Did Historical Jesus Ever Really Exist?

The folks at the Washington Post best brace themselves for spittle flecked rants from the "godly folk" who will no doubt take great offense at a story that raises the relevant question of whether the Jesus of the New Testament ever existed.  If not, Christianity's already damaged story line (e.g., the human genome project says Adam and Eve never existed) virtually collapses.  Here are excerpts from the piece:

The first problem we encounter when trying to discover more about the Historical Jesus is the lack of early sources. The earliest sources only reference the clearly fictional Christ of Faith. These early sources, compiled decades after the alleged events, all stem from Christian authors eager to promote Christianity – which gives us reason to question them. The authors of the Gospels fail to name themselves, describe their qualifications, or show any criticism with their foundational sources – which they also fail to identify. Filled with mythical and non-historical information, and heavily edited over time, the Gospels certainly should not convince critics to trust even the more mundane claims made therein.

The methods traditionally used to tease out rare nuggets of truth from the Gospels are dubious. The criterion of embarrassment says that if a section would be embarrassing for the author, it is more likely authentic. Unfortunately, given the diverse nature of Christianity and Judaism back then (things have not changed all that much), and the anonymity of the authors, it is impossible to determine what truly would be embarrassing or counter-intuitive, let alone if that might not serve some evangelistic purpose.

The criterion of Aramaic context is similarly unhelpful. Jesus and his closest followers were surely not the only Aramaic-speakers in first-century Judea. The criterion of multiple independent attestation can also hardly be used properly here, given that the sources clearly are not independent.

Paul’s Epistles, written earlier than the Gospels, give us no reason to dogmatically declare Jesus must have existed. Avoiding Jesus’ earthly events and teachings, even when the latter could have bolstered his own claims, Paul only describes his “Heavenly Jesus.” Even when discussing what appear to be the resurrection and the last supper, his only stated sources are his direct revelations from the Lord, and his indirect revelations from the Old Testament. In fact, Paul actually rules out human sources (see Galatians 1:11-12).

Also important are the sources we don’t have. There are no existing eyewitness or contemporary accounts of Jesus. All we have are later descriptions of Jesus’ life events by non-eyewitnesses, most of whom are obviously biased. Little can be gleaned from the few non-Biblical and non-Christian sources, with only Roman scholar Josephus and historian Tacitus having any reasonable claim to be writing about Jesus within 100 years of his life. And even those sparse accounts are shrouded in controversy, with disagreements over what parts have obviously been changed by Christian scribes (the manuscripts were preserved by Christians), the fact that both these authors were born after Jesus died (they would thus have probably received this information from Christians), and the oddity that centuries go by before Christian apologists start referencing them.

So what do the mainstream (and non-Christian) scholars say about all this? Surprisingly very little – of substance anyway. Only Bart Ehrman and Maurice Casey have thoroughly attempted to prove Jesus’ historical existence in recent times. Their most decisive point? The Gospels can generally be trusted – after we ignore the many, many bits that are untrustworthy – because of the hypothetical (i.e. non-existent) sources behind them. Who produced these hypothetical sources? When? What did they say? Were they reliable? Were they intended to be accurate historical portrayals, enlightening allegories, or entertaining fictions?

Ehrman and Casey can’t tell you – and neither can any New Testament scholar. Given the poor state of the existing sources, and the atrocious methods used by mainstream Biblical historians, the matter will likely never be resolved. In sum, there are clearly good reasons to doubt Jesus’ historical existence – if not to think it outright improbable.

In terms of historical fact, the Jesus story has no more documented support that the stories of the Olympian gods, the Egyptian goddess Isis or the middle eastern god Mithras.  Wanting a story to be true, in short, does not somehow magically make it true.

Southern Baptist Leader: Being Gay Is a Sin In and of Itself

The swamp fever afflicting the Southern Baptist Convention ("SBC") is apparently intensifying as Albert Mohler - who is frighteningly viewed as a leading intellect -  has finally conceded that sexual orientation is not a choice but in the next breath decreed that being gay in and of itself is a sin.  Never mind if one doesn't act on one's feelings.   The good news, of course, is that the  SBC's membership is falling, so that fewer individuals will give a damn about Pious Albert's rantings.  Here some of his batshitery from his blog (Note how being heterosexual is not automatically sinful):

I recently addressed a major national conference on “The Gospel, Homosexuality, and the Future of Marriage” held by the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Subsequent to the conference, it became clear that the vast coverage of the conference in the national press raised some issues that need to be considered further.
 

One of these issues is sexual orientation. As I explained in my address, I had previously denied the existence of sexual orientation. I, along with many other evangelicals, did so because we did not want to accept the sexual identity structure that so often goes with sexual orientation. I still reject that notion of sexual identity. But I repented of denying the existence of sexual orientation because denying it was deeply confusing to people struggling with same-sex attraction.. . . most people experiencing a same-sex attraction tell of discovering it within themselves at a very early age, certainly within early puberty. As they experience it, a sexual attraction or interest simply “happens,” and they come to know it.

