THIS BLOG IS NOW IN STASIS.


PLEASE VISIT MY NEW WEBSITES:


My other projects include:


TrueFreethinker.com


My side projects are:


Apologetics (with a heavy emphasis on Atheism)


Fitness Trends Examiner (wherein I review individual exercises and workout routines, diet and nutrition, supplements and healthy snacks)


My YouTube channel

11/30/09

The Most Anti-Religion Book Ever Published

Here at Atheism is Dead we have referenced and discussed very many books; some pro theism some contra theism and pro atheism some contra atheism some betwixt.

Yet, there is one anti-religion book that surpasses them all by far—very, very far.

Yes, there is one anti-religion book in particular that I have been aware of for some time but have, frankly, not developed the intestinal fortitude to tackle.

This book is so very anti-religion and makes such cutting statements against religion that, when discussing such matters, it is often all but ignored by both atheists and Christian apologists.

As powerful and destructive of the whole concept of religion as this book is it will, at some point, have to be tackle by someone.

I am not even writing this post as an announcement of triumph over the book’s arguments but merely to all but admit utter flummoxed defeat. It surely requires a mind much, much sharper mine to tackle this book. Compared to what is surely required to overturn this book’s attacks upon religion my mind is about as sharp as a Nerf ball.

This “book” is actually a volume which consists of the thoughts of one conceiver and was penned by 40 authors. Thus, the volume actually consists of 66 books.





This book typically goes by the title: The Bible.





Here are some examples of the Bible’s anti-religion statements:
This people draws near with words only and honors me with their lips alone, though their hearts are far from me, and their reverence for me has become routine observances of the precepts of men (Isaiah 29:13, Jesus quotes this verse in Matthew 15:8).

Has the LORD [as] [great] delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, [And] to heed than the fat of rams (1st Samuel 15:22).

“To what purpose [is] the multitude of your sacrifices to Me?” Says the LORD. “I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams. And the fat of fed cattle. I do not delight in the blood of bulls, Or of lambs or goats…Bring no more futile sacrifices; Incense is an abomination to Me. The New Moons, the Sabbaths, and the calling of assemblies—I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred meeting…Put away the evil of your doings from before My eyes. Cease to do evil, Learn to do good; Seek justice, Rebuke the oppressor; Defend the fatherless, Plead for the widow” (see Isaiah 1:11-17).

For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, And the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings (Hosea 6:6, also see 2:11; 4:6).

The Psalmist addresses God thusly,
Sacrifice and offering You did not desire; my ears You have opened. Burnt offering and sin offering You did not require (Psalm 40:6).

For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it; you do not delight in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, a broken and a contrite heart—these, O God, You will not despise (Psalms 51:16-17).


To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice (Proverbs 21:3).

…to love one’s neighbor as oneself, is more than all the whole burnt offerings and sacrifices (Mark 12:33).

There actually appears to be one favorable reference to religion in the Bible and it is when it is defined thusly,
Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world (James 1:27)

But wait a minute; did not God Himself establish the Jewish religion and the Christian religion? Did not God promulgate the 613 commandments (which a Jew never had to keep) many of which prescribe religious ordinances? Did not God ordain baptism, communion, etc.?

Therefore, God established and later besmirch religion!

This would be a good emotive/polemical point yet, overly simplistic and caricatured.

Christians, when allowed the privilege of defining themselves, have long stated that Christianity is not a religion but a relation—a relationship with God.

Judaism is to be considered a peoplehood, people who traditionally held to certain tenets. Let us consider some Jewish history.

When God freed the Israelites from slavery in Egypt (and I have yet to read anything by any atheist condemning Egyptian slavery) God was building up a nation from the ground up. The Israelites were institutionalized due to four centuries of slavery. They were freed and had to be provided a premise upon which to be build into a nation.

This premise was the God, their God, the one true God, the one who defeated the Egyptian gods had freed them and was making them into a nation, a people—recall that God stated, “against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment” (Exodus 12:12).

The Israelites agreed to abide by God’s laws and live according to them in their nation. In order to break their institutionalization God provided them guidelines that would place their attention where it belonged—on God.

The modern day environmental movement, even the most extreme sorts, present us with a good example of what the Law, the Torah, was meant to accomplish. The environmentalists hold to a save the Earth worldview. This means that everything they do, purchase, utilize, eat and discard is filtered through the question: how will this affect the environment?

Likewise, everything that the Israelites did was filtered through the question: how will this affect my relationship with God? Or, what has God said about this? Or, do I choose my own will or God’s? Or, some such question.

