February 28, 2009, 10:20 am by dc-agape.

It has been brought to my attention by a Muslim that my website title requires adjustments.  I am not just directing my observations to Christians.  I am using mostly Christian texts which are the major theme.  But I am referencing the Jewish (Old Testament and Dead Sea Scrolls) and the Islamic religions as well (the Holy Qur’an).

The experiment is growing.  And the title of the experiment should reflect this.  I would like to stay with the dc-agape theme so that minimizes my choices.  The best choice seems to be replacing the word Christian with canonist (freedicionary.com).  Canonist is not perfect since there are a number of problems with it.  First, it is an archaic term that most people will not suspect is directed at them.  Second, it does not directly refer to religious cannon.  So maybe that is a good thing.  Even though Atheist does not have a cannon law, many of us Atheist are specialist in Atheistic concepts.  Third, it still has a Christian connotation.  But in general it is more general and possibly not as off putting as “Dear Christian”. 

So at the moment the website will change title to:

Dear Canonist: A gay Atheist Personal Experiment (dc-agape)

h/t to a Muslim that used the name kay who posted on my post Introduction: Holy Qur’an for pointing this out.

Posted in Introduction | Print | No Comments »

February 28, 2009, 9:12 am by dc-agape.

I would be amiss if I did not start the Qur’an with the al-Fātihah.  This is the most important seven verse in the Qur’an.  It is also the seven verses that are repeated at each prayer during the day.  I wonder if this is helpful or harmful for the adherents to the faith.  Personally, the more times I repeat something to myself, such as the Lord’s Prayer (when I was a christian); many times it was just rote repetition.  I lost the meaning of what I was saying because I had repeated too many times. 

Like the Lord’s Prayer, the al-Fātihah has a very similar format, both seem to be about the same length and cover the same things.  You can read the al-Fātihah here (chapter 1: The Opening).  You can read the Lord’s Prayer here.

Looking at the two side by side, there really is no difference.  The al-Fātihah praises Allāh more than the Lord’s Prayer praises YHWH.  But then the Christians beseech YHWH to help them serve his will more than the Islamic faith.  Both ask for help being righteous.  The Christians actually ask for forgiveness and the power to forgive.  There is no direct relationship in the al-Fātihah.  And both end with begging the all-powerful to keep the individual from straying down the path of evil.

To an gay Atheist there are only subtle difference.  Which if you have the “god bias” you would say that that is normal and to be expected.  On the other hand, Christianity was not unheard of in the Prophets time…plagiarism is not out of the question.  Or at least this was taking what the Prophet like from the other religion.

This post is short and sweet.  Since it comprises the entire 1^st chapter of the Holy Qur’an, I see no reason to delve into the second chapter quite yet.  I can almost be certain that I will be comparing what is written in the Qur’an and what the christians and Jewish texts have to say.  It will get complex and probably ugly.  But this was a good start.

Posted in Holy Qur'an, Readings | Print | 5 Comments »

February 28, 2009, 8:39 am by dc-agape.

I am going to tackle the biggest reason for why I became an Atheist.  This might come across as being a YHWH hater, but if that crosses you’re mind you are using the “god bias”.  In no way are the verses I am about to us taken out of context, they are direct quotes from YHWH about himself.  And they are a preponderance of hypocrisy.  These verses show us exactly how not to be, just like when you parents told you “do as I say, not as I do”.  Well this is YHWH.  And in doing so YHWH is the world’s worst role model.

Everyone should have heard most of these: YHWH is an angry god, YHWH is a jealous god, he is a vengeful god, he murders people, and he punishes innocents (I’ll explain that one if it’s not clear).  Since he is an unchanging being how can he be a role model for us?  Especially when he gives us commandments that contradict what he himself is?  We have given YHWH human attributes, that in the end leaves us with “well God just does that”, “how can you question God?”, and “God created you he can do whatever he pleases”.  To a gay Atheist none of these cop-outs help. 

