• Main Articles
    • Critique Of Lee Strobel's *The Case for Faith* >
      • Response to God_and_Science.com
    • Another Case Not Made: A Critique of Lee Strobel's The Case for a Creator
    • Lee Strobel's "The Case for the Real Jesus"
    • Taylor Carr's Review of The Case for Christ
    • Earl Doherty on *The Case for Christ* >
      • Part One - Is the Gospel Record Reliable?
      • Part Two - What Was the Nature of Jesus?
      • Part Three - Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?
    • Atheism, Agnosticism, & Pascal's Wager
    • Historical Methods: A Primer
    • Paul Copan's Untenable Interpretations
  • Additional Articles
    • Why Historical Apologetics is Useless
    • Extraordinary Events -- Extraordinary Evidence?
    • The Implausability of Satan
    • The History Of Satan
    • Freewill: Is it Possible?
    • Death
    • Reply to TrinityRadio's 10 Questions for Atheists
  • Debates
    • A Polite Response to YouTube's TheFunkyTheist
    • Dennis Jensen Debate
    • Gene Cook of "Unchained Radio"
    • J.P. Holding: Tektonics Apologetics Ministries >
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 1 (Response to Holding's "Refutation")
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 2 (Continuing the debate with Mr. Holding via the TheologyWeb.)
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 3
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 4
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 5
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 6
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 7
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 8
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 9
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 10
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 11
      • Response to Tektonics - Part 12
    • Skepticism Examined - Wes Janssen Debate >
      • "Skepticism Examined," by Wes Janssen. Rebuttal by Paul Jacobsen
      • Janssen/Jacobsen Discussion, Round 2
      • Janssen/Jacobsen Discussion, Round 3
      • Janssen/Jacobsen Discussion, Round 4
      • Janssen/Jacobsen Discussion, Round 5
      • On Wes Janssen - C. R. Drost
      • Jansen Responds to Drost
      • A Counter-response to Wes Janssen by C. R. Drost
    • Extraordinary Events: G. Brady Lenardos Debate >
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 1
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 2
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 3
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 4
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 5
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 6
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 7
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 8
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 9
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 10
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 11
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 12
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Round 13 (conclusion of formal debate)
      • Lenardos/Jacobsen Debate - Informal Round 14 (post-debate comments)
      • Lenardo's Rebuttal
  • Faith & Diet
    • Paul Copan's Errors On Diet & Vegetarianism
  • Submissions
    • Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven Lie
    • The Eternal Return
    • Berating Brad Stine
    • Why Christians Steal from Secular Morality
    • Response to Smith
    • Choose Your Ancestors: God or Monkeys!
    • Response to "Hitler Wasn't an Athiest"
    • Hitler Really Wasn't an Athiest
    • Response To Phipps: Yet More About Hitler
    • Response to "The Implausability of Satan"
    • Defense of Cosmological Argument
  • Other Stuff
    • Guestbook
    • Admin
    • Contact Paul Jacobsen
    • What's New (Archive)
    • Interesting Links
    • Delphi & C++ Builder Programming Page
    • TabMaster -- Free Tab Utility
    • WB Hotkeys -- Freeware Keyboard Macros
    • Rebuttal on Cosmological Argument
  • Sitemap
  • Using Raize Components
Case Against Faith
.
Choose Your Ancestors!

Choose your ancestors, God or Monkeys!
By Lee Salisbury


In the legendary 1860 debate between Bishop Wiberforce and Thomas Huxley, Wilberforce sought to ridicule the Darwinian theory of evolution.  He asked Huxley, which of his grandparents were descended from monkeys. Today, fundamentalist preachers often use the same tactic carrying on about the devastating effects of teaching evolution.  They will say, “If we believe evolution then we’ll believe we came from monkeys….we didn’t come from monkeys, we’re created in the image of God.”      

 

Such preaching provokes me to ask, why is teaching that humans are created in the image of the Bible’s God more beneficial than teaching that monkeys might in some way be distantly related to humans?  Comparing monkeys with the Bible’s God should not be too difficult.

