Catholic magic tricks #2 – the Resurrection

Here’s another magic trick from The Catechist’s Magic Kit: 80 Simple Tricks for Teaching Catholicism to Kids. To repeat, this is not satire. It is from an actual book, published this year with the Imprimatur of the Bishop of Brooklyn, New York.

This week I am featuring some of my favourite tricks from this delightful book. Yesterday I showed you a card trick to encourage children to consider becoming Priests by lying to them. In today’s trick, you will learn how to persuade children that the Resurrection was real by showing them a faked illusion.

To perform this trick, you need a cutout of Jesus which is provided in the book, plus some crayons, an envelope and a pair of scissors. You start by asking a volunteer child to colour in the cutout picture of Jesus. You then put the cutout Jesus into the envelope, and cut the envelope in two with the scissors, before showing the children that Jesus has emerged unharmed from the cutting.

As before, you start by setting the scene: “When Jesus said that he would destroy the temple and, in three days, rebuild it, He wasn’t speaking about the actual temple in Jerusalem where the Jews would make sacrifices to God. Instead, Jesus was referring to His body, which would be crucified and then resurrected. let me show you an example of what Jesus meant.”

You now take the coloured-in cutout of Jesus, and slide it into the envelope. Or so the children think! Actually, you are sliding the cutout Jesus in and out of two slits that you have secretly cut in the back of the envelope. As the book warns: “Make sure that you don’t flash the back of the envelope or the illusion will be destroyed.” This is great advice, because who would want illusions about the Resurrection to be destroyed?

You continue: “When Jesus was killed, His body stayed in the tomb for three days,” and you illustrate the killing with the rather gruesome metaphor of cutting the envelope, inside which lies Jesus, in two with the scissors. Or so the children think! Instead, somewhat like Penn and Teller sawing a lady in two, you are actually cutting the envelope without harming the cutout of Jesus.

You then ask the children: “But do you know what happened after those three days?” And you show your delighted audience that the coloured-in cutout Jesus has not been destroyed. Lest they miss the theological significance of the parlour trick, you explain: “This is what Jesus meant. His body might have been destroyed, but He lives forever with us and the father.”

To convince any skeptical children that Jesus is really unharmed, you pass out the cutout for them to examine. But heed the final warning in the book: “And rip up the envelope to destroy any evidence of the trick.” Again, this is great advice, because if people have evidence that something is not true they are much less likely to believe it.

It’s a good trick, albeit with some practical and theological flaws. Based on the illustration, nobody would believe that the cutout Jesus has been put into the envelope. It is protruding from two ends where the envelope is sealed. And cutting Jesus in two is not really the same as crucifying him. But at least the book makes clear that, when Jesus talked of the temple, the temple that he referred to had nothing to do with those pesky Jews.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Catholic magic tricks #1 – Holy Orders

Warning: this is not satire. This is from an actual book, published this year, called The Catechist’s Magic Kit: 80 Simple Tricks for Teaching Catholicism to Kids. The book is written by Angelo Stagnaro, and has the Imprimatur of the Bishop of Brooklyn, New York.

The blurb reads: “Simple magic tricks for teaching spiritual truths to children are explained in precise detail in this distinctive compendium. The lessons faithfully follow the catechism of the Catholic Church… The strongest element of this book is the explanation of the theology and spiritual truths that underlie each trick in a simple and inspiring way.”

This week I will feature some of my favourite tricks from this delightful book, starting today with a simple mathematical card trick to encourage children to consider becoming Priests by lying to them.

To perform this trick, you need six profession cards, which are included in the book. Though the book does not refer to this, I assume there is no significance in the fact that the doctor looks slightly like Bono and the priest looks like a black Larry David. You also need an envelope, a black magic marker, and a photo of a small boy with a priest image glued on the back.

You start by setting the scene: “It is through the Sacraments that we principally experience God,” you tell the children. “Our Priests, our Bishops and the Pope get their authority from the Apostles, and they got it from Christ Himself. It is God that sustains our leaders.”

Now that you have set the mood, you place the six cards in a row, face down, on the table, placing the Priest card third from the left. You then ask a volunteer from among the children to pick a number between one and six.

If they pick three, you count out the number starting from the left, and turn over the Priest card. If they pick four, you count out the number starting from the right, and turn over the Priest card. If they pick one, two or six, you spell out the number starting from the left, and turn over the Priest card. If they pick five, you spell out the number starting from the right, and turn over the Priest card.

You then turn over the other cards and tell the child: “You have chosen the Priest card. You could have chosen any of these others…” (technically, of course, this is a lie, but that’s not important and the children will hopefully trust that you are telling them the truth).

You then say: “let’s look at my prediction,” and you open the envelope. The children are surprised to see a picture of a small boy. Has the catholic magician got it wrong? You then say: “Ah, this is a photo of a Priest long before he was ordained…” and turn it over to reveal the image of the Priest glued to the back.

Then comes the lesson of the trick. You say to the children: “Does anyone here know a Priest? Who here wants to be a Priest? Being a Priest is an important job in the Church. WIthout them we wouldn’t be able to experience the Sacraments. The Church community needs Priests. Always keep Priests in your prayers.”

Finally, and again I stress that this is not satire, the explanation ends with following advice: ”TIP: When looking for volunteers for this trick, it’s best to ask a boy to assist you rather than a girl as only males are allowed to become Priests in the Catholic Church”.

One threat that the book does not mention is that you have to make absolutely sure that you get this trick right. If you mistakenly turn over the wrong card, a child might end up wanting to become a doctor or a fireman or a teacher or an artist or a chef, which would of course be a disaster for society.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

New Hitchens Vs D’Souza debate

This is Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D’Souza debating in Orlando last week. In part one, they debate God, Christianity, and Science and Reason. In part two, they respond to questions from each other and the audience.

(If you can’t see the videos, go to this page.)

Part One: Topics

On God, Hitchens argues that the idea of God, unlike philosophy and science, provides only guesses and undeliverable promises based on faith. D’Souza responds that science answers the question of how, and God answers the question of why. Hitchens responds that these are linguistic superimpositions on things we don’t understand. D’Souza says he is arguing on reason alone, not on Biblical revelation, for intelligent design.

On Christianity, D’Souza argues that Islam is unusual among religions in creating suicide bombers. Hitchens responds by citing Christianity’s links with European fascism, and says there is no link between virgin births or resurrections, and preaching the truth. D’Souza argues that freedom is at the heart of Christianity.

