Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Thou Shalt Find It Impossible to Live Like the Bible Tells You to

By Anneli Rufus, AlterNet. Posted November 17, 2007.


Author A.J. Jacobs spent a year trying to follow the 600+ laws he found proscribed in the Bible, and concluded he's doomed to live in sin.
41zf6urajkl.ss500
sdfsdf

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Anneli Rufus

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

He didn't want to stone adulterers. But that was part of the deal. That's what A.J. Jacobs was being paid for.

"The Hebrew scriptures prescribe a tremendous amount of capital punishment," Jacobs writes in The Year of Living Biblically (Simon & Schuster, 2007), his account of an experiment in which the lifelong agnostic spent 12 months obeying the Old Testament as literally as possible -- while living in an Upper West Side apartment and working for Esquire.

"Think Saudi Arabia, multiply by Texas, then triple that. It wasn't just for murder. You could also be executed for adultery, blasphemy, breaking the Sabbath, perjury, incest, bestiality, and witchcraft, among others. A rebellious son could be sentenced to death. As could a son who is a persistent drunkard and glutton.

"The most commonly mentioned punishment method in the Hebrew Bible is stoning. So I figure, at the very least, I should try to stone. But how?"

At the time, Jacobs was in month two of his venture, still throbbing with a neophyte's enthusiasm: "I want to smash idols," he surprised himself by musing. Gathering a pocketful of tiny white pebbles in Central Park, he strolled until he met an irascible old man who mocked Jacobs' walking stick. When this man -- having been asked -- declared himself an adulterer, Jacobs lobbed a pebble at his chest. It bounced off.

He had grown up in a resolutely secular Jewish home -- sans bar mitzvah, sans Sabbath candles; he was even named after his still-living father, such an Ashkenazic rarity that an El Al security officer, eyeing the "Jr." on his passport six months into the experiment, doubted that Jacobs was even Jewish at all. "I'm Jewish," he writes, "in the same way that Olive Garden is an Italian restaurant."

All through school, even at a university "where you were more likely to study the semiotics of Wicca rituals than the Judeo-Christian tradition" and where the Bible was viewed "as a fusty, ancient book with the same truth quotient as The Faerie Queene," he'd been taught that the Bible inspired "many of humankind's greatest achievements: the civil rights movement, charitable giving, the abolition of slavery." And also, of course, that "it's been used to justify our worst: war, genocide and the subjugation of others."

By his late 30s, he'd long since decided "that religion, for all the good it does, seemed too risky for our modern world. The potential for abuse too high."

Then he became a father. And he couldn't reconcile raising a child without religion without learning more about religion. Firsthand.

As an Esquire reporter, Jacobs was into total-immersion journalism. His previous book, The Know-It-All (Simon & Schuster, 2004), detailed a year spent reading the Encyclopedia Brittanica from A through Z. Now, eyeing his small son, he mused: "If my lack of religion is a flaw, I don't want to pass it on to him."

And lo.

After poring over various versions of the Old and New Testaments and consulting with numerous clergy and academics over myriad interpretations, it began: a year in which he prayed several times daily (although, at first, merely saying the word "God" made him break out in sweats). He blew a ram's horn monthly. He stopped saying the word "Thursday" because its name derives from that of a pagan god, Thor. He refrained from turning doorknobs on Saturdays and from touching his wife for seven days after her periods. He visited Samaritans in Israel and snake handlers in Tennessee. He grew a chest-length beard that had strangers calling him ZZ Top and Gandalf; and he limited his fruit consumption to cherries -- you know, because Leviticus 19:23-25 forbids eating fruit from trees less than five years old. Peach trees start bearing at only two: "Too dangerous," Jacobs notes. "Pear trees in four. Again, too risky. But cherry trees, those are slowpokes. They take at lease five to seven from planting to produce."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: bible, a.j. jacobs, year of living biblically

Anneli Rufus is the author of several books, including Party of One: The Loners' Manifesto.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Huh?
Posted by: koavf on Nov 17, 2007 12:17 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is this posted on this site? I thought this was about politics. How did you decide to post this under "Rights & Liberties?"

-JAK

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» religion is all politics Posted by: psychochurch
» RE: religion is all politics Posted by: Richard House
» "The Mix is the Message" Posted by: Beck
» "44% of high school graduates... Posted by: eddie torres
Duh, Walked Right Into That One
Posted by: NoPCZone on Nov 17, 2007 12:21 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many Bible teachers hold to the belief that the very very purpose of the onerous and burdensome law and code was to show that no person could be perfect. If theologians have long espoused this, is anyone surprised it's virtually impossible.

The core of the Christian faith is actually very simple. Jesus Christ, when asked what was the most important commandment, said that loving God an treating your neighbor (others) as you would wish to be treated. He went on to say that in those two rules were ALL of the law and prophets.

Sorry for the Sunday School lesson, but the author was asking for it. Tomorrow, an expose on how staring at the sun can blind you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Duh, Walked Right Into That One Posted by: Non-Attachment
How 'bout a little less...
Posted by: matti on Nov 17, 2007 2:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...book promotion and a little more discussion of "progressive" issues?

I realize it can be hard to fill the site but this combined with the Jensen AD MARK III is getting a little sad.


-matti

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is why Jesus broke it down for us
Posted by: foolme1ns on Nov 17, 2007 3:24 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Love God with all your heart and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all of the laws.

"Rabbi, do you mean it is more important for me to love my neighbor than to follow all the laws" "I tell you truly, you are not far from the kingdom of heaven".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bob Dylan knew about stoning...
Posted by: war_on_tara on Nov 17, 2007 3:56 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Everybody must get stoned."

Before he became a born-again Christian, that is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

4.8
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Nov 17, 2007 4:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Funny and interesting.

Being raised Catholic, I can identify with the mixed thoughts and emotions about the Bible and religion.

It seems the Bible is like any other classic book: There's some really profound words and thoughts buried in thousands of pages of warped, confusing, self-indulgent crap, spewing from some very disturbed minds...I mean, if we all took the existentialists as literally and deeply as some people take the Bible, we all would have jumped off a bridge a long time ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 4.8 Posted by: donl51
» RE: raised catholic Posted by: davidg
what
Posted by: dawnteach on Nov 17, 2007 4:48 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
he who is without sin cast the first stone jesus said, people really need to learn and understand the bible before being jugemental,or discriminatory, if you knew your history, the new testement pretty much replaced the old testement. no we cannot live bible days in todays society, though our world would be a better place if we could. those were Gods ways of dealing with criminals and sinners. if we didn't have adultry our divorce rate wouldn't be over 50%, god had his reasons for those laws and of course those who want or chose to live in sin will of course never agree to having those kind of laws. and back in those days instead of the death penalty like we have today in our system,that was their way..if you really want to understand the bible maybe he should look to council in one our great churches..and also this has nothing to do with politics. and our rules are not to be discriminatory and i see alot of that on religion on this site..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: what Posted by: phatkhat
» RE: what Posted by: FedUp
» RE: what Posted by: Lector
» RE: what Posted by: MSTHOM
I loved this book!
Posted by: Camilla Cracchiolo on Nov 17, 2007 4:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, please, you who dislike Alternet talking about this, go get a life already. Haven't you noticed religion and politics are travelling hand in hand and eating up your rights?

