Creationism Debate Q&A

My video review of the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham discusses the majority of the debate, except for the final question-and-answer portion.  It was an important part of that night, and took nearly half of the debate time.  To streamline the review, I decided to handle the questions one by one here on the blog, rather than in video form.

Each question was written in by an audience member, and was addressed to either Ken or Bill, who then had two minutes to answer.  Then, the other got a one-minute chance to answer that same question.  Ken Ham went first, and then they alternated, with a total of sixteen questions in all.

The questions are verbatim, but the answers are not direct quotes (unless stated).   I’ll give a paraphrased answer from each debater so you can get a sense of what they said in their one-to-two minutes.  I'll offer further criticisms and comments in red text.  Obviously you should watch the full debate yourself before coming to any conclusions.

Question 1:  How does Creationism account for the celestial bodies moving further and further apart, and what function does that serve in the “Grand Design”

            Ken: Our Creation scientists observe the universe expanding, as do the traditional scientists, and the Bible says God stretches out the heavens.  This is another example of how observational science proves Creationism.  As to “why” God did it that way, I can’t answer that, but the Bible says that God made the heavens for his glory and to tell us how great and powerful he is.  And looking at this awesome power demonstrated by an infinite God makes you feel small, and makes you think about how special we are that God considers this planet so significant that he created us knowing we would sin and stepped into history to die for us to forgive us and let us live forever.

            Bill: We’re all born with a desire to know the answer to the question ‘why’.  To a Creationist, when your religion gives you the answer -- when it says "He made the stars also" -- that’s a satisfying answer to you.  You stop looking for reasons (even though religion is supposed to explain the “why” while science explains the “how”).  You give up on wanting to know.  To me, I’m driven to learn the truth.  (Bill also challenges Ken in the last few seconds of his time to deliver an example of something in the Creation model that predicts something that will happen in nature, once again trying to get him to address his earlier points.) 

Question 2:  How did the atoms that created the Big Bang get there?

            Bill: This is the mystery that drives us.  It’s what makes us keep looking, keep searching.  When I was young, it was believed the universe was slowing down in its expansion.  Scientists conducted experiments and took observations to find out the rate of the supposed deceleration, but they discovered that it is in fact accelerating.  And do you know why?  No, nobody knows why!  This is what drives us to find out!  Imagine a student from your local school who is excited about science and pursues a career in it, and one day discovers the answer to that deep mystery.  To us scientists and searchers this is wonderful and compelling and what makes us get up in the morning -- the Creationist just says, “God did it” and goes back to sleep.

            Ken: I just want to let you know that there is a book out there that actually tells us where matter came from, and the very first sentence in that book says “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”.  And really that’s the only thing that makes sense.  Matter can never produce information.  No matter how much energy you put into a stick, it will never create life.  The Bible tells us that the things we see are made from things that are unseen: an infinite creator god.  The only thing that makes logical sense!

Question 3: The overwhelming majority of people in the scientific community have presented valid, physical evidence…to support evolutionary theory.  What evidence, besides the literal word of the Bible supports Creationism?

            Ken: I often hear that the majority believes there is evidence for evolution, but it’s not the majority who is the judge of truth.  Just because the majority believes something doesn’t mean it’s true.  Observational science supports the biblical predictions, as I’ve shown before.  If the Bible is right, that we’re all descendants of Adam and Eve, there’s one race of humans; science has shown that.  If the Bible is right and God made kinds...I talked about that in my presentation.  Really that question comes down to, there are aspects about the past that you can’t scientifically prove because you weren’t there, but observational science in the present does.  Understanding the past is a whole different matter.

            Bill: If anybody makes a discovery that changes the way we view natural law, scientists embrace that person.  That’s the greatest thing in scientific thought: to be challenged and shown where we’re wrong.  You may have misunderstood something in evolution -- it’s the method by which we add complexity.  The energy we get from the sun is used to make life-forms more complex. (That last point was to Ken’s claim in his previous answer that matter can’t create complexity.)

Question 4: How did consciousness come from matter?

            Bill: Don’t know.  Another great mystery.  The joy of discovery drives us to find these things out.  We don’t know where consciousness comes form, but we want to learn.  I challenge the young people to investigate that question, and I remind the taxpayers and voters that if we do not embrace the process of mainstream science, we will fall behind economically as a nation.

            Ken: I just want to let you know that there is a book out there that does document where consciousness came from.  In that book, it says that the one who made us breathed into man and made him a living being.  That’s where consciousness came from: God gave it to us.  I have a mystery, Bill: you talk about the joy of discovery, but you say that when you die, it’s all over.  And if you believe that, then what’s the point of being alive and making discoveries in the first place?  I love the joy of discovery because this is God’s creation and I want to find out more about it for man’s good and for God’s glory.

(There's nothing really to do here.  Bill is showing why we use science, and Ken is saying "God Did It!"  You can't convince these people.)

Question 5: What, if anything, would ever change your mind?

