nameless daughter is burned as a sacrifice in order to
appease the wrath and flatter the vanity of God, who tacitly accepts and
never denounces this horrible practice.
"And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou shalt without
fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, then it shall be, that
whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return
in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lord's, and I will
offer it up for a burnt offering. . . . And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his
house, and behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with
dances: and she was his only child; . . . And it came to pass at the end of
two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to
his vow which he had vowed." (Judges 11:30-39)
The bible sanctions child sacrifice here. Notice how everyone assumed
the correctness of Jephthah's actions: there is no denunciation of this
pointless murder from God, or from anyone in Jephthah's community, or from
the biblical writers. It was the right thing to do.
The ultimate child sacrifice, of course, is the story of Jesus being put
to death to appease the wrath of his offended father. Ruth Green, author of
The Born Again Skeptic's Guide to the Bible, puts it this way: "If the
concept of a father who plots to have his own son put to death is presented
to children as beautiful and worthy of society's admiration, what types of
human behavior can be presented to them as reprehensible?"
The biblical god often requested and accepted human sacrifice: "And he
[God] said [to Abraham], Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou
lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a
burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of."
(Genesis 22:2) "For thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe
fruits, and of thy liquors; the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto
me." (Exodus 22:29) "But the king [David] took the two sons of Rizpah . . .
and the five sons of Michal . . . and he delivered them into the hands of
the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the Lord: and they
fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest . . .
And after that God was intreated for the land." (II Samuel 21:8-14) "We are
sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ . . . But this
man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins
forever, sat down on the
right hand of God." (Hebrews 10:10-12)
Corrected and Explained:
* This is the tragic account of the foolishness of making a rash promise to
God.
* In Genesis 22, Abraham was tested and Isaac did not die.
* Exodus 22 was not referring to human sacrifice. It is referring to
consecration.
* 2 Samuel 21 doesn't indicate that David's action was ordained or commanded
by God.
* Hebrews 10 reveals our one way of salvation; through faith in Jesus
Christ's sacrifice. He was the only, perfect person and the only sacrifice
for sins.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
18. What price did David pay King Saul for his first wife?
Answer: C
1.. 500 cattle.
2.. The heads of 100 Philistines.
3.. The foreskins of 200 Philistines. --David is supposed to be a biblical
role model; but how does massacre and mutilation show moral leadership? What
would Saul want with 200 foreskins? Possibly proof that his new son-in-law
was a truly macho man for his daughter. (More likely, this reflects the
pagan practice of offering foreskins as a rain/fertility ritual.)
"Wherefore David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the
Philistines two hundred men; and David brought their foreskins, and they
gave them in full tale to the king, that he might be the king's son in law.
And Saul gave him Michal his daughter to wife." (I Samuel 18:27)
4.. The swords, shields and horses of 300 Philistines.
Corrected and Explained:
* The Philistines were their wicked, pagan enemies. Therefore, Saul wanted
David to kill some of them before he gave him his daughter in marriage. God
was still judging these pagans for their sins and the Israelites were His
sword.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
19. How many regular sexual partners did King Solomon have?
Answer: D
1.. One wife and 300 concubines.
2.. One wife. (The concubines were servants.)
3.. 300 wives.
4.. One thousand sexual partners. --At least one thousand. Another fine
example of family values from one of God's favorites.
"But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter
of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and
Hittites . . . And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred
concubines." (I Kings 11:1-3)
Notice that this lifestyle is never denounced by God, Jesus, or the
biblical writers. Solomon, supposedly an ancestor of Jesus, was praised by
Jesus: "all his glory" (Matthew 6:29), "wisdom of Solomon" (Matthew 12:42).
Jesus compared himself (not so humbly) to Solomon's greatness: "a greater
than Solomon is here." (Luke 11:31)
Corrected and Explained:
* All throughout the Bible, we see that marriage is between one man and one
woman. This is true in Genesis and even in Jesus' time. See Genesis 2:24,
Matthew 5:31 and 32, etc.
* Solomon is not praised for his many wives and concubines. He is praised
for his wisdom.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
20. What happened to 42 little children who teased God's prophet Elisha for
being bald and he cursed them in the name of the Lord?
Answer: C
1.. They were whipped by their parents.
2.. They and their descendants to five generations were forbidden to enter
the tabernacle.
3.. Two bears came out of the forest and killed them all. --Note that this
bloody execution for a childish prank is the work of the God of the bible.
Is a person like this worthy of worship? Is this "pro-life"?
"And he [Elisha] went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up
by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked
him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he
turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord.
And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two
children of them." (II Kings 2:23-24)
4.. They were forced to work seven years for the Levites, as child slaves.
Corrected and Explained:
* These children were mocking Elisha and blaspheming God. When they said,
"Go up, you bald head, go up you bald head!", they were blaspheming a
miracle of God (Elijah's assumption) and taunting them both. Therefore, God
punished these children for their wickedness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
21. What reason did God give for tormenting Job?
Answer: C
1.. "Job was a sinner. He deserved it." --Job was not a sinner: "There was
a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and
upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil." (Job 1:1) "And the
Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is
none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth
God, and escheweth evil?" (Job 1:8) "In all this Job sinned not." (Job 1:22)
2.. "I didn't torment Job. Satan did it."
