February 26, 2007

February 26, 2007

Israel, U.S. to discuss new annual aid program - "Israel receives about $2.4 billion a year in mostly military aid from the United States. Most of that is spent on U.S. military equipment."

Israel seeks all clear for Iran air strike - "Israel is negotiating with the United States for permission to fly over Iraq as part of a plan to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, The Daily Telegraph can reveal."

Al-Jazeera Cameraman Still at Guantanamo - "A TV cameraman is getting an inside view of life at Guantanamo Bay prison - only he is unable to get out and tell the story."

US-Russia tensions rise over antimissile bases - "Russia has threatened to withdraw from INF missile treaty, and target proposed US bases in Poland, Czech Republic."

Voice of the White House February 23, 2008 - "“In 2002, a special high level telephone and computer tapping sub-agency was set up by order of Rumsfeld at the suggestion of Cheney. Their job? To spy on important people; diplomats, Democratic senators and congressmen, potential enemies of the administration and people neither Cheney nor Bush personally liked. Like Topsy, this growed to the point where the group was spying on people the senior military at the Pentagon didn’t like or trust. One of their top targets has been Israeli diplomats, their intelligence agents operating here, quite openly, and at the CIA especially and so-called Israeli action groups like AIPAC. When Cheney got wind of that, he screamed like a scalded cat and the group was ordered to immediately cease and desist spying…but only on the Israelis. Much of this material, reams and reams of it, have been Xeroxed and have been circulating around Washington for about two years. Although much of this material relates directly to the American political and diplomatic endeavors, the American media will never touch any of it. Bush himself is fanatically pro-Isreal as was John Ashcroft and woe to anyone who issued one word of criticism of that problematical state."

The US psychological torture system is finally on trial - "Something remarkable is going on in a Miami courtroom. The cruel methods US interrogators have used since September 11 to "break" prisoners are finally being put on trial. This was not supposed to happen. The Bush administration's plan was to put José Padilla on trial for allegedly being part of a network linked to international terrorists. But Padilla's lawyers are arguing that he is not fit to stand trial because he has been driven insane by the government."

US defiant on cluster bombs - "THE United States said last night that cluster bombs should be preserved as a military option, rejecting a call by 46 nations for a ban. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said: "We take the position that these munitions do have a place and a use in military inventories."The 46 nations adopted a declaration – accepted by Britain – at a meeting in Norway yesterday calling for a 2008 treaty banning cluster bombs, saying the weapons, which kill and maim long after conflicts end, inflict "unacceptable harm" on civilians."

Not ONE Member of the Bush Extended Family Has Served in Iraq! Not One! Take a Look. - "Yet, not one -- not one -- of any of Bush's children or his nieces and nephews have volunteered for service in any branch of the military or volunteered to serve in any capacity in Iraq. Not one of them has felt the cause was noble enough to put his or her life on the line. If Iraq is such an "honorable" cause, how come not one -- not one -- of Bush's extended family has joined the military to fight there? Not one. Same for Cheney's family."

Edwards: Israel not a threat to world peace - "John Edwards' presidential campaign wants to make it clear that he doesn't consider Israel a threat to world peace."

Does Being a Feminist Mean Voting for Hillary? - "Are feminists obligated to support a political candidate just because she's a woman?"

U.S. economy leaving record numbers in severe poverty - "The percentage of poor Americans who are living in severe poverty has reached a 32-year high, millions of working Americans are falling closer to the poverty line and the gulf between the nation's "haves" and "have-nots" continues to widen."

When God sanctions killing, people listen - "New research published in the March issue of Psychological Science may help elucidate the relationship between religious indoctrination and violence, a topic that has gained renewed notoriety in the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks. In the article, University of Michigan psychologist Brad Bushman and his colleagues suggest that scriptural violence sanctioned by God can increase aggression, especially in believers. ... The research sheds light on the possible origins of violent religious fundamentalism and falls in line with theories proposed by scholars of religious terrorism, who hypothesize that exposure to violent scriptures may induce extremists to engage in aggressive actions. "To the extent religious extremists engage in prolonged, selective reading of the scriptures, focusing on violent retribution toward unbelievers instead of the overall message of acceptance and understanding," writes Bushman "one might expect to see increased brutality.""

