Atheist sues Defense Department for violating his civil rights
posted at 6:16 pm on April 26, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Yes, there are a few of us in foxholes. I’m sympathetic, just like I’m sympathetic to the 96% of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation’s soldier-clients who are Christian but evidently not Christian enough. The tricky part of these cases, of course, is balancing the rights of the soldier with the military’s need to restrict some of those rights to promote discipline and improve morale. Hard to see how threatening a kid for being godless does either:
When Specialist Jeremy Hall held a meeting last July for atheists and freethinkers at Camp Speicher in Iraq, he was excited, he said, to see an officer attending.
But minutes into the talk, the officer, Maj. Freddy J. Welborn, began to berate Specialist Hall and another soldier about atheism, Specialist Hall wrote in a sworn statement. “People like you are not holding up the Constitution and are going against what the founding fathers, who were Christians, wanted for America!” Major Welborn said, according to the statement.
Major Welborn told the soldiers he might bar them from re-enlistment and bring charges against them, according to the statement…
Major Welborn declined to comment beyond saying, “I’d love to tell my side of the story because it’s such a false story.”
But Timothy Feary, the other soldier at the meeting, said in an e-mail message: “Jeremy is telling the truth. I was there and witnessed everything.”…
In November 2007, Specialist Hall was sent home early from Iraq after being repeatedly threatened by other soldiers. “I caution you that although your ‘legal’ issues are yours and yours alone, I have heard many people disagree with you, and this may be a cause for some of the perceived threats,” wrote Sgt. Maj. Kevin Nolan in Specialist Hall’s counseling for his departure.
I’ve written posts about the MRFF before and the comments tend to split between “they’re exaggerating” and “yeah, it happens, but to an acceptably small degree.” To the extent that that’s originating from a slippery-slope concern about litigation making commanders worry overly about their rhetoric in war zones, fair enough — but we’re not talking about a live-fire situation here. On the other hand, it’s worth noting that one of our more knowledgeable readers thought the Foundation was wrong on the law when it complained about Pentagon brass violating DoD regs by appearing in a video for a Christian ministry. They’ve also got a nasty habit, all too common among my fellow atheists, alas, of letting their own rhetoric run away with them: Witness the press release comparing Hall’s treatment to “rape” or Mikey Weinstein’s infamous threat to leave “sucking chest wounds” on his opponents. Or better yet, just go watch the first 20 seconds of the group’s introductory video. That analogy is sufficiently disgusting that it should keep any conscientious atheist away.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »
Sorry I can’t think of an insult stupid enough for you.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 2:13 PM
That’s actually funny. Evolution is NOT a religion. It’s not even a course. It’s a subset of a topic taught in a science class that most kids aren’t awake to hear anyway. And, you conveniently side-stepped what YOU and your Apocolyptic ilk would like taught in public schools and that is Intelligent Design. You and Ben Stein become physically ill at the mere mention of our mitochondrial anscestors. And, as far as taxpayer money goes, the Christian church has encroached on so many facets of public sector life that the IRS continually challenges its 501(c)
status.
Atheists and Deists are not the ones peddling fear via some great rapture or dispensing personal guilt in an effort to keep the pews filled on Sunday. No my delusional friend, “Paradise” after earth is your fantasy. You proove it.
DanKenton on April 27, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Atheists assume they have no burden of proof. Yet they cannot live with the implications of their world view and don’t think they have a world view to defend.
This just shows how naïve one has to be to accept that faith.
Right_of_Attila on April 27, 2008 at 2:44 PM
This atheists attempt to silence Christians in the Military reminds me of 1963 when prayer and Bible reading was taken out of the American school system. That was done by an atheist also, Madalyn Murray O’Hair (once president of the American Atheists who was referred to as “the most hated woman in America”). Her son, by the way, became a preacher. His mom used him to get prayer taken out. They took it all the way to the Supreme Court to get the Bible out of public schools, and she succeeded. But in 1963, that was the year when everything started going downhill. There started an increase in premarital sex, disease, divorce rates began to go up. Pregnancies in unwed girls began to rise. 1963 is when violent crimes began to increase. SAT scores began falling. Teen suicide rate increased. etcetera, etcetera.”
As noted, her son William J. Murray, is a Christian and the president of the Religious Freedom Coalition in Washington D.C. Unlike his mother who fought to ban prayer in public schools, he fights for the rights of other Christians around the world.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Huh? What is this jibber-jabber, tongue-speak? Perhaps Pentecostal nonsense? You’d think you would want MORE Atheists around so that God, Jesus, Ghostbuster, Sky-Jockey, whatever, would rush down and start the “End of Times” parade now. You’d get to Disneyland faster and we’d burn at 10,000 degrees; both of which give you great pleasure.
DanKenton on April 27, 2008 at 3:15 PM
So, why is it that Christians divorce at the same rate as non-Christians??? The Atheists didn’t steal all of the bibles, right? I mean, the church is still there, right? You hypo-Christians weren’t relying soley on 2nd period prayer study for your moral nourishment. Say it ain’t so.
DanKenton on April 27, 2008 at 3:20 PM
Yes it is funny. Look at that. We agree on something. However, this is where the agreement ends. Evolution is a religion. You must believe you evolved from a rock and there is no evidence of that. You have to believe it happened.