3.. "Satan dared me, so I destroyed Job for no reason at all." --This is a
damning confession. In a court of law, this would be enough to convict God
of the highest reckless crimes against humanity. In addition to ruining
Job's livelihood and inflicting him with a debilitating illness, God
murdered his 10 children and his servants--"without cause."
"And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that
there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that
feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity,
although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause." (Job
2:3)
4.. "I wanted to see how far a man would bend before breaking."
Corrected and Explained:
* Job 2:3 reads, "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.'" God
allowed Satan to test job. God didn't "destroy Job for no reason at all."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
22. According to the bible, what does Satan look like?
Answer: B
1.. A skinny red man with horns and a pointed tail.
2.. A red dragon with 7 heads and 10 horns. --Are there still adults in
the 21st century who believe in the existence of Satan? If they do, they are
forced to picture him as a mythical 7-headed dragon, the only physical
description of Satan given in the bible:
"And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red
dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them
to the earth . . . And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent,
called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast
out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." (Revelation
12:3-9)
3.. A garden snake. --The talking serpent that tempted Eve in the Garden
of Eden (Genesis 3:1-16) is not identified as "Satan" in the Old Testament,
nor does Paul make such a connection (II Corinthians 11:3). Talking animals,
by the way, are the stuff of fables (see fable in the dictionary). See
documentation at the end for a deeper analysis.
4.. An angel in a black robe.
Corrected and Explained:
* Satan is a spirit that fell from Heaven. Revelation 12 doesn't,
specifically state that Satan has a material body that looks like a seven
headed dragon with ten horns. There is a lot of symbolism in Revelation.
We have every reason to believe the description of this dragon is symbolic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
23. How does the biblical god treat haughty women?
Answer: B
1.. He makes them barren.
2.. He puts scabs on their heads and uncovers their private parts. --This
is sexual harassment and molestation. "Secret parts" (below) is poth, which
means "hinged opening" (vagina). This is just one of many biblical instances
in which women are debased, immorally or cavalierly treated as male
property, subject to purchase, sale, abduction, and even sexual assault. No
wonder the biblical writers never disapprove of such crimes when they are
committed by God himself. How can anyone possibly pretend to love a god who
would say such a thing?
"Moreover the Lord saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and
walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they
go, and making a tinkling with their feet: Therefore the Lord will smite
with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, and the Lord
will discover [lay bare-ASV] their secret parts." (Isaiah 3:16-17)
3.. He takes away their gold and expensive clothing.
4.. The Holy Spirit causes them to feel shame for their arrogance.
Corrected and Explained:
* Isaiah 3 indicates how God would judge some women that were embracing a
multitude of sins. Since God is perfectly holy, He has the right to judge
His sinful creation.
* If other scriptures were mentioned, that argue for the alleged
mistreatment of women, then they would be addressed. However, no argument
is being presented, so no rebuttal is necessary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
24. In dollars (shekels), how much is a woman worth?
Answer: A
1.. Half a male. --Modern sexism and inequality have their roots in the
Bible. Depending on age, a female is worth approximately half as much as a
male:
"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of
Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow, the persons
shall be for the Lord by thy estimation. And thy estimation shall be of the
male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation
shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary. And if
it be a female,then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels. And if it be
from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy estimation shall be
of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels. And if it be
from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of
the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be
three shekels of silver. And if it be from sixty years old and above; if it
be a male, then thy estimation shall be fifteen shekels, and for the female
ten shekels." (Leviticus 27:1-7)
This devaluation of women is reflected in the "double uncleanness" of
giving birth to a daughter:
"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of
Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then
she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for
her infirmity shall she be unclean. . . . But if she bear a maid child, then
she shall be unclean two weeks . . ." (Leviticus 12:1-5)
More documentation of the bible's treatment of women at the end of this
quiz.
2.. The same as a male.
3.. Twice as much as a male.
4.. Irrelevant. The Bible does not put a dollar value on human life.
Corrected and Explained:
* These verses are referring to vows and giving money to God. They aren't
talking about the monetary worth of human life.
* God gave the ancient Israelites instructions regarding childbirth. He
never indicated that girls were twice as dirty as boys.
* Since these laws are thousands of years old and directed to the ancient
Israelites, we do not know or understand all of the reasons for them.
However, there was surely some spiritual significance to God's laws.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
25. What happens if a man rapes an engaged virgin in the city, and no one
hears anything?
Answer: D
1.. The man should pay her father 100 shekels of silver.
2.. The man is stoned to death.
3.. The woman is stoned to death.
4.. They are both stoned to death. --What if she was gagged, or had
laryngitis, or the neighbors were out of town? Is it fair to punish the
victim of a crime, much less mete out the death penalty to a victim of
violence?! The bible primitively and unfairly frames rape as a crime
committed by a man against another man's property.
