Who Do You Think
This Whore Is?
Roger Wray

Graphic Rule

From: "Positive Atheism" <editor@positiveatheism.org>
To:
Subject: Re: Who is right?
Date: October 15, 2001 2:05 AM

I heard this exact same sentence numerous times thirty years ago, but we're all still here. What the Bible prognosticators and fortune tellers told us back then ("things that must surely come to pass") did not come to pass. The only Bible passage that can be said to have accurately foretold anything was the one that predicted:

Transparent Spacer
Quote Graphic Rule

there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
     -- II Peter 3:3-4

Quote Graphic Rule
Transparent Spacer

The fact that this would be the only Bible prediction ever to be unquestionably and unambiguously "fulfilled" makes sense considering that the charlatans and hypocrites who predicted the end of the world knew that they were just sitting there making these "predictions" up as they went along. Any dark and sinister doomsday imagery that they could find in the Hebrew Scriptures and the Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha was fair game to be reinterpreted, reapplied, and used as fodder to construct wild new poetic imagery designed to agitate the members of this new doomsday cult into becoming more and more dependent on the cult for every aspect of thinking and living.

Especially prominent in Christian doomsday literature of every era is the strong urge never to trust one's own thinking on this or any other matter. These carney side-show hawkers knew full well that they were pulling a fast one on the poor, gullible, ignorant members of the slave class who tended to join their most profitable little religious cult. So of course it makes perfect sense that these "predictions" from Second Peter, warning that some people will catch on to their wiles, becomes a very important element in their quest to entice their members to stop thinking for themselves and to stop thinking they can validate, refute, or otherwise check out the claims of the religious charlatans.

The only other thing that happened of any significance (but was not predicted) was that those who wrote these books and traveled the countryside delivering these sermons never had to work a day in their lives for as long as they lived, because it's human nature to want to know a mystery.

All that's changed is that now different Bible passages are now being said to have different interpretations than they did back then. Those passages that were said to have dealt with the Soviet Union are now strangely forgotten. And nobody could ever agree as to which passages refer to the United States.

You can force the Bible to say anything you want it to say (that's why there are so many different denominations of Christianity).
 

This imagery for Rome was common long before the Book of Revelation was published. What's your point?
 

One place in the Bible says that to God, a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day.
 

Why do you take only one part of this passage and run with it as if you're onto something? What is wrong with the other half of the statement that you do not take it into consideration? The traditional and common and popular and natural interpretation of this passage is that one of our days is, to God, as long as a thousand years and a thousand of our years, to God, go by as if that whole period were a single day.

In order for you to change the meaning of this passage so that you can entice your prospective converts into thinking that you have the key to unlocking this mystery of your own making, you must first cut the passage in half. Then, after getting rid of half of the passage, you're still left with the task of changing the meaning of the half that you're left with! Why do the Doomsday Christians so readily change the very words of their own God?

Could it be that if you took the entire statement into play, you would no longer have a point? that you'd have to make converts the hard way, through sound and honest argument involving human reason and truthfulness? Why, you could no longer trick your marks into accepting Christ, but would have to try to come up with valid reasons why they ought to go along with your game!
 

I think the Evangelical wing of the Christian religion is the biggest whore that human history has ever seen. Evangelical Christianity does not work for what it gets, but instead plays on the passions and emotions of its victims so it can profit from their miseries while pretending to bring them comfort. Is that not what a whore does? and does not the Evangelical wing of the Christian religion have representatives near every significant body of water on the face of the Earth.
 

Please tell me which cases ruled like this -- Who versus Whom, case numbers, dates, and the whole bit. It may be fun to bandy about those ominous two words, Supreme Court, but in order to make a case with me, you'll have to tell me which case said what and then explain to me how this has changed things so that "animal life has now been placed upon the same level as human life."
 

The United States would never lift a finger against Israel, and has even allowed her to get away with the cold-blooded murder of 34 young American soldiers and officers (and 171 others were seriously wounded) on June 8, 1967, in the unprovoked and unjustified attack of the USS Liberty.
 