On Science and Reason, Hitchens argues that scientists throughout history could be great scientists while also mistakenly believing in gods. D’Souza argues that we can infer that the play Hamlet was designed, even though we do not see Shakespeare today, and we can also infer that the universe was designed.

Part Two: Questions

Hitchens asks D’Souza would he rather that Hitchens stayed as an atheist, or became a non-Christian religious person. D’Souza responds that he feels safer debating him as an atheist.

D’Souza asks Hitchens if he has ever had any doubt about his atheism, and if so, what caused it. Hitchens responds that Pascal’s Wager is immoral, and that if he is honestly mistaken he is proud of that mistake.

In audience questions, Hitchens is asked about Stalin’s murders. He responds that Stalin was connected with the Russian orthodox Church, and that a fair comparison would be with a society that followed values from greek philosophy to Thomas Paine. D’Souza replies that if the Muslims are blamed for Bin Laden, and Christians for the Inquisition, then Atheists should be blamed for Stalin. Hitchens responds that Stalin did not act in the name of atheism.

D’Souza is asked whether god was not invented because of fear of the unknown. He responds that religions do not provide wish fulfillment, because Hell is the ultimate fear. Hitchens responds that not all of our wishes are benign, and that some people fear being free.

D’Souza is asked why God won’t heal amputees. He responds that amputees still have life, and that paraplegics and lottery winners are both as happy a year later as they were before their changes. Hitchens responds that D’Souza missed the point of the question, which was that miracle healers make untestable claims, not testable ones. D’Souza responds that miracles are spiritual ministry, not physical healing.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Ten funny anagrams for rational people

Creationism = I’m so certain

Intelligent design = Deleting listening

Evangelical Protestantism = Plainest, lamest overacting

Roman Catholicism = Criminal homo acts

Islam = I slam

Homeopathy = Empty hoo-ha

Alternative medicine = Tame evidence in trial

Faith healer – Hail the fear

Transubstantiation = Stuns brain to attain

The Rapture = Pure threat

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The false flow of the Biblical Jesus stories

Imagine you have never heard of the Bible, and you are given the 27 books of the New Testament and asked to put them in order.

You would probably come close to the order they appear in today: the four Gospels that tell the story of Jesus, then the Book of Acts that tells how the early church developed, then various letters by Paul and others, then the Book of Revelation that tells how the world will end.

If you did this, you would have created a continuous narrative, each book being a chapter, each building on the previous one, to create one grand story. You would also have created a false impression of how and why these books were written. And you would have obscured the sequence in which different writers gradually introduced the various elements of the Jesus legend.

Written in a Different Sequence

Firstly, these books were written in a very different sequence. Paul wrote his letters first, about 48-62 CE, and he wrote almost nothing about the earthly life of Jesus. Starting maybe in the 50s CE, someone compiled sayings attributed to Jesus into a text called Q, which probably became one source of two of the later Gospels. The book of Revelation, with its violent avenging Jesus, was written in stages between about 60-95 CE.

The Gospel called Mark was written about 65-70 CE, and it has no virgin birth and no detail of the resurrection. These stories first appear in the Gospels called Matthew and Luke, which were written about 80-85 CE, as was the Book of Acts, some of which contradicts what Paul earlier wrote about himself.

The Gospel called John was written about 90-95 CE, and it is the first book that suggests that Jesus was actually God, as distinct from a human being who had a special relationship with God.

Written as Standalone Books

Secondly, these books were not written as part of a grand meta-story. They were never intended to be read as continuous chapters of the same book. Their writers wrote them as standalone books, at different places and times, to convey different political and theological beliefs, for different audiences and reasons. This is one reason for the many contradictions in the New Testament.

And so, over a period of fifty or more years, these different individual writers separately created the apocalyptic apparitions of Paul, the eloquent quotations of Q, the raging ruler of Revelation, the marginalized messiah of Mark, the Moses-like messiah of Matthew, the all-inclusive leader of Luke, and the Jehovah-like Jesus of John.

The writers of those contradictory stories did not foresee that their texts would become part of a book centuries later. Indeed, many of them believed that the earthly world would have ended within their own lifetimes.

Written Alongside Rival Books

Thirdly, these books were only some among many rival Gospels that early Christians wrote and read. As well as political and practical differences, there were many theological arguments among early Christians about the nature of Jesus.

The Ebionites believed Jesus was totally human and not divine, and that the Jewish God had adopted him at his baptism. The Marcionites believed Jesus was totally divine and not human, and had come to save people from the Jewish God. The Gnostics believed that one of many Gods had used Jesus to convey special knowledge to save human souls from the material world. And the faction that eventually won out argued that Jesus was both totally human and totally divine.

This policy of Jesus being “both totally human and totally divine” enabled this faction (which evolved into today’s Christianity) to include contradictory versions of Jesus into what has become the New Testament.

How Jesus Gradually Became God

To help understand the New Testament stories better, read them in the sequence in which they were written, instead of the sequence in which they appear in the Bible. Doing this may change your beliefs about not only the Jesus of history, but also the Jesus of theology.

You will see how a human Jewish preacher gradually evolved into being part of a newly-invented Christian God, and how his relationship with this God gradually started earlier and earlier as time went on: from his resurrection in the letters of Paul, to his baptism in the Gospel called Mark, to his conception in the Gospels called Matthew and Luke, to the start of time in the Gospel called John.

For a comprehensive analysis of these and similar themes, read the work of Bart Ehrman and other academic textual critics of the New Testament.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Top ten kinky quotes by Pastor Anderson

Steven Anderson is the Phoenix Pastor who recently asked his parishioners to pray that God would kill President Obama, by giving him brain cancer so that he would die like Senator Ted Kennedy.

Anderson has since followed this up with a radio interview in which he calls for gay people to be executed, and insists that the host of the show Michelangelo Signorile, must be molesting children because he is gay.

(If you can’t see the video, go to the original article here.)

Anderson’s church website provides endless amusement in the form of transcripts of his sermons and essays.

Here are my Top Ten Kinky Quotes by Pastor Steven Anderson:

10. Pastor Anderson on perverted male gynecologists

“Because of years and years of looking at and touching scores of women inappropriately, the male gynecologist no doubt has a seared conscience and a perverted mind… Any doctor that looks upon and touches a woman’s private parts in his office “hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.”  Sir, if you let your wife go to a male gynecologist, you need to get right with God.”

