All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 27, 2005 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:11:42
29 Ten Questions To Ask Religious Friends

Some interesting questions about the Bible

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good day, everybody!
This is Stephan Molyneux on December the 27th, 2005, and I hope you had a wonderful, wonderful break over Christmas and are enjoying yourselves even!
Yay, as we speak!
So I've received some interesting comments and questions recently about my hostility towards religion.
One person on one of my podcasts said that the language was violent and I've received some sort of comments and questions about... I guess you could say counter-arguments towards my hostility towards religion.
So I thought let's have a little fun today and let's have a look at some religious texts and let's see if any sort of hostility on my part towards religious people is warranted or not.
So I'd like to start off by reading an email that I received from a very kind gentleman and I'll just sort of skim through it and then I'll sort of talk about why I think that this is an interesting topic that's well worth examining.
Stephan, I am new to podcasts and came across your site and found it quite interesting.
I listened to a few and find you a very compelling thinker.
Why, thank you.
In particular, your state in God was quite interesting.
The idea that if there is no God, then religion is a mental illness that is self-reinforcing and ultimately a horrendous crime against children.
I am not religious myself, nor is my biological family, nor my wife, but I just spent Christmas with in-laws who are raising their three young children to be quite devout.
When I heard your podcast tonight, it gave me pause with regard to those nieces and nephews, blood or not.
However, having said that, I do wonder if maybe calling this a crime may be going too far, as this implies intent, and malicious intent, at that.
Although I don't agree with my in-laws' viewpoint, I certainly believe that they are operating with utmost sincerity, and believe that they are doing the right thing for their children.
Of this, Christians have no doubt.
You can argue, and you would be right, that they display no rationality regarding this, but the point I wish to make regarding your logic was that lacking rationality, of which they are guilty, is quite different from lacking sincerity, of which they are not, which seems a requirement for criminality to have occurred.
Well, this gentleman, it's a wonderful letter.
I think that I certainly understand his empathy towards his pleasant in-laws and his concern for his nieces and nephews, which of course, if there is no religion and they're being taught all of this nonsense, is actually very bad for their minds.
And then the question which he poses, which is even more interesting, is to what degree are the parents responsible for their intent?
I mean, if they don't know that there's no God, are they responsible for teaching that there's no God?
Well, I think that that very interesting question can be answered by having a look at some Christian texts and trying to understand, at least from my perspective, why somebody who professes to be a Christian sort of has to be responsible.
for their moral beliefs.
If I refuse, let's say that I'm a doctor, and I refuse to read any medical journals, and I refuse to read any critiques of the medical practices that I've inherited, then I really am responsible for what I misprescribe.
So let's just say, you know, sort of, it's the 18th century and I'm still using leeches, even though it's been well proven that leeches are bad.
for patients.
But I just simply have refused to read any of this literature, and I've refused to debate this issue, and I've refused to accept any information.
Well, then I'm still responsible for prescribing leeches and sort of killing my patients.
And so for me, people are responsible in the modern world who are religious for the instructions that they give their children for two reasons.
One is that they're claiming To know and to teach a universal, absolute, moral and epistemological truth, or metaphysical truth, the nature of reality.
Now, if you're going to claim knowledge that is absolute and perfect and teach it to your children, you really do have a responsibility to at least listen to the criticisms.
And then, if you can answer those criticisms logically and rationally, then by all means go ahead and teach your children, but you have to teach them the method of thinking which allows you to determine truth from falsehood.
But if you are teaching a universal and moral absolute, and you have never, ever engaged in any debates about the truth or falsehood of what it is that you're proposing, then you are responsible.
You absolutely are responsible.
If you simply never learned anything about alternate viewpoints or the criticisms of your supposed absolutes, but you continue to teach them as if they are absolutes, that is a parental Sorry, an abrogation of parental responsibility that you are entirely morally responsible for.
You know, there is a science called nutrition which parents consult in order to be able to feed their children appropriate foods.
Now, if you never look up the science of nutrition and never figure out that what you're feeding your child is bad for them, then you're still morally responsible for failing to look up any of the information that is freely available.
I mean, if you have the internet, this stuff is just a click of the mouse away.
If you have failed to look up any of the information that criticizes your viewpoint and worked through the issues surrounding that information, then you're absolutely morally responsible for a parental negligence of the highest order.
As I've mentioned before, it is far worse to harm a child's mind than it is to harm his or her body.
The body can repair itself.
The mind, with few exceptions, generally cannot when it is given false instruction that is moral and absolute very early in life.
So, forgive me if I don't look upon Christians who simply believe things to be true and have never questioned or examined those issues.
I do not look upon these people as sincere, kind, nice, misinformed, ill-informed.
I mean, they simply have chosen not to Examine or to work through any of the opposing information.
And if you doubt this at all, all I suggest is that you have a wee chat with Christians and talk about your concerns, you know, nicely and kindly.
I don't yell at Christians.
I don't snarl at them.
I don't yell at religious people at all.
All I am is sort of blandly persistent in the Socratic method.
with my questions and their hostility will quickly become aroused because they themselves know deep down in their heart of hearts that they are utterly guilty of swallowing nonsense and never asking questions about it and then teaching it as if it is an absolute truth.
So let's have a look at some of the things that Christians should be aware of when they are conversing with their children or conversing with non-Christians.
So, let's have a look at some of these issues, or some of these quotes from the Bible, and if you want to bring these up with your Christian friends, I think that would make for a very interesting discussion.
So, let's have a look at Deuteronomy 22, verses 28 to 29.
This is the quote.
28 to 29, verses 28 to 29.
This is the quote.
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay 50 pieces of silver to her father.
Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
So this is a moral law wherein a woman who gets raped must be forced to marry her attacker and can never get a divorce.
A question would be, you know, is this a good moral rule?
Would Christians sort of get up behind this?
And if so, they really should be lobbying the Supreme Court to change the laws to require rape victims to marry their accusers.
And if they don't find that particularly appealing, then, you know, they sort of are turning against the Bible and so on.
Let's have a look at another one.
This is from Psalms 78, verses 31 to 34.
The anger of God rose against them, and he killed their strongest men.
He struck down the finest of Israel's young men.
But in spite of this, the people kept on sinning.
They refused to believe in his miracles, so he ended their lives in failure and gave them years of terror.
When God killed some of them, the rest finally sought him.
They repented and turned to God.
So, if you don't believe, you're going to get killed.
