www.freethoughtperspective.net

WILLIAM HARWOOD

When Herod the Great died, a Judean delegation traveled to Rome to try to dissuade Augustus Caesar from appointing Herod’s son Archelaus king of Judea. When Augustus rejected the petition and gave the Jewish kingdom to Archelaus, it is a matter of record (¹) that Archelaus promptly executed 3,000 adherents of the faction that opposed him.

The anonymous author of the gospel called Luke utilized that incident in a parable that he put into the mouth of Jesus. He showed Jesus quoting Archelaus as saying, (19:27), “As for those enemies of mine who didn’t want me to be king over them, fetch them here and kill them in my presence.” Even though Luke detested Archelaus and used those words to portray him as a monster, some commentators—but no prominent biblical scholars—have cited, “Kill them in my presence,” as depicting Jesus’ personal philosophy. Apart from the fact that the incident is fiction and has no resemblance to anything the Jesus of history actually preached, such an interpretation is incompatible with the reality that Luke saw Jesus as his ultimate hero and would not have portrayed him as an admirer of mass murder.

There is, however, a parable elsewhere in Luke that indeed depicts Jesus unflatteringly, portraying him as a prototype Machiavelli. Luke showed Jesus preaching (16:1), “There was a human, a capitalist, who had a steward, and he received complaints about him, that he was wasting his property.” (²) Luke then described how the steward, knowing that he was about to be fired, summoned his employer’s debtors and unilaterally reduced their debts in the hope that one of them would be sufficiently grateful to hire him when his current employment was terminated (16:2-8). He showed Jesus praising the steward’s actions and telling his followers (16:9), “So I’m telling you: Use swindled money to buy yourselves companions, so that when it runs out they’ll accept you into their permanent residences.” Or to paraphrase the verse, “Rob those who can no longer be of use to use, and  use the stolen money to bribe those who are in a position to reward you for your deceit.”

It is not known where Luke derived such a fable, since it did not come from a source also utilized by Mark or Matthew. But Luke must at some level have recognized the fable’s negative implications, since he tried to soften it by adding his own interpretation (16:10-11), “Whoever is unfaithful in the little will also be unfaithful in the large, and whoever cheats for a little will cheat for a lot. So if you’ve been faithful with swindled money, who’s going to trust you with anything real?” The incompatibility of those two verses with the rest of the fable is the proof that the whole thing was not Luke’s invention. He repeated a story from an unknown source, and added his own highly dubious interpretation to make the fable conform to his conviction that Jesus’ endorsement of swindling must have had a more moral purpose.

(¹) Josephus, The Jewish War, Penguin Classics, p. 122.

(²) All quotations are from The Protestant Bible Correctly Translated, World Audience, 2009.

STEPHEN VAN ECK

The crypto-Fascists (and Christofascists) of the Republican Party are up to their old tricks again.

During the Clinton Administration, they embarked on an Impeachment Crusade in search of an offense. They were out to get him before he was even nominated! And they were willing to use all means, fair and foul. At first they poked into the old Whitewater mess, even though no illegality there could be used for impeachment, which covers only crimes committed WHILE IN OFFICE. But when that didn’t pan out, they ultimately settled for a cheap sex scandal. Thankfully, their coup  d’ etat failed.

Now Republicans are calling for a Special Prosecutor to poke into some innocuous “Sestak-Gate”. They’re claiming the Administration’s job offer to him is some sort of illegal bribe, when it definitely is not. It is totally fair game for them to offer a job to anyone, whether or not it would foreclose other options. Now if you wanted to work for Amalgamated Widgets, and  Consolidated Widgets offers you a job so you won’t benefit their rival, is that illegal? Not in the slightest. But the GOP is hoping to make it look that way to fool the American people. (A similar Rovian tactic succeeded in railroading former Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama for a non-illegal non-offense!)

Note that the Bush Administration actually bribed columnists Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher, with cash, to tout Administration policies. No Special Prosecutor there. No one was arrested. No one was fired, or even reprimanded. No one harped on it—certainly not FOX!

And Bush buying an endorsement from a Black minister (using the dubious Faith Based Initiative) is indistinguishable from a disguised bribe. There was even less-to-do over that. So let’s note the grotesque double standard here: Real bribes OK, non-bribe is grist for spinmeisters.

If the Republican Party takes over Congress, I guarantee they’ll make another ridiculous attempt to impeach over trumped-up piffle. The previous effort during the Clinton years distracted us from the looming threat of Al Qaeda. We cannot afford to replay such nonsense again, or we’ll deserve the rewards of our foolishness.

A. J. MATTILL, Jr.

In this short study we focus our attention on a book known as The Book of Wisdom and The Wisdom of Solomon. Some claim that this Solomon was King Solomon of the tenth century BC/BCE. Others regard him as a writer of the first century BC/BCE. Here we shall refer to the author as Solomon, whoever he was and whenever he lived. The Wisdom of Solomon is neither in the Jewish canon of Scriptures nor in the Protestant canon, but it is in the canon of the Roman Catholic Church. Now we’ll sample thirteen of Solomon’s stupidities.

Stupidity One (7:1-2). Solomon wrongly asserts that in his mother’s womb he was molded into flesh in a ten-months’ period. Here Solomon accepts the opinion of the ancients about the period of pregnancy.

Stupidity Two (7:17-21). Solomon claims that God gave him unerring knowledge of existing things that he (Solomon) might know the organization of the universe, the operation of its elements, and the positions of the stars. What a stretch! The most highly trained scientists thousands of years after Solomon wouldn’t dare to boast like that.

Stupidity Three (9:2). Solomon ignorantly declares that God created humans to rule over the other creatures God made. Solomon’s attitude has encouraged humans to be cruel to animals and to kill them without restraint.

Stupidity Four (9:8). Solomon was stupid enough to believe that God ordered him to build a temple and an altar to practice brutal butcher-shop religion, pitiless packinghouse piety, and senseless slaughterhouse spirituality. Solomon’s God was merciless!

Stupidity Five (10:1). Solomon foolishly believed that Adam was the first man, for Solomon was ignorant of the evolution of species. We know of no first human but only of a long chain of animal forms gradually approximating humans.

Stupidity Six (10:4). Solomon was so uninformed that he accepted as fact Noah’s worldwide flood. Noah and the flood are figments of biblical imagination.

Stupidity Seven (10:7). Solomon in his ignorance of nature operating according to natural laws believed that God turned Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt (Genesis 19:24-26).

Stupidity Eight (10:10). Solomon was so benighted that he called Jacob a “just man.” Solomon overlooked the fact that Jacob lied to his father four times and deceived him three ways (Genesis 27).

Stupidity Nine (10:15). Solomon should have known better than to call Israel “a holy people and a blameless race.” Contrast Exodus 32:9-10 and Deuteronomy 9:6 which called Israel “a stiff-necked people.”

Stupidity Ten (14:3-4). Solomon must have had the blinkers on when he declared that God “can save from any danger.” The harsh reality is that one tsunami follows another, and no supernatural power deigns to intervene.

Stupidity Eleven (15:2). Solomon made a foolish promise to God which was and is impossible for anyone, including Solomon, to keep: “We will not sin, knowing that we belong to you.” We inevitably sin because we are born self-centered.

Stupidity Twelve (16:2). Solomon thoughtlessly praises God for providing quail for the Israelites to eat. Evidently Solomon never heard of a basic principle of enlightened ethics, namely, reverence for life. Reverence for life means recognizing and respecting the fact that every living creature, including quails, has a strong will to live life at its highest and best and not to be eaten by other creatures. Solomon failed to devote his thoughts to the knowledge of life, his affections to the love of life, and his actions to the service of life.

Stupidity Thirteen (16:17). Solomon, with hardly a child’s knowledge of the cold-blooded universe in which we live and move and have our being, rashly assumed that “the universe fights on behalf of the just.” If the whole universe works for just people and just causes, why are unjust people and causes so often victorious?

Conclusion. These thirteen samples of Solomon’s stupidity should be enough to prove that Solomon was indeed stupid: benighted, ignorant, misinformed, and uninformed.

Keep on reading. Mattill, The Seven Mighty Blows to Traditional Beliefs, 1995; and a Cosmic Creed for the Current Century, 2007, both published by the Flatwoods Free Press, 750 Lum Fife Road, Gordo, AL 35466-3357

LELAND W. RUBLE

That’s right, she’s having a temper tantrum because she thinks not allowing a “National Day of Prayer” will lead to America turning into a godless socialistic and hedonistic republic. Sarah Palin, the political Houdini of the religious and demented political right, told her host Big Mouth Bill O’Reilly, in reply to a question concerning the National Day of Prayer—a Billy Graham successful effort to de-communize the USA—that some people are trying to enact a “fundamental transformation of America.”