I've found the coffin of Jesus, says film director - "James Cameron says he has proof that Jesus married Mary and that she bore him a son, Judah, who was buried alongside them."

Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary - "Archaeologists and clergymen in the Holy Land derided claims in a new documentary produced by the Oscar-winning director James Cameron that contradict major Christian tenets."

Questions Your Pastor Will Hate - "I remember asking why the Bible, a book which had to know better since it was written by God himself, said Joshua raised his hands and the "sun stopped for the space of about a day," when clearly it would be the earth that stopped rotating? I asked him how oceans would not slop out of their basins in such a scenario and drown the whole world? I asked him if humans would not be cast into space by such a sudden stop of the entire planet? I even asked if this really happened, why did no one else on the whole planet notice it, or write about it? I got that dumb look again."

Is America Too Damn Religious? - "As if it weren't provocative enough to hold a debate on religion in America, panelists in a recent debate were tasked with answering the following: "Is America Too Damn Religious?""

Miami Church Brands Members With '666' Tattoos - "Church members say the symbol doesn't connect them to Satan but rather to De Jesus' claim that he has replaced Christ's teachings with a new gospel. ... Experts on new religious movements say De Jesus' opposition to other religions, and his claim to be the only legitimate spiritual authority, resemble the teachings of some cults." -- Man, that last statement sounds familiar.

Becoming an atheist - "I had believed that it was impossible to know whether or not God is real, but had always accepted His existence on faith. Eventually, I came to abandon that, as I realized that the argument in favour of God was not particularly strong."

Christian pediatrician denies child service because parents are tattooed - "A family is turned away by a local pediatrician, they say because of the way they look. The doctor said he is just following his beliefs, creating a Christian atmosphere for his patients. Tasha Childress said it’s discrimination."

Surveillance Cameras Get Smarter - "Researchers and security companies are developing cameras that not only watch the world but also interpret what they see. Soon, some cameras may be able to find unattended bags at airports, guess your height or analyze the way you walk to see if you are hiding something."

Teens Can Multitask, But What Are Costs? - "The students who do it say multitasking makes them feel more productive and less stressed. Researchers aren't sure what the long-term impact will be because no studies have probed its effect on teenage development. But some fear that the penchant for flitting from task to task could have serious consequences on young people's ability to focus and develop analytical skills."

Job seekers can cash in as baby boomers age - "Pay close attention in biology class -- students who pursue science and math careers will be earning far more money than their peers. "

Record number in U.S. relying on public aid - "Nearly one in six people relies on some form of public assistance, a larger share than at any time since the government started measuring two decades ago. "

Scientific Body Backs Creation Of Human-Animal Chimeras - "Scientists should be allowed to create human-animal hybrid embryos in the search for treatments for nervous system disorders, a Government advisory body said yesterday."

Mobile phones boost brain tumor risk by up to 270 percent on side of brain where phone is held - "The study, done by a collection of researchers from many universities and led by Anna Lahkola of the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in Finland, found firm corollary evidence that using a cell phone causes the risk of getting a brain tumor called a glioma to rise by 40 to 270 percent on the side of the head preferred for using the phone."

Antarctic ice melt reveals exotic creatures - "Spindly orange sea stars, fan-finned ice fish and herds of roving sea cucumbers are among the exotic creatures spied off the Antarctic coast in an area formerly covered by ice, scientists reported Sunday."

Site lets you buy friends (and they're hot) - "Now, prospective employers and others can gain some insights into an applicant's lifestyle and character by looking at a person's social-networking page, including the roster of friends. So what if a job applicant's networking page lacks friends? Enter FakeYourSpace.com, a business founded by Brant Walker, which offered users of MySpace.com and similar sites a way to enhance their page with photographs and comments from hired "friends"--mainly attractive models--for 99 cents a month each."

