Gingrich: America In Danger of Becoming Secular Atheist Country Dominated By Radical Islamists

Newt Gingrich is on a roll. Only a couple of weeks ago, Gingrich explained how his “passion” for the country led to his repeated adulterous affairs. Now, he is warning about the importance of the next presidential election — and presumably his election: “I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they’re my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American.” There you have it. Atheists and Islamic radicals will take over — a curious alliance to be sure.

What is always striking is the failure of religious conservatives to recognize that they have much more in common with radical Islamists than do liberals or secularists. Islamic radicals love the attacks on the separation of church and state, crackdowns on free speech in the arts, the anti-homosexual measures, and other morality issues pushed by some conservatives.

Gingrich also threw in the scourge of intellectuals — an issue that he picked up from Sarah Palin who made being smart a virtual sign of subversion. He reportedly warned about “college professors” who are secretly undermining Christian values. Anti-intellectualism has been the sign of radicalized movements throughout history. The Cultural Revolution was based on it. The Khmer Rouge under Pol Pot actually arrested people for wearing glasses. In our country, we have had Joe McCarthy and others who told people not to trust intellectuals — and instead follow their own agendas. We are now seeing a concerted effort to demonize intellectuals and reporters to deflect criticism over the lack of knowledge or factual support shown by some candidates.

While speaking at the Cornerstone Church with the rabidly anti-homosexual, evangelical pastor John Hagee, Gingrich heralded his own Catholic faith (ignoring Hagee’s history of intense anti-Catholicism). It seemed to work. Without mentioning his multiple wives and admitted lifelong pattern of adultery, Gingrich insisted that the election was about protecting the faith and our Judeo-Christian beliefs — adding “bravery will come from our churches, our synagogues, everyday folks. It won’t come from the elites.”

It seemed to work. One member of the congregation told Politico “I was really impressed with his sincere faith. He didn’t brag, but you can tell he’s a man of God.”

Atheists appear to be the new specter for politicians and clergy alike from Tony Blair to a wide array of U.S. conservatives. Gingrich appears to want to create a trifecta of hate with atheists, intellectuals, and Muslims. (He will occasionally throw in “mainstream media” to encourage supporters not to watch news other than Fox). That has a nice ring to it . . . Atheists, Intellectuals, and Muslims, oh my . . . one can almost see Dorothy walking hand in hand with Gingrich through the forest now.

Source: Politico

80 thoughts on “Gingrich: America In Danger of Becoming Secular Atheist Country Dominated By Radical Islamists

  1. Anti intellectualism is probably why I was demonized as a pro se litigant– that I had the courage to quote laws even though I didn’t go to law school. The Courts are OK with pro se litigants who beg for a lawyer-less divorce or who fill in forms claiming that they were discriminated against in their minimum wage job.

  2. Gingrich has nothing to offer and so has no choice but to bake up a red white and blue cake of stupid he can sell. It’s weird how someone as aggressive and smart as he claims to be can evolve into such a shameless loser. He sure has a low opinion of the American public.

  3. Religion does have something to offer society. Apparently many or most Moslems actually have very similar values to mainstream Christian churches. We should work with them in a new Ecumenical movement for world understanding and peace.

    In the 1970’s I attended two years of weekend religious education in a Lutheran church. Our minister claimed he had weekly meetings with leaders of local churches of other denominations and that in those they discussed issues involving teenagers. Our Lutheran minister took our class to meet with a Rabbi, a Catholic priest, and a Seventh Day Adventist. We also went as a group to services in the other churches.

    I saw one Ecumenical announcement of a progressive dinner where the public was invited to go from church to church visiting and eating.

    When we decided we were too sophisticated for religion and focused on the flaws of our religious institutions, we “threw out the baby with the bath water”.

  4. Without a common conviction about the course and direction of human history, it is inconceivable that foundations can be laid for a global society to which the mass of humankind can commit themselves.

    According to Bahá’í teachings, religious history is seen as an evolving educational process for mankind, through God’s messengers, which are termed Manifestations of God.

    The doctrine of Divine Manifestations is the central plank of Baha’i theology. Through this doctrine Baha’is are able to take seemingly amiable positions toward members of the major world religions, for each of their founders were manifestations of God and thus each religion has a measure of truth.

  5. anon,

    Pre-war Germany was a predominately Christian country and Hitler was a Catholic. Rwanda’s problems were primarily tribal and resultant from countries in Africa being created by imperialist powers putting arbitrary lines on a map. Christianity is also their dominant religion.

  6. anon – if you think Nazi Germany was a secular atheist country please explain “für Gott und volk”. But please study some actual history from actually knowledgeable sources before you attempt to reply. (BTW Hitler was not a vegetarian either)

    Really Newtie is just continuing the distillation of the Republican message of the last 30 years. Eventually it will consist of candidates just jumping out from behind a screen yelling “OOGA-BOOGA!” to scare the morans.