Jacobs was really funny. And very moving, because he truly cares about the ethical issues under the Biblical laws. Which makes this book one of the best discussions of what constitutes true righteousness and the best way to live one's life that I've seen in quite a while.

He's also absolutely honest and self-revealing and there is neither preachiness nor disrespect of those who are religious and also struggling with issues of ethics.

At the end, he talks about how the year permanently changed him; not becoming a believer, but becoming a person who tries to implement some of the moral lessons he learned along the way.

Do yourself and favor and read it. Please.

Camilla...who loves books to death and reads incessantly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I loved this book! Posted by: Basenjis
» RE: I loved this book! Posted by: phatkhat
Why are you attempting to follow man decreed laws
Posted by: jezemeg8 on Nov 17, 2007 5:04 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not surprised to discover that the author found it impossible to follow 600+ laws that were found in the Bible...the ancient Israelites who decreed them found them impossible too... God gave man 10 laws (commandments), man decided that it was way too easy to follow only 10 so set about creating a plethora of laws that they thought would make us even more holy. Jesus's death, resurrection and ascension into Heaven wiped all the old man decreed laws and made the two most relevant laws to all mankind to be 'Love the Lord your God and worship Him with all your heart' and 'Love your enemies'. Why is that too hard for people to understand????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I can't be equal... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
» RE: I can't be equal... Posted by: papibear
» I cannot fight... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
» RE: I cannot fight... Posted by: papibear
there are only 2 sins
Posted by: wawa on Nov 17, 2007 6:28 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Being selfish
2. Being boring

100 years before Christ walked the earth

Rabbi Hillel knew that the Hebrew understanding of Hokema;

Holy Wisdom;

The Feminine Divinity

Was the same as the Greek understanding of

The Logos:

The Word.

It was the first Paul and John who first understood:

The Word was good and

The Word was

The Logos

The Word is The Christ.




It was John on Rubber Soul who intuitively knew:

"The Word is just The Way and The Word is Love"

Listen to me +

Use your imagination,

For as William Blake understood:

"IMAGINATION is EVIDENCE of The Divine"

Before Christ walked the earth a man,

He was already a SHE:

Hokema, Holy Wisdom; the Feminine Divinity

Now, isn't that Good News?

The God Head is One Pure Being;

as much male as female

as much mommy as daddy.

And we are all children of Her Universe;

And **He is the oldest personality because He is the origin of everything;

and everything is born of Him.

He is the supreme controller of the universe,

the maintainer and instructor of humanity.

He is smaller than the smallest.[**Bhagavad-Gita]

He indwells the heart of every atom and

She is beyond the Universe.

Wisdom is calling,

She is rattling your windows and shaking your walls

With some more good news of the

three witnesses,

and three always beats one

and not just that,

I've got a fourth.

Get out your Good Book sisters and brothers and chew on this;

Matthew 12:31-32, Mark 3:28-29, and Luke 12:10

are simpatico with gnostic Thomas saying 44:

'Jesus said: "Whoever blasphemes against the father will be forgiven, whoever blasphemes against the son will be forgiven, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven either on earth or in heaven."

Listen to me, God is within every sister, brother and all Creation,

Wake up to your own divinity and

Get a clue Christian:

His ways are not your ways and Her thoughts are not your thoughts

Dominion never meant to rape and plunder,

but to nurture, care and love

And if you have not love, you have nothing at all

And on that final day we all will stand naked before The Creator

And we have been warned that there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth

by those who were so sure they were in, because they are the ones left out.

WAKE UP Christian!

Hear the wind begin to howl.

-copyright 2006, eileen fleming





*Wisdom has built her house and SHE calls to all; "Come, eat my food and drink my wine and you will live abundant life and walk in the ways of understanding." [*Proverbs 9: 4-6]

e
http://www.wearewideawake.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: there are only 2 sins Posted by: Richard House
» Gnosticism Posted by: garry minor
» RE: Gnosticism Posted by: Richard House
» RE: there are only 2 sins Posted by: lotus23
» RE: there are only 2 sins Posted by: jroth420
atheists and agnostics are further down the spiritual road
Posted by: wawa on Nov 17, 2007 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
According to the 1987 classic, The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace, Dr. Scott Peck defines the spiritual life as fluid and that one may pass back and forth repeatedly through any of the four-probably more-stages of the soul.

Stage one upon this journey -that begins from within-is essentially our infancy in the spiritual life. Like a wild child, a person in this stage reflects the inner chaotic and anti-social, unregenerate soul that is interested only in its own self-satisfaction and ego, much like the stereotypical spoiled child.


Stage one people may claim to love others, but their behavior reflects they love their own pleasure, money, power, prestige, and security above any other. For stage one people, it really is all about them.



The good news is that the vast majority of humanity responds to that inner tug which is God, for lack of a better word. Catherine of Sienna wrote that within us all is the divine diamond. But life and all our baggage dulls the flame of our divine brilliance.


Stage two souls seek to "let their light shine" and will live virtuous lives and do many good works. They also can be judgmental of others, self-righteous, rigid of thought, cold of heart, legalistic concrete literal thinkers and may even be guilty of a lukewarm faith.


They want to do right and they even may desire to love and please God, but have not yet fully opened up to the Inner Light, as Joan of Arc did when she challenged church and state and persisted that she had intuited God within -even while being fried.

Stage two souls have not yet been set fully free and prefer the security of a higher human authority than themselves for guidance.

They submit to institutions, scripture, dogma, ritual, ministers, or gurus. This is the most appropriate stage for older children and most adults who live busy lives just trying to keep bread on the table and a dry roof above.


The difference between a stage one and stage two soul, is that a one wouldn't even notice a neighbor in need, while the two has awoken to the fact that we are to be our neighbor's keepers and they will respond to a friend-and like the good Samaritan, even to a total stranger in need.

Most theologians would agree that the opposite of faith is not disbelief: the opposite of faith is fear.



Stage three souls have not just fearlessly awoken, they have evolved!


This evolution has led them to the realization and doing what Christ was really talking about in the Sermon of the Mount AKA:The Beatitudes.

TBC

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

good lord
Posted by: soulrebeljc on Nov 17, 2007 6:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So you can't follow "laws" written in a book that is supposed to be the word of some mysterious character called god.

so what?

You'd do better to worry about following the tenets of this country as enumerated in the constitution, and about trying to change the illegitimate laws such as the Patriot Act (unconstitutional), and our inane drug laws (unconstitutional) which incarcerate half a million people, disproportionally people of color.

Why is "faith" in the unseen and unproven supposed to be a mark of good character? Seems more like a mark of insanity to me. And I'm tired of religion being a litmus test in politics when the Constitution, in Article VI, states that there shall be no religious test for public office.

But really, if not being able to follow the Bible (or any other religious text for that matter) is so troubling to you, then maybe it's time to realize that "religious" texts are tools for control, sexism, racism, and general subjugation.

Believers of the world, you have nothing to lose but your chains.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: good lord Posted by: phatkhat
» RE: good lord Posted by: davidg
» RE: good lord Posted by: donl51
Unfortunately, God doesn't edit well
Posted by: logansafi on Nov 17, 2007 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem is simply that despite all his Greatness, God just doesn't edit his books well. And even if he did better now, no good Christian would read his re-edited Bible but would just keep on reading the old one.