 

The Bible’s God acknowledges He creates evil and darkness (Is. 45:7; Amos 3:6).  He also claims to be justified in condemning all humanity to eternal punishment because of Adam and Eve’s foreknown disobedience (Rom.5:18). His stopgap plan of salvation, improvised before the foundation of the world (Rev.13:8) to solve the sin problem of his creation, provided for only a mere fraction of Adam’s descendants.  However, the Bible’s God absolves himself of all responsibility (no wonder the White House loves Him so) and claims that the humans he created in his image are to blame for sin.  Excuse me, but I cannot imagine a monkey engaging in predetermined failure, nor condemning other monkeys for a sin that they did not commit, nor demanding a degree of punishment far in excess of the alleged act, especially if the monkey in charge is himself the creator of the evil he condemns.  Would not such egregious actions be beneath the moral standards of monkeys?

 

God’s further actions expose his character.  God sent lying spirits (II Chron. 18:22) and tells his prophet Samuel to lie (I Sam.16.2) even though he commanded Israel not to bear false witness (Ex.20:16).  He instigates the gang rape of David’s completely innocent concubine as punishment for David’s sin (II Sam. 12:11) showing God’s standard of justice.  God orders Saul to slay “man, woman, infant, and suckling” (I Sam 15:3) showing God’s concern for the sanctity of life.

 

In over 45 instances in the Old Testament, God who said, “Thou shall not kill” (Ex 20:13) either personally kills or orders Israel to kill people, once for an offense as slight as picking up sticks on the Sabbath (Num.15:32-36).  Doesn’t this define a serial killer?  In the New Testament, he tortures people for eternity. Humane parents have a constructive, redemptive purpose in punishment.  This inhumane God has no purpose other than punishment for the sake of punishment.  He makes Saddam Hussein’s Abu Ghurayb torture chambers look like a playpen.  To worship this God, one must relish sadomasochism.  

 

Is Jesus different?  The Sermon on the Mount and instances of Jesus’ showing mercy and forgiveness offer some hope. However, as we read on, we find Jesus typifies the saying, “like father, like son.”  Jesus declares that all who believe in him shall do the same works he did (Jn.14:12), which if true means Christians should turn water into wine, heal the blind, deaf, and sick, plus raise the dead.  Jesus tells his disciples they will not taste death before his coming again in glory (Mt.16:28), which means those disciples must still be alive cause Jesus’ second coming has yet to happen.  At Jesus’ trial, Jesus states that he taught nothing in secret (Jn.18:19) though he taught secrets to his disciples (Mt. 10-17).  Jesus, in unstinted Inquisitional form, justifies slaying those who do not submit to him as Lord (Lk.19:27).  Though Jesus promised he would return “quickly” (Rev.22:7, 12, & 20), his 2,000 year postponement indicates returning “quickly” was just another ill-informed promise to break.  A brief summation is Jesus does not practice what he preached, Jesus tells some absolute whoppers, and Jesus shows the same authoritarian murderous instinct as his immutable father Jehovah.  “I, the Lord, do not change” (Mal.3:6).

What monkey has such a sordid history as the Bible’s God? If the only alternative in choosing an ancestor were between the Bible’s God and monkeys, any moral person would choose monkeys.  Now we have a hint as to why The Treaty of Tripoli negotiated under George Washington, unanimously ratified by the US Senate, and signed into law by John Adams states, "The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."  Our founders knew the Bible.

Sacrifice for the sake of a good cause is normal, but to be in denial about the glaringly reprehensible actions of the cause’s founder indicates severe psychological dysfunction.  Many theists and liberal Christian theologians wrestle with these problems.  As a result, they reject fundamentalism’s biblical literalism and instead search for a deeper meaning in the myth of the Genesis creation story.

Whether it concerns Galileo, Galilei, or Charles Darwin, religion has an established history of fighting science whenever it threatens their belief system.  Fundamentalism’s biblical literalism depreciates and distorts rational, evidence-based scientific thinking.  Evolution has progressed in the last 150 years from an idea, to a workable hypothesis, to a provable theory.  Its supporting evidence is overwhelming, just as it is that the earth is neither flat nor the center of the universe. 

Maybe it is time fundamentalists learned to respect monkeys!  



Home
Log In
Picture
January 29, 2011 Site design upgraded by Leafolia Web Design
​www.leafolia.com