YHWH is an angry god.  We know this because it is repeated time and time again in the Word of God.  Moses has this to say about YHWH:

Deut 9:19 I feared the anger and wrath of the Lord, for he was angry enough with you to destroy you.  But again the Lord listened to me.

Here is what David (YHWH’s favorite) had to say:

2^nd Samuel 22:8-9 The earth trembled and quaked, the foundations of the heavens shook; they trembled because he was angry.  Smoke rose from his nostrils; consuming fire came from his mouth, burning coals blazed out of it.

Yet we are not allowed to be angry worse we are commanded to love (the exact opposite of anger):

Mark 12:31 The second is this: “Love your neighbor as yourself.  There are no commandments greater than these.”

Luke 6:29 If someone strikes you on the cheek, turn to him the other one also.  If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic.

These second two verses are the exact opposite of what YHWH is.  If we are the imperfect one’s what does that make YHWH? He is commanding us to be better than him!

YHWH is also a jealous god.  One of my favorite verses makes this clear:

Exodus 34:14 Do not worship any other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

As the old one liner goes, “My middle name is….” well YHWH middle name is Jealous.  Notice the capitalized word.  Yet we are told in the ten commandments:

Deut 5:21 You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.  You shall not set your desire on your neighbor’s house or land, his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

How is that for a double standard?  “I am jealous”, but you can’t even want someone else’s property.   YHWH wants your undivided attention (he will not share), yet we are not allowed to even have a simple desire for better things.  You just have got to love the role model here.

What about YHWH’s vengeance?  It’s legendary, right?

Numbers 31:3 So Moses said to the people, “Arm some of your men to go to war against the Midianites and to carry out the Lord’s vengeance on them.

This is actually a double whammy on YHWH.  First, he has humans take out his vengeance on innocent nations.  The Midianites were innocent because YHWH chose Israel; the Midianites would of course not follow YHWH.  YHWH rejected them.  Second, it is an example of YHWH breaking a promise.   You see the Midianites were Ishmaelites and YHWH promised to Abraham that:

Gen 17:20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard you; I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers.  He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation.

While I’m on the subject of YHWH breaking promises:

Gen 14:16 In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure.

Those four generations turn out to be 480 years (dabar.org), 430 years from Exodus 12:41.  Whatever happened to the 120 year life span (Gen 6:3)?  So basically, YHWH got a little confused…life times, generations…ah it’s all the same to him.  So here YHWH is a vengeful liar.  Now doesn’t that make for a great role model of perfection?

I should warn you now, I still have two more.  YHWH is also a murder, he claims that they deserve it…but that still makes him a murderer.  In the famous act of wrath where YHWH destroys Sodom he also destroys Gomorrah.  The odd thing about this is that the sins of Gomorrah are not listed, in fact YHWH checks out Sodom personally but we have no record of him going to Gomorrah.  Abraham only asks to save Sodom, so the whole topic of an entire city being destroyed is questionable.  What did they do that was so grievous?  Can there truly be a city so sinful, when YHWH has not set down his commandments yet?  Remember he does not start making demands until after the Israelites leave Egypt.

But there is another story about YHWH killing for minor infractions.  In the Book of Acts (Acts 5:1-11) Ananias and Sapphira hold some of their money back from the apostles.  In the process they lie.  YHWH kills them instantly.  For a lie, after baptism in Jesus’ name, YHWH still struck these two down.  So without a doubt YHWH is a murder, yet we are commanded in:

Deut 5:17 You shall not murder.

Here again is the “do as I say, not as I do” attitude.  How can anyone follow such a perverse system of logic?  The perfect being that is far from perfect requiring his flawed creation to be perfect or die.  It makes no sense to the unbelieving Atheist.

Let me finish with justice.  From the following verse it is quite clear that YHWH is not just:

Num 14:18 The Lord is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion.  Yet he does not let leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.

