"Bible-based" Religion is Founded on Lies

Sent to "The Star", Johannesburg, on Mon 21/06/2010 21:54; never published.

Bob Holcombe (The Star Letters, June 17 2010) concludes that "Each responsible individual must avoid false religion and heed the consequences of not living a Bible-orientated life".

This is a contradiction in terms.  The Bible itself includes serious falsehoods.

 
Allow me to prove it:

If an authority makes two conflicting statements then, logically, at least one of them must be false.

Let me take two glaring examples from the Bible.

Firstly, the tales of Creation.

Genesis 1 says the "beasts of the earth" were created, then male and female humans. Genesis 2 contradicts this, saying that a man was created, then (in a quest for a "help meet for him") all the beasts of the earth arose (which Adam named all in one day!), and finally, woman.

Genesis 1 says the world was created in six days. "Day" and "night" were created on day one, and the sun, moon and stars on day 4.  Everyone knows that "day", "night", "evening" and "morning" are nonsense without the Sun.

Secondly, the genealogy of Jesus.

Matthew 1 claims Jesus as "the son of David, the son of Abraham".  He traces the male line from Abraham through David to "Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus".  He gives 27 generations inclusive from David to Joseph.

Luke 3:23-38 gives the male line going back from Joseph to David to Abraham to Adam.  Alas!  He fits in 42 generations from David to Joseph!  Except for David and Joseph, only four of the names he cites are similar to Matthew's list.

How could they diverge so radically if the Bible is divinely inspired truth?

Luke's list from Adam to Abraham disagrees in places with Genesis 5 and 11. Not only was Luke NOT divinely inspired, he didn't even read his Old Testament...

It gets worse:–

Matthew and Luke list the male line to give the impression that Jesus was descended from David, in fulfilment of prophecy.  But, oops, it's also claimed that Jesus was not the son of Mary's husband, but of God himself, who cuckolded poor Joseph!  They can't both be true.

Did God fib to Moses, Matthew, or Luke, or all of them?

As anyone with a Bible and an open mind can see, the Bible contains lies.

 
The Bible is grand literature and majestic mythology, but its morality is debatable, its history is inaccurate, its science is wrong, and on the subject of gods and an afterlife, it is pure fiction.

Why Must Religion be Protected from Humour?

Sent to "The Star", Johannesburg, on Wed 09/06/2010 20:08; published Fri June 11, 2010 as “Seriously, all religions are a joke”, except for the paragraph in blue.

AR Modak wants his or her faith respected ("Even People of Other Faiths Dislike the Cartoon" in The Star, June 8, referring to a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed).

Why should religion, unlike any other human activity, be shielded from humour?

Is it because religion is so open to mockery?

Consider the outrageous claims of religion: There is an invisible being (or several), the existence of which can not be proved, that can read your mind.  The nature and names of these beings are in dispute.  What they want of us varies from religion to religion, but generally involves massaging their egos and enriching their priests.

Several religions are rooted in the Bible, a flawed compendium of doubtful accuracy.  Important parts of it disagree with science and even common sense.  It is not even internally consistent: Some passages flatly contradict others.

Most religions claim to know what happens after death: Pity they don't agree.  Several promise damnation if you don't follow their brand, threats that should be illegal in a democracy.  If I threaten to burn your house down unless you vote for me, I will end up in jail.  Yet a priest can tell you that you will burn in hell forever (a much worse fate), and no action is taken.

Property used for religious services and housing religious officials pays no municipal rates.

Why indeed is religion privileged?

Religion is a con-job, and people have been taken in.

I suspect that many have a superstitious twinge that "God" will punish them if they speak up against religion.  Does it really happen?  Would some Muslims use violence if they really believed that Allah would do it himself?