So let's have a look at another one.
Ah yes, this is from Exodus 21 verses 7 to 11.
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.
If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again, but he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners since he is the one who broke the contract with her.
And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter.
If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing, or fail to sleep with her as his wife.
If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.
That's from Exodus 21, verses 7 to 11.
So, obviously a man has the right to sell his daughter as a sex slave, and there are all of these particular rules, and so the question is, do Christians agree with this or not?
Deuteronomy 17, verse 12.
Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the Lord your God must be put to death.
Such evil must be purged from Israel.
Well, I don't really listen to priests that much.
In fact, I think that they're full of nonsense, and the fact that they wear tea cozies on their head doesn't elevate them in moral stature to me.
So, you know, I sort of have to ask Christians, do you believe that I should be put to death?
And if they say yes, well, I frankly condemn them as genocidal lunatics and go my merry way.
And if they say no, then I say, okay, well, here's something else that you don't believe.
All right, let's look at Leviticus 20, verse 13.
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed.
They have forfeited their lives.
Now, of course, this should cause all righteous Christians to gather their stones together and go and pummel to death Elton John and, you know, other such evildoers.
And, you know, if they're not doing that, then this is just another one of their moral teachings that they've discarded.
Leviticus 20 verse 9.
All who curse their father or mother must be put to death.
They are guilty of a capital offense.
So, you know, I mean, to my friend who wrote in, he can go and have a chat with his in-laws and say, if your children ever say F you or, you know, to hell with you or whatever, I hate you, then we can only assume that they're going to drag them out and stuff them in a wood chipper or something because it is a capital offense.
It is something which you can, you must murder, must be put to death, not can be put to death, must be put to death.
Let's say death.
Here's another one, Leviticus 20 verse 10.
If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death.
All right, so obviously Jude Law, I actually know he's probably a sinner because I don't think he's married to his wife, but I guess we can say that perhaps impeachment was too soft a penalty for Bill Clinton and, you know, a public execution would be the one that would make more sense.
Let's have a look at Chronicles.
2 Chronicles 15 verse 12 to 13.
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul.
And everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
You know, this killing of non-believers obviously is a little bit troubling to me.
And as I've mentioned in other podcasts, I view Christianity and Christians exactly As I would view those who are members of the Ku Klux Klan.
Sure, there are members, you know, and if I was a black guy or some sort of minority, those who are members of the Ku Klux Klan.
And of course there will be some members of the Ku Klux Klan who say, oh no, man, it's just a social club, don't worry about it, we just like the little hats, you know, it's kind of fun sitting out there in the woods burning stuff.
Well, that's fine.
But when you join a group, you have a responsibility to understand what it's advocating.
And if you choose not to understand what it's advocating, you're still morally responsible because you're claiming to be a member of that group.
All right, so let's have a look at a slightly longer passage, which I think is interesting.
And this comes from Deuteronomy 13, verses 13 to 19.
Suppose you hear in one of the towns that the Lord your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods.
In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully.
If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as the livestock.
Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it.
Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the Lord your God.
That town must remain a ruin forever.
It may never be rebuilt.
Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction.
Then the Lord will turn from His fierce anger and be merciful to you.
He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as He solemnly promised your ancestors.
Quote, The Lord your God will be merciful only if you obey Him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to Him.
So, you know, the moral argument that you should kill and murder all of the men, women, and children in an entire town if just one person worships another god, you know, it does seem a little genocidal.
And it's a little hard to sort of understand what sort of moral argument could be made to make that sort of a decent thing to do.
Of course, those who've been following the argument for morality would quickly recognize that since most other religions have similar commandments, and since this is in the Old Testament, right?
So the Jews, the Muslims, and the Christians all have the same commandment.
And I guess that's why there's not a whole lot of peace in the Middle East, right?
Because they all have this commandment to kill everyone else who doesn't believe.
All right.
Fun?
Yes, I think so.
Let's keep going.
Now, for those harlots and jezebels who are not virgins on their wedding night, the Lord has some plans for you.
This is from Deuteronomy 22, verses 20-21.
But if this charge is true, that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night, and evidence of the girl's virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her father's house, and there her townsmen shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house.
Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst.
Now, if you lay a hand on my wife, you're going to have to answer to me.
So, I mean, this is just, this is funny, right?
I mean, this is like, you know, Britney Spears' song, Oops, They Stoned Me to Death.
And, you know, this is the kind of thing that's being advocated, right?
So, I mean, it's important to talk to your Christian friends and say, well, if your daughter has sex before marriage, will you stone her to death, right?
And if you won't, okay, but then you're not really Christians, right?
All right, Deuteronomy, which is where a lot of this juicy stuff is.
It's Deuteronomy 13, verses 7 to 12.
If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or your intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other, do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him to spare or shield him, but kill him!
Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him.
The rest of the people shall join in with you.
You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery.
And all Israel, on hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst.
So, if you flip on the television and you sort of see Daily Islam the television show or, you know, Punjab in action or whatever, then obviously you have to go and kill, you know, the producers and the people who are reading the news or reading these sort of religious views and so on.
So, good luck with all that.
All right, let's have a look at Leviticus 24, verses 10 to 16.
One day, a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men.
During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the Lord's name.
So the man was brought to Moses for judgment.
His mother's name was Shelomith.
She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan.
They put the man in custody until the Lord's will in the matter should become clear.
Then the Lord said to Moses, Take the blasphemer outside the camp and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head.
Then let the entire community stone him to death.
Say to the people of Israel, Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished.
Anyone who blasphemes the Lord's name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel.
Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the Lord's name will surely die.
Again, I'm sure the comment is fairly obvious here.
Let's have a wee trip over to the lovely land of Ezekiel, 9 verses 5 to 7.
Then I heard the Lord say to the other men, follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked.
Show no mercy, have no pity, kill them all, old and young, girls and women, and little children.
But do not touch anyone with the mark.
Begin your task right here at the temple.
So they began by killing the 70 leaders.
Defile the temple, the Lord commanded.
Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill.
Go!
So they went through the city and did as they were told.
Genocidal, you know, murdering of little children and so on, all of this commanded by the Christian deity.
Probably not really good, right?
Let's have a chat, a wee look at Isaiah 13 verses 15 to 18.
Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword.
Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes.
Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes.
For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon and no amount of gold or silver will buy them off.
The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows.
They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children.
