A tad bit proud….(in the good way)…

My son wrote the following, which stands on it on, so I won't waste time with much introduction... but may I say that it makes me a tad bit proud?...

Technorati Tags: Darwin,evolution,father,education

“He said he made it all up!”

When I was younger, during one of my many weeks of summer bible camp, I experienced something which I now look back on with distain. It was the final day and we were in chapel. The speaker was firing away at the finale of his anti-evolutionary speeches, and we were all listening intently; after all, this was one of my favorite topics. We were passing around a chart of the theoretical evolutionary chain when the speaker said something like: “and after all his years of saying that this was fact, on his deathbed Darwin told everyone that he had actually made it all up…” Wow! Proof that evolution is completely untrue! Or at least it was to 11 year old me, and all of my friends at the time. However, looking back on this now I am very disheartened about certain things.

In my years of growing up since that time in my life I have discovered a great many things, and fortunately one of them has been to think for my self. Unlike many of the children there that day I have a father who inherently seeks the deeper truth in matters that might seem granted to everyone else. One of these matters just so happened to be the origin of life, and in recent years he devoted a good amount of time towards studying that and the thoughts of those who might have previously done the same. My father’s new insights into the workings of the biological world and man’s progressive understanding of it were shared daily with me and my brothers, and we began to open our minds.

The knowledge that he imparted to me drew forth many other thoughts of my own. I learned how Charles Darwin first theorized about the connections between species, and their ancestry. I learned about the dynamics of heredity, and the structure of a variation of a species. And I learned that Charles Darwin was a brilliant man, despite what Mr. Preacher told me back in the 5th grade. Although I am not persuaded towards the evolutionary point of view as of yet, I do have respect for this method of thinking, which is more than I can say for most of the Christian parents and teachers today.

Firstly, Charles Darwin never said on his death bed that he made it all up, that is absurd, and anyone who even knew there was a book called The Origin of Species would not have said such a thing as that. Charles Darwin put forth his best and most sincere efforts to understand life as we know it, and how it got here. His discoveries and his theories were one of the greatest contributions to science, he didn’t just happen to “make it up”. But here I am, about 11 years old, and I have just been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Charles Darwin and his ramblings are completely lunatic. What is wrong with this picture?

When you are a parent, or a teacher, you are given a responsibility. That responsibility is your child or pupil. You are not raising a zombie, or a religious zealot; that’s what the radical Muslims are doing. No, you are raising a conscious adult, and just the way you would teach him or her to write different words you would teach him or her to think different thoughts. You are not creating a one minded soldier out of your child, you are making tomorrow’s diplomat in the world of free thought and knowledge. I was mercifully saved by my father from that very point of view; but my question to you is this: how far will you go before you realize the dogmatic hole you’ve dug your self Into? At what point will you realize that your offspring don’t actually know why people believe the way they do, only that it is a belief different from his or her own?

You, as a mentor, are obligated to the pursuit of true and complete teaching. And if it is not your goal to be the most informative and unbiased teacher to your son or daughter or student then you should not open your mouth except to tell them that you love them. The world demands people to think and to understand, not to stand for something that they have no knowledge about. Hopefully you will realize that before it is too late.

Josiah Ross.

Can Coexisters and Uncoexisters Coexist?

Stephen Hicks is my idea of a philosopher. He’s done the study, but he relates the issues to the real world. See the brilliant analysis of Hitler here: http://www.netflix.com/WiMovie/Nietzsche_and_the_Nazis/70064793?trkid=1481020

See my comment on his probing of the bumper sticker wars, here:  http://www.stephenhicks.org/2009/10/12/coexist-or-uncoexist/

And see his discussion of Abraham’s epistemology, here:  http://www.stephenhicks.org/

Technorati Tags: Coexisters,Stephen Hicks,epistemology,faith,Abraham,philosophy

NETBible: Psalms 89:11

I wanted to find out what others thought "he founded it" meant in Psalm 89:11, so I went here:

NETBible: Psalms 89:11

What I found was this:

MSG ©
biblegateway Psa 89:11
You own the cosmos--you made everything in it, everything from atom to archangel.

What an amazingly reckless "translation!"

If you own "The Message" "Bible", may I suggest that you flush it down the commode?!

At any rate, I must respectfully disagree with this reading...

The point is that he is the one that put the sky (a solidish, translucent structure - one tower-height about the bottomless sea) and dry land on its pillars. These are finite structures (to the Hebrews). It is merely wicked interference of data reception that these people are about!