  7. To control….offer fear mongering…we are right….they are wrong….offer no solution that is reasonably attainable….and you win….control…control…

  8. Pre-war Germany was a predominately Christian country and Hitler was a Catholic.

    Adolf Hitler’s religious views have been a matter of dispute, in part because of apparently inconsistent statements made by Hitler, and those attributed to him. The relationship between Nazism and religion was complex and shifting over the period of the Nazi Party’s existence and during its years in power.

    According to historian Bradley F. Smith, Hitler’s father Alois, though nominally a Catholic, was somewhat religiously skeptical,[1] while his mother was a practicing Catholic.[2] According to historian Michael Rissmann, young Hitler was influenced in school by Pan-Germanism and began to reject the Catholic Church, receiving Confirmation only unwillingly. A boyhood friend reports that after Hitler had left home, he never again attended a Catholic Mass or received the Church’s Sacraments.[3] Georg Ritter von Schönerer’s writings and the written legacy of his Pan-German Away from Rome! movement, which agitated against the Catholic Church at the end of the 19th century, may have influenced the young Hitler.[4] At the Benedictine monastery school which Hitler attended for one school year as a child (1897–98), Hitler became top of his class, receiving 12 1’s, the highest grade, in the final quarter. He also sang in the choir at the monastery.[5]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_religious_views

  9. I am just amazed at the possible list of candidates…yeaah baby……..where’s my bently…. if they win we all get Bently’s in the garage right?

  10. According to Wikipedia,

    ” the Vatican felt it necessary to issue two encyclicals opposing the policies of Mussolini and Hitler: Non Abbiamo Bisogno in 1931 and Mit Brennender Sorge in 1937, respectively. Mit Brennender Sorge included criticisms of Nazism and racism. However, the exigencies of the geopolitical situation constrained the ability of the Vatican to act in opposition to these regimes.”

    “John Cornwell claims that Pius XI disliked political Catholicism because it was beyond his control. According to Cornwell, a succession of Popes took the view that Catholic party politics “brought democracy into the church by the back door”. Cornwell asserts that the result of the demise of the Popular Party was the “wholesale shift of Catholics into the Fascist Party and the collapse of democracy in Italy”.

    “Germany’s Catholic population, particularly in rural areas, consistently withheld support from the Nazi Party until its takeover of power in 1933. Before Hitler rose to power, many priests and leaders in the German Catholic Church vociferously opposed Nazism on the grounds of its incompatibility with Christian morals.”

    “While numerous German Catholics, who participated in the secret printing and distribution of Mit brennender Sorge, went to jail and concentration camps, the Western democracies remained silent, which Pope Pius XI labeled bitterly as “a conspiracy of silence”

  11. Apparently, credibility is a u-shaped function: you have a lot of it if you’re very smart and savvy or bat-shit crazy. Newt falls into the latter category.

    And people, it’s not healthy for every discussion thread to degenerate into a Nazi rant.

  12. I’m amazed that Obama has a very real chance of being given a second term. Remember Farakahn said he was selected before he was elected. Of course he’s the second man of color who’s made the same claim.

    I can here it now.

    FOUR MORE YEARS FOR MORE YEARS.

  13. “brought democracy into the church by the back door”

    What is it about the Catholic Church and back doors?

  14. This world would be a much better place – politcally, socially, environmentally and economically – if more secular athiests were in charge.

    As usual, Gecko talking out of his voluminous rear and is pandering to the weakest of minds and courage among us.

  15. “the scourge of intellectuals”….as opposed to the scourge of armies of dick run amok.

    Yes, no doubt that those who think are a terrible fright to some people….

  16. Every time I get really fedup with Obama and what his administration is doing good old Gringrich or Huckelberry or any one of a number of right wing crazies opens there mouths and I think OBAMA is a jewel compared to them.

  17. Gingrich is just continuing the Republican frogmarch towards the religious right. He thinks he can commit adultery on multiple occasions and still be a holy man. If he can be considered a religious man, I guess Gaddafi should just repent and convert to Christianity and we could stop the bombing and put that money to good use…propping up some corporation somewhere.

  18. Is not the greater danger becoming dominated by people who think similarly to Gingrich?

    If he thinks, that is.

    Reaction may not involve thinking…

  19. How do you have a secular, socialist, Islamic country? Isn’t Islam a religion to Gingrich? This makes no sense.

  20. Swarthmore mom
    1, March 29, 2011 at 2:45 pm
    How do you have a secular, socialist, Islamic country? Isn’t Islam a religion to Gingrich? This makes no sense.