She continued to assert the absurd notion that this country create laws based on the god of the Bible and the Ten Commandments. (It’s doubtful she is aware that disobeying any one of these ancient commands could result in death by stoning or some other barbaric form of punishment intended to kill the individual who disobeyed any one of the Ten C’s.) However, if she is aware of this fact, than she is more dangerous than the folksy motherly image she flaunts before the public. Palin is regarded by some on the religious and political right as not only a constitutional scholar, but also along with bubblehead Rush Limbaugh, crybaby Glenn Beck and the arrogantly opinionated Sean Hannity, as the religious right’s most prominent soothsayer.

Is she, as some have suggested, using her Tea Party notoriety to appeal to religious fundamentalists foaming at the mouth with the aspect of realizing their dream of turning America into a theocratic, fascist country not unlike what the Islamic Taliban once enjoyed in Afghanistan? Or does she just say goofy, absurd things to appease her audience of wacky Tea Baggers, hardcore conservatives, and blowhards like O’Reilly, because it assures her of a steady income on the political right talk-show circuit?

It’s not too far fetched to imagine that Palin actually believes most of the blathering nonsense that emerges from her mouth. And, to also believe that she tremendously enjoys being the recipient of funds that have turned her into an overnight millionaire with endless offers to speak at gatherings for the politically hysterical and deranged who feel neglected because policies of the Obama administration have slowed down their fascist and theocratic ambitions to turn the USA into their nightmare society of god and religious insanity.

In a sane world, a folksy, incomprehensible political hack like Sarah Palin would refrain from opening their mouths on programs viewed by an audience of several million. But this is not a sane world, and there will always be an audience of political Frankensteins, fairytale authors of the fantastic and unreal like Tim LaHaye, and the politically demented and fascistically inclined like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck etc. In fact, her appeal to those on the religious and political right is so seductive that she is assured of having an audience wherever she has (for a fee) made the decision to open her mouth and utter absurdities like that previously mentioned. The crazies that flock to hear her speak have assured her of a steady income far into the future. Her most aspiring admirers, the Tea Baggers and religious fundamentalists, are certain she is the political answer to Obama’s more liberal policies, and even possibly a future candidate for president.

I know, it’s hard to imagine her assuming the presidency, but the USA, by all indications, is not alone among nations that have elected a leader because of his or her irrational motives and pronouncements. If anyone has viewed the antics of a Tea Party demonstration, it becomes evident after a few minutes that these people are on the verge of exploding in frenzied convulsion over issues they view as socialistic, anti-god, overly liberal, anti-American, anti-gun, and on and on. If there is no issue, a bombastic clown like Glenn Beck will step into the fray, and create an issue from the Mormon theological nightmares that plague his mind. It’s not unexpected to presume his giving the Tea Baggers an issue, even if it’s something as ludicrous as claiming a race of liberal aliens from outer space  are controlling the environment by secretly beaming destructive protons toward the surface of this planet.

It would be ridiculous for anyone to  seriously entertain the notion that Palin’s fatuous pronouncements that America be governed by the Bible god and Ten Commandments be considered as viable objectives in this era. However, after making her lunatic observation in the presence of Bill O’Reilly, I’m sure there were thousands of Tea Baggers and Christian zealots clapping their hands and shouting hallelujah and Amen, after she opened her mouth. It is this bizarre group of people for whom Sarah Palin’s pronouncements are nourished and given a life of their own, have evolved into a  political and religious Frankenstein.

WILLIAM HARWOOD

A recent news report on BBC television told of the demand by an Egyptian theocrat that persons importing a device that would enable Muslim brides to pass themselves off as virgins be executed. Reading about such misogynous hatred prompts me to explain how virginity-addiction became such a widespread fetish, and why it continues to exist long after the beliefs that triggered it are known to be as scientifically illiterate as phrenology and phlogiston.

Religious believers are not noted for “prove it to me” skepticism. The ability to believe that a book endorsing a flat earth is nonfiction is solid evidence that Christians and Jews are as capable of doublethink as any Muslim. If unteachables such as recent American presidential candidates are able to rationalize that the discoveries of science are wrong because they falsify a 2,000-year book of fairy tales, it is understandable that they can continue to view victimless recreation as a taboo violation even though they have no awareness of why it was so categorized in the first place.

Virginity was originally a negative quality. Following the Big Discovery of c 3500 BCE, that children have fathers as well as mothers, a “virgin” was a woman who had never given birth to a live infant. Given the cost of feeding and housing a woman for a minimum of several months only to see that investment wasted when two out of three women died in childbirth, that made a virgin a risky purchase as a breeder of heirs. But purchasing a breeding woman who already had a child was no bargain either. The problem was solved when priestly castes in widely separated cultures came up with the solution of demanding that all firstborns be sacrificed to the tribal god (Exodus 13:1). Thus a woman was able to demonstrate her economic viability by giving birth to a child that would be sacrificed, and thereafter, by adhering to an “adultery” taboo, producing biological heirs for her legal owner.

But as early as 2000 BCE, disparate cultures evolved concepts of morality that found human sacrifice abhorrent. Herakles is credited with declaring that, “Zeus hates human sacrifice.” That presented a problem, because firstborns were believed to have been jointly fathered by every lover the woman had ever had, whether the coupling had occurred several days before birth or as recently as the day before quickening. Pregnancy was believed to be initiated when the total amount of sperm intromitted into a woman reached critical mass. The belief explained why Zeus needed thirty-six hours to pump sufficient sperm into Alkmene to generate his greatest son, Herakles.

Since neither buying a wife whose womb was carrying sperm that would eventually combine with her husband’s to produce a bastard (defined as a child of many fathers), nor adopting the child she already had, was a desirable option, the solution was to impose on women birth-to-marriage celibacy, so that children of the marriage would be the biological offspring of her legal owner and no one else. At that point virginity, redefined as possession of an unpolluted womb capable of producing a legitimate heir, became the virtue the culturally conditioned still consider it today. (The concept of a male virgin, a man capable of bearing his owner’s legitimate heir, is the ultimate oxymoron.)

But even premarital virginity was no guarantee that a wife’s future children would be the lawfully-sired offspring of her husband alone. So to guarantee that only husbands could impregnate their breeding slaves, men imposed a further taboo on all sexual recreation capable of throwing the paternity of a married woman’s child into doubt. They declared adultery, meaning the fraudulent impregnation of a married woman, a capital crime. But since birth control was virtually unknown and certainly unreliable, extramarital copulation by a married woman was automatically equated with adultery, even though it was  the procreational and not the recreational element of the act that was recognized as a crime against property and prohibited.

As increasing knowledge about the biophysics of impregnation spread, and most alleged adultery was recognized as nonprocreative, civilized societies removed it from their shortening lists of capital crimes, although Muslim cultures did not, and preacher Billy Graham is on record as endorsing the execution of adulterers. Henry VIII executed two allegedly adulterous wives (most historians consider Anne Boleyn innocent) and their alleged lovers at a time when adultery by the wife of the king had the potential to put a bastard, by that time defined as a child passed off as the legitimate heir of a woman’s husband but actually fathered by a usurper, on the throne of England and therefore constituted treason. The failure of the foregoing information to reach the masses enabled at least one educationally challenged individual to write a letter to The Times, citing Henry VIII as a precedent, demanding that Princess Diana’s lover be similarly beheaded.

Had the ancients been aware of the duration of pregnancy, the brief mortality of sperm, and the fact that a child was fathered by a single spermatozoon, and had they had the means of ensuring that a copulation would be nonprocreative, the current belief that copulation involving an unmarried woman, a pregnant woman, or a woman using birth control constituted adultery would never have come into existence. With the invention of The Pill, the belief that nonprocreative recreation constituted adultery should logically have disappeared. But by that time all taboos, regardless of the logical reasons for which they had originally been invented, were attributed to capricious gods whose only reason for banning anything was, “Because I said so.” The belief that a god’s laws did not have to have a logical basis eventually led to the expansion of the adultery concept to include copulation between a married man and an unmarried woman, as well as same-sex couplings when one of the participants was married.

