Fundamentalists of all stripes want to turn back the clock

"Despite all their theological and cultural differences, fundamentalists of every faith share at least one common characteristic: resistance to modernity. That’s the assessment of scholars and firsthand observers who have evaluated the varieties of religious expression. “Fundamentalism worldwide is religious anti-modernism,” noted Roger Olson, professor of theology at Baylor University’s George W. Truett Theological Seminary. “Fundamentalism reacts against various types of modernity,” echoed Bill Leonard, a church historian and dean of the Wake Forest University Divinity School. Whether it’s Baptist preachers J. Frank Norris and Jerry Falwell calling America to return to pre-scientific Christianity or Ayatollah Khomeini and Muqtada al-Sadr calling Muslims to resist the intrusion of Western decadence, fundamentalism finds a home in most major faith groups."

Associated Baptist Press, April 1, 2008

It's a long article crammed with points. Apart from being against modernity there were four other subjects discussed: Dogmatic Faith, Identity, Fear and Politics.
It's the first in a series on Fundamentalism at Associated Baptist Press.

Spanking Kids Increases Risk Of Sexual Problems As Adults

"Children who are spanked or victims of other corporal punishment are more likely to have sexual problems as a teen or adult, according to new research presented today by Murray Straus, co-director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire.

[...]

Straus analyzed the results of four studies and found that spanking and other corporal punishment by parents is associated with an increased probability of three sexual problems as a teen or adult:

* Verbally and physically coercing a dating partner to have sex.
* Risky sex such as premarital sex without a condom.
* Masochistic sex such as being aroused by being spanked when having sex.

“These results, together with the results of more than 100 other studies, suggest that spanking is one of the roots of relationship violence and mental health problems. Because there is 93 percent agreement between studies that investigated harmful side effects of spanking, and because over 90 percent of U.S. parents spank toddlers, the potential benefits for prevention of sexual and relationship violence is large,” Straus says."

ScienceDaily, Mar. 2, 2008

And the reason why I post this here is that corporal punishment is favoured among religious conservatives.
The most grave aspect (after they grow up) is verbal and physical coercion. Can you say rape? It has to be said though, that calling sado-masochism a sexual problem is stretching it a bit far if it's consenting, and not of the extreme variety.(No, it's not my thing)

Now, a little bible reading will do:

Hebrews 12:6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.

I looked this up earlier, because at least in Norway, there has been discussions among theologians whether or not this just meant teaching your children to behave. To liberal Christians, this is no doubt a preferable interpretation, (and to society too I must admit).
But after looking it up at Scripturetext.com (hit the Lexicon tab) I think it is safe to say that this is not just about teaching:

As you can see, the word mastigoo is used, meaning to flog, scourge. To put things into perspective, we can have a look at Matthew 20:19: "And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.". And yes, it's the word mastigoo that is used.

You can also see the other places it has been used.

Still, there's another thing that complicates this. Hebrews 12:6 refers to Psalms 94:12: "Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest, O LORD, and teachest him out of thy law;"

"Chasteneth" can be physical, but notice that there's no mention of outright flogging. The reason is that the writer of Hebrews only had access to the Septuagint, the less than perfect Greek translation of the Old Testament. However, from what I can see, mastigoo does not appear in the Septuagint version of Psalms 94:12

Maybe the write of Hebrews was a sadist, but I'll leave it there, because I realize I'm on fairly deep water now. But I think it's safe to say that the verse in Hebrews has caused a lot of grief, and that it's not necessarily the correct reference to Psalms 94:12.
In any case, you don't flog your children like the Romans flogged Jesus.

Reaping the benefits of a good Christian upbringing:

Turkey in radical revision of Islamic texts

"Turkey is preparing to publish a document that represents a revolutionary reinterpretation of Islam - and a controversial and radical modernisation of the religion.

[...]

Significantly, the "Ankara School" of theologians working on the new Hadith have been using Western critical techniques and philosophy.
They have also taken an even bolder step - rejecting a long-established rule of Muslim scholars that later (and often more conservative) texts override earlier ones."

BBC News, 26 February 2008

Best news to come out of Turkey lately. We keep hearing from Muslims how Islam has always been changing, yet, the last hundred years it has generally been for the worse. But a move like this is real progress.