    ==========================================

    This is what passes for right-wing intellectualism … it’s not supposed to make sense … silly wabbit …

  21.      
    “As people do better, they start voting like Republicans – unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing”

    -Karl Rove

  22. Poor Newtie has to make a living somehow, doesn’t he? He has decided that taking donations from frightened imbeciles is how he will pay his rent and buy food. So now we’re ganging up on the poor man for simply plying his trade? Tisk, tisk.

  23. TomD,
    I am not sure lying about the reasons why he left two spouses for a mistress is plying a trade. However, with what we know about Newt, maybe his trade is that of a Gigolo!

  24. rafflaw,

    ” However, with what we know about Newt, maybe his trade is that of a Gigolo!”

    Eww. I just threw up in my mouth after reading that … If Gecko were the last man on earth, I’d still pick the cucumber …

  25. I’m convinced that Republicans hold a secret contest each year. Each contestant is given a list of words to incorporate in a speech of specified duration. The word list will vary from year to year, but recent lists always include socialist, marxist, communist, Kenya, gay, lesbian, atheist, secular, Islamic and sharia. The list will also include important phrases, such as “take our country back.”

    The winner is the person whose speech includes the most words and phrases from the list. The award is an all-expenses paid trip to speak at the annual Values Voters Summit. Newt Gingrich was the 2010 winner.

  26. A secular atheist state dominated by radical Islamists is starting to sound like an improvement, if only it weren’t a paradox. Then again so is trickle-down economics so why should that stop us.

  27. I think I may have finally figured out what the “Republicans” mean by taking our country back; they mean back into the stone age or before…

  28. Mike Appleton
    1, March 29, 2011 at 7:48 pm
    I’m convinced that Republicans hold a secret contest each year. Each contestant is given a list of words to incorporate in a speech of specified duration. The word list will vary from year to year, but recent lists always include socialist, marxist, communist, Kenya, gay, lesbian, atheist, secular, Islamic and sharia. The list will also include important phrases, such as “take our country back.”
    ============================================================

    it’s kinda like the perfect country music song, it has to have something about a pick-up, a train, the rain, your mother and your dog.

  29. Is the idea that only intellectuals can be “secular atheists”? 23% of U.S. potential voters don’t even graduate from high school. Are they “secular atheists”?

  30. I am a secular atheist.

    @anon, says: Without a common conviction about the course and direction of human history, it is inconceivable that foundations can be laid for a global society to which the mass of humankind can commit themselves.

    What do these two things have to do with each other, at all?

    The foundations of a global society are secular, and what the vast majority of humans want is actually secular, even when framed in their own particular religion’s words.

    What the vast majority of humanity wants are the freedoms expressed in our Bill of Rights that have nothing to do with religion (except for keeping government out of it). What they want is non-oppression and non-exploitation and (consequently) a reasonable amount of protection from crime, fraud and endangerment. They want the right to choose their own path through life, whether it is a life of 24/7 worship or secular science or artistic endeavor fueled by peanut butter sandwiches and cherry cola.

    WHY people obey the rules of society is immaterial, whether for religious belief or secular, for fear of supernatural punishment or secular punishment, as long as they obey, they can have a society.

    We don’t need history to understand a fair system, we don’t need a common vision of where we are going. We don’t have to be going anywhere; what people do with their time, within the rules, is their own business.

  31. people want the state to behave as the state…..and the church to behave like the church….with respect and not derision from one to the other.

  32. Just finished a posthumusly published collection of Carl Sagan’s lectures for “The Gifford Lectures.” Well worth it for anyone who seeks to understand how people can have morals, or a sense of wonder, without a belief in any sort of god.

    It also contains one of my favorite quotes about Buddhism: The Buddhist’s God is so great he doesn’t even have to exist.

  33. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph! Why are people arguing over the validity of Islamist and atheists taking over America, without recognizing the contradiction in Gringich’s statement? He says that this country will become a secular atheist Nation, most likely run by Radical Islamists. How can a country be a secular atheistic nation, even though it’s run by RELIGIOUS extremists of ISLAM? Does no one see the fallacy of this man’s statement?

  34. @Tk: Of course we do; but to me that simple fallacy isn’t the issue. The issue is an attack on me, as if my being a secular atheist essentially makes me to a terrorist or inherently evil.

    The surface illogic is immaterial, he can explain that away (he said, “I meant to say ‘or'”). But the deeper lie is claiming this false equivalency and promoting this view that “If you aren’t a God fearing Christian, you aren’t an American.”

  35. I am an Irish-German-Swedish American. Don’t hold it against me!
    Oh, and before I forget, Gingrich is a nutcase who screwed the country once before and now that he is on his third wife, he thinks he has “seen the light”! Is he trying to save the country from radical islamists by having radical Christians take control?

