How I see it: Bibles

The Source

I once balked on an atheist’s blog because the writer implied something about all atheists. He said we all view the bible as fiction. While I did not agree with that description, my real squabble was with saying anything about all atheists beyond some sort of negative conclusion regarding gods. Atheists debate, argue, and many of us commit logical fallacies, especially the owner of the blog I questioned. I recall no response by him, but one comment by another atheist did make me wonder.

Her comment questioned me directly as to what we (presumably we atheists) should call the bible (or how we should see it). I did not respond. I cannot answer such a question quickly because I would be presuming to speak for how others should, or do, see something and identify it. However, I can state how I personally regard the collection known as the bible. I can also explain why I see it as I do. I can further say why I think it incorrect to refer to the bible as a book of fiction. While I don’t care how others refer to the collection, especially if their motive is antagonistic or trolling for reactions, I feel my opinion should carry as much weight as the original blogger; and I was asked.

My Background

While I grew up religious (Roman Catholic), my world was not dominated by bibles or thumpers. I went to a religious school through 8^th grade, but I only recall studying a lot of Catechism for eight years and Bible History in 7^th and 8^th grades (textbook and academic course title).

We had religious paraphernalia in our home, but I recall no bible. So, I was not indoctrinated into a bible-based form of Christianity during my formative years, although Catholic liturgical practice (Mass) included several bible readings according to a liturgical calendar which is followed closely today by several main-line protestant denominations. This probably left me with a more flexible view of scripture compared to those raised in bible-based and sola-scriptura faiths (protestants). It was many years before it dawned on me that everything in the Catholic Mass is based in some fashion on the contents of the bible.

I have attended a variety of protestant churches (I married a protestant) over the years during which I gained a greater appreciation for, and knowledge of, the bible. I have studied the bible and read all of it, including the additional books of the Catholic bible, and others for comparative analysis. I’ve read most books more than once or twice. I have read and researched various versions (side by side) and miscellaneous translations. I have taken and taught courses about the bible. For years I taught what is called Bible Study in many forms and attended same. I became something of a lay expert on the bible. I also became very aware of people reading and studying the bible and the various views and ways to interpret it.

Understanding the Bible

Hermeneutics is the study of the various ways to interpret the bible and other literary texts. How one interprets the books of the bible is important, especially for people who apply metaphysical value to them. While there may be others, there are four main types of bible interpretations: literal, moral, allegorical, and anagogical.

I have never considered myself a literalist in biblical interpretation (or in much of anything), but I confess to using all four variants in interpreting scripture. When atheists (and some believers) challenge biblical content, they are often told that they are misunderstanding the text. This is often the case when a literalist is challenged and needs to jump into an allegorical or anagogical defense because literal interpretation is often what the atheist is doing, and what the biblical defender has been doing. Such arguments become a silly game, especially when one or more participants are basically biblically ignorant.

Is the Bible True or the Word of God?

The bible was written by humans. To believe or say otherwise is nonsense. To get around this fact, the claim of being inspired by god works well. But then the problem becomes how we are to determine which religious documents were inspired by god (or an angel). That water gets mighty muddy, but someone made such decisions regarding the biblical cannon, and the result is scattered scripture within all three Abrahamic religions, and fractured Christianity being lost within itself.

Can such variety be both true and the word of god? Not in my opinion. But it is a fact there are many bibles. None of them are original documents, and they do not all agree. All of them have been tampered with in one way or another over two millennia. All must be read in languages other than the original (Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek [not Latin], all now dead languages) which confounds already questionable authenticity.

The number of books in the bible and what they say are not agreed upon. If there is a god, one would think that He would have been a better steward of the only valid communication he has ever made with his creation.

I attended an event at a church this weekend. I saw no visible signs (a cross or something) to determine its denomination, so I looked it up. They claim to be Christian in some new age, inclusive way. They also state that their biblical interpretation is metaphysical. Ok, but what they are claiming is to be philosophically interpreting the bible which is a highfaluting way to say whatever. That makes truth relative (or subjective) and literalists would have a fit.

