So President Bush “Lied” About the Existence of Saddam Hussein’s WMDs?

Yeah, I know… this is an old topic but it’s one that keeps coming up again, and again, and again in discussions.  People keep saying that he “lied” about Saddam’s WMDs,”so that” he could justify a war in Iraq—ostensibly for oil.  Really?  I think it’s time to put this baby to bed once and for all.

My recollection is that for several years leading up to the war in Iraq, pretty much the ENTIRE WORLD was saying that Saddam had these weapons and that he was actively seeking to gain more, and to obtain nuclear (or “nucular,” for President Bush) weapons capability as well.  Virtually every national intelligence agency in the world said that he possessed (chemical and biological) weapons of mass destruction and that he had no qualms about using them–even on his own people.  They said that he represented a dangerous threat to the Middle East and to the world at large.  EVERYONE was saying it.  How is, then, that President George W. Bush “lied” when he said the exact same thing?  Did the rest of world lie as well?  Did they do so in order to help President Bush bamboozle the citizens of his own country, or did they have their own reasons for saying that Saddam had these weapons—like maybe that their own national intelligence bureaus were telling them that Saddam had these weapons as well?  Oh, and the worldwide press was also stating it as well.

Look, I am NOT a fan of President George W. Bush’s—at all.  In fact, I would have MUCH preferred that President Clinton had been allowed to serve two more terms than to have had Old G.W. at the helm.  But I believe in telling the TRUTH.  For me, this was a dead issue a VERY long time ago.  Saddam ran an extremely secretive government, and the world at large could do little more than speculate (based on limited intel and the information they could obtain from U.N. weapons inspection reports, I imagine) about the nature and extent of Saddam’s weapons programs.  See?  The world at large–including President Bush thought Saddam had WMDs.  Personally, I just don’t see a lie here.  Not even a small deception.  Bush and his people were saying the SAME THING the rest of the world was saying.

So the ones who seem to be “lying” are those who keep insisting that the President lied about this.  So how about this… I’ll concede that President Bush lied, if those who continually accuse him of lying will FIRST concede that all the following people ALSO lied about Saddam’s WMDs (and please take note of the party affiliation of each):

• “One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.  That is our bottom line.”  — (Democrat) President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
• “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.  We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”  — (Democrat) President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
• “Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here.  For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.”  — Madeline Albright, (Democrat) Feb 18, 1998
• “He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”  — Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, (Democrat) Feb, 18, 1998
• “[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”  — Letter to President Clinton, signed by: (Democrat) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
• “Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”  — Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
• “Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”  — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, (Democrat) Nov. 10, 1999
• “There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs.  Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status.  In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”  — Letter to President Bush, Signed by: Sen. Bob Graham (Democrat, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
• “We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region.  He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.”  — Sen. Carl Levin (Democrat, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
• “We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”  — Former Vice President Al Gore, (Democrat) Sept. 23, 2002
• “Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”  — Former Vice President Al Gore, (Democrat) Sept. 23, 2002
• “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”  — Sen. Ted Kennedy (Democrat, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
• “The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.  We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.  Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons.”  — Sen. Robert Byrd (Democrat, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
• “I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force—if necessary—to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”  — Sen. John F. Kerry (Democrat, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
• “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years.  We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”  — Sen. Jay Rockefeller (Democrat, WV), Oct 10, 2002
• “He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.  This he has refused to do.”  — Rep. Henry Waxman (Democrat, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
• “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program.  He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members.  It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”  — Sen. Hillary Clinton (Democrat, NY), Oct 10, 2002
• “We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”  — Sen. Bob Graham (Democrat, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
• “Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein.  He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime.  He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation.  And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.  So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real.”  — Sen. John F. Kerry (Democrat, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 (Only two months before the invasion of Iraq!)

So… President Bush lied, huh?  Tricked us all, did he?  As I said, I’ll concede that nonsense as soon as the dishonest Bush-haters concede that all the Democrats listed above lied as well.  Besides, don’t the Bush-haters also call him “stupid?”  Well, you can’t have it both ways.  Either he is a dense country bumpkin, or he is uber-brilliant and deceived and manipulated all the intelligence agencies of the entire world to justify “his” war in Iraq.  Pa-leeeze!  The man can’t even pronounce nuclear!

It’s time to stop hating… and LYING!

Hopefully, that is enough said on this ridiculous topic!

