It is said by the "born again" Christian than God knows all things, past,
present, and future. If this is not disputed by any Christian it follows
that God Knew from the beginning that man would discover first hand that the
moon is not made of green cheese. God knew from the beginning that His Word
would be transmitted globally by satellite television. Man would discover
the double helix of DNA, map the human genome, and clone animals from
embryonic stem cells native to every living creature that is cloneable.
It is a given that many morally responsible people think many of the things
I mentioned are sinful. But are they wrong because the average man does not
believe how things can be possible without exercising the powers of black
magic or witchcraft? If such things are "wrong" are they "wrong" for the
same reason Galileo was condemned as a heretic when he declared that earth
is not the center of the universe, when clergy in his era (i.e., those "in
power") called him a heretic for saying things contrary to the accepted
tenets of the religions of the day?
If the bible is the inspired word of God and God has known all things that
would occur from the beginning of time to the end of time, then He knew that
someday man would walk on the moon, the manipulation of DNA would become a
reality, and man would learn the earth is not at the center of the universe.
If it is true that the Bible was written for all time then why do readers of
the bible get the impression it was written for generations of people who
lived 2,000 to 3,000 years ago when God could easily have inspired "holy men
of God" to write a Bible for all generations to come.
If it would one day be decided that splitting the atom was immoral or
cloning may be a sin, why were the Ten Commandments limited only to the
types of sins a person could commit with the technology available two or
three millennia ago. If God was the inspiration and if God is all-powerful
and all-knowing, why didn't he have his holy men write a bible additional
commandments (the sense of which would become apparent with the passage of
time) such as thou shall not split the atom for purposes of warfare or man
shalt not use stem cells to create new life? What would it matter if the
writing was nonsensical to the people of the time? "Relevelations" is
nonsensical to this day and it's allegories have been interpreted by
preachers to mean anything they conjecture in their sermons because there is
no believer who would refute a man of God with the comment, "That's
riduculous!" Or, "that is totally absurd!"
The fundies STILL do not question what they have been taught in Sunday
School because should they lose their belief in the basics the whole house
of cards is subject to falling down. Therefore fundies have to overlook
famed TV preachers who state "all men will sin" after they have been caught
with a prostitute on more than one occasion, after the very priests who
bapitized their kids are later put in jail for having had anal sex with
adolescent boys, after history books have made it clear there were Catholic
popes in the middle ages who had mistresses on the side; so, no, I'm not
saying I'm an atheist. What I am saying is why doesn't God inspire modern
holy men of God to write a new bible updated for the times which can be
found believeable by the intellectuals as well as imbeciles (and every one
in between). Isn't it absurd to have complete faith in a document over 2,000
years old, mistranslated by thousands of who stood to benefit by reiterating
the Word as best benefits themselves, doing so under the ruse that to
question the handed down Truth is nothing but lack of faith -- in the old
days known as "heresy" punishable by a death sentence?
Isn't death a bit extreme just for asking questions that really make sense
if you think each one for longer than twenty minutes?
.
|