"If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man
find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out
unto the gate of the city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they
die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man,
because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil
from among you." (Deuteronomy 22:23-24)
And if the woman is not engaged, she is forced to marry her rapist! The
rapist simply pays a fine:
"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and
lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay
with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and
she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away
all his days." (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)
Corrected and Explained:
* (Verses 23 and 24) These verses have nothing to do with the loudness of a
betrothed virgin's cry. They are indicating what to do if a betrothed
virgin willingly fornicates with another man.
* (Verses 28 and 29) These verses are not talking about rape. A man who
rapes a woman is to be put to death. This is clear from verse 25.
* These verses are referring to consenting individuals (one is an
unbetrothed virgin). A man is to marry a woman that he decides to sleep
with. He is also to pay her father and avoid divorcing her.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
26. What is the Mosaic Law punishment for being handicapped?
Answer: C
1.. You will be stoned to death.
2.. You must sacrifice two additional doves on the altar.
3.. You are not allowed in church. --This is an ancient, unenlightened
view, treating the disabled as inferior people. Shouldn't an all-loving God
be bigger than this?
"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron, saying,
Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let
him not approach to offer the bread of his God. . . . a blind man, or a
lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous. Or a man that
is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookbacked, or a dwarf, or that hath a
blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; No
man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to
offer the offerings of the Lord made by fire . . . he shall not go in unto
the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he
profane not my sanctuaries: for I the Lord do sanctify them." (Leviticus
21:16-23)
4.. You must bathe for two months before entering the tabernacle.
Corrected and Explained:
* God had high and specific standards for His priests. This isn't simply
referring to people going to church. This command was for priests.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
27. According to the Bible, when may a husband have sex with his wife?
Answer: B
1.. As often as he likes. She is his property.
2.. Not during her menstrual period. --Another example of biblical sexism:
women are "unclean." This is also an example of disproportionate punishment,
as being "cut off" from the tribe for this "crime" (see below) was likely a
death sentence in a nomadic culture.
"And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she
shall be put apart seven days . . . and if any man lie with her at all, and
her flowers [impurity] be upon him, he shall be unclean seven days; and all
the bed whereon he lieth shall be unclean." (Leviticus 15:19-24) "And if a
man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her
nakedness; he hath discovered her fountain, and she hath uncovered the
fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among the
people." (Leviticus 20:18)
3.. As often as he likes until the first son is born, then by mutual
agreement.
4.. As often as the wife allows it.
Corrected and Explained:
* God had spiritual and practical reasons for His commands. In this case,
He wanted His people to stay away from blood. The ancient Israelites didn't
have advanced medical knowledge, advanced medicine, immunization shots, etc.
Therefore, it was simply easier to avoid blood.
* God's people were not to eat blood. They were also to respect animal
sacrifices that were required by God. Therefore, we also see some more
reasons why blood was to be avoided.
* God wanted His people to multiply and fill the Earth. It has been well
documented that women do not get pregnant while having intercourse during
menstruation. Therefore, this command was also, likely a way to get the
Israelites to populate the Earth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
28. How should you feel when you dash babies against the rocks?
Answer: A
1.. Happy. -- Is this "pro-life"? This is one of numerous examples of
god-ordained genocide. Even if you coldly feel there is justice in killing
the innocent infants of people deemed "evil" by your religion, would you be
happy to do it, as the bible declares? If this is not evil, then what is?
"O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that
rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and
dasheth thy little ones against the stones." (Psalm 137:8-9)
2.. Ashamed.
3.. It depends if the babies were guilty or innocent.
4.. Nothing. It is all in God's hands.
Corrected and Explained:
* The preceding verses in this chapter explain the context of this
statement. Verse 8 sums it up: "O daughter of Babylon, who are to be
destroyed, happy the one who repays you as you have served us!"
* Contrary to the leading question, this statement is not written to you or
me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
29. How many human generations were there before Jesus?
Answer: D
1.. "More numerous than the stars."
2.. 144,000.
3.. 412.
4.. 62. --The bible got it wrong by two orders of magnitude. History and
archaeology prove that there were more than a mere 62 generations before
Christianity. The species Homo sapiens has existed for 100,000 - 200,000
years, which would be at least 5,000 generations.
Luke 3:34-38 lists 20 generations between Adam and Abraham: Abraham,
Thara, Nachor, Saruch, Ragau, Phalec, Heber, Sala, Cainan, Arphaxad, Sem,
Noe, Lamech, Mathusala, Enoch, Jared, Maleleel, Cainan, Enos, Seth, Adam.
Then Matthew 1:17 gives 42 generations between Abraham and Jesus: "So all
the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from
David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and
from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations."
Matthew and Luke also contradict each other: both genealogies claim to
go through Joseph, the father of Jesus (Matthew 1:16; Luke 3:23. Why Joseph?
Wasn't God the father?), yet their lists disagree in length and in
names--except for Shealtiel and Zerubbabel, an intersection that proves they
were not intended to be separate lines. They also contradict the Old
Testament genealogies, conveniently deleting and adding in order to make the
numbers fit a pattern.