Since books attributed to a god declared adultery a sin, and the original and only logical definition of adultery had long been forgotten, the victimless nature of most extramarital copulation was deemed irrelevant, as was the reason for the glorification of virginity. The tribal god had labeled once-injurious behavior a no-no, and believers were incapable of asking themselves, “Why would any sane god ban victimless pleasure?” The consequence is that victimless pleasure is today denigrated as adultery, or fornication (originally a form of false-god worship, since it meant the tupping of a fertility goddess’s nun), or sodomy (an anachronous term for the same-sex coupling that was not a Jewish taboo prior to 621 BCE). And the masochism of self-inflicted celibacy continues to be lauded as the virtue of virginity—all because believers in religion allow their deities to make laws that, if a president or king issued the same decree, would have him committed to an asylum for the criminally insane for the term of his natural life.

LELAND W. RUBLE

His opulent majesty, the authoritarian dictator of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, has made it official. As far as he’s concerned, the famous rag of Turin (an obvious 13th century forgery) has been proclaimed by Benedict XVI, as an icon “written with the blood of a crucified man.” This no doubt was said in desperation to detour critical attention away from overwhelming evidence that his priests have been engaged for decades in molesting children. And believe it or not, were doing it for centuries without any realistic form of punishment or disbarment as employed propagandists for the theocratic and fictionalized agenda of this ancient establishment of a false, manmade religion. A faith based on the mostly nonverifiable escapades of a four foot evangelizer who some deny ever existed, while other historians claim he did, but was just like any other evangelizer living delusionally with the distorted figments of an active imagination.

Of course, as is usually the case, it has been reported that the pope “didn’t raise scientific questions concerning the linen and whether as many in the scientific community consider it a medieval forgery.”

It’s an obvious realization that you cannot expect a man thoroughly indoctrinated in the dogmas and fantastic rituals of his church to reach sensible conclusions in regard to anything concerning reality. In fact, the avoidance of reality is a primary function of those who spend their existence avoiding the realistic falsehoods of heaven, hell, devils, and mystical salvation.

How extreme is this pope’s proclamation? “This is a burial cloth that wrapped the remains of a crucified man in full correspondence with what the Gospels tell us of Jesus,” the pope said. Just because someone, or more likely many individuals, were complicit in writing the individual fantasies that make up the gospels, this (the Shroud of Turin) does not pertain to any historically physical evidence for the very improbable and impossible circumstances of a man being resurrected after being declared permanently dead, and placed in a sealed tomb. It is obviously a forgery like many other antique relics that adorn Catholic churches and museums.

We can only guess that Benedict is merely continuing the practice of giving credence to another relic with the intended result of convincing his converts that Catholicism is a religion that depends greatly on supernatural explanations for its mystical and theocratic interpretation of existence. Of course, no matter how many scientists claim that the shroud is a forgery, this pope and his church hierarchy will never as they have for centuries, allow their religion to be swayed by rational scientific opinion. After all, nurturing the delusion that science is the enemy of religious faith, means that the pope and his church will avoid by all means possible, any notion that prevailing scientific opinion is convinced that the supernatural is a bogeyman invented by the religious establishment to bamboozle the public into falsely thinking such a realm actually exists.

It may be another 100 years before the Catholic church comes to the conclusion that the Shroud of Turin, and numerous other so-called holy relics, are no more holy than the pope himself. And that there is nothing on this planet that can in reality be properly designated as having the attributes of an object with supernatural capabilities. And then again, it may never be convinced that the supernatural is unreal, fictitious, and imaginary.

GARY WALKER

According to a recent news report in our ever vigilant media, Noah’s ark has been found once again. The eminent Ark-eologist, Spade Digsmore, has just returned from Turkey with yet another piece of wood that can only be from Noah’s ark. According to professor Digsmore, the piece of wood survived for 4,500 years because it was pressure treated.

Now I know that scoffers will ridicule the idea of a world wide flood reaching fifteen cubits (Gen. 7;20) above the tops of all the mountains of the world. That’s about five miles of water. But verily, the Bible warns us that there will be scoffers in the last days (2 Peter 3:3), thus their very scoffing proves Bible truth.

Some may wonder how a man who was 600 years old (Gen. 7:6) managed to get all those animals, (dinosaurs, polar bears?) on board the love boat. But the flood story has to be true because Jesus (God’s other son, before Ronald Reagan) mentions it in both inspired books of Matthew and Luke. True believing Fundagellicals know that Jesus also mentioned other Bible truths like Lot’s wife being turned into a pillar of salt, naked Adam and Eve, Jonah and the fish story, and of course King David (Who once saw the Bible God riding on a flying cherub—2 Sam. 22:11). There is even a genealogy (Luke #3) of Jesus that goes all the way back to Adam. (Don’t read the one in Matthew, #1, it’s totally different, a trick of Satan who knows scripture.) Anyway, the genealogy in Luke mentions Noah (Noe) and proves that evolution is a lie.

So, on board the ark were the 600 year old Noah and his three 100 year old sons, Shem, Ham, and Japeth, and their three wives who remain nameless because afterall they were only women. Someone had to clean up after all those animals. And of course there was Noah’s wife. The Bible didn’t give her a name either, but Spade Digsmore discovered on Mt. Ararat a high school yearbook, wrapped in a shroud, from the class of 2500 BC with her picture and name. It was Joan. Joan of Ark. Beside the year book was a box of tea bags and a loaded rifle. Those citizenship papers, and birth certificates were “left behind” to die with their grandmothers.

The best part of this true Bible story is that during Noah’s ocean cruise, the Bible god killed all the other people on the planet because they were wicked. He even killed all the animals, including the cuddly bunny rabbits who must have been wicked too. That is a feat not even Hitler or Stalin accomplished. Curiously, the wickedness must have been caused by the “giants” and the other “sons of God” (Gen. 6:4), who saw the “daughters of men.” The women didn’t have burkas on so the “sons of God” couldn’t help themselves, and well, you know what happened next. “The wickedness of man was great in the earth,” and according to professor Digsmore, it was so bad that the people had socialized mediSin, and they watched a lot of Jane Fonda movies.

And so it came to pass, the ark ran out of gas and landed on a hill. Noah and his sons wasted no time growing grapes and producing a lot of wine that must have been pretty good because Noah drank of the wine and passed out in his tent bare assed naked (Gen. 9:21). Then they got down to the business of being fruitful and multiplying. Unfortunately, after the flood the people were just as wicked as the people who had been left behind. So what was the point, you ask? Perhaps professor Digsmore will find out someday. Amen.

GARY WALKER

As I grid my loins in breathless anticipation of the National Day of Prayer (May 6), I have to wonder why so many Americans can’t handle freedom. NPD began in 1952, jumpstarted by crusader, Billy Graham. This was during McCarthyism when one of the gods slithered its way into the pledge, and onto the dollar bill, and bumped our national motto, E Pluribus Unum (an all inconclusive motto). Americans were whipped into a frightful frenzy over godless communism and so they decided to hack away at our own Constitution. Sound familiar?

In 1988 the congress declared the NPD to fall on the first Thursday in May and that the president must make the proclamation. Why do these people, who hate American freedom, need the big government telling them when to pray? Why do they relentlessly whine and whimper for the arm of the state to grant them special rights? Is their faith so vain, and so frail that it needs the crutch of government to support it?

Fortunately, on April 15, the NPD was declared unconstitutional by judge Barbara Crabb, thanks to the efforts of the intrepid Freedom From Religion Foundation. “Isis, Isis, RA, Ra, Ra!”

There are about 30 million Americans who are not “religulous.” We, along with the Constitution, will be dissed by the president and all the other pious hypocrites (who pray to be seen by men—Mt. 6:5). Shepherds are for sheep.

GARY WALKER

Holy Moses Batman, maybe there really is a god. I must admit that I have been riding on cloud melancholy for a while now. And just when I thought the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune would never cease, along comes American Family Association guru, Bryan Fischer to cheer me on. I think I will be in a good humor all week now.

The ever so pompous Fischer blogs for the AFA and he recently had this revelation, “Bottom line: you want to know who’s running the US Army, The US Navy and the Marines and calling the shots when it counts? Fundamentalist Muslims and homosexual activists.” Really. Thank god the US Air Force has been possessed by evangelicals for a while now and was spared, or should I say saved, from this satanic predicament.

The ever so righteous Bryan Fischer got his knickers in a twist over the DISinvitation, by the Pentagon, of Franklin Graham (Billy’s boy) to a looming Pentagon ceremony of the national day of prayer extravaganza. Apparently, the Pentagon didn’t dare risk associating itself with the Islamaphobic Graham. Bombing wedding parties, torture, and of course killing a million, mostly Muslims, in Iraq who were no threat to the US didn’t bother the ever so righteous Fischer, or the Pentagon.