The so-called word of god seems subject to human opinion so much so as to negate any god’s involvement with the bible.

Then What is the Bible?

Try this familiar children’s tune.

Jesus loves me! This I know,
For the Bible tells me so;
Little ones to Him belong,
They are weak but He is strong.
Yes, Jesus loves me! … The Bible tells me so.

The original poem for this was in a novel and used to comfort a dying child. But this is not biblical, and it is not being used for any reason other than to provide solace and perhaps courage in the face of death (in a book of fiction). But notice that justification and truth are supported by reference to the bible. The bible says so, therefore it must be true.

Other descriptions of the bible include fiction, wisdom, poetry, history, and religion. Indeed, the bible contains all of this (although much of the historical value is questionable). I prefer the last. It is a book of religion. Classifying the bible as fiction is confusing even though it is without doubt fictional in many ways (parables are not true).

I do not believe any god exists, but even if one or more did, I seriously doubt they would claim any authorship of what we today call the bible. If you want to refer to the bible as fiction, that is up to you. Much of it is. If you want to claim all atheists see the bible as fiction, you’re wrong. I do not.

Shalom,

Bill © 5/7/2019

A to Z Challenge: Zoro’s Zion Zealots (Z)

Zealots (religious zeal) – are uncompromising fanatics in pursuit of their religious or political ideals. They are diehard activists, maniacs, ultra-extreme nuts. Not moderates. Members of an ancient Jewish sect aiming at a world Jewish theocracy. Glad we don’t have any religious groups like that today, aren’t you?

Zion and Zionism – Zion is a specific hill in Jerusalem. It’s the place from which God rules the world. Zionism is the belief that God’s covenant with the Jews is linked to Palestine and Jerusalem and that said land is rightfully theirs (Jews). Why would that upset anyone? When I say that religion is responsible for many of the problems in the world, throughout history, and today, this is one example of why. There are no gods, so it’s all bull shit, and people die every day because of it.

Zoroastrianism – is the religion founded by Zoroaster about 3,500 years ago. It reformed ancient Persian polytheism into a one god belief system. However, Zoroastrian is considered dualistic since it has a good god and an evil god. This religion influenced Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, specifically in the concepts of heaven and hell, resurrection of the dead, final judgment, and many other concepts which the Abrahamic followers think they invented. Freddie Mercury’s family faith was the ancient religion of Zoroastrianism

And that concludes the 2019 challenge of the alphabet. Shalom.

A to Z Challenge: Yin Yiddish Yoga Yang Yahweh (Y)

Yahweh – a name of the Abrahamic god in the Bible. Regarded by Jews as too sacred to be spoken. The vowel sounds are uncertain (yay-whee?).

Yiddish – is a wonderful and entertaining language. It is the source of many rich expressions, especially terms of endearment, complaints, and insults. I love this language for the many words it has given us: bupkes, chutzpah, glitch, goy, kibbitz (kibitz), klutz, kosher, maven, mazel tov, nosh, oy vey, shalom, schlemiel, shlock, schmooze, schmuck, spiel, tuches (yer butt), and many more.

Yin and Yang – are the two primal cosmic principles of a concept of dualism in ancient Chinese philosophy. The key is how seemingly contrary forces are complementary, interconnected, and interdependent in the natural world; how one may give rise to the other as they interrelate to one another. I like this idea. It’s so me.

Yoga – means union with the divine. I thought that was sex. I see it as an exercise of body and mind. Swami Vivekananda introduced Yoga in the US in 1893. It became popular in the 1950s and 60s and is now mainstream. I tried it. While I would recommend it for exercise, I found it not to my way. I would still do Yoga. Oy vey, I might strengthen my tuches.