The Lost Quran Archive

"On the night of April 24, 1944, British air force bombers hammered a former Jesuit college here housing the Bavarian Academy of Science. The 16th-century building crumpled in the inferno. Among the treasures lost, later lamented Anton Spitaler, an Arabic scholar at the academy, was a unique photo archive of ancient manuscripts of the Quran.[...] The wartime destruction made the project "outright impossible," Mr. Spitaler wrote in the 1970s.
Mr. Spitaler was lying. The cache of photos survived, and he was sitting on it all along. The truth is only now dribbling out to scholars -- and a Quran research project buried for more than 60 years has risen from the grave."

Wall Street Journal, January 12, 2008

This is a very interesting story in many ways. Firstly, it is great news that historians can get their hands on this. With some research, we'll soon see the same effect that has torpedoed literal reading of the bible for anyone with a minimum of intellect.

Now there's another question: Why did the scholar, Mr Spitaler, hide the photos? This would of course have been tremendous for any scholar to his or her hands on.

"Another possible factor, she adds, was Mr. Spitaler's own deep religious faith. She opens up a copy of a Quran used by the late professor, a practicing Catholic, until his death. Unlike his other Arabic texts, which are scrawled with notes and underlinings, it has no markings at all.

"Perhaps he had too much respect for holy books," says Ms. Müller."

OK, so we've lost 60 years of research thanks to Mr. Spitaler's faith and are now up to our necks with Muslim fundamentalists.

Apostasy is a right, not a crime

""There is no compulsion in religion" declares a famous verse (2:256).
[...]

How then came the ban on apostasy? Well, it was a political, not religious, verdict that soon became a part of the religious canon. David Forte, professor of Law at Cleveland State University, explains this fact very briefly and vividly in his article titled "Islam's Trajectory."
"The primary justification for the execution of the apostate is," he notes: "That in the early days of Islam, apostasy and treason were in fact synonymous. War was perennial in Arabia. It never stopped. To reject the leader of another tribe, to give up on a coalition, was in effect to go to war against him. There was no such thing as neutrality. There were truces, but there was never permanent neutrality. It is reported, for example, that immediately after the death of Mohammed, many tribes apostatized. They said in effect, "the leader whom we were following is gone, so let's go back to our own leaders.' And they rebelled against Muslim rule. The first caliph, Abu Bakr, ordered such rebels to be killed.
Many scholars argue that the tradition that all apostates had to be killed had its origin during these wars of rebellion and not during Mohammed's time. In fact, many argue that these traditions in which Mohammed affirmed the killing of apostates were apocryphal, made up later to justify what the empire had been doing."

[...]

The second thing that the origin of the apostasy ban shows is that Islamic sources need a serious reconsideration. What most Muslims attach themselves to as divine commandments are actually the political and cultural codes of the early centuries of Islam, which were, to be sure, man-made facts. The divine principles of a religion should remain eternally valid, but not its historical context."

Turkish Daily News, November 3, 2007

Higher criticism would be needed indeed.

Some good tools for Bible studies

I've been reading a little bible lately and also discussed it with believers. This, of course, can be straeneous, but you learn a lot as you go.

The most obvious, and probably the most well-known tool among Atheists is Skeptic's Annotated Bible. It takes you right to the goodies. It has to be said, that sometimes it tends to take a worst case interpretation of verses, so whatever you do, you need to read it in context. But as for showing you the good stuff, and the subjects you need, it is pretty perfect.
Notice that SAB also provides you with links to articles about the subjects at hand, even including apologist rebuttals. You get both sides then, so you can prepare for counterarguments.

Skeptic's Annotated Bible is the King James version, and it is not always the most reliable translation. Therefore, Biblegateway is good because it allows you to easily compare different translations, also non-English. For generally searching the KJV bible, Blue Letter Bible is the most easy to use.

A tool I found today however is a real goodie: Scripturetext.com. You look up a passage at the upper left and you can see different translations below, including Greek and Hebrew if you push those tabs. The real nice part is to hit the Lex tab because you get dictionary definitions of each word in Hebrew/Greek so you can easier see if the translations into English (etc.) could have had different meanings. And you can probably counter the more blunt attempts by apologists to explain away about what the words "really" says.
I now also noticed that Blue Letter Bible has a similar function to Scripturext. When you have a list of bibleverses, you can hit the C tab for Concordance on the left. Then you'll see al the words of a verse, and their Hebrew/Greek counterparts as well as Strong's numbers. Click a number, and you'll get a list of all the places that the same Greek/Hebrew word has been used in the bible.