Maybe one should stick to just trying to live with one set of God's laws, and not all of them at once? Begin with either the laws that guide diet, or the ones that guide sex, say? Dr. Dobson is trying to stick with only God's laws that deal only with sexual conduct, for example. And he is having a damn time of even that!

What God needs to do for his children, is give us a few more miracles anew. That would save more of us I believe. He could recreate the earth and then re-edit the Bible. That might help, but then again, who am I to suggest to God what he should do about the mess his children are making?

Thanks, alternet, for at last giving us some honest material for us Christians readers on this site. Spirituality is important. My first wife used to tell me that all the time. Thanks again, and may God be with you all!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well, OK, but ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
"Love the Lord your God and worship Him with all your heart"
Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal on Nov 17, 2007 8:04 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why?! Is He that insecure that He needs to be worshiped? And why do I have to go to special places (Churches) to "worship" Him?

This behavior is the antithesis to a "Loving" god. If you were asked to do the same to any other person on this earth, he would be known as a dictator or worse. Definitely not known as "loving."

Would you like your kids, spouse, employee etc. to worship you? Did He not say do unto others as you would have done to you?

It is all insane, inane to me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Silly experiment, interesting outcome
Posted by: SayBlade on Nov 17, 2007 8:14 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While this experiment is a rather silly one, I concede it did illustrate the ridiculousness of literalism.

It also illustrates the absurdity of designating this collection of Hebrew and Greek writings, called The Bible, as science or history.

The writings say much about the writer's ideas about living as a human being in the world and what lies beyond. The beyond includes how we ought to relate to nature, neighbour, friend and family which is why the social and economic justice movement embraces these writings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fear God...yeah...I now undersand why!
Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal on Nov 17, 2007 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For far too long priests and preachers have completely ignored the vicious criminal acts that the Bible promotes.

The so called “God” of the Bible makes Osama Bin Laden look like a Boy Scout. This God, according to the Bible, is directly responsible for many mass-murders, rapes, pillage, plunder, slavery, child abuse and killing, not to mention the killing of unborn children. I have included a few references to the Biblical passages below, so grab your Bible and follow along:

It always amazes me how many times this God orders the killing of innocent people even after the Ten Commandments said “Thou shall not kill”.

For example, God kills 70,000 innocent people because David ordered a census of the people (1 Chronicles 21).

God also orders the destruction of 60 cities so that the Israelites can live there. He orders the killing of all the men, women, and children of each city, and the looting of all of value (Deuteronomy 3).

He orders another attack and the killing of “all the living creatures of the city: men and women, young, and old, as well as oxen sheep, and asses” (Joshua 6).

In Judges 21, He orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married. When they wanted more virgins, God told them to hide alongside the road and when they saw a girl they liked, kidnap her and forcibly rape her and make her your wife!

Just about every other page in the Old Testament has God killing somebody! In 2 Kings 10:18-27, God orders the murder of all the worshipers of a different god in their very own church! In total God kills 371,186 people directly and orders another 1,862,265 people murdered.

The God of the Bible also allows slavery, including selling your own daughter as a sex slave (Exodus 21:1-11), child abuse (Judges 11:29-40 and Isaiah 13:16), and bashing babies against rocks (Hosea 13:16 & Psalms 137:9).

I could go on...and will for any "good" Christian that requests it.

THE BIBLE IS THE MOST GENOCIDAL BOOK IN HISTORY.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ummmm... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
» As usual... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
» RE: Ummmm... Posted by: davidg
» RE: Capone couldn't be forgiven Posted by: UnEasyOne
If you can amend a constitution, can't you amend a Bible?
Posted by: Sojourner on Nov 17, 2007 9:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One could look at American history and find laws that establish churches, that only allow rich white men to vote, etc.

The Pilgrims had a big to-do with the Mass Bay Puritans in 1630-something about dancing around a maypole. That opposition didn't last long--been in a strip bar lately?

The Old Testament represents a similar historical process. How about "And they shall beat their swords into plowshares"? We ought to give that a try sometime. Not likely.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

thekidde
Posted by: thekidde on Nov 17, 2007 10:08 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, "proscribe" means to ban. Other than that, this should not be news to anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together regardless of their religious affiliation. Religions, all of them (and there have been a bunch over thousands of years), are by nature bigoted, prejudiced, based on supernatural (and very derivative) magical crap, and finally, very destructive of human intercourse. Take a look at fundamentalists as well as middle-of-the-road religious believers. To a person they believe in foolish claptrap, silly, self-serving and exclusionary bullshit. Why anyone would subscribe to this crap, aside from praying to win the lotto and "living" forever, is beyond me. Get a life - now - this is not a fucking dress rehearsal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Something New?
Posted by: aberdeen on Nov 17, 2007 10:37 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the author of this book had bothered to read the New Testament very carefully, he could have saved himeself a lot of trouble and AlterNet, a lot of egg on their face.

According to the New Testament, God gave his law to prove that human beings can't obey God and thus, need forgiveness from God. I've never met or heard of anyone who can obey God's law. That is the entire point of the New Testament as to why Jesus died. If human beings are "good", then why did Jesus end up crucified? Somehow, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and the rest of the modern atheist crowd fail to adequately explain that.

According to the Bible, God challenges all conservative Christian liars, moderates, liberals, progressives, agnostics, atheists and authors and readers of AlterNet, to prove him wrong. Try to love your neighbor as yourself all of the time and see how well you do.

Imagine that, even modern progressives and atheists somehow, seem to come up all little short in the obedience-ability department. Go figure...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Gee, Thank you, God Posted by: Suz
» RE: Something New? Posted by: donl51
Jesus upheld all 613 commandments
Posted by: vasumurti on Nov 17, 2007 10:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Christians think they are no longer under Mosaic Law, because Paul referred to his background as a former Pharisee and previous adherence to Mosaic Law as "so much garbage."

Nothing in the synoptic gospels suggests a break with Judaism. Jesus was called "Rabbi," meaning "Master" or "Teacher," 42 times in the gospels. Jesus' ministry was a rabbinic one. He went to the synagogue (Matthew 12:9), taught in the synagogues (Matthew 4:23, 13:54; Mark 1:39), expressed concern for Jairus, "one of the rulers of the synagogue" (Mark 5:36) and it "was his custom" to go to the synagogue (Luke 4:16).

Jesus himself said, "Do not suppose I have come to abolish the Law and the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill...till heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or tittle pass from the Law till all is fulfilled. Whoever, therefore, breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven...unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:17-20)

Jesus also upheld the Torah in Luke 16:17: "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest portion of the Law to become invalid."

Nor do these words refer merely to the Ten Commandments. Jesus meant the entire Torah: 613 commandments. When a man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, Jesus replied, "You know the commandments." He quoted not just the Ten Commandments, but a commandment from Leviticus 19:13 as well: "Do not defraud." (Mark 10:17-22)

Jesus' disciples were once accused by the scribes and Pharisees of violating rabbinical tradition (Matthew 15:1-2; Mark 7:5), but not biblical law. Jesus never says anywhere in the entire New Testament that the Law is abolished; this was Paul's theology.