  36. @ Tony C.: You misunderstand me Tony. I am in no way, shape, or form trivializing the rhetoric and or implications that Gingrich is spouting. What I’m merely questioning is how sane people can even get towards a discussion about the likelihood of his comments, when his very statement defies reality. But apparently my incredulousness is irrelevant. After I posted my first comment, I later told my mom what He said. She simply replied: “I don’t blame him for thinking that way”. I was aghast. Not surprised or anything (my mother is a traditionalist Christian. Even though that doesn’t apply to her being a ‘female’ Minister…), but I was disgusted non-the less. So then I made her aware of the gross contradiction in his statement, and she, being slightly embarrassed, laughed at its absurdity.

    What makes it worse, is that my mother is drinking the ‘white panic'(I didn’t come up with this term) kool-aid. Or what I mean to say is that, as a black woman, she is doing the very thing to Muslims and Atheist, that white people have done to blacks:Which is wallowing in irrational panic, fear, and prejudice against groups that threaten her traditional ideology that Christian hegemony is the only American way of life (or the only way our nation will survive). I’m very disappointed in her. None of this however changes the fact that if people immediately identified the fallacies in Gingrich’s argument, there would be no need to debate the validity of his claims. It’s demagoguery at its best (or worse to those of us who understand justice).

  37. @Rafflaw: Wow! We should form a club or something.
    I am Irish-Swedish / German-Italian. With a dash of something else; my maternal grandfather had a Swedish last name, but himself was the result of American mixing back to a single male Swede arriving in the 1880’s.

    I think it is funny how so many of us owe our Americanity (I just coined that word, or perhaps re-coined it) to religious intolerance and social conservativism in other countries, yet ache to implement precisely the same intolerance here.

    Honestly, it is too bad independent thinking is not a heritable trait. (Or if it is, it is hopelessly recessive).

  38. @Tk: Understood.

    That’s the funniest (ha ha hilarious funny) thing about modern Christians; the utter hypocrisy of claiming the Bible is the infallible Word of God — Except for the parts that get in their way.

    I could give a list, but anytime somebody tells me they are a devout Christian, I check for their tassles. No tassles, no respect. Either they have never read it, or they cherry-pick.

    (Numbers 15:38, for the curious; Goog it).

    (As long as you are in Numbers, read 31, where Moses orders the death of all the males in a country. When his soldiers return with captured women and children, he orders all the captured women that are non-virgins put to death, all the male children put to death, and gives the remaining 32,000 female virgins to the soldiers for their pleasure. Except he sacrificed 32 of these female virgins on the altar, to give thanks to God for victory. He also orders a 50% tax of war booty to the community there.)

  39. So, if a 50% tax is okay with Moses, why not America? All those anti-bible conservatives, tsk, tsk. Also don’t forget, there is the death penalty for kindling a fire on the Sabbath day, even for heathens that know nothing about your religion. Moses chose to have them captured and then stoned to death. Oh, and death penalties for children that disobey their father, and for the fathers that fail to execute their children for disobedience. One more thing for you men: If you sell a woman or daughter as a slave, God says the price should be half the price of a male slave. Just in case that ever comes up; like if a friend drops by and wants to purchase your daughter.

    C’mon you guys! Read The Book!

  40. @ Tony: I feel where you are coming from and I mostly agree. I disagree about your sentiments of people who say they are devout christians. I think Christians have created a fallacy for themselves, in which a good Christian only follows the bible verbatim. And because they’ve been taught to do this, many Christians struggle with applying compassion, love, and rationality towards scripture, which causes the hypocritical mess today. There are many devout Christians, who are good non-judgmental people, but in order to be like this, they have to have contempt for a lot of scriptures written in the bible. I am one of these people. Nothing hurts my stomach worse than reading the Old Testament. Sure, there are some good things in it, but a lot of it is violent filth. I suspect that a lot of it had nothing to do with God’s ‘word’, but with the will of man, and the need to justify it with God’s name.

    There’s just no way someone is going to convince me that women being on their periods is an occurrence worthy of suspicion and or superstition. No one is going to convince me that men have more worth (even at birth) than women. No one is going to convince me that slavery or forced servitude of any kind is a good and or natural thing. And as far as Numbers 31 goes, that had nothing to do with God in reality. It is my belief that God was used as a justification for brutal ancient warfare tactics (wouldn’t be the first time). It’s similar to Fundamentalist Christian’s crusades against gay people. These are all fine reasons of why no particular religious institution/ideology/or lack there of should be in control of any Country. Just know Tony, that not all Christians are for a theocratic takeover of America. Some of us are with our non-Theist, non-Christian, pro-equality American brothers and sisters, in the fight for freedom, justice, and peace.

