Biblical Bloopers: A Two-Dimensional God
Posted on June 02, 2009 by Andrew Bernardin
If you ever want to blow your mind, I suggest attempting to read the Bible as an unbiased, critical thinker. My guess is that smoke will start pouring out your ears before you make it halfway through Leviticus. To save you some of the effort, and the risk to your sanity, I’ll periodically post some nuggets I have encountered in my reads of the Bible. Today I present five “bloopers”–both trite and significant–contained in a god’s allegedly perfect book.
1) When the heavens are shut up and there is no rain because your people have sinned against you. (1 Kings 8:35, New International Version)
So that is why Death Valley is so dry. The people who don’t live there are sinners. And the Bible god apparently loves all those secular liberals in western Oregon and Washington states, for they are yearly blessed with abundant rain. Which is ironic. For not-believing in him is the biggest sin. Without that first, fundamental belief, he has no authority. Back to the weather: according to the 2004-2005 Statistical Abstract of the United States, Oregon was dead last in the number of Christian Adherents (30.1%), while Washington came in at 48th of the 50 states (31.8%). No area of Oklahoma gets the rainfall the western Northwest does, yet it has twice the number of Christians.
And Israel–the land of his chosen people–is a desert wasteland. Go figure.
The author of the Bible (a.k.a. God . . . ghostwriters notwithstanding) had little understanding of the weather. According to the Bible, not only are rain, hail, and snow sent from the heavens, but they are stored there as well. Additionally, the Bible god does not simply make the weather, he sends messages to people via his cold fronts and high pressure systems. In fact, during this most recent decade he sent an angel named Katrina. Some think.
2) Therefore I am against you and against your streams, and I will make the land of Egypt a ruin and a desolate waste. (Ezekiel 29:10)
The Contemporary English Version words the passage this way: Now I am turning against you and your river. Your nation will be nothing but an empty wasteland. Even under extreme drought conditions, as have been documented, the Nile never stops flowing. Additionally, archeologists know that although Egypt’s population has grown and shrunk over the millennia, it was never devoid of people. In other words, the Bible god threatened a punishment that didn’t come to pass. At least in any fashion that would reflect the work of an almighty agent.
3) Have you entered the storehouses of the snow or seen the storehouses of the hail? (Job 38:22)
Here is how the Message Bible puts it: Have you ever traveled to where snow is made, seen the vault where hail is stockpiled? And the Contemporary English Version: Have you been to the places where I keep snow and hail? The meteorological sciences did not exist in the time of ancient Israel. Thus the Bible writers did not know, as elementary school students do today, that rain, snow, and hail are part of a cycle of the evaporation and condensation of the Earth’s water. Do we attempt to disguise the ignorance contained in the Bible by claiming that these passages are metaphorical? That the lord did a bit ‘o poetry jam?
Once believers play the “this-verse-must-be-interpreted-metaphorically” card, the entire Bible becomes vulnerable to doubt. Maybe Mary was a virgin . . . metaphorically speaking. And maybe it was just a metaphor that Jesus rose from the dead post-crucifixion. And maybe after death followers go not to a grave in the dirt but up to the airy stratosphere. Let’s call it “heaven.” Metaphor?
4) The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good. (Psalms 14:1)
Wrong. Totally wrong. Atheists commit crimes in no greater numbers than believers in a god. Our divorce rate is no greater. Etc. Interestingly, in contemporary Christian America, three of the most philanthropic individuals–people expressing their compassion for strangers in need through charitable deeds–are non-believers: Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and Charles Branson. Through his foundation Bill Gates is saving thousand of lives in Africa. Man that guy is vile.
5) In the heavens he has pitched a tent for the sun . . . . It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other; nothing is hidden from its heat. (Psalms 19:4 – 6)
Not until a few hundred years ago did humanity discover that the world is not flat. And, gasp, the Earth is not at the center of creation. The Bible god was in no way ahead of his time. Thus his two-dimensional understanding of cosmology. So to speak. The Contemporary English version expresses the same verse with these words: It [the sun] travels all the way across the sky.
The Message Bible engages in a huge act of dishonesty. Here is how you will find the passage in its pages: God makes a huge dome for the sun-a superdome! . . . That’s how God’s Word vaults across the skies from sunrise to sunset, Melting ice, scorching deserts, warming hearts to faith. So the Bible god’s words, rather than the sun, rise and set. Yeah, that makes sense. Believers should thank their god for his abundance of metaphors.
Numerous other verses in the Bible repeat the theme of the flat Earth. If the Bible god is up there in heaven, you would think he would notice that the Earth isn’t flat. And it spins.
Because there is no perfect god in heaven, preachers continue to spin what is in the Bible.
Related Posts:
Tags | Bible
Seeketh -
Congratulations. In your one comment you managed to commit two errors of logic. 1) Quoting out of context. 2) Equivocation.
First, quoting out of context.
Sure, Victor Stenger did write that. Big deal. The overall point of his piece, however, was clearly spelled out in the abstract. Namely, Stenger’s model “serves to refute any assertions that the universe cannot have come about by natural means.”
Second, equivocation — which involves the misleading use of terms.
Faith has a number of meanings. These include religious faith, and, in addition to but not completely synonymous with, a non-religious faith. Religious faith means something distinctly different from the “faith” of scientists. The second is is akin to confidence. An example of a scientist’s “faith” would be this: I have faith that when I drop an apple it will fall to the ground, for I have observed it countless times and have equations that make confirmed predictions about it.”
The believer’s faith is something altogether different.