A to Z Challenge: Junk and Four J’s (J)

Junk Science – is an expression used to describe scientific information considered spurious or fraudulent (fake). The concept is often invoked in political, legal, and religious contexts. The term became popular in the 90s. Recently, it has been invoked to criticize research on the environment or public health effects of corporate activities, and occasionally in response to such criticism. There are books on this. One is by Dan Agin, who in his book, Junk Science, harshly criticized those who deny the basic premise of global warming. It is somewhat different from pseudoscience and fringe science.

Jesus Christ – may have been a (perhaps mythical) Jewish male who allegedly performed miracles to prove he was a god or the son of one. His mother was a virgin or was impregnated by the Jewish god. Christ is rumored to have been killed by Romans at the encouragement of some Jews by crucifixion, an unpleasant form of legal execution common about 2,000 years ago. Maybe the largest religious belief in the world today. The original source of the term zombie, since he was supposed to be dead and then walked around and visited old friends before he went physically to heaven with a promise to return soon. Has been seen with Elvis.

Jamais vu – The opposite of déjà vu, which is a feeling of recollection. Jamais vu is when an experience feels like it is the first time even when the experience is a familiar one. This occurs in certain kinds of amnesia and epilepsy.

Jinni – I wrote about these last year. These spirits of demonology make many appearances in the Koran.

Jogini – are women who are forced into prostitution by a religious custom known as devadasi in India. While this was banned in 1988, that law is not enforced in all parts of India.

A to Z Blog Challenge: Good God of Glossolalia’s Ghost (G)

God or gods – are:
(1) In Christianity and other monotheistic religions, the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.

(2) In certain other religions, a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity, goddess, divine being, celestial being, supreme being, divinity, immortal creator, a demiurge or godhead; maybe an image, idol, animal, or other object worshiped as divine or symbolizing a god.

(3) An adored, admired, or influential person.

(4) A word used for emphasis or to express emotions such as surprise, anger, or distress, such as, “God, what did I do to deserve this?”

God of the Gaps – is a religious argument presented to fill scientific gaps of knowledge. This fallacy assumes that an act of God is the explanation for an unexplained phenomenon, which is a variant of an argument from ignorance fallacy. It’s nuts, but it gets worse.

Ghosts (poltergeists) – are alleged disembodied spirits of dead persons. A poltergeist is (literally) a noisy spirit. People believe ghosts exist, but they don’t. The idea is fun, the stories are scary (fun), and Casper serves a purpose. But the reality is there are no ghosts. Sorry.

Glossolalia – is speaking in tongues, which is semantically and syntactically unintelligible speech. If one is schizophrenic, it is called gibberish. If one is a charismatic Christian (including some Catholics) it is called the gift of tongues. I think it is crap and many believers agree with me. Mumbo-jumbo which fails to rise to the more respectable level of woo-woo. The trick is to maintain one’s composure when one of them starts this crazy shit.

A to Z Blog Challenge: Divine Druid Dreams (D)

Divination (fortune telling) – is nonsense. It is an attempt to foretell the future or discover occult knowledge by interpreting omens or with supernatural powers.

For example: anthropomancy is by reading organs of newly sacrificed humans, bronchiomancy is reading the lungs of a sacrificed white llama, cephalomancy is from reading a donkey’s head, cromniomancy is onions, haruspicy is reading the guts of sacrificed animals, hepatoscopy is specifically their liver, astrology, dowsing, myrmomancy is watching ants, necromancy is talking to the dead, omphalomancy is from the belly button. There are also dreams, bird flights, tea leaves, or cheese holes, reading bubbles of piss, and finally (one that makes sense) divination by wine. There are many more.

Sounds crazy, but are these are no more looney than thousands of people believing a man or woman when they say, God spoke to me. I don’t think fortune tellers are making a killing reading belly buttons these days but give them a deck of cards and a glass ball—Lady Wanda-woo-woo is divining all the way to the bank.