  41. @Tk: I think Christians have created a fallacy for themselves, in which a good Christian only follows the bible verbatim.

    If that were true, then good Christians would follow the bible verbatim at least when it did nobody any harm; but they do not. That is part of my point with the Tassles requirement. God mandates it in the Old Testament. Actually wearing tassles, with one blue thread, would be completely harmless for Christians. It would hurt nobody and break no laws. Yet Christians ignore it.

    Mostly because they are ignorant of it, which I find simultaneously laughable and incomprensible: Somebody believes the Bible is the one and only WORD OF GOD, a supreme universal infallible and omniscient being to whom they have surrendered their life and judgment, and they keep this one and only WORD in their home and even on their person like a talisman, but have never found the time in their entire life to READ what this God has to tell them?

    I find that to be an unfathomable lack of curiosity; that somebody can believe they will be judged and possibly face an eternity in hell, and still can’t be bothered to go to the original source, but just trusts whatever the preacher says.

    As for the Old Testament; Christ believed in slavery, and practically the first words out of his mouth in the New Testament is that nothing he says will change a “jot or tittle” of the Old Testament (tiny marks like a comma or an apostrophe in their alphabet and writing), and all those laws must be obeyed. So Tassles are no more exempt from being in the Old Testament than are the Ten Commandments, or the demand that homosexuals be put to death: Christ endorsed these explicitly.

    A Christian is not devout if they only obey the rules that are convenient or do not embarrass them. Just like a citizen is not law-abiding if they break the laws that get in their way.

  42. Tony,

    Have you read the excised “heretic” gospel of Thomas? researchers suspect it may be as old as 1st Century, but they can only find proof of it as far back as the 3rd Century. What makes Thomas interesting is it isn’t stories or anything like that, but rather simply sayings attributed directly to Jesus. It was part of the Gnostic gospels and paints a considerably different portrait of Jesus. In Thomas, he’s oddly (or perhaps not) a lot more like Buddha than the Jesus of the New Testament.

  43. @Rafflaw: I’d pay 50%. Notice Moses didn’t tax everybody; just the rich! (soldiers with looted riches).

    @Buddha: One of my fellow atheists brought that up a few years back. I more subscribe to the view (which falls into the category of an educated guess) that Jesus, Moses, and other biblical figures are simply mythical; invented sometime between 250 AD and 300 AD. There is some evidence for that, and it would explain some of the historical anachronisms about towns and historical events that are in the Bible.

    I believe the Christ story is a rip from the Krishna story; at least 1000 years older, which itself was a characterization of an even older myth, called the Solar Myth. There are artifacts with drawings that indicate the Solar Myth was being told before 2000 BC.

    The story of the Solar Myth is the story of the Sun traveling through the Constellations; which were given as various characters, and the Sun had various adventures with the characters. At the end of the story the Sun is betrayed and ends up on a Constellation called the Cross between two stars, called The Two Thieves. Of course this happens at the Winter Solstice, December 22nd, and in three days the Sun is reborn (days get longer) and begins his journey again. This is why Christ (and Krishna) are crucified, and why they have December 25th as a Birthday. The Solar Myth was popular, Kersey Graves has a book called “The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors [Christianity Before Christ]”.

    It is presumed the Solar Myth was told as a verbal memory tool, to remember the order of the Constellations. Many people do not realize that the early Constellations were not named for what they looked like, but for what they foretold: Aries, for example, is the Ram, and foretold something about Sheep mating (I do not recall which event, mating or birthing) that happened when the Sun was in Aries.

    Anyway, the 250-300 date sounded plausible to me; it was the best guess of an atheist archaeologist I read (many years ago).

  44. Tony,

    I don’t disagree that much of the Bible is pure myth and that it steals quite liberally from other traditions. For example, Genesis is almost exactly the Sumerian creation story. However, ever since taking several religious studies courses in college, I’ve always been interested in whether or not there was a historical Jesus. Not because I believe in organized religion. I think Simon Peter was a rat bastard politician and that one of my professors said a simple truth when he said that “whether or not there was a historical Jesus is irrelevant as the character – real or fictional – has still had a demonstrable and dramatic effect on Western culture.” My interest is purely in discovering the deviation of any historical teachings should they exist as compared to the second hand confabulation that this the New Testament. In this respect, I’ve always found it interesting that Jesus as portrayed by the collected sayings in Thomas is much more about an internal process of discovery and self-actualization and that the Gnostic traditions were essentially wiped out by the Council of Nicea in favor of the external validation provided (or withheld) by a hierarchical church structure. The shift from the contemplative mode of finding the nature of God within one’s self to the dictatorial edicts of a patriarchal church is – to my mind – responsible for a large amount of the really crappy and evil things that have been done over the centuries in the name of the RCC and other similarly top-down doctrinal churches. If the Gnostic traditions had not been attacked by the forces of organized religion, Western civilization would have taken a wildly different – and probably better – path.

