Skip to main content

The truth shall set you free

By WizenedSage (Galen Rose) --

Below is my latest foray onto the Letters-to-the-Editor pages of a local weekly newspaper here in Maine. It was submitted with the title, “A Blasphemy Law for America?”, but printed with the title shown below… whatever. I offer it here to show what can be done in a public forum to provide readers with reasons to doubt the teachings of Christianity. Of course, I have a great advantage over many of you in living well outside the Bible Belt, but I urge you to consider submitting letters to your own local newspapers. You may have to be a bit less direct in your part of the world, but I have to believe that re-educating believers is the surest way to a sane and secular world. (Special thanks to Riz S. - “Leaving the Past Behind” 5/31/10) - from whom I borrowed parts of my last paragraph.)

"Isn’t open debate the best way to uncover the truth?"

Monty Pythons Holy Ail: Tempered over burning ...Image by dullhunk via Flickr
I read recently that Ireland has a new law against blasphemy. It defines blasphemy as "publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion…”

What do you think? Would such a law be good for our country? Such a law would put the non-believers like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens out of business because no publisher would dare to publish their books. Although I have read numerous accounts of people who claimed those books improved their lives. Also, we wouldn’t have people writing letters-to-the-editor which seem intended to disrupt everyone’s religious comfort. Yet, again, sometimes a little discomfort can serve a greater social good. Most parents insist on the standard inoculations (measles, mumps, etc.) for their children, no matter how loudly they protest, for the protection of all of us.

You think it couldn’t happen here, where we have a Constitutional Amendment which forbids government entanglement with religion? Don’t be too sure. The US Congress, by law, put “God” in our national motto and in the Pledge of Allegiance back in the 1950s, despite that Amendment.

Clearly, the Irish law is pretty subjective. Where does one draw the line of “grossly abusive or insulting?” For some, the Bible itself is sacred and ANY criticism of it is an insult to their religion. For some, every word in it is the direct revealed word of God. This is illustrated by a post I recently read on an internet site; “To say the Bible was written by men and may contain inaccuracies completely contradicts the word of the Bible.” Did you get that?

Of course it could get awkward when someone points out, correctly, that the Biblical “wisdom” to be protected from dissent includes commands to kill disobedient sons (Deuteronomy 21:18-21), those who work on the Sabbath (Exodus 35:2), and homosexuals (Leviticus 20:13). After all, no one in our society believes this stuff anymore, even though it is in the Bible.

And one has to wonder if it should really be illegal to admit in print that one doesn’t believe in witches (Exodus 22), ghosts (Matt. 12:31), dragons (Isaiah 27:1), unicorns (Job 39:9), or 900 year-old men (Gen. 9:29).

We would also have to ask whether we should prosecute doctors who write that evil spirits are not the cause of disease, in contradiction to Matthew 8:16. And should we prosecute people for saying they don’t agree with the Bible where it says that women shouldn’t be teachers or leaders (1 Tim 2:12)? Does anyone in our society agree with this anymore?

The more I think about this, the more doubtful I become about a blasphemy law. As I reflect on history, I can’t think of any society which ever benefited in the long run from making dissent illegal. And I can think of many societies which stifled social, religious, and economic progress and unleashed horrible abuses on the public through such laws (think Inquisition, numerous monarchs, the Nazis, Maoist China, and Stalinist Russia).

Yes, there are those who don’t believe the Bible is the revealed word of a god. They think it was written by a few dozen primitive and very superstitious men (it was a very long time ago, after all). They don’t believe there ever was a Garden of Eden with a talking snake and a magical fruit tree (Exodus). Does it really harm society to let them say this in public? Isn’t open debate the best way to eventually uncover the truth? Hasn’t it always been the best way?

Now I would never argue that the Bible is useless; certainly there are many things we can learn from it which are still useful for our own age. Who would argue with John 8:32, “The truth shall set you free”? In fact, this passage would have made a good title for my letter.

The Bible is a useful window on history and on the thinking of ancient peoples. We should always study our past, sure, but only to learn from our mistakes and move past them, not to uncritically embrace them as “truth” and indoctrinate them into children as religion. Had our ancestors not fought for and achieved the right to criticize religious beliefs, we might still be burning “witches” today, as the Bible commands (“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.” Exodus 22:18).


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not

On Living Virtuously

By Webmdave ~  A s a Christian, living virtuously meant living in a manner that pleased God. Pleasing god (or living virtuously) was explained as: Praying for forgiveness for sins  Accepting Christ as Savior  Frequently reading the Bible  Memorizing Bible verses Being baptized (subject to church rules)  Attending church services  Partaking of the Lord’s Supper  Tithing  Resisting temptations to lie, steal, smoke, drink, party, have lustful thoughts, have sex (outside of marriage) masturbate, etc.  Boldly sharing the Gospel of Salvation with unbelievers The list of virtuous values and expectations grew over time. Once the initial foundational values were safely under the belt, “more virtues'' were introduced. Newer introductions included (among others) harsh condemnation of “worldly” music, homosexuality and abortion Eventually the list of values grew ponderous, and these ideals were not just personal for us Christians. These virtues were used to condemn and disrespect fro