Corrected and Explained:
* History and archaeology do not prove that humans or any lifeforms are over
10,000 years old. If this weren't an argument by assertion, then more
evidence would be provided.
* These genealogies never claim to be exhaustive. Therefore, it is entirely
possible that they skipped people. The Greek text indicates a clear lineage
and it does not show "father and son" relationships for each pair of people
listed. For instance, two, consecutive names could represent a son and a
great-grandfather; not necessarily a son and a father.
* There are some omissions in the genealogies. However, this is no problem
and is, in fact, to be expected because the authors were clearly showing
lineages and not simply father/son relationships. These genealogies were
never intended to be exhaustive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
30. What Christmas tradition is expressly forbidden in the bible?
Answer: C
1.. Singing carols house-to-house.
2.. Exchanging gifts.
3.. Christmas trees. --Many other Christmas traditions have their roots in
pagan practices, such as the holly wreath, a fertility symbol. Even the date
of Christmas, near the winter solstice, is linked to sun worship. Modern
Christians have stolen Christmas from the pagans.
"Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not
dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For
the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the
forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it
with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that
it move not. . . . They are altogether brutish and foolish." (Jeremiah
10:2-8)
4.. Kissing under the mistletoe.
Corrected and Explained:
* These people were making idols from the trees. This verse isn't about
Christmas trees.
* Jesus Christ came to earth hundreds of years after this passage.
Therefore, Christmas (notice the word "Christ" in "Christmas") trees weren't
a topic of discussion and this passage has nothing to do with them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
31. According to Jesus, what must you do to have eternal life?
Answer: B
1.. Obey the law and keep all the sacraments.
2.. Sell everything you have and give all the money to the poor. --Heaven
will be very empty, it seems. How many Christians take seriously this direct
command of Jesus?
"And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good master, what good thing
shall I do, that I may have eternal life? . . . Jesus said unto him, If thou
wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor; and thou
shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me." (Matthew 19:16-21.
See also Luke 12:33)
3.. Attend church regularly and tithe ten percent of your income to
God. --Christian tithing is difficult to support biblically. In Old
Testament times, when church and government were united, the tithe was the
state tax, often used to support the non-working Levites (priests). But
there is no consistent explanation of tithing in Hebrew scripture or in
other nations. Babylonians used the tithe as a secular tax for royal
purposes. In America, where state and church are separated, Christians
should not tithe--unless they want to be doubly taxed! There is nothing in
the New Testament to support tithing. Jesus mocked the scribes and Pharisees
who tithed (Matthew 23:23). The writer of Hebrews affirmed that the tithe
was to be paid to the Levites, admitting that times are different now: "For
the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of
the law." (Hebrews 7:5,12)
4.. Confess your sins and ask Jesus to come into your heart.
Corrected and Explained:
* Jesus never mentions eternal life. Jesus tells this man what he needs to
know because he needs to give his riches to the poor. Jesus also mentions
"treasure in Heaven." Jesus never mentions eternal life, though.
Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the man was putting his money ahead
of God's desires and needed to submit to God.
* The doctrine of salvation is obvious from the New Testament scriptures. A
person needs to repent and trust, believe, and accept Jesus Christ as Lord
and Savior.
* All of our belongings are God's. We are merely stewards of God's riches.
Therefore, we should submit 100% of our things to Him. Giving 10% (which is
the definition of a tithe) or even 20% to churches and Christian ministries
is a great start that will please God. However, believers should be
striving, willing, and able to give God everything.
* There are numerous scriptures about eternal rewards. Obeying God's
command to give money to Him and needy people will result in earthly
blessings and eternal rewards. However, the doctrine of salvation does not
depend on or include one's giving.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
32. According to Jesus, how should Christian disciples treat their parents?
Answer: C
1.. Parents should be loved, honored and cared for.
2.. Parents should be taken care of by the church community.
3.. Parents should be hated. --More family values from the "Good Book."
"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26) The word "hate" here is miseo, the
Greek word for "hate," from which we get the prefix in "misanthropy" and
"misogyny." The same writer uses miseo in such verses as: "Blessed are ye
when men shall hate you." (Luke 6:22)
The concept of devaluing your family is reflected by Matthew: "And a
man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or
mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter
more than me is not worthy of me." (Matthew 10:37-38) Why not love your
family first? This sounds like something an uneasy dictator would say.
4.. Parents should be ignored--"Let the dead bury the dead"--because when
you are born again, God becomes your true parent.
Corrected and Explained:
* This Greek word for "hate" is better translated "love less."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
33. According to Jesus, how should slaves be treated?
Answer: B
1.. They should be beaten daily to keep them in line.
2.. They should be beaten for disobedience, but not more severely then
they deserve. --Jesus never denounced slavery: he endorsed it! He
incorporated it into his teachings as if it were the most natural order
(which it was for the biblical writers who didn't know any better). Why
doesn't the bible--supposedly inspired by an all-loving deity--ever hint
that there is something wrong with such a brutal social institution? If it
were not for the influence of the bible (see answer 'd' below), the
appalling American slave trade might have been curtailed, along with the
bloody Civil War.