  45. @ Tony: “If that were true, then good Christians would follow the bible verbatim at least when it did nobody any harm”

    According to whom Tony? Jesus only gave two official commandments: Love God with all of your heart, and love your neighbor as you love yourself. He did not say that one must follow all of scripture verbatim in order to be a Christian. To be a ‘devout’ Christian, is to simply believe that Christ has secured a second chance for you through His sacrifice; to Love God with all your heart; and to love your neighbor as you love yourself. Nothing more, nothing less. Through the love you have for your neighbor, you would never oppress or condemn them for their beliefs. For the mere fact that one does not have empirical proof that any other worldly being exists, is perhaps the most prime reason why atheists should not be discriminated against or held in contempt. Matthew 22:34-40 is where Jesus tells the Pharisees what the Greatest commandments of the Law are.

    Also Matthew 19:17-22 says: “17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness. 19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 20The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? 21Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. 22But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.” Here, Jesus lists many of the laws, in which we recognize are said to be personally authored by God (Ten commandments). He didn’t say “kill gay men”, or “wear tassels”.

    “Mostly because they are ignorant of it, which I find simultaneously laughable and incomprensible: Somebody believes the Bible is the one and only WORD OF GOD, a supreme universal infallible and omniscient being to whom they have surrendered their life and judgment, and they keep this one and only WORD in their home and even on their person like a talisman, but have never found the time in their entire life to READ what this God has to tell them?

    I find that to be an unfathomable lack of curiosity; that somebody can believe they will be judged and possibly face an eternity in hell, and still can’t be bothered to go to the original source, but just trusts whatever the preacher says.”

    This I agree with to the highest levels.

    “As for the Old Testament; Christ believed in slavery”

    Christ recognized slavery as a modern practice of that time. I too though, am curious as to why He didn’t proclaim the practice of slavery to be an evil one. Even going as far as to say that Christian slaves should obey their masters. He did say that Masters should not treat their slaves badly though. But does that mean that he believed that slavery was a necessary or good practice? I’m not sure. But if I go by His commandment to love your neighbor as you love yourself, and scripture’s proclamation that you should do unto others as you would have them to do unto you, then I would think that he was not in favor of slavery. After all, how can a human be able to enslave his/her neighbor, if he/she would most likely not want their neighbor to enslave them? It’s an instance of moral relativity. That’s exactly why I’m more of an exegesis bible reader, instead of a literalist.

    “and practically the first words out of his mouth in the New Testament is that nothing he says will change a “jot or tittle” of the Old Testament (tiny marks like a comma or an apostrophe in their alphabet and writing), and all those laws must be obeyed”

    Jesus says: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law,’TILL ALL BE FULFILLED’ (Matthew 5:17-18).”

    Jesus fulfilled the law by following all of God’s commandments (which as I mentioned before probably had nothing to do with killing non-virgin women, killing homosexuals, and making women sacrifice pigeons for their ‘sin’ of menstruating. But are more likely the commandments that God physically authored Himself). This was something that no other human had yet to achieve. Thereby a covenant was made by God on behalf of Humanity, to where he would essentially sacrifice this perfect harbinger of His commandments (Jesus, a manifestation of God), to pay, from that day on, for the sins of all people. In doing this, now humans are no longer under the yoke of the law, but are under grace and salvation through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Roman 6:14, Rom 7:4-6,Galatians 3:23-25,ephesians 2:8-9). So no, Jesus was not sent to destroy God’s commandments or His prophets. He was sent to fulfill the law (God’s commandments), which allowed him to be the only candidate that could, in God’s view, wash away the sins of Man.

    Take the story of the woman with the issue of blood (luke 8:43-48). As anyone who has read the first five books of the Bible knows, it was seen as a ritually unclean thing for a woman to touch another person while she was on her period (which is ridiculous) . But this woman who had been bleeding for 12 years touched Jesus. Instead of Jesus condemning her and quoting ‘the law’ (Man’s authored law) to chastise her, He simply responded:”Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace”. This symbolizes that one can only be ‘healed’ and ‘made whole’ by faith, not by following Moses’ Law. One can only truly be a devout Christian by faith in Jesus, Love for God, and genuine love for all human beings. The ‘Law'(mosaic) results in death, power corruption, and hypocrisy. It didn’t help the Israelites, and it certainly won’t help us now.