Given the depth of the Bible’s teachings on sin and this fallen world, this should not surprise us. In some sense, each of us finds within ourselves a pattern of desires — sexual and otherwise — we did not ask for, but for which we are then and now fully responsible. When it comes to a same-sex attraction, the orientation is sinful because it is defined by an improper object — someone of the same sex.  Of course, those of us whose sexual orientation is directed toward the opposite sex are also sinners, but the sexual orientation is not itself sinful.

It [homosexuality] is not something that is, in itself, freely chosen. That does not mean that the individual is not completely responsible before God for how that orientation is then handled.

 I suppose Pious Al blames all of this ultimately on original sin.  The problem, of course, is that Adam and Eve never existed and, therefore, there was n "Fall."  I'd argue that one of the biggest sins is refusing to utilize ones intelligence and instead cling to ignorance and bigotry.  Pious Al is one of the biggest sinners of all. 

More Cretinous Judges Resign in North Carolina

While parts of Southwest Virginia are culturally like something out of the old Burt Reynolds movie, Deliverance, surprisingly there has been no flurry of resignations by court officials over same sex marriage now being legal in Virginia.  South of the border in North Carolina it's another story.  Six magistrate judges have resigned rather than - oh, the horror - marry same sex couples.  In doing so, they have naturally cite their "religious beliefs" and in their comments about the Bible display their utter ignorance and, I would argue, demonstrate that they are too ignorant to hold any court position.   Meanwhile, they are held up as martyrs by the professional Christian crowd which needs martyrs to continue their flim flam operations asking the ignorant and gullible for money.   Here are examples from the Christian Examiner:

Six North Carolina magistrates—a judicial officer of the District Court who handles certain criminal and civil matters—have resigned rather than violate their Christian convictions by performing same-sex marriage ceremonies.

About 670 magistrates serve in North Carolina, and by resigning the six give up a comfortable income, as well as standing in the community.

"I believe marriage was ordained by God to be between a man and a woman," said Gayle Myrick, magistrate in Union County, N.C. told the Christian Examiner. "For me to do what the state said I had to do, under penalty of law, I would have to go against my convictions, and I was not willing to do that. I want to honor what the Word says."

In addition to Myrick, the magistrates who resigned because of their Christian convictions are Gilbert Breedlove of Swain County; Bill Stevenson of Gaston County; Tommy Holland of Graham County; Jeff Powell of Jackson County; and John Kallam Jr. of Rockingham County.

Regarding next steps, all six say they are waiting on God to provide direction.

"We've rejected the prime authority of the scriptures, something our Nation's Founding Fathers, such as John Adams, knew better than to do. ... In both the Old and New Testaments, homosexuality is something the Lord does not approve of, and since He doesn't, I could not put the sanction of the state on a relationship that runs afoul of scripture."

Each of the six wanted it known they had no animosity, no ill will, toward people who live in a homosexual lifestyle. "I'm just standing in faith to declare this is what the Lord has said. If they object, that's fine; it's between them and God," Breedlove told the Christian Examiner.

How do you not hold animosity against gays if you want to keep them inferior under the civil laws?  These statements are, pardon my French, bullshit.   I'd also note that if one truly bothered to study the Bible, it quickly becomes clear that POLGAMY - not one man and one women - is the biblical form of marriage.  But that, of course would require effort and discernment - something terrifying to conservative Christians. It would also require and acknowledgment that Adam and Eve never existed as historical persons.  The ignorance of these magistrate judges also includes misrepresenting the views of the Founding Fathers who held deep suspicion of religion mixing with politics and the civil laws.  Hence what Jefferson called the fall of separation between church and state.   North Carolina is a better place with these individuals out of the judicial system.

The Christianists' Continuing Problem of Adam and Eve's Non-Existence

The biblical inerrancy crowd continues to grapple with a serious (actually fatal) problem: science tells us that Adam and Eve did not exist.  As noted before on this blog, this poses a huge problem for Christianity - especially the conservative variety which claims that the Bible is literally true in all aspects.  Without Adam and Eve, the Fall as described in the Bible goes away as does the need for Christ's redemption of mankind.  Some Christofascists are simply doing what they do best: ignoring reality and believing only what they want to believe.  Others seem to realize their entire storyline is on the verge of collapsing and, thus, are trying to find a work around to stay in business, if you will.  I for one have little sympathy for the crowd that chants about Bible being the inerrant word of God.  The set the stage for their own debacle.  Andrew Sullivan looks at some of the feverish efforts to salvage the storyline. Here are highlights:

Noting that “genetic diversity in the human population is not consistent with what we would expect if all humans had descended from a single pair of individuals,” Loren Haarsma grapples with what that means for the Christian understanding of original sin:

A variety of scenarios are being proposed by Christian scholars today for how we might understand the Adam and Eve of Genesis 2, and their disobedience in Genesis 3, in light of modern science. Some scenarios propose Adam and Eve as two individuals living in Mesopotamia just a few thousand years ago, acting not as ancestors but as recent representatives of all humanity. As our representatives, their disobedience caused all of humanity to fall into sin. Other scenarios propose Adam and Eve as two individuals, or as literary representations of a small group of ancient representative-ancestors, selected out of a larger population, living in Africa over 100,000 years ago at the dawn of humanity; they were ancestors—but not the sole ancestors—of all humans today; they fell into disobedience against God over a relatively short period of time with a fairly distinct “before” and “after.” Other scenarios propose that Adam and Eve’s disobedience in Genesis 3 is a symbolic retelling of the story of every human who, over our long history, became aware of God’s claims on how they ought to live, and then disobeyed.

Jerry Coyne snarks:

Adam and Eve couldn’t have been the literal ancestors of all humanity. Normally, such a scientific trashing of scripture could be absorbed, at least by liberal theologians. They’d just reinterpret Adam and Eve as metaphors. But that causes big trouble on two counts.

First, if there really were 2,000 or more ancestors, then all of them must have transgressed to bring original sin into the world. That is hard to fathom: did everyone do something bad at the same time? Second, if Adam and Eve were metaphors, and the source of original sin is mysterious, then we have no idea why Jesus died. After all, his death and Resurrection occurred precisely to save us sinful humans from the transgressions of Adam and Eve. If you have to turn that story into a metaphor, then Jesus died for that metaphor. That’s not too palatable to Christians.

An easy and sensible way to solve this conundrum is to assume that the whole scenario is concocted: humans don’t have original sin; there was no Adam and Eve; and the Resurrection and divinity of Jesus were fictions. But Christians won’t have that, for the meaning of Jesus’s life, death, and resurrection is the final, non-negotiable “truth” of Christianity.

In short, there really is no way around the problem.  Hence, we can expect the Christofascists to merely pretend that the problem doesn't exist.  Otherwise, their entire house of cards reality comes crashing down and they are - God forbid - required to think and make moral judgments not based on a book that is in the last analysis largely fictional. 

Adam and Eve Debacle: Science Drives Theologians into Frenzy of Fabrication

As noted previously on this blog, the human genome project has scientifically confirmed that the Adam and Eve of the Book of Genesis never existed as historic people.  Thus, the story of the serpent, the fruit from the tree of knowledge and mankind's fall through the sin of Adam and Eve never happened.  Obviously, this blows the Hell out of the Christian story line and the need for a redemptive Messiah to atone for mankind's sinfulness.  Some denominations are trying to merely ignore this reality which has blown apart Christianity's entire premise as violently as the U-boat torpedo ended the Lusitania's reign as a queen of the seas.  Other denominations - e.g., the Southern Baptist Convention - that have stupidly held to the inerrant truth of the Bible are desperately seeking to fabricate a revised story line that avoids the total collapse of the story of the Fall and Christ's redemption.  A piece in Why Evolution is True looks at this desperate endeavor.  Here are excerpts:

Busily engaged in apologetics, BioLogos has a new post on the never-ending kerfuffle about the meaning of Adam and Eve: “Why the church needs multiple theories of original sin.” It’s by Loren Haarsma, who has a doctorate in physics from Harvard and teaches it at Calvin College (he’s also the co-author, with his wife Deborah, of Origins: Christian Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design). 

The cynical—but correct—answer to the title question is: “Because science showed that there isn’t an Adam and Eve, so you have to make up stuff to save the meaning of Jesus.” And indeed, that’s precisely what theologians do, though of course they don’t admit it. Instead, they pretend that the scientific results showing that humans didn’t evolve from a single pair of ancestors simply means that we must reinterpret the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. But, as usual, theology cannot solve this problem, though Haarsma pretends that diligent theological study and proper interpretation of Scripture will yield an answer. It’s a prime example of how religious tenets are not only disproven by science, but, more important, how religion, unlike science, is powerless to find truth.

The facts first. Sheehan et al., building on an earlier paper by Li and Durbin (references below), calculated that the minimum population size associated with the worldwide expansion of humans out of Africa about 60,000 years ago was 2,250 individuals . . . . Note: 2,500 is larger than two.

Normally, such a scientific trashing of scripture could be absorbed, at least by liberal theologians. They’d just reinterpret Adam and Eve as metaphors. But that causes big trouble on two counts. First, if there really were 2,500 or more ancestors, then all of them must have transgressed to bring original sin into the world. That is hard to fathom: did everyone do something bad at the same time?

Second, if Adam and Eve were metaphors, and the source of original sin is mysterious, then we have no idea why Jesus died. After all, his death and Resurrection occurred precisely to save us sinful humans from the transgressions of Adam and Eve. If you have to turn that story into a metaphor, then Jesus died for a metaphor. That’s not very palatable to Christians.