Translation Challenge: Song of Solomon « God Didn't Say That

I contributed to this blog:

Translation Challenge: Song of Solomon « God Didn't Say That

Here's what I wrote:



It is my considered opinion that this story is about the fantastic power of erotic love. This is a paean of Solomon, the "larger than life" lover. Could this verse not be suggesting that Solomon has a reputation as a great lover, so that the reputation of his smell excites girl to throw themselves into bed with him?

Song of Solomon 1:3
Because of the incredibly intoxicating fragrance of your great ointments,
it is your reputation that [your lovers] will exude oil,
so girls flock to you, to make love with you.

If I'm right on this, then in some small way, this is also about me, although the smell seems to be installed backwards, so it actually repels them.

Where can I find some of Solomon's magic cologne??!

On marriage, divorce and the Song of Solomon

I did some more blogging here:

http://goddidntsaythat.com/2010/04/09/q-and-a-how-mistranslation-created-divorce-in-the-bible/

 

I write under the name “WoundedEgo.” Its a very interesting discussion. I offered a couple of comments, this being one of them:

 

Thank you for posting these verse. I think that perhaps I would render it “whoever dismisses his woman, for any reason other than so he can go fornicating…” (Just kidding about that last part).

In the time of “The Song of Solomon” (which, based on the language used, is some 400 years after the time Solomon would have lived and loved), there seems to be a formalized wedding ceremony happening. Apparently, Solomon has only got 60 wives, 80 concubines and “unlimited teen mistresses”:

Song of Solomon 6:8 There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, and virgins without number.

Then, an African slave girl, convinced that “once Solomon goes black, he’ll never go back!” asks her Jewish girlfriends for advice on how she can meet the “Stud King”. They suggest that she nonchalantly hang around his tent, when he is out in the field keeping watch over his flock by night:

Song 1:
2 ¶ Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love[making] is better than wine.
3 Because of the savour of thy good ointments thy name is as ointment poured forth, therefore do the virgins love thee. [I need some of that cologne!!]
4 Draw me, we will run after thee: the king hath brought me into his chambers [bedroom]: we will be glad and rejoice in thee, we will remember thy love more than wine: the upright love thee [also, those on their backs].
5 I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.
6 Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me: my mother’s children were angry with me; they made me the keeper of the vineyards; but mine own vineyard have I not kept. [She has been a slave]
7 ¶ Tell me, O thou whom my soul loveth, where thou feedest, where thou makest thy flock to rest at noon: for why should I be as one that turneth aside by the flocks of thy companions?
8 If thou know not, O thou fairest among women, go thy way forth by the footsteps of the flock, and feed thy kids beside the shepherds’ tents. [Solomon has met "virgins without number" there - are you the only one who doesn't know that?]

To prevent everyone from getting all bothered, all skip the details of the story, and only point out that the slave girl does find that Solomon is like a stag that can’t turn down a doe in heat, he’s hung like an apple tree and everything is moaning after that. But then, Solomon makes an honest woman of her. She is alone and abused in the streets, a wretched slave girl, who dares to approach to the king, but the guards won’t hear of it:

3:1 ¶ By night on my bed I sought him whom my soul loveth: I sought him, but I found him not.
2 I will rise now, and go about the city in the streets, and in the broad ways I will seek him whom my soul loveth: I sought him, but I found him not.
3 The watchmen that go about the city found me: to whom I said, Saw ye him whom my soul loveth?
4 It was but a little that I passed from them, but I found him whom my soul loveth: I held him, and would not let him go, until I had brought him into my mother’s house, and into the chamber of her that conceived me.

But she finally gets passed the guards, and brings the King back to her house and she **throws** him onto her momma’s water bed, and then **leaps** onto him, tearing off his tie…:

3:4 It was but a little that I passed from them, but I found him whom my soul loveth: I held him, and would not let him go, until I had brought him into my mother’s house, and into the chamber of her that conceived me.

After all of this passionate courtship, Solomon, in huge fanfare, takes her for wife 61.

3:6 ¶ Who is this that cometh out of the wilderness like pillars of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, with all powders of the merchant?
7 ¶ Behold his [portable] bed, which is Solomon’s; threescore valiant men are about it, of the valiant of Israel.
8 They all hold swords, being expert in war: every man hath his sword upon his thigh because of fear in the night.
9 King Solomon made himself a chariot of the wood of Lebanon.
10 He made the pillars thereof of silver, the bottom thereof of gold, the covering of it of purple, the midst thereof being paved with [pictures of] love[making], for the [horny] daughters of Jerusalem.
11 Go forth, O ye daughters of Zion, and behold king Solomon with the crown wherewith his mother crowned him in the day of his espousals, and in the day of the gladness of his heart.