Hold on now get it right. I never said ID should be taught in schools. As I posted before this is a common misconception — this notion that ID & Creation are the same thing. When Creation says that “God created the world in 6 days, roughly six thousand years ago”, and Intelligent Design that “Somebody, or something, was involved with in the process, at some point — or points — in the past (ie, it could be Jehovah, Allah, or Nilly, from the planet silly), that is not the same thing. ID & Creationism are two very different things. I don’t think neither creation and evolution should be taught in schools. If you want to teach the evolution fairytale to your children, fine, send them to a private school that teaches evolution, but don’t force everyone else to pay for your religion to be taught day after day dogmatically in public schools and even refuse to treat students who disagree with evolution fairly. Same thing with Christians. Get there children out and send their children to private schools.
While I disagree with your decription here, it is optional to go to Church. It’s not optional to have to be force fed the fairytale everything started off from a rock and the rock came from nothing. I think this is religious .. I don’t care if somebody wants to believe that. That doesn’t bother me. I don’t care what you believe. What bothers me is we have to pay for that to be taught in our schools system as if it is science and it is not science.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 3:36 PM
Great observation, JetBoy. I think most people deny God because of their lifestyle. Not because they don’t believe He exists. See, if God’s Word is true, and He created the world, then that means He makes the rules. This seems to be abig factor in many people believing in the religion of evolutionism. And the frustrating thing for me as a Christian is that many who are rejecting God have a skewed idea of who He is and what the Bible teaches.
The Bible says, “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him” (1 Corinthians 2:9).
I really don’t think anyone (who is able to properly explain it) has actually sat down with them and described what God has waiting for them.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 4:00 PM
So I guess carbon-dating, radio-carbon testing, mitochondrial DNA analysis and every other analytical tool used to trace evolutionary development and migration is simply pixie dust in your opinion? Curiously, why is it that Christians don’t protest law enforcements’ use of similar methodology when it comes to solving crimes or dating/testing evidence at crime scenes?
Btw, the world is 6000 years old because the bible says so?
DanKenton on April 27, 2008 at 4:03 PM
you act like it’s a crime that prayer was taken out of schools… why the “hell” should I have to pay for and have my children be made to worship your god? you sir are “preaching” for Theocracy… and that’s worse than Communism… at least Communism has righteous ideals based on every man deserves an equal share… the more you spout fountains of insults and scripture the more you show your need to have your own beliefs confirmed by others.
in the end, if you’re right you’ll have eternity to gloat, if I’m right then no one will ever know, but as Americans we have the right to choose that path on our own. not to have you or the christian right force it on anyone.
what terrifies the right most of all is that the left is surprisingly full of Christians… not the Atheists you equate them to. on some issues the left is right!
again, personally I’m agnostic… so I do enjoy watching you two groups duke it out. when there will never be any real answer to either question, you still keep arguing.
Kaptain Amerika on April 27, 2008 at 4:18 PM
This is typical. Evolutionists will try to discredit one or two evidences and then mistakenly think that they have successfully proven the entire list wrong. This is not logical, of course. Christians are people too y’know, who have the very same temptations evolutionsts and atheists have, both will sin, the difference is the Christian will try to stop. The fact remains and the statistics prove that in 1963 when prayer and Bible reading was taken out of the American school system, that is the year everything went downhill. 1963 is when violent crimes began to increase. SAT scores began falling. Teen suicide rate increased. etcetera, etcetera.” Many who support evolution are great at straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel. (Matthew 23:24)
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 4:24 PM
Personally, life after death forever completely frightens me. Believing that my life will live on in Heaven hardly makes it easier. It’s the concept of forever that bothers me as everything in this life has an end.
Then again, ending doesn’t sit well with me either.
I suppose you mean aside from public schools, colleges, and MSM.
I agree with your points about atheists in the military. They should be allowed to meet together and be treated with respect, but it’s not as though Christians are kept in the dark about secular points of view.
In your haste to insult Christianity, you seem to have forgotten (or maybe you never knew) that one main point about Christ’s death is that God knew exactly what was going to happen long before Cain even killed Able.
That’s why the night before Jesus sweat blood during his prayer. Knowing you’re about to be tortured in one of the most painful ways conceived of by human mind can stress people out it seems.
Again, you could gain by slowing down a little. This was already addressed at length in the comments already.
The Bible (which is capitalized just like any other book title) never once claims the earth is 6,000 years old. Some people have tried to make that claim by adding up the ages of people listed in the genealogies, but that doesn’t make them right.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 4:53 PM
.
You just proved that theists are not the only ones capable of making stupid statements.
.
What a glittering jewel of ignorance you are!
Right_of_Attila on April 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM
“Ever since William (“Fossil”) Smith (1769-1839) at the beginning of the 19th century, fossils have been and still are the best and most accurate method of dating and correlating the rocks in which they occur. Apart from very ‘modern’ examples, which are really archaeology, I can think of no cases of radioactive decay being used to date fossils.” Agar, Derek V., “Fossil Frustrations,” New Scientist, vol. 100 (November 10, 1983), p. 425. (Emphasis added)
“Radiometric dating would not have been feasible if the Geologic Column had not been erected first.” O’Rourke, J. E., “Pragmatism versus Materialism in Stratigraphy,” American Journal of Science, vol. 276 (January 1976), p. 54 (Emphasis added)
So they don’t date fossils by Carbon Dating or Potassium Argon dating, they date them by their position in the Geologic Collumn. They find an area and conclude it was so many thousands of years ago and so the fossil must be that old too. And where’s the Geologic Column? .. it can only be found one place in the world — in the textbook. The Geologic Collumn does not exist any place in the world.
Watch why Carbon 14 dating is useless for dating fossils.
Now that’s science!