    “A Christian is not devout if they only obey the rules that are convenient or do not embarrass them”

    I agree. A true devout Christian would not have such contempt for those who are different than them. A true Christian’s belief should not be threatened by the fact that other people with different views exist. Not to say that a true Christ believer will be perfect, but in their imperfection, the love they have for all of humanity should still be intact. The Bible also says that you can tell a tree by the fruits it bears. Gingrich has no love for anyone but himself. He wants power, and he’ll hold any group out to the hungry religious wolves to get their votes. And a lot of Christians are too busy boasting about their apparent ‘political might’, and justifying their abuse of others with scripture. But we’re not all like that. I may not be an Atheist, but I’m gay AND a woman, so I know what it feels like to be used as political bait for the crazies. What I hope to achieve in the future, is to create an American atmosphere where we can all stand united regardless of religious belief/or lack there of/Gender/Ethnicity/sexual orientation, etc.

  46. @Tony: I don’t know if Jesus ever existed, but I believe it to be so. However, even though I have no proof of His existence, I will say that many of the supposed comparison/rip offs between Jesus and other ancient religious figures (Krishna, Horus, etc) I find not to be true. And the claims that points to these comparisons not being correct, is usually when they try to compare Jesus’ birthday with other deity’s birthdays. It’s a myth created by the Catholic Church that Jesus was born on December 25th. They made this up in an attempt to combat Ancient Pagan winter solstice celebrations (which didn’t work since we basically celebrate Yule here in the U.S). In fact, Jesus was not even born in the winter time. As for the solar myth, I will look it up. It sounds fascinating.

  47. Holy cow. I haven’t read this amount of religious material since the good Benedictine nuns were trying to convince me to give a crap about catechism clas. They didn’t succeed, but I appreciated their efforts.

  48. @Buddha: The shift from the contemplative mode of finding the nature of God within one’s self to the dictatorial edicts of a patriarchal church is – to my mind – responsible for a large amount of the really crappy and evil things that have been done over the centuries in the name of the RCC and other similarly top-down doctrinal churches.

    I think a similar thing; patriarchal top-down religion was the first big business I can think of outside of straight domination by force of arms (which had been going on for thousands of years).

    It was quite a clever run around the kings and dictators; this idea of being in charge of a supernatural realm. However, like all businesses that essentially allow new people in that can then rise to power and control, they created a competitive environment. And like all competitive environments, when the stakes got high enough (there was enough free floating money to control) the ruthless pretenders rose faster than the sensitive devout, because the ruthless will do anything to win. So in time the church became dominated by dominators, liars and literally ruthless killers.

    It is not an accident that the Vatican (and I have been) is the most opulent place on Earth and holds the greatest collection of stolen art on the planet. It is not an accident that so many priests are sexually assaulting little boys; they go into the church with identity problems created by the church and the church doesn’t give a shit about them as long as they keep the money rolling in. It has been a scam for 1800 years, and it was preceded by smaller scams before it that worked the kinks out. But they’ve had it working smoothly for quite some time. That whole idea of turning the Vatican into a sovereign country was a master stroke. Now they just have to deal with the information revolution, which is really inhibiting the cover-ups of their various sexual exploits. But I am sure they will come up with something; they have the advantage of being able to tell the most outrageous lies and get away with it.

  49. @Tk: Why me…

    Matthew 5:17-20, Jesus Talking:

    Think not that I am come to destroy the law [meaning the Old Testament], or the prophets [among them Moses]: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

    Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

    Matthew is the first book in the New Testament. Jesus endorsed the Old Testament as practically the first thing he said in the New Testament.

    Numbers 15:38 gave you a direct order from God himself via Moses; if you disobey that order you are disobeying Jesus.

    You can stop Bibling me. Anybody that claims Jesus rejected the Old Testament or toned it down or diluted its demands is either illiterate or a liar, Jesus specifically endorsed every jot and tittle of the Old Testament and every despicable action of Lot and Moses, RIGHT THERE.

    Of course it ain’t too tough to be more righteous than Lot (banged his daughters) or Moses, unless Jesus means “self righteous,” in which case they are damn hard to beat.

  50. @Rafflaw: I thank my father (by which I mean my biological male parent) for sparing me that. My father was big on independent thinking. When it came to religion (and politics), his opinion was nobody should decide on anything before they were about 22. He was an agnostic, but insisted we had to learn enough to be able to find our own answers, without anybody telling us what to believe, including him.

    So my funniest religious awakening occurred when I was in the second grade. A school friend of mine went to Sunday school, his mother invited me to go with them and I did. We basically played religious based games. But I was new, so the church sent some young men to my house to talk to my father about joining the church.