            Ken: I’m a Christian.  I can’t prove it to you, but God has shown me himself through his Word and the person of Jesus Christ.  I admit that’s where I start from.  I challenge people to go and test that, you can make predictions based on that, you can check the prophesies in the Bible.  I can’t prove it to you, all I can say to someone is, if the Bible really is what it claims to be: then check it out.  The Bible says if you come to God he will reveal himself to you, and as Christians, you can say we know.  So as far as the word of god is concerned, no.  No one's ever gonna convince me that the word of God is not true.  We build models based on the Bible and they’re not subject to change.  The facts can’t be disputed; only the methods by which those facts occur can be disputed because we observe in the current world and can’t observe in the past. (Ken then asks Bill to answer this question, as if he’s forgotten that they’ve been doing that for the last four questions.  It’s a telling bit that reveals further illustrates how much he wants to get the topic off of his unquestionable faith.  I encourage you to watch him answer this question.  From the very beginning you can tell he is uncomfortable and having a hard time figuring out how to answer.  I think it’s because he knows his answer is close-minded and groundless: No, nothing will change my mind because I really believe in Jesus and don’t make me think about it, next question!)

            Bill: One piece of evidence.  Show me one out-of-place fossil (such as a rabbit in the Precambrian, as Haldane said) or evidence that the stars appear to be far away but they’re not.  We would need evidence that you can somehow reset atomic clocks and keep protons from becoming neutrons.  Bring on any of those things and you would change my mind immediately.  (Once more, Bill challenges Ken:) What can you prove?  You’ve spent your time coming up with explanations about the past.  What can you predict and prove in a conventional sense?

Question 6: Outside of radiometric methods, what scientific evidence supports your view of the age of the Earth?

            Bill: The age of stars I guess?  Radiometric dating is pretty compelling.  There were attempts in the past to try to find how the earth could be old enough for evolution to have taken place.  Then radioactivity was discovered.  This question to me is akin to saying, “if things were any other way, things would be different”.  Radiometric dating works, protons become neutrons, and that’s our level of understanding today.  These are provable facts.  The idea that there was a flood four thousand years ago is not provable and I think that there is ample evidence that disproves it.  And Ken, you haven’t addressed my point about how the various skulls support evolutionary theory.  (Bill was cut off there at the end for time, but I think that like the last question was Ken’s stumbling block, this one was Bill’s.  He seemed to have a hard time answering the question, and like Ken did, at the end he tried to divert the topic away.  Of course, Bill was stating provable fact and when you’re doing that it’s hard to keep from just doing that.  But I think he could have answered the question better with the fact that we use a variety of dating methods that all support one another.  When you have different sources pointing to the same relative time-frame, it makes a more convincing argument.)

            Ken: There was no earth rock dated to get the date of 4.5 billion years.  People think that, but they actually dated meteorites and because they assumed they were the same age as the earth left over from the formation of the solar system, that’s where that date comes from.  Look at my slide again as proof. There’s no dating method that proves young or old. (Ken is engaging in misinformation here to make it seem like scientists don't check these things constantly.  Is it reasonable to think that no earth rock has ever been dated, or that it would be difficult to just go out and do so?  What Ken is disingenuously alluding to is that the oldest rocks we've ever found came from meteorites that are 4.54 billion years old.  Earth rock has been dated to 4.47 billion years -- so yeah, 4.5 billion, Ken)

Question 7: Can you reconcile the change in the rate at which the continents are now drifting verses the rate at which they must have traveled 6K years ago to reach where they are now?

            Ken: This again illustrates what I’m talking about with regards to observational science vs historical science.  I’m not an expert here, but we have Creationists with PhD's and they’ve written papers on this stuff.  If you look at the plates today and you assume that the rate has always been that way, that’s an assumption and you can’t prove that.  That’s historical science.  We would believe in “catastrophic plate tectonics” as a result of the Flood and what we’re seeing now is a remnant of that catastrophic movement.  (And this is a direct quote:) “We do not deny the movement, we do not deny the plates; what we would deny is that you can use what you see today as a basis for just extrapolating into the past.”  (I’ve made a video that shows Ken Ham in his own words stating that, on the one hand you can’t assume laws worked in the past as they do today, and on the other hand God created the laws to be unchanging and that gave us the basis for doing science, and the writings from Creation scientists further proves this.)

            Bill: One of the reasons we think that the continents are drifting apart is sea floor spreading in the mid-Atlantic: the earth’s magnetic field has reversed over the millenia, and as it does it leaves a signature in the rocks as the continental plates drift apart, and so you can measure the speed – that’s how we real scientists do things.

Question 8: Favorite color?

            Bill: Green.  It’s an irony that green plants reflect green light.  Most of the light from the sun is green and yet they reflect it, it’s a mystery.  Science is cool!

            Ken: (points to his shirt) Observational science: blue.

(Time for some comedic relief, I suppose.  I found it telling that even though it was a lame question, Bill used it to continue his point about how science fosters our curiosity.)

Question 9: How do you balance the theory of evolution with the second law of thermodynamics, and what is that exactly?

            Bill: It’s basically where energy decays to heat.  The fundamental flaw in this question is that the earth is not a closed system, it’s powered by the sun.  It’s that energy that drives living things.

            Ken: You can have all the energy you want, but energy or matter will never produce life. God imposed information and a language system and that’s how we have life.  Before man sinned, there was decay such as in digestion, but after the Fall things are running down and God doesn’t hold everything together as he did back then. (Ken answered this scientifically-based question with complete religion-infused non-answers.  He explained entropy by saying God doesn't keep everything working like it used to!  That's like saying objects float in space because God isn't pushing them down. Mind-numbing!)