How is this just?  Punishing the great-grandchildren for something that their parents did?  The fourth generation barely knew who that sinful generation was!  But there is more in that verse, another example of YHWH lying.  There is no rebellion that YHWH will not forgive and is not abounding in love:

Matt 12:31 And I tell you, every sin will and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

So here we have an unjust YHWH that has limits to his “love and forgiveness”.  For a perfect being he is a piece of trash.  This has got to be the worst example of a loving, forgiving, just, and truthful perfect being that man has ever made up.  Even the Greek and Roman Gods were at least personification of humanity….people expected them to be capricious and arbitrary.  YHWH is the exact same, but we don’t have the option of worshipping a different deity that is more in-line with our personal needs.

Posted in Inerrancy - My Ass, Becoming an atheist | Print | 11 Comments »

February 27, 2009, 9:37 am by dc-agape.

Many Atheist bloggers have been accused of only “picking” on the Christian religion.  I want to ensure that no one can claim that of my blog.  I have mentioned in the past that I will be reading from both the Old Testament and the New Testament.  And I have completed the first book of each: Genesis and Gospel of Mark (yes, the Gospel of John Mark was written first).  I am planning to include the Jewish Apocrypha (that only the Catholic Church now uses), the Dead Sea Scroll (and no they are not a collection of the Essenes), the Nag Hammadi Library (Christian Gnostics – no that is not an oxymoron), but that is not all the Abrahamic monotheist religions.  I will be starting to review the Holy Qur’an as well.  Forgive me if I have not figured out a good way to organize all these Holy Documents.  I’m working on it.

The translation of the Holy Qur’an that I will be using is by Maulana Muhammad Ali.  The entire translation is available here: English Translation.  Read along if you like.  Starting with the seven part introduction will help. 

1)      The divisions of the Holy Qur’an

The Book was written over 23 years by the Prophet himself.  This included the 13 years in Makkah and 10 years in Madinah.  Even though the 114 chapters were not written in a specific order, as it was written an organization was specified.  So in the end, this book has divisions such as the preface (Sūratu al-Fātihah), the main text of four chapters, then the Alif Lām Rā, the Tā Sin, the Hā Mim, 48 small chapters, and then the closing 2 chapters.

2)      The Spiritual Force of the Holy Qur’an

The purpose of the Holy Qur’an is to bring mankind to perfection.  To fulfill that purpose all of humanity and the entire world will be conquered.   Lovely thought, especially when the Christian religion believes the exact same thing.  I’m sure we all see the problem in this thought process. 

The history of the Islamic peoples is quite compelling.  The effect of the Holy Qur’an on the tribesmen of the area was a resounding transformation from superstition and idolatry into a unified monotheist society almost overnight.

3)      Completion of the Abrahamic Religions

The Islamic faith believes that both the Old Testament and the New Testament were written by earlier prophets.  Yet at the same time they do not believe in the godhood of Jesus.  So basically, they give lip service to other religions but do not follow the teachings of those Abrahamic religions.  I am not aware of a way to make Jesus truly human yet still obey what he and the apostles taught.  The way the Holy Qur’an and Islam as a whole twists around this problem is by claiming “errors” were incorporated into those Holy Texts.  As an Atheist I can wholly agree with that…I want to see if the Holy Qur’an is any better.

4)      Islamic Liberal Views

I must quote one verse in the Holy Qur’an (the Maulana uses it to claim how accepting the Islamic religion is:

The Cow: Chapter 2:256 There is no compulsion in religion – the right way is indeed clearly distinct from error.  So whoever disbelieves in the devil (evil) and believes is Allāh, he indeed lays hold on the firmest handle which shall never break.  Allāh is Hearing, Knowing.

Quite the verse is it not.  We have been arguing over right and wrong for thousands of years, but to the Islamic faith a clear distinction exists.  And there is no requirement to do right.  Best of all, the only thing that must be done to do right is to disbelieve in evil. 