So this is an army that God is motivating to do X, Y, or Z. You know, running through prisoners with swords, you know, hacking babies to bits, all this kind of stuff.
I mean, this is just psychotic evil sickness.
This is genocidal moral corruption.
This has nothing to do with any kind of gentle morality or church ladies or nice Christians.
Um, Jeremiah 48 verse 10.
Cursed be he who does the Lord's work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood!
And I don't know, it's funny that people have a problem with the violence in my language because I get a little testy with this kind of genocidal psychosis.
And of the two sort of chunks of language they focus on the violence in mine, I certainly have never ever even dreamed of lifting a finger against a Christian because you don't ever change anybody's mind with violence, right?
You only change them with reasons.
All right.
So, you have to kill those who are not Christians or Jewish.
Exodus 22 verse 20 says, you must kill those who worship another god.
Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different from your own.
Deuteronomy 13, verses 6-10.
Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you.
Deuteronomy 13, verses 12-16.
Kill everyone who has religious views that are different from your own.
Deuteronomy 12, verses 2-7.
Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest.
Kill any false prophets.
Any city that doesn't receive the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah.
That's from Mark 6, 11.
So, here's some other commandments that are in the Bible.
Don't associate with non-Christians.
Don't receive them into your house or even exchange greeting with them.
So, if this gentleman who wrote me calls up his in-laws and they don't just hang up on him, then they are not obeying God.
Shun those who disagree with your religious views.
That's from Romans 16, verse 17.
Paul, knowing that their faith would crumble if subjected to free and critical inquiry, tells his followers to avoid philosophy.
That's in Colossians 2, verse 8.
Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ is a liar and an antichrist.
That's in 1 John 2, verse 22.
The non-Christian is a deceiver and an antichrist.
Anyone who doesn't share Paul's beliefs has an evil heart.
That's from Hebrews 3.12.
False Jews are members of the synagogue of Satan, which is not only a phrase from Revelations 2.9 to 3.9, but also a fabulous name for a band.
So, I mean, this is the sort of stuff that, if you have not sort of had any glance into the Bible, then it's a little hard to understand why atheists have a problem with Christians.
I mean, this is Old Testament stuff, so this is sort of the three major religions that are based off the Old Testament, right?
I mean, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.
So, you know, when people sort of accuse me of having violent language or being angry about Christians, I do find it a little baffling because when they're talking about putting the entire city of Mississauga to death and killing every single person in it because I don't believe in God, I do find that that's rather offensive.
I do find that people who advocate that kind of stuff, I don't have a lot of moral patience with.
And if you claim to be a Christian, this stuff's all available on the internet.
I mean, it's like...
It took me like, what, eight minutes to find it and I'm no Google wizard.
So, you know, anybody who's a Christian can immediately find these views and sort of help to, it would help them understand the philosophy that they're following.
It's completely available to parents who are teaching their children.
It's completely available to priests.
It's completely available to everyone with a access to the internet or a library.
And so people who failed to look into any of this stuff, people who failed to recognize the fact that most religions, Christianity, Islam, and Judaism in particular, advocate genocide, and baby killing, and the selling of daughters into sexual slavery, and forcing women to marry rape, and stoning to death people who are Unfaithful and stoning to death women who aren't virgins on their wedding night and so on.
I mean, this is just pre-medieval brutality of the most sick and psychotic order.
I mean, there's absolutely no way that anybody can advocate this kind of stuff, unless you are, you know, an insane and sick human being from 2,000 years ago.
So, you know, if I do get a little testy with Christians, and if I do get a little testy with the people who base their religions on the Old Testament, I think it's a little fair to sort of understand why, and I think it's a little unfair to say that I'm the one whose language is a little violent.
All right, well, I can't stomach reading any more genocidal and murderous doctrines out loud, because I find it quite repulsive to do so.
So, let's just have a look at something that's a little less morally repugnant and just a little more sort of logically inconsistent.
Now, here's just some examples of theological doctrines that are self-contradicted within both the Old and the New Testament.
I'm not going to read off all of the references here.
If anybody's really curious, just email me and I will be happy to send them to you.
Here's some examples of biblical contradictions, and I'll keep them fairly short and snappy.
If the Bible is divinely inspired, it's a little hard to understand why In Genesis we learn that both God is satisfied with his works and dissatisfied with his works.
We are also told that God dwells in chosen temples and also that God dwells not in temples.
We also hear that God dwells in light and God dwells in darkness.
God is seen and heard but God is invisible and cannot be heard.
God is tired and rests and God is never tired and never rests.
In Proverbs, we find that God is everywhere present, sees and knows all things.
But in Genesis, we hear that God is not everywhere present, and neither sees nor knows all things.
In Acts, we find that God knows the heart of men.
And in Deuteronomy, we find that God tries men to find out what is in their heart.
God is both all-powerful and not all-powerful.
In James, we hear that God is unchangeable.
Genesis tells us that God is changeable.
The Psalms tell us that God is just and impartial.
Genesis and Exodus tell us that God is unjust and partial.
In Jeremiah, God is the author of evil.
In Corinthians, God is not the author of evil.
God gives freely to those who ask.
God also withholds His blessing and prevents men from receiving them.
God is to be found by those who seek Him, according to Matthew and Proverbs, but later on in Proverbs we find that God is not to be found by those who seek Him.
God is warlike and God is peaceful.
God is cruel, unmerciful, destructive, and ferocious.
Most of the Old Testament.
God is kind, merciful, and good.
Some parts of the Old Testament and the New Testament.
God's anger is fierce and endureth long.
God's anger is also slow and endures but for a minute.
In Exodus and Leviticus we find that God commands, approves of, and delights in burnt offerings, sacrifices, and holy days.
In Jeremiah and Psalms and Isaiah we find that God disapproves of and has no pleasure in burnt offerings, sacrifices, and holy days.
God accepts human sacrifice according to Samuels and Genesis, but God also forbids human sacrifice which we see in Deuteronomy.
God tempts men, God tempts no man, God cannot lie, according to Hebrews 6 verse 18.
God lies by proxy.
He sends forth lying spirits to deceive, which we find out in Kings and Ezekiel.
Because of man's wickedness, God destroys him, which is in Genesis.
Later on in Genesis, also because of man's wickedness, God will not destroy him.
God's attributes are revealed in his works, but God's attributes cannot be discovered.
Deuteronomy says there is but one God.
Throughout Genesis and John, we hear there is a plurality Let's have a look at some of these moral precepts.