"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself,
neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he
that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with
few stripes." (Luke 12:47-48) The entire context (Luke 12:41-48) shows that
this is not part of a parable--it is the explanation of a parable, after
Peter asked a question. But even if it were a parable, it would carry the
same weight as a teaching of Jesus.
The word "servant" above is doulos, which means "slave" in Greek, and is
correctly rendered "slave" by the NRSV, NAS, Scholar's Version, and others.
"Shall" meant "should," as Jesus adds: "For unto whomsoever much is given,
of him shall be much required." (Luke 12:48)
3.. They should be treated humanely, as members of the family. --Paul did
urge Philemon to treat his slave Onesimus as a brother (Philemon 15-16), but
he was not speaking for Jesus, and Onesimus was a special case, a personal
friend. Paul never denounced slavery.
4.. They should be set free because slavery is wrong. --The Bible nowhere
states that slavery is wrong. Slavery is ordained by the Bible: "Moreover of
the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye
buy, . . . and they shall be your possession . . . they shall be your
bondmen forever." (Leviticus 25:45-46) "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six
years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing .
... . And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out
as the menservants do." (Exodus 21:2,7) "Servants [slaves], obey in all
things your masters." (Colossians 3:22)
Corrected and Explained:
* The word "slave" is not mentioned. The word "servant" is mentioned.
Simply because a couple translations may agree with FFRF, it doesn't mean
they are better than all the rest. In fact, the Greek text and definition
surely allows for this word to be translated "servant."
* God did not condone or command slavery. There are no, clear scriptures
that indicate God approving of slavery. If there were, then they would
surely be listed here!
* The issue of servants to the Israelites is very similar to the issue of
divorce among Israelites. God never wanted slavery and never wanted
divorce. However, He made laws that curtailed these practices. He would
have made laws that outlawed these practices, but the Israelites had
hardened their hearts, so He met them where they were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
34. What did Jesus say about peace?
Answer: B
1.. "Peace on earth, good will toward men." --This Christmas message from
Luke 2:14 contradicts Jesus himself.
2.. "Don't think that I came for peace on earth. I came to start
wars." --Are these the words of a good man?
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send
peace, but a sword." (Matthew 10:34) "I am come to send fire on the earth;
and what will I, if it be already kindled? But I have a baptism to be
baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished! Suppose ye
that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather
division." (Luke 12:49-51) These words, by the way, come immediately after
Jesus talked about beating slaves. (See Question 33)
3.. "Each person makes their own peace, according to their faith and how
they treat others."
4.. "There is no peace apart from God." --Paul sometimes wrote about peace
(see Romans 15:33), but this also contradicts Jesus.
Corrected and Explained:
* Jesus never states that He came specifically to destroy families.
However, He does say that families will be divided over Him.
* Jesus brought peace to the ones that repent and trust, believe and accept
Him as their Lord and Savior. However, to those that do not, they will not
have peace with God.
* Jesus is also emphasizing the need to love and follow Him at all costs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
FFRF's Claim and Perversion:
35. Which one of these phrases did Jesus not say about witnessing?
Answer: B
1.. "Thou shalt not bear false witness." (Matthew 19:18)
2.. "God is my witness." --Paul wrote: "For God is my witness, whom I
serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son." (Romans 1:9) Notice that
Jesus contradicts himself below.
3.. "If I bear witness of myself, it is true." --"Jesus answered and said
unto them, though I bear record [martyria] of myself, yet my record
[martyria] is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye
cannot tell whence I come, and wither I go." (John 8:14) Martyria means
"bear witness" (NAS) or "testify" (NIV, NRSV), the same word used in the
contradictory John 5:31 (below).
4.. "If I bear witness of myself, it is not true." --"If I bear witness
[martyria] of myself, my witness [martyria] is not true." (John 5:31)
Martyria means "bear witness" (NAS) or "testify" (NIV, NRSV), the same word
used in the contradictory John 8:14 (above).
Needless to say, Jesus was not very reliable, nor was he very clear.
Corrected and Explained:
* Jesus was very reliable and clear. However, He was making two, different
points with the two, different statements recorded in John 5:31 and John
8:14.
* If your logic is good, then you would have to avoid making seemingly
contradictory statements for your entire life; even if you were making
different points, addressing different people, using different points of
reference, etc. In short, this is an unreasonable standard.
.
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 12:03:16 PM |
|
|
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
<snip>
8. When the Israelites conquered the Midianites, what part of the spoils
of
war was given to the priest as "the Lord's tribute"?
Answer: D
1.. 50 sheep. --It was actually 675 of the 675,000 sheep. (See Numbers
31:37)
2.. 30,000 asses. --It was actually 61 of the 61,000 asses. (See Numbers
31:39)
3.. 32,000 cows. --It was actually 72 of the 72,000 beeves. (See Numbers
31:38)
4.. 32 virgins. --Of the 32,000 virgins that were kept alive as "booty"
for God's warriors, 32 young captives were handed to the priest. The bible
brutally sanctifies war crimes against girls and women that continue to
this
day. Who could possibly respect a dictator who behaves like this?