That is extremely liberal…I wonder why the Sharia Law is so extreme?  I certainly hope that the Holy Qur’an will help me understand how the most liberal religion can have the most compulsive requirements.

5)      The After-life

As with the other Abrahamic religions there will be a Day of Judgment.  Also, all of our actions have been recorded in writing.  Paradise is so mind blowing that no words can describe it.  Sorry guys, it’s not 72 virgins!  But at least hell is not permanent…the torture that sinners feel is just cleansing away the evil. 

6)      Woman in the Islamic Religion

I particularly like this section.  Just as in Genesis, Allāh made both man and woman equal, spiritually that is.  Women have the right to inherit.  Polygamy is harmful to woman.  And in the days of the Prophet, women were even teachers of the Holy Qur’an.  Three women are recorded as being qurra (reciters of the Holy Text, one of the highest positions in the early days of Islam). 

7)      Purity of the Holy Qur’an

I do have to admit that the way the Holy Qur’an was written and transcribed was incredible.  Hundreds of people had it identically memorized, that way with the written portion there was no way duplicates could be made with errors.  That was much better than the “inerrant” Bible, which has so many different versions it is impossible to get a reliable translation. 

The rest of the introduction is about how the copies were made to ensure no copy errors occurred.  One caveat was allowed, if a tribe could not pronounce a word correctly that tribe was allowed to “do their best”.  I am assuming that this is how Maulana Muhammad Ali determined that an English translation was acceptable.  I certainly cannot understand nor speak the original Quraish. 

Posted in Holy Qur'an, Readings, Introduction | Print | 12 Comments »

February 27, 2009, 7:02 am by dc-agape.

I am making structural changes to my home website (dc-agape.com).  The purpose of is to help find specific posts and to give more information about this experiment than the typical blog structure allows.  For example, I have a chart of links to all of my posts on the Book of Genesis on one page organized by the chapter source.  I have done the same thing with the Gospel of Mark.

Due my addition of the Holy Qur’an, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Nag Hammadi Library, and the Jewish Apocrypha I will have many different “religions” represented in this experiment.  Since all are of Abrahamic decent I see no reason to have separate blogs on each Holy Book.  Important blogs that start a new section, or give the reader more understanding about me and this experiment are duplicated on the main website.

So check out the new format:

The Old Testament 

The New Testament 

The Holy Qur’an

Posted in Holy Qur'an, Word of God, Biblical topics | Print | 2 Comments »

February 26, 2009, 7:18 am by dc-agape.

Mark Chapter 16

This is the last chapter in the Gospel of Mark.  It must be one of the shortest chapters in the Word of God; as a result it would be a very short post about a gay Atheist’s interpretation.  But someone had to go and add to the Word of God.  That’s right; some purposely changed the unchanging Word of God.  And yes, that’s right; whoever did it broke the commandments of Moses (Deut 12:32), Peter (2^nd Peter 2:3), Paul (1^st Tim 6:3-4), John of Patmos (Rev 22:18) and even in Proverbs (Proverbs 30:5-6) which is attributed to a man named Agur son of Jakeh.  And yes, you can claim that it was YHWH will to have the change made.  But then you have to justify why YHWH commanded someone to lie and attribute this addition to John Mark, when it certainly was not John Mark who made the addition.

As Agur says:

Proverbs 30:6 Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.

That is exactly what happened in this chapter.  Within two verses the lie is revealed.

Mark 16:8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb.  They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.

These women were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome (Mark 16:1).  Yet just a short few sentences later:

Mark 16:9-10 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared to first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons.  She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping.

Two lies are recorded in these three verses.  The inerrant Word of God was changed and as Agur warned…the liar is easy to prove.  In verse 8 Mary Magdalene did not tell anyone what she saw.  Yet in verse 10 she immediately tells them what she saw.  The other difference is that in verses 9-10 it is only Mary Magdalene…all of a sudden Mary the mother of James and Salome are missing.  Someone has added to the Word of God and the lie is easily proved just as Agur warned in Proverbs. 