After weighing all the evidence and reviewing the creation/evolution subject thousands of times, I believe and can say with all certainty that the universe was created in six literal, 24 hour days about 6,000 years ago as revealed in the creation verses of the Bible (see Mathew 19:4; Exodus 20:11; Genesis 1 & 5 etc……). There is evidence everywhere indicating creation and a young earth. Watch this debate between one creationist vs three evolutionists for some examples. Note: This video is hillarious when the evolutionist tries to explain their silly views we all came from a rock.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 5:06 PM
This so-called “constitutional separation of church and state.” No where in the US constitution is this mentioned. That phrase was started by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to a friend in which he explained that the church must be protected from the state (not the other way) in order to ensure freedom of religion. The founding fathers established a constitutional republic, not a democracy, to enforce the laws. Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Constitution stated, “A simple democracy is one of the greatest of evils.” A Republic is ‘rule of law’ not the rule of the mob. A republican form of government is where citizens elect representatives who will then enforce the laws by which we are to be governed. Democracy, will always lead to a dictatorship, it’s an illegitimate form of government in that rights are conferred by man. In a constitutional republic like the US, rights are conferred by the creator.
“The LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king.” Isaiah 33:22
The first five books of the Bible are called “the Law” (Matthew 7:12; Luke 24:4) and they just so happen to be the foundation of the American legal system. In Genesis 9:6, God commissioned man to carry out those laws. Government was not formed to change God’s laws but rather to enforce them. The Bible is the basis for American law system and Constitution.
In 1846 the Supreme Court of South Carolina declared: “Christianity is a part of the common law of the land, with liberty of conscience to all. It has always been so recognized… it is the foundation of those morals and manners upon which our society is formed; it is their basis. Remove this and they would fall. The U.S. Supreme Court in 1892 ruled –”Our laws and institutions must necessarily be based upon the teachings of the Redeemer of Mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian.” Again the Supreme Court in 1952 stated: “We are a religious people whose institutions all presuppose a Supreme Being …”
These quotations are representative of many which support the facts; that this is supposed to be a Constitutional Republic - based entirely upon Christian principles – with no separation of Church and State. Our very form of government and legal system were formed from, and based on, God’s natural law and the Bible. The fact is the absence of prayers in public schools has played a role in the “moral decline” of America. And now they want to silence Christians in the Military. This is the beginning of the end for America.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 5:35 PM
This is completely false.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 5:39 PM
Eternity to gloat? Kaptain, I hope you don’t think I’m gloating here, because I’m not. I don’t wish anyone to Hell. I do not make this statement lightly. Hell is much worse than anything any living human being can ever imagine. I sincerely hope and pray that all of you reading will believe the truth concerning the reality of Hell, and give your life to Jesus, while you are alive. It is only in this lifetime in which you can repent (turn away from sin and receive Jesus). Incidently, agnostic (ie, I don’t know) is the Greek word for ignoramus.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Esthier, the dates are all given in the Bible in Genesis 5 and Genesis 11 and a few other places if you add up the dates in the Bible, it says, “Adam lived 130 years, and begat a son and named him Seth…. Seth lived 105 years and begat Enos…. Enos lived 90 years and begat Canaan…” etcetra. If you add up the dates in the Bible, it comes to about 6000 years ago … not millions and billions. And as I posted before around the time of Christ there were only 250 million people on earth. In 1800, there was only one billion. The Bible says there was a flood 4400 years ago. The current population of earth (6.5 billion) could easily be generated from eight people (survivors of the Flood) in less than 4,000 years. Today’s world population fits perfectly with the flood and young earth creation account. It doesn’t match evolution. So I think you may want to reconsider your position on this matter in light of the evidence.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 6:03 PM
1) The “First Book of Enoch” isn’t part of any mainstream Jewish or Christian canon.
2) As for Revelation: no it doesn’t.
3) Perhaps Adam had free will (not saying that he did or that naming of the animals in any way implies that he did), but the rest of humanity is in slavery to sin unless they are saved and then they are a slave of Christ.
This debate has been going on for thousands of years, you’re not going to end it with three vauge references, one of which isn’t even Scriptural.
29Victor on April 27, 2008 at 6:08 PM
Where is the evidence that the “the universe was created in six literal, 24 hour days about 6,000 years ago”?
Difficulty: No Bible references!
thisaintnopicnic on April 27, 2008 at 6:19 PM
Thanks, but no.
I understand that the Bible lists their ages. I specifically referenced that.
However, all that tells us is how long it’s been since Adam was on the earth, and even that is only true if you assume every single person was included in the lists.
Besides, Adam wasn’t created as a baby. He was created as a fully grown man. Even if people have only been on the earth for 6,000 years, it would be in keeping with the Creation story to believe that God created the earth at an age that could house humans.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 6:59 PM
No need to yell, this-aint-no-picnic.
“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth…. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” Genesis 1:1, 31
“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day.” Exodus 20:11
The Bible tells us clearly in Exodus 20:11, God made everything in six days. Everything in heaven, and earth, the sea, and all that in them is. And if the average layman cannot understand that verse, then the Bible is incapable of being understood.
“Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.” Genesis 2:1-3
It’s very simple. Hope that helps. Have a great day/night.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 7:01 PM
Okay, this is where you gotta make sure I understand what you really mean by what you say, because I’ve read some of your stuff here and um, well, let me ask, so you think the earth was there for billions and billions of years before Adam?
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Considering that the Bible was translated from ancient Hebrew, it’s worth it to note that some have interpreted the word “days” as “stages” instead, which changes the story dramatically.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 7:20 PM
I do not know.