"And the booty, being the rest of the prey which the men of war had
caught, was 675,000 sheep, And 72,000 beeves, And 61,000 asses, And 32,000
persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him . . . of
which the Lord's tribute was 32 persons. And Moses gave the tribute, which
was the Lord's heave offering, unto Eleazar the priest, as the Lord
commanded Moses." (Numbers 31:32-41)
Corrected and Explained:
* The ancient Israelites were a nomadic people. They wandered the desert,
fought in some wars, etc. Therefore, they didn't have any sort of welfare
system or rehabilitation program for pagan women and children that
survived
a war. Keeping some of the undefiled women with them was a blessing to
the
women because it ensured their survival. If they didn't allow these women
to join them, they would have quickly died in the desert.
While most of the so called explanations are childish this one stands out.
Usually when someone fights a war, even with modern weapons, there are
survivors.
Jason's callous disreguard of the fact that his comment implies that every
man, woman and child who was not a virgin was killed by the winners who are
a god's choosen people (The Jews deny the christian god is the real god
because of the trinity.) is perhaps only a sign of his childishness. War
movies don't bother children even if they know it's not real.
<Snip >
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 12:31:27 PM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net> wrote:
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
4.. 32 virgins. --Of the 32,000 virgins that were kept alive as "booty"
for God's warriors, 32 young captives were handed to the priest. The bible
brutally sanctifies war crimes against girls and women that continue to
this day.
Corrected and Explained:
* The ancient Israelites were a nomadic people. They wandered the desert,
fought in some wars, etc. Therefore, they didn't have any sort of welfare
system or rehabilitation program for pagan women and children that
survived a war. Keeping some of the undefiled women with them was a blessing to
the women because it ensured their survival. If they didn't allow these women
to join them, they would have quickly died in the desert.
Jason's callous disreguard of the fact that his comment implies that every
man, woman and child who was not a virgin was killed by the winners who are
a god's choosen people . . . is perhaps only a sign of his childishness.
Jason the phony doctor, already proven a fraud and a charlatan, is also
a monstruos, amoral human being. He's contemptible beyond words. <spit>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 01:03:40 PM |
|
|
On 31 Dec 2003, "trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> screwed
up his face, groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message
in news:v856vv4ba4fgumuqspt1b2dj8lgh3o0ruj@news.supernews.com:
"Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net> wrote:
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
4.. 32 virgins. --Of the 32,000 virgins that were kept alive as
"booty"
for God's warriors, 32 young captives were handed to the priest. The
bible brutally sanctifies war crimes against girls and women that
continue to this day.
Corrected and Explained:
* The ancient Israelites were a nomadic people. They wandered the
desert, fought in some wars, etc. Therefore, they didn't have any
sort of welfare system or rehabilitation program for pagan women and
children that survived a war. Keeping some of the undefiled women
with them was a blessing to the women because it ensured their
survival. If they didn't allow these women to join them, they would
have quickly died in the desert.
Jason's callous disreguard of the fact that his comment implies that
every man, woman and child who was not a virgin was killed by the
winners who are a god's choosen people . . . is perhaps only a sign of
his childishness.
Jason the phony doctor, already proven a fraud and a charlatan, is
also a monstruos, amoral human being. He's contemptible beyond words.
<spit>
I fully agree. Jason is a worthless and twisted human being.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 09:18:01 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 18:03:16 +0000 (UTC), "Mike Painter"
<mdotpainter@att.net> posted to alt.atheism:
[piggybacking]
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
Corrected and Explained:
* The ancient Israelites were a nomadic people. They wandered the desert,
fought in some wars, etc. Therefore, they didn't have any sort of welfare
system or rehabilitation program for pagan women and children that survived
a war. Keeping some of the undefiled women with them was a blessing to the
women because it ensured their survival. If they didn't allow these women
to join them, they would have quickly died in the desert.
1) They could have killed those "women" the same way they killed all
the men, boys and non-virginal women.
2) They were kept for only one reason, and it wasn't to keep them from
dying in the desert or as a blessing - they were kept as concubines.
Bottom line - your god told his people to rape pre-pubescent children.
--
"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my
contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him, the
spinal cord would fully suffice."
- Albert Einstein
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 01:38:30 PM |
|
|
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
Andrew Arensburger wrote:
Dr. Jason Gastrich <news@jcsm.org> wrote:
The Bible is inerrant. Sure, there are some people who can doubt
parts of it. It's not difficult to doubt. However, there are
precious few that will even attempt to assert where it is in error.
Since theology is my area of expertise, I'm looking forward to
discussing the Bible and its inerrancy.
What are the consequences of bible inerrancy?
Bible inerrancy seems to be your main point.
Is it your only point?
