Our New Home

We have a new home, come join us at WeAreSMRT (We Are Skeptical Minds & Rational Thinkers)

The Forum

Friday, December 5, 2008



Sorry it's a bit small. Click for the larger image.

23 comments:

  1. It's a sign of a good cartoon when I find myself doing the squeaky voices in my head

    ReplyDelete
  2. Seriously, how do Christians justify this verse? Other than the snake handlers in rural Appalachia, I mean the Comforts, the fundys, how on earth do they possibly justify this?

    I suppose I already know my answer--just like anything else in the bible that doesn't fit, they probably say it was a metaphor or something. I'm glad I don't have to do that to my brain.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, you see, this relates to verse 79 in the book of fuck ups where they get bit and they justify it because the faith of the practitioner was low that night kinda like when your gas tank is low.

    You ned to read your bible, honey.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The funny thing is those verses, they're not really in the bible. If you check the NIV or any modern translation, it says they shouldn't be there.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Obsidian,

    Bullshit. My copy of the NIV says, and I quote:

    Mark 15-18:

    He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved, but whoever does not believe shall be condemned.

    And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues, they will pick up snakes with their hands and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people and they will get well."

    ReplyDelete
  6. From my NIV footnotes
    ((The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.))

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ob,

    What you said is that it isn't there as well as that modern translations say it shouldn't be there.

    It is there, whether it was in early manuscripts or not.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Also, it is interesting that in this instance we have an account of Jesus saying something that some claim wasn't really said, yet there it is in the Bible. The reality of the situation is that we really have no idea what Jesus said or did, or if he really even existed and even if he did exist that still doesn't make any claims to divinity true.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Funny - I just got back in the house from talking with a pair of Jehova's Witnesses.

    Too little too late, man!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I've been considering making a thread about this - but I don't think it'd be necessarily interesting enough to the group.

    In short, I often enjoy stuff like that - I'll readily talk with Mormons and JWs and anyone who wants to share their religious ideas with me. for the most part, I simply want to learn more about their belief system.

    In the end, most wind up mired in illogical dogma, which reinforces my deist (vague agnostic) standpoint.

    Today, it went fine - I actually got a copy of their "What The Bible Says" book, and I'm hoping it'll have stuff worthy of posting here.

    I really only want to learn, rather than support my existing opinions. I'll swear this on anything you'd consider sacred, and believe it to my core.

    To date, most of this learning has resulted in my current world view: if God exists, he's nothing like people seem to think :)

    ReplyDelete
  11. nonmagic sez....

    "Also, it is interesting that in this instance we have an account of Jesus saying something that some claim wasn't really said, yet there it is in the Bible."

    People discovered it throuh textual criticism.The only real reason it is there is because it made its way into the KjV.

    "The reality of the situation is that we really have no idea what Jesus said or did,"
    Lets be reasonable NM. At this standard we would have to questio what EVERYONE in ancient history said.We've got a fair idea of what he said.
    "or if he really even existed"
    Again , NM we would have to question eveyone's existence too. We have about 4 biographies wrttenn about him within a century of his life. It is very reasonable to say he existed.

    "and even if he did exist that still doesn't make any claims to divinity true"
    I guess that's true.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ob,


    People discovered it throuh textual criticism.The only real reason it is there is because it made its way into the KjV.

    You said it wasn't there and it is. Whether the 'only real reason' it is there is the one you give or not, the fact is that is IS there.


    Lets be reasonable NM. At this standard we would have to questio what EVERYONE in ancient history said.We've got a fair idea of what he said.

    No, we wouldn't have to question what everyone in ancient history said. Some people actually wrote things down themselves. If Jesus ever did write anything down, we know nothing of it.

    Also, please substantiate how we have a 'fair idea of what he said'. If you mean oral tradition handed down before it was written down, forget it. People can't even tell others exactly what was said in a presidential debate from one day to the next, much less after decades (minimum).


    Again , NM we would have to question eveyone's existence too. We have about 4 biographies wrttenn about him within a century of his life. It is very reasonable to say he existed.

    No, we wouldn't have to question everyone's existence. Loose oral tradition does not a biography make, at least one based on actual evidence based fact, not hearsay.

    ReplyDelete
  13. WEM,

    I used to be like you describe yourself as being. In high school and college, and even a few years beyond, I actively sought out those of different religions and talked to them at length about their beliefs. I learned a lot about sociology and got t apply a lot of what I learned in psychology (psych major here) during these talks.

    I don't do it anymore, I've lost interest due to having done it for so long and also I think that people approaching me on streets and in the workplace so often, touting their views, soured me on it. It was fine as long as it was something I was seeking, but when it was something they were pushing like an agenda, I lost interest in it.

    Still, when someone tells me they talked to a JW or a Mormon, I sometimes ask how it went. I guess it's a holdover from my old curiosities about how people think.

    I also think it's note worthy that you can talk to 10 different denominations of Christians and get 10 different versions of the same book (Bible) due to the combination of ambitious wording of the Bible and apologetics being so widespread.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Nonmagic wrote Still, when someone tells me they talked to a JW or a Mormon, I sometimes ask how it went. I guess it's a holdover from my old curiosities about how people think.

    Maybe one differences between us is where we live. I don't remember and couldn't easily find your state in your profile (maybe you live in Canada? I forget). In central Massachusetts, people are fairly quiet about their beliefs - it's not worn as a badge of honor as it is in places west and south of us. Maybe that's why it's a touch easier for me to be curious?

    I ask this, rather than suggesting it. In any case, I'm sure a healthy theistic background also keeps me receptive to it.

    ----

    You wrote again I also think it's note worthy that you can talk to 10 different denominations of Christians and get 10 different versions of the same book (Bible) due to the combination of ambitious wording of the Bible and apologetics being so widespread.

    Most definitely! If there was a single thing that makes me skeptical of Christianity in all its forms, it's this point. How they can co-exist with others who believe in the same book but come to different conclusions - all while asserting their interpretation is the most accurate...

    It's simply ridiculous...

    ReplyDelete
  15. To answer your question, I spoke with them for about 10 minutes, and then asked them to come back in 2 weeks. I want some time to absorb their book, and possibly come up with some questions as it relates to the beliefs of other religions.

    I plan on asking them why they felt the need to form their own splinter. I'm not sure they'll be able to answer that unless they have a good knowledge of their history - but knowing whether THEY can answer that question is a subtle way of getting them to stop and think about the stuff they're saying.

    ReplyDelete
  16. WEM,

    I was raised in the South and now live in Vegas. In the area where I was born people are very vocal about their beliefs, but I've lived in other places in the same state where it was highly frowned upon to do so.

    Here in Vegas we still have street preachers, believe it or not, but they are concentrated mainly around the Fremont Street area and I purposefully avoid that part of town.


    Most definitely! If there was a single thing that makes me skeptical of Christianity in all its forms, it's this point. How they can co-exist with others who believe in the same book but come to different conclusions - all while asserting their interpretation is the most accurate...

    It's simply ridiculous...


    OMFSM!! When I was growing up my mother (who was a fundy Baptist) wouldn't go to the Baptist church down the street because they were all going to hell for not believing like her Baptist church, which was across town! Christians can't even agree within there own denominations and then you get the different denominations all pointing the finger of Hell at each other and it's just hysterical!


    To answer your question, I spoke with them for about 10 minutes, and then asked them to come back in 2 weeks. I want some time to absorb their book, and possibly come up with some questions as it relates to the beliefs of other religions.

    I plan on asking them why they felt the need to form their own splinter. I'm not sure they'll be able to answer that unless they have a good knowledge of their history - but knowing whether THEY can answer that question is a subtle way of getting them to stop and think about the stuff they're saying.



    I admire you for this. I couldn't do it. You have tons more patience than I do. And I love your approach to getting them to think!

    ReplyDelete
  17. nonmagic..
    Oral tradition was very reliable.There is a difference. Rabbis and jews used to memorise the whole Old testament and Talmud and recite them. It would not be hard for the early Christians to memorize the sayings of Jesus.There is a difference between some modern day person trying to remember what he heard yesterday or a 1st century Jews memorizing the sayings that his teacher told him.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ob,

    You've made a couple of ok posts here so I really expected more from you than this. This is so weak it's almost not even worth responding to. As a matter of fact I call Poe on you.

    Not only is memory one of the least reliable ways to preserve evidence of anything, but also humans have agendas. Think before you type. Seriously. You honestly want to put forth the argument that memorization is evidence for any of the claims made about Jesus?

    Either bring something to the table worth considering or just admit ya got nothing, dude.

    ReplyDelete

Unlike Ray we don't censor our comments, so as long as it's on topic and not spam, fire away.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.