Here are also two informative sites:
The Rejection of Pascal's Wager. Don't let you scare away by the title, because there's much more than Pascal-bashing. If you read up on the texts on Paul and Jesus and scriptures, you get introduced to a lot of good research, complete with references and all. I'd wish the site had a better structure, but there's a lot to be learned.

Religious Tolerance is also good. It's not an Atheist site, but gives you information about beliefs and theology from a critical and liberal view in addition to providing the conservative view. This can often be illuminating.

Last year I read Who Wrote The Bible by Richard E. Friedman. It's about the Documentary Hypothesis, which says that the five first books in the Bible were not written about Moses, and gives some pretty interesting insights into higher Bible criticism. I don't think anything compares to get the introduction from this book, but even so, here are some OK links on the subject of the Documentary Hypothesis:
Article at University of Pennsylvania website and example using the flood story.
Article at Religious Tolerance.

Well, that's enough research for now!

Unravelled Threads

""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. (Matthew 27)"

Needless to say, there is no historical record of such an astonishing event, and no other book in the Bible so much as mentions it - a stunning omission, considering this easily qualifies as the most spectacular miracle of the New Testament. Yet if we are to believe Christian apologists who say that every word of the Bible is true, this mass resurrection really did happen, and then sank into obscurity without a ripple and was forgotten. Not a single person who witnessed it felt compelled to write it down or make any record. Nor does any Christian evangelist of the first several centuries ever refer to it in their preaching."

Daylight Atheism, 12, 2007

So Many Christians Ignorant About Their Bible

"We can start with this great little post by the Educated Eclectic from Pam's House Blend. It is widely known that fundamentalist Christians rely on Leviticus to justify their preexisting hatred of GLBT individuals. Their argument is quite simple:

The bible is the inerrant word of some god.
The bible condemns homosexuality (in Leviticus).
Therefore, homosexuality is wrong.

The first claim is accepted uncritically for it is a core tenet of Christian fundamentalism. That the bible condemns homosexuality is clearly evident in Leviticus. So the conclusion is inevitable, at least to the fundamentalist Christian.

The Educated Eclectic invites us to apply exactly the same argument to another part of Leviticus.

Leviticus 19:19 says:

.. neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee.

There is nothing in the Christian bible to suggest that this portion of Leviticus is any less serious than the part about homosexuality. And yet, the inescapable conclusion is that wearing clothing made of linen-wool blends is wrong in the same way homosexuality is wrong. I see two possible explanations for the fact that fundamentalist Christians ignore this passage. First, they are unaware of what the rest of Leviticus says, suggesting that they are not the Christians they claim to be. Second, their objections to homosexuality have absolutely nothing to do with their bibles and are simply based in prejudice."

Atheist Revolution, 28. august

On Literal Interpretation

"The theologians who hold this [liberal] view usually claim that large parts of the Bible, or whatever other text, should not be read literally and were never meant to be read literally. Instead, they should be interpreted as allegory meant to convey a spiritual message. [Still] there remains an irreducible core of verses that should be interpreted literally. Usually, these verses are the ones that convey the message of God's existence, his providence, and his love for all of humanity.

[...]

However, though the theologians are pointed in the right direction, I think they have not gone far enough. Their progressive mythologization of the Bible is a good idea, but it stops at an arbitrary point for no good reason. Why don't they go further and admit that the concept of "God" is itself just a metaphor for the way ancient cultures viewed the world? If they were to do this, they'd finally have a theology that is rational and in accord with the evidence, and one with which an atheist could agree without qualm.

[...]

Our response to liberal believers, who want us to take a certain set of scriptural verses literally, is the same as our response to fundamentalists, who want us to take a somewhat larger set of verses literally. If you want to go there and no further, what is your evidence? What are the facts that give us reason to believe that what you say is true?

Daylight Atheism, 20. August 2007

WikiIslam - critical encyclopedia

"How is WikiIslam different from WikiPedia?
Asides from the fact that Islam is the primary topic at WikiIslam, the main difference between WikiIslam and Wikipedia is that the primary goal of WikiIslam is to help Muslims leave Islam by providing them with information that may otherwise not be available to them.

Is WikiIslam a hate site?
No, WikiIslam is not a hate site. We do not believe all Muslims are terrorists. In fact, many of us are ex-Muslims with Muslim family and friends. The purpose of this wiki is to archive those truths about Islam which are frequently censored by Muslims or political correctness. This project also provides a much-needed relief for editors at WikiPedia whose opinions are constantly edited out by Muslims and others who are afraid of saying anything against Islam for fear of NPOV or bias.