Robbery is both commanded and forbidden.
Lying is approved and sanctioned and also forbidden.
Killing is commanded and killing is forbidden.
In Genesis, the bloodshedder is commanded to be killed and also the bloodshedder is commanded not to be killed.
In Exodus, we hear that the making of images is forbidden, and then later on that the making of images is commanded.
In Genesis, Leviticus, and Joel, we hear slavery and oppression is ordained.
And in Isaiah, and Exodus, and Matthew, slavery and oppression is forbidden.
In Providence, it's enjoyed.
In Providence, it's also condemned.
Anger is approved and disapproved.
Good works to be seen of men, also good works not to be seen of men.
Those are both in Matthew.
Matthew says judging of others is forbidden.
In Corinthians we hear that judging of others is approved.
Matthew says Christ taught non-resistance.
Luke and John say Christ taught and practiced physical resistance.
Luke says that Christ warned his followers not to fear being killed.
John says Christ himself avoided the Jews for fear of being killed.
Public prayer is sanctioned in Kings and disapproved of in Matthew.
Importunity in prayer is commended by Luke and condemned by Matthew.
In Numbers, the wearing of long hair by men is sanctioned.
In Corinthians, the wearing of long hair by men is condemned.
Genesis says that circumcision is instituted, and later on in the Bible, circumcision is condemned.
Exodus, the Sabbath, is instituted.
Isaiah, Romans, is repudiated.
The Sabbath instituted because God rested on the seventh day.
In Exodus and Deuteronomy we hear that the Sabbath was instituted because God brought the Israelites out of Egypt.
Exodus and Numbers say no work is to be done on the Sabbath under penalty of death.
John and Matthew, Christ both broke the Sabbath and justified his disciples in the same.
Matthew commands baptism.
Corinthian baptism is not commanded.
Every kind of animal is allowed for food according to Genesis and Romans.
In Deuteronomy certain kinds of animals are prohibited for food.
Taking of oaths are sanctioned by some parts of the Bible and forbidden by others.
Marriage is approved in Genesis and disapproved of in Corinthians.
Freedom of divorce is both permitted and restricted.
Adultery is forbidden and also allowed.
Marriage or cohabitation with sister is denounced.
But Abraham married his sister and God blessed the union.
Deuteronomy says that a man may marry his brother's widow.
Leviticus says a man may not marry his brother's widow.
Hatred to kindred is enjoined in Luke and condemned elsewhere in the Bible.
Intoxicating beverages are both recommended and discountenanced.
Romans says it is our duty to obey our rulers who are God's ministers and punish evildoers only.
Other places in the Bible it is not our duty to obey rulers who sometimes punish the good and receive unto themselves damnation therefore.
Obedience to masters is enjoined, and obedience is due to God only.
And there is an unpardonable... Mark says there is an unpardonable sin in Acts.
There is no unpardonable sin.
And let's also let the Bible speak for itself in this area.
I'm not going to read all the locations of these in the Bible, but feel free to email me if you want the actual references.
Matthew says, Think not that I come to send peace on earth.
I come not to send peace, but a sword.
He also says, All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
In Job we hear, For wrath killeth the foolish man.
Ephesians, Let not the sun go down on your wrath.
John says, And no man hath ascended up to heaven, even the Son of Man which is in heaven.
2 Kings says, And Elijah went up by whirlwind into heaven.
Now, Jesus says, in the same biblical section in John, Jesus says, if I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
He also says, I am one that bears witness of myself.
In Proverbs, we hear, a good man leaveth an inheritance to his children's children.
Luke commands, sell that ye have, and give alms.
That's to the poor, I guess.
Psalm says, blessed is the man that feareth the Lord.
Wealth and riches shall be in his house.
Matthew says, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.
Jesus says in John again, I and my father are one.
He also says, I go unto my father, for my father is greater than I. Exodus says, thou shalt not kill, as we all know.
Exodus also says, thus saith the Lord God of Israel, put every man his sword by his side and slay every man his brother.
Exodus says, remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.
Isaiah says, the new moons and Sabbath, the calling of assemblies I cannot away with.
It is iniquity.
Leviticus, thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image or any likeness of anything that is in heaven, earth, or water.
Exodus, and thou shalt make two cherubins of gold of beaten work shalt thou make them.
Cherubins, of course, are angels, so.
Ephesians 4, by grace are ye saved through faith, not of works.
Whereas James says, ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by faith only.
In Numbers we read, God is not a man that he should die, neither the son of man that he should repent.
Exodus says, and the Lord repented of the evil which he brought, which he thought to do under his people.
So God both repents and doesn't.
John, the hour is coming in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and come forth.
Whereas in Job, as the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away, so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more.
So, you know, zombie movies are no zombie movies.
We really can't tell.
Exodus, thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Matthew, resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Exodus, honor thy father and thy mother.
Luke, if any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
So you gotta honor your father and mother for God, and you've gotta hate him for Christ.
It's beautiful.
Matthew, lay not up for yourselves the treasures of the earth.
Proverbs, in the house of the righteous, is much treasure.
Genesis, I have seen God face to face and my life is preserved.
John, no man hath seen God at any time.
The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, says Ezekiel.
Whereas Exodus says, I, the Lord, thy God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.
I always want to do this stuff with a southern accent.
Proverbs.
Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding.
Ecclesiastes, not so much.
For in much wisdom is much grief, and he that increaseth knowledge, increaseth sorrow.
Psalm.
The Lord is good to all.
Isaiah.
I make peace and create evil.
I, the Lord, do all these things.
Romans.
For all have sinned.
Job.
There was a man whose name was Job, and that man was perfect and upright.
Kings.
Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign.
That's my second favorite name in the Bible.
My first is Nebuchadnezzar, just because it sounds like you're trying to hold in a sneeze and failing.
So, 2 and 20 years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign.
However, in Chronicles, 40 and 2 years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign.
Maybe if God is invisible and he doesn't have fingers, it's tricky to count.
Who knows?
Numbers, if a man vow a vow unto the Lord or swear an oath, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.
Matthew, but I say unto you, swear not at all, neither by heaven nor by earth.
Ecclesiastes.
Sorry, Ecclesiastes.
The earth abideth forever.
Second law of thermodynamics, I guess.
2 Peter 3 verse 10.
The elements shall melt with fervent heat.
The earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
In Jeremiah we hear both.
For I am merciful, saith the Lord, and I will not keep anger forever.