Fake Private Parts Are No Joke, Myers Says - "As the General Assembly debates global warming and the death penalty, Myers (R-Washington) has something else on his mind: the outsized plastic testicles that truckers dangle from the trailer hitches of their pickups. To some truckers, they are manly expressions of rural chic. But Myers, who says his Western Maryland district is brimming with giant fakes on the roadways, calls them vulgar and immoral -- and filed legislation this week to outlaw them."




Quote of the Day
"If you want truly to understand something, try to change it."
~ Kurt Lewin

3 comments:

Unknown said...

Strap yourself in, this one’s gonna be a long one...

Regarding Dennis Diehl's article, Questions Your Pastor Will Hate.

I hope you don't mind, but I'd like to take a crack at some answers:


Q: "Why did God not like Cain's vegetable sacrifice but loved Abel's cooked meat?"

This is a great question to start with.

The best place to start is to examine the goal of the question. This isn't to be posed as an I'm-confused-and-would-like-clarity question, but rather a I-know-that-you-don't-have-a-good-answer-and-I'm-going-to-frustrate-you question. That said, it deserves a response from a let's-pick-apart-your-little-agenda perspective.

The natural response is itself a question; specifically, "where, in the Bible, does it go into the cause of God's preference to Able's offering over Cain's?"

The answer, of course, is that the Bible does not go into these details anywhere. So, any answer to the original question posed will, to varying degrees, be a matter of interpretation of the text. The true question is whether this is acceptable.

For many, and I'm guessing Mr. Diehl is among them, this is not acceptable. Any response offered, no matter how rational or consistent with Jewish and Christian tradition, is seen as arbitrary and a cop out. Since "it is not disclosed" is not an acceptable answer to these folks, they have an immediate response to any explanation offered. They either counter with "that doesn't answer the question", or, "the Bible doesn't explicitly say that". With these little items in their pockets, they could disregard all discourse and lump it all together under, "Vegetarians are weak Christians", because after all, that explanation is as good a cop out as any other offered. And this is sad, really, because it shows the mentality behind these questions: I'm going to show you that you're an idiot even if I have to disregard any valid points you may have.


Q: "Who was Cain afraid would kill him when God put him out of the Garden for killing Abel? There were mom, dad, bro and himself on the whole planet at the time."

This is the perfect follow-up I-know-that-you-don't-have-a-good-answer-and-I'm-going-to-frustrate-you question, since it illustrates more of the typical mentality behind such questions.

Let's start with the "there were mom, dad, bro and himself on the whole planet at the time" statement. This is obviously not true, because Cain finds a wife after he is banished (so, it stands to reason, that there were other folks mulling about). The real questions are: Who were these people? Where did they come from? How did they come about? I'm sure these are the questions Mr. Diehl is getting at... it just seems that he's not quite as good as asking probing questions as he thinks.

The true answer is, of course, "it is not disclosed". But again, that answer is not quite acceptable. Why? Because we, like Mr. Diehl, got the question wrong. The question isn't "who were these people?". The true question is, "why doesn't the Bible disclose each and every detail regarding the activities of God?". That's the question that people want answered, because without an answer to that question, there are holes in the story... and some folks find that patently unacceptable.

The opinion is this: if God indeed wrote (or inspired) the Bible, then the truth revealed would be the whole truth. Otherwise, it wouldn't make sense, and that would mean that it wasn't true. So, since there are holes, obviously it isn't true.

This opinion is very telling. There's an intrinsic need in some folks to place limits on God: If there was a God, I would understand him. If there was a God, he would play by my rules. If there was a God, he would cater to my vision of what he should be.

The response "it isn't disclosed" is unacceptable because, in their opinion, it should be disclosed. If God did it, we should have a work order and a tracking ID so that FedEx could look up and let us know what was done, where, how, and why. It's an affront to claim that something happened for a reason that isn't shared, or for a reason that folks wouldn't understand, or, heaven forbid, for a reason that isn't any of our business. After all, if there was a God, he would want me all up in his grill. That's just how he would roll.