Never mind that the national day of prayer is a gross violation of the constitutional separation of religion and government, and never mind that public prayers were deemed hypocritical by a 1st century dude named Jesus. Do not be like the hypocrites who love to pray on the street corners and on Christian TV, to be seen by men (MT. 6:5). Every person who serves in the military or congress swears an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. They are not obligated to pander to any of the gods.

A. J. MATTIL, Jr.

In this short study we concentrate on a book which was probably written about 180 BC/BCE. This book has various names, such as Ecclesiasticus (Book of the Church), or the Book of Ben Sira, or The Wisdom of Ben Sira, or simply Sirach. Whatever we call this book of fifty-one chapters, it is not part of the Jewish and Protestant canons of inspired scriptures, but it is included in the canon of the Roman Catholic Church. Now let us focus our attention on six of what I as a freethinker would call Sirach’s screwups, that is, blemishes, blotches, blunders, botches, and bungles.

Screwup One. Sirach 1:12 declares that “the beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord.” “Fear of the Lord” is an attitude of profound awe in the face of God’s power and splendor. Now we revise Sirach 1:12 in the light of modern knowledge. The beginning of wisdom is not “fear of the Lord.” Rather, the beginning of wisdom is trembling with awe before the threefold mystery of the universe, that is, meditating on the tremendous mystery, the primal mystery, and the cosmic mystery.

The tremendous mystery is the mystery of the vastness and power of the universe which is infinitely beyond our comprehension. The primal mystery is the unexplainable given at the beginning of all things. Here we puzzle over what was there first, and why and how it was there, and whence it came, and wither it is going. We think about the source of the source. The cosmic mystery is the mystery of whether there is anything personal about the vast creative and destructive process in which we live and move and have our being (see Acts. 17:28).

In short, “a sincere recognition of the truth that our own and all other existence is a mystery absolutely and forever beyond our comprehension, contains more of true religion than all the dogmatic theology ever written” (Philosopher Herbert Spencer, 1820-1903). That’s the true beginning of wisdom.

Screwup Two. According to Sirach 12:1-7 “we should do good to just people and they and the Lord will reward us. Give to the good man, refuse the sinner. The Most High himself hates sinners.” On the other hand, Jesus commands us to “do good to those who hate us and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great” (Matthew 5:43-48; Luke 6:27-36).

Many thoughtful people say we should decide for ourselves on a case by case basis whom we should help or not help. Never should we expect a supernatural being to reward or punish us for our generosity or niggardliness.

Screwup Three. Sirach lived in Jerusalem and was a lover of the Mosaic law, the priesthood, temple, and divine worship. In other words, Sirach was enthusiastic about brutal butcher-shop religion/pitiless packinghouse piety/senseless slaughterhouse spirituality (Sirach 50:1-29, which is a eulogy of Simon, the high priest). Few sensitive persons who seek to follow reverence for life will endorse bloody butcher-shop religion.

Screwup Four. Sirach was intoxicated with chosenpeopleism, the detestable belief that Almighty God is a partial God who plays favorites. The Lord places a ruler over every nation, but Israel is the Lord’s own portion (17:14; 24:8). Wisdom fixed her abode in Zion (24:10). Chosenpeopleism is the basis of the unending warfare between the Israelites and the Palestinians, and should have been discarded centuries ago.

Screwup Five. Sirach screwed up when he adopted the human-centered doctrine that the Lord gave humans rule over beasts and birds (17:4; Genesis 1:28). How unfortunate that the Lord didn’t instruct humans how to live by the ideal reverence for life so that they would respect the animals’ will to live. The Lord could have taught us to treat all beings as relatives and to do the least harm to the least number of life forms and the greatest good to the greatest number of life forms. The Lord could have inspired us to devote our thoughts to the knowledge of life, to devote our affections to the love of life, and to devote our actions to the service of life.

Screwup Six. Sirach blundered when he issued this command, “When you are ill, delay not, but pray to God, who will heal you” (38:9). Sirach hadn’t lived long enough to discover through bitter experience that nothing fails like prayer.

Conclusion. We could consider many more of Sirach’s screwups, but these six screwups should be enough to convince us that the Book of Ben Sira should not be included in any canon of inspired scriptures.

GARY WALKER

And so it came to pass, President Obama ventured to the home of Rev. Billy Graham for a secret visit. As a patriotic American, I am wondering why.

Anyone who has been swilling their fair share of tea knows that Obama is a Muslim obsessed with converting our great country to Islam, burning the flag, and killing our grandmothers. Soooo, why would he go visit Graham? Is Graham a Muslim too!

Afterall, fundamentalist Islam and fundy Christianity are pretty similar. They hate gays, believe in creationism, and want to keep women in their place as subjects of the men, love theocracy and holy scriptures, blasphemy laws, capital punishment, and religious wars. They both believe in Satan and hell and demons, and Adam and Eve and Noah’s ark. And they both hate America for its freedoms fought for and won by liberals who then gave us a GODLESS Constitution. Yes, Godless!

Has anyone actually seen Billy Graham’s birth certificate?

Amen.

GARY WALKER

I was recently rebuked on a blog that I occasionally contribute my two sheckles worth of baloney to. My sin was that I referred to the tea bagging, patriotic, numbskulls as sheeple. The devil made me do it.

But when you think about it, the baggers should really be proud of the term sheeple. Afterall, sheep is a word that Christians identify with throughout their purpose driven lives. According to their own signs from below that I have seen, most of the baggers are god fearing, gun totin, Christians. So the teaple, sheeple should actually thank me for the compliment. It fits them to a tea.

Curiously, sheep are some of the dumbest animals ever “created.” They don’t even need a shepherd to guide them. A dog can do it. This must be why Faux News has barked and growled its way to become the top sheepdog of sheepdumb. Has ignorance been enthroned as an American value?

According to the inspired gospel of John (20:29), Jesus said to doubting Thomas, “You believe because you have seen. Blessed are those who have not seen and believe.” This is the puffed up trumpet call for blind faith. Blind faith is the foundation of sand (Mt. 2:26) that most religions are built upon, and Faux News is the foundation of breathtaking inanity. I leave with the words of the famous Saint Porkas Aswinas, “That’s all folks.”

JIM LEE

(This was in my mailbox this morning.)

If you are Christian then you are ipso facto a person who cannot reason logically and believe you can be “washed in the blood of the lamb” to cleanse your sins by the fact that in the whole Universe of Billions of galaxies “gawd” spawned a bastard son on this planet and by the fact of him spilling his blood and going to room temperature this same gawd will feel obligated to forgive your sins, It does not compute. It is just more blood libel from a caveman type of ancient Jewish beliefs.

I for one have relentlessly presented the facts regarding ersatz religious beliefs to the Christians and the religiously motivated  mentality. Instead of reflecting upon them and having the light come on somewhere in the deep recesses of the mind of a Christian, they will in turn revile me and fight like a bucking bronco to preserve their antique religious belief filters in order to escape a concocted religious illusion constructed on the fallacy of a mythical hell.

The vast majority of humankind are un-savable and a total waste of time in religiously evangelizing the unrealistic sadism of a god-created hell. Time for us all is short. Perhaps less than 100th of 1% of Christians will ever crawl out of the pit of false belief and fear. Those that do not, lack the natural intelligent makeup to disregard religious beliefs, and also lack the ability to remove their less than effective gene pool from the earth, so that those more enlightened may survive to carry on for the next phase in human evolution.

Wildly imagine a man being sent to a Christian Heaven, and looking down views his wife being sent to Hell because she did not suck up to the Jesus myth. Imagine that same man turning to Gawd and requesting that he be allowed to join his wife regardless of whatever her fate. Freedom does not enter into any aspect of religious belief. In Heaven, you will have to kiss the ass of Gawd and Jesus for all eternity. The spirit of mankind cannot countenance such manmade insanity.

LELAND W. RUBLE

I have no sympathy for whooping, crybaby Tea Baggers gathering in public to protest the motivations of the Obama administration. The sky is not falling, we are not being socialized, and fascism is more likely to emerge from the political right than from the political left. Where were these Glenn Beck/Sarah Palin inspired activists during the Bush/Cheney administration, when  our democracy was suppressed, and an illegal war, (Iraq) was instigated on the basis of lies and propaganda?