He also says, Ye have kindled a fire in mine anger, which shall burn forever.
James, God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.
Genesis, and it came to pass after these things that God did tempt Abraham, in fact.
Genesis says, and God saw everything that he made, and behold, it was very good.
And also, and it repented the Lord that he had made man on earth, and it grieved him in his heart.
Anyway, I mean, we can go on and on, but I think you sort of get the idea that the Bible is just full of contradictory nonsense, opposing moral laws, inconsistent facts, contradictory statements, all of which, you know, would be entirely predictable for, you know, a bunch of lunatic monks half-dead with starvation and having hallucinatory visions to be written down, mistranslated, carried over, having books lost, found, redirected, rewritten for sort of expediency of the moment political and religious issues.
And, I mean, that's exactly what you would expect from a book that's written by human beings for the sake of political power rather than some deity for the sake of moral instruction.
All of the laws that you would expect in a sort of religious power grab political situation would be there.
Like the injunction to worship no other gods is pretty clear as to why priests would want that to occur because they don't particularly like competition.
It would be like Walmart saying that they're going to put to death anybody who shops at Kmart.
That may be good for their business but not so much good for anybody else.
So when I talk to Christians and when I Discuss these ideas with them.
I don't come at it from a sort of, you know, you evil bastards, you're advocating my death.
I tend to come at it a little bit more gently because for me there's always the off chance that I may come across a Christian who is sort of open to these ideas and curious and so on, you know, as that sort of that remains a theoretical possibility so far.
But, sort of to conclude this little chat, I would like to just sort of share with you a couple of questions that would be worth asking your Christian friends.
And this will help you to figure out whether they are, you know, sort of well-meaning but misinformed, or whether they have sort of actively rejected any sort of inquiry into the nature of their faith.
So in a stunningly unfunny version of Letterman's top 10 lists, let's look at the top 10 questions which I believe it's important to ask Christians.
And, you know, for those who've heard other podcasts, you know that my particular approach to dealing with people, which I found to be very successful, and by successful I don't mean that it converts people, but for a number of other criteria which we don't have to get into here, You know, the first time that I deal with anybody, I treat them the best that I possibly can.
And after that, I treat them as they treat me.
And I found that to be a very, very helpful way of approaching these kinds of problems.
So, let's have a WeChat with a sort of supposed Christian, and let's ask him our ten questions.
Number one.
It is certainly true, and I'm sure Christians will admit this, That people believe false things.
I mean, certainly if we look throughout history, people believe that the earth was flat, you know, that the sun went around the earth, and that the moon and the sun were the same size, and the stars were ever affixed, and so on.
So it's certainly true that throughout history we know that people believe false things.
We also know that people believe false religions, right?
So there are very few Christians who'd say, I sort of flipped a coin and came down on Jesus Christ, rather than Zeus and Apollo.
They would say that the people who worship non-Christian deities are not right, not correct.
Because they're teaching their children, I would assume, that Christianity is true and therefore it is the only truth.
Because in Christianity You know, Christ says there's only one God, and he is my Father, and there's three in one, but let's not worry about that.
The fact that the Christian deity has similarities to a lubricant you can buy at a hardware store, this sort of three-in-one situation, but let's just call it a monotheistic religion despite the, you know, the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, the Virgin Mary, and about 8,000 saints.
Let's just call it a monotheistic religion.
So, you know, the Christians have to teach that it's the one religion, but of course, They then must, as a corollary, say that everybody who believes in non-Christian deities are incorrect.
They may not say, as a lot of Deuteronomy does, that they should be put to death, but they certainly would have to say that they're incorrect.
So, the first thing to establish with a Christian is that people can believe false things, both in a material and a spiritual manner.
Certainly, they would doubtless prefer that If you're an atheist that you believe in the Christian deity and go with them to church and so therefore you must be believing false things.
So to get them to accept the basic fact that people have the capacity to believe false things.
And once you can get them to accept that fact, right, then you've established the fact that there can be falsehood in spiritual matters and in philosophical matters.
Which is great, right?
Sort of the first step.
Now, the second step is that people throughout the world have no problems, or few problems, killing and dying for spiritual beliefs.
I mean, they don't have to be any sort of PhD in history to figure out that a lot of conflict is fermented by people who have spiritual beliefs and read these kinds of lunatic texts that I've been talking about earlier.
And so people do kill and die for believing false things, right?
And this establishes a couple of things.
The first thing that it establishes is that if spiritual matters are believed in but the belief is false, then great destruction can result.
If in the Middle East everybody's spiritual beliefs is contributing to, you know, slaughter, death, murder, suicide bombers, you know, two thousand years of, you know, genocidal and murderous impulses, then, you know, the fact that people can believe false things in a spiritual sense and also that the belief in those false things can cause an enormous amount of destruction is very important.
And the fact that people are willing to kill and die for those beliefs in no way proves that they are true or false.
Simply because if killing and dying for false beliefs were the criteria for truth, then Hitler, Stalin and Mao would be the most rigorous and honest philosophers in the history of the world.
So, that question.
The second question is, do you admit that people kill and die for their spiritual beliefs?
And they would have to say yes, right?
Or sort of withdraw from reality completely.
Now the third question is, were you taught what you believe or did it come to you without being taught?
A very important question, right?
Because they're basically saying that this is a universal spiritual truth.
But of course, if it was a universal spiritual truth, then they would not need to be taught it, right?
I mean, there's no school that every Sunday will herd you into a room and teach you over and over again that if you fall down and go boom, you're going to hurt, right?
Because gravity and concrete and scrapes and bruises and band-aids are all fairly familiar to children and are sort of learned The knowledge of pleasure and pain is innate and therefore it does not need to be taught.
Now, of course, every Christian who is alive and who is even remotely honest is going to have to tell you that no, the entire Christian theology did not descend upon his brain during some orgiastic vision, but in fact was taught to him step-by-step and drilled into him over and over again using all of the tricks of modern demagoguery and
You know, all of the tools of Sunday school and coloring and coloring books and pleasant stories and church.
All of this stuff was taught to him and therefore his knowledge of the spiritual matters was not innate to his mind but was in fact communicated to him by others.
And therefore Unless he's going to say that the hand of God moved everyone who talked to him, the Christian is going to have to recognize that everything he believes was taught to him initially, and therefore cannot be specifically said to be of divine origin.
I mean, he may say that the content of what was taught is divine and this and that, but the methodology of the teaching was definitely not divine.