Sometimes Christians cite Matthew 7:12, where Jesus says "Do unto others..." and this "covers" the Law and the prophets. But Jesus was merely repeating in the positive what Rabbi Hillel taught a generation earlier. No one took Hillel's words to mean the Law had been abolished--why should we assume this of Jesus?

If Jesus really did come to abolish the Law and the prophets, Simon (Peter) would not have resisted a divine command to kill and eat both "clean" and "unclean" animals (Acts 10), nor would there have been a debate in the early church as to what extent the gentiles were to observe Mosaic Law (Acts 15). When Paul visited the church at Jerusalem, James and the elders told him all its members were "zealous for the Law," and they were worried because they heard rumors Paul was preaching against Mosaic Law (Acts 21). None of these events would have happened had Jesus really come to abolish the Law and the prophets.

Paul says if anyone has confidence in the Law, "I am ahead of him."

Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who said he did not come to abolish the Law and the prophets? Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who said whoever sets aside even the least of the Law's demands shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:17-19)?

Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who taught that following the commandments of God is the only way to eternal life (Mark 10:17-22)? Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus who said that it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest portion of the Law to become invalid (Luke 16:17)?

Paul may have regarded the Law as "so much garbage," but it should be obvious JESUS DIDN'T THINK THE LAW WAS "GARBAGE"!

Christians believe in Paul, not Jesus. Bertrand Russell called Paul the "inventor" of Christianity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Only One Law is Necessary
Posted by: Libertine on Nov 17, 2007 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Treat others as you would wish to be treated", aka "the Golden Rule". All else is superfluous.

If this is all you take away from the Bible and ignore all else, you've gotten the main point and have done well.

It's interesting to note that this sentiment is expressed by nearly every religion and ethical tradition.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Paul taught a different theology than Jesus
Posted by: vasumurti on Nov 17, 2007 11:14 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jesus repeatedly upheld Mosaic Law (Matthew 5:17-19; Mark 10:17-22; Luke 16:17), as did his disciples (see Acts 10, 15, and 21), whereas Paul taught that the Law was abolished, and he gave his own set of moral instructions to be followed instead.

Paul taught his followers to bless their persecutors and not curse them (Romans 12:14), to care for their enemies by providing them with food and drink (12:20), and to pay their taxes and obey all earthly governments (13:1-7).

Paul mentioned giving all his belongings to feed the hungry (I Corinthians 13:3), and taught giving to the person in need (Ephesians 4:23). He told his followers it was wrong to take their conflicts before non-Christian courts rather than before the saints. (I Corinthians 6:1)

Paul taught that "it is good for a man not to touch a woman," i.e., it is best to be celibate, but because of prevailing immoralities, marriage is allowed. Divorce is permissible only in the case of an unbeliever demanding separation. (I Corinthians 7)

Paul repeatedly attacked sexual immorality:

"This is God's will--your sanctification, that you keep yourselves from sexual immorality, that each of you learn how to take his own wife in purity and honor, not in lustful passion like the gentiles who have no knowledge of God." (I Thessalonians 4:3-5)

Paul told his followers not to associate with sexually immoral people (I Corinthians 5:9-12, 6:15,18). He opposed homosexuality (Romans 1:24-27) and incest (I Corinthians 5:1). He taught that fornicators, idolaters, adulterers and robbers will not inherit the kingdom of God. (I Corinthians 6:9-10)

Paul condemned wickedness, immorality, depravity, greed, murder, quarreling, deceit, malignity, gossip, slander, insolence, pride (Romans 1:29-30), drunkenness, carousing, debauchery, jealousy (Romans 13:13), sensuality, magic arts, animosities, bad temper, selfishness, dissensions, envy (Galatians 5:19-21; greediness (Ephesians 4:19; Colossians 3:5), foul speech, anger, clamor, abusive language, malice (Ephesians 4:29-32), dishonesty (Colossians 3:13), materialism (I Timothy 6:6-11), conceit, avarice, boasting and treachery. (II Timothy 3:2-4)

Paul told the gentiles to train themselves for godliness, to practice self-control and lead upright, godly lives (Galatians 5:23; I Timothy 4:7; II Timothy 1:7; Titus 2:11-12). He instructed them to ALWAYS pray constantly. (I Thessalonians 5:17)

Paul praised love, joy, peace, kindness, generosity, fidelity and gentleness (Galatians 5:22-23). He told his followers to conduct themselves with humility and gentleness (Ephesians 4:2), to speak to one another in psalms and hymns; to sing heartily and make music to the Lord. (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16)

Paul wrote further that women should cover their heads while worshipping, and that long hair on males is dishonorable. (I Corinthians 11:5-14) According to Paul, Christian women are to dress modestly and prudently, and are not to be adorned with braided hair, gold or pearls or expensive clothes. (I Timothy 2:9)

I'm not saying Christians should all be circumcised and following Mosaic Law. I'm merely saying Christian doctrine for the past 2000 years has been based on a misunderstanding.

My friend Rankin Fisher, a former Missionary Baptist minister, quoted a Methodist minister friend of his as having admitted, "We (Christians) aren't really following Jesus. We're following Paul."

And my problem really isn't with Christians not being able to follow Jesus or Paul, but with the hypocrisy of saying "I believe," while ignoring everything else their religion dictates when it suits them.

Why not just be secular, like everyone else?

We really live in a secular society; people just pay lip service to religious ideals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: those clowns in gowns Posted by: davidg
the bible is totally irrelevant in today's world
Posted by: madaha on Nov 17, 2007 11:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
his gimmicky experiment just proves that. A better book on the subject is The End of Biblical Studies by Hector Avalos. Now let's move on as a society and stop trying to force a collection of documents from a backward, tribal culture from 3,000 years ago onto today's world. No one's trying to live their life according to Homer's Iliad, which makes just as much sense!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Senior Cynic
Posted by: rdodell on Nov 17, 2007 11:28 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When any religion, organization, government or person demands total, blind loyalty, unreasonable personal sacrifice and total, unquestioning faith to the death, BEWARE!!!
It is highly unlikely that such an agenda is
in the best interest of either the individual "believer" or of humanity in general.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What the hell is wrong with buying beer on Sunday?
Posted by: eddie torres on Nov 17, 2007 11:56 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jacobs: "A literal interpretation of the Bible -- both Jewish and Christian -- shapes American policies on the Middle East, homosexuality, stem cell research, education, abortion -- right down to rules about buying beer on Sunday."

Sunday = football, football = TV, TV = beer. Is Jacobs saying the Bible is un-Americun? Well, let's just take a little look-sie at Jacobs' bona fides...

Jacobs is using "a pocketful of tiny white pebbles in Central Park" to accomplish God's work in Manhattan - the Temple of Adam (Smith). Are those regulation-size stones that Jacobs is using in his stoning operations?

I think not.

Stones for home and building foundations are specifically rated at "8 and 10 cubits" (1 Kings 7:8-11), while stones rated for use as tomb doors must be hand-hewn and "great" (1 Peter 2:4-8).

Stones for use in the establishment of Zion may be rejected stones that builders and contractors cast aside, but still have landscaping value because they "...make men stumble... for they stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do" (1 Peter 2:4-8).