Druids – actually existed as a group. They exist today as a way of looking at human life within nature. Ancient druids were the wise men (and women) of the Celts. They were written about in different ways by ancient Roman writers and may have been a religious group in some way. However, little information is known other than they predated the Celts in the British Isles because the practices were private and there are no real temples or written traditions.

Druidry was integrated with Celtic culture and Druids were held in high esteem apart from the warrior class as judges, prophets, soothsayers, wise men and keepers of the collective memory.

I like the tie to nature and have few issues with groups that hold nature in high esteem. I do too, but not as gods or a religion. There is no proven historical link between ancient Celtic druidism and modern-day Wicca, but the claim has been made.

Dreams – are normal. Other animals also appear to dream. Making important real-life decisions, or foretelling the future with dreams may be fun, but it is unreliable woo-woo and may be dangerous. Much too much in the way of (conflicting) books and articles have been written about dreams over the years for me to dive too deep here. I have never believed that any god talks to any animal or human through dreams. It came to me in a dream. In your dreams. Dream on, dream on, dream on…. I like music about dreams.

A to Z Challenge: Giants, Cults, and Coincidences (C)

Cardiff Giant – is currently on display as America’s Greatest Hoax, this fake fossil is 10-feet tall with 21-inch feet from about 1869. P. T. Barnum was so impressed by its popularity, he had a copy made. It was a fake of a fake, but people still paid to see them, knowing, but not believing, they were fakes. Apparently, people could not be persuaded that this was not a real giant like the one in the Bible called Goliath. Given proof to the contrary, they still believed it to be a real fossil and paid to see it. Even with irrefutable proof, people will continue to believe what they want.

Cults – are:

How members of large religions refer to smaller religions or denominations (Mormon, Scientology, Amway, Order of the Solar Temple, Heaven’s Gate, Jonestown).
How I refer to all religions due to the us versus them thinking; intense brainwashing/indoctrination; criticism and humiliation; fear, anxiety, and paranoia; controlled information. Also, beliefs in heaven, hell, angels, devils, gods (living and dead), reincarnation, trinities, transubstantiation, and the list goes on and on.

Membership consists mostly of manipulated and deluded people and especially children.

Coincidences – The word used to name the reason for actual events that people who believe in one or more gods do not believe in. This is the opposite of everything happens for a reason. The best-known homages to a coincidence are shit happens, and it is what it is. Maybe these could be shit caused by god. See the law of truly large numbers to take a deep dive into this term.

A to Z Blog Challange: The B’s of Questions, Controls, and Codes

Begging the (and the loaded) question. – I had to call an unscheduled board meeting in December to vote on budget issues that had come up suddenly and needed to be voted upon before the fiscal year ended. The village baboon asked me, “Why did you wait until December to address those issues?” I regret being kind by explaining that I did not know about them before that.

You beg the question when your premises assume without proof the stand/position that is in question. More examples:
Question: How do you know that the bible is divinely inspired?
Answer: Because in the third chapter of II Timothy it says, “all scripture is given by divine inspiration of God.”
Prosecutor to defendant: So how did you feel when you killed your wife?

Brainwashing (mind control) – indoctrination to accept regimented ideas. We are all indoctrinated with many things. Religion is probably the biggest one and that indoctrination often continues for a lifetime and is more noticeable later in life. Stress, isolation, and repetitive (perceived or real) threats are effective tools.

It is important to understand that (for purposes of definition) this involves control of the thoughts or actions of another without his or her consent.

Bible Code – Apparently, predictions of contemporary events and some birthdays have been surmised from the bible using computers to decode what some believer thinks god placed there. If so, only god knows why. It is ridiculous. Run enough words and letters of any large book or books through some computer program and it might just come up with the name of the 50^th President of some country that does not exist yet.

So? You don’t have to be agnostic or atheist to recognize this bull shit for what it is.