Question 10: Hypothetically, if evidence existed that caused you to admit that the earth is older than 10,000 years and that creation did not occur over six days, would you still believe in God, and the historical Jesus, and that Jesus was the son of God?

            Ken: I’ve been emphasizing all night: you cannot ever prove the age of the earth using science in the present, so there is no hypothetical.  We can make assumptions but you can’t ultimately prove the age of the universe.  You can see there are methods that contradict the billions of years, and as the creation scientists said in my video earlier, there’s nothing in science that contradicts a young earth.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the reason I believe this is because of the Bible’s account of origins.  There is no hypothetical, bottom line. (Ken might as well have had his fingers in his ears and going "nana-nana-na no it's not no it's not nana-nana-na I can't hear you!")

            Bill: You can prove the age of the earth with great robustness by using the universe around us.  Ken wants us to take his word for it that his interpretation of an ancient book is more compelling than what you and I can observe around us today with our own eyes.  Ken, you asserted that life can’t come from non-life – are you sure?  Are you sure enough to say that we shouldn’t look for life on other planets, that it’s a waste?  One again, what can you predict, what can you tell us about the future, not just your ideas about the past?

Question 11: Is there room for God in science?

            Bill: Billions of people embrace science and are religious.  Everyone has a cell phone, uses medicine, and befits from agriculture.  So if you reconcile those two things, that’s not really connected to your belief in a higher power.  I see it as a separate point, and I see no incompatibility between religion and science for each person.  The problem I have is that Ken wants us to take his religious word for it in place of what we can observe on our own. (Here, Bill tried to stay away from theology.  While it's true that one can believe in both God and science, the idea of theism isn't scientific.  But Bill didn't need to go into all of that, and did a good job of keeping on the real point: Ken just says the bible is true, even when it is contradicted by things any person could see.)

            Ken: I think God is necessary for science.  We love science here at Answers In Genesis.  You talked about cell phones and satellites and technology, I agree – those are things that can be done in the present with observational science.  In order to do science you have to assume the uniform laws of nature and logic, and where does that come from if the universe is here by natural processes?  The bible and science go hand-in-hand, but inventing things is very different from talking about our origins.

 

Question 12: Do you believe the entire Bible should be taken literally?

            Ken: I would need to know what that person meant by literally.  If you meant “naturally”, then yes.  If it’s history, as Genesis is, you take it as history.  If it’s poetry, as in the Psalms, you take it as poetry.  You take what is written in the context that it is written in and let it speak to you.  The bible says that all scriptures are inspired by god.  You have to take the bible as a whole.  If it’s really the word of god, then there’s not going to be any contradictions, which there’s not.  And Jesus said marriage is between one man and one woman. (Ken has a Clinton-esque "what is is" moment with this one.  He, like many others, take literally what they want, and things they don't agree with are figurative.)

            Bill: When the facts contradict the things you take as literal interpretations, and then you want me to take other parts of your bible as literal, it's unsettling.

Question 13: Have you ever believed that evolution was accomplished via a higher power? [Literally: Have you ever believed that evolution partook through evolution?]

            Bill: Intelligent design has a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of nature.  Nature is bottom up design, not top down.  If you found a watch on a beach, you’d recognize it was designed.  But that’s not how nature works.  Nature has its mediocre designs eaten by its good designs, and the perception that there’s a designer isn’t needed because we have model that makes predictions and repeatable, testable claims.

            Ken: Bill needs to show some new function that arose that was not previously possible from the genetic information that was already there.  There’s no new information or function that can be added to a kind via evolution, and there is no example that you can give that shows this.

Question 14: Name one institution, business, or organization (other than a church, amusement park, or the Creation museum) that is using any aspect of Creationism to produce its product.

            Ken: Any scientist that is using the scientific method is using Creation!  They’re borrowing from a Christian worldview.  Because, in a naturally arising universe there can’t be logic and you couldn’t trust the laws of nature.  A lot of scientists in the past were Creationists.  And if we don’t teach our children about this, they’re not going to be innovative or come up with inventions to advance our culture. (Ad hoc arguments, appeals to authority, and general misunderstanding of real science from Ken here.  I find it hilarious that he claims we couldn't trust the laws of nature in a natural system.  That's precisely why they're the laws of nature!  And if they changed all the time, they wouldn't be laws -- which are descriptive, not proscriptive, Ken.)

            Bill:  The reason I don’t accept the Creation model is because it has no predictive quality.  Many people are religious, but not all of them share the same religious views as you do.  What happens to those people? Are they doomed? (Oh Bill, don't get into grade-school theology here.  Stick to holding him accountable for claiming books trump eyes.)

Question 15: Since evolution teaches that man is growing smarter over time, how can you explain the numerous evidences of man’s high intelligence in the past?

            Bill: Evolution doesn’t say we’re getting smarter.  Survival of the fittest doesn’t mean those who are the most physically strong or the smartest will survive.  It means those that fit into the environment the best.  Sure, our capacity to reason has taken us to where we are now, but if the right germ shows up, we can be taken out.  It has nothing to do with smarts.