Peace…

“I am here to challenge your comfortable and familiar perceptions and paradigms—to help awaken you—to make you think.” — AAJG

Hispanics to Obama: “We helped you, now you help us.”

A response to the article found here.

———————————————

“Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”  My, how our nation has changed since the days of President John F. Kennedy.

So the Hispanics feel that they “helped” President Obama, and they now demand that he “help” them in return?  Wow.  Blatant political quid pro quo.  Conceptually, how is this any different from a professional lobbyist who makes a significant campaign contribution to a lawmaker, in exchange for a vote that will benefit those whom the lobbyist represents?  It just sounds sleazy and unethical—and it’s probably even illegal.  It’s one of the things that is most wrong with our country now.

“We helped you, now you help us.”  It makes it sound as if it was either the illegal aliens who “helped” the president (by voting illegally?) and now they want amnesty for themselves and their families; or maybe the Hispanic U.S. citizens voted en masse for him and now are demanding amnesty for their illegal alien brethren—based solely on their ethnicity.  Neither of them sound very good for America.

John Kennedy’s words should apply just as powerfully to new immigrants and to prospective immigrants, as they do to American citizens.  There is far too much ME in America today.  It is very sad.  It is too bad we haven’t had a president who is a real leader, and a healer, and a much needed “Uniter-in-Chief” in a LONG, long time.  President Obama is not that man.  He has already proven that.  President Bush certainly wasn’t.  He proved it too. President Clinton was far closer than most, I think, but even he was a long way from what we really needed.

It certainly would be nice if the so-called “experts” in our government would finally do the right thing and CLOSE ALL BORDERS, and then adopt a sensible immigration policy and guest-worker programs that are in the best interests of the U.S. and its citizens and just end this nightmare!  But they won’t.  Ever.  So in reality, this issue/debate/problem will never go away.

All the turmoil, and the anger, and the division, and the “racial” tensions are killing us as a nation; as is the “me-and-my-group-first-at-all-costs” selfishness that seems so prevalent these days.

I believe it is mostly governments and religions that create the feelings in people’s hearts that are often perceived by others to be “racist.”  These things don’t exist naturally in the hearts of the vast majority of human beings (of any race or ethnicity), I think—least of all Americans of the 21st century (among the most generous and welcoming people in the world).  In this case, our government has continued to grossly mishandle the border/immigration issue for decades (PURPOSEFULLY and for political gain for themselves and for their respective parties).  They are knowingly allowing a bad situation to exist and to continually worsen, and when IT (i.e., the situation that THEY created and allowed to continue) causes great tensions between the citizens of our country (and also with and for the peoples of the world who want to immigrate here), they simply allow it to continue (because it serves their strategic political purposes to do so) and they label the citizens “racist” (or allow them to be wrongly labeled so by those who support unfettered immigration) instead of looking at the truth of what is happening and taking responsibility for CAUSING and perpetuating the problem themselves, and then implementing a sensible and PERMANENT solution that ACTUALLY WORKS–and one which creates/restores peace, harmony, and unity among the citizenry—including the newly immigrated and those who are here as non-citizens on visas or work programs.

In this particular case, millions upon millions of Americans are angry over the illegal and disrespectful WAY millions of citizens of other countries are coming here, and the disrespect that they show once here.  My wife is a first-generation Mexican-American and she literally can’t stand what she calls “the arrogant and disrespectful way they come here.”  She says it embarrasses her and it angers her, as a Mexican-American.  Millions of Americans (of all races and ethnicities) agree with her, and they are no more racist than she is, though that label will continue to be purposefully misapplied—because it is an effective way to shut people up and win debates.  (BTW, my wife’s parents immigrated here legally in the 1950’s, and have become proud U.S. citizens.)

And now, President Obama, as Samwise Gamgee said to Faramir of Gondor in the caves of Henneth Annûn in J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, “Now’s a chance to show your quality.”  SOLVE the problem and help heal our nation!  Show us some change we can ALL believe in.  BEGIN with CLOSING DOWN both borders, or anything else you do is a total joke!  If you permanently sealed off both borders FIRST, I think all Americans would be drawn to your intelligent leadership and would be okay with any sort of amnesty program you want to implement (even those who might otherwise oppose it), because they would be assured that this is the LAST time America will have to go through this!  Then, I think all concerned would be mostly satisfied, and some pretty significant national divisions could finally be healed.  It’s time to show your quality, Sir!