9. Pastor Anderson on the Beatles as God-hating communist devils

“If music without drums, syncopation, or a rock beat is acceptable music, then “Yesterday” by the Beatles would be suitable for a Christian. This song has no drums, syncopation, or rock n roll beat – so what’s wrong with it? It doesn’t talk about drugs, illicit behavior, or violence – so what’s wrong with it? What’s wrong with it is the source. It was written by God-hating communist devils. Rock n roll music was pioneered by ungodly sinners like Little Richard, a sodomite filthy animal, and Ray Charles, a heroin addict. The source of rock n roll music is ungodly.”

8. Pastor Anderson comparing Letterman and Leno unfavourably to Jesus

“God, please just help it to be real to us. Help us to realize that David Letterman and Jay Leno just aren’t that funny.  The sitcoms and the TV shows and the movies just aren’t that cool.  The rock music just isn’t that great anymore when we realize that there is a far greater purpose for our lives; to win souls to Jesus Christ.”

7. Pastor Anderson on sinful sports heroes

“Other Christians only use the television to watch sports, but are the typical athletic superstars of our day the role models we want for our children? Aside from the numerous beer commercials, not to mention the scantily clad cheerleaders at half-time, they are also being taught to idolize whoremongers like Coby Bryant and Michael Jordan, freaks like Dennis Rodman and Magic Johnson, and drug-users like Jose Canseco and Mark McGuire.”

6. Pastor Anderson on married sodomite perverts who molest children

“Every Sodomite in the Bible is a rapist or molester… A common misconception is that homosexuals are only attracted to and only prey on men. It is clearly seen in the Bible that homosexuals are perverted in other ways and are always bisexual… Just because a man is married and has children does not rule out the fact that he is a sodomite pervert. This is one reason why small children should not be left alone with a man that is outside their immediate family.”

5. Pastor Anderson on the evils of The Odd Couple

“Consider the show “The Odd Couple” from the 1960’s. Aside from sinful content, we are being exposed to an alternative lifestyle of two men living together as roommates. Genesis 2:24 tells us God’s normal plan, “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” Although neither man in the show is a homosexual, this show was obviously a forerunner of the sitcoms of today which feature homosexual characters.”

4. Pastor Anderson on Ellen Degeneres and other perverts

“I am not a fool. Don’t tell me that Sodom is not on the TV because it is. I mean, don’t tell me that there is a prime time show that doesn’t have these filthy sodomite queer characters, because it does.  I remember when I was in high school.  I was 17 years old. The show came out Ellen. Ellen, the first… was going to be the first lesbian sitcom. It was ripped off the air. That was in 1999.  That was 1998 or whatever it was.  They ripped it off the air.  And they said, “No.  People couldn’t handle it.” Twelve months later it was back on the air.  And twelve months after that, every prime time show had sodomite characters.  That’s how fast it happened.”

3. Pastor Anderson on the bunch of queers on the cooking channel

“You say, “Well, I don’t watch that stuff.  I just watch the weather. I just watch the cooking channel.” Those guys cooking on the cooking channel are a bunch of queers.  You know they are. “Oh, you know, I just throw in a little bit of this.” Good night.  Be a man.”

2. Pastor Anderson on his desire to beat Christopher Lowell

“You say, “Oh, I just like…I just watch the home decorating show.” Oh, good night.  What’s that guys name? This guy was on when I was a teenager.  Christopher Lowell.  And who has ever heard of that guy?  Is that what his name is?  I got the name right?  Christopher Lowell. That gay little piece of trash.  I would like to beat the fire out of him. Somebody needs to beat him with the ugly stick.”

1. Pastor Anderson comparing hell to being locked in a closet (Hmmmmm….)

“And this is what thought entered mind. I thought to myself… I looked over at the closet and I thought to myself, “What if I were locked in that closet for 100 years, nothing to do, nothing to see, the closet is dark.” … And then I thought, “What if you never get out of that closet.” That would be awful, wouldn’t it, just locked in a closet forever and you knew you were never going to get out.”

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

How to have faith in your football team

The story about the American High School football coach who brought his team to church during a school trip, and had nearly half of them baptized, reminds me of a story about the father of a friend of mine in Ireland. He too coached a junior football team, who played on a Sunday morning, and he regularly brought them to church to attend Mass on the day of their matches.

When the Mass schedules did not fit in with the football schedules, he devised an improvisation. He would bring the boys to an early Mass, they would leave halfway through the Mass to play their football match, then he would bring them back to church to catch the second half of a later Mass.

Whatever your views about him bringing the children to Mass, you’ve got to admire his ingenuity.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The garden of Eden court case

A courtroom. There are two snakes. One is sitting at a Barrister’s bench. The other is lying on the ground.

BAILIFF
Hear ye, hear ye, hear ye. The Court of Appeal of Biblical Decisions is now in session. All rise for the case of The Snake versus God at the Garden of Eden.

The judge enters. The Barrister-Snake rises and stands upright. The Defendant-Snake stays lying on the ground.

JUDGE
(to Barrister-Snake)
Why has your client not risen?

BARRISTER-SNAKE
He has been cursed by God, your honour, and he must now…
(looks at papers)
‘Go on his belly and eat dust’. He wishes to appeal that decision.

JUDGE
Very well
(to Defendant-Snake)
Do you swear to tell the truth, so help you God?

DEFENDANT-SNAKE
Well, he hasn’t really helped me so far.

JUDGE
(looking at papers)
I see you were convicted of deceiving a Mr. and Mrs. Adam.

BARRISTER-SNAKE
And it is they who I shall call as my first witnesses.

Adam and Eve enter. They are wearing only fig leaves.

BARRISTER-SNAKE
Mr and Mrs Adam, can you please tell the court what you were doing on the day in question?

ADAM
Well, I was very tired, because I’m only made out of dust, and God had just ripped out one of my ribs to make her.
(Eve giggles)
So I had sent her to get some food.

EVE
And then I met him
(points to the Defendant-Snake)
And I told him that we couldn’t eat from the tree in the middle of the garden, because we would die if we did that.

BARRISTER-SNAKE
And was that true?

ADAM
Well, that’s what God told me anyway. He said we would surely die on the same day that we ate from it.

EVE
But he
(points to the Defendant-Snake)
said that we wouldn’t die, that we would just know the difference between good and evil.

BARRISTER-SNAKE
So you ate from the tree.

ADAM
Yes, we did.

BARRISTER-SNAKE
And did you die on that same day?

EVE
Well, no.

BARRISTER-SNAKE
And how long ago was that?

ADAM
(Counts on his fingers)
Just over nine hundred years ago.

BARRISTER-SNAKE
And you are both still alive.