This obvious lie negates the rest of the chapter and there is no reason for a gay Atheist to interpret it.  Oddly there is disunity between the Gospels here as well.  In John 19:40 it is Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea who prepare Jesus’ body by the Jewish burial customs.  Yet in Mark 16:1, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome go to do the same thing 3 days later.  The disciple’s spiritual leader was just killed and they do not understand what will happen in the future…wouldn’t they all be together and won’t they all relate the stories about Jesus, especially the last few days?  Wouldn’t Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea tell the others that they had completed the burial customs?  From a gay Atheist’s interpretation this is another disunity.

So the chapter ends with a young man sitting outside the tomb and tells the woman that Jesus is not there.  He wants them to tell the other disciples to meet Jesus in Galilee.  So the disciple’s Master and Lord has risen from the dead, just like a Zombie Lord.  Worse is that Jesus is also a Zombie Master, remember in Matthew 27:52-53, zombies invade Jerusalem at the same time as the woman reach the empty tomb.

Posted in Word of God, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Readings | Print | 1 Comment »

February 25, 2009, 10:26 am by dc-agape.

Mark 15:21-47

The “prophecies” that were fulfilled with Jesus’ crucifixion are spread across the four Gospels.  But this is as good as any to examine if they are prophecies of wishful thinking or more like those of Nostradamus, where we fit the outcome to his writing.  The first type of prophecy is like the Tarot cards.  The cards are vague and cover almost any condition possible; in hindsight the “meaning” of the read is understood.  In the case of Nostradamus, well he was uncannily accurate on the time, place, and sometimes even the name.  Jules Verne was of a similar vein to Nostradamus; Verne’s science fiction was highly accurate but written 50-100 years before his topics switch from fiction to fact. 

The main prophecies of the crucifixion are:

Oops, that’s a heck of a lot of verses to compare.  Well as I get to each Gospel I will cover these prophecies in a special post.  I think I best just focus on the Gospel of Mark for today.

1)      Mark 14:49 vs. Isaiah 53:7-12

a.      All Jesus says in this verse is that the Scriptures must be fulfilled.  Then all his disciples deserted him.

b.      I did mention that Jesus was not lead off without opening his mouth.  But I do think it strange that he could be assigned two graves: one with the wicked and one with the rich.  We don’t even know that the grave he was buried in was a rich man’s tomb.  Disunity in the Gospels – Part 2. 

2)      Mark 15:23 vs. Psalms 69:21

a.      In the next verse somebody offers Jesus wine with gall. 

b.      This verse is directly related to the after effects of King David’s sins, when Israel is in turmoil.  Interestingly, the gall was placed in King David’s food.  It is correct in the vinegar water.  But that is not what Mark describes.

3)      Mark 15:23 vs. Proverbs 31:6

a.      Same verse in Mark about wine with gall.

b.      Proverbs 31:6 Give beer to those who are perishing, wine to those who are in anguish; Jesus fits both of those, why did someone not give Jesus some beer!

4)      Mark 15:24 vs. Psalms 22:18

a.      In Mark they divide his clothing by casting lots.

b.      In Psalms 22:18 David is crying out to YHWH, since he has not been delivered yet from his enemies (due to David’s own sin).  The verse is a direct word for word quote.  But it is still taken out of context.

5)      Mark 15: 27 (alternate translation) vs. Isaiah 53:12

a.      Jesus was counted with the lawless ones in Mark’s version of this prophecy.

b.      In Isaiah the Servant will only gain a portion among the great but he will be numbered with the transgressors.  So taken in full, Jesus will not be sitting on the right-hand side of YHWH…he will only have a portion of what any other “great” gets.  This prophecy is even worse than being taken out of context…it nullifies the Word of God.