It’s Time to End the Tax-Exempt Status for churches and other religious organizations!

Our economy is in deep trouble.  We all know that.  We are deeper in debt than ever before in American history, and this problem grows continually worse by the day.  American families are being squeezed between rising prices, lowering wages, and the constant threat of new taxation to generate more revenue for the federal government.

Meanwhile, churches and religious organizations of all faiths enjoy tax-free 501(c)3 status.  They pay NO taxes, and apparently they have special sections written into the tax code that exempt them from oversight–even by the IRS!

So while many ordinary American citizens are barely making it AND are responsible for most of the tax burden that sustains this nations governmental operations, mega-churches and religious organizations all over America deal in untold BILLIONS of dollars in revenue/monies each year (collectively) but they are exempt from paying taxes!  The also get many other perks as a result of their tax-exempt status.  It seems manifestly unfair for the vast religious community to enjoy such a special status, especially in times such as these, and to force a greater tax burden onto the strained backs of the American public as a result.

Many of the leaders of these mega-churches live like kings and queens compared to the rest of us, and they wield great wealth.  For example, Joel Osteen bought the former Compaq Center (the previous home stadium of the NBA’s Houston Rockets) to serve as his church building!!!!  The links at the bottom will allow you to see the shocking way many of these people live.  I strongly encourage you to review them.  Do these people really need tax-exempt status?!  I’m sure the rest of us could maybe “prosper” too, if we could enjoy such tax-exempt status for awhile.

You know, there is already something kind of sleazy-feeling in the way these people raise money for themselves, and their palaces, and their special projects.  Really.  Buy the “miracle water” and we can be healed or blessed?  Buy a “prayer shawl” to become closer to the lord?  Purchasing a “miracle manna loaf” will help us understand the principles of prosperity?  ANOTHER set of DVDs that we “need?”  ANOTHER book?  You need ANOTHER “love gift” from everyone in order to renovate your mansion… er… I mean… in order to keep doing the lord’s important work?  (A desperate, captive audience, being manipulated and slowly drained of money and hope.)  But on top of all the (literally) unfettered sleaze and manipulation, they enjoy tax-exempt status and freedom from government oversight as well?!  Something is very wrong here!  It is time for a change.  “Change we can believe in.”

I agree with President Obama that richer Americans should pay a bit more in taxes–especially now.  I also think it is time the government reconsiders its policy of tax-exempting religious organizations (of ALL faiths) and changes the tax code so that they PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE too!  After all, if we are all in this together–it should include us ALL.

To that end, I have just started a petition through the White House’s web site.  If you agree with me that it is time to end this “religious welfare,” especially at a time when we need our whole team on the field (ALL people and organizations paying their fair share and doing their part), then I hope that you will sign this petition.  If 25,000 people visit the petition site and sign by Dec 10th, then the White House staff will officially review it and consider it.  I hope you will help.

Please click HERE to view and sign the official petition.  Thanks very much!

———————————————————————

Here are just a few sites that provide some eye-opening information on how these people live. You will be SHOCKED:

• Taxpayers Pay for Televangelists’ Lavish Lifestyles
• Greedy Televangelists!  Where’s all that money going?
• Lifestyles of The Tele-Evangelist:  Fleecing The Flock
• A Slideshow: America’s 10 Biggest Mega-churches
• Televangelist builds $4 milllion home while employees lose jobs
• Grassley Says Subpoena of Church Data Possible if Televangelists Do Not Cooperate

The “Omniscience” of God

Christians (and let’s be fair… the followers of all religions with gods) are taught to believe that their “god” is omniscient (i.e., he possesses all-inclusive knowledge regarding everything that has ever been, everything that currently is, everything that will ever be, and everything that has ever been possible—even if it never actually came to pass. You know… everything). I assume that this also means that he possesses all wisdom and understanding regarding the deepest meanings of the knowledge he possesses and the seemingly infinite possible applications of this knowledge; and that he possesses perfect clarity of foresight and perfect foreknowledge regarding the outcome of the things that he (and everyone else) plans, or does, or causes to be done—and that he can see with perfect clarity how all of these things fit together in some sort of giant, multi-dimensional mosaic we call “life” or “reality.” In other words, nothing can ever surprise him if he is truly omniscient, and possesses perfect wisdom, perfect understanding, perfect insight, and perfect judgment (as we are lied… I mean, led to believe). Surely he must have perfect, advance knowledge of how everything will turn out and he only does the wisest, most righteous, most just things, right?  I mean, his “children” can count on him, right?  He is, after all, perfect and loving and righteous… isn’t he?