EVE
Yes. I just recently gave birth to our last child.

BARRISTER-SNAKE
(to Judge)
So I put it to you, your honour, that my client did not deceive the two witnesses, but that God deceived them, and my client told them the truth. If anything, my client should be commended under the recent legislation for the protection of whistleblowers.

JUDGE
(looking through papers)
Well, the Genesis transcript does seem to verify your argument. Very well. Mr Snake, you are free from the curse of going on your belly and eating dust.
(hits bench with gavel)
Case closed!

DEFENDANT-SNAKE
Yessssssssssssssssssss!

Emotional music as the Defendant-Snake rises from the ground in slow motion and runs to the Barrister-Snake. They both embrace by intertwining their bodies.

ADAM
Actually, before we go, can I just say that God cursed us as well.

EVE
He made childbirth painful for me. And he put him
(points to Adam)
in charge of me.

ADAM
And he made the soil barren, so now I have to work to earn a living.

JUDGE
Very well. You are all free from your curses.
(hits bench with gavel)

DEFENDANT-SNAKE
Yessssssssssssssssssss!

Reprise of emotional music as Adam and Eve run in slow motion into the embrace of the Defendant-Snake and the Barrister-Snake. As everyone leaves:

ADAM
Can I still be in charge of her, though?

JUDGE
Of course you can.

SCENE ENDS

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The fanciful first page of the New Testament

First fiction in the New Testament

How soon is the first fiction in the New Testament? Try the first page. The title is the Gospel of Matthew. In reality, nobody knows who wrote any of the Gospels, other than they were Christians who spoke Greek and lived outside Palestine between about 65-95 CE. It was much later, maybe as late as 180 CE, that the names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were attached to these books, in order to give them credibility and authority.

At that time there were many rival Christian Gospels, only some of which ended up in the Bible. The main theological dispute among early Christians was whether Jesus was totally human or totally divine. The faction that eventually won out, and that evolved into today’s Christianity, argued that Jesus was both totally human and totally divine. This enabled them to include contradictory stories about Jesus into what became their New Testament by about 300 CE.

First contradiction in the New Testament

How soon is the first contradiction in the New Testament? Again, try the first page. It begins with a lengthy genealogy of Jesus, to prove he was descended from David and Abraham. The list starts when Abraham begat Isaac, and ends when Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary. But the very next paragraph tells us that Joseph was not the father of Jesus, which means Jesus was not related to anyone in this lengthy genealogy.

In reality, this is a clumsy attempt to merge two contradictory myths: that the Jewish messiah would be descended from King David, and that Jesus had a virgin birth. And the virgin birth myth has a mix of two sources: somebody mistranslated the Old Testament Hebrew word for ‘young woman’ into the New Testament Greek word for ‘virgin’, and early Christians were seeking converts among Greek and Roman Gentiles who were familiar with existing gods who were believed to have been born of virgins.

First absurdity in the New Testament

How soon is the first absurdity in the New Testament? Again, try the first page. It introduces the central theme of the Christian story. We are so used to hearing this fantastic story, and we know so many people who sincerely believe it to be true, that we can easily become desensitized to how utterly absurd it is.

The story suggests that the creator of the universe deliberately interrupted the laws of nature, in order to impregnate a virgin female of one specific tribe, of one of millions of species of sentient life, on one small planet in one small solar system, in one of hundreds of billions of galaxies in an ever-expanding universe, in order to give birth to himself, so that he could die and return to life and write his story in a book, in order to save the descendants of this human virgin mother from the spiritual consequences of a talking snake persuading one of her ancestors to eat a piece of fruit, and furthermore the creator of the universe wants me personally to benefit from this.

In reality, none of this ever happened. It is a cumulation of fictional stories, invented in more primitive times to convey messages through metaphor.

Fanciful first page sets the tone

That fanciful first page sets the tone for the unreliability of the New Testament as a coherent guide to who Jesus was or how Christianity evolved. Many scholars have researched the historical Jesus, and their quest has been well recorded by writers like Albert Schweitzer, David Boulton, and Bart Ehrman.

All of these studies faced the same underlying problems: nobody wrote anything about Jesus during his lifetime, none of the writers of the New Testament had never met him, none of their original texts exist, and the copies that do exist are riddled with centuries of errors in both transcription and translation.

It is on such shaky foundations that the Christian faith is built.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Stephen Fry on religion

Here is a wonderful reply by Stephen Fry when asked if secularism leads to a world without imagination and beauty.

(If you can’t see the video, follow this link to the original article.)

Fry begins: ‘I don’t think we should ever allow religion the trick of maintaining that the spiritual and the beautiful and the noble and the altruistic and the morally strong and the virtuous are in any way inventions of religion, or particular or peculiar to religion.’

He then compares the Genesis myth of Christianity, which leads to humans apologising for being sinful, with the Prometheus myth of the Greeks, which leads to humans believing that whatever is divine is within us.

And he concludes: ’That’s what religion has become, a feeble and anaemic nonsense, because we understood that the fire was within us. It was not in some idol on an altar, whether it was a gold cross or whether it was a Buddha or anything else. We had it. The fault is in us and not in our stars but also the glory is in us and not in our stars. We take credit for what is great about man and we take the blame for what is dreadful about man. We neither grovel and apologise at the feet of a god, or are so infantile as to project the idea that we once had a father as human beings and we therefore should have a divine one too. We have to grow up.’

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

140+ favourite atheist books

This list is regularly updated: add your own favourite atheist-related book to the comments and I will add it to the list.

During July I asked on Twitter and Facebook about your favourite atheist-related books, and why. The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins was recommended as many times as the next three books combined. The Bible took second place, with its power to convince people of atheism edging it ahead of God is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens.

Also popular in the original list were books by Phillip Pullman, Sam Harris, Bertrand Russell, Daniel Dennett, Douglas Adams, Michael Shermer, Julian Baggini, Pascal Boyer, Nietzsche, Carl Sagan and Derren Brown. More have since been added based on the comments to this post.

But the most fascinating part is the eclectic list of books recommended once. You may not have heard of all of them, but each is a book that somebody, somewhere, believes to be a valuable read for anybody interested in finding out more about atheism, reality or morality.