6)      Mark 15:33 vs. Amos 8:9

a.      In this verse 3 hours of darkness covers the land, in broad day light.  An actually solar eclipse of the sun can only last for at most 7.5 minutes (Bruce McClure’s Astronomy Page).  So someone was exaggerating here!

b.      The verse in Amos, so what?  YHWH predicts that a solar eclipse will occur.  Amos does not describe the length of time.  Amos goes on to describe horrible misery and famines.  Oddly that does not occur at Jesus’ death.  Another verse taken out of context.

7)      Mark 15:40 vs. Psalms 38:11

a.      This verse in Mark describes the women who were at the crucifixion.

b.      Psalms 38 is another song written by David asking for YHWH help.  David complains about his companions avoiding him.  Yet this does not occur in the Gospels…in the Gospel of John, Jesus directly talks to the disciple John.  So again this is a verse taken out of context and does not even fit the situation.

So, most of these “prophecies” are nothing more than fitting the Old Testament to events that were occurring with a strong dash of liberalism.  Most of these OT verses were so taken out of context that it is shameful to even claim that they are “prophecies” about the Christian savior that the entire religion is based on.  These over-exaggerations make the story a lie, whether it happened or not.

Posted in Word of God, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Readings | Print | No Comments »

February 24, 2009, 9:39 am by dc-agape.

Mark 15:21-47
This is the story of how the Christian savior died.  It would be a horrible tale no matter who it was about. Mankind has devised many ways to torture, but crucifixion is supposed to be one of the longest, painful, and most humiliating one ever created.  Jesus was but one of millions (Wikipedia) who have been killed in this way.  What truly makes this story so sad is that we have four accounts of it in the inerrant Word of God that is so inconsistent we don’t know what happened.

Because it is recorded four different times the traditional thought was that we got to see four different perspectives.  But this is just not the case.  Five different things happened only in one of the stories; the other stories either omit these happenings or outright deny them.  To compound the variability of the story (and hence its veracity) the parts about Joseph of Arimathea and the location of the tomb are not anywhere close to being in harmony.  The prophecies of his death will require a second post, there are just too many taken out of context.

The six differences that break the harmony of the story include: the thieves, an earthquake, the undead, Jesus’ mother, Nicodemus, trip to Golgotha.  Starting with the thieves, in two of the stories the thieves heap insults on Jesus as all three die (Matt 27:44, Mark 15:32).  Only in Luke 23:40-42 does one of the thieves ask to be remembered by Jesus.  If he was insulting Jesus to begin with, what would be the point in asking to be remembered at a different period of time?  The Gospel of Matthew has two more events that are not collaborated by the other three Gospels. 

Matt 27:51-53 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in tow from top to bottom.  The earth shook and the rocks split.  The tombs broke open and he bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.  They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus’ resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared too many people.

No other Gospel records these two events.  Don’t you think that if the earth shook the disciples would all have remembered it?  Don’t you think that is a bunch of zombies entered Jerusalem all the disciples would have recorded it?  The Gospel of John (the only actual witness) also has two events that are not collaborated by the other Gospels.  Does his actual witness make it correct?  The other three Gospels do not mention that Mary the mother of Jesus was witness to the crucifixion.  Only in John 19:26-27 is this story mentioned.  Yet all the other Gospels mention which Mary’s were present (Matt 27:55-56, Mark 15:40, Luke 23:49).  The other event that occurred only in the Gospel of John was the burial preparation that Nicodemus and Joseph of Ariamthia carried out.  Nicodemus is not even mentioned being there by the other Gospels.  Lastly, the trip to Golgotha is not in harmony between the four Gospels either.  Three of the Gospels remember Simon of Cyrene (Matt 27:47, Mark 15:21, Luke 23:26) carrying the cross for Jesus.  Yet in the Gospel of John (John 19:17) Jesus carries it himself.  These six events that are not collaborated by the other Gospels indicate the disharmony in the Gospels. They are much more important than the directly copied verses from the Gospel of Mark into the other Gospels at telling us something about this story. 

