Skepfeeds-The Best Skeptical blogs of the day

Skepquote of the day

Posted in Skepquote by Skepdude on August 19, 2009

It looks to me as if being brought up with a belief in the literal truth of a misogynistic document like the Bible can inculcate the evil idea that women are possessions, and that marriage is an act of handing over a woman’s bill of sale to a man. I thought a wife was a partner, not a slave.

PZ Myers

On the veracity of the Bible

Posted in Skepdude by Skepdude on April 12, 2009

I have one question for anyone who believes the Bible to be the true word of God:

-How would you distinguish between the Bible written be the true omnibenevolent, omniscient God and the very same Bible written by a malicious God who’s just playing with us? What criteria would you use to distinguish the one from the other?

Please note that “the Bible tells me so” ain’t good enough because the content of  both books would be the same under my scenario, only the authorship would differ.

Court saves Jehovah’s Witness girl’s life

Posted in News by Skepdude on February 20, 2009

A 12-year-old Jehovah’s Witness girl has received a life-saving blood transfusion that she did not want after a Johannesburg High Court order gave doctors the go-ahead.

The girl, who suffers from leukaemia, was admitted to Chris Hani-Baragwanath Hospital on Tuesday. Despite being told that a blood transfusion was needed to save her life, the girl and her parents refused to consent to the procedure.

Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that it’s against God’s will to take other people’s blood, or one’s own blood that has been stored, into one’s body.

The official website of Watchtower, a Jehovah’s Witness organisation to which The Star was referred by the Jehovah’s Witnesses of South Africa, says: “True Christians will not accept a blood transfusion. They want to live, but they will not try to save their life by breaking God’s laws.”

The Gauteng Department of Health said doctors consulted the girl’s parents and church elders to explain the need for the transfusion. When their explanations were rejected, they brought an urgent application before the High Court on Wednesday.

The court order was issued on the same day, and the girl was given a transfusion immediately.

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE AT “THE STAR”

Do You Have Biblical Morals?

Posted in Unreasonable Faith by Skepdude on February 3, 2009

Old BibleChristians love to claim that their morality comes from the bible. And they do — to an extent. But they often forget about or ignore the evil examples and commands of their holy book.

Here’s a quiz to see if you have biblical morality. It asks questions like:

Two strangers visit your home, and you are kind enough to provide them with accommodations for the night. They tell you they are angels appearing on behalf of the Lord. However, later in the evening, an angry mob turns up seeking to sodomize your guests. What do you do?

If you buy a Hebrew servant, how many years must he serve?

READ THE REST OF THIS ENTRY AT UNREASONABLE FAITH

Christians are such nice moral folk!

Posted in Skepdude by Skepdude on January 28, 2009

You shouldn’t listen to this around small children or at work or any other such situation. I think this guy’s been reading the Satanic Bible. And why the hell is he, at least, half naked? In defense of religion, I think this guy’s missing about 3 pounds of screws to begin with, but of course religion does not help when it comes to intolerance!

The historical Jesus-Why care?

Posted in Skepdude by Skepdude on January 21, 2009

There is a lot of time and effort spent by people trying to find out if a man named Jesus actually existed or not. The search for the historical Jesus is resurrected time after time. But why care? Does this missing piece of evidence matter? Why should we as skeptics care if Jesus really existed or not?

I suppose the answer is that we don’t, we shouldn’t. Jesus’ existence has nothing to say about his supposed miracles. We know John Edward exists, I can pretty much guarantee that, but that does not have anything to say about his supposed psychic abilities. That much ought to be clear to anyone, it’s simple, straight logic. But then why are people so obsessed with the quest of the historical Jesus?

I think at the heart of this lies a logical fallacy. At least based on what I have observed, I think that the religious folks are more obsessed with this issue than the non-religious. After all they are the ones trying to prove something. I think there is a thought in their head, albeit I do allow for the possibility that in many cases this may be unconscious, that if they prove that a man named Jesus actually lived, preached and died on the cross, that would lend more credibility to the Bible as a historical book, thus lending more credibility to everything the bible says, including the miracles and the whole God stuff.

I suspect they think that proving that Jesus existed will make his described miracles more true, than if he didn’t. In a certain sense that is true. He would have to have existed in order to have performed these so-called miracles. But nevertheless, just because a man existed does not, on its own, increase the likelihood of him having walked on water. Furthermore, when we as skeptics analyze the so-called miracles, we’re already assuming, for the sake of the argument, that that human being existed. We’re not even worrying about that, because as I said, if we did not assume that, there would be no conversation to be had. So we’re already giving the benefit of the doubt to the believer. You say there was a man called Jesus who lived 2,000 years ago. Fine, I’ll accept that claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and that claim alone is not so extraordinary. The miracle claims on the other hand are quite amazing, so for those we require much more evidence than a book.

So to answer my original question, we shouldn’t care. I don’t care, it makes no difference one way or another if Jesus turns out to have actually existed or not. It’s inconsequential to the issue at hand, and there’s nothing to be gained in this regard by that piece of information.

Ricky Gervais on Genesis.

Posted in Skepdude by Skepdude on January 19, 2009

In honor of an upcoming interview with Rebecca “The Skepchick” Watson ( oh yes dear reader it’s true and I have at least one other Rogue who’s agreed to be interviewed. Stay tuned!) enjoy this video of Ricky Gervais analysing the Bible, more specifically Genesis. I did not know of him until Rebecca mentioned him while answering one of the questions, and I’m glad she did. This guy is brilliantly funny!

Five Biggest LIES About Christianity

Posted in Uncategorized by Skepdude on December 21, 2008

Oh Ed, Ed, Ed what would we do without you!

Nonsense quote of the day

Posted in Skepdude by Skepdude on November 2, 2008

Once again, a bit of biblical history has been matched up with an archaeological finding.

A team led by archaeologists from the United States and Jordan has made a discovery of perhaps biblical proportions at the Ruins of Copper (Arabic “Khirbat en-Nahas”), a region south of the Dead Sea now lying in Jordan.

The site has been known for decades to have hosted metalworking dating back some seven centuries BC. But the current team, led by Thomas Levy of the University of California–San Diego and Mohammad Najjar of Jordan’s Friends of Archaeology, unearthed materials such as seeds and sticks that are claimed to be from the 10th century BC. That was the time of King Solomon, whom the Bible notes was “greater in riches . . . than all the other kings of the earth” (1 Kings 10:23) and who had unprecedented access to natural resources, presumably including copper, but also many others from sources near and far.

Answersingenesis

I guess god’s grace knows no bounds. He gave Solomon who was “greater in riches…than all other kings of the earth” seeds and sticks. SEEDS AND STICKS! Now that deserves the term theistarded for real!

Does faith healing really work?

Posted in Edger by Skepdude on October 17, 2008

This is a follow-up to a previous post.

Ever wondered why people supposedly get out of their wheelchairs and run about on stage during a healing crusade; but no one has ever regrown an amputated limb?

There are a few possibilities:

1. God is not omnipotent. Regrowing an amputated limb is beyond what he can do. (Remember, this is the same ‘god’ who flooded the whole earth, parted the Red Sea, created humans from dust, etc). This obviously does not make sense even if you look at it from the theological side.

2. God refuses to regrow limbs due to reasons that we, being humans, are not supposed to comprehend. As the popular apologetic argument goes: We cannot understand god’s ways. Most Christians that I have spoken to love using this cop-out.

However, this runs contrary to the Bible:

(Matthew 7:7) Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!

(Matthew 21:21) I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.

Uh-oh. That argument doesn’t seem to work either.

READ THE REST OF THIS ENTRY AT “EDGER”