            Ken: I remember one of my professors at university was going to give us an example of evolution, and he showed us cave fish that are blind.  He said, 'look these fish have evolved not to see.  They’re evolving because those who are living in this dark cave had ancestors who had eyes and now these ones don’t', and I said, 'but now they can’t do something that they could do before!'  They might have an advantage in this dark cave now, but it could be that those who had eyes got a disease and died out and those with a mutation to have no eyes survived.  (Direct quote:) "It’s not survival of the fittest; it’s survival of those who survive."  You’re not getting new information or new function.

Question 16: What is the one thing, more than anything else, upon which you base your belief?

            Ken: The bible.  It’s the most unique book out there.  There’s no other religious book that talks about an infinite God, the origin of the universe, the origin of matter, the origin of light, the origin of darkness, the origin of day and night, the origin of the earth, the origin of dry land, the origin of plants, the origin of the sun/moon/stars, the origin of sea creatures, the origin of flying creatures, the origin of land creatures, the origin of man, the origin of woman, the origin of death, the origin of sin, the origin of marriage, the origin of different languages, the origin of clothing, the origin of different nations – it’s a very specific book with a detailed account of history.  And if that history is true and so is the rest of the book, then that means man is a sinner, and he needs the saving power of Jesus Christ who died for you so that you can live forever with God.  If this book is true -- and has no contradictions, which it doesn't -- it should explain what we see in the world today.  There was a global flood; yes, we see fossils.  There was the Tower of Babel; yes, we have different languages around the world, and they have flood legends and creation legends very similar to the Bible.  There’s prophecy you can look at as well.  The bible says, if you seek God, you’ll find him.

            Bill: Science.  I base my belief on the information and the process that we call science.  It fills me with joy to make discoveries, and to know that we can even ask the questions and pursue the answers.  It’s astonishing to think that we are one of the ways for the universe to know itself.  We are created from the universe, it’s in all of us.  And we want to know if we are alone in the universe.  It’s the process of science that will help us find this another other things out.  If we abandon all that we’ve learned through science, if we stop using it and stop looking for the answers, we as a nation will be out-competed by other countries.  We have to keep science education in science classes.

###

So that was the other half of the debate.  It was very telling and reveled the positions of both sides a little better than their illustrated presentations were.  Here are some of my final thoughts:

• Bill said a lot by his facial expressions during the times Ken was answering questions.  Bill kept things very formal, and did a good job of sticking on point, only getting off into the you-can't-be-serious-how-is-your-religion-true avenues once or twice.  But you could see on his face at times, he wanted to.  You could see him saying to himself, "oh really?" and "you've got to be kidding me!"
• You could tell Bill Nye doesn't debate these people often.  He had questions that were rudimentary and didn't use answers that are generally presented, some of which I pointed out in my comments.
• Creationism is a thought process that is “almost there”.  Creationists agree that science works…but you can’t make assumptions that things worked in the past just because the do today.  And they agree that evolution happens…just not enough to make one thing so different from it’s "kind" that it becomes something distinct.  And that the genes for a life-form to have incredible complexity are all already within it, apparently eschewing the mechanism of mutation.

See other Creationist questions from the audience here.


-STA

Put Down Your Old KJV Red Letter, The Good Book Just Got a Whole Lot Better

The Holy Bible.  It's been translated into 2400 languages and over 300 English translations alone, but when you get right down to it, they all contain the same boring, outdated, hard-to-get-through dry text.


But not any more!


How Many Meters in a Foot?
Now there's a way to read about the loving power of the Ultimate Father-Figure in Kyle Holt's "The Bible in Rhyme".  Yep.  Rhyme.

How many ten-year-olds can stand to sit through a dreary sermon that involves phrases like: "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."

Ugh.  Can't you feel your eyes glazing over?

Now take a gander at this little ditty from Genesis 3, with rhyme:

"Never will your kind view Eden again.

All are shut out for your cognizant sin.

Man, you shall toil and work in the earth.

And woman, your pain will come giving birth.

You’re banished! Get out! All three of you go!"

Then God set a guard at the Tree of Life so

we’d not be let in, but always we’d know

that this was how woman and man fell so low.

You can't help but try to sing it as you dance and smile, reading about God's wonderful forgiving spirit.  Be sure to pick up your copy today, and get your kids involved!  They'll have a great time learning how to regurgitate doctrine while beginning a long-lasting emotional attachment to ideas that make them feel good.  'Cause come on, I dare you to read this and not feel good:

Though everyone knew of the things God had spoken,

the men muttered angrily, "Our God is broken!

Why worship Him? Can He not see our power?

We're greater than Him. Come, let's build a tower

and show Him that He should be worshiping us."

But God saw their plan, and was filled with disgust.

"Man never changes, so I must change him."

So he twisted their tongues and confused all of them.

And he scattered mankind, confounding the rabble

and that's why it's called the Tower of Babel.

(From page 7, Genesis 9:18 - 11:32.  And remember kids, the perfect word of the Living God contains ZERO contradictions or errors because it was inspired by a god who does not author confusion!)

I dread how they sugar-coat the Numbers conquests.

-STA

Divine Slang, or How "Soon" Means "A Really Long Time"

You Better Watch Out...
When I was a Christian, I was swept up into the idea that I was living in the "end times".  The Son of Man would be flying in on clouds of glory, probably in just a couple years.  This was back before Y2K, and so we all thought that sounded like a date Jesus would pick.  So we all got ready, prayed, and stayed awake, fearing and waiting.  And waiting.