My personal belief is that God created the earth at a specific age, because a “newborn” earth would not have been able to sustain life of any kind.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Ah, yes… I had a hunch you felt this way. Correct me if I’m wrong, but your think there were six long days of creation, billions of years, and acts of creation during those eons. How about a local flood? You think the flood wasn’t world-wide, isn’t that right? Oh, and you believe pre-Adamic non-human human-like creatures existed. I guess I’m jumping the gun, but …
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 7:27 PM
Oops, we cross posted. Sorry bout that. I’ll wait for your answer. I guess I’m just a bit confused. Do you consider yourself a Christian?
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 7:29 PM
Yes, you’re jumping it very much.
Please, with all due respect, do not make assumptions about me. It is insulting, especially when it’s not true.
You asked me a question, and I answered it. Please respond to that instead of what you think I believe.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 7:30 PM
I don’t “consider” myself a Christian. I am one, have been since I was very young.
In fact, when I was in junior high I read a book challenging evolution and attended a seminar on the same topic. I then came back to school and argued intensely with my science teacher.
But I’m still not convinced that Adam was around when the world was newly formed. It’s illogical, scientifically impossible, and it breaks from the pattern set out in Genesis.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 7:32 PM
First of all, the God that I worship is able to make a full-grown man in a full - grown garden and full - grown universe. He doesn’t need seventeen billion years to get it put together so we can live here. He can make it right in six days. And He’s capable of writing a book that the average person can understand. Why don’t you just come out and say it Esthier. You bmhEÃod used evolution. The fact is, there’s no difference between what you’re saying and what evolutionist says. That’s what I see. I see what you say as being totally foreign to God’s Word, and I get real nervous when somebody teaches something — where we have to have a guru to explain it. Show me one verse in the Bible that supports what you’re saying, that He used evolution. He said I made everything in six days. To me that means He made everything in six days.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 7:43 PM
It’s just six normal days Esthier, just like we have today, there’s no difference at all. You’re reading out of the King James?
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 7:46 PM
You’re not understanding me. You’re so fixated on your preconceived misconceptions that you have no idea what I’m saying.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 7:49 PM
1. I never said it took billions of years.
2. I’ve never said it didn’t take six literal days.
3. I just finished telling you that I argued against evolution not so very long ago.
After you’ve digested those three points, I’ll actually have this discussion with you.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 7:51 PM
Some people have tried to make that claim by adding up the ages of people listed in the genealogies, but that doesn’t make them right.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Esthier, the dates are all given in the Bible in Genesis 5 and Genesis 11 and a few other places if you add up the dates in the Bible, it says, “Adam lived 130 years, and begat a son and named him Seth…. Seth lived 105 years and begat Enos…. Enos lived 90 years and begat Canaan…” etcetra. If you add up the dates in the Bible, it comes to about 6000 years ago … not millions and billions. And as I posted before around the time of Christ there were only 250 million people on earth. In 1800, there was only one billion. The Bible says there was a flood 4400 years ago. The current population of earth (6.5 billion) could easily be generated from eight people (survivors of the Flood) in less than 4,000 years. Today’s world population fits perfectly with the flood and young earth creation account. It doesn’t match evolution. So I think you may want to reconsider your position on this matter in light of the evidence.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 6:03 PM
Errr… What??
OldEnglish on April 27, 2008 at 7:58 PM
Cherry-picking is a cop-out.
Rev 2 v26.
OldEnglish on April 27, 2008 at 8:05 PM
That’s what I like to see…a couple of “christians” trying to out-Jesus each other. Come on fellas, just say “jesus loves me yes I know…for the bible tells me so.” It’s about as logical as anything else you’ve said.
DanKenton on April 27, 2008 at 8:06 PM
Once More Down the Rabbit Hole.
Well Esthier, the Bible’s simplest interpretation is for a young earth creation account. The universe was created in six literal, 24 hour days about 6,000 years ago as revealed in the creation verses of the Bible (see Mathew 19:4; Exodus 20:11; Genesis 1 & 5 etc……). I’m not trying to argue with you. I’d actually like to help if I can. So, where do we differ on this Esthier? Do you think God used evolution anywhere? When you say “I’m still not convinced that Adam was around when the world was newly formed.” What do you mean? Thanks.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 8:06 PM
Maybe great great great great great great great great great great grandpa was a monkey — in your case.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 8:08 PM
Interesting discussion going between you and Esthier. I’m curious about one thing which you may have mentioned and I missed. What denomination Christian are you?
Oldnuke on April 27, 2008 at 8:09 PM
Please tell us again how Noah was able to keep the T-Rex’s from eating the other animals and his family during those 40 days and 40 nights. And, while you’re at it, please remind me where they found that boat. Wasn’t it near…uh..um…oh yeah…they never found it, did they?!?
DanKenton on April 27, 2008 at 8:10 PM
Well since that’s only 13 generations and long after they nailed your hero to a piece of wood, that would make jebus a monkey too. Hmmm…I knew he was a hairy dude but I had no idea. The first Geico caveman perhaps?
DanKenton on April 27, 2008 at 8:18 PM
I’m sorry that life is pissing you off at the moment. If dishing it out on an anonymous stranger helps, then please, keep it up. Doesn’t bother me.
I mean that a 1-day-old earth cannot sustain life.
However God worked that one out is however God worked it out. I really have no stake in picking one answer to that problem.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 8:19 PM
Hey, Oldnuke.