Legal abortion is health care; back-alley abortions are deadly. When you make abortion illegal, you don't stop abortion from happening, you simply make the procedure more dangerous. You also make it so that the rich can afford safer abortions and the poor must depend on what they can get -- even if it's an uncle who is a retired veterinarian or even one of her girlfriends with a coat hanger.

What are you going to do about it? Why don't you do this: If you don't like abortion, then don't have an abortion! If you don't believe in drinking alcohol, then don't drink it!

If you Fundamentalist Christians were not so meddling, if you were not so utterly greedy about it, we would have long ago worked something out to where you wouldn't have to pay for abortion either through your tax dollar or in your health plan. Abortion would be a special rider or would be covered by a separate plan altogether. Indigent people would have plenty of opportunity through private charity. Unfortunately, Evangelical Christians want to ban abortion entirely, and so we've had to spend all our resources just keeping this medical procedure legal. That accomplished, we have no more time, energy, or money (or even willingness) to try to accommodate the real moral issue here: Christians and others who think abortion is wrong should not have to pay for this procedure through their tax dollar or through their health plan.

Ah, but you did it to yourselves. And that's just what being greedy does to a person (or group): by the time the rest of us have dealt with the problem of you, we have no willingness left to try to accommodate your desires.

Why do you Fundamentalist Christians always want things to go on a one-way street? You don't like abortion so you want to ban it for everybody. However, you want your kids to pray, so you try to make it so all kids are required to pray your Christian prayers in the public school classroom. You want it so that nobody has the option of letting their kids avoid the patently immoral influence of government-mandated Christian ritual.

Through the hypocrisy of Evangelical Christians such as yourself, we regular folks now spend large quantities of our own resources just keeping our kids away from the influence of the Christian religion. Rather than simply ignoring Evangelical Christianity (like we can Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, Mormonism, Humanism, atheism, and regular Christianity), we now face the unpleasant and disconcerting duty of explaining to our kids that there is one group at work in our society that is truly dangerous. We must expose our children to teachings of which we'd just as soon they remain ignorant -- and we do this just to warn our children about you people, the Fundamentalist Christians, the greedy and childish ones.

Evangelical Christianity is such an unhealthy influence on our children that just to protect them, we must teach them how to think and act like bigots! We must warn them about an entire group of people rather than teaching them to judge every individual on her or his own merits. This is wrong, but what other choices do we have? My parents only had to worry about explaining to us why we should not take candy from strangers: pedophiles were the biggest danger we faced as children. There was no such thing as the threat of Evangelical Christianity coming in and, through the sanction of the schools, telling our children that our morality and our religious view is wrong or inferior!

But now we must spend time and money teaching our children exactly what hypocrisy is and exactly what bigotry is and we must explain how adults can be so childish and so greedy.
 

This happened in 1948, not 1945. Israel took nothing, but the allies who had conquered that land as part of a settlement during World War II gave it to a group of Jews simply because the Jewish people had been almost completely exterminated by the Nazis. The Jews later grabbed much more land than had initially been given to them by the allies, who had no right to give it to them in the first place, considering that it has always belonged to the Palestinians, who lived there long before the Jews took it from them the first time.

No, that land has not "always belonged" to Jews, unless you folks have changed the Bible even more than I previously feared! In fact, it has never rightfully belonged to them, but rather they came in and slaughtered the original inhabitants of the land. If the Jews' own history of themselves is to be believed, Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldees, of southern Babylonia -- not Palestine! First the land belonged to seven tribes (according to the Bible). Then Moses and Joshua slaughtered those tribes and numerous others and stole the land and occupied it for several hundred years. Then the Babylonians came in and liberated the land and gave it back to its rightful owners. But the Jews came in again and conquered the land once more, again killing those who would dare get in their way. An attempt was made by the Greeks to return the land to its rightful owners, but the Jews prevailed in this conflict. Finally, the Romans, through Titus, had had enough with them and flattened the land, giving it back, once again, to the tribes who had always lived there. Later those tribes converted to Islam and the Christians came by and tried to take it over for themselves (thinking they were now the "true Jews"). The rightful owners of the land (before Joshua and the Maccabees and the Crusades) prevailed and the land remained at peace for almost 800 years after the slaughter wrought by the Christians. But the land was never theirs. They have occupied it several times, but each time it was eventually liberated by outside forces and given back to its rightful owners. I suspect that this will happen again real soon -- probably during your lifetime if not mine.