And waiting...

Okay, so not the turn of the century.  That's fine -- but it will be soon!  Just look at all the wars, earthquakes, death, pestilence, and hardships around the world!  Kids are listening to heavy metal and cutting themselves!  You can't leave your front door unlocked anymore!  The world is turning to shit!  The end is neigh!!!!!!!!

It wasn't until I escaped Christianity that I realized this was an ongoing thing.  Really.  Since the dawn of Christianity, believers have been claiming the end of the world was just around the corner.  I love browsing the website "A Brief History of the Apocalypse" whenever I hear a doomsday preacher on TV or read an end-times blog post.  The phenomenon of predicting the end of the world is almost as old as the world itself.

Back In 5 Mins  --J.C.
Examining the bible without my Jesus goggles, I started to understand things a little clearer.  Things like Jesus's quotes in Matthew.  "Immediately after the distress of those days 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken'... Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door...I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened...I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes...For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

That's a pretty clear indication that Jesus expected to return within his follower's lifetime.  I find it both amusing and startling how every generation thinks of itself as the quoted "this generation".  I guess it makes since to want to be "the generation" that gets to see Glory coming.

Even the apostles of Christ felt similar sentiments. James (5:8) instructs his fellow believers to "be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near."  In fact, a lot of the New Testament is full of this sort of "be ready to go" language.

"For in just a little while, 'He who is coming will come and will not delay'." -Hebrews 10:37

"The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed." -Romans 13:11

"...time is short...For this world in its present form is passing away." -1 Corinthians 7:29

"The end of all things is near." -1 Peter 4:7

Dude, You are Soooooooo Fuggin' Late!
The looming threat of Judgment Day is held over believers by one another and by themselves.  The other day I drove past a peeling, weather-worn church sign and I though, It never crosses a Christian's mind when they have to pay for a brand new billboard that says, "Jesus is coming SOON!" when the old one is decrepit and broken and has been sitting there for the past 20 years.  Let's face the facts, people: Jesus promised to return soon and very soon, and that was nearly 2,000 years ago.  I'm not really sure why Christians need to keep that sense of urgency, though it may have something to do with the fact that their god died 2000 years ago (if he ever really existed in the first place).  Otherwise, it's a moot and unostentatious ending.

 -STA

Unholy Word: Slaughter the Infidels, Rape the Girls

The God of the Old Testament is extremely bloodthirsty.  All over the bible, we can find stories of tribe murdering tribe in the name (or usually by the direct command) of God.  Here's just one example and this one makes a great bedtime story.

Bathe Her, And Bring Her To Me
Read over Numbers 31.  In it, Moses is instructed by God to have the Israilites kill all of the Midianite children, any child still in the womb, all of the men, and every woman who as slept with a man.

Let's ignore all the problems involved with an all-loving God ordering these "hits" and look at how the story plays out.  After the Israilites kill all the Midianite men, they take the women, children, livestock, and plunder back to the camp. But Moses is furious with them. "Kill all the male children! And kill all the women who have had sex with a man!' Moses orders.

And the best part of the spoils of war..."But spare the lives of the virgin girls. Keep them for yourselves!"

I can raise the issue of keeping other people as property, but I won't.  I can raise the issue of men doing as they please to virgin girls, but do I really need to? I could ask, "How would they know who the virgins were?" but my imagination brings dark imagery.

The story claims there were 32,000 virgins that were divided up among the camp. Half were assigned to those who fought in the war and Moses gave the head priest the portion set aside for God (32 girls), as ordered by God himself.

Again, as with all stories brought to light in this series, the immorality is stomach-turning.  Every time I read these stories I find it inconceivable that the book which contains them is lauded as the pinnacle of human morality and a guide for how we should live our lives.  The fact that we've learned that the kind of behavior taken by Moses is wrong is not due to God (for he is supposedly the one ordering such massacre), but rather due to where we actually get our morality from -- not from any gods, but from society, observation, empathy, media, upbringing, history, and instinct.


-STA

Unholy Word: A Love To Die For

With the atrocity that is "National Bible Week" in full swing (though I haven't seen any effects of it, thank goodness), let's delve into another look at this Unholy Word.

Dinah Blow Your Horn
Today the tale is from Genesis 34.  Dinah, a Jewish girl, is raped by a man named Shechem. After he rapes her, he goes to his father and pleads, "I've fallen in love with her, you gotta get her for me, I must marry her!"

Shechem's father goes to Dinah's father, Jacob, and says "My son raped your daughter...but he loves her, so let's have them marry. Even better: let's swap daughters between our two tribes and form a peace treaty! We'll rule this area together and be strong!"  He is so infatuated with her that he asks, "Set the bride-price as high as you want and we'll pay."

The sons of Jacob were there and they said, "Sorry, our sister can't marry anyone who isn't circumcised. That's just the way it is. As a matter of fact, if you want to create a peace treaty, your whole tribe will have to convert and be circumcised."

Well evidently Dinah was Helen-of-Troy hot, because not only did Shechem agree to be circumcised, his entire tribe took the snip in order to seal the deal and make up for raping Jacob's daughter. That's real dedication!