One passage that is off topic, but I can’t help but bring up is the following, which **clearly** indicates that they did boob jobs back then:

Song 7:

Technorati Tags: Bible translation,Song of Songs,Song of Solomon,marriage,divorce

8 ¶ We have a little sister, and she hath no breasts: what shall we do for our sister in the day when she shall be spoken for?
9 If she be a wall, we will build upon her a palace of silver: and if she be a door, we will inclose her with boards of cedar.
10 I am a wall, and my breasts like towers: then was I in his eyes as one that found favour.

Verse 9 should be hung on the wall of every plastic surgeon in the world!

There are so many great images in this story of passion, which is written from the viewpoint of a sexually free and even powerful woman. This would still be considered feminist literature today, if only Solomon were another woman, instead of an “Ewww!” man…

Bill Ross – uncensored – on Psalm 36:5

I enjoy participating on other discussion lists, such as the “BetterBibles.com” but some lists censor my posts, which makes me angry, and they probably will censor this one, so I’ll post it here. For the original discussion, go here:

http://betterbibles.com/2010/04/16/titanic-translation/#comment-17035

Technorati Tags: Bible translation,Psalm 36,God's love

>>>...I like and prefer the Danish translation “…without end, …without limit, …without equal.”...

What the Psalmist literally says is that "your CHSD is in the sky." What CHSD suggests is "commitment." And his commitment is in the sky. The modern view of the sky is that it is "the limitless universe," but to the ancients, it was a solid structure that was one tower-height above the dry land and the bottomless abyss. The sky is where God hung his bow as a reminder of his commitment to not wipe out humankind and the animals. It was his chalkboard, where he repentantly wrote a hundred times:

"I WILL NOT GET ANGRY AND KILL EVERYBODY AND EVERYTHING"
"I WILL NOT GET ANGRY AND KILL EVERYBODY AND EVERYTHING"
"I WILL NOT GET ANGRY AND KILL EVERYBODY AND EVERYTHING"
...

The sky is not limitless to the ancients. Now the sea was. The ancients conceived of the sea as having no bottom. Hence, it was a point to ponder how the dry land stayed up. One popular view was that the dry land was on the backs of large, endlessly swimming turtles. For the Hebrews, the dry land was on mysterious pillars that YHVH laid.

The sky functioned as a tent for the resting sun that got up each morning as athlete in training to run across its face.

Into this tent - this curtain - this moving "structure" upon which were connected tiny lights, called "the fixed stars"... YHVH placed the rainbow, and when it rained, it lit up and reminded him:

"YOU WILL NOT GET ANGRY AND KILL EVERYBODY AND EVERYTHING"
"YOU WILL NOT GET ANGRY AND KILL EVERYBODY AND EVERYTHING"
"YOU WILL NOT GET ANGRY AND KILL EVERYBODY AND EVERYTHING"
...

He also relied on blood on doorposts to keep him from being "Trigger Happy" (any Danes who are present may know that show!)

It would be anticlimactic to say "your love extends into infinite space" and then say "and it also goes about 11 miles up to the clouds."

I would offer "your commitment is in the sky" as a translation, and then offer a cross reference to this verse:

Genesis 9:13  I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.

I might add another cross reference to Johnathon expressing his commitment not to harm David, also by giving a bow:

1 Samuel 18:4  And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle.

YHVH is not *constitutionally* incapable of getting angry and smashing the undeserving, but he has made a very specific *commitment* to not do so (though, floods occur periodically as they always have, and the scriptures suggest that the wrath of God has been accumulating, and will vent later on after all...)

The very psalm that people want to read as being about a faithfulness to man and beast, without boundaries, refers to the **end** of the wicked. He is NOT preserved. Only the faithful Hebrews are, and you can count those on one hand (as far as the scriptures are concerned).

The scriptures do not share modern sentimental notions of a warm, fuzzy God. He's a god of wrath, a god of war, a god of judgment... but, a god of commitment, to a very finite but comforting "covenant" that the psalmist finds comfort in, because God will take care of him, and wipe out his lousy neighbors.

Richard Dawkins calls for arrest of Pope Benedict XVI -Times Online

Richard Dawkins calls for arrest of Pope Benedict XVI -Times Online

Two other blogs I've been participating in...

I've been participating in two discussions on other blogs that I think it would be profitable for others to read. The first is a contemplation of Luther's view of "law." In this blog, I show why the Protestant view of "works" and "the law" are wrong:

http://exegete77.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/luther-and-the-commandments/

In another blog, I show where Paul provides a "full frontal assault" on "Trinity" dogma:

http://betterbibles.com/2010/04/05/in-which-is-all-in-all/

My comments on these two blogs are so unassailable that they, if you are a Protestant, could turn your thinking on its head.Which is a good thing.