But before Haarsma even gets to the science (whose truth he gracefully admits, because he has to), he discusses how the Church has historically dealt with the problem of atonement. The answer is that they’ve considered multiple theories and can’t settle on one. 

A variety of scenarios are being proposed by Christian scholars today for how we might understand the Adam and Eve of Genesis 2, and their disobedience in Genesis 3, in light of modern science.

1. Some scenarios propose Adam and Eve as two individuals living in Mesopotamia just a few thousand years ago, acting not as ancestors but as recent representatives of all humanity. As our representatives, their disobedience caused all of humanity to fall into sin.

2. Other scenarios propose Adam and Eve as two individuals, or as literary representations of a small group of ancient representative-ancestors, selected out of a larger population, living in Africa over 100,000 years ago at the dawn of humanity; they were ancestors—but not the sole ancestors—of all humans today . . .

3. Other scenarios propose that Adam and Eve’s disobedience in Genesis 3 is a symbolic retelling of the story of every human who, over our long history, became aware of God’s claims on how they ought to live, and then disobeyed.

[E]ach of these has its own set of problems if you want to save the idea of original sin. The first raises the problem of how the transgressions of two people could infect the entire species.

The second scenario, which proposes that Adam and Eve could be “literary representations” (i.e., made up) of an entire group of ancestors, also fails to explain how that whole group became infected with original sin.

The final alternative, if you wish to save original sin, is the one employed by more sophisticated theologians like Peter Enns (reference below). Enns, formerly a biblical scholar at BioLogos, but presumably expelled from Paradise by his science-y transgressions, simply says that the whole scenario is metaphorical. . . . In other words, the Adam and Eve story is fictional.

[T]he whole problem is this: what, exactly, is God’s revelation in Scripture? It used to be a literal interpretation of Adam and Eve, and still would be had science not taken that off the table. But maybe original sin is metaphorical, too, and perhaps even Jesus is!  Indeed, maybe God isn’t loving and good, either. After all, he’s pretty much of a hateful bully in the Old Testament.

In the end, the inerrant Bible crowd is left with nothing.  This, of course means their entire house of cards faith construct collapses.  Yet despite this reality, we continue to see folks like those at The Family Foundation and individuals like failed GOP candidates Ken Cuccinelli, "Bishop" Jackson, and Mark Obenshain seeking to impose precepts based on fictional myths on all citizens.  Thinking, decent people need to resist these efforts strenuously.
 

Costco Labeled The Bible As “Fiction”

The Christofascists are always busy looking for perceived offense and reasons to claim they are being persecuted.  Whether it was done "accidentally" as now claimed or not, Costco set off a fire storm when Bibles were placed in the "fiction" section of the retailer's book section.  Candidly, the Bible IS a work of fiction and modern scientific knowledge increasingly makes it clear that only a fool or psychologically damaged individual would take the Bible is inerrant and a truthful historical chronology.  E.g., the human genome project has made it clear that Adam and Eve never existed as historical individuals.  This reality demolishes the whole Bible narrative of mankind's fall due to the disobedience of Adam and Eve.  Not surprisingly, Fox News, a/k/a Faux News, has played to the outrage of the Bible thumpers.  BuzzFeed looks ate the spittle flecked hysteria over what was in fact an accurate classification of the Bible.  Here are highlights:

Californian pastor Caleb Kaltenbach was looking for a gift for his wife when he spotted this Bible labeled as “fiction,” in a Costco.

It immediately sparked furious reactions from his followers and members of his congregation.

Some questioned why The Koran wasn’t also in the “Fiction” section.

Costco released a statement saying a distributor had mislabeled a “small percentage” of Bibles before sending them to the store. 

“We take responsibility and should have caught the mistake. We are correcting this with them for future distribution,” Costco said. All mislabeled Bibles were also immediately relabeled.  “We greatly apologize for the error,” the store said.

For the record: this labeling mishap was at one Costco, and has not been reported at other stores nationwide.

Candidly, BOTH the Bible and the Koran should be placed in the fiction section of book stores everywhere.

The Rising Anti-Science Party

Everything from advances in longevity to declines in infant mortality stem ultimately from increases in scientific knowledge.  Scientific advances have been a boon for mankind.  At the same time, however, science has been bursting more and more bubbles for the deeply religious fundamentalists who seek to desperately cling to stories authored numerous millennium ago by ignorant men motivated by fear and superstition or a need to feel superior over other surrounding cultures.  For fundamentalist Christians, perhaps the biggest blow has been the human genome project which has confirmed that the Adam and Eve of Genesis never existed as historical persons.  The result?  The entire Christian story line collapses.  Rather than have their simple minded beliefs undermined, these people are part of a growing tide of those engaged in a flat out denial of scientific truths.  Denial is the only thing that keeps their house of cards world view from collapsing.  And most of these people now make up the base of the Republican Party.  Here in Virginia, GOP gubernatorial candidate is an avid science denier. A piece in Huffington Post looks at the phenomenon and the efforts by some to counter it.  Here are excerpts:

New atheism refers to a set of ideas presented in a series of bestselling books that appeared between 2004 and 2007. Today it remains a strong but minority view among atheists. Basically, new atheists differ from the old atheists by being more willing to challenge religious beliefs that contradict science and reason, and engage in intellectual, moral, and political disputes with even moderate believers.

