Tuesday, December 16, 2008

We Live in a Theocracy!

How do keep missing these things? I could have sworn we lived in a representative democracy. *rereads constitution* No . . . wait . . . now I'm confused.

What follows is the argument that if the bible is not literally true, every word of it (stop eating shrimp!), then all is chaos and anarchy. Admittedly, I do lean toward anarchy myself, but this is insane. I don't need to believe that the bible is literally true to follow the rule of law. In fact, I am an atheist and I follow the rule of law, therefore I have already proven that biblical innerrancy is unnecessary. Billions of people prove this every day.

The corollary to the above assertion that biblical innerrancy is necessary is that the writer of the article to be dissected would immediately start raping his grandmother while throwing molotav cocktails at a preschool if his faith wavered for a moment. Watch those people with biblefish on their cars very closely.

The Bible Not Literal? by David Welch (how 'bout a verb, buddy?)

Is the Bible literally true?" interviewer Cynthia McFadden of Nightline queried President George W. Bush recently. i can't figure out why she asked this, but whatever "Probably not. … I'm not a literalist. But you can learn a lot from it," was his reply. it's not you, it's me . . . you're a nice person, really. There are a number of reasons we should grant grace to the outgoing president on this issue it's really not our business?; however, the overarching issue lies squarely at the center of the turmoil we are in as a nation. really? the economic meltdown and the health care crisis are caused by Bush not believing that the bible is literally true? The answer to that question and its variances have divided families, churches, denominations – and certainly nations. really? nations?

Does it and should it matter what a politician thinks about the Bible? no, unless you're freakin' Huckabee and you're ok with turning the US into a theocracy. Does it? yes, unfortunately, should it, no. After all, his role is civil, not religious oh my tao, it's separation of church and state!. Is the president alone in his belief that, "I happen to believe that the way to God is through Christ; others have different avenues to God and I believe we pray to the same Almighty"? if you truly are a monotheist, then you necessarily believe that everyone praying to a god is praying to the same god. If you believe that there are many gods, you've just chosen the right one, that's monolatrism. (Reread the torah. the ancient israelites clearly believed in many gods, but believed they had chosen the best one.)

We do not expect nor even desire our commander in chief also to be our theological voice for the nation. really? you'd be the first bible literalist not to want that. refreshing! We do and should, however, expect that someone who professes to be a Christian exhibit knowledge of and commitment to the orthodox principles of the faith. oh, not refreshing. you know what orthodox means? "having the right OPINION" emphasis mine. opinions and facts are two different things.

During the mid '90s Nirvana!, I debated a liberal minister from a mainline denomination before a gathering of pastors in Washington state over a proposed "No Special Rights" state ballot measure that would have prohibited recognizing sexual behavior as a protected class. we lost the blacks to civil rights, we're not giving up the gays! As I prepared and prayed over how to cut through emotional hyperbole civil rights for everyone is "emotional hyperbole"? biblical literalness, on the other hand . . . and clearly address the core principles of hate, I felt led god made me do it! I ocassionally feel led to [censored], but I resist the voices in my head. to start out with what I believed to be at the heart of the matter.

In the opening comments, I asserted to the pastors that it was really quite simple as to why we could both be standing before them as Christian leaders and take opposite positions on something that the Bible clearly addresses. The bible clearly forbids eating shrimp, wearing clothes made of more than one fabric, trimming one's beard, rounding the corners of one's hair, and sitting in the same chair that a menstruating woman has sat on. Which of these commandmants is Mr. Welch obeying? Orthodox Jews actually hold to these rules, and even they don't kill adulterers, which the bible clearly commands. (Orthodox Judaism is really hard work!) I held my Bible up and said, "I believe that this is the inspired, inerrant and infallible word of God, from cover to cover." no, you don't, or you'd have a beard! I turned to the minister and said, "He doesn't," and explained that he then had the latitude to make up and modify his positions to suit his own desires, feelings or a myriad of other factors. just like you, Mr. Welch!