Someone sat him down and said, this is the facts, this is the case, this is the truth, here are your coloring books, and if you don't believe it, you're going to burn in hell and your parents won't love you anymore.
Maybe it wasn't that extreme.
It certainly wasn't that extreme with me, but definitely there was a lot of social disapproval, of course, if you didn't particularly buy the whole package.
So, you know, the fact that what a Christian believes is taught is particularly important because then the methodology of communication is not divine but human.
Now, and none of these disprove God.
I mean, of course not.
I mean, that's a whole different category of question and answers.
But this is simply questions that you can ask your Christian friends to help them to understand your particular perspective and perhaps why there may be some skepticism in your approach to religion.
Or if there isn't, why by the end of this podcast there might be.
Now, the fourth question is, and again, you have to ask this in my suggestion, ask this with simple curiosity, right?
With simple, you know, I want to know, not, ah, gotcha, or anything like that, because there's nothing more powerful than persistent and non-aggressive curiosity, right?
As Socrates and Plato and Aristotle demonstrated millennia ago, you simply can't get to the truth any better than just asking questions and pointing out contradictions.
As a sort of minor aside, when I was... many, many years ago, I was biking on the sidewalk and, you know, occasionally would say, eh, get the hell off the sidewalk!
And I'd say, eh, whatever, right back.
And then one fellow sort of stopped me.
He just stood in front and just stood there.
And he said, you know, if you ride on the sidewalk, it's sort of dangerous for old people who can't get out of your way and, you know, people in wheelchairs and children and so on.
So it probably would be better if you rode on the street.
Well, you can't yell at someone like that.
And I never did ride on the sidewalk again because you can't, you know, when people sort of speak to you reasonably, they don't provoke your defenses and your fight-or-flight mechanism is not provoked.
And what happens is the anxiety that they feel when the questions arise can't be directed at you as the hostile instigator of the conversation and somebody who's bullying them or whatever.
And so that anxiety sort of stays within their own heart, which is sort of where it should be.
Because you're not telling them, when you question a Christian, you're not telling them anything they don't already know.
You're just telling them things that they've repressed and rejected.
Now, the fourth question is, would you agree that there is a financial motive for you to be taught what you were taught?
I mean, I do these podcasts for free, so nobody's going to accuse me of attempting to teach people stuff for my own financial gain.
However, when you teach children about Christianity, or any religion, You gain lifelong access to their bank accounts.
We have no problem with advertisers and understanding that when you're shown a breakfast cereal on television that the advertiser has a financial motive for showing that ad.
It's not out of the kindness of his heart.
Obviously, we'd hope that he believes in the product and so on.
You know, what he's trying to do is to gain access to your bank account, right?
And so when people tell you things that are, you know, that they claim are the good or good or beneficial to you and you pay them then, you know, it would be fairly I guess obvious to say that there's a financial motive in teaching children about Christianity, which is, you know, important.
Because, you know, people always say, well, why?
Why would they do this?
And so on.
Well, it's pretty simple, right?
I mean, if I buy a breakfast cereal based on a TV ad, I actually have to like it, and it has to do me some good, in one form or another.
Or I don't never have to buy it again, and no one's going to call me evil for not buying Count Chocula.
Although I guess some real fundamentalists might call me evil for buying it.
But, you know, there's far less of a financial obligation than what goes on in a church, right?
Where they get you very young and, you know, you have to go back to church for the rest of your life.
And I know in certain religions you have to give a certain percentage of your income to the church.
So, you know, there's an enormous financial incentive, which does not disprove that what they're saying is true.
But it certainly does help us to understand why such energy might be put into teaching children these things.
Now, the fifth question, which is an interesting question to ask a Christian, which is, well, Mr. Christian, or, you know, Mr. Islam, or Muslim, or Mr. Jew, why don't I believe this?
I mean, if it's universal and it's true, and God moves through the spirit of the waters and, you know, and inhabits the mind with his glory, and he's spoken to you, why has he spoken to you and not to me?
Which is a very interesting question.
Because I certainly have always been fascinated by and drawn to moral and ethical questions, to philosophy, to an examination and understanding of belief and faith and reason and empirical verification of the scientific method and theology.
All of these things are fascinating to me.
And so the question is, of course, well, you know, why did God speak to you?
And why did he not speak to me, right?
I've never had, even remotely, any sort of religious experience in my life.
And, you know, if they say stuff, well, you know, you're not ready, or God will be there when you want him, and things like that, well, that's really not an answer, right?
I mean, why has God speaking to you already and never spoken to me?
And to understand that That the difference may be that I've asked questions that you haven't, right?
So I've sort of fought my way free of an illusion and that's why maybe I don't believe and you do.
It's a possibility.
So another question to ask a religious person is, well, you know, why are there so many religions?
If there's one God and one truth, then you would sort of think that there would only be one religion, right?
I mean, there's only one scientific method.
There's only one free market.
You know, there's not a lot of varieties in things which are, you know, empirical and verifiable and so on.
So, why would there be so many religions?
And to, you know, just to help the Christian to understand where your skepticism comes from, right?
I mean, I find it sort of useful to approach this as a confessional, and to say something like, well, you know, this is the problem that I can't get around, right?
I can't just believe something because somebody tells me that it's true, right?
Because if I was raised by a racist, then I would think that, you know, all blacks are this, or all whites are that.
And I would want to obviously fight my way free of that prejudice, right?
So it doesn't matter if my parents or my whole community tell me that something is true.
The important thing is to find out if it is true or not, right?
Because, as we sort of pointed out in question one, people can believe false things.
So you can't just take what people say as gospel.
See?
There's a little religious joke there, just for your enjoyment.
So, you know, help me to understand, because if there is no God, then you would sort of expect there to be a lot of different types of religions.
Right?
Because it's not based on anything that's true, and therefore, you know, a multiplicity of religions would sort of make sense, right?
Because you've got a whole bunch of people who, for a variety of cultural reasons, have found different things that work within each culture to transfer money from the gullible or the young, the people, the children who've been programmed young to themselves.
And so if there is no God, you would expect there to be a multiplicity of religions.
And you would also expect that if children are taught fewer religious principles, that religious adherence would go down, right?
Because that would be an indication that religious belief comes from the teachings of adults to children rather than any sort of innate God speaking to you or whatever, right?
Because then if it were the case that God were speaking to you, then religious instruction shouldn't have a lot of effect on what you end up believing, right?