The most telling errors in the Gospel stories about the crucifixion of Jesus is that of Joseph of Arimathea and the location of the tomb.  Two of the Gospel openly tell that Joseph was a disciple (Matt 27:57, John 19:38) the other two Gospels only say that he was a Council member (Mark 15:43, Luke 24:50).  They all agree that he was responsible for taking Jesus’ body to a tomb (I get to that in a minute).  He was the most important person in the story at that moment, yet the disciples could not remember him well enough to be accurate about whom he was?  If Joseph was a disciple and helped them in the worst period of their experience with Jesus, don’t you think they would give him proper recognition?  At least all four of the Gospels remember him as a disciple?  It seems to a gay Atheist to be a great oversight in the harmony of the Gospels that Joseph is so poorly documented. 

The other poorly documented and extremely important piece of information that is not recorded accurately is where the tomb was located.  In the Gospel of Matthew (Matt 27:59-60) the tomb actually belongs to Joseph of Arimathea (another reason to remember him better).  But in both the Gospel of Mark (Mark 15:46) and the Gospel of Luke (Luke 24:53) the tomb is unspecified.  But the oddest of all is what the Gospel of John says about the tomb:

John 19:41-42 At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden was a new tomb, in which no one had ever been laid.  Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there.

John’s documentation of the tomb is quite different from the others.  This tomb obviously did not belong to Joseph of Arimathea.  Why would he purchase a tomb in Golgotha, where the crucifixions took place?  But since the disciples actually did not know where Jesus was buried, how can they (and we by extension) be certain that there was ever an empty tomb?  This is the most critical piece of the resurrection story and the disciples and we don’t even know where it took place!  Would not the exact place where Jesus rose from the dead be remembered by the disciples?  And wouldn’t they, even secretly, point it out to all the new followers?

Yet, instead, there is no consensus on where and what took place during this most important time in the history of Christianity.  The validity of the entire story is broken by these “personal” additions that conflict with the other “eye witnesses”.  In the end, the inerrancy of the Word of God is put to the test.  And guess what…it failed. 

Posted in Word of God, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Readings | Print | 3 Comments »

February 23, 2009, 7:56 am by dc-agape.

Mark 15:1-20

These last two chapters of the Gospel of Mark are crucial to the Christian faith.  Yet from a gay Atheist’s reading of the Bible two major “flaws” are quite apparent.  One is the story of Jesus being by himself in front of the Sanhedrin, Pontius Pilot, possibly Herod Antipas, and the soldiers prior to being lead to the crucifixion.  Who exactly recorded this information?  The second “flaw” is the relationship between accounts and Jesus fulfilling the prophecy here:

Isaiah 53:7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

In the Gospel of Mark he said two things to his “oppressors” but in the Gospel of John Jesus became extremely long winded.

The biggest question that requires an answer is who recorded these events?  Did Jesus, after returning to his disciples tell them all about?  Then why would there be such a huge variation in the story?  True the synoptic Gospels are all second hand info…which would make the events in the Sanhedrin third hand information.  The Gospel of John would be more accurate, but it would still be second hand recollection written between 20 and 50 years after the event.  Everyone knows that second hand information that is at least 20 years old is suspect.  If the story was third hand or 50 years old, wouldn’t that make the entire section before the Sanhedrin useless information.  Since this is the crux of the faith, how safe is it to use this information to base the future of your soul?  Or do Christians just ignore these questionable passages?  If you don’t think about it, it’s ok?  On the other hand, if you believe that one of the Sanhedrin joined the Church after these events and confessed all the deeds, many other people would be required as well…one of the soldiers who mocked him, a servant to Pilot or Herod, etc.  This is even more unreliable than the other hypothesis, due to the number of people required.  And these are hypotheses…it is not recorded in the Bible who was responsible for this information being passed to the authors of the four Gospels.