Well, I don’t care much for all these different denominations. I think denomination is another word for divide. That said, I’m not particularily against denominations, it’s just that at the time of Christ people were just followers of Christ. The word Christian is first mentioned in the Bible in Acts 11:26,
“And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch (Syria).” Acts 11:26
These were called Christian. So I am just a Christian.
However, the denomination that best describes my beliefs is an Independent, Fundamental, Baptist. The name “independent” means that the church patterns itself after the New Testament example and stands alone under the authority of the Bible and not apart of a national organization that would exercise authority over the local church. What Is An Independent Fundamental Baptist?
I don’t attend this specific church, but this is a general Statement of Faith for an Independent, Fundamental, Baptist Church.
In summary, I prefer an Independent, Fundamental, Baptist Church that uses the King James Bible only.
Hope that helps.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 8:22 PM
That was HILLArious!! Sometimes I crack myself up… ha haha
Copyright © 2008 DanKentonisstupid™
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 8:25 PM
I’m from Western Kentucky. I know what a Fundamental Baptist Church is. Thanks for the link anyway. Other than being what you were raised with why do you choose The King James bible over any other?
Oldnuke on April 27, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Transporting baby T-Rex and Brontosauri would have made the most sense and the wooden ark likely disintegrated some time during the past 5,000 years.
dedalus on April 27, 2008 at 8:32 PM
Or even just eggs, as there was limited space on board.
Really though, isn’t the bigger question how Noah was able to get every single animal on board, especially considering thousands of years later we’re still discovering new species we didn’t know existed?
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 8:39 PM
I had read that it was about 15,000 different animal types, assuming that he didn’t have to get all the insects and that somehow the freshwater fish could survive in pockets of freshwater. The 15,000 could have fit on a boat built to the size described in the Bible. Getting rid of all the waste matter would have been a challenge.
dedalus on April 27, 2008 at 8:49 PM
Challenge is an understatement, especially if it was just him, his three kids and the spouses.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 8:54 PM
The waste matter would be even tougher to deal with if one took into account that probably a third of the animals would have been housed below the water line and it was also raining for 40 days and nights.
I’d want to be the kid with the navigation skills in order to push latrine duty off on my siblings.
dedalus on April 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM
Before the flood animals ate vegetation, they were not meat eaters. So T-Rex didn’t need meat. Check out The lion that wouldn’t eat meat to see it’s quite possible. A female African lion, born and raised in America, lived her entire lifetime of nine years without ever eating meat. And for the sake of brevity, here’s a short video explanation how Noah’s Ark may have worked. And this also lends proof to a young earth. In 2005, scientists found traces of soft tissue, including blood vessels, inside the leg bone of a Tyrannosaurus rex dinosaur. This tissue was “stretchy” and it had blood cells, I mean real flesh and blood from a T-Rex dinosaur! Of course this soft tissue was quite a shock for evolutionists. If these dinosaurs are supposed to have been dead for at least 65 million years it doesn’t make sense. Finding soft tissue is not so surprising if the bones are only a few thousand years old though. Again, the findings are consistent with what the Bible teaches — a young earth. That is the real story here my friends, but one you will never hear in the media whose religion is evolutionism and whose writers are prejudiced. I’ve left out tons of other interesting information regarding these subjects too.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 9:01 PM
If they were vegetarians before the flood, why would they become meat eaters after the flood when there are less animals and more vegetation per animals available?
I’ve heard the argument that animals were vegetarians before The Fall, which at least has a spiritual component to the transformation, but I’ve never heard the argument that animals became carnivorous after the Flood.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 9:25 PM
Huh? The bible doesn’t say anything about eggs!?! Actually it contradicts itself (big surprise) by stating that Noah was to take 1 pair (M/F) of every animal and every bird-Genesis 6:19-20 then immediately after in Genesis 7:2 instructs Noah to take 8 pair (M/F) along:
7 clean and 1 unclean.
Please to explain?
DanKenton on April 27, 2008 at 9:32 PM
You’re very welcome.
There are alot of problems with the other versions, Oldnuke. Over the past few decades, new Bible translations have been popping up like popcorn and a lot of these authors do not believe God perfectly preserved His words. However, this contradicts what God Himself said!
Gos֩ʢBqhangeable. God’s word is unchangeable too. In Matthew 24:35, the Lord Jesus said, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.”
Psalms 12:6-7 says, “The words of the LORD are PURE words… Thou shalt KEEP them, O LORD, thou shalt RESERVE them from this generation for ever.”
As God promised in Psalms 12:6-7, I believe the King James Bible is the “preserved” word of God for the English-speaking people.
Look at this: This is a confession by one of the Co-founders of the New American Standard Version Bible (a modern Bible translation):
“I must under God denounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I’m afraid I’m in trouble with the Lord…We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words…it’s wrong, it’s terribly wrong; it’s frightfully wrong… I’m in trouble;… I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can’t refute them. The deletions are absolutely frightening…there are so many …Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?” Dr. Frank Logsdon - Co-founder, New American Standard Version.
He now renounces the work he did in the NASV and said “I’m afraid I’m in trouble with the Lord.” He now realizes he used a faulty Greek manuscript was used in the all these new versions. He now believes that the King James Bible is absolutely correct.
Watch a few minutes of this to give you an idea what the Bible versions are doing. Gail Riplinger on New Age Bible Versions 1 of 16
And this comparison might interest you as well.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 9:33 PM
It also doesn’t say they were adults.
Why? If I do will you renounce your ways and declare me a genius?
