rfwu

I just checked out a book from the library called "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Bible (or via: amazon.co.uk)" and after flipping through it I don't know if I should laugh or cry at seeing what some people in this world actually believe.

I would like to know what you all think of some of these claims, if you see it as ridiculous. Then we can create a rebuttal or something.

Anyway, here are some things that this book claims...

"The Bible made modern science possible (which is why it started in the Middle Ages)."

"Contrary to what anti-religious secularists assert, far more lives have been snuffed out throughout history by faith-hating fanatics than by religious believers."

"The Old Testament is unquestionably anti-slavery."

"Without armies or force, Jesus founded one of the largest empires in history. (Even Napoleon gives him credit for such a feat!)"

There's a lot more and I can provide more details if you want.

Toto

The P.I.G series is aimed a conservative ideologues and people who believe that Fox News is fair and balanced.

James Hannam aka Bede on these boards wants to claim that Christianity begat modern science. But even he has to claim that Christianity preserved Greco-Roman science and built on it.

But this quote makes no sense. The Bible was written or put together in the first few centuries of the Roman empire, and did nothing for science at that point. It was then kept in monasteries and read only by the clergy through the middle ages. I'm not sure why he thinkg modern science started in the Middle Ages, or what the Bible had to do with it. :huh:

Without reading his arguments, I suspect this is the usual numbers game, and involves defining Hitler as a faith hating fanatic, although he was raised as a Catholic, never excommunicated, and had alliances with the Catholic and Lutheran churches. It also involves claiming that Stalin was responsible for all of the deaths in the USSR in World War II.

Both the old and new testaments endorse slavery. St. Paul told slaves to obey their masters.

Jesus had several armies - Constantine's army, the crusaders, . . .

You will find most of his arguments addressed somewhere on these boards.

avi

The second world war, with its devastating loss of life in Europe and Russia, leads some folks to forget about the loss of life in asia during that 14 year war. Conservative estimates include AT LEAST 20 million casualties in Korea, China, Indonesia, Phillipines, Burma, Thailand and VietNam. Nota Bene, 99% of those victims were killed over territorial issues, rather than "faith" or "non-faith" ideology, and none of them died at the hands of either Hitler or Stalin. The majority of the soldiers in the invading imperial Japanese army were nominally Buddhists.

Crimson Glory

What about Stepinac, Mussolini, Franco and the whole list of dictators from Latin America bearing solid ties with the Catholic Church? They count, don't they?

Bullmoose Too

Of cousre they don't. They are not true Christians. Duh. (sarcasm.)

Avi: I thought the majority of the Japanese army were Shintoist. Shinto was the state reiligon of Japan during that time.

SkippyTheSkeptic

You know you're in for a treat when it quotes the Bible in defense of itself on the 3rd page. Then we get to page 5 and are treated to the whole "well, it's inspired but not inerrant...except that it was originally inerrant but now it isn't...it's just inspired...and thus kind of inerrant...except when it's not" song and dance.

The more apologists that I encounter, the more I realize that their arguments are almost entirely the same...

bacht

Yes, and not much different from UFOlogists, Antlanteans, New Agers, numerologists... the supernatural/paranormal/occult always trumps logic and evidence - our brains seem to be wired this way

spamandham

You should shake your head and sigh. Once your done with that, figure out how to rip them off by selling them a book of quackery that strokes their egos and tells them they're wise for their faith.