You don't have to be a physicist to throw a ball, is sort of what I'm saying.
So if the Christian can sort of help you understand why there are so many religions, and they can't use religion to explain that, like they can't say, well, the devil goes around and gives all these false religions to people and so on, because, you know, the question is, is religion true?
So you can't use religion to sort of prove that it is, right?
You know, if you can, you know, to say to the Christian, help me understand why there are so many religions and how that supports the idea that your God, not just in all the hundreds of gods or thousands of gods that are worshipped now, but the tens of thousands of gods that have been worshipped throughout history, why your God is the one true God, right?
I mean, it doesn't, just because somebody says it's true who has a financial motive for telling you, doesn't really answer the question, right?
Then, of course, question number seven.
Why does the Bible contradict itself so much?
If the Bible is a document of man, like a study in spiritual fantasies or a study of visionaries or mental illness and so on, or just a study of what people believed at the time, then you would fully expect it to be full of contradictions and full of moral commandments that were believed back then, which we could never imagine believing now, like killing women who aren't virgins on their wedding night.
Then, you know, if it's of divine origin, you would expect it to be consistent and perfect and so on.
And they, you know, they might say, well, it was divine in origin, but now, by golly, it is mistranslated and so on.
Well, if God can speak to one person, surely he can speak to the translator, right?
If the Bible is the work of divinity, you would expect it to have more consistency than your average Ken Foley novel, but if it was the work of accumulated human knowledge based on subjective belief or illusion, then you would expect it to be full of contradictory
statements and you know morals that were appropriate to the time not true or good but you know what appropriate to what people believed at the time and not what people believe now and so if the Bible is true it should be more consistent and the fact that it's not consistent is more of an indication that it does not reflect any sort of divine statement but rather is a reflection of people's beliefs who weren't necessarily very stable themselves
Now, the eighth question which I find it interesting to ask Christians is, well, you know, can you pick and choose?
I mean, given that the Bible contradicts itself so much, Which parts of the Bible do you pick as the parts that you find the most valid?
We're going to assume that if your children say, to hell with you, mom and dad, that you're not going to kill them, strangle them in their beds or anything.
So therefore you've immediately rejected one aspect of the Bible.
You can go through hundreds of examples of how You have to pick and choose as a Christian.
You simply can't accept everything that the Bible says, because then you become a genocidal murderer, right?
You know, you just simply can't do it.
So, you know, can you pick and choose?
And if you do pick and choose, what does it mean to really be a Christian?
Like, let's say there are, I don't know, 8,000 moral commandments in the Bible, of which 1,000 contradict each other.
I mean, that's being generous, but let's just say that, right?
So, you know, at least, you know, fifteen to twenty percent of your beliefs are entirely subjective, right?
And we, you know, stuff that you choose based on what it is you prefer, right?
I mean, if you have a more aggressive personality, maybe you like an eye for an eye.
And if you're meeker by nature, perhaps you prefer to turn the other cheek.
So, you know, can you pick and choose?
And if you can pick and choose, what do you have in common with a Christian who has chosen something different.
So if I say that I believe that homosexuals should be murdered, and I take that on as my mission, and you're a Christian who doesn't believe that that should be the case, What do you have in common with that other Christian, right?
So I'm the guy out hunting down and killing homosexuals and atheists, and you're somebody who doesn't think that's so good.
Well, are we enemies?
You know, I mean, but I'm actually going by what the Bible says and you're not.
So are you a false Christian who's opposing a true Christian?
You know, do you believe that I've just been badly divinely inspired although I'm You know, following the teachings of a book that you claim is divinely inspired.
I mean, it's sort of confusing to understand what is meant by a Christian, when not only are there so many sects within Christianity, but, you know, there's so many biblical commandments that are contradictory that whatever you sort of cherry-pick out of the pile and assemble into this belief is pretty personal to you.
Now, you can say God inspires everyone in his own way and all that, but that really doesn't answer the question of what it means to be a Christian.
so number nine uh... so uh... mister christian or miss christian Do you reject parts of the Bible?
Right, so having sort of understood some of the moral commandments within the Bible which are questionable to be as generous as possible and, you know, psychotic, genocidal, and murderous to be more honest and open about it, you know, do you reject the parts of the Bible that have those commandments?
Now for my friend who wrote in, of course he said he spent Christmas with his in-laws and the Bible expressly forbids them from having any contact with him because he's not a Christian.
And, you know, these Christians might say, well, we believe in tolerance and that's all well and good, but that's not what the Bible says.
That's certainly not what Christ says.
It's certainly not what God says.
And so you can say, I mean, it would be like an atheist saying, but I believe in God.
I mean, a Christian is somebody who follows the teachings of Christ and of God in the Old and New Testament.
And so the question then is, do you reject parts of the Bible?
And, you know, if they say no, then obviously the conversation's over because they have to start gathering the stones to sort of kill you.
And if the answer is yes, I do reject parts of the Bible, right, then, you know, it's sort of hard to understand how it is that they're not just making up a religion of their own, right, because there's no objective way to determine which parts of the Bible you should keep as truth and which parts of the Bible you should not keep as truth.
I mean, if you say, well, the Bible is just the starting point and you go off in your own prayers and you go off in your own spiritual journey, well, that's fine, right?
But that doesn't mean that you're a Christian.
It just means that you're taking this sort of hysterical and violent book as your starting point and then sort of making it more gentle and picking and choosing what you want.
And it's hard not to understand why that's not just a form of theology called me-ism, you know?
Whatever I like and think is good is what I'm going to believe.
But it's certainly not anything objective like Christianity, which would be adherence to.
The Bible.
And, of course, objective Christianity is impossible because the Bible has so many moral contradictions and things which are just morally repugnant.
So, I mean, Christianity is impossible.
I mean, because you just can't cherry-pick and say that you're consistent with anyone else who cherry-picks.
So, you know, when you have all of these questions in place, I mean, there's many more that you can ask, but suppose you have all of these questions in place.
Then I think that what you need to do is sort of sit that person down and say, well, let's sort of run over what we've sort of established here.
It's certainly possible for people to believe false things, both spiritually and materially.
People will kill and die for those false beliefs.
Now, you were taught what you believe It didn't come to you through any divine mechanism.
It came to you through people telling you over and over again.
And the people who told you had a very strong financial motive for getting you to believe what they were telling you.
So you've sort of established those first four points.