I said you can berate me if it makes you feel better, but I didn’t say I’d play along with you just for the hell of it.
And now this is the part where you can gloat about how I don’t know the answer because I’m refusing to answer.
That’s just one Bible. There are several others that have been translated straight from the Hebrew and Greek versions. There are several that are much better than the King James. Of course if you really want authenticity, you can read them in their original language.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 9:50 PM
You need to re-read Genesis, Esthier. God created light on the first day (Genesis 1:3-5) if you just read the first chapter, you’ll see God made the plants, the grass, and the trees on day 3, He made the sun on day 4, plus the insects are made on day five, and they pollinate the plants. I have no idea what you’re talking about here when you say a “1-day-old earth cannot sustain life.”
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 9:53 PM
I came back to look and this thread has to win the championship for the greatest number of non-sequiturs. When I saw a reference to Kent Hovind I knew that high comedy was also on display (If memory serves Dr. Dino was convicted of fraud and got 10 years). Referencing a book of fiction, the Bible, as a means of disproving the fundamental laws of the physical sciences is simply laughable.
I can just imagine how two of each kind of dinosaurs fit on that boat was about half the size of the Titanic. It would have displaced about 22, 000 tons with deck space around 9,000 square feet (anout the floor space of Jeremiah Wright’s new house. Long before the last pair of dinos got on it would have been crushed by the weight and sunk.
If someone wants to believe such nonsence, fine. But don’t feed it to the kids in public schools, that would truly be child abuse.
Annar on April 27, 2008 at 9:57 PM
How much clearer can I possibly be?
A 1-day-old earth literally cannot support life, just as a 1-day-old child cannot name other animals or take care of itself. It’s literally impossible.
That’s what I mean.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 10:00 PM
corrections: nonsence –> nonsence
anout–>about
Sorry, I hit the submit key instead of preview.
Annar on April 27, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Clear?! You gotta be kidding me. You call yourself a Christian, yet all I’ve see you do here is say stupid things and cast doubt on God’s Word like the scoffers do.
God created a full-grown man in a full-grown garden and full-grown universe. Adam was old enough to walk, talk, get married first day. Are you always this stupid or are you making a special effort today?
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 10:15 PM
I don’t think you are a fool. But then, what’s my own humble opinion against thousands of others?
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 10:16 PM
I don’t know why anyone bothers arguing with a guy who is absolutely convinced the world is 6,000 years old. The numbers in the original texts of the Bible, pre-translation, were colloquialisms and idioms of the language at the time and were never meant to be read literally. I.e. the whole 40 days and 40 nights thing with Noah. That was a Hebrew colloquialism for “a very long time” and not a specific reference to the actual number of days and nights.
I don’t think even the Jews, who created the Old Testament, take those numbers literally. And if anyone would know about OT scholarship, it would be them.
Mindcrime on April 27, 2008 at 10:16 PM
Leaving Matrix Island, now… buh bye.
apacalyps on April 27, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Insults from a Christian. Is that how you follow the Bible?
I’m done with you.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Let’s not forget the first thing Noah did when he got off the boat was sacrifice one of the pairs.
frreal on April 27, 2008 at 10:25 PM
Esthier, as I said prior to this I found your exchange with apacalyps interesting. Most of it I have heard in one form or another many times over the years. That’s why I made my query about denomination. It all sounded very familiar and I wasn’t surprised when he (I think he) confirmed that he was a Fundamental Baptist. From your queries I would guess that you haven’t had much exposure to that branch of Christianity. That’s a guess on my part though. Logical debate is very difficult with any fundamentalist. I’m not trying to be insulting and I certainly mean no disrespect to anyone holding those beliefs. I’m merely stating an opinion formed over a lot of years. Their beliefs run very deep and they will accept no dissenting views as valid no matter the facts that support them. My paternal Grandfather and Grandmother were Fundamental Baptists. When I was about fifteen I stopped even trying to engage in meaningful dialog with anyone of that religious persuasion. It’s simply a useless endeavor usually ending with all parties involved leaving upset and confused.
Apacalyps, when you read this I sincerely hope that you are not offended. I certainly meant no offense and did truly find your interchange interesting.
Oldnuke on April 27, 2008 at 11:06 PM
Err…. What??
OldEnglish on April 27, 2008 at 11:08 PM
Is atheism a recognized “religion” among the military? That is, can ‘atheist’ be stamped on a soldier’s dogtags of so desired?
HeIsSailing on April 27, 2008 at 11:59 PM
frreal, Noah took two of every unclean animal and seven of every clean animal. He would not have sacrificed an unclean animal. He had plenty of clean ones to sacrifice.
Oldnuke, you assume your grandparents were the ones who were wrong. It sounds like you were as stubborn as you felt they were.
Rose on April 28, 2008 at 1:36 AM
Actually it was collagen in microscopic amounts. Not dinosaur “meat”. Not blood vessels. Or blood cells. Just ancient proteins and they were sequenced in order to read them. They are also 68 million years old. Truly remarkable. Not however, support for creation mythology or young earth ideology. You present the sophisticated science that recovered these ancient proteins as evidence that that same science is false?
ronsfi on April 28, 2008 at 1:50 AM
The faithful seem to worship continuity of life for its own sake, and to worship merely incidentally the one whom writers say has promised it to them. They already have continuity of life–as a kind, not as an individual–and I’m afraid they’ll forfeit it through pining away for individual immortality and through obedience to men who claim to speak for one who can give it.