It is impossible to sympathize with the majority of Tea Baggers, who if left on their own, would be incapable of thinking  few rational thoughts. Dressed like colonial politicians, or wearing clothes that represent frontier settlers, Tea Baggers are agreed on one thing, a fanatical hatred of the current Obama administration. Where, one might ask, do these people get their lunatic ideas about government, the Constitution, social policy, and many other absurd thoughts that have provoked them  into becoming engaged in politically motivated right wing demonstrations across America? Why is there no visible condemnation of corporate America which is largely responsible for moving the majority of our  manufacturing industries to low-wage countries? Isn’t it because corporate America and the Insurance establishment is complicit in encouraging Tea Party activists to oppose any humane legislation that emerges from the political left?

The primary source for the motivation and support of Tea Party demonstrations has been “Talk Radio” dominated by the usual gang of bubblehead, fascistized stooges, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and other mindless talk radio jocks, whose talk-fests are focused exclusively on support for an agenda of   extreme politically conservative legislation, and support of the impractical Ayn Rand branch of libertarian political absurdity.

Fox News, which has always been complicit in stirring up a naive audience with news mainly focused on supporting the fascist, racist, and imbecile motives of the religious and political right, has been a fanatical  contributor to Tea Party demonstrations. It has, too many times to mention, shown endless news clips favorable to the rabid antics of this fanatic crowd of Palin god worshipers and disgruntled right wingers still smarting from their enormous loss in the 2008 presidential election.

Fox News, contrary to its denial that it is “fair and balanced” has consistently promoted an agenda focused on presenting the gullible view that the only political objective worth pursuing in this country is that of a hardcore right wing political perspective. A fact easily verified by its eccentric assortment of pundits whose programs are produced exclusively to preach the false values of right wing political evangelism.

It has been verified in news polls and on the web, that the majority of participants at Tea party events, 74%, are those who voted for the MaCain, Palin ticket in the 2008 presidential election. They are mainly disgruntled voters who haven’t yet come to the realization—and probably never will—that their nominee for president lost the election. I’ve even seen news accounts on the web, suggesting that some on the political right, actually believe the election was stolen, that it was inconceivable that Barack Obama could have won honestly. Others  involved in Tea Party demonstrations, are people identified as “Birthers,” who sincerely and idiotically believe that Obama was not born as an American citizen and therefore is not legally qualified to be president. If this was a fact and not a fiction, it’s doubtful Obama would ever have campaigned for president. Do the simpleminded “Birthers” really believe Obama is so incompetent that he would have campaigned for president all the while knowing he was not born a citizen of the USA? This loony bit of information has been spread by a cult of politically hardcore theofascists who will and have, done just about everything in their playbook of deception and trickery to present a false portrayal of Obama as the political reincarnation of Stalin and Hitler,  intent on turning America into a modern socialistic dictatorship. The political right has as one of its chief nitwits and prolific propagandists, the clown Glenn Beck, to thank for convincing Tea Party activists to falsely believe this propaganda to the extent that more than a few Tea  Party activists  end up spending  hours designing crude signs proclaiming Obama is turning the USA into a replica of the former Nazi Germany. Other demonstrators at Tea Party events are those who, having worked hard to nominate McCain and Palin,  still yearn for the years when the advocate of their ambitious agenda, George W. Bush, occupied the White House.

Notice also in the numerous news clips of Tea Party demonstrations, that Blacks and Latinos, if participating in these events, are barely visible. From this one gets the obvious impression that Tea Baggers are mainly individuals who are either politically conservative Ayn Rand libertarians, or extreme Neanderthal conservatives susceptible to the fantasy of religious evangelism. They are still, after the legislation has passed, protesting healthcare reform which is far more humane than the previous system of health care in this nation. Nagged on by the conservative opposition—not one conservative on the right voted in favor of this legislation—and talk radio bubbleheads like Hannity, Beck etc., have never once considered the fact that healthcare expense in this country is one of the leading causes of bankruptcy. And, while many faces that appear on news clips of Tea Party demonstrations show that many of the participants are at that age when Medicare pays for a majority of their medical expenses, these people are seen ranting and raving against the more humane benefits of a social program which will now be made available to the general public,  and has saved them thousands in costly medical expenses. How, you may ask, can people be so ignorant—a recent poll suggested that Tea Baggers are more educated and wealthy than the general public—of facts that can be obtained from any library, the web, and magazines?

The fact is, that Tea Baggers, unlike the majority of the thinking American public, are caught up in a swirling political whirlpool of right wing propaganda, deception and infantile Limbaughian pomposity. Whatever bubblehead Limbaugh pronounces over the airways becomes sucked into the brains of listeners who allow this clown, Fox News, and others like him, to decide what they should do and believe politically and socially. If for instance, the clown Glenn Beck says liberals are scum, without asking why, his listeners simply accept it as fact, because they falsely assume Beck, Limbaugh and others are honest, truthful purveyors of the current political environment. They follow simplistic directions like little children in kindergarten obeying their teacher’s commands. This is how anti-democratic fascist and religious movements are started. It only takes one individual with a warped sense of reality—Limbaugh, Beck, Palin, Hannity—plus a lunatic perception and passion to realize his/her inconceivable concept of society to start a movement. In this instance, Tea Party demonstrations are frenzied activities structured on a blind hatred of the current Obama administration, and a desire to return to the corrupt politics of the Bush/Cheney/Rove decade.

Of course a Tea Bagger will not admit that he/she is intent on disrupting democracy, however, the entire movement is an activity whose purpose is, on moving national and local politics as far right as is politically feasible under the present circumstances. Using Hitler and Nazism to identify a liberal democratic agenda, is so absurd and so idiotic that it makes Tea Party activists appear as raving maniacs seized by the insane gibberish of a Glenn Beck; a demented clown who has successfully evolved into the primary leader of the conservative Republicans. It is both him, Sean Hannity, and Sarah Palin, who have been the most vocal supporters of this anti-democratic movement. Both shock jocks and Palin, have participated in numerous Tea Party demonstrations by acting as hosts at events, and yelping like rabid dogs, directed their hatred of the Obama administration toward an audience easily persuaded into believing whatever goofy nonsense these clowns of a theofascist right wing propaganda proclaim.

It’s doubtful that Tea Party activists will refrain from demonstrating any time in the immediate future. For as long as Sarah Palin, and those previously mentioned, continue to use their mouths to agitate and motivate their fans into falsely believing that the USA is turning into a totalitarian fascist republic because of social policies instigated by the Obama administration, there will be Tea Party’s.

As long as there are people who believe the outlandish absurdities the political right asserts as truth, there will be people flocking to Tea Party’s falsely believing the USA is turning into a modern fascist republic. The same Tea Party activists who never once demonstrated against the theofascist and plutocratic policies of Bush II, or ever considered that  Bush II and Cheney were acting illegally by engaging this country in a war in Iraq, are the same people who have unfortunately swallowed hook, line, and sinker, the deceptive rhetoric of radio jocks who are in bed with, and have an incestuous relationship with the worst characters who inhabit the conservatively  dominated Republican Party. The Tea Baggers are, whether consciously or unconsciously, aiding and abetting the current Republican Party by acting as a modern version of “Brown Shirts,” willing to go to any lengths to act as its army of disgruntled angry voices.

The Tea Party’s are what they are, political demonstrations working for the benefit of the Republican Party, trying with enormous effort to regain the White House in 2012.  Now so thoroughly discouraged, especially after watching healthcare reform become a reality, the political right will do anything to once again regain the prominence it enjoyed during the dismal years of Bush II, Cheney and Rove. A period in history that will be remembered historically as the hijacking of democracy in order to fulfill the fantasies of hardcore right wingers repelled by, and allergic to, the authentic objectives of a democratic republic.

A. J. MATTILL, Jr.

Stephen was one of the first deacons (Acts 6:1-7) and the first Christian martyr (Acts 7:54-8:2). He “was filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 6:3, 5; 7-55). “God gave Stephen the power to work great miracles and wonders among the people” (Acts 6:8). Jerome (about 340-420) and other fathers of the Church praised Stephen as a man of great learning and eloquence. Roman Catholics regard Stephen as a saint.

Stephen made the longest speech recorded in Acts (Acts 7:2-56). His speech is a rapid survey of Hebrew history, beginning with Abraham and moving on to Joseph, Moses, David, and Solomon, who built the Temple of Jerusalem. Let us now scrutinize Stephen’s speech.

l. Contradictions with the Old Testament. Here we look at three likely contradictions between Stephen’s speech and the Old Testament.

Contradiction One. Stephen said that God called Abraham while he was still in Ur in Mesopotamia, before he went to Haran (Acts 7:2-4). Or did God call Abraham after he had moved to Haran (Genesis 12:1-5)?