IF it is true that nothing can surprise “god” and that he has perfect foreknowledge of how everything will turn out (in spite of our free will to make random, illogical, meaningless, emotional, disjointed, selfish, unpredictable, impetuous choices, and then to change our minds over and over again), and IF it is true that the totality of everything that has ever happened is a combination of: (1) things that god purposefully and directly caused to happen, (2) things that happened as a consequence of something that god purposefully and directly caused to happen (though it too was foreseen by his omniscient mind and purposefully allowed to happen), (3) things that happened as a result of mankind’s free will (which he supposedly gave us, so refer to number 2) or mankind’s fallen state (which HE caused in more than one way, so refer to numbers 1 & 2), (4) things caused by so-called “supernatural forces of evil” (which HE created and turned loose on the world, according to the bible, so refer to numbers 1 and 2) or (5) things that happen as a result of natural forces such as physics (which HE created and which he either passively allows to happen or fails to plan for, so refer to numbers 1 and 2); IF these things are true, then isn’t everything that has ever happened or ever will happen, in effect, really “GOD’S” FAULT?  Not ready to go there yet?  Fair enough. Let’s take a look at a few of the more “brilliant” things “god” has done, as documented in his own bible, and judge his culpability—and let’s judge his omniscience, his perfect wisdom, his perfect judgment, and his fitness as a “heavenly father.”

Now obviously, I could be wrong, but it occurs to me that if “god” were truly an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent being who loves us and wants the best for us:

• Shouldn’t god have anticipated that his Archangel Lucifer (aka, satan) would lead an angelic revolt against him, and that he would find it necessary to cast him and his followers out of heaven and reclassify them as “demons” and “evil spirits,” and shouldn’t he have foreseen that they (led by Lucifer/satan) would spend an eternity tormenting his beloved children and leading them into “sin” and ultimately into eternal damnation in hell? (Revelation 12:7-9 — “Then war broke out in heaven. [Really?  War?  In heaven?  God can’t even manage things in his own “paradise?”]  Michael and his angels fought against the dragon [i.e., satan], and the dragon and his angels fought back. [BTW, why is Michael fighting god’s war if god is all-powerful? And where did satan’s “spirit of rebellion” and ambition come from?  If god made everything in heaven and on earth as the bible says, then didn’t god create these things in the heart of satan?  For what purpose?]  But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.”  [Why to Earth?  Isn’t that his beautiful creation, and where his “children” will live?])  Now… maybe it’s just me, but shouldn’t an omniscient god have seen that “war in heaven” coming and just never created Lucifer/satan in the first place (or at least destroyed him and his followers after that war in heaven)?  Shouldn’t he have done this if he was truly a “god of peace” and if he “loved” his children and desired that they all are happy and spend eternity in heaven with him?  As a fallible human being with very finite intellect and knowledge, wouldn’t you do at least as much for your children?  I think most of us would. How much more a “loving,” omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent “heavenly father” and “god of the universe?”  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question his omniscience, his omnipotence, his judgment, his wisdom, his fitness as a so-called heavenly “father,” his faithfulness as a friend, and his basic ability to run things. I’m not trying to offend anyone, I’m just saying. It’s a little hard to have “faith” in such a seemingly inept deity.)
• What about the Garden of Eden and the fall of man?  Now remember that god had just had a war with satan and cast him out of heaven—he knows what satan is about. Yet “god” chose to cast him out of heaven and “down to Earth” among his children, instead of just destroying him on the spot. And as if that’s not stupid enough, next, god invites (or, knowingly allows) satan into the Garden of Eden for the purpose of tempting his “beloved children” into sin—knowing in advance (as omniscient beings supposedly do) that satan would be successful and that all generations of his “children” would suffer, live difficult lives, be consumed by disease and depravity, and the vast majority would eventually be judged as unworthy of heaven and cast into a lake of fire in hell to burn eternally. Now, shouldn’t god have seen all that coming and just… gotten rid of satan?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question his omniscience, his omnipotence, his judgment, his wisdom, his fitness as a so-called “heavenly father,” his faithfulness as a friend, his basic ability to run the universe, and his so-called “love” for us. It’s a little hard to have “faith” in such a heartless and seemingly inept deity.)
• Genesis 11: 1-9 describes the Tower of Babel incident on the plains of Shinar (i.e., Babylonia according to biblegateway.com). According to the story, the people decided to build a great city with a tower to heaven, and thus make a name for themselves and prevent being scattered all over the Earth. Big deal. It was the Bronze Age. It was probably a tough time on the plains of Shinar, and they wanted a certain reputation among the other peoples of the region. And what could they really accomplish, after all?  But apparently god saw the building of the tower as arrogance, or ambition, or pride, or a threat to himself and took (what he obviously considered to be) decisive action to prevent its completion, and to prevent the people from ever being able to work together in such an arrogantly “sinful” way again. According to the bible, he “confound[ed] their language” so that they could no longer understand one another or work together. Supposedly this is where the different languages of the world come from. [Silly, right?]  And then, he scattered the people all over the Earth. Okay… the story is completely juvenile and ridiculous on its face, but let’s pretend for a moment that it were true—after all, “it’s in the bible.” Now, it’s true that people sometimes do some boneheaded things and are often in need of guidance and instruction (and whether that was more true during the Bronze Age or now, is debatable), but of all the seemingly infinite “teachable moments” god could have chosen to include in his rather small bible, he chose this one—so surely it must be really important. Apparently, he meant for his people to see the consequences of such arrogant teamwork, and to be warned—lest he be forced to confound our languages and scatter us—again. IF god was/is a truly omniscient being, then consider the following:
  • Why would any “god” get so pissed about the “Tower of Babel” incident described in Genesis 11 (little more than a pile of rocks built during the Bronze Age)?  What was the big deal?!  If such a small thing upset him so much, then what must he think of us today?  Just look at us!  We are arrogantly working together again (in spite of his “solution”) and because of it, we are curing diseases, going to other worlds, cloning life, decoding DNA (the very stuff of life itself), creating self-replicating proteins in the laboratory and closing in on creating life itself, and creating great energy sources through atomic fission!  We embrace the theory of evolution and growing numbers reject even the idea of god’s existence. We build skyscrapers of unimaginable height, and have taken apart the atom—even subatomic particles. Throughout human history, great cities have been built, great nations, great armies, great (as in large and powerful—not benevolent and good) religions, great institutions of all kinds, great societies, great causes of all sorts—all these things have been built by people working together with a unity of purpose, and the people who built these things made great names for themselves. What was so bad about building a small stone tower?  If god was so angered by such a small thing, shouldn’t he have foreseen the things humankind is doing today and prevented them too—or something?
  • Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have known that “confounding the languages” of the people of Babel would ultimately make no difference?  In other words, his solution would be completely ineffective—it would make no difference whatsoever. Look at the world today, and how the people of all nations and languages have overcome this so-called barrier “god” supposedly placed between the people of the Earth, and how we work together globally to achieve anything that the human mind can conceive of.
  • Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have known that scattering the people of Babel all over the Earth would ultimately fail to prevent humankind from working together on even more “sinfully arrogant” projects?  In other words, his solution would again be completely and laughably ineffective.
  • Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have known that his method for teaching humankind about the sinfulness of arrogance, pride, ambition, and working together for such “sinful” purposes would fail miserably?
  • If god were real and if he were omniscient, then he must have known in advance that none of his actions regarding the handling of the Tower of Babel incident would make any difference. In other words, why would there be a need to include this “teaching lesson” in the bible if god believed that he had actually solved the problem?
  • Regarding his handling of all aspects of the Tower of Babel incident, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question god’s omniscience, his omnipotence, his judgment, his wisdom, and his basic ability to solve simple problems. It’s a little hard to have “faith” in such an apparently inept and short-sighted deity.
• Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have foreseen that unleashing satan onto mankind would bring about such depravity and “sinfulness” that eventually he [god] would lash out in anger at humankind and destroy all but a single family in a “great flood?”  Shouldn’t he have foreseen this and just destroyed satan rather than cast him out of heaven and onto the Earth and cause everything he ultimately hated?  BTW, it occurs to me… Why did he have to destroy all the animals too?  Were they depraved and sinful too?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question god’s omniscience, his omnipotence, his judgment, his wisdom, his fitness as a so-called “heavenly father,” his faithfulness as a friend, his basic ability to run the universe, and his so-called “love” for us. It’s a little hard to have “faith” in such a heartless, unfair, and seemingly inept deity.)
• Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have foreseen that his “great flood” idea wouldn’t solve the problem of “sin” in the world and that he was wasting his time?  Wouldn’t purifying the hearts of his children and destroying satan and all his demons have worked better?  After all, the so-called “fall of man” was 100% his fault. (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question god’s omniscience, his omnipotence, his judgment, his wisdom, his fitness as a so-called “heavenly father,” his faithfulness as a friend, his basic ability to run the universe, and his so-called “love” for us. It’s a little hard to have “faith” in such a heartless, unfair, and seemingly inept deity.)
• The bible tells us of a man named Job. A good man. In fact, chapter 1 of the book of Job begins this way: “There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared god, and eschewed evil.”  According to god’s own bible, this was a good man who loved god with all his heart—please note the use of the terms “perfect” and “upright.”  Then one day, the angels came to present themselves before the Lord, and satan also came with them. god asked satan, “Where have you come from?”  [Okay, wouldn’t an omniscient god already know the answer to this?]  satan said that he had been roaming throughout the earth. So god asked satan if he had noticed “his servant Job,” and said that “there is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears god and shuns evil.”  satan reminds god that he [god] has greatly blessed and protected Job, but that if god were to “stretch out [his] hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse [god] to [his] face.”  So god tells satan that he can do any evil thing he wants to do to Job except to actually harm Job himself. So, apparently satan caused all but four of Jobs many servants to be put to the sword or burned alive, all of his many flocks and herds of various animals to be stolen or burned alive, and all of his children to be killed when a great wind made the house they were feasting in collapse. Job’s response to all of this sudden calamity?  He tore his robe and shaved his head. Then he fell to the ground in worship and said:  “Naked I came from my mother’s womb, and naked I will depart. The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; may the name of the Lord be praised.”  In other words, he stayed faithful to god. Chapter 2 tells us that satan came back again another day and spoke with god about Job and his faithfulness. satan tells god, “Skin for skin!  A man will give all he has for his own life. But now stretch out your hand and strike his flesh and bones, and he will surely curse you to your face.”  So god told satan to do as he please with Job, but to spare his life. So satan afflicted Job (and remember, this is god’s “perfect” servant) with “painful sores from the soles of his feet to the crown of his head. Then Job took a piece of broken pottery and scraped himself with it as he sat among the ashes.”  Even Job’s wife admonished him to “curse god and die.”  Naturally, Job lamented and cursed his own life, but remained faithful to god. In the end, the story tells us that god restored Job’s wealth and gave him a new family, but one has to admit that this is a very disturbing story. The most disturbing part of this story to me, is that god was supposedly omniscient and loving—he loved Job—and he knew in advance that Job would remain faithful and that satan would be proven wrong. So WHY was it necessary to crush Job’s children to death, kill all but four of his servants by burning them alive or having them killed by the sword?  Why did so many of his animals have to be burned alive?  Why was it necessary to wreak so much intense torment and suffering onto Job and his family and servants, when he already knew that Job was perfectly faithful?  Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have known that Job would not turn his back on him and just flicked satan away like a booger?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question god’s omniscience, his omnipotence, his judgment, his wisdom, his fitness as a so-called “heavenly father,” his faithfulness as a friend, his basic ability to run the universe, and his so-called “love” for us. It’s a little hard to have “faith” in such a petty, cruel, unfair, and seemingly inept deity.)
• Genesis 22 tells of the time when god decided to “test” Abraham—his most faithful and obedient “servant” of that time. Basically, he told Abraham to take his beloved son Isaac up into the mountains and to sacrifice him as a burnt offering to god. Naturally, Abraham obeyed, but he didn’t tell Isaac what was happening. Instead, Abraham misled Isaac by telling him that they were going into the mountains to give a sacrifice to god, and that god would provide the lamb for the burnt offering. Naturally, Isaac believed him, but imagine his shock when his dad tied him up and laid him on the altar they had built. Imagine his terror and confusion, because he had no doubt witnessed or participated in the killing of lambs for sacrifice. Now he was to be the lamb. Abraham actually took the knife in his hand and prepared to cut his own son’s throat for his “god” before god supposedly told him to stop. Imagine the terror in the heart of young Isaac!  If this story in Genesis 22 were true, it certainly does not show god in the most favorable of lights. Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have known that his faithful servant Abraham would not disobey him?  Why was it necessary to terrorize young Isaac?  What was proved by this ridiculous and cruel act?  Is this the work of a loving and omniscient god?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question god’s omniscience, his omnipotence, his judgment, his wisdom, his fitness as a so-called “heavenly father,” his faithfulness as a friend, his basic ability to run the universe, and his so-called “love” for us. It’s a little hard to have “faith” in such a petty, cruel, unfair, and seemingly inept deity.)
• Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have known that his “infallible holy word” would be confusing, misunderstood, mistranslated, self-contradicting, misquoted, and misused and do a much better job of “writing” or “inspiring” it in the hearts of men and then protecting it from change?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question…)
• Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have foreseen that choosing the Israelites as his chosen people, was stupid because they would forever piss him off, disobey him, forsake him, and dishonor him (according to the accounts written in the bible)—just like all his other (non-chosen) “children” would?  So why designate the Israelites as being more special or “treasured” than any other people on Earth?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question…)
• Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have foreseen that his original system for the forgiveness of sin (by slaughtering selected young animals on an altar and doing strange ritualistic things with their blood and carcasses) would fail miserably and that eventually he would have to send his “son” to be ridiculed, tortured, and murdered to make it easier for us?  Shouldn’t he have done it right the first time?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question…)
• Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have foreseen that all of his great and elegant plans would go badly awry at the hands of simple-minded human beings, and prevent such things by the use of a smarter plan—with a few basic safeguards built-in?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question…)
• Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have foreseen that sending his “son” (which was really himself… somehow) down to preach the gospel and save our souls would work no better than his previous system had worked?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question…)
• Wouldn’t a truly omniscient god have foreseen that there would eventually be a need for a “new covenant” with his people/children, because the original covenant (from the old testament) was so poorly thought out, grossly flawed, and stupid?  (Personally, if I were a Christian I would have to seriously question…)