What is the purpose of WikiIslam?
The purpose of WikiIslam is to help Muslims leave Islam. WikiIslam can help Muslims leave Islam either by showing Muslim visitors a side of Islam that they may have never seen before, or by being used as a reference by non-Muslims who are trying to help Muslims leave Islam.

[...]

Who runs this website?
The site belongs to and is maintained by Faith Freedom International. FFI is an organization whose goals are to unmask Islam and help Muslims leave it. It is founded by Ali Sina, an ex-Muslim from Iran.

FAQ, WikiIslam.com (Last edit 30. Jun. 2007)

Seems like a good resource!

Come to think of it: something similar would be good for Atheism in general. There's this one: wiki.atheist.net but it seems to go slow.

My plea to fellow Muslims: you must renounce terror

"When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network, a series of semi-autonomous British Muslim terrorist groups linked by a single ideology, I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was Western foreign policy.
By blaming the government for our actions, those who pushed the 'Blair's bombs' line did our propaganda work for us. More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology."

The Observer, July 1, 2007

God's forgiveness = self-forgiveness

"This isn't going to be another of those posts full of "religion kills" bromides. In this case, the possible reason for Benoit's rampage may be linked to his use of too much of what the bodybuilding world calls Vitamin S. But the role the Bible plays here is interesting. [...] Benoit was using religion as many people do in life: a forgiveness quick-fix, the moral equivalent of using Fix-a-Flat to pump up a punctured tire.

While Christians go on about how no one without religion can possibly have a moral compass to follow, what they never talk about is the way in which people who do embrace religion, however fervently or casually, typically behave no better than unbelievers, and oftimes worse. And when they do behave worse, they use religion as a convenient thing to fall back upon, either to justify their actions, or to showboat a fake display of remorse."

atheistexperience.blogspot.com June 26, 2007

Or as they say: "We're not perfect - we're forgiven". It's a point that should be stressed more often. In real life it doesn't sound too convincing if you say "I'm a crappy driver, but I have a good insurance". You wouldn't want a person like that to drive any car, would you?

Atheism makes you accountable to your fellow human beings, not a made-up figure in your head that will forgive you if your delusion is getting worse.

Why the bible is wrong about Pi

In several different passages of the bible, seemingly round objects are described with a single diameter of 10 units and a perimeter of 30 units. These quoted dimensions may strike the mathematically inclined reader as odd, since it has been known for millenia that the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter is the irrational number Pi, which is approximately 3.1415926535.

The UNM Humanist Society

Here's a sequence with a million digits.

How many species did Adam name?

""And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."

[...]

So Adam must have identified and named millions of species on that fine afternoon in the garden of Eden. 350,000 species of beetles, 120,000 flies, 100,000 parasitic wasps, 20,000 nematodes. And he was just getting started."

Dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com 4/15/2007

It makes you wonder if the Bible really is true, doesn't it?

[Theology] Original Sin in the Bible

"The first mention of the concept of Original Sin is found, not in Genesis, where the fatal event was supposed to happen, but in the fifth chapter of Romans, written by Paul. According to Paul, humanity was cursed because Adam sinned when he ate of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

[...]

At no point [in Genesis 3:14-19] do we see anything that might qualify as a curse of "Original Sin" to be handed down to all of Adam's descendants. Sure, their lives are supposed to become much more difficult than what they had heretofore experienced; but where in all of that is the "Sin" being passed along?

[...]

The rest of the Old Testament is of no help to Christian theology in this area: from this point in Genesis all of the way through the ending of Malachi, there isn't the slightest hint of there being any sort of Original Sin inherited by all humans through Adam. There are plenty of stories of God getting angry at humanity in general and at the Jews in particular, thus offering many opportunities for God to point out how everyone is "sinful" because of Adam. Yet we read nothing about that."

Atheism.about.com, May 5, 2007

[Theology] Little-Known Bible Verses VI: Slavery

"Civil rights leaders like the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. were famous for their use of biblical allusions to demand liberty for all human beings, and from their writings, many believers today have gotten the idea that the Bible teaches the equality of all people. But nothing could be farther from the truth, as we can see from a set of little-known Bible verses.

[...]

"The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. —Luke 12:46-47"

[...]

"These verses and others like them were not overlooked by slaveholders of the American antebellum. On the contrary, in the period leading up to the American Civil War, Southern slaveholders repeatedly cited these verses against abolitionists, as proof that slavery was a just and proper institution sanctioned by God."

Daylightatheism.org 10 May 2007