[N]ew atheists don't want to see creationism in the schools any more than the old atheists did. But they don't regard this as such an overarching problem that we should ignore the even greater damage that is done to society by the irrational, magical thinking associated with religion, which penetrates all areas of human life. Creationism is not the cause but the effect of such thinking.

Most working scientists and scientific organizations, notably the National Academy of Sciences, are accommodationist. They carefully avoid confronting religion for fear of losing public support for science. But let me tell you something. They're losing it anyway. Spurred on by the antiscience of the religious right, political support for science is lower now than at any time in memory. 

Once America was the foremost nation in science. Today the most important discoveries are being made elsewhere. Few fresh science PhDs in the U.S. have much hope of getting a post-doctoral appointment and virtually none of making a career in the academic world.

In the meantime, our schools are producing a generation of science illiterates. The US is 29th among developed nations on a list that ranks the science literacy of 15-year olds.

Where does all this hostility to science come in?  I think the answer is clear. The hostility is not directed toward the practical applications of science, as in medicine and technology, but with the challenges that basic science brings to the religious views held by the majority of Americans. Unfortunately most Americans do not seem to realize that basic scientific research is the foundation of the welcome applications.

Let's take a look at some of the conflicts between science and religion that have an important impact on society. Of course, evolution is the most familiar; so let me cover that first. In a survey of 33 countries in Europe plus Japan, only Muslim Turkey had a lower belief in evolution than the United States.

Evangelicals and fundamentalists see evolution as a threat to their belief in the inerrancy of scripture, which indeed it is. No compromise is possible here. However, the Catholic Church and moderate Protestant churches say they accept evolution.  But that is simply not true.

The second big combat zone is climate change. There can be no factual disputing that the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere is far above what is expected naturally and is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. And the simplest physics tells us that this will lead to global warming by the greenhouse effect. 

Yet we still hear people saying that the whole global warming thing is a hoax, cooked up (no pun intended) by unscrupulous scientists in order to get more government funding. What have scientists actually done to deserve such mistrust? Nothing but present facts that conflict with the "deeply held belief" of many Christians that God would never allow such a thing.

In 2009, John Shimkus, Republican of Illinois, and a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, argued that climate change is a myth because God told Noah he would never again destroy Earth by flood (Gen 8:21-22). He is seen on video as saying, "The earth will end only when God declares it's time to be over. Man will not destroy this earth. This earth will not be destroyed by a flood. . . . I do believe God's word is infallible, unchanging, perfect."

Now, it's not a surprise that the fossil-fuel barons and the politicians they support financially are behind all this global warming denial propaganda. . . . .  Perhaps it is not surprising that oil and coal companies would resort to dishonest tactics to protect its investments--the cutthroat business world being what it is. What is surprising is how many ordinary people fall for their lies.

Here again, few scientists and accommodationist atheists are willing to publicly acknowledge the role of religion. But the facts speak for themselves. A recent poll showed that only 31 percent of evangelicals believe there is any global warming at all, while 58 percent of those unaffiliated with any church not only believe Earth is warming but agree it is the result of human activity. 

Faith would not be such a negative force in society if it were just about religion. However, the magical thinking that becomes deeply ingrained whenever blind faith rules over facts warps all areas of life. It produces a frame of mind in which concepts are formulated with deep passion but without the slightest attention paid to the evidence that bears on the concept.

From its very beginning in prehistory, religion has been a tool used by those in power to retain that power and keep the masses in line. This continues today as religious groups are manipulated to work against believers' own best interests in health and economic well being by casting doubt on well-established scientific findings. This would not be possible except for the diametrically opposed world-views of science and religion.

I have an urgent plea to scientists and all thinking people. . . . That goal is the replacement of foolish faith and its vanities with something more sublime--knowledge and understanding that is securely based on observable reality.

I agree with the author.  Religion - especially fundamentalist religion of all faiths - is an increasing blight on humanity.  It needs to be defeated and absolutely no deference given to religious based ignorance and denial.  House of cards faith systems need to be demolished along with the hate and bigotry that seem to be always tied to them.