Kralizec on April 28, 2008 at 1:59 AM
Ah! He said the exact same quote to me in the mega thread the other day. Cute huh? Apparently we are graced by one of the greatest minds ever to appear on earth. Smarter than all science. Deeper than smiring Buddha. Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound. Truly a legend in his own mind and deeply socially retarded. Ladies and gentlemen! I give you the leg humpin’ bible thumpin’ Eighth wonder of the world and all around laughing stock! Alpacalips!
ronsfi on April 28, 2008 at 2:02 AM
Educate yourself pakylips. You’re a disgrace to Christians everywhere.
How do account for a 9000 year old tree?
How do you account for the Egyptian First Dynasty 900 years before your flood?
How do you account for 100,000 year old Australian cave paintings?
How do you account for volcanism?
How do account for Plate Techtonics?
How do you account for the Alps? The Matterhorn carved by glaciers eons ago.
Or the Rockies or the Himalayas or Limestone or Accretion or the light from objects millions of light years away? If the speed of light is constant then how did that light get here in 6000 years? Or do you only accept physics when it restores microscopic collagen in cretaceous fossils?
How do you account for sedimentation and erosion?
How about radiometric decay?
Ancient life captured in Amber?
A continuous ice core record spanning 420,000 years?
Redshift?
Supernovae?
Let me guess…Magic?
ronsfi on April 28, 2008 at 2:41 AM
No, faith. Blind faith. :)
OldEnglish on April 28, 2008 at 5:01 AM
Here’s the deal.
There are ‘Atheists’ and there are anti-Christians.
The latter are “Fundamentalists” and can be as annoying as any other zealot. There is a point at which atheism becomes just another organized Religion.
The History they rewrite will be their Bible, and Algore can be their Pontiff.
’nuff said.
Tina Hey on April 28, 2008 at 5:20 AM
are you joking me? You must be about 80 years old or just didn’t pay attention in Biology.
Evolution isn’t a religion. Evolution isn’t the completely blind leap of faith you make it out to be. Is it 100% proven? No. Nothing in science is. NOTHIG. Even laws aren’t People still test gravity FFS. Some things get close to being 100% like 99.999%, but science seeks to answer questions and operates independently of religion. It is entirely possible to be quote religious and be quite a strict scientific adherent. (my mother is a prime example, she is down at the old Catholic Church EVERY DAY for mass, after she gets home from the lab)
If you would like to buy me a gross of fruit flies and a 5 habitats to raise them in I can literally show you evolution in action. I’ll even let you decide what trait you’d like me to select for.
Furthermore, if you buy me some bottles of aminoacids and lipids I can literally begin to form cells with nothing more than those materials and water. (they are called protobionts)
Back OT: Maj. Welborn needs to re-read the Constitution he claims to defend. If atheists in the army can’t have meetings amongst one another and are outcast and unworthy to serve in the armed forces to protect that which they believe in, we may as well go and torch the Constitution because it’s not worth the paper it’s printed on.
MannyT-vA on April 28, 2008 at 5:55 AM
Holy lord, you are willing to believe that a man sprouted up out of nowhere despite seeing first hand (presumably unless you believe that is a myth as well) that people simply aren’t created that way? Why isn’t everyone just willed into being fully formed and grown up? Seems like it would make things a whole lot more straightforward.
You should probably spend about 10 seconds thinking before you call ANYONE especially stupid. Just a thought.
MannyT-vA on April 28, 2008 at 6:01 AM
Oh, my; I’ll say. I emailed this knucklehead after watching the video intro — in which he compares his fellow soldiers to Hamas (or was it Hezbollah?). His responses leave me wondering if it is even possible that he served in the military.
His rhetoric is right out of Huff Post, which is where he will surely end up. He is also functionally illiterate, and would seem to be an atheist of Jewish descent (Weinstein). What a strange combination of
failuresqualities.Jaibones on April 28, 2008 at 7:46 AM
Not sure how you jumped to that conclusion, and I didn’t assume that they were wrong. I decided that their beliefs were incomprehensible to me after much deliberation and not a little hard evidence.
Oldnuke on April 28, 2008 at 7:57 AM
What!? I am an atheist, and I insist that history always be written as is, (not that liberals take any notice of that), and as for Gore…. he’s a menace!
OldEnglish on April 28, 2008 at 8:56 AM
Do I just have to provide the flies? Define “habitat”. I want gold fish created from your demostration. No wait, I’ll give you a break and just ask for fish. I’ll even give you a bigger break in that the resulting fish don’t even have to be able to be able to reproduce.
Selective breeding is not evolution.
Are you sure about those protobionts? Last I new it was a theory that they may have formed not a reproducible experiment any high science fair student could do.
jmarcure on April 28, 2008 at 9:19 AM
opps, I should have said high school science fair student not “high science fair student”.
jmarcure on April 28, 2008 at 9:22 AM
That was my first experience with that particular denomination, but I’ve been in Christian circles long enough to have similar experiences with others who cannot have a respectful dialog on the issue.
I started debating religion after my junior year in high school when I participated in a summer program at Stanford. Everyone there was intelligent, and while they infuriated me at times, they at least listened and debated me on the points I was making, rather than the ones they assumed I would make.
It’s unfortunate that religious people can be so close-minded. After all, their beliefs require an open mind. There’s no reason to shut it afterwards.
Rose, he said he tried to talk to them, not debate them. Without knowing anything about him, we may as well take him at his word.
Esthier on April 28, 2008 at 9:38 AM
I don’t know. Your point sounds more impressive the other way.