Are you only interested in establishing that
the bible is inerrant or is there something that
follows from that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Jason Gastrich" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 02:58:58 PM |
|
|
Ron Baker, Pluralitas! wrote:
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
Andrew Arensburger wrote:
Dr. Jason Gastrich <news@jcsm.org> wrote:
The Bible is inerrant. Sure, there are some people who can doubt
parts of it. It's not difficult to doubt. However, there are
precious few that will even attempt to assert where it is in error.
Since theology is my area of expertise, I'm looking forward to
discussing the Bible and its inerrancy.
What are the consequences of bible inerrancy?
Bible inerrancy seems to be your main point.
Is it your only point?
Are you only interested in establishing that
the bible is inerrant or is there something that
follows from that?
Thanks for your questions.
What do you mean? Is there something that follows from that?
After concluding that the Bible is inerrant, it is easy to conclude that the
gospel message is true and God is trustworthy.
Sincerely,
Jason
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 06:05:20 PM |
|
|
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:tNGIb.33681$Vs3.491@twister.socal.rr.com...
Ron Baker, Pluralitas! wrote:
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
Andrew Arensburger wrote:
Dr. Jason Gastrich <news@jcsm.org> wrote:
The Bible is inerrant. Sure, there are some people who can doubt
parts of it. It's not difficult to doubt. However, there are
precious few that will even attempt to assert where it is in error.
Since theology is my area of expertise, I'm looking forward to
discussing the Bible and its inerrancy.
What are the consequences of bible inerrancy?
Bible inerrancy seems to be your main point.
Is it your only point?
Are you only interested in establishing that
the bible is inerrant or is there something that
follows from that?
Thanks for your questions.
What do you mean? Is there something that follows from that?
After concluding that the Bible is inerrant, it is easy to conclude that
the
gospel message is true and God is trustworthy.
What happens if one doesn't believe in Jesus?
Why are you posting these messages?
Are you trying to save souls?
.
|
|
|
| User: "catshark" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 06:48:37 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:05:20 +0000 (UTC), "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!"
<rbaker4@msnn.com> wrote:
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:tNGIb.33681$Vs3.491@twister.socal.rr.com...
Ron Baker, Pluralitas! wrote:
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
Andrew Arensburger wrote:
Dr. Jason Gastrich <news@jcsm.org> wrote:
The Bible is inerrant. Sure, there are some people who can doubt
parts of it. It's not difficult to doubt. However, there are
precious few that will even attempt to assert where it is in error.
Since theology is my area of expertise, I'm looking forward to
discussing the Bible and its inerrancy.
What are the consequences of bible inerrancy?
Bible inerrancy seems to be your main point.
Is it your only point?
Are you only interested in establishing that
the bible is inerrant or is there something that
follows from that?
Thanks for your questions.
What do you mean? Is there something that follows from that?
After concluding that the Bible is inerrant, it is easy to conclude that
the
gospel message is true and God is trustworthy.
What happens if one doesn't believe in Jesus?
Why are you posting these messages?
Are you trying to save souls?
Why, yes, he is.
According to Jason's website, part of his "Miscellaneous Service and
Ministry" is to:
"Actively minister to and debate evolutionists and atheists."
<http://www.jcsm.org/MISC/Resume.htm>
One can only hope that his non-miscellaneous flock gets better service.
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
Those who reject biological evolution do so, usually,
not out of reason, but out of unjustified vanity.
- Isaac Asimov -
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
01 Jan 2004 07:44:07 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:48:37 +0000 (UTC), catshark <catshark@yahoo.com>
posted to alt.atheism:
According to Jason's website, part of his "Miscellaneous Service and
Ministry" is to:
"Actively minister to and debate evolutionists and atheists."
It would be nice if he stopped posting nonsense and started debating.
Think anyone here will live long enough to see that?
--
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "catshark" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
01 Jan 2004 08:54:39 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 01:44:07 +0000 (UTC), Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:48:37 +0000 (UTC), catshark <catshark@yahoo.com>
posted to alt.atheism:
According to Jason's website, part of his "Miscellaneous Service and
Ministry" is to:
"Actively minister to and debate evolutionists and atheists."
It would be nice if he stopped posting nonsense and started debating.
Think anyone here will live long enough to see that?
No . . . least of all Jason.
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one:
'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.'
And God granted it.
- Voltaire -
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Davey" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
01 Jan 2004 09:07:04 PM |
|
|
Użytkownik "catshark" <catshark@yahoo.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:i8n9vv0c4evm92e37gc2volimqt1shc3vp@4ax.com...
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 01:44:07 +0000 (UTC), Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:48:37 +0000 (UTC), catshark <catshark@yahoo.com>
posted to alt.atheism:
According to Jason's website, part of his "Miscellaneous Service and
Ministry" is to:
"Actively minister to and debate evolutionists and atheists."
It would be nice if he stopped posting nonsense and started debating.
Think anyone here will live long enough to see that?
No . . . least of all Jason.
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one:
'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.'
And God granted it.
- Voltaire -
He'd have been good at getting rid of Boggarts.