Doubtless, there are many other examples that could be cited and discussed. You probably know of some yourself. These are just a few that jump out as being kind of obvious. Personally, I think organized “religion” (as it is conceived and written) is silly, and it (as it is practiced) is too often dangerous, cruel, controlling, and oppressive; and surprisingly, detrimental to the ideas of freedom, peace, and love in our world. In the end, each person’s life is their own and each must decide spiritual matters for themselves, but it is clear to me that even if there were a god (and there is not), he is most certainly not omniscient, in any sense of that word—unless he is also cruel, sadistic, and uncaring. Neither is he omnipotent nor omnipresent. He obviously cannot be wise, or loving, or benevolent—unless he also lacks the omniscience to “see” the consequences of his own actions and inactions. In fact he repeatedly reveals himself (throughout his own bible) to be anything but benevolent, loving, wise, consistent, trustworthy, or omniscient. And if he is not all-knowing, all-wise, all-powerful, and ever-present; if he is not benevolent, loving, faithful, consistent, and trustworthy—if he is none of these things, then can he really be called “god?”

Peace.

© 2012

“You may say that I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one.” — John Lennon

The Importance of Truth

“Often, even the truth is offensive—but it is still the truth.  If we are offended by truth, then we must reexamine our own hearts—our own thoughts or beliefs, our own actions, or our perspectives—not suppress the truth in order to feel better.  Truth must always prevail over political correctness or fear of personal shame or “offense” of others.  We should be strong and welcome it—not weak and fear it.  Truth must always be free to express itself—or we are lost.” ~ AAJG (aka, Gandalf Stormcrow)

Contradictions in the “Infallible Word of God”

It is said that the bible was written by (or was at least “inspired” by and protected by) God himself and is, therefore, infallible—completely inerrant.  In spite of this, the bible is replete with examples of apparent contradictions, some so obvious a child could point them out to us.  Web sites like biblegateway.com that offer searchable text in multiple versions and translations of the bible make finding these contradictions easy.  Here are a few examples of seemingly BLATANT biblical contradictions for your consideration:

• God Tempting Man:
  • James 1:13 — “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.
  • Genesis 22:1 — “And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.“
• God’s Anger:
  • Jeremiah 3:12 — “…and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you: for I am merciful, saith the Lord, and I will not keep anger forever.“
  • Jeremiah 17:4 — “And thou, even thyself, shalt discontinue from thine heritage that I gave thee; and I will cause thee to serve thine enemies in the land which thou knowest not: for ye have kindled a fire in mine anger, which shall burn forever.”
• Man Ascending to Heaven:
  • 2 Kings 2:11 — “And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.”
  •  John 3:13 — “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.”  (In other words, only Jesus has ascended to heaven—after his crucifixion and resurrection.)
• The Death of Judas:
  • Matthew 27:5 — “And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.”
  • Acts 1:18 — “Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.”
• Jesus’s Last Words:
  • Matthew 27:46 & 50 — “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?  Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.”
  • Luke 23:46 — “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.”
  • John 19:30 — “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

** I will update this list as I have the time and the inclination to do the research.  There are SO many obvious contradictions in the bible, I kind of figure, “What’s the point?”  It seems that any rational, objective, thinking human being can see that the bible is NOT inerrant.  Whether it is the word of “God” may be another matter, and I leave that to each individual to decide for themselves.  My personal position on this is that if any part of a religious text like the bible is questionable or untrue, then the entire thing must be considered questionable (at best), if not flatly untrue.  I mean, let’s face it… if an all powerful “God of the universe” can’t even write (or cause to be written) a coherent, easy to understand “instruction book” for his created “children” (the most “faithful” of whom obviously hunger for it greatly and devote their lives to studying it in excruciating detail and following its precepts) and then protect it from distortion and change, then WHAT ELSE CAN’T HE DO?

God is Love?

IF, as the bible tells us, “God IS love,” (1 John 4:8) AND IF
Love “keeps no record of wrongs,” (1 Corinthians 13:5) THEN
Why is God so damned OBSESSED with keeping track of ALL of humanity’s “sins” (or, wrongs) so he can adequately punish us?

It seems that something is wrong here.  Either:

• “God” is not love, or
• Love does keep a record of wrongs after all, or
• The love-not-keeping-a-record policy doesn’t apply to “God,” or
• We (human beings) aren’t the object of “God’s” love, as the bible leads us to believe.

Of course, my personal belief is that there is no God.  There is no heaven.  There is no hell.  There is no supernatural creator-being watching over us, listening to our prayers, interceding on our behalves, and keeping track of all of our “wrongs” so he can adequately judge and punish us later.

So… relax.  Let go of religion and just enjoy your life, because you only get one.  Be good to each other along the way.

For God So Loved the World…

For “God” so loved the world:

• He gave his “beloved children” an incoherent, confusing, inconsistent and self-contradicting “word” to live by (the bible) that no two people could agree upon, and then he told them that it was their only hope.  Then he stood back and judged them, and he “poured out his wrath” upon them, and he “condemned” them, and he “cast them away from himself” if they got any of the crazy, mixed-up stuff in his bible wrong.
• He allowed untold billions of human beings (his own “children”) to live and suffer in desperate poverty, sickness, enslavement, torment, and fear; and as if that wasn’t enough, when they died he found them to be “unworthy” of him and sentenced them to burn in hell eternally–because during their lifetimes they grew up, and perhaps grew old, in a non-Christian culture and never even heard of his so-called “good news.”  They never even had a chance.  He never even gave them a chance!  How does that song go?  (“Our God is an awesome God…“)
• In spite of his “omniscience,” he personally and intentionally created Satan and he personally and intentionally allowed Satan access to his “Garden of Eden” and he personally and intentionally allowed Satan access to his beloved and innocent children (Adam and Eve) in order to (yes, IN ORDER TO) tempt them into sin–knowing (he was “omniscient,” after all) that Satan would be successful and his children would be “lost” to “sin” forever.  In effect, he knew in advance what Satan would do, and allowed him to do it; therefore, the so-called “fall of man” that Christians speak of was 100% GOD’S FAULT—though it is mankind who gets all the blame in God’s eyes; and therefore, all the punishment.  (By the way, might I remind you that the bible also refers to God as a “righteous judge.”  Ummm… yeah.  Oh, and isn’t the whole Garden of Eden thing yet another example of God “tempting man” by proxy—through the Satan-being he created and personally allowed into the garden while knowing in advance what he was going to do?  So it’s a bit hard for many of us to sing along with, “Our God is an awesome God; he reigns from heaven above; with wisdom, power, and love; our God is an awesome God.”)
• He arbitrarily designated the Israelites as his “chosen people” and his “treasured possession” (according to Deuteronomy 7:6 and Deuteronomy 14:2) and apparently considered them as better than everyone else—better than all his other “children.”