Three days later, while all the men of this tribe were sitting around sore, two of Jacob's sons come in and slaughter all of them. They kill every man in the city, including Shechem and his father. Then they grabbed all these men's sisters and wives and headed home. Then the rest of Jacob's sons showed up and plundered the city, taking livestock food, children, everything.

Jacob was mad at his sons; they'd runed any chances at a peace treaty with any other tribe -- who would trust them again? His sons said, "So we should have just let them treat our sister like a whore?"  There's nothing more on the story, it just ends there.

Too Many Bad Ideas
I guess the moral is that if your family member gets raped and your original ludicrous demands are met, you're justified in killing, pillaging, and enslaving to get even.  But I could be wrong; like a lot of these old stories, simple moral points tend to get added and mixed.  To some the point is not to disobey your father and the consequences of killing your new-found friends. Or maybe it's a sad story about how a guy lost his one true love.  Its a tortured jumble of lessons that weren't being thought out as they were being put together.

Of course, I can understand anyone being enraged to the point of murder at the rape and forced marriage of your sister.  (Yes, keep in mind that woman didn't get a say in who thy married.  They were treated as property and bargaining chips.)  But the actions they took were unjustified and immoral.  These kinds of stories fill this antiquated book that so many will point to as being the backbone of modern American society and good moral values.  If only these people would just read the thing!

The bible offers more instructions on rape in Deuteronomy 22 if you weren't sure how to get away with it.

Good stuff.  Read it to your kids or at the dinner table between the turkey and the pumpkin pie.


-STA

The Bible Warns Against Learning

Time for a quick Friday rant. The bEarthDay thing has got me thinking about the humorous side that religion brings, but I can't help but shake the fact that it's ultimately detrimental to society as a whole.  It seems I'm always talking about this: religion is counter-productive to the advancement of human understanding and knowledge. We cannot learn as a whole as long as we are shackled by the chains of this way of thinking -- or should I say, not thinking.

I'm targeting the bible here, but all religions are guilty of this. The fact that Christianity is based on the idea of how wrong it is to learn something new. The Genesis story tells of humanities first and largest sin: gaining forbidden knowledge. All throughout the bible, we can find passages that strictly condemn thinking. Proverbs 3:5-6, Ecclesiastes 1:18, Philippians 2:14, Romans 1:22, and 1 Corinthians 1:19,27 are just a few examples of this wonderful guidebook that about one third of the planet identifies as the backbone of society. The bible states very clearly: don't think for yourself.

The idea that thinking for yourself is fundamentally against faith or the laws of the creator of the universe is dangerous and it squelches any hope of advancement for humankind. The fact that you're reading this right now is testament to the power of understanding brought on -- not by the wisdom of an almighty ghost -- but by the labors of reason and the drive to understand reality. I find it simultaneously absurd and terrifying that people fight tooth and nail to try to keep us in the Dark Ages by blocking off any progress in the battle against ignorance.


-STA

Happy bEarth Day!

Way back in 1658, Archbishop James Ussher determined that the world was created precisely at 9am, October 23, 4004 BC.  So today is the official creation day and the earth is a ripe young 6012 years old!  Men of God have faith, and that counts just as much as evidence, right?


-STA

The Missing Bible

I just stayed at a hotel in Branson, Missouri-- the G-rated Las Vegas. The town is filled with nothing but "family" shows and activities; there's a lot of brochures for shows with the little Jesus fish on them. I couldn't wait to play hide-the-bible at the hotel.

Seek And Ye Shall Find
If you haven't played that game, you really should consider it on your next hotel stay. See, the cleaning staff have to put everything back the way it was before you got there, in preparation for the next guest. And I mean everything: the towels are folded a certain way, the blinds are set to a specific angle, even the TV is put back on the default channel and the remote put back in its place. They essentially reset the room.

You usually find a bible in the bedside drawer, and if you're an infidel like me (or just mischievous in general) try to find a better place for the bible before you check out. Make it difficult for them to find; put it behind the TV or way under the bed in the corner, or wrapped up in the towels. (I generally tend to not damage it too much; it's not my rightful property and I respect that.) You could even write a letter and put it deep within the pages, so the next person who opens it will find your message. Whatever works best for you.

Blessed Are Those Who Do Not See
Anyway, I was all looking forward to playing, seeing as how the town seemed to carry that nauseatingly sweet air of righteousness just under its surface...when come to find out, my hotel room didn't have a friggin bible in it!

Maybe it was just a fluke, or maybe the previous occupant kept (or destroyed) it. Or maybe the FSM was watching over me and, knowing that the World's Largest Toy Museum had blatantly attempted to shove Christianity down my throat, supernaturally hid the vile tome from mine eyes. Whatever the cause, I was extremely grateful and a little sad at not getting to play my favorite hotel game.

Moral: Don't visit Branson's Toy Museum if you don't like being proselytized to.

-STA

W's Religious War

Recently declassified briefings from the Bush administration further reveal the link between our current war and religion. The cover sheets to these documents are adorned with pictures of troops and other war images captioned with quotes from the Christian bible. These briefings were delivered by Rumsfeld to the White House. Although this propaganda wasn't directly sent to the troops themselves, the fact of the matter is that those in power believed war was the correct course of action because of their religious belief. I think the images speak for themselves.