Mesha, the king of Moab who rebelled against the king of Israel (2 Kings 3:5), recorded his rebellion on "The Moabite Stone," which is roughly 4 feet high, 2 feet wide, and 14 inches thick. Europeans have re-measured it at 1.15 meters high and 60 to 68 centimeters wide.

That's a whole lot of stone measurements that Jacobs ignores in his quest for biblical perfection.

Heed this ancient Hebrew rule of thumb, Jacobs: "If ain't Kashrut, it ain't Kosher, so you better Karet..."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Beer is bad, m'kay (Corinthians?) Posted by: eddie torres
» What kind of beer? Posted by: SayBlade
There's a book
Posted by: VannaLaRoche on Nov 17, 2007 2:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's called Every Man [or Woman!] a Profit: Power and Wealth With One Hand On The Bible and One Finger In The Air.

There's a new-age spiritualist version, too. /s

Like we need more preachers in this world of any stripe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's hope we can end religion before religion causes our extinction
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Nov 17, 2007 2:59 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's hope that religions, all of them, are on their last legs. What do you do
when you are describing the extinction of Homo Sapiens due to global warming
or asteroid impact and some insane person says: "God wouldn't let that happen"?
Somebody suggested saying: "Noah, how long can you tread water?" Flaw one
in that argument is that, in the legend, Noah survives. Flaw two is that we have
to do the entire thing ourselves. There is no god to warn us or tell us how to
survive. [It was really the ice age, not a flood, it was a cave, not a boat, and the
animals entered the cave because people were unable to keep them out. How
else would primitive people who had never seen ice describe an ice age?]

If religion is ended and replaced by science, democracies will have a much better
chance of reaching reasonable decisions on subjects like global warming. Note
that science is NOT a religion. Science is a method or a procedure or a process,
not a fixed set of beliefs. Student scientists repeat the major experiments of their
science and prove to themselves that the professor is right, no matter how much
they don't want to believe him or her.

If religion is not ended, we are much more likely to go extinct soon because
religion eliminates or limits the possibility of rational thought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If I thought I was designed by a god, I would sue him for malpractice
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Nov 17, 2007 3:04 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seagulls live to 150 actual
calendar years without pain or visible aging. They just get clumsy and
eventually crash land very badly. Scaled up to human size that would be 300
years. Only a little genetic engineering would be needed to achieve that. If I
thought I were designed by a god, I would sue Him for malpractice. Only
evolution could do such a rotten job. The bones + ligaments of the knee joint look
like something some 5 year old made out of sticks and scotch tape. It surely
couldn't have been designed by an intelligent designer with a degree in
engineering. The human backbone is a suspension bridge stood on end. Not
even a 5 year old would be stupid enough to do that, but evolution did. Why do I
feel hungry when my blood sugar is high?

The human brain is worse. See "The Accidental Mind" by David J. Linden, 2007
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Religion is caused by the extreme
klugeyness of the "designed" by evolution brain. In particular, the narrative
creation system cannot be turned off. It generates false narratives that are
believed by the generating person. This is seen in experiments done in the
laboratory. This book has the best explanation of resistance to evolution: "There
has also been an assumption that if one accepts the idea that life developed without
divine intervention, it necessarily follows that all aspects of religious thought must
be rejected. Those who take this line of argument to extremes argue that when
religious thought is rejected moral and social codes will degenerate and "the law of
the jungle" will be all that is left. It is imagined by religious fundamentalists that
those who do not share their particular religious faith are incapable of leading
moral lives." These suppositions are not true many times over. Linden later
mentions that the creationists [intelligent design advocates] are exactly 180
degrees wrong rather than just a little wrong. Being exactly wrong, they are
unable to unlearn their error. See Sociobiology or Sciobio.

A human re-designer couldn't make things worse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is no possibility of finding truth in the bible.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Nov 17, 2007 3:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you want to know the TRUTH about life, the universe, humanity or anything
else, your only real choice is to go to college and get a degree in science. If you
want to know where the universe came from, you will need a post doctoral degree
in physics. If you want to know how mankind originated, get a degree in biology.
If you want to know about morals and ethics, study sociobiology. Science is a
method, NOT a religion.

As a sophomore undergraduate student in Physics, your homework may include
figuring out when the second coming would be required, assuming that the bible
was 100% true in the year zero. That is, when would the bible be down to 50%
true? The popular and professors' answer in 1965 was the year 500. The true
answer: A friend of mine was born and raised in Budapest, Hungary. As an adult,
he came here and stayed. After 25 years, he visited his home town of Budapest.
He was unable to communicate with his high school classmates because the
Hungarian language had changed so much. The correct answer is less than 25
years. The first gospel was not written down until 50 years after the alleged
events and then in a different language. The people who told the story were at
about the same level of civilization as "wild Indians", I mean Native Americans
before Columbus got here. We have all played or seen played the game called
"Telephone" in which a story is passed down a line of re-tellers. By the Sixth re-
telling, the story has no resemblance to the original. The gospel story had to have
been re-told at least 6 times before it was mis-translated the first time. [Note that
whoever wrote it down the first time was free to write whatever he wanted to.
The storytellers were illiterate and unable to check his written text by reading it.
Besides that, he wrote in Greek rather than Aramaic.] Conclusion: There is no
truth anywhere in the bible, and there never was.

ALL of the jurisdictions that were formerly in the jurisdiction of religion have
been taken over by Science. There is no longer a need to debate the issue.
Religion is an unfortunate side effect of a major and ongoing step in evolution.
[Not that evolution has a predetermined direction. We could devolve, but we have
to get over religion or go extinct. "God" will not save us from the consequences
of global warming or an asteroid impact because there is no such critter as "god.".]
Ethics and morality are instinctive, not derived from religion. Female instinct has
greater force in morality than male instinct because the female is in command of
the sexual encounter. Look up "Sociobiology". The origin of the Universe is the
subject of Cosmology which is part of astronomy which is part of the science of
physics.
Religion is a SCAM. ANY religion, there are 10,000 to choose from at any one
time. People keep inventing new religions [for the benefit of the "prophet," of
course] and forgetting other religions. ALL preachers, priests, imams, rabbis,
iatolas, etc. belong in jail for "grand theft, bunko type".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Religion is caused by insanity.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Nov 17, 2007 3:50 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good books on religion:

"The Neuropsychological bases of god beliefs" Dr. Michael A. Persinger
MD, psychiatrist 1987 "Religious people are just like my temporal lobe
patients"

"The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bi-Cameral Mind"
Julian Jaynes Professor, Harvard University 1976
"Religious people are just like schizophrenic patients"

"The Psychiatric Interview in Clinical Practice" Roger A. MacKinnon,
M.D., Robert Michels, M.D. W. B. Saunders Co. 1971
"Religiosity is a common symptom [of] schizophrenic patients"

"The God delusion" by Richard Dawkins. "Religion is caused by a kind
of computer virus that infects the living computer, the human brain."

"The Science of Good and Evil" by Michael Shermer, 2004
"Morality and Ethics are now in the jurisdiction of Science and greatly
improved thereby."

"God: The Failed Hypothesis" byVictor Stenger Scientific proof that god
does not exist.

"The Accidental Mind" by David J. Linden, 2007. No INTELLIGENT
designer could have had anything to do with such a klugey brain.

"Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism" edited by Petto &
Godfrey, 2007. The ID and creationist crowd are trying to do away with science.
They see science as a "godless religion." Creationists say that training in science
is brainwashing. The creationists are wrong. The creationists are seriously
mentally ill. Science is a method, not a religion.

Other authors: Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens

These are relevant because you are trying to deal with insanity, stupidity
dishonesty, political conniving and a brain that is a kluge at best. Resistance to
evolution is resistance to all science. Let the religionists go live in the stone age,
where they belong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Brains "designed" by evolution are kluges [very badly designed]
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Nov 17, 2007 3:56 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The Accidental Mind" by David J. Linden, 2007 Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press. Religion is caused by the extreme klugeyness of the "designed"
by evolution brain. In particular, the narrative creation system cannot be turned
off. It generates false narratives that are believed by the generating person. This is
seen in experiments done in the laboratory. This book has the best explanation of
resistance to evolution: "There has also been an assumption that if one accepts the
idea that life developed without divine intervention, it necessarily follows that all
aspects of religious thought must be rejected. Those who take this line of
argument to extremes argue that when religious thought is rejected moral and
social codes will degenerate and "the law of the jungle" will be all that is left. It is
imagined by religious fundamentalists that those who do not share their particular
religious faith are incapable of leading moral lives." These suppositions are not
true many times over. Linden later mentions that the creationists [intelligent
design advocates] are exactly 180 degrees wrong rather than just a little wrong.
Being exactly wrong, they are unable to unlearn their error. See Sociobiology or
Sciobio.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Religion can also spearhead social change
Posted by: vasumurti on Nov 17, 2007 6:32 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with Reverend Marc Wessels, Executive Director of the International Network for Religion and Animals (INRA), who said on Earth Day 1990:

"It is a fact that no significant social reform has yet taken place in this country without the voice of the religious community being heard. The endeavors of the abolition of slavery; the women's suffrage movement; the emergence of the pacifist tradition during World War I; the struggles to support civil rights, labor unions, and migrant farm workers; and the anti-nuclear and peace movements have all succeeded in part because of the power and support of organized religion. Such authority and energy is required by individual Christians and the institutional church today if the liberation of animals is to become a reality."

The Rev. Steve Keplinger recently said:

"We are on the verge of not only destroying all of God's creatures, but we are now beginning to
realize, finally, that this is threatening humanity's existence too.

I would dearly love to tell you as an Episcopal priest that it is the secular world that has caused this broken relationship between ourselves and the rest of creation. But the truth of the matter is that this is our fault, the religious leaders of today's world.

"We have not interpreted our sacred texts for our present day situation. We have not followed the example of our predecessors of identifying those most abused in our culture; and then taking the necessary steps to change the way of thinking that causes that abuse.

"Why have we not responded when the pain and suffering we have perpetrated on animal populations is so obvious? From my own Christian tradition's perspective, my best guess is that it is an accident of history. When Christianity first came in contact with indigenous groups like the Celts and the Druids who saw nature as God, church leaders were apparently so fearful of pantheism that they began speaking of God only as transcendent, as totally separate from us. All those descriptions in our sacred text that describe God as being intimately with us were buried in favor of a God far away. This seems a bit absurd for a religion based on a God that became one of us. But that's what we did.

"So while Colossians says, 'There is only one Christ - he is everything and he is in everything.' , Christianity decided to reject this notion altogether. We would totally break our relationship with the animals and the rest of God's creation.

"The time has now come to recapture the God of all creation. The time has come for us to identify the animals as the ones in our time that are being rejected, oppressed and segregated. Then we, like the religious leaders that have come before us, must be the impetus for creating a gigantic shift in our culture that convinces the world that we must be in relationship with our animals and all of God's creation again. We must change our worldview entirely.

"Animals, my friends, are not a resource. They deserve to live in dignity and we are called by each of our faith traditions to bring that dignity to them.

"This Religious Proclamation for Animal Compassion is, in my mind, the perfect first step in bringing this seismic change about. In forming it, we brought together leaders from faith traditions that have recently been polarized from one another. That, in itself is so critical in today's fragmented society. But even more importantly, this Proclamation focuses us on the task ahead.

"Every age has a deep calling to bring about a wholly new worldview. This is the evangelism of our time. It is time for us to hear not just the cry of God's people, but to hear the cry of God's animals, of God's creation. Let us save the animals and each other by bringing this world back into relationship with all of God's creation."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Being raised pentecostal and almost converted to Judaism...
Posted by: abstractedaway on Nov 17, 2007 9:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...Before I said to hell with it, start with the material and empiric basics, I found this article downright charming.

There are good rules in that book, but then, it is never more true that more laws mean more crime. Being raised to take this book totally literally can be frightful. One stray thought about a good-looking woman and there you are, a miserable sinner again. There's no end to the guilt. Fundamentalists are positive they need their faith in part because it's convinced them that they're awful people by default.

I'd like everyone to read this. We live in a world with people who thump a book that they don't themselves understand. Taking it seriously requires that you understand the culture that it came from, which is such a big ride into history and anthropology as would amaze many in the modern day. If you read, say, the Schocken translation of the Pentateuch, you begin to get just a hint of how differently that old culture thought. Modern people are taking a buffet approach to the remains of that culture, and what they choose says more about them than about what happened thousands of years ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: Religion can also spearhead social change
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Nov 17, 2007 9:22 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not any more. Not after religion brought us George W. Bush, the
Iraq Oil War, the Republican War on Science, the Republican war
on social security and retirement, the Republican push for the
extinction of Homo Sapiens by means of global warming and on
and on. Religion is the relinquishment of rational thought. We
need a great deal of rational thought and Science to avoid our own
extinction. We need nuclear power to replace coal fired power
plants as the biggest and first wedge to cut CO2 production. If
we don't drastically cut CO2 production, we go extinct in about
200 years. I don't know whether vasumurti and Reverend Marc
Wessels were campaigning against nuclear weapons or nuclear
power plants, but they may not have distinguished them. We
need nuclear weapons to defend our whole planet from giant
impacts of asteroids and comets, like the one that killed the
dinosaurs. Nuclear bombs are the only effective defense we have
at this time to protect our planet. Of course I prefer peace on
earth. You can find more of my comments on these subjects at:
http://www.alternet.org/environment/61872/
http://www.alternet.org/environment/60773/
http://www.alternet.org/environment/62365/
http://www.alternet.org/environment/59780
http://www.alternet.org/environment/59416
http://www.alternet.org/environment/52799/
http://www.alternet.org/environment/52222
http://www.alternet.org/environment/54198
http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/51566
http://www.alternet.org/environment/56125/
http://www.alternet.org/environment/53113
http://www.alternet.org/environment/63019
http://www.alternet.org/environment/52799
http://www.alternet.org/environment/57532/
http://www.alternet.org/environment/61108/
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/59052
http://www.alternet.org/story/57530/
http://www.alternet.org/environment/62927/
http://www.alternet.org/environment/63842
http://www.alternet.org/environment/63261/
and other places.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Follow the cultural trails....
Posted by: talkville on Nov 18, 2007 5:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One crumb: A Supreme Court Case of 1963: Abington School District; and it's impact on higher education especially in human, literary and other cultural studies.