Mr. Diehl's next question/answer only makes my point for me: "

Q: "Why would God stop the whole earth for a day so Israelites could finish a genocide against the enemy? I mean, I can see stopping it so there is more time to hug, or feed the hungry, or plant the crops, but more time to kill? Dumb story. Answer...God hates sin and had to kill the bastards, he just needed more time than he planned on."

The telling part comes from the phrase, "I can see stopping it so that there is more time to hug...". In other words, this wouldn't be listed in the set of questions if it were done for a reason considered "Godly" by Mr. Diehl, but given that it was deemed out-of-character for God, it's ok to question. In other words, it doesn't fit in the limits, so obviously it displays that we're not really talking about God.

It's clear that this question really isn't concerned with the time issue... clearly Mr. Diehl understands that God didn't "finish a genocide", but that this "genocide" was committed through agents of God, and therefore it could take a while. This leads to a debate about why God didn't grant them super speed, etc., so they could get the job done efficiently... but this really goes back to understanding God and why he acts the way he does. The need to not only know the what, where, how and why, but the why-nots as well.

So we have two issues here: first, we see God not fitting into the limits placed on him. Second, we don't have an invoice of the events. Obviously God is not a reliable service provider.


Q: "How come the horses in the Exodus die twice in the Ten Plagues and still survive for Pharoah to mount a final attack against the Israelites, and then die again." Answer...Where do you get this stuff?

I'll have to leave this one unanswered, because I cannot find the second death of horses during the ten plagues (admittedly, I didn't look very hard). I found one immediately in the fifth plague. But we can chalk this up to "if you're going to ask questions, give enough of a reference for those wanting to answer to do so directly".



Q: "Why, no matter what, is it always the human's fault and God never gets any blame for not making good on his promises?"

Let's rephrase this one: Why is God perfect when people aren't, and why is God such a welcher?

I've also heard it this way: Why did God give us free will to do wrong, and then when we did, why does he punish us by not living up to the original covenant?

Or: Why would God make a covenant contingent on man not doing evil, but then gives man the faculty and desire to do evil?

Or: Why does God allow evil to exist?

Now, this is indeed a very interesting point to discuss (too long for this response). A good approach is to look at alternatives. A reasonable person could come to logical conclusions, but it seems that logic and reason don't quite get the welcome they deserve.


Q: "Why does the Apostle Paul, who writes most of the New Testament, NEVER quote Jesus, tell a story of his life or death, discuss a miracle or teaching?"

This, it seems, is too simplistic a question to come from Mr. Diehl, who "went to a Christian college to study these things". A quick look at Paul's writings in a historical sense clears it up immediately: all of Paul's writings were letters to early Christian communities meant to clear up certain issues. As such, we don't see a Paul who's sitting around writing stories and poetry, but we see a Paul who is guiding communities by clarifying existing doctrine. Why didn't he tell the life story of Jesus? I don't know why, maybe he didn't feel like it. And who's to say he didn't? Again, we're talking about the need to know each and every thing a person does. If he did, should it have been included in the Bible? There's no reason to think so... Paul probably wrote a whole bunch of things not included in the Bible. He might have been a first-class storyteller, spinning yarns nightly. But that doesn't mean anything.

Why didn't he discuss a miracle? Maybe he didn't see the need. He was addressing specific concerns. Should he have forced himself to introduce a discussion of a miracle even though it was off topic? Apparently.

Why didn't he discuss Jesus' teaching? This is where you have to ask if the question is serious or not. Paul clearly elaborates on the teachings of Scripture. Some argue that he teaches his own theology, but neither the text nor the historical evidence supports this.


Q: "Why does neither Mark nor John know anything about Jesus birth, while Matthew and Luke do but tell contradictory stories?"

This is an interesting question. Matthew and Luke do indeed tell the story, and do indeed tell different stories... but, we find Mr. Diehl running fast and loose with the term "contradictory". Because the accounts are independent and do not include the same details, Mr. Diehl calls them "contradictory", despite the fact that there are no actual contradictions (such as, Matthew said "X" happened and Luke said "not X" happened). Apparently, to suit Mr. Diehl's needs, the same details should be disclosed in each of the four Gospels, since lack of unity means lack of credibility.