-STA

God Is Love

Here's a poem from a guy I'm subscribed to on YouTube:
-----------------

He tempted Eve with a forbidden tree
God is Love
He allows Satan to wander free
God is Love

He killed newborn babies with a worldwide flood
God is Love
He just cant get enough fresh blood
God is Love

He killed poor Uzzah just for saving the ark
God is Love
He hated vegetables and gave Cain a mark
God is Love

He fried little babies in Sodom and Gomorrah
God is Love
He killed thousands more in the Amalekite slaughter
God is Love

He caused Davids newborn son to die
God is Love
Yet honored Rahab for her lie
God is Love

He let the devil ruin Job
God is Love
So he could brag and he could boast
God is Love

He hardened poor old Pharaohs heart
God is Love
Condemned by God, doomed from the start
God is Love

But with escape he was not content
God is Love
All firstborn died before they went
God is Love

He spared not one poor Canaanite
God is Love
The newborn went without a fight
God is Love

He killed forty-two boys with a grizzly bear
God is Love
Because Elisha had no hair
God is Love

He killed Ananias and Sapphira too
God is Love
For holding back their portion due
God is Love

So to cap off all that he had done
God is Love
He tortured and killed his only son
God is love?

© 2001, TruthSurge

The Terror of Ignorance

Most people are stupid. I've probably said a thousand times by now that the education in this country is atrocious, and our critical thinking skills are about on par with those of common mouse turds. I'm not entirely sure of it, but I'd be willing to bet a small fortune that religion (or at least, religiously-based thinking) is at the root of our collective ignorance.

"Duh buybull sez..."
That ignorance is of the most terrifying molds: self-imposed. The fact that ignorance is necessitated by religion, coupled with the modern life-altering "gifts" that science, technology, and otherwise intelligent and knowledgeable people have given us, should alone be enough for any sane person to loudly cast religion aside. As I've said in an earlier post, I feel that one of the worst things you could possibly do to yourself is to willfully shackle your mind. Evidence -- pure, unadulterated, on-the-nose evidence -- still isn't enough to make some people see the light, as it were.

So the story goes for the idiots in Waco, Texas, where atheist Bill Nye was literally booed during a lecture where he said that the moon reflects the sun's rays and gives off no light of its own. I mean...wow. Stop and think about that: there are actually grown human beings in this day and age...people with kids...who don't, can't, or don't want to understand that the moon doesn't make light. I suspect the latter, because it's not from a lack of education or some serious head trauma or something. It's because they believe in God. They think their God wrote a book and because it says that he "created two great lights" that any physical evidence, no matter how strong and solid, won't convince them otherwise.

"Jesus, please save us....from your people!"
The knowledge that people like that make up a majority of the electorate, are raising children, and have a say in the education of future generations makes me physically ill. After typing the above paragraph, I actually had to stop and go outside for a bit. Just like when politicians or judges simply ignore rules clearly stated in our Constitution, the realization that some (most?) people can't seem to put two and two together makes me wish there was another habitable continent on this planet that wasn't already filled with the likes of them.

Religion is to blame for the ignorance in Waco, surely. Religion is synonymous with ignorance; it means ignoring evidence and reason in favor of "this-is-how-it-is" doctrine from other morons who don't know what they're talking about. Christianity's book starts out with humans being ignorant, and the first attempt at knowledge warrants damnation of their kind. And think a little more on just how that story went down: you have two ignorant humans listening to opposing discussion (by a snake, no less). Now forget the symbolism, ridiculousness, and supposed sacredness of the text, and ignore the idea that the snake wasn't lying, etc. Just think about what the story implies. The worst thing you can do is talk to someone who doesn't believe what you believe. Ignorance is bliss.

And IGNORANT!


-STA

A Conversation with Yahweh

Just thought I'd share a video from a fellow YouTube user called NonStampCollector (if atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby)! It's actually his first video, and his twenty-two others are just as awesome. Enjoy!





-STA

Unholy Word: Rape My Daughter

Today's Unholy Word is one of the most disturbing stories I've ever heard. It can be found inside a book that Presidents place their hands on as they swear to uphold the values of our country. This same book is read to children as bedtime stories, and then to adults as a fountain of good moral character. This book is a backbone to the three biggest religions on the planet; millions seek guidance and wisdom from it. Here's a taste of what's in the Holy Bible.

Where You Goin', Woman?!
If you open to Judges 19, you'll read tell of a Levite who had a concubine (that's a woman who lives with a man and takes care of, other than his wife). She gets mad at him for some reason and wants to go back home to her father. Women, huh.

Sorry for the joking. It's the only way I've found to dull the appallingly sick feeling I get when I read this tale.

Anyway, the man goes after her and chases her to her father's house. The Levite brings with him another servant girl -- 'cause hey, I guy can't travel without his servants. When they arrive, her father welcomes the Levite and his servant girl in to stay for a while.



They stay for three nights and on the morning of the fourth day, as they were planning on leaving, the father insisted that they stay longer. Poor guy...maybe he just liked having company? So they stayed. Even on the fifth day they're trying to leave and the man is asking them to stay and rest and eat. They agree to eat dinner, but then they finally leave afterward, even though it is sunset and the man asked them to stay, again. Maybe he was having fun helping smooth things out with his daughter and her pimp?

Okay, up to this point all seems fairly okay. But now things get interesting.

