Need anti-inerrancy resources help

[steve_bank]

You have great insight into the human psyche.

Nothing out of the ordinary. Politicians make a living out of exploiting knowledge of human behavior. Applied psychology and image manipulation. The same as relgion. That iconic photo image of Lincoln was actually crafted by political strategists of his day.

Compromise and tolerance to a degree was a cornerstone of our system, and is quickly eroding.

It is not hyperbole when Biden says we are in a war for the soul of America.

Tolerance vs Trump's authoritarianism. Atheist vs theist is at the bottom of the issue list.

 

[TomC]

It is not a trivial issue.

No, it's not a trivial issue.

Plenty of people have been taught that the reason to avoid murder, rape, and theft is because God is watching and will punish you for such behavior.

Kicking the foundation out from under their ethical code, however well intentioned, is still kicking the foundation out from under their ethical code.
Tom

 

[Brian63]

Why isn’t “anti- inerrancy” the same thing as “errancy”, and why would anyone need it?

1. Those words can be used interchangeably for this. The former phrase happened to come to mind. Sorry for the mixup.


2. This group promotes a view of the bible that it is inerrant (and heavy on End-Times scare themes), perfectly accurate, etc. So even having a thought about the possibility that something it says is not 100% accurate runs counter to their ideology. Do they think people if people are wanting to learn more about this subject, that they should learn from a wide variety of sources and views on it? Or restrict themselves to only the materials this group gives endorsement of? Do they in any way discourage researching of opposing materials? The goal is to get the audience and even some leaders to question the methods of the group.


I have had similar discussions over this past summer with Christians (inside their churches) about tactics that religions use. There has been tremendous success with many. Several were very interested in hearing more, it was a completely different perspective than what they were used to hearing. Several members, staff, and pastors seemed interested in discussing arguments against religious belief and existence of god, along with thoughts about secular morality. Privately, some pastors were willing to discuss some problems they had with their own religion or church members. They seemed more comfortable talking about it with an atheist than they would with their own church. We can relate better in some ways. They also have less to hide from us than they do their own church.

 

[Ruth Harris]

Speaking of strawmen:

Is it really that chilling to believe that some viewpoints are toxic to our world? That the world would be better if they in particular were gone? You can't think of a single one? How about cannibalism? Slavery? All views and beliefs ever in history are great?

Where did I ever say that all views and beliefs are great? We are discussing only one thing: religious belief.

Also note you made a strawman. I never said or believed only my views should be in existence. You misidentified my view.

I don't think you can claim it was a strawman when you showed approval of an atheist quote regarding removing religion from the planet.

Even in atheist circles some settle for just separation of church and state. As long as you do not encroach on others, I do not care what you do to yourself.

Some of us realize that is an impossible scenario. We do not live in a laissez-faire world where people’s beliefs (including their religious beliefs) will not affect the others. They will. The only questions are how they will affect others and whether those others are aware of it or oblivious to it.



Also, I do not like to see religion hurt the members of the religion. I care about them. Maybe you are unaware of the harm of religion on the members themselves or you do not care about it. Others of us are and do.

And this is not logical. First, you say you do not care what I do to myself. Then you finish by saying you do care about "the harm of religion on the members". This, by default, will include me since I am one of those members.

You also state that in our world, people's beliefs will invariably affect others. To a certain point, I do agree with this; our personal beliefs guide how we treat other people. But I defy you to prove that religious believers cause harm simply by existing. You cannot indict the entire religious community for the actions of a few. Nor can I indict the entire atheist community for the actions of a few. I know you have seen before how I despise painting an entire community with a broad brush as that is invariably incorrect.

Each of us is formed by our innate thought processes, our life experiences, and the things we learn. The vast majority of people, religious or not, do not wish for the elimination of any group's belief unless it is proven harmful to others. Your opinion that religion causes harm is just that - your opinion. You are welcome to hold that opinion, but you do not have the right to insist that it is the only valid viewpoint.

Back to the original topic. I still think you need to spend some time studying the resources you are requesting. I would think you would be very hesitant to recommend literature that you have not personally reviewed; I know I would be.

Ruth

 

[Brian63]

“Where did I ever say that all views and beliefs are great? We are discussing only one thing: religious belief.”


Okay. Do you think all religious beliefs are great? If not, please name a handful of religious beliefs you think humankind would be in a better situation if those beliefs were not present.


“First, you say you do not care what I do to myself.”


Please quote me as saying that. You will not find it.