Forged: Writing in the Name of God--The Truth About the Bible's Authors

Admittedly, this blog is often not kind to religious fundamentalists of any stripe, but American Christofascists get particular attention.  Why?  Because modern scientific knowledge increasingly shows that some of the claims/myths set forth in the Bible simply are not true.  The human genome project which has shown that the Adam and Eve of the Bible never existed as historical individuals is but one glaring example.  But adding to the batshitery and hypocrisy is the fact that much of the Bible was written by unknown authors or even outright forgers.  A new book by Biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman, the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and is a leading authority on the Bible and the life of Jesus.  Here are details from his new book "Forged: Writing in the Name of God--Why the Bible's Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are":

Bart D. Ehrman, the New York Times bestselling author of Jesus, Interrupted and Gods Problem reveals which books in the Bibles New Testament were not passed down by Jesus's disciples, but were instead forged by other hands and why this centuries-hidden scandal is far more significant than many scholars are willing to admit. A controversial work of historical reporting in the tradition of Elaine Pagels, Marcus Borg, and John Dominic Crossan, Ehrmans Forged delivers a stunning explication of one of the most substantial yet least discussed problems confronting the world of biblical scholarship. 

The Untold Story of Forgery in the Bible:  In Forged, leading Bible authority Bart D. Ehrman exposes one of the most unsettling ironies of the early Christian tradition: the use of deception to establish the truth. With the scholarly expertise and provocative claims for which he's known, Ehrman reveals which texts were forged in the name of Jesus's disciples and considers how the deceptions of an unnamed few have prevailed for centuries. The untold story of widespread forgery in the ancient world sheds new light on how documents of scandalous origin became part of the Bible we have today.

Straight blogger, Bob Felton, has some very apt remarks on the truth about the Bible and the utter dishonesty of "conservative Christians" who maintain - either through ignorance and stupidity or in the quest to shake down the gullible or money - rant that the Bible is inerrant.  Here are some money quotes:

When Bart Ehrman’s Forged was published a few years ago, he characterized it as a popular work and promised that a textbook-level treatment of Biblical forgeries would be published soon afterward. That book is now to hand: massiv

It is bad enough that scholars don’t actually know who wrote most of the Bible’s ‘inerrant’ texts, or anything about the authors. Worse, scholars do know that a great many of those texts are forgeries, texts written by somebody who wasn’t Paul but claiming to be Paul, for example, with the purpose of influencing early Christian beliefs, doctrine, behavior. They probably weren’t written at midnight by some drunk who just wanted to see what he could get away with — but, then, you can’t be sure. Nobody knows who was the author of a majority of the Biblical texts, and scholars have known since the revival of historical criticism in the 1850s, following the suppression of Spinoza in the 1670s, that many of the texts are forgeries.

The Bible is not the progressive revelation of the Invisible Wizard’s plan, et cetera, et cetera; it is a collection of texts by different men who practiced related but different religions, and its hundreds of well-documented contradictions are there because they believed different things and sometimes made-up stuff for propaganda purposes.

On what grounds, then, do Holy Men claim that the Bible in inerrant? There are no grounds. It is done solely because the preposterous claim of inerrancy provides them a platform upon which to build their authority, and once they acknowledge the Bible is highly, endlessly, hopelessly errant — this is before we get to the hundreds of years of deliberate revisions by anonymities, scribal errors, and mistranslations — their schtick falls apart and they look like nothing so much as gaudy flim-flam men.

A brutal assessment?  Yes.  Is it on point and accurate?  Again the answer is yes.  Personally, I do believe in the existence of a higher being/creator.  Likewise, I believe in the Gospel message and the teachings attributed to Christ.  The rest of the Bible?  It is most likely mythology written by the ignorant and uneducated and by those with a personal agenda to further (likely involving power, money and control of others).  The true history of Christianity and the Catholic Church is very ugly stuff.  So many deaths and so much suffering so that the few could bask in power and wealth.  It's the antithesis of what Christ - if he truly existed - was all about.

 

France: Gay Marriage Signed into Law

Friday French President Francois Hollande signed gay marriage into law after an eleven hour appeal by the far right challenging the constitutionality of the law.  The Constitutional Council rejected the challenge and it is expected that marriages will begin before the end of the month.   It goes without saying that the child rapist enablers in the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy and their accessories in crime in the pews are big time unhappy.   France is yet a former Catholic bastion which has ignored the Church's hysteria and anti-gay bigotry and embraced modernity and equality.  The BBC reports on this final step in passage of marriage equality.  Here are excerpts:

On Friday, the Constitutional Council rejected a challenge by the right-wing opposition, clearing the way for Francois Hollande to sign the bill.

He said: "I have taken [the decision]; now it is time to respect the law of the Republic."  The first gay wedding could be held 10 days after the bill's signing.

The anti-gay marriage lobby, backed by the Catholic Church and conservative opposition, argues the bill will undermine an essential building block of society.

Opinion polls have suggested that around 55-60% of French people support gay marriage, but only about 50% approve of gay adoption.

France is now the 14th country to legalize gay marriage after New Zealand last month.  It is also the ninth country in Europe to allow same-sex marriage after legalisation in the traditionally liberal Netherlands and Scandinavia, but also in strongly Catholic Portugal and Spain. Legislation is also moving through the UK Parliament.