What's really hilarious about this "Nation of Israel" thing is that the Doomsday Christians who make a big thing of the modern nation of Israel always talk about the judgements that will be meted out against any country who'd dare to oppose their nationhood. This idea does not come from the Bible, however; rather (as far as I can tell), it comes from a misreading of Edward Gibbon's monumental 1776 epic history book, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire." Here, Gibbon appears to make the observation that no nation has survived which has gone against the Hebrew people. Christians have been using this one since before I was a kid in their attempts to keep America from withdrawing support for this patently racist nation of usurpers. Were it not for the tribal legends of the Doomsday Christians, America might have used the human rights angle and dealt sternly with this group which, because they enjoy our full support, is able to get away with even the murder of 34 Americans -- not to mention the virtually uninvestigated disappearance of a substantial amount of plutonium plus the destabilization of dozens of Islamic nations representing almost one-sixth of the world's population.

Meanwhile, there are more atheists in the United States than there are Jews in the world. But you'd think we atheistic Americans had just run over a puppy or something horrible like that, considering the wholesale mistreatment that we endure from all sides.

The Doomsday Christians have everything they need as far as American policy goes and then some -- and now you're sniveling and acting as if you want even more! Your behavior and attitude in this letter coincides precisely with my over thirty years of experience in dealing with Evangelical Christians, trying to find a way to justify giving them the benefit of the doubt but getting nailed every time. But as Lenny Bruce's caricature of the Jewish mother of a homosexual said, "And he's so good-hearted, too!" Yes, I'll always try to find that one reason that I can give somebody -- anybody -- the benefit of the doubt. That's because I think it is wrong to judge all members of a group by the same criteria. I prefer to judge each individual by his or her own behavior. However, with this one group, the Evangelical Christians, I'm still waiting for that one exception to the rule.

Cliff Walker
Positive Atheism Magazine
Six years of service to
     people with no reason to believe

Graphic Rule

Graphic Rule

From: "Positive Atheism" <editor@positiveatheism.org>
To:
Subject: Re: Who is right?
Date: October 16, 2001 12:35 AM

You are a bigot. Please do not write to any addresses in our domains any more.

And I notice that your bigotry has a Scriptural foundation (Romans 1:16-32). Institutionalized bigotry is the most destructive form of bigotry, because the bigots think their bigotry is the very will of God! People who would ordinarily be very lovely people have been known to kill their ideological opponents because Scripture told them to hate certain types of people.

This is the main reason I'm glad that the claims of the Christian religion are so easily refuted: I certainly wouldn't want for Christianity to be true, because then I'd have to join the church in the interest of truthfulness. And then I'd probably end up becoming a bigot like yourself -- hating people and making life miserable for them simply because I thought that was God's will for me.

Cliff Walker
Positive Atheism Magazine
Six years of service to
     people with no reason to believe

Graphic Rule

Material by Cliff Walker (including unsigned editorial commentary) is copyright ©1995-2006 by Cliff Walker. Each submission is copyrighted by its writer, who retains control of the work except that by submitting it to Positive Atheism, permission has been granted to use the material or an edited version: (1) on the Positive Atheism web site; (2) in Positive Atheism Magazine; (3) in subsequent works controlled by Cliff Walker or Positive Atheism Magazine (including published or posted compilations). Excerpts not exceeding 500 words are allowed provided the proper copyright notice is affixed. Other use requires permission; Positive Atheism will work to protect the rights of all who submit their writings to us.