The exact opposite is actually true. I do care what harm your religious beliefs bring to you and the religious beliefs of others do to themselves. That has been a major motivation for much of my activism. I do not wait until harm comes to non-members before taking action. I also care about the harm to the members themselves. Many Christians-turned-atheists experience lifelong trauma because of all that religion stole from them. I try and help reduce such occurrences before they get to that point. Even if a religious person never becomes secular, I still see much harm their religious beliefs do to them and I want to help, because I care.


“I defy you to prove that religious believers cause harm simply by existing. You cannot indict the entire religious community for the actions of a few.”


It is not “just a few” in the real world. In the U.S., millions and millions of fundamentalist Christians have been conned into handing power to a morally bankrupt president who has helped send the whole country and world in many wrong directions. Christian nationalism is an existential threat we face. Islam is a very oppressive religion, particularly towards women. This is way more serious than “just a few”.

 

[TomC]

Okay. Do you think all religious beliefs are great? If not, please name a handful of religious beliefs you think humankind would be in a better situation if those beliefs were not present.

Dang, you sound like a proselytizing religionist.

I can well imagine circumstances where I would be willing to agree to sell my children into slavery if you'd just find the door.
Tom

 

[Ruth Harris]

“Where did I ever say that all views and beliefs are great? We are discussing only one thing: religious belief.”


Okay. Do you think all religious beliefs are great? If not, please name a handful of religious beliefs you think humankind would be in a better situation if those beliefs were not present.

I am not going to spend time making an itemized list of religious beliefs that I think should be gone, but the one that comes to mind immediately is the belief that the Bible teaches non white races are less than human. That is despicable and the world would be a better place if it was gone.

“First, you say you do not care what I do to myself.”


Please quote me as saying that. You will not find it.

As long as you do not encroach on others, I do not care what you do to yourself.

“I defy you to prove that religious believers cause harm simply by existing. You cannot indict the entire religious community for the actions of a few.”


It is not “just a few” in the real world. In the U.S., millions and millions of fundamentalist Christians have been conned into handing power to a morally bankrupt president who has helped send the whole country and world in many wrong directions. Christian nationalism is an existential threat we face. Islam is a very oppressive religion, particularly towards women. This is way more serious than “just a few”.

The estimated number of Christians in the US is about 210 million in 2021, according to this Wikipedia article. The estimate was higher around the time of the 2016 election. Yes, a large part of the evangelical community voted for him. But evangelicals only make up about 6% of the Christian community, according to this Barna article. Fundamentalists comprise an even smaller part of those evangelicals. So you can hardly blame Christians as a community for the election of an experienced conman and grifter. There were a lot of nonbelievers who fell for his rhetoric too.

I agree that Christian nationalism is dangerous, as is fundamentalist Islam. I stated basically that in my original reply. I have no argument with that view. But you are indicting an entire community of people for the views held by a decided minority. This is wrong.

Ruth

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Here is a Youtube series with archaeologist Israel Finkelstein taking us through history of the beginnings of Israel from an arcaeological stand point. If one wants a good guide to this all, this is a good series with one of the world's foremost Near East archaeologists.

 

[Brian63]

“I am not going to spend time making an itemized list of religious beliefs that I think should be gone,”

I only asked for a handful. You gave just one. Is that the only one you can think of, even after several minutes to consider more?

““First, you say you do not care what I do to myself.”


Please quote me as saying that. You will not find it.

Brian63 said:

As long as you do not encroach on others, I do not care what you do to yourself.”

Ruth, that is not a description of my view. I was recapping the views of some atheists who espouse only separation of church/state while criticizing others of us atheists who want religion to have even less influence than that. In effect, they are the ones who would be saying they do not care what you do to yourself ---because they only care that religious believers do not encroach on others. They naively do not realize that religion has influence on others even in ways that are not as blatant as government enforcement of the religion.

“So you can hardly blame Christians as a community for the election of an experienced conman and grifter. There were a lot of nonbelievers who fell for his rhetoric too.”

He got selected as the GOP nominee through a large amount of support from the religious right. Once that nomination came through, then he had an even greater opportunity to exploit even more people. If he had not gotten that far to begin with (by exploiting the religious right), he would not have been president. They hold a lot of sway in the U.S., and that sway has had disastrous consequences on the world.

 

[Elixir]

Sorry for the mixup.

Heh, my apology Brian.
I was simply putting a blunt point on my opinion that the whole concept - the very possibility - that there is anything that cannot be deemed errant by humans or that anything created by a tri-Omni god could possibly be errant, is itself errant.

Then again there’s the whole fludde thing, which I see taken by some as an omnipotent - but apparently not omniscient god saying “oops!”

That has to be errant, one way or the other.

 

[Ruth Harris]

Ruth, that is not a description of my view. I was recapping the views of some atheists who espouse only separation of church/state while criticizing others of us atheists who want religion to have even less influence than that.