Contradiction Two. Did Abraham’s father, Terah, die before God called Abraham (Genesis 11:32)? Or was Stephen correct in saying that Terah died after God called Abraham (Acts 7:4)?

Contradiction Three. Did seventy people of Jacob’s family go to live in Egypt (Genesis 46:27; Exodus 1:5; Deuteronomy 10:22)? Or was Stephen correct in saying the number was seventy-five (Acts 7:13-14)?

Apologists point out that Stephen, speaking extemporaneously in a tense situation, could easily have become confused on some details. Yet Stephen “was filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 6:5) and therefore should not have erred on any matters, large or small. Surely Jesus’ words spoken to the twelve disciples applied to Stephen as well: “When someone arrests you, don’t worry about what you will say, for at that time you will be given the words to say. But you will not really be the one speaking. The Spirit from your Father will tell you what to say” (Matthew 10:19-20). No chance for errors there!

Now let us look at what the Hebrew text of the Bible says about how many people of Jacob’s family went down from the Promised Land to live in Egypt. Genesis 46:27 says that “all the people comprising Jacob’s family who had come to Egypt amounted to seventy persons in all” (New American Bible). Exodus 1:5 reports that the total number of the direct descendants of Jacob who migrated with Jacob into Egypt was seventy people. Deuteronomy 10:22 agrees that seventy Israelites went down to Egypt. The Hebrew text stands 100% opposed to Stephen’s 75.

According to the Septuagint, the translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek in the third century BC/BCE, the number of Hebrews who migrated to Egypt was 75 (Genesis 46:27) and 75 (Exodus 1:5). Deuteronomy 10:22, however, reports that 70 went down to Egypt.

Thus the Hebrew texts of Genesis 46:27, Exodus 1:5, and Deuteronomy 10:22 unanimously report that 70 Israelites went to Egypt, thus contradicting Stephen’s 75, 3 times. The Greek text, however, agrees twice with Stephen (75)  (Genesis 46:27; Exodus 1:5), and disagrees once with Stephen (70) (Deuteronomy 10:22). The biblical texts, Hebrew and Greek, thus support Stephen’s 75 twice and contradict Stephen’s 75 4 times.

Our survey would be incomplete without a report on the eminent Jewish historian, Josephus (died about AD/CE 100). Twice he states that 70 Hebrews migrated to Egypt (Antiquities 2:7, 4 and 6:5,6). Thus Josephus contradicts Stephen two times.

In short, 4 times the biblical evidence contradicts Stephen’s claim that 75 Hebrews went to Egypt from Canaan. Twice the extra-biblical evidence (Josephus) contradicts  Stephen. Thus the biblical and extra-biblical evidence contradict Stephen six times. This evidence supports Stephen only twice.

On the basis of this evidence, I conclude that Stephen erred in Acts 7:14. So what? If the Bible errs once, it may err thousands of times and thus is not a trustworthy book!

ll. Cruel Circumcision. Now let us note Stephen’s wholehearted approval of the rite of circumcision: “God said to Abraham, ‘Every son in each family must be circumcised to show that you have kept your agreement with me.’ So when Isaac was eight days old, Abraham circumcised him. Later Issac circumcised his son, Jacob, and Jacob  circumcised his twelve sons” (Acts 7:8, Contemporary English Version). See Genesis 17:9-14.

The origin of circumcision is not known. In ancient times it was practiced among the western Semites—Hebrews, Arabians, Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, and Egyptians. Stephen, however, says right up front that the Hebrews practiced circumcision, not because they copied other Semites, but because God commanded them to do so. End of discussion.

It never dawned on Stephen that circumcision is the unkindest cut of all, for it’s a cruel, disfiguring, painful, senseless, unnecessary mutilation of the sensitive penis.

lll. Chosenpeopleism. Stephen declares that the Lord said to Moses, “With my own eyes I have seen the suffering of my people in Egypt” (Acts 7:34). Here Stephen accepts the unacceptable doctrine of Israel as God’s chosen people. Stephen’s God is a God who plays favorites. Much more discerning than Stephen was a Roman philosopher of the second century AD/CE, Celsus, who observed, “The very notion of an elect people of God is worse than irrational; it also leads Christians and Jews to imagine that their myths are superior to everyone else’s, and that their religion is true and all others are false. The Jews’ belief that they are God’s elect is a mere reflection of inflated pride. Nor is it likely that they are in favor with God and are loved more than other folk, and that angels are sent to them alone, as though they had been assigned some land of the blessed.” For more on chosenpeoplesim, see my The Seven Mighty Blows to Traditional Beliefs (Gordo, AL: The Flatwoods Free Press, 1995), pp. 186-188.

lV. Promisedlandism. Now we concentrate on Acts 7:4-5, which has Stephen saying, “Abraham settled in the land of Canaan. God didn’t then give Abraham any part of it as his own, not even a square foot of ground, but God promised to give it to him, and that it would belong to him and his descendants forever.” See Genesis 12:6-7; 13:15; 15:18-21; 17:8. Note especially Genesis 15:18, where the Lord says to Abraham, “I promise to give your descendants all this land from the river of Egypt unto the great river Euphrates.” On the basis of such hallucinations as these. today’s Zionists are planning for a “Greater Israel” which will include all the land between the Nile and the Euphrates. Stephen’s words in Acts 7:4-5 harmonize beautifully with the Zionists’ plans and therefore Stephen must bear some of the blame for today’s turmoil in the Near East.

The Conquest of Canaan. Stephen said, “Our ancestors went with Joshua and took over the land from the nations that God drove out as they advanced” (Acts 7:45). Stephen here approves the Israelites’ conquest of Canaan, which was a “holy war,” in which every person in the seven nations of Palestine was to be killed, a horribly brutal operation. According to the Bible’s own figures (Exodus 12:37; Deuteronomy 7: 1,7), that would have been some 21,000,000 men, women, and children. Exodus 12:37 indicates there were 3,000,000 Israelites, and Deuteronomy 7:1,7 informs us that each of the seven nations had more people than Israel. Yet Stephen was unmoved by this incredible blood bath perpetrated by a God who was a merciless monster.

Vl. Hallucinations. Now we look at the hallucinations of Moses and Stephen. By hallucinations we mean seeing and/or hearing the creations of one’s imagination, that is, perceptions for which there are no external stimulants.

1. Moses’ Hallucinations. Stephen tells his audience that an angel appeared to Moses from a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai. Moses was surprised by what he saw [that is, by what he imagined he saw]. He went closer to get a better look, [and he thought] he heard the Lord say, “I am the God who was worshiped by your ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” Mose started shaking all over and didn’t dare to look at the bush. [Then Moses had another auditory hallucination] and heard the Lord say to him, “Take off your sandals. The place where you are standing is holy ground. With my own eyes I have seen the suffering of my people in Egypt. I have heard their groans and have come down to rescue them. Now I am sending you back to Egypt” (Acts 7: 30-34; comments within brackets added by AJM).

2. Stephen’s Hallucination. According to Acts 7: 55-56, Stephen, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked toward heaven where he saw the glory of God. Stephen also saw Jesus standing at God’s right hand. Then Stephen said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” That’s Stephen’s visual hallucination—he saw the creation of his own over-heated imagination.

In short, Moses and Stephen were seeing and hearing the fruit of their imaginations.

Vll. The Flawed Characters of Stephen’s Heroes.

1. Abraham. Abraham owned slaves (Genesis 12:5, 14:14; 17: 12-13). He had three wives and concubines (Genesis 16: 1-3; 25:1). Cold-blooded Abraham and Sarah sent Hagar and her child, Ishmael, into the desert, where they almost perished (Genesis 21: 9-21). Abraham was a liar. He instructed his wife Sarah to tell the Egyptians that she was his sister (Genesis 12: 10-20). Genesis 20:1-18 tells of Abraham’s similar dishonesty with King Abimelech of Gerar.

2. Jacob. Jacob is infamous for being a liar par excellence. Genesis 27 informs us that Jacob, in order to obtain his brother Esau’s blessing from his blind father, Isaac, lied to Isaac four times and deceived him in three ways. Lie One. “Which of my sons are you?” asked Isaac. “I am your elder son Esau,” responded Jacob (27:18-19). Lie Two. Jacob said to Isaac, “I have done what you told me,” meaning, “I have taken my bow and arrow, gone into the country, killed an animal, and cooked it for you” (27:3, 19). In fact, Jacob had taken two goats from the flock and his mother, Rebecca, had cooked them (27:9, 14). Lie Three. “How did you find it so quickly, son?” Jacob answered, “The Lord your God helped me find it” (27:20). Lie Four. “Are you really Esau?” “I am,” answered Jacob (27:24).