Now the other flaw is actually more serious.  Jesus claimed, and the Traditions of Men, continue to claim that Jesus fulfilled a prophecy from Isaiah 53 in this chapter.  Yet he was not silent.  In the Gospel of John (John 18:19-39) he preached to the Sanhedrin and to Pontius Pilot.  As a result, if you take Isaiah 53 to be a prophecy about Jesus, then this prophecy was not fulfilled.  I have pointed out in other posts that Jesus made the prophecies fit the situation.  I have, also, pointed out where he took verses so out of context and claimed them to be prophecy about himself.  Here I am pointing out that he did not fulfill prophecy at all.  The core of Christian faith is that Jesus fulfilled prophecy, yet a close read of the Bible and it is apparent that much of this is not true.  How do Christians adjust their faith to include these blunders in the inerrant Word of God?

Posted in Traditions of Men, Word of God, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Readings | Print | No Comments »

February 22, 2009, 1:04 pm by dc-agape.

The Word of God has many things to say about itself.  The concept of believing what Word of God says about itself is difficult to grasp for those without the god bias.  Think about it, do you trust a human that tells you “I do not lie”?  Of course, not…you know that just saying the “I don’t lie” line is a lie.  It works the same way when someone tells you “I’m flawless”.  When someone uses that line, immediately any flaw is revealed.  But the Word of God does exactly that.

Proverbs 30:5 Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those you take refuge in him.

Rev 19:9 Then the angel said to me, “Write; ‘Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!’”  And he added, “These are the true words of God.”

If a human were to tell you this, would you believe it?  Yet that is exactly what the Bible is!  It is men, thousands of years ago, telling you exactly this.  The faith that these words were inspired by YWHW helps, but it is still word of men.  You must be extremely gullible to trust someone who uses these phrases.

Another verse along the same vein of reasoning is:

John 10:35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came – and the scripture cannot be broken – what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?  Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, “I am ‘God’s son’?

This verse has a lot of different topics in, but just focus on the “scripture cannot be broken”.  Here the Apostle John tells you that the Word of God cannot be broken.  He is saying that it is reliable.  This is similar to the first two verses, when someone says that they are reliable…that statement is tested to insure that reliability is a true virtue of the speaker.  How reliable is the Word of God?  How many times does it not fulfill a promise?  What about this verse:

Luke 11:9-10 “So I say to you: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.  For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.

Christians need to ask some tough questions.   Does this verse prove that the Word of God is reliable?  That the Word of God is flawless?  And no “sometimes the answer is no” does not justify this verse as being reliable.  Instead, it proves that this verse is not reliable.  This verse clearly says that if you ask, you will receive!  And the phrase “God works in mysterious ways” does not cover this verse either.  So the Word of God is neither flawless, nor reliable, nor true.  Only with the god bias can someone be so gullible to ignore these contradictions.

Worse, after recognizing that the Word of God is not flawless, reliable, or true, there is this verse:

1^st Thess 2:13 And we also thank God continuously because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as the word of God, which is at work in you because you believe.

Here Paul is thankful that the Thessalonicans accepted the words of men (Paul) as words of God.  So in the end humans must trust the Word of God as the Word of God from the word of men. 

The best contradition about the Word of God is here:

Ephesians 6:14-15 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace.

This set of verses claims that the Word of God is peaceful.  Yet the Salvation Army believes that Spiritual Warriors exist.  Is that peaceful?  What about the Crusades (middle-ages.org)?  Was that peaceful?  Is the Phelps family peaceful (Daily Kos)?  What about the ex-VP candidate Palin saying that the war in Iraq was “God’s will – Religion Dispatches”, how peaceful was that concept?  It is quite obvious if the Word of God is inerrant and peaceful then these “Christians” are misguided.  Yet “True Christians” do nothing to make their religion peaceful!

Posted in Word of God, Biblical topics | Print | 1 Comment »