What's more distressing is Mr. Diehl's lack of honest interrogation. If one is going to question the Gospels, especially Luke, there are much more difficult questions to bring up. Mr. Diehl's criticism of "the Gospels are like four people who see a car wreck" is, academically, amongst the weakest of arguments. A rudimentary survey of biblical history could be used to explain away his questions. It makes one wonder about where his time and tuition really went when he went to his "Christian college", as it obviously didn't go to books.


Q: "Why does Paul only say Jesus was born of a woman like everyone else?"

It could be me, but I'm not even understanding the question. Jesus was born of a woman... so if Mr. Diehl has a problem with Paul saying so, I'm unclear why.


Q: "Did Paul ever spend five minutes with the real human Jesus?"

Again, I'm not seeing the point. Is he saying that Paul, who had access to a rich Christian community (including access to actual Apostles) didn't have a right to teach? Seems like he's reaching for questions to me.


Q: "Isn't it strange the man who writes most of the New Testament and tells us all how to live, think and believe about Jesus, never met him, while the Twelve who did, vanish into thin air and write nothing?"

Ahh, ok, I see... it's a two-part question.

First, it is clear that Mr. Diehl sees Paul as being unqualified to teach "how to live, think and believe about Jesus" (despite his earlier claim that Paul didn't mention Jesus' teachings). We've already addressed this above.

Second, Mr. Diehl finds it strange that the Apostles didn't write anything. Maybe he overlooked the two letters by Peter. Even still, I get the point. Paul wrote a whole bunch, while the others didn't do a darned thing. Except spread Christianity. Build Churches. Get martyred. I even seem to remember Peter being bishop of the Church at Rome, which I think may still around today *eyeroll*. Yep, it sure looks like Paul carried the load in that group.


Q: "How come Jesus never wrote anything himself while alive, but then writes perfect Greek after he is dead in the form of the Book of Revelation?"

Actually, unless my memory fails me, I believe that Jesus knew Greek.

And the "Book of Revelation", as Mr. Diehl calls it, is "The Revelation To John". The "to John" is the important part.

Seems like Mr. Diehl isn't even trying anymore.


Q: "If Herod killed all the little children under two to get at Jesus, who escaped, can we not say the little children had to die for Jesus before he died for them?"

Sophistry 101. Since Herod didn't need to "kill all the little children" (the whole free will thing), there don't have to say "the little children had to die".

Next.


Q: "How come Herod couldn't follow the Star of Bethlehem himself to find Jesus, but sent others to report back when they found him?"

Why couldn't George jump on a plane and go down and find the WMD's himself? Because he's the freekin president, that's why. Don't be a dolt.


Q: "How could Mary leave town after being warned of Herod's intentions and never tell the women in the town, their kids were about to be butchered?"

Matt 2:13-15, "...behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, 'Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there till I tell you; for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him." And he rose and took the child and his mother by night, and departed to Egypt, and remained there until the death of Herod."

D'oh! Looks like Mr. Diehl needed to refresh his memory because now he's just making things up. Looks like Mary only knew what Joseph chose to share, and Joseph only knew that Jesus was in trouble.



Q: "Do you think Mary thought, 'I know something you don't know,' as she left town?"

Ah, it's so much fun to see the smugness.


Q: "How could Jesus family flee to Egypt sometime during the first two years in one story but go home to Narareth quietly after 40 days in the other?"

Now, this might just be me, but I'm not seeing where Mr. Diehl is getting his timeline. In Mark, we have a reference to the death of Herod, so perhaps he's doing a bit of math to get his timeline... in which case I'd like to see the figures. But even if that's the case, I don't see anything in Luke to give a timeline to reference (in terms of years or days), so I'm very curious where Mr. Diehl gets his numbers (keeping in mind that it might just be me missing some obvious statements).