I continue to believe opposition to gay marriage ultimately stems from several things: (i) the reaction of the Catholic Church  and other anti-equality churches to finally losing undeserved rights and privileges, (ii) the need for some individuals to have others subjected to discrimination so that they can feel superior about themselves, and (iii) gay marriage sends a strong message that a handful of Bible passages used against gays are wrong and this threatens the make believe world of the Christofascists.  The irony is that a far bigger threat exists to the Christian story line:  The human genome project has confirmed that Adam and Eve never existed as historical individuals.  As a result, there was no "fall" in the Garden of Eden, there is no such thing as original sin inherited from Adam and Eve, and there was no need for a Messiah to redeem mankind from original sin.  Gay marriage is ultimately the least of the Christofascists problems.

GOP Congressman Introduces Bill To Require Political Approval Of Scientific Papers

Nothing threatens the house of cards world view of the Christofascist - and by extension, the policy positions of the Republican Party - than modern scientific knowledge which shows that much of the Bible's supposed inerrant historical and doctrinal positions are untrue.  The human genome project that has confirmed that Adam and Eve were not historical figures is perhaps but one of the many scientific break through that have sent the fundamentalist crowd into conniptions and spells of the vapors.  So what does one do if one is a fundamentalist Christian or one of their political whores in the GOP?   You try to block new scientific research which may further discredit the veracity of supposedly Christian sacred texts.  Rushing in to do just that is GOP Congressman Lamar Smith of Texas (pictured at right) who has introduced a bill that would require that any research done using federal funds (which constitutes the majority of research done in the United States) must have its results and finding approved by the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives.  Given the far right GOP's stranglehold on the House of Representatives, this means that scientific research would come to a halt.  Thus we see the GOP's further embrace of ignorance in the quest to pander to the sensibilities of the most lunatic elements of the GOP base.  Here are some highlights on this idiocy:

Congressman Lamar Smith of Texas really does not understand science. Not scientific method, not scientific theories or laws, none of it. Which is why he submitted a bill draft titled the “High Quality Research Act” which would in effect add a politician into scientific studies.

The bill says that any research done using federal funds (which is the majority of research done in the United States) must have its results and finding approved by the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives. If the findings are not agreed to, the research is taken from the researchers and disposed of by Congress as it sees fit.


Congressman Smith has already landed himself in scientific hot water over his April 25th Letter to the National Science Foundation where he demanded that the NSF conduct an investigation into five research programs which contradict policies his donors want passed. This is what was expected when the noted anti-science Texan was appointed to the Congressional Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

Congressman Lamar Smith is a leading example as to the disconnect within the Republican Party and reality. His “improvement” would compromise scientific research, and dismantle what little America has left for integrity. Despite how many other industries have fallen apart across the United States, we as a nation remain the gold standard of scientific research. It appears Lamar Smith will not rest until that too joins our other areas of once excellence, and we surrender to our national collapse.

To be a Republican nowadays, one must be either (i) a far right religious nutcase, (ii) clinically insane, (iii) motivated first and foremost by greed, or (iv) have had a lobotomy.   My many Republican ancestors must be spinning in their graves if they can see what the once respectable and rational GOP has become.

Christianists and the Non-Existence of Adam and Eve

As noted before on this blog, new advances in the human genome have more or less conclusively confirmed that the Adam and Eve of the Bible did not exist as historical people.  For those not obsessed with Biblical literalism, this reality is perhaps not unavoidably fatal to their faith/religious belief construct.  But for those who foolishly continue to claim that the Bible is literally true in every respect - except, of course for those inconvenient passages such as the ones that condemn divorce, instruct the wealthy to give all they have to the poor, etc., that they ignore with abandon -  the non-existence of Adam and Eve as historical figures threatens to destroy their entire artificial faith world.  As Bob Felton at Civil Common notes, some of the extremists in the Southern Baptist Convention are in a particular dither over the collapse of the Adam and Eve myth:

Hey! What do you know? Albert Mohler and a buddy are giving a talk next April about the historicity of Adam and Eve.

Are Adam and Eve Historical Figures?
Recent challenges to the historicity of Adam in evangelical settings make it essential that we discuss the necessity of our first parent’s existence and origin according to the biblical record. Mohler and Chapell will discuss both the importance of Adam to our understanding of humanity, our world and salvation, as well as, the “field and fences” of what should be considered consistent with biblical fidelity.

The answer is … No. Adam and Eve were not historical figures.  Y’all are not going to believe I’m saying this, because it’s no secret that I loathe Mohler unreservedly, but he is right about at least this much: Adam and Eve are necessary, absolutely indispensable, to the Christian narrative.

• IF no Adam and Eve, then …
  
• No Fall, and …
  
• No such thing as Original Sin, and …
  
• Jesus doesn’t save us from our Just Cosmic Death Sentence.

Read Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, Kierkegaard … Adam and Even are not a poor metaphor for the idea that we could all be nicer to each other. No. In Christian theology, that couple’s actual criminal guilt is transmitted from parent to child and at the very instant of your ‘ensoulment’ you were sentenced to eternal torture because of that guilt.

