House Rules Re: [FoRK] The drum beat continues

Jeff Bone < jbone at place.org > on > Tue Nov 21 00:14:19 PST 2006

On Nov 20, 2006, at 5:56 PM, Russell Turpin wrote:

>> The short answer (which even if trite is still true) is that I   
>> believe in Christianity for the same reason I believe in science:  
>> though deeply flawed, both work much better -- for a longer period  
>> of time -- than any of the other alternatives that have been tried.

To Dr. Ernie:  Christianity == long-term good?  Turn the other  
cheek?  You must be joking.  Father's house, many mansions ---  
REALLY?  And what, maybe 69 virgins, too?  At least the freakin'  
Muslims falsely promise some visceral rewards.  Read Twain:  I don't  
fucking want harps and hymns forever, I can only do karaoke when  
drunk, for Christ's sake!  Forward-looking good?  Really?  How many  
have died in His name?  How many atrocities committed?  How much  
anguish, how much suffering, how much corruption and exploitation?   
How much continuous, ongoing suppression of the human potential?  How  
much authoritarianism?  How much anti-progress?  How much non- 
reason?  (I'm sure you've heard of Copernicus, Kepler, Gallileo, and  
their troubles and theo-political compromises...)  How much failure?   
How much arrogance?  How much self-righteousness?  How much  
ignorance?  HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH?  How, in the scope of history, is  
Christianity any different from that other blood-stained, and oh-so- 
more au-contemps, "religion of peace" --- ISLAM?!?

Show me 10 righteous (Christian) men, and I will spare the world.   
Paraphrasing, of course, and for evocative purpose.  Surely you get  
it.  Put more contemporarily and less politically:  show me 10  
"righteous" (Muslim) men, and I will show you several terrorists.

What will it take for otherwise reasonable people to break from  
tradition and LOUDLY proclaim THE TRUTH:  that RELIGION ---  
regardless of variety --- is at best a quaint social-evolutionary  
anachronism:  a biological, instinctive means to keep us melded in  
smallish tribes and to keep mothers from murdering rival's  
daughters?  What will it take for us to finally admit that RELIGION  
is nothing more than a SOCIALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE, borne by the  
males, and particularly the young ones that have limited reproductive  
opportunity?  Is 9/11 --- really --- not enough of an existence proof?

WHAT DOES IT TAKE, REALLY?

> What facts does the Christian god explain?

None, inasmuch as He's never authored a book, personally.  As far as  
I, or any *non-ignorant Christian theologist* that I'm aware of, know.

On the other hand, there is a significant --- some might say  
"significant" --- correspondence between Biblical folklore and both  
archaeological fact and plausible extrapolation.  Even such  
apparently "miraculous" events as the culling of the firstborn of  
Egypt and the parting of the Red Sea, when put into proper historical  
(I hesitate to say "scientific" for fear of offending the theists)  
context make some amount of sense.  (I saw a show on "Ashbiel-Ploos"  
--- i.e., HBO Plus --- in Spanish in Mexico last week that, let me  
tell you brudda, was VERY convincing. ;-)  But the question is one  
mythopoesis, as always.

I myself have nothing to say on the existence of God that is likely  
to be persuasive, one way or the other, to Him.  On the other hand,  
though a Skeptic, I remain quite open to any such persuasive  
arguments He might wish to personally make.   I have, as yet, seen no  
such persuasive arguments.

;-)

jb


More information about the FoRK mailing list