Here’s the full list, along with some of the reasons that you gave as to why this was your favourite atheist-related book.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

35 x The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. The first to comprehensively address a lot of the issues I had been thinking about… Because he is a genius and much more eloquent than I could ever be… Because it reinforced with me that my decision was right and it turned my dad from agnosticism to atheism… Because I kept shouting “YES!! That’s what I’ve always said!”… Because it’s all covered… I wanted to hand it to others that didn’t understand my beliefs and yell “See? Read”… The modern classic. I found it more “fun” than others I’ve read, and that counts with shallow folk like me… I already had ‘Faith’ I just needed the ammunition to argue more effectively… Total eye opener and extremely thought provoking… Logical and concise. Dawkins at his best… For its clear wording, its non-aggressive (well almost) approach and the breath of subjects covered… It was the first book that actually made question the beliefs I was brought up with in a scientific manner… He’s a brilliant man!… After 39 years was glad to find out that atheism was more prevalent than thought plus it was my first book to read on atheism… Provides the most clear scientific explanations for the existence of religion… It’s the most comprehensive rebuttal of religion out there and I’m drawn to the fact that Dawkins tackles it mainly from a scientific as opposed to a social viewpoint… Because it appears aggressive, domineering and arrogant but is in fact only plain and honest or reciprocating… By far my favorite and most important… The God Delusion changed my life.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

22 x The Bible (or holy book of choice), taken with a grain of skepticism… At least as far as books that led to my inability to believe… The New Testament… Hard to beat the Bible itself as a cornerstone for fundamental atheist belief!… It deconstructs itself… If only more Christians would read it… It has a bit of everything: genocide, incest, child murder, rape pillage, incurable knee botches… Best reason to reject theism… Makes it a whole lot easier to disbelieve in a god… My favorite is Leviticus… It’s really the only one you’ll ever need… It’s the best example of the ludicrousness of religion… It was certainly the Bible that started me doubting. I was a good little catholic girl but at the age of four or five when I heard the first thing Noah did on reaching dry land was to sacrifice some of the animals I said the whole thing was dotty.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

12 x God is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens. More aggressive and attacking of religion than just the existence of gods… Utterly brilliant… Really blasted religion… It takes all my beliefs on religion and wraps them up as eloquently as possible… Bloody brilliant… Mainly because it goes straight to the point… Just a comprehensive analysis of the wrongs of religion against humanity… It’s vicious but brilliantly argued… I just like polemics I guess.

* * * * * * * *

8 x Why I am not a Christian by Bertrand Russell. Mostly because it was my first… I was very young when I read it, and it really made me think, still does… A clear, calm critique/argument against religion in essays; doesn’t ridicule believers… Not “against” religion, but against its use as a source for moral or ethical rules… Probably the most famous atheist of his time, he also supported son-in-law through seminary… 80 years later and that pamphlet hasn’t lost its potency.

* * * * * * *

7 x His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman. Celebrates the unleashing of human creative thought and action over imposed dogma… Remember Pullman’s image of The Authority?… Like something from the fashion show in Fellini’s Roma… Nil points for originality on my part, but full points on his.

7 x Letter To A Christian Nation by Sam Harris. For its brevity… Because it’s short, to the point and covers all the bases… It’s a short, but sharp critique of Christianity… Short, sweet and loaded with powerful arguments against irrational religious belief.

* * * * *

5 x Breaking the Spell by Daniel Dennett. Pretty good. Easy to read & understand with a touch of humor… Good popularization of Boyer, et al… More convincing, less strident than Dawkins.

5 x The End of Faith by Sam Harris. Because it delves into the psychology… Less gratuitously nasty and better argued than many others… Well argued on points I was often uncomfortable with.

5 x The Portable Atheist by Christopher Hitchens. Great collection of essays from past & present atheists… It serves as a sort of atheist/humanist Bible, if you will… In it, Michael Shermer’s “Genesis Revisited; A Scientific Creation Story” is a long time personal favourite.

* * *

3 x A Very Short Introduction to Atheism, by Julian Baggini. Philosophically precise yet readable… Packs in all the arguments, including a few you may not find elsewhere, but does it pretty dispassionately, which can be an advantage sometimes.

3 x All in the Mind by Ludovic Kennedy. Often overlooked.

3 x God’s Problem. How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question: Why We Suffer. by Bart D. Ehrman. Ehrman is a higly educated biblical scholar and former evangelical christian who became an atheist through his knowledge of the bible.

3 x Godless by Dan Barker. How an evangelical preacher became an atheist advocate.

3 x Die Zukunft Einer Illusion by Freud. Essential to any atheist library.

3 x Dune by Frank Herbert

3 x In Defence of Atheism (aka The Atheist Manifesto) by Michel Onfray. Gives a great historical picture of how religion has obstructed social progress. Really for the convinced Atheist to help think more deeply about how Christianity has influenced every aspect of our lives and how to start deconstructing that influence.

3 x Infidel by Ayann Hirsi Ali. Displays the evils of Islam and particularly the oppression of women and irrational dogma.

3 x On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin. Probably the book that started the ball rolling as far as a valid alternative to the god idea is concerned. It is amazing how much Darwin had correct when he had no knowledge of the details of DNA and Plate Tectonics etc.

3 x Small Gods by Terry Pratchett. The gods in this book (and in The Galactic Pot Healer by Phillip K Dick) are real, as in eating, drinking, farting, fighting, falling in love real, as well as ridiculous. As any god would be.

3 x The Antichrist by Nietzsche

3 x The Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan. Beautifully written… I think it might be because I read it in his voice.

3 x The Hitch-hiker’s Guide To The Galaxy by Douglas Adams. Classic… Particularly the Babel fish… God vanishes in a puff of logic!

3 x Tricks of the Mind by Derren Brown. Mostly for the non-atheist related stuff, but also he explains the rationale very well. It’s a stealth atheist book, you read about the shameful scam of mediums preying on the vulnerable and…

3 x Why People Believe Weird Things by Michael Shermer. Great on general skepticism, logical fallacies etc… Didn’t change my view on the world, but made me understand that I’m a skeptic, which led to understanding that I’m an atheist… Isn’t really atheistic but I loved it.

* *

2 x 50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God by Guy Harrison. Good broad & nonthreatening introduction to give to believers.

2 x An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Atheism by Daniel Harbour. Explains beautifully the difference between the two ways one can view the world. One is the view which underlies the scientific process, and the other is the one which underlies religion, belief in healing crystals and all that.

2 x Atheism Advanced by David Eller. Better than his Natural Atheism… takes atheism beyond atheism, so to speak, and brings his audience to atheism’s ultimate conclusion.

2 x Das Wesen des Christentums by Feuerbach. Essential to any atheist library.

2 x Natural Atheism by David Eller

2 x Religion Explained by Pascal Boyer. Great overall explanation.