You made no distinction showing that this was the view of others. If it is not your view, you should make that clear.

I am currently working and will be back later to respond to your other statements.

Ruth

 

[Brian63]

I made no distinction because I thought the reader would be able to make that distinction. Other people have argued for just separation of church/state. I have argued for more. We criticized each other's views. If any view represented less interest or care about the wellbeing of religious believers, it would have been theirs. Even if they would not frame it that way, that would be the end result.

 

[Brian63]

“I defy you to prove that religious believers cause harm simply by existing. You cannot indict the entire religious community for the actions of a few.”

In case anyone is going to downplay the evangelical role in electing Trump as the actions of "a few"---

Article after the 2016 election:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/11/09/exit-polls-show-white-evangelicals-voted-overwhelmingly-for-donald-trump/

"Exit polls show white evangelical voters voted in high numbers for Donald Trump, 80-16 percent,"

Article after the 2020 election:

White evangelical Christians stick by Trump again, exit polls show

75% voted for Donald Trump this year, compared with 81% in 2016, a group makes up almost one in five of US electorate

www.theguardian.com

"75% voted for Donald Trump, compared with 81% in 2016
Group makes up almost one in five of US electorate"

Those millions of voters far exceed "a few".

 

[steve_bank]

It is not a trivial issue.

No, it's not a trivial issue.

Plenty of people have been taught that the reason to avoid murder, rape, and theft is because God is watching and will punish you for such behavior.

Kicking the foundation out from under their ethical code, however well intentioned, is still kicking the foundation out from under their ethical code.
Tom

Did not say trivial, it is at the bottom of my importance list. Trump is at the top for immediate problems.

 

[southernhybrid]

I know that Brian probably doesn't want my input, but considering that this discussion has become somewhat of a community discussion, I do have a couple of things to say. Naturally, Brian can do what he wants, but I don't think it's wrong for other atheists to give their opinions on his plans, because we atheists are often misunderstood and judged harshly. It matters to me how other atheists represent. us. I have two major issues to state.

1. Were you invited to debate this group, or did you take their invitation as an invite to debate? My point is that if debate isn't openly permitted at this conference, then I feel it would be very rude of you to force yourself on this group. If debate isn't welcome, will you display good manners and listen to what they have to say? I get invites to religious things, but since I don't believe in proselytizing as an atheist and since I already spent years during my youth, considering other metaphysical positions and world religions, I'm a strong supporter of personal investigation of religion/atheism. When someone comes to this site, they are asking for debate and discussion. That is different from what you plan to do. When I'm at an atheist meetup, the last thing I want is for a Christian to come and try to convince us to become Christians.

2. As a couple of other posters have mentioned, religion often brings a lot of hope, joy, community and hopefully, the development of good moral guidelines etc. Extreme religious fanatics are harmful, as are extreme secular fanatics. I'm going to gift an article that I saw today in WaPo. Evangelicals are beginning to get it now when it comes to climate change. We need people to work together if we want to leave a livable world to future generations. If Evangelicals are becoming more enlightened regarding climate science, let's celebrate that, even if they view it as Biblical. Most theists are decent people, just like most atheists are decent people. I have many Christian friends, most know I'm an atheist. It's our shared values that bond us, not our different perceptions of the supernatural.

I assume you are going to attend this conference. I hope you will meet some nice people, who may be willing to learn that atheists are also good people, who enjoy doing positive things. Sorry the thread didn't go exactly how you hoped, but you should know by now, that a lot of us are going to post how we feel about something like what you plan to do. Whatever you decide to do, I hope it goes well.

Here's the article from WaPo:

https://wapo.st/3QlBS8e

The National Association of Evangelicals has unveiled a sweeping report on global climate change, laying out what its authors call the “biblical basis” for environmental activism to help spur fellow evangelicals to address the planetary crisis.

10 steps you can take to lower your carbon footprint

“Creation, although groaning under the fall, is still intended to bless us. However, for too many in this world, the beach isn’t about sunscreen and bodysurfing but is a daily reminder of rising tides and failed fishing,” reads the report’s introduction, penned by NAE President Walter Kim. “Instead of a gulp of fresh air from a lush forest, too many children take a deep breath only to gasp with the toxic air that has irritated their lungs.”

But the authors admit that convincing evangelicals is no small task, considering the religious group has historically been one of the demographics most resistant to action on the issue.