According to the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey (the link in the article brought you to . .. the article. I looked this up myself. I remember hearing something about the Pew Forum, but I don't remember if it was good or bad. Anyway.) conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, 59 percent of evangelical church attenders believe that the Bible is the "Word of God, literally true word for word."

59% of people sounds like a majority, right? Actually, only 26.3% of people in the survey self-identified as Evangelical Protestant. So 59% of 26.3%, or 15.5% of people, believe that the bible is the "Word of God, literally true word for word." That's still crazy frightening, but it's hardly a majority.

However, 57 percent of those same evangelicals believe "many religions can lead to eternal life," huh. wierd. they really believe that Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims get to go to heaven? a different heaven, perhaps? maybe there is hope for us all. which is a direct contradiction of the "literal" teaching of Jesus Christ. why are we quoting around literal? it's literal, or it isn't. can't be a little pregnant.

The rest of the article displays a frightening and essential misunderstanding of our country, our constitution and our founding fathers.

If we serve a God who is incapable of speaking through the created beings made in His image without error, then He is not God. or, god, allowing free will, allows for errors. or, god isn't speaking to anyone. Think about this for a second. If god really loved me, and the millions of people like me, and he truly will make me burn in hell for all eternity if I don't worship him, then why doesn't he just put his exact message in the sky in 500 foot tall, burning letters for me? I'd believe in him then. God should know that I'm not going to buy into a badly translated, several thousand year old document without some help. Either god is a bumbling moron, or god is a sadist. Either way, I'm not worshipping him. If he could transmit His word to a writer (from Moses to John) but could not assure that it was preserved to pass to future generations without error, then He is not God. Assuming facts not in evidence. After all, we don't have the ten commandments, do we? Why not? We have other many thousand year old stone writings. Why not that one?

If the above were true, our nation would then be at the mercy of man-centered and created philosophies, ambitions, desires and behavior restrained only by the power of the bayonet what about the gun that bayonet is attached to? After all, aren't you more afraid of a bullet than a knife? Unless it's a Lancer (see above), in which case I'd much rather be shot., as Speaker of the House Robert Winthrop noted proslavery politician! wisely proslavery! observed in the 1830s.
President Ronald Reagan, in his proclamation declaring 1983 the National Year of the Bible, why oh why would the US have a Year of the Bible? That was so fucking wrong. stated:

The Bible and its teachings helped form the basis for the Founding Fathers' abiding belief in the inalienable rights of the individual, rights which they found implicit in the Bible's teachings of the inherent worth and dignity of each individual. really? The Israelites were allowed slaves if they came from neighboring countries. Lev 25:44 (Get yourself a Canadian while they're still cheap!). It was permissable to rape a woman if you married her afterwards, or paid her father for the privilege. Deut 22:28-29 The bible does not teach the inherent worth and dignity of each individual. This same sense of man patterned the convictions of those who framed the English system of law inherited by our own Nation, as well as the ideals set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

If the Bible is not literal, then there are no such absolute standards by which to assert the rights claimed by the founders in those documents You mean like Thomas Jefferson, who coined the phrase "separation of church and state"? and by which to govern our nation today. Yes, there are. They are called the Constitution and the law. I obey them without god, you can, too. Since our president-elect is even more pluralistic He's MUSLIM! TERRORIST! He's BLACK! in his beliefs than his predecessor no, they're both christians who don't believe in biblical innerrancy, the time for reasserting the profound and irreplaceable "true truth" truthyness? of the Bible and its benefits for all mankind is now – and we must start in the church. stay there.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are for you guys, not for me. Say what you will. Don't feel compelled to stay on topic, I enjoy it when comments enter Tangentville or veer off into Non Sequitur Town. Just keep it polite, okay?

I am attempting to use blogger's new comment spam feature. If you don't immediately see your comment, it is being held in spam, I will get it out next time I check the filter. Unless you are Dennis Markuze, in which case you're never seeing your comment.

Creative Commons License
Forever in Hell by Personal Failure is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at foreverinhell.blogspot.com.