Q: "How come in Mark 3 Mary and his brothers came to get Jesus and take him home because they thought he was "mad" which I assume means insane. Did Mary forget who he was and how he got here?"

D'oh! Looks like he forgot to read the text again. He's confusing two bits. Mark 3:20-21 is the part he's referring to with regards to the "madness", but these are only "friends". Mary and Jesus' brethren (a better translation than "brothers") don't appear until Mark 3:31, which is addressing something completely different.

Regarding Mark 3:20-21, and Jesus' "madness", my translation gives a gentler phrasing... "beside himself". And, despite the phrasing, this is indeed the meaning. Did they "forget who he was and how he got here?" If only Mr. Diehl would read on, he would discover the answer... YES! Is this the first time we'll see Christ's followers doubt him? Nope. Not by a long shot.

It's looking like Mr. Diehl's questions come from not reading the book. He's getting a D for his lack of preparedness.


Q: "How come Matthew uses the Old Testament to weave a story of Jesus, where every quote he uses has absolutely nothing to do with the point he is making about Jesus birth?"

This is too broad a question to answer. The onus would lie on Mr. Diehl to mention specifics, which I assure are easily supported.


Q: "If Jesus was asked 'who sinned, this man or his parents that he was born blind?', would that not imply the man had sinned before his birth, perhaps in a previous life, if his blindness at birth was some kind of punishment? I mean, the blindness was from birth, so the sin had to be before that."

Ok, let's get this straight. A non-believer asks Jesus a question trying to show him as a fraud, and because Jesus answers it (and at the same time exposes the non-believer's "trap"), there is a criticism of Jesus based on the non-believer's question? That's a new one. "Let me critique you based on the illogical statements made by someone who disagrees with you."


And his last, self-aggrandized question/answer:
Q: "'So is it just me, or are these good questions to ask about the text and theology of the Bible?' Answer...It's just you. While we might be marginally informed ourselves, we are very piously convicted of our answers. The wisdom of man, and this would be you in this case, is foolishness with God. You're fired and have a nice day."

The hubris is impressive. The statement, "The wisdom of man, and this would be you in this case, is foolishness with God," makes it clear. Even if there was a God, he would have nothing on me.


Lastly, Mr. Diehl writes (emphasis mine), "And so it goes. If you want to make a pastor, elder or deacon turn white with fear or red with anger, just ask a Bible question based on the actual text or what today we would simple know as common sense. Depending on his denomination, education, candor and personal spiritual confidence, he will react accordingly. Most pastors I know are sincere, but ill informed or duplistic and well informed, not willing to risk all for what they clearly also see is a problem with the 'inerrant' text of the Bible. Kinda sad actually, but when it comes to matters of the spirit, it is important to keep asking those questions about a book that proports to have the key to everything and the only right way for a human to think. It's important to ask questions of all such books and ideas. Let's face it, take away the zealots and fundamentalists from Judaism, Islam and Christianity, and the planet might actually find some peace. Killing the messenger for bringing the message some don't want to hear, is however, still the preferred way to handle such things all too often."

Ahhh, the wonderfulness of thinking that every cleric is a buffoon. That a well-phrased question can reduce even the most knowledgeable theologian into a bumbling, crying idiot.

While it is true that there are a good many clerics out there that could really use a good theology course, the fact of the matter is that this sort of everyday "let's stump the religious" tripe is easily disregarded.

There are many honest and challenging questions to pose to religion, much discussion and debate to be had. Discussions and debates aimed at understanding greater truths, in which history, anthropology and theology all play roles. Discussions and debates where all parties come away with, at the least, a deeper understanding of human nature, and, perhaps, a little knowledge regarding the nature of God (or the concept of God). Unfortunately, folks like Mr. Diehl aren't particularly interested in these discussions, because they're convinced that already have all the answers. And they share these little tips for stumping the religious with each other, and spread their ignorance. And this is the saddest part of all, because the spreading of ignorance, of any kind, is a shame.

Sheeple, religious or irreligious, should make us all sad.

Amelia said...

Luis, do you fucking work? ;-)

Unknown said...

I'm fully functional baybee!