The Torah was meant to function as building blocks or a staircase that was meant to build the Israelites from institutionalized slaves to free agents who learned thesis and antithesis thinking, discerning, deciding, reason, etc.—recall that it was God who stated, “let us reason together” (Isaiah 1:18). This is why the Jews have considered illiteracy to be a sin and have always been known as academicians, scholars, intellects, scientists, jurists, etc.

There came a time when the Israelites were performing rituals robotically. They seemed to forget that the spirit of the law was the surface upon which the letter of the law was written. You may have heard about a Shabbat Goy; this is a Gentile whom a Jew may get to perform certain tasks that are unlawful for the Jew to perform during the Sabbath. Thus, the Jew could still get what she wanted accomplished during the Sabbath but not be technically performing those functions herself.

Nationally, the Israelites had reached the point of forgetting what the rituals meant, what they were conveying, to what they pointed, their ultimate purpose and were simply jumping through ritualistic hoops. This, at this level, at this point, really is what is commonly termed “religion” and it is condemnable—God condemns it.

The rituals were meant to symbolically represent one’s relationship to God (as well as the coming Messiah for example). They were meant to enact a change from institutionalized slaves, to people who could daily make various decisions for themselves via laws and rituals, to ultimately changing the persona.

Thus, God emphasizes to them that He wants and what is wrong with “religion”:

They are merely going through the motions whilst “their hearts are far from me” and they are merely following “the precepts of men.”

God emphasizes that to obey and heed is better than sacrifice. What is the point of the performing the sacrifice if it is merely the performance of a religious duty—quite literally; merely a performance?

Just what is the point? “Cease to do evil, Learn to do good; Seek justice, Rebuke the oppressor; Defend the fatherless, Plead for the widow.”

Why? Because God “desire[s] mercy and not sacrifice, And the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.”

Judaism has long known that the commandments in the Torah where temporary and that the Messiah would fulfill them.

The Gospel message was given to the first two people who ever lived and thus: it has always been in the ever since. In Genesis 3:15
I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.

This is known as the protoevangelium and it denotes that the seed of the woman (note: not the seed of the man) will crush the serpent’s (symbolic of satan) head (ultimate defeat) while satan bruises the seed’s heel (a strike, not defeat). Thus, the belief in the ultimate redeemer has always been known and is in the most ancient knowledge of the ancient peoples.
Don Richardson conducted some interesting research in the area and published a book entitled: Eternity in Their Hearts: Startling Evidence of Belief in the One True God in Hundreds of Cultures Throughout the World


Note Rabbi Saul of Tarsus, aka Paul the Apostle’s condemnation of the trappings, and I mean literal traps, or religion gleaned from Colossians ch. 2:
Beware lest anyone cheat you…according to the tradition of men…So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. Let no one cheat you…taking delight in false humility and worship of angels…if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations—“Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men? These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.

Or consider what he stated as gleaned from Galatians ch. 4:
…when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world. But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!” Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods. But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage? You observe days and months and seasons and years.

Thus, ritual was meant to be indicative. Paul, notes this in stating,
So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ (Colossians 2:16-17).

Thus, let us keep in mind that when anyone besmirches “religion” they are merely seconding the Bible and God Himself. Indeed, religion, the sort against which atheists and various anti-Judeo-Christians rail is the very same religion against which God rails—and He was first.

12 comments:

  1. Mariano, you have done it again!!!! Awesome!!!! I concur!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with these other guys...good work Mariano! A very enjoyable and thought provoking read.

    But I'm curious about something; what is your opinion (if you have one) on baptism by water? Isn't that a sort of "religious ritual"? And since Jesus participated in it Himself, aren't we as Christians pretty much required to do it too?

    Personally speaking, I was seven years old when I was baptized (and I chose to do it, my parents sure didn't push me into it), but I haven't attended a church even semi-regularly since I was about 15 because I'm not a big fan of organized religion. So it's not like I'm plugging Baptist churches here or anything by asking the question. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm not a big fan of organized religion

    You prefer disorganised religion?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Rhology wrote: "You prefer disorganised religion?"