 Bob is correct.  Without Adam and Eve, the entire far right Christian - and that includes reactionary Catholics like the current Pope - face seeing their entire story line collapse.  And as science and knowledge continue to progress and expand, the challenges to Christianity will only intensify.  Bishop John Shelby Spong has correctly argued that unless Christianity changes, it will ultimately die.  Those unintentionally leading the charge to kill it are the Mohlers and Benedict XVI's of the world.

The Vatican And Church Hierarchy Refuse to Accept Responsibility for Collpase of Catholicism in Advanced World

Simple Google search agents yield multitudes of news articles that address the issue of the world wide Catholic Church  sex abuse scandal as well as countless stories of educated Catholics walking away for the Church's 12th century "natural law" theories that underlie much of the Church's "flat earth"  mindset and deliberate rejection of medical and scientific knowledge.   Yet a synod of Catholic cardinals meeting in Rome still refused to acknowledge their own culpability in the Church's collapse in the western world and now even in South America, a former bastion of Catholicism.  With no thorough house cleaning of the Hierarchy of those who enabled and protected sexual predators and no acceptance of modern knowledge, especially in respect to sexual orientation, it is reasonable to expect the collapse of the Church - a net positive in my view - to continue.  A piece by Rueters looks at the phenomenon.  Here are excerpts:

The alarm was sounded in the final message of a synod of bishops from around the world who met at the Vatican on the theme of the "New Evagelisation", or the need to stop the hemorrhaging of the faithful, particularly in developed countries.

The Church is suffering desertions from its practicing flock in former strongholds in Europe, North America and Latin America due to sex abuse scandals, increasing secularism, rival faiths and open dissent against Church teachings on homosexuality and its ban on a female priesthood.

The message, a synthesis of the topics discussed in three weeks by more than 260 bishops, said that. . . . the Church needed to find new ways of putting it "into practice in today's circumstances".

During the synod, some bishops said it had become more difficult to ask lapsed and lukewarm Catholics to return to the Church after the sexual abuse scandals that hit the worldwide institution in the past decade.

What the synod totally failed to address, in my view, is the growing scientific evidence that shows that Adam and Eve never actually existed, that the story of "the "Fall" through Adam and Eve is untrue and that the whole story of the redemption through Christ the Messiah is unraveling.   I suspect that no matter what the Church does in the advanced nations of the world, it's membership will continue to hemorrhage.  In the context of gay rights, the irony is that in the longer term, the Church may be digging its own grave through its opposition to gay rights and gay marriage.  The hypocrisy of the Vatican and the rest of the Church hierarchy remains staggering.

 

Focus on the Family Continues to Back Fraudulent "Ex-Gay" Ministries

With the changes at Exodus International and the admission by Alan Chambers that no one has every successfully changed their sexual orientation the Neanderthals and religious extremists at Focus on the Family are none too happy.  As a result, the FOTF folks have gathered up their toys and are now backing a break away "ministry" that continues to market the lie that gays can "change."  The "ministry" is disingenuously named "Restoring Hope Network" and will continue to prey on religiously brainwashed and tortured gays and their self-centered parents who cannot stand the personal embarrassment of having a gay child.  Think Progress has details.  Here are excerpts:

Focus on the Family has endorsed the Restored Hope Network, an ex-gay splinter group that broke off after Exodus International announced it would no longer try to “cure” homosexuality. Restored Hope describes homosexuality as a “perversion of God’s will for sexual holiness” and tries to “transform” gays and lesbians from being “broken sexual sinners.” Focus’ resident ex-gay, Jeff Johnston, who said recently that there are “a variety of roads into homosexuality,” described the “sexual brokenness” that Restored Hope purports to heal:

Sexually and relationally broken – just think about it for a minute:

• Because of Adam’s sin, our whole self is impacted by sin – including our identity, our sexuality and our ability to connect and maintain healthy relationships
• After they sinned, Adam and Eve feel ashamed, hide from God and begin blaming others; their eldest boy kills his brother; relational brokenness – inside families and between us and God
• Our culture is saturated with broken sexuality, and we’re exposed to it and impacted by it from childhood on; sexual brokenness runs deep in our world; it’s so much a part of our background that we don’t always notice
• Satan roams the earth like a lion, using sexual and relational brokenness to destroy individuals, families, churches, groups, businesses…

This is how conservative Christianity describes homosexuality, as “Satan roaming the earth like a lion.” It leaves no room for the very true love that same-sex couples have for each other, nor the families they are raising across this country. According to Focus on the Family, they are defective people destroying society who need to be fixed and erased. 

This whole anti-gay batshitery has a major flaw:   as the human genome project has revealed, there was no Adam and Eve and hence no "Fall."  FOTF and its allies continue to choose ignorance and bigorty rather than embrace modernity and admit that the Bible is a work of mand and anything but inerrant.