2 x The Foundation series by Asimov. Shows how easily a religion could be invented – in this case, to control the nuclear power generation plants… My skeptical journey through agnostisism , eventually leading to atheism, began with Asimov.

2 x The Misery of Christianity Joachim Kahl. Brilliant, but sadly out of print.

2 x The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. A very readable science book, which explains how we evolved, and how behaviours like empathy evolved (not god given).

2 x Skepticism Inc. by Bo Fowler. Lovely bit of Vonnegut fanfic.

2 x Voltaire’s Bastards by John Ralston Saul. Saul is wonderful and a deep, black cynic. Vastly under-rated philosopher, economist and social commentator.

2 x Waiting For Godot by Samuel Becket. The greatest play of the 20th century and a powerful commentary on the emotions that engender religion – fear, vulnerability, a desire for certainty, and so on: ”Yes, in this immense confusion one thing alone is clear. We are waiting for Godot to come.”

*

1984 by George Orwell. The most important book for me on the topic of what truth is, and being influenced by others, and lying to yourself.

A History of American Secularism by Susan Jacoby. It ought to be a mandatory read. I doubt even atheists realize the extent to which the religious bloc have impeded social progress. Or the extent to which just about every leap in humankind was either conceived or fervently encouraged by brave atheists and agnostics.

A History of God by Karen Armstrong. Should be required reading for ALL!

A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce

After God by MC Taylor

Against All Gods by AC Grayling. Like Life, Sex and Ideas, this makes the case against god/s and religion and outlines what makes healthy, sane, intelligent, informed, dare I say happy, people and societies.

An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding by David Hume. If for no other reason than his classic argument in Section X, “On Miracles”.

Androcles and the Lion by George Bernard Shaw. The preface gave me my first set of tools – ideas and words – for dismantling religion.

Atheism: A Philosophical Justification by by Martin. For the detail.

Atheism: A Reader. I liked all the essays.

Atheism Remix by R. Albert Mohler Jr. A Christian perspective on atheism’s recent popularity and growth surge since 9/11

Atheism: The Case Against God by George H Smith.

Atheist Universe by David Mills. Lucid, daring and cute as Dawkins, but deals with physics stuff too.

Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. Demonstrates the dangers of dogma in society whether mystical or social. Offers a view of ethics which rejects altruism as its basis and tells why and how rational egoism is the rational ethics in which to life by.

Beyond Good and Evil by Neitzsche

Black Mass by John Gray

Caesar’s Messiah’ by Joseph Atwill. Argues, very convincingly, that Jesus was a propaganda invention by a Roman emperor used to undermine Jewish resistance to Roman rule.

Cannery Row by Steinbeck. I’ve also always felt warm atheist fuzzies from Steinbeck. Not sure if that is a fair reading of Steinbeck, but there it is.

Chimpanzee Politics by Frans de Waal. Like Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin, it shows just how closely we are related to the living world and arose from it instead of being divinely purposed and partitioned from it.

Confessions of a Justified Sinner by James Hogg. A chilling 19th century tale that gets into the head of an utterly deluded religiot.

Cosmos by Carl Sagan. Goes into the struggles of science & reason versus religion throughout history.

Critique of Religion and Philosophy by Walter Kaufmann. Presents the elements of philosophy of religion in a way that is both intellectually and morally serious, but also accessible to a high school student.

Darwin’s Angel by John Cornwell

Darwin’s Dangerous Idea by Daniel Dennett. Mind-opening.

Does God Hate Women? By Ophelia Benson & Jeremy Stangroom

Doubt: A History by Jennifer Michael Hecht. A skeptic’s Bible of historical doubt.

Early Christian Doctrine by J.N.D. Kelly

Examination of the Prophesies by Thomas Paine. A fisking of the New Testament claims that the Old Testament predicted the life of Christ.

Faith of a Heretic by Walter Kaufmann

Ghost Rider by Neil Peart. He chronicles the loss of his wife & daughter, how he copes and recovers, and there is zero mention of God, Religion or faith! He does it himself with a motorcycle, friends and love.

God: the Failed Hypothesis by Victor Stenger. I don’t understand why it isn’t right up there in the bestseller list alongside TGD, God is not Great, The End of Faith, etc.

Godless Morality by Richard Holloway. A Christian acknowledging that atheists can be moral people!

Golden Torc series by Julian May. Paints a nice alternative reality that’s just as ridiculous as, and yet somehow much more believable than, the bible.

How to Read The Bible by James L. Kugel. Goes through how modern scholars and early Christians interpreted the Old Testament. Great source if you want to talk to people about how to interpret the Bible.

Humanity’s Gain from Unbelief by Charles Bradlaugh. Bradlaugh may not have written a book length treatment of atheism but he did write a number of essays some of which are available in the Thinker’s Library under the title of one of his essays – Humanity’s Gain from Unbelief

Irreligion by John Allen Paulos. Mathematical arguments against the existence of a god. Love it!

Is Christianity True? by Michael Arnheim. Maybe not a great book but the first one that did it for me back in 1985.

Job: A Comedy of Justice by Heinlein

Kiln People by David Brin. Deals with morality and deity in a well written and fascinating Sci-Fi story.

Knowledge of Angels by Jill Paton Walsh

Leaving the Fold by Marlene Winell. A great book for a person who just left the faith. I highly recommend it.

Letters from Earth by Mark Twain. He will laugh you right out of Christianity.

Letters to a Young Contrarian by Christopher Hitchens. Not explicitly about atheism but independent thought, skepticism.

Life, Sex and Ideas: the Good Life without God by AC Grayling. Like Against All Gods, this makes the case against god/s and religion and outlines what makes healthy, sane, intelligent, informed, dare I say happy, people and societies.

Man and His Gods by Homer Smith

Memoirs of a Dutiful Daughter by Simone de Beauvoir

Miracle of Theism by Mackie. Classic critique of the standard philosophical arguments for God.

Morals Without Religion by Margaret Knight. A fascinating little book that gives a window onto attitudes to religion in 1950s Britain.

Not Wanted on the Voyage by Timothy Findley. Another good atheist-related work of fiction (Noah’s Ark retold)

On the Genealogy of Morals by Neitzsche

On the Nature and Existence of God by Richard M. Gale. Precise critique of standard arguments and best explanation of what a god *could* be.

Re-Engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings, Piecewise Approximations to Reality by William Wimsatt. A collection of essays on the philosophy of science, not atheismper se. Helped me see my underlying approach or method, and my atheism is a product of my approach or method.

Second Philosophy by Wittgenstien

Talks by Ramana Maharshi. He reiterates again and again the folly of following the inventions of ego.

The Adding Machine by Elmer Rice. 1923 play that condemns a man to eternal mediocrity and drudgery for failing to challenge himself.

The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine

The Ancestor’s Tale by Richard Dawkins

The Battle for God by Karen Armstrong. For me its completely Deadly, killing off the fundies for all time. Can’t believe the clever-clogs tosh she’s writing now!

The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins

The Book on The Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are by Alan Watts. Not strictly atheist, but his work dismantles Christianity and offers an alternative worldview derived from interpreting Eastern thought.

The Conquest of Happiness by Bertrand Russell. It’s a self help book for atheists.

The da Vinci Code by Dan Brown. More of an example of how chirstianity was abducted and bastardized by the catholic church, but I find it interesting.

The Day I Sold my Soul to Santa by Dirk DurplePick

The Decameron by Boccaccio. For its raunchy clerical satire, topped later by the likes of Voltaire and De Sade.

The Faith Healers by James Randi. Love how Randi exposed that sham. Makes me wonder why Sister Cleo had 2 stop.

The Galactic Pot Healer by Phillip K Dick The gods in this book (and in Small Gods by Terry Pratchett) are real, as in eating, drinking, farting, fighting, falling in love real, as well as ridiculous. As any god would be.

The Golden Bough by Frazier

The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood. A frightening tale of an anti-feminist theocracy in a future dystopia in North America.

The Heroes Journey by Joseph Campbell. Because it shows myth is hardwired instinct.

The Jesus Puzzle. A scholarly work that explains the ancient world view that spawned a mythical Jesus.

The Last Witchfinder by James Morrow

The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality, by Andre Comte-Sponville (translated to English by Nancy Huston).

The Making of the Fittest by Sean B Carroll. It totally trashes the design argument by looking at the evolution of genes.

The Monstrosity of Christ by Slavoj Zizek

The Passover Plot by Hugh Schoenfeld. This was crucial in my coming to understand what kind of document the Bible is.

The Quotable Atheist by Jack Huberma. A collection of quotes from non-believing philosophers, scientists, poets, writers, artists, entertainers, and political figures.

The Reason for God by Tim Keller. The best Christian response to atheism I’ve read.

The Rebel by Camus

The Satanic Bible by Anton LaVey

The Six Ways of Atheism by Geoffrey Berg

The Stranger by Camus

The Threat to Reason by Dan Hind

The Towing Jehovah Trilogy by James Morrow (Book iii The Eternal Footman is best)

The Varieties of Religious Experience by William James. An emperical psychologist interviews people of all denominations, documents their experiences with religion. He believes that the backbone of the worlds spiritual life is in the experiences of the individual.

The Wisdom of Insecurity by Alan Watts. Not strictly atheist, but his work dismantles Christianity and offers an alternative worldview derived from interpreting Eastern thought.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra by Neitzsche

Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus by Wittgenstein. Each aphorism is a bitch slap to god fanatics.

Prison Notebooks by Gramsci. Beautifully written, insightful, testiment to the human spirit: defiance of his fascist censors.

Saxon Tales by Bernard Cornwell. Cornwell always has a few mean things to say about God.

Stranger In A Strange Land by Heinlein. Showed the social mechanisms of fame and faith, & how 1 could be exploited 4 the other.

Unweaving the Rainbow by Richard Dawkins

What Is Good? by A C Grayling. Provides a godless account of morality, and its pre-christian history.

Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin. Like Chimpanzee Politics by Frans de Waal, it shows just how closely we are related to the living world and arose from it instead of being divinely purposed and partitioned from it.

Your Religion Is False by Joel Grus. Because it’s brilliantly funny.

Any book by Ayn Rand

A small booklet debunking the so called miracles and shams of the “godmen” of India… that booklet made me think rationally

Also: the work of many notable social scientists – Weber, Durkheim and more recently B.F. Skinner. If God is a Creation of man then it is toward social scientist that awe should look for an explanation, not philosophers like Dennet or biologists like Dawkins.

In much need of poststructuralist philosophy, absolutely devastating stuff. Try readable introductions to Deleuze, maybe Derrida & Lacan to a lesser extent.

Reading Carl Sagan and Richard Leakey was the final nail in the coffin of supernaturalism.

The work of Voltaire, Thomas Paine, Lock, Quine, Hume, and, of course, Hobbes (not the tiger!)

Thanks to the following for replying to the original post

26Tim | AllanCavanagh | Ammouni | Aperture11 | AprilBraswell | atheistie | askegg |asoulorg | Autarkis | BLADT | BrainCramps | brainycat | brenstrong | BriefLess | cafedave | CaptainGraviton | CheapEatsDotIE | Chrsthmsn | cpmichetti | damienlooney | danielgrosvenor | DaveMann | davemurdock | davidnicolson | daycoder | defiantskeptic | delfrisco | denvy | derekbradley | derekrootboy | dermotcasey | DollarLama | doodledawne | DeusExorcist | dhskee | drunkenmadman | dsriharsha | EddieBaseball | ElaineEdwards | expatina | failedmuso | FaithInterface | fatmike182 | finkeegan | galelem | GordonGoblin | HarryGuinness | hipishizik | HLindskold | H0llywoodWh0re | hudsonette | IAmRoot | Icaruspoe | irodman | istaranews | jbtweeter | Jackster69 | JM_Boivin | julzart | jptxs | justinf | joshcarples | Killarny | Larro | lippard | Locnar1970 | lucykjohnstone | m_ls | MarkLane71 | mary_martin | matt_warner | mattincinci | mdhughes | MeLorena | midnightcourt | MusiCaller | naehutch | NomDuJour | nwoolhouseuk | PattiMoran | pedro_vazquez | Pete_Knight | picklepumpers | PopuliAtheist | PrashVader | primaryposition | Rationalists | reeft | reneehendricks | richardmbunn | robertbruce13 | rodiell | SabreNation | saveourbluths | SeandBlogonaut | setdragonfriend | SkeptiKat | sketchfordawn | SloRunnerMom | spacetrucker | spam_methuselah | SpiderSlayer | spiller2 | stephanie206 | stinginthetail | straggleyway | Suckermouth | taueret | teebalicious | theadividual | thebeernut | theirishpenguin | TheMadderHat | tnargnitram | TomMendham | tommcmullenjr | trontsephore | TSLtLillith | tuibguy | tylermassey | Underbundle | UserNameError | vjack | WillLynch | woodpigeon01 | Ygern | yoga99 | yrif | ZenMonkey

Adam Dinan | Annie West | Billy Sands | Brian Carey | Colleen Murphy | David Maguire | Eoin Stephens | James Burkill | Keith Drummond | Paula Kirby | Richard Green | Shane Wrightson

Thanks to all who made comments about the list on RichardDawkins.net.

Thanks also to everyone below who added to the list with a comment

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

True as God? Part 3

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

True as God? Part 2

Here are ten more examples of passages from the Christian Bible that are either silly or unjust. You can read the first ten examples in the series here.

11. God will save only 144,000 male virgins, undefiled by women (Rev 14:3-5)

And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

12. Effeminate people are unrighteous and cannot go to heaven (1 Cor 6:9-10)

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

13. Jesus sent devils into 2,000 pigs and drowned them in the sea (Mark 5:11-13)

Now there was there nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine feeding. And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them. And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea.

14. If you believe in Jesus you can safely drink poison (Mark 16:16-18)

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

15. Jesus ordered his apostles to sell their clothes to buy swords (Luke 22:35-38)

And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

16. Women must not teach and must learn in silence (1 Tim 2:11-14)

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

17. Priests may not shave off the corners of their beards (Lev 21:5)

They shall not make baldness upon their head, neither shall they shave off the corner of their beard, nor make any cuttings in their flesh.

18. Priests may not marry a whore or a divorced woman (Lev 21:7)

They shall not take a wife that is a whore, or profane; neither shall they take a woman put away from her husband: for he is holy unto his God.

19. If a priest’s daughter plays the whore, she must be burned with fire (Lev 21:9)

And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.

20. It is unnatural and shameful for men to have long hair (1 Cor 11:14)

Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

Photo: Bible Title Page by mrbill (cc)

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

True as God? Part 1

The Christian Bible contains many assertions that are either silly or unjust. I’ve been posting them one at a time on Twitter. Here are the first ten together:

1. Dragons and owls honour God because he puts rivers in the desert (Isaiah 43:20) 

The beast of the field shall honour me, the dragons and the owls: because I give waters in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert, to give drink to my people, my chosen.

2. Dwarves or flat-nosed men may not offer bread at the altar of God (Lev 21:16-23) 

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy. Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries: for I the LORD do sanctify them.

3. King Saul gave his daughter to David for 200 foreskins (1 Sam 18:25-27) 

And Saul said, Thus shall ye say to David, The king desireth not any dowry, but an hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of the king’s enemies. But Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines. And when his servants told David these words, it pleased David well to be the king’s son in law: and the days were not expired. Wherefore David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the Philistines two hundred men; and David brought their foreskins, and they gave them in full tale to the king, that he might be the king’s son in law. And Saul gave him Michal his daughter to wife.

4. God sends bears to kill children for mocking a bald man (2 Kings 2:22-24) 

So the waters were healed unto this day, according to the saying of Elisha which he spake. And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

5. God will bring so much evil that it will make your ears tingle (Jer 19:3) 

And say, Hear ye the word of the LORD, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem; Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle.

6. When Jesus died, many local corpses came back to life (Mat 27:50-53) 

Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

7. New brides must prove their virginity or be stoned to death (Deut 22:13-21) 

If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel’s virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate: And the damsel’s father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her; And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.

And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him; And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days. But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

8. God tells Isaiah to walk naked and barefoot for three years (Isaiah 20:2-3) 

At the same time spake the LORD by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot. And he did so, walking naked and barefoot. And the LORD said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia;

9. It is okay to kill your slave if he takes a few days to die (Ex 21:20-21) 

And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

10. If you disobey God, he will make you eat your own children (Lev 26:27-29) 

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Discussing the idea of a god

What do we mean by the word God? Ask a random hundred Americans. About sixty will believe in a personal god, 25 will believe in an impersonal force, seven won’t know which, and eight won’t believe in either.

Then ask a random hundred Europeans, and it gets even more ambiguous.

Only about forty will believe in a personal god, up to 33 will believe in a spirit or life force, fifteen won’t know which, and twelve will believe there is neither.

These figures are based on research by the Pew Forum and World Values Surveys. But the exact figures are not important. My point is that we cannot assume that the phrase “I believe in God” means anything like the same thing to each person who says it.

Same labels, different ideas

So what might “a personal god” be? Is it a god who is also a person, or a god who is in some way personal to you? Are the different variations of “god as an impersonal force” just attaching the label “god” to completely different ideas? Can we discuss these other ideas more effectively by removing the label “god” from them?

To complicate things further, many people also attach different meanings to other related words: belief, certainty, doubt, faith, truth, knowledge, evidence, proof, religion, theist, deist, atheist, agnostic, good, bad, evil, right and wrong. What do each of these words mean? Again, it depends.

As a unit of language, each word has at least three types of meaning: (a) its common meaning in general public discourse, which evolves over time and is recorded in reputable dictionaries; (b) one or more specialised meanings that people agree to use in fields like philosophy or in private groups; and (c) any number of contextual nuances of any of these meanings.

Then we each filter these meanings through at least three personal screens: (d) the meaning we each prefer to attach to the word, and how important that meaning is to us; (e) the meaning we each intend to convey when we use the word; and (f) the meaning that we each receive when we hear or read the word.

Discussing the idea of a God

In ordinary conversation, most of us assume the default meaning of a word to be some variation of its common meaning as used in general public discourse. But when we discuss the idea of a god, or many related ideas, we cannot make this assumption.

So we should agree to either clarify our respective definitions, or ideally use shared definitions, and then move on to discussing the ideas behind the labels. Otherwise, many crucial words will be reduced to meaning, for each of us, only “this-word-as-I-personally-define-the-word”.

Then we will each seem to agree with propositions that we reject as false, we will each waste our time disputing propositions that we accept as true, and we will never reach the stage of discussing what we actually mean.

Sources

The Pew Forum Religious Landscape Survey was conducted in 2007, in the continental United States, by Princeton Survey Research Associates International, on behalf of the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. The results are based on interviews in English and Spanish with 35,556 Americans aged 18 and older.

The World Values Surveys were conducted in four waves from 1990 to 2005, in over eighty countries spanning all six inhabited continents, by a network of social scientists at leading universities around the world. The question on personal god versus spirit or life force was asked of 27,622 people in thirty European countries between 1999 and 2005.

Image: Pantheon of Gods by Grizzli (cc)

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Next Page »