And then number five, you will not have got a satisfactory answer as to why one person does not believe in another person what does.
You will not have got a satisfactory answer to the question why there are so many religions.
Why does the Bible contradict itself so much?
How can you pick and choose from a book and then call yourself consistent with other people who pick and choose from a book?
People will have said, yes, I reject parts of the Bible.
So, when you put all of these things together, I think it's a fair question to say, isn't it possible that you're wrong?
Right?
They've already admitted people believe false things.
They've already admitted that they never got their knowledge directly from God, but were taught instead through people.
And that those people have a strong financial motive, similar to advertisers, only much stronger.
Because advertisers just get you to buy the product once, voluntarily, and don't call it a moral decision.
So people have a very strong moral belief, sorry, people have a very strong financial incentive to getting people to believe what is being taught.
So you put all of this stuff together, isn't it just possible, isn't it possible that they're wrong?
Isn't it possible that People told them false things with whatever intention.
It really doesn't matter what the intention was, but we know that the fact is, because you can't judge people by their intentions, you can only judge them by what they do.
It's the same thing when you're looking at self-knowledge, you don't look at what your intentions were, you look at what you actually did, right?
Isn't it possible That given the enormous financial incentive of teaching children false things, given all of the inconsistencies, given the fact that people do believe false things, given the fact that the Bible contradicts itself all the time, given all of these facts, isn't it possible that they're incorrect?
That there is no sort of Christian deity, that there is no way to objectively define Christianity, that given all of the ghastly and genocidal moral commandments within the Christian Bible, that it is in fact the work of people who are seeking political or material or economic power over others.
However, forget about the intention.
The intention does not matter at all, because we can't judge the intentions of people 2,000 years dead.
We have no idea.
It's hard enough even to figure out people's intentions if you're a psychologist with five years working with someone.
So forget about intentions.
It doesn't matter what the intentions are.
All you have to do is judge people by their actions.
Now, if after all of this they say it's absolutely impossible, That I'm incorrect.
It's absolutely impossible that I'm incorrect.
Then they're mentally ill, right?
Because any sane human being would look at all of these factors and say, you know what?
It could be.
It could be the case that I'm wrong.
And of course, if they flatly deny it, you'll never even get this far, right?
But assuming you get to question number 10, if they say, there's just no way, then they're mentally ill, right?
And then they're now fully responsible for rejecting any kind of rationality, any kind of honesty, any kind of intellectual rigor.
And now, when they turn around and teach their children that the Bible is true and God is good and blah, blah, blah, Then, you know, we certainly know that their intention is nothing to do with the truth or intellectual honesty or rationality or anything, that they're just re-imposing their own blind prejudices on their children for the sake of never having to ask a single question and never having to stand up and be courageous and to act with integrity and morality, intellectual rigor, honesty, and so on.
If they do then say that it's possible that they're in error, it's possible.
A 0.0001% chance, right?
Is it possible that they're in error?
Well, if they say that it is, then you ask them if it would be worth having this conversation with their children.
And, you know, if they say, you know what, given that I could be in error, and I've just realized that, and I don't want my children to believe, even have a small chance of believing something that is false, absolutely, let's call our kids in here and let's have the same discussion with them.
Then these are people who you can respect, at least who I could respect.
I mean, they're taking on a very tough problem, which is that they have sort of ignored all of the evidence against religious belief.
And, you know, having been confronted with the evidence, they're taking a noble route.
Or as noble as they can, given that they've actively sort of not sought out any of these sort of problems with their own religion, which are fully available to everyone all the time.
This isn't France in the 10th century, where you can't even read the Bible, let alone figure out any contradictory opinions.
I mean, they're all over the place.
But if finally confronted with this kind of response, they say yes let's bring our kids in here let's teach them about these objections so that they can have a more thorough understanding of how to understand truth from falsehood right from wrong and so on and so that I don't teach them something that is that something is absolutely and incontrovertibly true when it might in fact be completely false.
That's something that I can really respect.
That will never happen.
That will never ever happen.
If you try and hang your hat on that it will fall for eternity.
Once you have spent a lot of time, and this is why it's so important to figure these things out before you have kids, once you have spent a lot of time claiming an absolute moral authority for your children, or to your children, that there is a God, that God is good, respect your parents, and blah blah blah, your children are going to look up to you as somebody who knows the truth and is communicating the truth, and you've taken all of that moral authority on your shoulders by teaching your children false things.
Well, you know, what is going to be the look in your children's eyes when it's sort of revealed that you've kind of been lying to them the whole time?
Or, if you don't like the term lying, that you have never questioned anything but simply assumed that things were true?
And, you know, of course, if your kids do have questions, you have probably opposed them fairly strenuously.
If your kids haven't wanted to go to church, you have opposed them very strenuously.
It is simply impossible for parents who start building a sort of edifice to their own moral absolutism on false ground, right?
I mean, they simply can never reveal it because they lose all moral authority in the eyes of their children.
And then their children are going to talk to other children and say, you know what, my uncle atheist said such and such, and you know, then they're going to get damned by the church, they're going to get damned by their peers, they're going to be rejected from their community, they're going to get cursed by the priest, they're going to... I mean, this is not a structure that That invites much criticism.
So, I mean, they're going to be fully aware that even if they no longer, if they wake up one morning with no faith in God, that they're not about to destroy their whole community or their relationship to their community.
They're not about to become outcasts and they're certainly not about to stare into their children's eyes and see their own hypocrisy reflected back to them in the shock of their children when they switch suddenly from, you know, basically blind absolutists to, you know, people who can actually think and that every moral instruction and commandment and commandment to thinking, towards thinking and rationally examining the world, that every commandment they've ever given their children is false.
I mean, I guess it's a theoretical possibility, but in all practical cases, it's never going to happen.
Well, I hope this has been helpful.
I've certainly enjoyed it.
I guess if things had gone another way, I might have made a decent preacher, but I'm glad they didn't.
So thanks so much for listening.
I hope that this helps clear up at least why I feel a certain amount of anger towards those who advocate my death, and also why it doesn't really matter What the intention is of Christians or what you think of their motives.
The real way to test it is simply to converse with them and find out.
Right?
And I guarantee you, you know, within about 30 seconds you're going to run into a bottomless well of hostility and sanctimonious pretension.
And, you know, then you'll find out just how nice these people really are.
So, do tell me as you go forward with this journey exactly what you get and I'll be sure to share more conversations that I have with people.
▲
Export Selection