Uncle Davey
.
|
|
|
| User: "catshark" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
01 Jan 2004 10:05:37 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 03:07:04 +0000 (UTC), "Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com>
wrote:
Użytkownik "catshark" <catshark@yahoo.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:i8n9vv0c4evm92e37gc2volimqt1shc3vp@4ax.com...
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 01:44:07 +0000 (UTC), Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:48:37 +0000 (UTC), catshark <catshark@yahoo.com>
posted to alt.atheism:
According to Jason's website, part of his "Miscellaneous Service and
Ministry" is to:
"Actively minister to and debate evolutionists and atheists."
It would be nice if he stopped posting nonsense and started debating.
Think anyone here will live long enough to see that?
No . . . least of all Jason.
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one:
'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.'
And God granted it.
- Voltaire -
He'd have been good at getting rid of Boggarts.
Who, Voltaire? I doubt it.
Jason might just be annoying enough to even make poltergeists want to leave
.. . . just by talking.
Of course, for people of a certain age, "bogarts" have another meaning . .
..
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
In the name of the bee
And of the butterfly
And of the breeze, amen
- Emily Dickinson -
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew Arensburger" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
01 Jan 2004 11:32:07 PM |
|
|
In talk.origins catshark <catshark@yahoo.com> wrote:
Of course, for people of a certain age, "bogarts" have another meaning . .
You mean, "Here's lookin' at you, kid"? Or perhaps "I stick my
neck out for nobody"?
--
Andrew Arensburger, Systems guy University of Maryland
arensb.no-bloody-spam@umd.edu Office of Information Technology
If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs,
you must be at least a foot shorter than they.
.
|
|
|
| User: "catshark" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
02 Jan 2004 12:38:50 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 05:32:07 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Arensburger
<arensb.no-bloody-spam@umd.edu> wrote:
In talk.origins catshark <catshark@yahoo.com> wrote:
Of course, for people of a certain age, "bogarts" have another meaning . .
You mean, "Here's lookin' at you, kid"? Or perhaps "I stick my
neck out for nobody"?
.. . . or "Hey! Hand over that thing, man, other people need a hit!"
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
Nunc Id Vides, Nunc Ne Vides
- Unseen University Motto -
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jos Flachs" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 08:51:07 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:48:37 +0000 (UTC), catshark <catshark@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Why are you posting these messages?
Are you trying to save souls?
Why, yes, he is.
According to Jason's website, part of his "Miscellaneous Service and
Ministry" is to:
"Actively minister to and debate evolutionists and atheists."
I wonder when he will begin debating.
So far, he operates more like a drive by fundy. (For this remark, I'll
be no doubt plonked by the good "Dr.")
.
|
|
|
| User: "catshark" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 09:25:37 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 02:51:07 +0000 (UTC), Jos Flachs
<'wcruise'@ksc15.th.com> wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:48:37 +0000 (UTC), catshark <catshark@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Why are you posting these messages?
Are you trying to save souls?
Why, yes, he is.
According to Jason's website, part of his "Miscellaneous Service and
Ministry" is to:
"Actively minister to and debate evolutionists and atheists."
I wonder when he will begin debating.
So far, he operates more like a drive by fundy. (For this remark, I'll
be no doubt plonked by the good "Dr.")
To tell you the truth, I'm not sure Jason sees all that many posts from
t.o. anymore . . .
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
The ultimate tragedy of creationism:
The inability to distinguish between one's personal ignorance and god.
- Howard Hershey -
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Susan S" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 05:45:33 PM |
|
|
In talk.origins I read this message from "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
<news@jcsm.org>:
Ron Baker, Pluralitas! wrote:
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
Andrew Arensburger wrote:
Dr. Jason Gastrich <news@jcsm.org> wrote:
The Bible is inerrant. Sure, there are some people who can doubt
parts of it. It's not difficult to doubt. However, there are
precious few that will even attempt to assert where it is in error.
Since theology is my area of expertise, I'm looking forward to
discussing the Bible and its inerrancy.
What are the consequences of bible inerrancy?
Bible inerrancy seems to be your main point.
Is it your only point?
Are you only interested in establishing that
the bible is inerrant or is there something that
follows from that?
Thanks for your questions.
What do you mean? Is there something that follows from that?
After concluding that the Bible is inerrant, it is easy to conclude that the
gospel message is true and God is trustworthy.
Sincerely,
Jason
Two questions. Is that like question bombing?
Susan Silberstein
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D3" |
|
| Title: Re: Gastrich JEPD - FFRF: Corrected and Explained |
31 Dec 2003 06:16:18 PM |
|
|
Piggybacking:
Susan S <otoeremovethis@ix.netcom.com> said:
In talk.origins I read this message from "Dr. Jason Gastrich"
<news@jcsm.org>:
Ron Baker, Pluralitas! wrote:
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:WgAIb.33590$Vs3.4781@twister.socal.rr.com...
Andrew Arensburger wrote:
Dr. Jason Gastrich <news@jcsm.org> wrote:
The Bible is inerrant. Sure, there are some people who can doubt
parts of it. It's not difficult to doubt. However, there are
precious few that will even attempt to assert | | | | |