    For brevity's sake, since I could ramble on and on about it, let me just give a quick answer and say I prefer a personal relationship with God through our Lord Jesus Christ over showing up to a church with throngs of people every Sunday (or Saturday, whatever the case may be). That's not to say that I think churches are inherently bad, in fact I think they tend to benefit the majority of people who attend (at least the smaller ones). I'm just saying that for me, on a personal level, I tend to feel closer to God as a "lone wolf Christian" so to speak. Jesus said that if two or more people were gathered in His name, that He'd be there among them; note the number: He didn't say there was a minimum requirement of a congregation of 20 or 50 or 200 or whatever, so I don't see church attendance as a required part of the package when a person becomes a Christian. If it benefits you or whoever, great, I just don't think it's a requirement, and it's not something I prefer for myself.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You do realise that in saying that He was commanding you to be part of a church, don't you?
    Read the context - it's CHURCH discipline.

    Heb 10:23-25, how will you fulfill that as a lone-wolf "Christian"? How about any of 1 or 2 Thess? 1 Cor 8-14? Heb 13:17?
    All the "brethren"s in the NT?

    For real, and I'm not just trying to be a jerk here, you need to join a church. Immediately. Start looking. You are disobeying many, many direct commands of God in holding yourself aloof.

    Peace,
    Rhology

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rhology:

    Or he could just start a fellowship with local believers. I know plenty of Christians who don't wish to join a church who do that. It also helps avoid the whole "denomination" thing which I see really gets in the way of fellowship sometimes.

    signed "that anonymous troll" ;)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks for the concern Rhology, and thanks for the back-up anonymous troll. I'll have to look up those scriptures, re-read them, and take what you say into consideration. Thing is, I have never gotten the idea from reading the Bible that being an offering giving part of a church was a requirement, but then I'm never too old to learn something new either. Thanks for the recommendation...I've got me some reading to do tonight. :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well, I hate to interrupt you guys but… :o)

    There is a certain equivocation of terms. After all, the atheist activist Michael Newdow claims that atheism is a religion.

    I would say that the point of baptism is an outward sign of an inward commitment, of repentance, of dying and being raised again in the Messiah while manmade “religion” would tell you that it is a magic trick of sorts. Recall my point that the rituals were to affect change but some turned them into robotic hoop jumping.

    aDios,
    Mariano

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anon,

    No, you're absolutely right. I'm glad to have the opportunity for clarification, b/c in no way do I think nor does the Bible teach that one's church has to be in a fancy, specific building, nor have a denomination's name applied to it. But it has to have certain traits - a group. Of believers. Who know who each other are (ie, a sort of membership). Who baptise converts when God grants them. Who praise God. Who fellowship together. Who celebrate the Lord's Table together. Who pray together. Who give money and service toward the Kingdom. Who study the Word of God together.

    That's pretty much it.
    Lou, please know I don't mean to be argumentative just for the sake of argument. I really do blv this and want the best for you. God has blessed my wife and me so much thru His church, but that wouldn't be available if we weren't in it.

    Grace and peace,
    Rhology

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rhology wrote: "Lou, please know I don't mean to be argumentative just for the sake of argument."

    Not at all Brother, I understood where you were coming from, and again, I thank you for your concern. Maybe I should've been a little more clear about where I was coming from. I have been in at least one Bible study group that some guys and I arranged at this place where I used to work, I currently have weekly Bible readings with friends and family (in which I encourage others to join in if they like), I've given an actual sermon once (boy was that unnerving, getting up in front of a crowd of people) I go out and witness to other people, I send money to causes I believe in, and on occasion I will attend a church or two...I basically do the whole nine yards, I just don't belong to any particular church or denomination...pretty much what anonymous troll mentioned. So I guess I could've kept this shorter and sweeter by simply saying: "Yeah, what he said!" ;)

    If and when I start going to a particular church, I would like for it to be one in which I agree at least 110% with what they're teaching. I don't want some pastor to tickle the ears of the congregation or buckle to political correctness...I don't want to walk into a fashion show comparing clothes or cars every Sunday morning...I don't want it to be a three ring circus with tele-monitors and theater styled seating (we even have a church here in town that has a COFFEE SHOP set up inside of it, can you believe that?!) Maybe I have unrealistic demands...I don't know.

    But rest assured Bro, I'm not sitting on the Good News or keeping it hidden just because of the "lone wolf" status. You make a great point about fellowship and all, and perhaps one day I'll find a church that "feels right", but until then I wouldn't necessarily consider myself any less of a Christian. :)

    Thanks again for the clarification and your concern. And Mariano, if you're reading this thanks for fielding the question!

    Your Brother in Christ,
    -Lou-

    ReplyDelete
  11. (we even have a church here in town that has a COFFEE SHOP set up inside of it, can you believe that?!

    Oh, yes, I believe it. Seen it myself. May the Lord have mercy.

    ReplyDelete