Another crumb: From the 60's: "Post-modern" imports from France, e.g. Foucault. Again mostly impacting human, literary and other cultural studies.

Another crumb: Head-long immersion by cinema, tv, media in general in these "novel" new interpretations of reality; again mostly impacting human, literary and other studies.

Soon economics and politics get enthused.

Soon Ascetic Practices are all the rage -- self chosen or imposed by others. Therapies of every conceivable aspect of living are all the rage -- self chosen or imposed by others. It's all about "Fitness" (read: Conformity)--self-chosen or imposed by others.

And now today, 40 plus years later, it's no longer self-chosen (as the author of this article attempted to do in his experiment); it's imposed by others on each of us -- whether we agree or not. And Patriarchs and Patriarchy want to re-patriate themselves. And the ones these days have a pretty mean and vicious streak and really, really love Punishment and Revenge. As in the days of the 1st centuries (seculums)of the Christian Era (another seculum), it's all about Discipline. And Milton Friedman theorized it imposed on the entire planet by IMF, WTO.

And by now, it's "trickled down", economically speaking, to the ravings of such as Limbaugh and O'Reilly and the MSM generally -- other tiny patriarchs of a sort... . Only their ascetic practices will do. These are our new commodities; manufactured Heroes, Leaders, Characters, Virtues and the lot.

All of which leads to a popular consultant and writer named Frank Luntz,advisor of a special strain of Republicans and writer of a fairly popular Theory (based on scientistic "empirical" analyses) titled "The Power of Words"

And one particularly power-full word: Hypostasis and it's close cousin Reification.

Our so-called "culture" has been maneuvered and engineered onto the field of "Faith"; that is, Tautology.

And Hansel and Gretel still try to wind themselves back to their Conservative "Golden Ages", dragging the rest of us with them usually by Force (read: Discipline)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not just Thursday--
Posted by: WitchyNy on Nov 18, 2007 8:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Monday-Moon Goddess Day
Tuesday-Viking God-Tiki
Wednesday-Viking God-Oden-Wooden's Day
Thursday-Thor's Day-Viking God
Friday-Freida Day-Viking Goddess
Saturday-Saturn Day-Roman God
Sunday-Sun God-NOT son of God.

Also 'Christmas' is actually based on the winter Solstice-for the shortest day of the year.
And the 'Christmas Tree'-comes from the Druids who worshipped Trees.
Christ is actually supposed to have been born in the springtime. The Christian Church just overtook the existing Winter Solstice holiday-(Holy Day).
And Easter-comes from East-star- a pagan Goddess of the spring Solstice.
The ritual killing of Jesus-comes from the old traditional yearly killing of the human King. Perhaps we should consider returning to this if it prevents war. I would be willing for our country to sacrifice President Bush....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keith Richard Radford Jr: We were left with 2 Laws by Christ
Posted by: KeithRichardRadfordJr on Nov 18, 2007 8:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just before Christ was taken into custody in the garden after the fight which brought them all to there senses he left us with two statements to follow provided we chose. He came here to abolish the vast disparity of law. He said put God before all other and love your neighbors as your self. Now that some are looking at the world population as neighbors, How important is his words to us? Having a whole book summed up in a few words is God speaking.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An agnostic's perspective
Posted by: lotus23 on Nov 18, 2007 10:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am an agnostic, or perhaps just simply non-religious. This article gives 600 reasons why I have not joined any religion. I do however like religious art and architecture. I'm moved by Josquin motets, Sufi devotional music, and shamanistic ritual music. There is much to be said for ecstasy, bliss, elation, and other "irrational" states of mind (which makes me empathize with religious adherents). Similarly intense "irrationality" can be said of hardcore punk and drum-n-bass. Of course, irrationality in art/music is not the same as irrationality in poltics.

For all the violence and wars done in the name of religion, let's not forget that our atheist prodigal-son-lefty Christopher Hitchens has been one of the staunchest Iraq war supporters and belligerent hawks. (In a debate with in Chris Hedges, in a fit of rage he declared that the "enemies of civilization....should be beaten". I guess waterboarding is Ay-OK, Hitch?)

I don't blame this on his atheism, which is simply defined as a lack of espousal of religion, rather than a centralized belief system. Hitchens' pseudo-jingoism has more to do with Enlightenment-turned-Eurocentric colonialism. The point is Hitch's atheism hasn't spared him from the same irrational and destructive impulses found in jihadists and Christian Zionists.

None of the atheists I've ever known have been this bellicose. They look upon the vagaries of religious fanatism with dismay, befuddlement, and occasional amusement. They fear the creeping theocracy, the erosion of laicité, and the encroachment on religious law upon civil liberties. They roll their eyes contemptuously at the de rigeur religious pandering of presidential candidates. As an agnostic, I have the same reactions.

Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkins do make some good points. Dawkins seems to me the most persuasive of the three.

Like it or not, religion isn't going away anytime soon. What to do about it, I don't know. Perhaps milk it for all the liberation theology that we can?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

According to the bible, who has killed more people, god or the devil?
Posted by: Lesha on Nov 18, 2007 11:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the bible we read of god drowning his own creation(the flood) in the Noah story, fire and brimstone (Sodom and Gomorrah), more drowning in the story of Moses vs Pharaoh and the many more so-called god sanctioned killings that various characters in the scriptures have profess to committing in the name of god.

It appears to me that god according to the bible has killed more people than all of the mass murderers that have existed on record (combined).

There doesn't seem to be any reference in the bible of the devil killing anybody.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Devil... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
» RE: The Devil... Posted by: AppleMommie AZ
» RE: They were... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
ANNETTE
Posted by: AKRASS65 on Nov 18, 2007 5:17 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is very interesting take on the Bible, but the author is wrong! There is are only 10 laws set by God. Simple, easy, understandable and easy to follow.

They are the 10 COMMANDMENTS. I believe that if the author takes the time to re-think his essay, he will be forced to re-write.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Maybe it is because of the PENALTIES... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
What (any) religion is about
Posted by: GPFrank on Nov 18, 2007 5:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I had written this before I came upon your great humorist:

Last night I picked up on a blog from AlterNet about Charles tayler's new book, "A Secular Age"
Wondering how the bloggers got ahold of it before we could but that is beside the subject.
Reading the reviewer's comments on Taylor's views on religion and the continued seeking of
people for religions where we are barely becoming acquainted with all the diversity out there;
now that for the most, the enlightenment has driven out superstition:
I was sitting in Meeting this morning, while several people made eulogic comments about
a teacher who just died, while I was annoyed because I didn't know the person and these
frequent messages were interrupting my thoughts;
then recalling something a therapist says about the experience of the Departed not letting
go because of unresolved issues;
The whole import of Taylor's talking about all religion all at once in its diversity:
from the Chinese ancestor worship to the Talmud saying Rabbi A says this while Rabbi
B says that: I stated the question out loud, "Just what is religion all about?" and then
the answer comes,
"Religion is about what dead people are trying to tell us."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Read This Bible by Aldous Huxley and Blow Your Mind: The Doors of Perception
Posted by: sofla100 on Nov 18, 2007 5:54 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Under certain circumstances, the most scientific of all can quickly change into the "most religious." But, not religious in the sense of the Bible or something like that, but "religious" in terms of direct experience. If your mind exits your body and is floating around seeing things, what do you say then? This then, is the real religion. This stuff in books is pale by comparison

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Jesus thought we could follow 613 laws why sacrifice Himself?
Posted by: chief of okeefe on Nov 18, 2007 8:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I thought he gave himself up on the cross knowing full well we could not obey 613, or 10, or even 2 Laws?

It is the sacrifice of His perfect body and the pouring out of His blood that saves us, not our obedience to Laws.

Every time we break a Law, He has to take another blow from the whip (or nail to His hand). So we do our best to reduce our sin, in His name.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Fantasy Posted by: Lesha
The opposite of Faith is REASON
Posted by: drblack on Nov 19, 2007 3:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reason is the opposite of faith. Reason is what intellectually mature and honest folk follow.
Fear comes before faith. It is fear which causes faith in superstitions.
Faith is a drug which helps people who cannot accept the reality of life get through the day and feel good about their faults.
The scientific method is so far superior to superstitions like, christianity, islam ...all theistic religions.
History is full of examples of scientifically superior societies taking control of those cultures rampant with superstitions.
People were and would be decent to each other without religion. There is nothing positive that religion has given to society...excepting quaint ways of drss, and living and a whole lot of hate and prejudice.
It is time for the human race to grow up and get rid of its pacifiers and security blankets.
Only a few people who profess to believe in god have read the bible and fewer still understand it.
Adding to the confusion is the fact that the bible was translated and edited many times over the centuries....and how many self proclaimed christians have read any of the older versions written in languages other than their native tongue? None I have met.
Theistic religion is nonsense and superstition...god is a myth.
The religious extremists in the USA are a far greater threat to American Freedom and Prosperity then any foreign religious fanatics.
If the USA doesn't get back to scientific excellence we will be owned by China.....even more so than Bill Clinton and Bush have sold us out(and Hillary and all Republicans except Paul will sell us out more as President)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Share the land and resources?
Posted by: peacelf on Nov 19, 2007 7:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I understand what Jacobs was trying to accomplish by showing that the Torah is outdated and fundamentalism makes no sense in modern society. Well, the spirit of the Torah is not outdated, as the OT prophets show us through their message and actions. The prophets spoke out against imperialism.

Many people follow the traditions of the prophets of the Old Testament and Jesus by speaking out against imperialism. People like Cornell West, Michael Eric Dyson, John Dominic Crossan, John Shelby Spong, Martin Luther King Jr. Gandhi, and many many lesser known people. Why did Jacobs ignore this aspect of the OT?

Jacobs missed the laws in Leviticus 25 that states God owns all the land, that it should be divided up equally among the people and "cannot be sold into perpetuity," to ensure everyone has their fair share. If it is sold, Leviticus lays out rules for the return of the land to its "tenant." This is the basic law that the prophets sought to restore. However, imperialists have other designs.

The original plan for Judea was not to have earthly rulers, but that God was their only ruler. Human rulers were too easily corrupted. This all proved true when the Kings became corrupted and taxed the people into poverty, or invading imperialist armies took over land and resoources. The prophets all admonished the actions of those kings with imperialistic goals and told them God would destroy their empire. And, as every knows, God does destroy all empires: all empires fall.

In Jesus' day, it was the Roman imperialists. In our day, it's the american imperialists. However, living in and benefitting from the empire is different than being one of the conquered, oppressed and colonized, like Jesus was in his day. It's difficult to be critical of the system if you benefit from cheap products, even if those exploited products and resources came on the backs of poor people throughout the world.

To be critical of the system is to step outside the system, indeed, to see imperialism from the vantage point of the oppressed. To understand slavery, you wouldn't go to the slave master for his opinion. You go to the slave. Read a slave narrative, then you'll understand slavery.

My point is that Jacobs' year long adventure may have taught us a bit about fundmantalism, but it surely could have taught us and him much more had he looked at the prophets of the OT.

peace

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

long live the Flying Speghetti Monster
Posted by: karyse on Nov 19, 2007 7:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yay.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gee
Posted by: opeluboy on Nov 19, 2007 3:53 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, that was one of the most ignorant, ill-informed pieces I have read here in some time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gee...Truth... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
» RE: Gee Posted by: AppleMommie AZ
Believe This
Posted by: penobscotdziekuje@yahoo.com on Nov 20, 2007 9:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Finally, someone with the wherewithall to post a honest and funny account of living by the bible in modern society.
Jacobs was funny and poignant, too, when describing the numerous laws we try to live by. Six hundred! Man, factor that into city, county, state and federal laws; don't you think we're a lawed-out society? I don't know what to believe these days.
And in the U.S.A., politics and religion are becoming more intertwined before our eyes. It's a lot like oil and water; two different kinds of liquids that can't mix no matter how vigorous the strokes are in the vat. Think Pat Robertson and Dennis Kucinich.
One advocates an assassination; the other peace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Exploring
Posted by: weatherking on Nov 21, 2007 3:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is fun, fundamental and informative. I've always thought that most peoples GOD is too small.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Following "proscribed" laws? Poor guy!
Posted by: KACalder on Nov 21, 2007 4:46 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Author A.J. Jacobs spent a year trying to follow the 600+ laws he found proscribed in the Bible, and concluded he's doomed to live in sin."

Well, if he was trying to follow proscribed laws, no wonder he was having a problem. "Proscribed" means forbidden, prohibited.

This article originally appeared I believe in the New York Times, of all places, with exactly the same headline with exactly the same linguistic blunder. A tangent issue, I realize, but I am being driven to distraction over the fact that even publications of the highest repute have become increasingly sloppy with the extraordinary treasure that is our language.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Aren't you glad I don't have an immortal soul?
Posted by: socrates2 on Nov 21, 2007 9:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Christ said it best, "love they neighbor as thyself." That is the greatest commandment.
Works for me. Even though I know I have no immortal soul but still have to share this existence with 8 billion fellow humans and countless other species who don't generate theoologies, teleologies and other myths to seek validation for their personal existence...
So ethics comes down to enlightened self- interest. And a dash of empathy...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

***TRYING TO LIVE LIKE THE BIBLE INSTRUCTS****
Posted by: marrieah on Nov 22, 2007 8:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I found this piece (while a matter that should be taken seriously) hilariously funny because I myself had attempted to take a like journey.

I failed miserable. I guess I shall meet Mr. Jabobs in Hell. That he lasted one year without locking himself up in a safe house, alone, I commend him.

I have come to realize the Bible is a guide book. If you try to follow it verbatum, you will become a nut case, especially in this day and age. Perhaps the people in that period had nothing to do. Afterall, to compare the life style of that period to now is like night and day, worst living on another planet perhaps.

I have personally broken at least four of the Ten Commandments. Yes I felt remorse. When I think about, I still do and try to live each day as I should. However between the time I get out of bed and go back to bed, something or someone causes me to go back to the begainning of the lines every time, every day.
I'm doomed. Oh well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How about following this suggestion?
Posted by: mhhensel on Nov 24, 2007 10:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons, and of thy daughters which the LORD thy god hath given thee..." --Deuteronomy 28:53.

"So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son." --2 Kings 6:29.

I expect this suggestion would have a certain disciplinary effect on the rest of the children that haven't been eaten.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]