    My father invited them in, he got us all some coffee (a staple in my house, even for kids), and he smoked unfiltered cigarettes and heard them out, without interruption. I had to sit there for the whole pitch. At the end, he told them that he wasn’t interested in joining or contributing, and he wasn’t the one they should be selling on the idea.

    Then he turns to me. “So these boys say if you want to go to this church and play these games and all, you have to give them some money every week. For you, your allowance is one dollar a week, so they want you to give them a dime. Every week. I think maybe you can do it for a nickel. You want to do that?”

    Me (horrified): “NO.”

    Dad stands and turns back to the young men. “The boy says no. Thanks for stopping by.”

    It was burned into my memory. I have no idea what happened after that, because I bolted.

  51. @Tk: I will say that many of the supposed comparison/rip offs between Jesus and other ancient religious figures (Krishna, Horus, etc) I find not to be true.

    I don’t understand that; the correlations are both obvious and it is essentially impossible they occur by accident, and these 16 crucified “saviors” all predate Christ, some by over 1000 years.

    If you do not believe the Christ story ripped them off, you are denying independently verifiable fact. Which I suspect means you are in emotional denial, you want to believe Jesus was unique so you search for reasons to do that. But it is like searching for differences between two romance novels: You can find those differences, but the plot is pretty much the same. Only the set dressing and makeup is changing. (Okay, there are three or four plots for ten thousand stories, but you get the idea).

    You get to believe what you want. I get to point out how ridiculous it is. That is what freedom of speech and freedom of religion are all about.

  52. How about a simple religious trinity?

    1: If it is a dogma, it is false.

    2: If it is a doctrine, it is false.

    3: If it is not false, it may or may not be true.

  53. @Brian: I do not believe that dogma or doctrine are always false; I see accepting them as a defect in somebody’s comprehension. If I accept a claim simply because somebody else told me it is true, I really do not believe in that claim: I only believe that the person making the claim of truth is infallible.

    I personally cannot maintain a belief of infallibility in any system, most especially humans and human systems.

  54. I honestly believe that our Nation has lost everything that it was founded on. I believe that we are headed to more of a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. Where radicals rule the land and our freedoms as we know is will be stripped away from us. Our “fearless” and I say that completely being a smart@ss is destroying the country from the inside out. The very moral fiber of our country is being stricken and we have lost our nerve as Americans and have bought into the political BULL@@@@ that people watch on CNN and CNBC. People just take things and run with them and have no clue what the true is! They hear it so it must be true this is the way of the MINDLESS Democratic Party.

    Our country is gutless and weak and it is the Democratic Party and those who just believe them are the culprits. Let just ignore that there are entire countries at WAR and yet lets give them what they want. Lets just ignore that most teenagers didn’t even know who Bin Laden was and had to google who got killed. Lets just ignore the term “SOCIAL JUSTICE” and not realize that it means lets fight for a Socialistic/Marxist Society. One that is ran by the Government! One that wants nothing but for Americans to be fully reliant on them for health care and for Money. A Government that in the last 20 years has made the dollar drop 20 Cents because they can’t stop spending TAX PAYERS MONEY. So just raise the debt ceiling, that’s the answer! Do you realize that we have incurred more debt in the last 6 years than we have from George Washington until 6 years ago. George Bush doubled the National debt in his term and when he left in January 20, 2009, was $10.618 and NOW we are at a crises with raising the debt ceiling. We are now at 14.30 trillion and the government wants more money.

    All the while the giving a billion dollars to a foreign country and a large surplus of wheat… What? When the Mississippi river is flooding and we are worried about not having enough food because hundreds of thousands of acres of farm land is under water. We are giving food to other countries?

    Amongst all this Obama wants to go back to the 1967 lines in the West and give the Palestinians more land and part of Jerusalem. This means that we will not have access to the Whaling wall, the upper room, the room of the last supper, or Golgotha where Christ was Crucified. Many of the sites that Christians tour every year to see where all of these biblical events took place will be off limits. Including the Church of Holy Sepulcher! Not only this the Palestinians want to Massacre the Jewish Race very much like Hitler did. Do some research and you will see along with them celebrating a brutal killing of the Fogal family. Then they went around handing out cookies celebrating it! So what this all amounts to is that the world as we know and the American Idea is under attack! So just do some research and realize how messed up our world is! We need to stand up and have morals get rid of the Socialist and Marxist who are “Leading US” and get back to the basics that we were founded on!

  55. Actually, Tony, Jesus said he was the “new covenant” meaning the old one (as outlined in the OT) was past. He issued new commandments and a new rules on the relationship with the Father.

    Christian history says that God rend the barrier separating the Ark of the Covenant from the Temple at the moment of Jesus death.

    So, yeah, He did replace the OT.

Comments are closed.