Deceit One. Jacob’s deceitful mother, Rebecca, put Esau’s odoriferous clothes on her cunning son, Jacob, so that Isaac would think he was smelling Esau (27: 15, 27). Deceit Two. Rebecca put the goatskins on Jacob’s smooth skin to make Isaac think he was feeling Esau’s hairy skin (27:11, 16, 22-23). Deceit Three. Rebecca cooked the meat to taste like Esau’s tasty food (27: 4, 9, 25).

To top it all off, Jacob owned slaves (Genesis 32:5) and had four wives and concubines, Leah, Rachel, Bihah, and Zilpah (Genesis 29:21-30:13).

3. Moses. Moses was a murderer, for he killed an Egyptian (Exodus 2:11-12; Acts 7:23-28). At Moses’ command, Levites killed about 3,000 men for worshiping a golden calf (Exodus 32: 19-29). During the holy war against Midian, Moses ordered his commanders to kill every Midianite boy and to kill every Midianite woman who had had sexual intercourse, but to keep alive all the girls and women who were virgins, 32,000 virgins [miraculously identified?] (Numbers 31: 13-35). In connection with the conquest of Canaan, Moses ordered the death of some 21,000,000 men, women, and children (Exodus 12:37; Deuteronomy 7:1-7).

Moses’ barbaric behavior didn’t bother Stephen, but it did offend Thomas Paine (1737-1809): “Among the detestable villains that in any period of the world have disgraced the name of man, it is impossible to find a greater than Moses, if this account [Numbers 31] be true. Here is an order to butcher the boys, massacre the mothers, and debauch the daughters.”—Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason (Secaucus, NJ: Citadel Press, 1947), pp. 114-115.

Vlll. Cobbett’s Rule. Toward the end of his speech (Acts 7:47-50), Stephen said a few words about the Temple in Jerusalem: “Solomon built a house [Temple] for God. However, the Most High does not dwell in houses and temples made with human hands. It is just as the prophet Isaiah said when he spoke for the Lord [Isaiah 66: 1-2], ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me? In what place will I rest? I have made everything.”‘

In light of these verses, what was Stephen’s attitude toward the Temple? According to some commentators, Stephen regarded the building of the Temple as a misguided act, a major error in religion, based upon a misconception of God and nature. Solomon’s idea of building a stone temple treated God as if he lived inside a building rather than in heaven. Other scholars, however, find that Stephen did not disparage the Temple, for Solomon himself used language similar to Stephen’s (1 Kings 8:27; 2 Chronicles 6:18).

Now enters Cobbett’s Rule: “I speak not only so that I can be understood, but so that I cannot be misunderstood.” Stephen, then, violated Cobbett’s Rule, for one group of commentators or the other has misunderstood Stephen.

Conclusion. Stephen’s sense of right and wrong leaves quite a bit to be desired.

Keep on reading. Rachel Konrad, the Associated Press, “U. S. circumcision rate drops,” The Tuscaloosa News, June 19, 2007, p. 4A.

WILLIAM HARWOOD

Vatican Führer Joseph Ratzinazi has swindled more money from gullible suckers than any other criminal in human history, outstripping Bernard Maddoff one-thousand-fold.

Führer Joseph Ratzinazi has swindled more suckers than any other criminal in human history, outstripping L. Ron Hubbard ten-thousand fold.

Joseph Ratzinazi has suckered more marks with lies that contradicted his previous day’s lies than any other liar in human history, outstripping Joseph Smith one-hundredfold.

Ratzinazi is absolute dictator of the world’s largest organized crime syndicate, outstripping Al Capone’s Mafia five-million-fold.

Ratzinazi’s ability to brainwash himself into believing his own lies makes him the most self-deluded brain amputee alive today, surpassing Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Sarah Palin, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney combined.

Ratzinazi’s sixty million AIDS and starvation murders, attributable to his prohibition of sane birth control and sane disease control, make him the most prolific serial killer in human history, with the possible exceptions of Joseph Stalin and KarolWojtyla. Only if he is considered culpable for every World War ll death on both sides does Adolf Hitler come even close to Ratzinazi’s level.

Ratzinazi instructed his cardinals, bishops and priests in America and other countries to use death threats involving eternal torture with flamethrowers to order citizens of a democracy to violate their nation’s laws in order to obey the laws of a foreign state, the Vatican. That order constituted the same treason for which England’s Queen Elizabeth l executed 300 Catholic priests.

Ratzinazi ordered the cover-up of priestly pedophilia that has cost various dioceses of his crime syndicate more than one billion dollars in compensatory and punitive damages, six thousand times the largest corruption damages ever awarded against any non-religious organization.

Ratzinazi is fast-tracking the deification/canonization (same thing) of some of the most monstrous, evil tyrants in human history, including Hitler’s full partner in the Holocaust, Pope Pius XII; the most monstrous psychopath in Vatican history, Pope Pius IX; the man Ratzinazi replaced as the most prolific mass-murderer on earth, Pope John Paul ll; and the lying, swindling, thieving, self-serving hypocrite Mother Teresa, who collected millions of dollars for the declared purpose of feeding the starving, and used it for the benefit of herself, her nuns, and the RC crime syndicate while Calcutta’s slum dwellers continued to starve. In 1992 he encouraged his down syndrome predecessor, Wojtyla, to finalize the deification of the Don Corleone clone, Josemaria Escriva, who founded Opus Dei, a cult even Jesuits have denounced as more antihuman than the Mafia. If Ratzinazi’s deification of such epitomes of absolute evil continues unimpeded, can Saint Hitler be far behind?

Ann Coulter, Billy Graham and Glenn Beck continue to laud Senator Joseph McCarthy, generally considered the most morally depraved politician in American history, and by their ongoing behavior demonstrate that McCarthy is their ultimate role model. Joseph Ratzinazi has never apologized for his membership in the Hitler Jugend, which he only deserted when he recognized that Germany’s defeat was a matter of days away, and his behavior sixty years later makes it clear that Hitler is still his ultimate role model.

Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince and Richard Condon’s The Manchurian Candidate convey the implication that the bigger the lie, and the more often it is repeated, the more effective it is at wiping out the truth. Ratzinazi’s use of the Big Lie, particularly the lie that condoms do not save lives, is unsurpassed even by the centuries of popes to whom it was standard operating procedure.

Apologists for Islam recently denounced a series of books titled World of Islam, because, while trying to present the rugbutter perversion in the most favorable light, it mentioned the observable fact that, “Some Muslims began immigrating to the United States in order to transform American society, sometimes through the use of terrorism.” Ratzinazi denounced the world press for reporting cases of priestly pedophilia that he had tried desperately to sweep under the carpet. He wrote that, “The constant presence in the press of the sins of Catholic priests, especially in the United States … is a planned campaign … intentional, manipulated … to discredit the Church.”

Al Capone’s crimes include ordering the Bartholomew’s Day Massacre. Yet he wailed, “I have spent the best years of my life giving people the lighter pleasures, helping them have a good time, and all I get is abuse, the existence of a hunted man.” Ratzinazi, as Grand Inquisitor and again as Pope, ordered his cardinals and bishops to cover-up thousands of cases of priestly crimes against children. Yet as recently as 2010 he issued a denunciation of his subordinates for obeying his own orders, and declared himself a public benefactor who had no awareness of the actions of pedophiles he had personally protected.

Five times a day rugbutters are required to aim their rear ends at the sky so that the devil Allah, who differs from the devil Satan in no way whatsoever, can tup them up the rectum whenever it has the urge. Ratzinazi has never claimed that altar boys who bare their bottoms for Catholic priests to tup them up the rectum are obeying a divine imperative. But neither has he ever lifted a finger to stop pedophile priests from practicing the child-buggery that was their big incentive to become priests in the first place, and neither has he attempted to discipline priests who perpetrate such child abuse. Instead he has forced victims of pedophilia to sign guarantees, under pain of damnation, that they will not report the priests’ action to civil authorities. Ratzinazi’s actions do not compare to Allah’s quantitatively. But qualitatively it is hard to see any difference.