I've already said too much. I won't judge you for doing this, but I hope some of our comments might help you find satisfaction in finding common values with some members of the group instead of trying to offer an alternative to what they find satisfying. There will always be people who leave Christianity and other religions. The US is becoming less religious, without the help of us atheists.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I am down here in Texas. Our morom governor and legislature is now cramming far right religion down everybody's throats. As we move into the fall covid season, these oh so Christian morons have made it illegal for businesses, government agencies and schools to implement mandatory covid vaccinations, mask wearing or so ial distancing. Insuring death and long term illness. They vetoed medicare exchanges, so a lot of ill people with no or inadequate insurance will slowly die.

It is hard to have sympathy with the 'good' Christians who have not made themselves heard while govenor Abbot is on a tear. Christianity in Red America is becoming truly obnoxious and very aggressive. Why would anybody be surprised at any push back?

The extreme Christian right is moving on to their next projects. Banning same sex marriage and birth control. Let America's sane Christians get as well organized and effective as the insane Christian fanatics.

 

[Brian63]

Trying to plea to such fundamentalist Christians that it is okay to hold the views that they have but just avoid imposing those views on other people is a non-starter. Their religious views do not allow for that kinds of hands-off approach for the rest of the society. It is a goal to forcefully dominate others with their religion. Our better approach is to criticize the religious beliefs themselves, go straighter to the source. The fewer of them that hold those religious beliefs, the less power they will hold over everyone.

Plus, I care about themselves who are hurt by their own religious beliefs---even if they are currently unaware that their own beliefs are hurting them. Maybe in the future they will become aware, maybe they never will.

 

[Ruth Harris]

Okay, I am back.

One more thing on your response to my earlier post: It is incumbent on the writer to make sure they are clearly stating their viewpoints and those of others. It was not clear in your post which was which. I have been guilty of this myself, and have apologized for my lack of clarity.

Now, for religious beliefs that I think would be better gone. These are strictly the things that come to mind quickly and by no means is it an all inclusive list:

1. I find it abhorrent when a modern day religious believer thinks their holy book gives them the right to kill, maim or torture others who do not share their views.
2. I have no patience with religious believers who think that women and children are lesser people and should be subject to the control of men. These ideas came from interpreting cultural conditions at the time of the writing of their religious texts as being “God breathed” mandates.
3. I very strongly oppose the idea that a country should be governed by a particular set of religious texts. Religious nationalism is one of the worst ideas ever to surface.
4. I find it very offensive when religious believers feel it is their right to denigrate the morals and intelligence of those who do not believe in a deity. (I find it equally offensive when atheists do the same thing to believers.)
5. It is ludicrous for believers to think that their ancient holy texts are “inerrant and infallible” when it comes to science and history. They were never intended to be used for that purpose.
6. There should be NO laws which give preference to a particular set of beliefs in the public square (Texas, I am looking at you!)

Donald Trump’s rise in the primaries was also due to the support of birthers, white nationalists, business owners who thought he would favor them, and people who were convinced that he was not a “politician”. It was far from being exclusively far right evangelicals that put him in office. Let’s place the blame fairly here. I live in a very conservative Republican part of the country and he had very little support here before he started winning primaries in other parts of the country; Mike Huckabee was the preferred candidate of the local evangelicals. The only reason Trump received the vote here and many other places in the general election is simply the fact that people refused to vote for any Democrat – and particularly Hillary Clinton.

Ruth

 

[Brian63]

It was far from being exclusively far right evangelicals that put him in office.

Can we stop those strawmen or red herrings, please? Nobody has breathed or hinted at "exclusively". Introducing those irrelevant words is misleading. Yes, he got support from others who were not white evangelicals. Done. Agreed. Accepted. Let's move on to the relevant point.

Among white evangelicals, who comprise about a fifth of the voting population, they voted for him in very large numbers. More than "a few".

The only reason Trump received the vote here and many other places in the general election is simply the fact that people refused to vote for any Democrat – and particularly Hillary Clinton.

Yes, conservative evangelical churches do not just villainize Hillary Clinton. They villainize other Democrats as well. That represents another problem by such churches. We should be speaking up for ourselves and criticize their flawed thinking.

I do not want to focus entirely on the political significance of Christianity either. I do not think of a Christian as merely a voter or a number, I also think of them as a human being. Even if somehow Christians were not political, their religion does harm to themselves and others in various ways. If we care about them and ourselves and each other, we should see their religion as an important element to focus on.

 

[Ruth Harris]

Here is a Youtube series with archaeologist Israel Finkelstein taking us through history of the beginnings of Israel from an arcaeological stand point. If one wants a good guide to this all, this is a good series with one of the world's foremost Near East archaeologists.

This is an excellent resource. I have watched the first two videos, and have bookmarked the series so I can continue watching as I have time.

Ruth