To better understand the “faith” of the scientist, I recommend checking out my website, “the evolving mind,” beginning with this post: “Quick Hits: The Strength of Science.”
http://evolvingmind.info/blog/2009/10/quick-hits-the-strength-of-science/
“Assuming the universe came from nothing, it is empty to begin with . . . Only by the constant action of an agent outside the universe, such as God, could a state of nothingness be maintained. The fact that we have something is just what we would expect if there is no God.”
- Atheist, Victor J. Stenger, Prof. Physics, University of Hawaii
http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Godless/Origin.pdf
…that is quite strong testimony of atheist’s faith…..
Seeketh -
There are many definitions of information. Which are you using?
In lieu of a response, I invite you to check out a post at my science blog that addresses the issue.
“DNA as a Code . . . With a Code-Maker”
http://evolvingmind.info/blog/2009/01/ccet-%E2%80%93-5-dna-as-a-code-with-a-code-maker/
Andrew:
Do you know what information is? Can information be explained by natural processes as a non material entity?
Existence of information alone in genetic code refutes any materialistic philosophy, anthropology and whatever else you consider as so called “objective evidence”.
seeketh -
To quickly answer your questions:
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Lack of objective evidence. (I don’t own the book so can’t consult it. I’m sure I could get more specific but I don’t have the time and am unconvinced it would accomplish anything.)
- You have a bogus premise in this question/statement. The foundation of my criticism is an understanding of science and knowledge of psychology, sociology, anthropology, and world religions.
You: However, being a “free thinker” says nothing of free will. All it means is that a person is committed to exploring, scrutinizing and even criticizing any and ALL ideas without needing to consult religious authority. If there is truth out there, we believe that a mind free of constraints is more likely to find it. So yes, we do not prevent ourselves from reading the Koran critically, just as we don’t prevent ourselves from reading the Bible critically.
Me: Have you ever heard of laws of thermodynamics?
Have you ever heard of the most fundamental principle of science, namely cause and effect?
Have you read “God delusion” critically?
If so, name some scientific arguments Dawkins uses to support his idea of believers being deluded with God.
And again: what is the base of your criticism when reading the Bible since your thoughts are result of pure chance and chemistry?
I concur with Andrew’s last point. Psychologists and philosophers have proven that you don’t have to believe in god to think and behave morally.
This probably comes as a shocking idea to believers — that you don’t need the wrath of god to keep yourself in line. If you don’t need belief in god for that, what else might you not need him/her for?
Seeketh –
I will respond to your statements one at a time.
You – your “freethinking has no logical base in reality.
Me – And your belief in an invisible being does? Logic must be coupled with verifiable evidence to be of worth.
You – If there is no God then everything “evolved” from chaos.
Me – That is a false dichotomy, an error in logic. If there is no God there are a whole number of other options as to why the universe is as it is.
You – Do you realize then according to materialism, that your “free” thoughts are only result of chemistry in your brain. Why then you should call yourself “free thinker”. Free from what? What is wrong what is right,what is free what is not? Again: what is the logical base of your arguments?
Me – The first part of that statement is an intriguing and fascinating topic. I have many thoughts about it. However, being a “free thinker” says nothing of free will. All it means is that a person is committed to exploring, scrutinizing and even criticizing any and ALL ideas without needing to consult religious authority. If there is truth out there, we believe that a mind free of constraints is more likely to find it. So yes, we do not prevent ourselves from reading the Koran critically, just as we don’t prevent ourselves from reading the Bible critically.
You – Say openly: you want to have sex with anything that moves and the Bible makes it clear you can not do that.Then I will understand….
Me – What kind of perverted mind would think that? My wife of over two decades is the only person or thing I want to be intimate with.
Finally, I think you have a poor understanding of atheists and freethinkers. For one, study after study has shown that those without belief in a god are no more immoral/unethical than those with belief in god. We are all people seeking to live the best lives we can. Some include religion in what makes their lives better, others, such as myself, do not.
your “freethinking has no logical base in reality. If there is no God then everything “evolved” from chaos.Do you realize then according to materialism, that your “free” thoughts are only result of chemistry in your brain. Why then you should call yourself “free thinker”. Free from what? What is wrong what is right,what is free what is not? Again: what is the logical base of your arguments?
Say openly: you want to have sex with anything that moves and the Bible makes it clear you can not do that.Then I will understand….
It is alleged that Socrates reasoned the Earth was round in 350 B.C. by noting that the Earth’s shadow on the moon was spherical. I was a victim of a couple of JW’s the other day. When I explained why I am an Atheist, she asked “Well, what about the prophecies in the Bible which describe the Earth as a sphere? We later found that to be true.” My response was “Well, the Bible also says the Earth sits upon pillars. That’s NOT true.” Grasping at straws.
Frank -
A couple things: 1) The validity of a position is independent of the tone/style it is expressed in.
2) In my opinion it has been to the world’s detriment that religion has been and continues to be taken so seriously.
So, this is what you call an example of critical and unbiased thinking?! How misleading and sad. What’s the value in just spouting your angry beliefs? You end up revealing that you are no different from those whom you criticize.
I’d just like to note that people ancient Greeks figured out the world is not flat over 2,000 years ago and even figured out the circumference of the planet, off by only a few hundred feet from what I’ve read. This knowledge was well known to the better educated at the time Columbus was trying to convince Isabella and Ferdinand to finance his proposed western route to China. Columbus, however, had miscalculated, believing the circumference of the world to be much smaller that it actually is, which was the real reason many royal advisors distrusted Columbus. Of course, “God” himself apparently remained ignorant of both the true shape of the Earth, but also of the continents half a world away from the supposed holy land.