Esthier on April 28, 2008 at 9:40 AM
I wasn’t sure until I read that, but we’ve definitely been trolled. Funniest thing I’ve read in a while. Well played, sir.
thisaintnopicnic on April 28, 2008 at 11:39 AM
You’re correct Esthier. I never tried to debate my Grandparents on religion. I just talked to them trying to understand the basis for their beliefs. I was never successful and my curiosity has never been satisfied.I said that my grandparents were Fundamental Baptists but that is not completely accurate. They did not belong to a Fundamental Baptist Church. They were members of a small independent Baptist church that held fundamental beliefs. In their later years they migrated towards what most people call Holy Rollers. As far as I could tell this posed no moral dilemma for them. In that part of the country there are literally hundreds of these little churches all sharing pretty much the same core beliefs but not affiliated with any organized central authority group. They range all over the scale from fairly mundane to extremely radical. I eventually came to the conclusion that religious belief is not something that can be debated. You either have faith and believe or you don’t. It’s that simple for me. There is no way that God can be proven to exist. You can quote Bible verses all day long but they prove nothing. Unless you have faith the Bible means nothing and proves nothing. It is merely a compilation of words written by fallible men translated into English, and other languages, by other fallible men.
Oldnuke on April 28, 2008 at 11:41 AM
I don’t get it, just ignore the atheists, they will eventually go away. Most of them just want to pick a fight, they have no real argument, and they usually get into “rabbits don’t chew cud” or Jesus is a Zombie, or some other nonsense.
Meanwhile, they get to enjoy the fruits of the labor and faith that the faithful have built for them (while whining about not be shown courtesy).
*
Just like the “great society” has shown, when you give something to someone, they never appreciate it.
If the atheists had worked for the benefits they are reaping from the faithful, they would fall on there knees and thank God for all that has been given to them.
right2bright on April 28, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Have rabbits started doing that?
dedalus on April 28, 2008 at 11:53 AM
That’s what it looked like you were saying, and really, it’s foolish to debate grandparents on any issue. They might be completely wrong, but they’re your grandparents and generally don’t tolerate “backtalk” even if it’s not really backtalk.
You’re right that the Bible itself cannot prove God exists, but I’m not yet convinced that it is impossible to prove God’s existence.
Esthier on April 28, 2008 at 11:59 AM
I think your analysis is a little harsh. You seem to be lumping all athiests into one category. I know athiests who don’t wear wear it like a badge, work as hard as anyone else and are not prone to whining. Speaking of whines:
Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Oldnuke on April 28, 2008 at 12:00 PM
If you ever succeed please let me know how you did it. I’m in my 60’s and haven’t figured out a method yet.
Oldnuke on April 28, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Considering that the Bible was translated from ancient Hebrew, it’s worth it to note that some have interpreted the word “days” as “stages” instead, which changes the story dramatically.
Esthier on April 27, 2008 at 7:20 PM
They never used the word “day” it was “yom”. (here is one version). Now go back to the ancient hebrew and look at what the word means, in the context it was written. Other “scholars” argue differently, but mainly from the context that to accept the change would mean they would have to change their thinking…heaven forbid.
I posted this a couple of times, it is well worth reviewing.
*
This is why totally relying on a translated version is so dangerous. Or you could use the ol “it is accurate as how I want it translated and mean” trick.
Another link
right2bright on April 28, 2008 at 12:03 PM
There is only one way to confirm if God exists…you don’t want to try it out.
right2bright on April 28, 2008 at 12:04 PM
If I do I certainly won’t keep it a secret, but I know it might never happen in my lifetime.
True. That way would confirm God’s existence, but it wouldn’t serve as proof, since even if you could come back you wouldn’t be able to bring proof with you.
Esthier on April 28, 2008 at 12:12 PM
Linkage
Linkage
fossten on April 28, 2008 at 12:18 PM
I was under the impression that the Bible was compiled and translated from original writings in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.
Every one of us will eventually use this method. How does that saying go, “Everyone wants to go the heaven but nobody wants to die.”
Oldnuke on April 28, 2008 at 12:21 PM
LOL. Liked both links. I’ll clip Bart and read through the CARM site a little more.
If CARM is saying that the word of God was translated into a human language of a place and time and that modern scientific language and methods of observation are more granular, I wouldn’t disagree.
dedalus on April 28, 2008 at 12:26 PM
It would be hard to argue with that. There are few ancient texts that are studied even half as closely as the Bible is in the modern world.
We have to understand that even if we’re coming from the angle that God’s word is perfect and still means what it meant then, that at the very least we are reading it from a completely different perspective.
Esthier on April 28, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Sorry Oldnuke but from the way you describe your conversations with your grandparents it seems that you felt they were wrong and your frustration came from not being able to convince them. If you had discussed the subject you would at least be able to understand why they believed the way they did even if you didn’t agree. Your words show contempt for them and others like them, albeit in a passive tone.
Rose on April 28, 2008 at 1:02 PM
I sincerely don’t mean to argue with you, but your conclusions aren’t necessarily correct.
I’ve many times tried to simply have a conversation with people about their beliefs, and instead of learning anything about them have instead been called names and been told what I believe.
To some people, even having a conversation of the subject constitutes an argument.
Now, you could be completely right, and maybe Oldnuke was being a jerk to his family. I’ve got nothing to prove the truth either way, but I do know from personal experience that it’s possible he wasn’t being combative.
I don’t understand why you refuse to give the benefit of doubt to a stranger who enjoys this site too.
Esthier on April 28, 2008 at 1:10 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »