Intelligence is a Curse

[Erinome]

I was perusing the new testament today, just for shits and giggles. Here are some things I found.

The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well into his going.- Proverbs 14:15

I've looked well into my going and found God to be a fallacy.

Prove all things; hold fast to that which is good.- Thessalonians 5:21

I don't believe in much that can't be proven. To me, truth is good.

For in much wisdom is much grief; and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.- Ecclesiastes 1:18

Wait. This contradicts quote #1. I'm not unhappy. Not at all. I am taking my kids to Atlanta this weekend to Six Flags, I am independent, I cherish my life, and I increaseth my knowledge all the time. Debunked.

Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding- Proverbs 3:13

Wait. I thought that was a ticket to Sorrowville. The bible is full of these little contradictions. So what do you live your life by, exactly?

I'm a pretty quick reader, so it took about 30 minutes of thumbing through the bible to come up with all this crap. I didn't twist anything it said, I just read it, made note of it, and used common sense. It isn't that hard, and despite what the bible says, and doesn't say, and unsays, it doesn't increaseth sorrow.

[Ryft]

Could you elaborate further on what you meant here?

Sure, no problem. Aleialoura said, "If Christians are going to defend and claim to live by the Bible, then they should invoke all the laws in the Bible," which I understood from the context of her post to mean also those laws found in Leviticus, Deuteronomy, etc. But to do this would require the Christian to toss biblical exegesis right out the window, ignoring the structure, form, context, themes, soteriological paradigms and so forth contained in the text. It is quite absurd to expect Christians who defend and claim to live by the Bible to do so while ignoring what it says. In other words, those who defend and claim to live by the Bible must do so with the tools for understanding what it says (biblical exegesis)—and what it says is precisely why Christians do not invoke the laws found in Leviticus and so forth. (This gets into covenant theology, the structure by which the biblical text organizes itself, which is both deeply involved and outside the context of this discussion.)

---

---

Fundamentalist young-earth creationists are a minority? Where are you from? They're everywhere. It's unfortunate.

I do not need to be from anywhere in particular to understand that the vast majority of Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants reject young-earth creationism. It is a minority of Christians—typically Baptist, Seventh-Day Adventist, Pentecostal and so forth—who subscribe to that unbiblical, illogical, and unscientific view. (And I say this with a heavy burden on my heart because I am Baptist myself. But I have a glimmer of hope because there are a few in my church who express a willingness to reconsider their view if shown how to understand Genesis rightly, which I am quite happy to help with.) True, these fundamentalists are everywhere, but they still represent a (very vocal) minority of Christianity. I would recommend to you Ronald L. Numbers, The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design (Harvard University Press, 2006).

That statement was in regards to cherry-pickers. I was denoting hypocrisy.

And what hypocrisy was that, exactly? (See my response to Faith No More above.)

Have you read them [Deuteronomy and Leviticus]? If so, I really don't understand why you need evidence.

You said that the reason why Christians "selectively disregard Deuteronomy and Leviticus is because it's no longer a part of our culture." Please cite the evidence which shows that this is their reason for disregarding old covenant laws, rituals, and practices (e.g., books or articles where Christians say this), so myself and others can verify your claim.

I was using the word 'daft' in the [sense of] "mad, insane."

Is this a clinical diagnosis, or just you hurling gratuitous invective at people who believe differently from you?

I'm sure whatever the inane point, it was inspired by Jesus. I'm sure he is so proud of you—wherever he is.

So I was right. Color me underwhelmed.

---

---

Hm. I'm not sure how to respond to this. I think what I'm saying is aligned with both Romans & Ephesians. In Ephesians it says that he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will.

All right, so this is the point to which I was driving you. You were, it turns out, confusing election with predestination; i.e., the elect are those chosen by God (by definition), and predestination is the path for which they were chosen, which begins with their being called and ends with their being glorified. Predestination simply denotes that God has a set purpose for those he elected or chose which he will not fail to bring to pass. In other words, they are not predestined to come to the Lord so much as elected or chosen to. What they are predestined for is justification, adoption, sanctification, and glorification—that is, God's redemptive purpose for them. I am glad that you are conscious of the "golden chain of redemption" in Romans 8:28–30; hopefully you are aware that "foreknew" in v. 29 is a verb, conveying the activity of God's electing love (as Paul elaborates upon through the rest of chapter 8 and into chapter 9). So your statements were on target, but you mixed the words up. Here are your statements reworded:

"Those who are elected to come to the Lord will be seeking to live according God's pleasure and will. Sometimes they will start out as lost (e.g., Josh McDowell), sometimes they will start out as ignorant (e.g., Lee Strobel), but when the Lord makes himself known the elect will come and they will follow hard."

There are people who want to know God; but they don't know who he is, so they seek him.

Agreed. But those are the ones chosen by God, the ones whose names were in the book of life from the foundation of the world; they seek him only because he enabled and drew them, as your reference to John 6 explains. "No one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him," Jesus said (v. 65). And as he confidently stated earlier, "All that the Father gives me will come to me" (v. 37). Those whom God chose and gave to the Son will heed that calling without fail when it comes; thus Paul can say things like, "And all who were appointed for eternal life believed" (Acts 13:48; cf. 16:14).

However, this does not justify your claim that people "are born with the ability to choose to come to Christ from their own desire to know him" (emphasis mine). That is what I am requesting scriptural warrant for. It is the Pelagian heresy which to this day still lacks biblical evidence (which is why it is deemed heretical), so I would be deeply interested if you have scriptural warrant for it.

The teachings of Jesus Christ do not push men to perform good works as an avenue for salvation ...

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think what you mean is: "We do not do good works to be saved, but rather because we are saved" (i.e., saving faith produces good works). So if those who do not have faith in Christ for their salvation strive to follow the teachings of Jesus, they gain nothing and lose everything.

Right before the portion of Matthew that you quoted above Jesus says, "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

And what is the will of the Father? "To believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us" (1 John 3:23); cf. John 6:28–29, "Then they asked him, 'What must we do to do the works God requires?' Jesus answered, 'The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent'."

[Erinome]

Could you elaborate further on what you meant here?

Sure, no problem. Aleialoura said, "If Christians are going to defend and claim to live by the Bible, then they should invoke all the laws in the Bible," which I understood from the context of her post to mean also those laws found in Leviticus, Deuteronomy, etc. But to do this would require the Christian to toss biblical exegesis right out the window, ignoring the structure, form, context, themes, soteriological paradigms and so forth contained in the text. It is quite absurd to expect Christians who defend and claim to live by the Bible to do so while ignoring what it says. In other words, those who defend and claim to live by the Bible must do so with the tools for understanding what it says (biblical exegesis)—and what it says is precisely why Christians do not invoke the laws found in Leviticus and so forth. (This gets into covenant theology, the structure by which the biblical text organizes itself, which is both deeply involved and outside the context of this discussion.)

The entire bible is filled with contradiction. Why anyone as smart as you seem to be would pour that much energy into biblical nonsense is beyond me. To each their own, I suppose.

Fundamentalist young-earth creationists are a minority? Where are you from? They're everywhere. It's unfortunate.

I do not need to be from anywhere in particular to understand that the vast majority of Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants reject young-earth creationism. It is a minority of Christians—typically Baptist, Seventh-Day Adventist, Pentecostal and so forth—who subscribe to that unbiblical, illogical, and unscientific view. (And I say this with a heavy burden on my heart because I am Baptist myself. But I have a glimmer of hope because there are a few in my church who express a willingness to reconsider their view if shown how to understand Genesis rightly, which I am quite happy to help with.) True, these fundamentalists are everywhere, but they still represent a (very vocal) minority of Christianity. I would recommend to you Ronald L. Numbers, The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design (Harvard University Press, 2006).

Unbiblical? The bible is unbiblical now? Blow that smoke up someone else's ass, please. It's charming that you hold on to a glimmer of hope, but unless you and those in your church are going to forgo your bible completely and side with science, I think you should just scrap your hope and focus on how to cope with your own delusions.

Science and religion don't mix. They have absolutely nothing in common. I'm sure you and Ronald L Numbers put a lot of thought into the whole Intelligent Design theory, but until you have any evidence to support your thinking, you've got nothing. I applaud anyone for ditching the ignorance of biblical creation, but to put some other unfounded ignorance in it's place is just redundant.

It seems like people who are willing to accept science, as long as it doesn't step on the toes of the bible, are just terrified to live in a world where this one life might be it. It reminds me of a child not wanting to let go of it's blanket... except the god blanket is invisible.

That statement was in regards to cherry-pickers. I was denoting hypocrisy.

And what hypocrisy was that, exactly? (See my response to Faith No More above.)

Christians are the biggest hypocrites ever. In Exodus/Deuteronomy, for example, Mr. God writes a list of commandments for Moses. One of them says that killing is bad. Moses and his band of former "El" worshipers go on to slaughter masses of innocent people, because God commands them to do so. God himself is a hypocrite.

I feel like it's a great waste of time to going on about the billions of examples of biblical hypocrisy. It's your beloved book. You read it. I did, and that is one of the many reasons I am a happy, unapologetic atheist.

Have you read them [Deuteronomy and Leviticus]? If so, I really don't understand why you need evidence.

You said that the reason why Christians "selectively disregard Deuteronomy and Leviticus is because it's no longer a part of our culture." Please cite the evidence which shows that this is their reason for disregarding old covenant laws, rituals, and practices (e.g., books or articles where Christians say this), so myself and others can verify your claim.

Are you telling me that Christians find stoning naughty children acceptable? Give me a break! I'm starting to think you've never even thumbed through the bible. How is this practice remotely regarded as acceptable in modern civilization? Yet, it is the word of God. Understand? I'm not sure how I could be more clear.

I was using the word 'daft' in the [sense of] "mad, insane."

Is this a clinical diagnosis, or just you hurling gratuitous invective at people who believe differently from you?

I don't have enough information about salty to make a clinical diagnosis, but from what I do know, "daft" fits. It's not insulting if it's true, and if she believes in god wholeheartedly, as she claims, it is accurate.

I'm sure whatever the inane point, it was inspired by Jesus. I'm sure he is so proud of you—wherever he is.

So I was right. Color me underwhelmed.

[Ryft]

Unbiblical? The Bible is unbiblical now?

That is so far removed from what I actually said it might as well be in another universe—not to mention how utterly incoherent your statement is ("The Bible is unbiblical"). Although I suspect that you could probably prove otherwise, I sincerely hope that you could not craft a more incomprehensible response if you tried. What I said is that young-earth creationism is unbiblical (and illogical and unscientific, a perfect strike out).

I'm sure you and Ronald L. Numbers put a lot of thought into the whole Intelligent Design theory ...

Anyone who is familiar with this distinguished scholar on the history of science—Hilldale & William Coleman Professor of the History of Science and Medicine at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and recipient of the 2008 George Sarton Medal (for a lifetime of exceptional scholarly achievement in the field) by the History of Science Society—just laughed themselves into an asthma attack over the unmitigated hilarity of your ignorant response. As I did too. Thank you for making my night, Aleialoura.

Professor Numbers... an Intelligent Design proponent... bahahaha!

Christians are the biggest hypocrites ever.

My unsolicited advice to you would be to take a course in critical thinking. You said you were indicating hypocrisy. I asked what hypocrisy, exactly. So you reply, "They're hypocrites!" Um, thanks for reasserting your claim and completely failing to answer my question. Furthermore, putting your ignorance of the sixth commandment on public display like this does nothing to substantiate your claim of hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right?

I will grant that you are a happy, unapologetic atheist. Not to put too fine a point on it, but so what?

Are you telling me that Christians find stoning naughty children acceptable?

Lolwut? I am not telling you anything. I am asking something of you—that is, to substantiate your claim. Or retract it, if you prefer. You said that the reason why Christians "selectively disregard Deuteronomy and Leviticus is because it's no longer a part of our culture." Please cite the evidence which shows that this is their reason for disregarding old covenant laws, rituals, and practices (e.g., books or articles where Christians say this), so myself and others can verify your claim.

[Erinome]

That is so far removed from what I actually said it might as well be in another universe—not to mention how utterly incoherent your statement is ("The Bible is unbiblical"). Although I suspect that you could probably prove otherwise, I sincerely hope that you could not craft a more incomprehensible response if you tried. What I said is that young-earth creationism is unbiblical (and illogical and unscientific, a perfect strike out).

Young-earth creationism is unbiblical? To say that is to say the bible is unbiblical. You made reference to some of the more nutty branches of Christianity and called their beliefs "unbiblical". I'd like to watch you tell a room full of Pentecostals that very thing... from a closed circuit television miles away, of course.

It's okay that you don't get it. It's like the watchtower: Nobody can see it from the inside.

Anyone who is familiar with this distinguished scholar on the history of science—Hilldale & William Coleman Professor of the History of Science and Medicine at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and recipient of the 2008 George Sarton Medal (for a lifetime of exceptional scholarly achievement in the field) by the History of Science Society—just laughed themselves into an asthma attack over the unmitigated hilarity of your ignorant response. As I did too. Thank you for making my night, Aleialoura.

I'll admit that I was ignorant of who exactly Numbers is, forgive me, I assumed that since you were dropping his name he must be someone who wrote a book that taught you about the Intelligent Design, apologetic crap. I do hope that prayer, or albuterol saved you from your asthma attack.

Christians are the biggest hypocrites ever.

My unsolicited advice to you would be to take a course in critical thinking. You said you were indicating hypocrisy. I asked what hypocrisy, exactly. So you reply, "They're hypocrites!" Um, thanks for reasserting your claim and completely failing to answer my question. Furthermore, putting your ignorance of the sixth commandment on public display like this does nothing to substantiate your claim of hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right?

"Christians are the biggest hypocrites ever. In Exodus/Deuteronomy, for example, Mr. God writes a list of commandments for Moses. One of them says that killing is bad. Moses and his band of former "El" worshipers go on to slaughter masses of innocent people, because God commands them to do so. God himself is a hypocrite.

I feel like it's a great waste of time to going on about the billions of examples of biblical hypocrisy. It's your beloved book. You read it. I did, and that is one of the many reasons I am a happy, unapologetic atheist."

Is actually how I put it. Don't cherry pick me.

Are you telling me that Christians find stoning naughty children acceptable?

Lolwut? I am not telling you anything. I am asking something of you—that is, to substantiate your claim. Or retract it, if you prefer. You said that the reason why Christians "selectively disregard Deuteronomy and Leviticus is because it's no longer a part of our culture." Please cite the evidence which shows that this is their reason for disregarding old covenant laws, rituals, and practices (e.g., books or articles where Christians say this), so myself and others can verify your claim.

Example 1- Bible
http://spot.colorado.edu/~huemer/biblequotes.htm

Example 2- Unacceptable in modern society.
http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2010/02/...cing-word/

Michael Pearl (mentioned in article, author of "How To Train Up a Child") is actually not a hypocrite. He is right. The only way to get a child to be obedient to the laws of god is to beat it into them. I recently discovered that Christians are responsible for the majority of abortions worldwide. This would suggest that not enough parents are beating their children, possibly?

This sort of thing was acceptable at the time that "God" and "Moses" wrote the book of Deuteronomy. It isn't now. Since the bible is said to be the word of god, it is in my opinion, hypocritical of people to pick parts out of the bible that are relevant in their life somehow, and skip over all the parts that are socially unacceptable.

The fact that I had to spell that out for you really slowly shows me that your reading comprehension skills are low, and you possibly shouldn't worry about my critical thinking skills.

Please do work on the reading comprehension thing before attempting to read the bible. If you can actually understand it by reading it, your morals might get the best of you, and perhaps you will put it down forever.

[ElDinero]

BOOF. It's outta the park!

[tackattack]

Pardon my interjection,

---

That is so far removed from what I actually said it might as well be in another universe—not to mention how utterly incoherent your statement is ("The Bible is unbiblical"). Although I suspect that you could probably prove otherwise, I sincerely hope that you could not craft a more incomprehensible response if you tried. What I said is that young-earth creationism is unbiblical (and illogical and unscientific, a perfect strike out).

Young-earth creationism is unbiblical? To say that is to say the bible is unbiblical. You made reference to some of the more nutty branches of Christianity and called their beliefs "unbiblical". I'd like to watch you tell a room full of Pentecostals that very thing... from a closed circuit television miles away, of course.

It's okay that you don't get it. It's like the watchtower: Nobody can see it from the inside.

---

I have told a room full of evangelicals that their beliefs and statement of faith was unbiblical and inconsistent. In true Christian format we discussed it, practiced patience and understanding. Some changed their opinion on the matter, others couldn't see anything other than the 2 verses they cherry-picked. Denial of one verse while accepting another is, IMO, just as bad as only reading the verses that agree with your view. It's not my understanding that throwing away reason and denial of presented evidence is consistent with Biblical teaching. Some people just don't like to question what they've established is their version of right.

Back to the point; while YEC may be particularly prevalent in certain geographical areas, generally, from my experience (from speaking with missionaries, pastors and believers all over the world) it is a minority view. Probably because it denies physical evidence and logic. YEC focuses more on denying scientific evidence than Biblical exegesis, hence I support the claim that YEC is in a minority view of what is Biblically accepted by most of Christendom.

---

Christians are the biggest hypocrites ever. In Exodus/Deuteronomy, for example, Mr. God writes a list of commandments for Moses. One of them says that killing is bad. Moses and his band of former "El" worshipers go on to slaughter masses of innocent people, because God commands them to do so. God himself is a hypocrite.

I feel like it's a great waste of time to going on about the billions of examples of biblical hypocrisy. It's your beloved book. You read it. I did, and that is one of the many reasons I am a happy, unapologetic atheist."

Is actually how I put it. Don't cherry pick me.

---

I also feel it's a waste of energy to rebut everything you feel is hypocritical because your view of Christianity does come off as strongly biased in the negative. Whatever apologetics I give will probably be chalked up to mental acrobatics or something. I will however still address this point.
In Exodus/ Deut. God doesn't say killing is bad. I completely agree that if he did it would be a contradiction. Look up the Hebrew ratsach. You'll find that while the less thorough translations might say kill, the original text is about murder, ie. unjustified killing. I know of no stories in the Bible where death was ordered without cause. Yes, even the killing of children.

Note for next point.. take note of your last sentence in that quote...

---

Example 1- Bible
http://spot.colorado.edu/~huemer/biblequotes.htm

Example 2- Unacceptable in modern society.
http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2010/02/...cing-word/

Michael Pearl (mentioned in article, author of "How To Train Up a Child") is actually not a hypocrite. He is right. The only way to get a child to be obedient to the laws of god is to beat it into them. I recently discovered that Christians are responsible for the majority of abortions worldwide. This would suggest that not enough parents are beating their children, possibly?

This sort of thing was acceptable at the time that "God" and "Moses" wrote the book of Deuteronomy. It isn't now. Since the bible is said to be the word of god, it is in my opinion, hypocritical of people to pick parts out of the bible that are relevant in their life somehow, and skip over all the parts that are socially unacceptable.

---

... First example is clearly listing verses without context, independent of their surrounding text, with no understanding of their place in the text.. and you hate cherry picking... ok next point

I couldn’t get to the second link but I'll take your comment
"The only way to get a child to be obedient to the laws of god is to beat it into them."
I disagree, I don't beat.. or even spank my children and they know very well what's right from wrong, have a well developed conscious and my oldest chooses to learn more about what God's will is for him. If you're going to state it, please support it, because I feel it's a ludicrous statement.

" I recently discovered that Christians are responsible for the majority of abortions worldwide. This would suggest that not enough parents are beating their children, possibly? "Or would it suggest that perhaps Christians (or at least those claiming it) are also a majority of the people. Your statistical analysis is severely flawed. Whatever your statistics, the vast majority of Christiandom feel/ teach that abortion is against God's law. Therefore if people are having abortion, they're not following typical Christian doctrine, ergo not in mainline Christianity.

---

Please do work on the reading comprehension thing before attempting to read the bible. If you can actually understand it by reading it, your morals might get the best of you, and perhaps you will put it down forever.

---

Please read the entire Bible and realize that context is a part of reading comprehension.

[Erinome]

In Exodus/ Deut. God doesn't say killing is bad. I completely agree that if he did it would be a contradiction. Look up the Hebrew ratsach. You'll find that while the less thorough translations might say kill, the original text is about murder, ie. unjustified killing. I know of no stories in the Bible where death was ordered without cause. Yes, even the killing of children.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...ersion=NIV

Line 13! Am I the only one here who has read this thing?

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...ersion=NIV

Out of context my ass.

Nooo... God wouldn't kill innocent babies to prove a point. Except for when he did... according to the bible:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...ersion=NIV

I don't give a shit what context you put that in, it's detestable. Not like men having butt sex detestable, but "filling them with horror so they would know I am the LORD" detestable.

Your statistical analysis is severely flawed. Whatever your statistics, the vast majority of Christiandom feel/ teach that abortion is against God's law. Therefore if people are having abortion, they're not following typical Christian doctrine, ergo not in mainline Christianity.

Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".

http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html

Denial helps nothing. Cling to your silly claim that those who get abortions are not truly Christian, but it's pointless to those of us who live in reality. Who is to judge what makes or breaks someone's authenticity as a Christian? You? Get over yourself.

I disagree, I don't beat.. or even spank my children and they know very well what's right from wrong, have a well developed conscious and my oldest chooses to learn more about what God's will is for him. If you're going to state it, please support it, because I feel it's a ludicrous statement.

http://www.bible.com/bibleanswers_result.php?id=153


I could spend all day using the bible to make the bible look ridiculous and disgusting. It's actually not that hard, if you really think about it.

[The Grand Nudger]

Reason, denial of evidence? What reason? What evidence? We have a thread for that you know. Have you been holding out on us?

[Zen Badger]

I know of no stories in the Bible where death was ordered without cause. Yes, even the killing of children.

Yep, those kids deserved death for making fun of Elishas baldness