Essay: Proof God Exists

A young man, a believer at the time, once asked me regarding my skepticism of the existence of (in his case) the one true god, what kind of proof I would accept. My answer was simple: God. You, me, the neighbor’s cat, the magnificence of the universe, the remarkable unlikeliness of human existence (much less me being one), all of nature and the cosmos are not proof or even evidence that any god exists.

About one year ago I had a lump on my arm that appeared to be a one- or two-centimeter cyst. I asked my primary care doctor if I could have it removed since it detracted from my otherwise magnificent handsomeness, called my vanity. He said and wrote into my medical record that I had a small sebaceous cyst on my left forearm. He went on to say that he would refer me, if it was bothering me. I said it was. I agreed that it was a cyst.

I reported to a surgeon who said it was a cyst. She measured it and found it to be of the necessary size to qualify for surgical excision. I delayed the appointment slightly due to other overlapping medical issues, and since this was still only about my ego. I thought the other issues to be more important.

I eventually had the surgery, and with a local anesthetic, she skillfully removed the lump, showed it to me, and said, “See? It is only a cyst.” She sewed up the two-inch incision and placed the ugly cyst in a sample bottle for analysis by the pathology laboratory. She could have tossed it in the trash.

When I met with her again ten days later to remove the stitches, the surgeon explained that the lab sample was slow in being returned by the path lab. She said that was because it was determined to be soft tissue sarcoma, an uncommon form of cancer that grows on soft body tissue, as opposed to bone (another form of sarcoma). The tumor was determined to be aggressive growing with only minimal margins showing in the sample. She had already scheduled my appointment with an oncologist. Everyone thought it was a cyst, but I had cancer, and still would if my ego had not stepped in. I believed it was a cyst, as did every person I knew and every doctor in my medical chain. We were all wrong. Everyone was wrong.

It took the path lab about a week to complete their review. The only proof anyone had that I had cancer was a scientific lab report. After more time and referrals, I ended up with a sarcoma surgeon. Wait and see was one treatment option, but not the one I chose. We decided on 25 radiation treatments to the affected area on my arm followed several weeks later by radical surgery to remove all soft tissue, including skin, from wrist to elbow. It turned out to be much less than that, but the removed area was about three inches long by two inches wide. I don’t know how deep. All removed tissue was sent to pathology for review.

Driving home after surgery I told my wife that all of this was based upon one lab report that may have been mistaken. It happens, maybe, right? If so, all this radiation and surgery and hospital stuff was for naught. Maybe I did not have cancer at all. I believed I did. I am a skeptic but in this case, wishful thinking is something I was willing to entertain. No one had questioned the first lab report.

After a few days I spoke with the sarcoma surgeon, and he reported that the second sample lab report was back and it indicated that residual cancer cells were present in the second sample, meaning that the original minimal margins had not removed all cancer. But he did. Now I had two reports claiming that sarcoma cancer had been in my body. That is all the proof anyone has, but now everyone agrees that the lump on my arm was cancer, although one doctor explained that it may have originally started as a benign cyst and later became malignant. I don’t know. Maybe.

There was a lump. It was removed (twice) and bombarded with radiation. But the only proof I had was what others had told me after pathology had weighed in. I believe I had cancer and now I take regular tests to monitor for more. I believe this because I have reports written by experts I have never met. I don’t know how the lab tested the first or second sample or made their determinations.

I have read a lot about sarcoma. I have read much more about the existence of a god or gods and how humans should believe and behave because one or more of these gods exist. I have no scientific report. No one claims to have seen the God of Abraham, not even Abe. Scripture was written by men, or perhaps women, we don’t really know who wrote it. The only proof anyone offered regarding god is faith and miracles that allegedly (no evidence or proof of them) happened long ago.

What proof do I need? No one has ever seen a god. I have tried, but I get nothing. For now, I would want to see a god for myself, because I have no believable scientific evidence that any god exists.