When I wrote the first sentence of this article, I was planning to spell out Ratzinazi’s crimes against humanity in graphic detail. Instead I find that I have filled a feature-length article merely cataloging his atrocities in the minimum number of words. Even a minor expansion would fill a chapter. And that tells me that what is really needed is a whole book devoted to the topic. For me to write it, I would have to spend many months of research just to obtain as much data as Garry Wills and John Cornwall already have. Both of those authors are brainwashed Catholics with no ability to evaluate Catholicism’s most infantile fairy tale doctrines. Resurrection? Trinity? Virgin birth? They are “in the Book” and therefore must be true. But each has nonetheless demonstrated a clear ability to question the behavior of popes and denounce their failure to live up to the author’s concept of what makes a “good” Catholic. They have written books denouncing John Paul ll and Benedict XVl for the most blatant of the imperfections and hypocrisies listed above. But they have yet to examine Ratzinazi’s overall record and report their findings to the world. Another expert in seeing through sacred cows is Christopher Hitchens, author of the definitive exposé of the media-created Mother Teresa. Any one of the three could write the biography that will give Ratzinazi the place in history such a monster truly deserves. I urge them to do so.

BILL GRIGG

To replace the smashed side view mirror on my ’06 Hyundai at Courtesy Ford in Elizabeth City.

And if this acknowledgment gets back to the religious nut who executed the damage he will undoubtedly be filled with joy.

Now, I did not actually see the damage being done, but after a close examination of the damage and evaluation of the circumstances existing at the time I had to rule out the likelihood of an accident being the cause.

The evidence indicates that a forceful blow by the butt of a hand inflicted the damage to this side view mirror.

Now, there are a lot of local people who are aware that I am an ‘active agnostic.’ I have in the past been in a position to observe some of these ‘religionists’ being very much antagonized by the very thought of it. You know, they just cannot tolerate such things. If you happen to be standing anywhere near them when they receive this revelation, you can observe the deadly fury in their faces.

Since the dawn of recorded history the miseries of religion have fermented upon good Planet Earth. And look at what it has done to witless human beings. It has made so many of them hateful and vicious. A classical current example being the news-making Hutaree militia: Religion gone berserk…

The theologian, Dexter said: “Religion is insanity, its own cultured, cultivated Species of insanity.” And I would say, that pretty well defines the issue…

I do expect that most of us would prefer to live at peace with the world. But sometimes that seems to be an inaccessible goal. There is always some form of antagonism working against it. Worldly and natural antagonisms are of course fundamental and essential for the physics of life and the transformation of its chemistry. Stuff we all eventually learn to live with. But ‘religious fanaticism’… Who can learn to live with it? Not even the religious enthusiasts themselves…

What can we do to save the ‘religious nuts’ from themselves? A lot of grief would be spared from our precarious planet if it could be done.

Some easily applied form of mental cathartic would be needed, I expect.

TAKE WARNING: These religious fanatics are going to have their Delusional Reality. And they will kill every living thing on Earth to get it if they have to.

Anyone got any constructive ideas?

Bill Grigg 03/30/10

WILLIAM HARWOOD

Every time I turn on the television news, or open a magazine that should be impervious to theocratic propaganda, I encounter the Big Lie that there are more than two billion Christians on this planet, including more than one billion Catholics. Has the human population doubled since 1990, when official Christian statistics claimed a mere one billion Christians, only sixty percent of them Catholic? And at a time when attendance at Sunday Mass has decreased by seventy percent in Germany, and by more than fifty percent in most other countries, including Catholic-permeated Latin America, are we to believe that conversions to Catholicism from other forms of theism and nontheism have doubled the number of Catholics worldwide? Even the 1990 figure of one billion Christians of all denominations was calculated by counting the entire population of countries with a Christian majority. Knowingly falsifying statistics for personal glorification is what theofascists do.

Conservapedia.com, reporting a survey on professed religious belief in several countries, found that in France 64 percent of respondents described themselves as atheist or agnostic, and a further 10 percent declined to identify themselves as a “believer in any form of god or supreme being.” Acknowledged nontheists in Germany numbered 45 percent, with a further 14 percent declining to express any form of god belief. In the Czech Republic the number of acknowledged nontheists was 59 percent. Figures from wordpress.com show the number of nontheists in Britain to be between 39 and 44 percent, in Sweden between 46 and 85 percent, in Denmark between 43 and 80 percent, and in Norway between 31 and 72 percent. Even in America, most polls echo conservapedia.com in showing the number disclaiming any religious affiliation as 18 percent, with a further 6 percent unwilling to respond. Overall, one sixth of the persons surveyed in twenty countries acknowledged themselves to be nontheists. When a sixth of the respondents in countries with an intolerant theist majority are willing to risk the social and economic consequences of making such a politically incorrect admission, it is a safe assumption that the true figure is at least twice that. Indeed, when Ronald Aronson analyzed the statistics objectively in Living Without God, he found that the number of nontheists in America (and the worldwide figure would be the same) is 36 percent. And the figure does not include a further 32 percent who do not want theocratic religion imposed on them by law.

As of 1 PM, Wednesday April 1, 2010, there were 701,673,127 Catholics on earth. Anyone who views that figure as wild speculation about a statistic that cannot possibly be measured accurately (as of course it is), should ask himself: Why is an attempted calculation of an accurate figure any less worthy of consideration than the theofascist propaganda of the world’s largest crime syndicate, whose hierarchs know as well as I do that the number of adherents to their mythology has decreased since 1990, not increased?

While all figures are approximate, and may be out by as much as three or four percent, the Occam’s razor calculation is that there are currently 6.7 billion humans on earth, consisting of 1.2 billion Christians, including 700 million Catholics, 1.1 billion Muslims, 0.9 billion Hindus, 0.6 billion folk religionists, 0.6 billion minority religions, including Buddhism, Shinto and Judaism, and 2.3 billion nontheists.

RON STAUFFER

CORPORATIONS ARE: Privatized profits and Socialized losses!

If this country is to be fair about welfare reform, then Corporate Welfare must be addressed too.

I’m fed up with “this costs too much and people do not need that entitlement…” mentioned by the same people who have no problem funding two ridiculous wars in the last decade and insisted on bailing out Wall Street last year so that the fat cats get even fatter. You talk about socialism—brother, we got it right here in River City!

CONSERVATIVES HEAR THIS: The only conservation you are interested in is in cash that you have in your wallet and portfolio. You were the TORIES when America was founded—you’ve always been against progress! And you are too dumb to realize that today big corporations are controlling you and this country with their lobbying rhetoric. You’ve not only been Swift-boated, but now you are Sarah Platinized!

WHO ARE you going to vote for now? The Republicans (the party of NO!) or the Tea Pots (the future of, whatever?).

STEPHEN VAN ECK

Jack Van Impe has been one of the leading proponents of “The end is Near” eschatology for, ironically, a very long time. But lately he has gone out on a limb in a way that will eventually prove him to be a False Prophet. Van Impe has cast his lot with those who have decided that President Obama is the Antichrist. (Also, for good measure, some sort of Commie.) A ridiculous, paranoid delusion that fails Scripturally and will also fail the test of time. Because Obama will serve 4, perhaps 8, years, and by the end of his term it will be abundantly clear that he was NOT the Antichrist. Van Impe, if he has any sense, will be embarrassed (whether or not he admits it) and everyone else will know he was wrong. When it comes to alleged Scriptural Prophecy, it’s a mistake to get too specific.

Speculation that Obama may be the Antichrist (a suspicion entertained by 24% of registered Republicans!) started well before he was elected, and it’s all too easy to shoehorn him into that role if you have only a glancing familiarity with the Real World. Van Impe inhabits an alternate reality consisting of Biblical fantasy, so it’s not surprising that he’s made what will prove to be a colossal error. What’s surprising is how he’s embroidered it with details. More than once he’s proclaimed that Zbigniew Brzezinski selected Obama to be our Future Dictator and started grooming him for the position in 1975—when Obama was 14! Even adjusting for the obvious error in time frame it’s impossible in the extreme to think that anyone would select anyone else for distant future leadership with any assurance of success that would make the effort worthwhile.

Over 40 years ago, before his big-time TV ministry, Jack Van Impe was just the pastor of a Baptist Church in Royal Oak, Michigan who had a local radio show on the side. Another station, WKNR (the one that started the “Paul is dead” rumor) would frequently run a snippet of one of his rants as part of their station identification: “There’ll be sex in the streets by 1975 because of Rock & Roll music!” Given the failure of that shocking prophecy (and his even worse failure to predict the disgusting rise of Disco by that time), Van Impe should have been chastened enough never to try playing Prophet again. But he wasn’t. And now he’s made a prophetic interpretation—unlike the long-pending Return of Christ—with a clear expiration date. In time, there’ll be egg on his face. I only hope he’ll be alive to feel the fool for it. For my part, I’ll be pointing like Nelson Muntz and singing, “Ha ha!” Join me then.