What's for Dinner? Gang Rape? Oh...Okay
As I said, they set out around sunset after dinner, and as it got dark the man's servant asked if they could stop at the approaching Jebusite city and spend the night there. The Levite says that he doesn't want to stay "in a city of foreigners with people who are not Israelites" (19:12), and that they'll stop in Gibeah instead. Racist prick.

They trudge on and get to the city square of Gibeah, and eventually an old man offers to take them in for the night. He's real nice to them -- he takes them in, feeds their donkeys, washes their feet and gives them food and drinks. As they were enjoying themselves, the bible says "some worthless men of the town surrounded the house and pounded on the door, saying, 'Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him!' " I guess not everyone in the city was as courteous as the old man. Or perhaps they were a little too courteous, hmm?

The owner of the house comes out and says "No, my brothers, do not be so wicked! This man is my guest, so do not do such a shameful thing!" Finally, some sanity here.

"Here is my virgin daughter and [my guest's] concubine. Abuse them and do to them whatever you wish, but do not do such a disgraceful thing to this man!" Oh. Never mind.

The book relays that the Levite had to physically drag his concubine outside. Judges 19:25 says "The men raped her and abused her all night." Thanks, God!

Special Delivery
As dawn comes, they finally let her go and she crawls up to the door of the house and falls down. When her master awakes and goes outside, he sees her and tells her "Get up. Let's go!" but there was no response. So he put her corpse on his donkey and headed home.

Now, if you're any sort of dignified, sane, moral human being, you should be disgusted by what you've just heard. It should have curdled your stomach and made you second-guess reading a book like this to children. But oh no folks, it doesn't end there.

Chapter 19, verse 29 says that when he reached his house, the Levite took a knife and carved up his concubine and mailed the pieces all over the land of Israel. We're not told why or if anyone was damned or punished in any way for the events in this story.

God's a Terrible Editor
In fact, many feel that the story in Judges is actually a retelling of Lot's adventures in Genesis 19. The story is almost identical, except Lot's daughters (whom he gave to the angry mob for raping) weren't hacked up and sent around the coasts at the end. The story is most likely a retelling that got edited and added on to and mixed up during copying. This of course doesn't excuse any deity from wrong-doing either. On the one hand, if the story is accurate, gang rape and dismemberment is a sick way to provide moral guidelines, especially if this Levite was on God's team. On the other hand, if this story was a mistake, then you must admit that the bible contains errors. Either way, God doesn't look like a very respectful guy.


-STA

Unholy Word: Love Thy Father

To assume the truth of your opponent's worldview and then deconstruct their arguments from the inside out is a common and very effective way to argue. This series bypasses the need to first find out if the Judeo-Christian bible is credible and reliable. Instead it simply examines the stories and analyzes the flaws -- absurdities and all -- by taking it to its logical conclusions.

We continue the series with a story from Genesis featuring a man called Lot. This man was supposedly the most moral and upright person in the town of Sodom. In fact, everyone else in the town was so immoral that God sent fire to wipe it off the planet!

There's Incest In 'em Thar Hills!
After their city is destroyed and their mother is turned into salt, Lot's two daughters escape with him to a cave in the mountains. The night before this, Lot had offered his two virgin daughters to a mob to be raped (we'll cover this in a future Unholy Word). Apparently they're still really horny, because they proceed to get their father drunk and have sex with him...on two consecutive nights. Lot doesn't seem to be aware that these are his own daughters.

Genesis 19, verses 31-32 state: The elder said to the younger, "Our father is an old man, and there is no one here to marry us in the normal way of the world. Come on, let us ply our father with wine and sleep with him. In this way we can preserve the race by our father."


So the eldest daughter gets good ol' righteous dad hammered on enough wine to make him forget where he is and who he's with, and precedes to engage in a little father-daughter coitus. Any man of God would do the same, right?

When I Drink My Dick Hurts
The next day, the eldest tells her younger sister what she did, and advises that she do the same. So here's poor old Lot, just lost his wife, all his friends, and his hometown because of immorality. For the second day in a row now, he's getting shit-faced drunk and pleasured by some strange woman -- "though he was unaware of her coming to bed or leaving." (19:35) Have you ever been that drunk; so drunk you didn't realize you were having sex?

After that night, and presumably mysteriously to Lot, both of his daughters became pregnant. Maybe he thought that the guys from the mob knocked them up. Neither Lot nor his daughters are criticized here or anywhere else in the bible. He probably didn't know about Leviticus 18:6, so we should blame him, huh? Even 2 Peter 2:7-8 cites Lot as "just" and "righteous". Professor Richard Dawkins muses, "If this dysfunctional family was the best Sodom had to offer by way of morals, some might begin to feel a certain sympathy with God and his judicial brimstone."

Family Values From "The Good Book"
I suppose we are to look upon this fictional story as a metaphor of some kind. We're to understand that Lot's "race" seeded the nations of Moabites and Ammon, from each respective daughters' child -- two nations that are subsequently slaughtered by and/or for God. Some of you may be saying that it was the daughters who were wrong. If so, why did future-seeing God let them go when he was burning down Sodom and Gomorrah? Even still, I wouldn't call Lot blameless. Do you? After all, the poor girls just wanted their children to be good like daddy, and not heathen scum.


-STA