Empty metaphysical arguments are not enough. Noisy religion is not enough. The unsupported opinion of the majority is no longer enough. The possibility of any gods existing is further exacerbated by what I experience, see, and hear in the real world.

I believe I had cancer based upon the evidence I have. I also believe I may be cancer free today. I’m optimistic for now. That is my faith, but now everyone wants evidence that is ironically referred to as no evidence of disease or NED.

If you have proof god exists, show me if you want. Otherwise, there are no gods because there is no evidence of god (NEG). I could be wrong. But if I went with what everyone thought to be true, I would still be walking around with deadly cancer growing in my arm. Maybe.

Bill

“Relationships prove that God exists.” ― Nityananda Das, Divine Union
(Well now, that is about as good as it gets. Silly me! How’d I miss that?)

Review: Why Are You Atheists So Angry?

This is a review of Greta Christina’s 2012 self-published book titled, Why Are You Atheists So Angry: 99 Things that piss off the godless.

Bottom line up front (BLUF): I enjoyed finally reading this book. I learned from it, and I recommend it to any atheist, anyone who must deal with an atheist or atheism in any way, or who believes in a god or gods.

Jim recommended the book via blog comment. Greta Christina is a well-known atheist activist (writer and artist) who promotes activities to apostatize people away from religion. I reviewed the e-book version.

She begins the book with quotations from MLK and M. Gandhi supportive of anger as a motivating human force leading to constructive change.

In the intro, Greta explains her book, why she wrote it, and why she is angry. In Chapter 1, she lists the ninety-nine things she is angry about. I agree and especially liked what she said about reality, her criticism of religion, and of many religious people. She finishes the chapter saying that she could have listed 200, 500, or 100,000 things. 99 is enough.

The only thing I do not like about this book is the title. It’s misleading, applies only to the first chapter, and relates to why the author is angry. The book is much more and better than that. People are not angry because they are godless. They are angry because of things done in name of god or religion.

Chapter Two addresses challenges to her anger by answering questions from people of belief, something she does often in the book. Chapter Three explains why religion is at fault. Her main premise is that there is no reality check in religion, and bemoans how it makes people more vulnerable to deception and fraud.

In Chapter Four she aims her criticism at moderate and progressive religion, while Chapter Five pulls in New Age religions. In Six she involves the spiritual but not religious crowd. Chapter Seven captures ecumenicalism and interfaith (coexisties, my term) in her criticism. I acknowledge my agreement with virtually all of what I read.

In Chapter Eight Greta explains some reasons why she does not believe in God – an extra good chapter that does not align with the book’s title.

My favorite chapter was Nine, “Why ‘Religion is Useful’ is a Terrible Argument – The Santa Delusion.” I found her discussion enlightening and her arguments useful.

Chapter Ten explains why Gretta does what she does as an atheist activist. It’s a good explanation. Then, in Eleven she examines the validity of activism and champions each person doing his or her part, even if it is living as a good and descent human being. She accounts for the efficacy of that in Chapter Twelve.

Christina dedicated Chapter Thirteen to talking about anger and compassion. It’s short. So is Fourteen, which compels further action on the part of atheists.

Chapter Fifteen is an extensive list of resources – a good one, but this book has been out for seven years and has a lot of blog posts in it. I checked out some of the blogs and found them active and well, except one.

Greta’s blog reports that she is taking a break from writing, but it is linked (click) here. She has instructions on how to order any format of the book (click) here.

https://freethoughtblogs.com/ is also good with many resources and blogs listed. Try it.

Two good resources for looking stuff up are The Skeptic’s Dictionary; and The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, a fun bible source.

“…One of the things that makes me angriest about religion is the way it makes people trivialize reality in favor of their wishful thinking. … I care passionately about reality, and get ticked off when people treat it like a petty nuisance. … Every unsupported belief you hold makes you more vulnerable to others…and less likely to value skepticism and critical thinking at all.” All quotations from the book by Greta Christina.