guidetogod 1
September 11, 2012 • 4:19 am
Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
I had no idea the Protestant god was “Maleish”. I always thought it was a male personification. Could someone explain it to me? Great graphic though, quite amusing actually.
Well, there’s a question. First of all, like most rational individuals – atheists – it is necessary to understand that the myths and legends in the Bible, especially the Old Testament, are lifted, virtually wholesale, from the myths and legends of Ancient Egypt and Babylonia. These civilisations were pantheistic and had shedloads of male and female gods. However, the Hebrews (a word I use in a broad sense to encapsulate the various, let’s say Jewish, tribes from around 2000 to 1500 BCE) decided, for whatever reason, to invent a monotheistic religion.
The stories in the Bible, then, had to be edited in such a way that only one god did everything with the other gods being given bit-parts as either human beings or angels. Needless to say, none of the various gods of the time had enough cop-on to provide the scribes who were writing their stories down with even the basics, like a spell-checker, translator software, thesaurus or text comparison functionality which allowed different scribes to compare their different version.
As different versions in different languages were developed, all hell broke loose (to coin a phrase) and the ‘original’ “as dictated by the gods” versions were mangled, not least in 1611 when King James (I of England & VI of Scotland) got his version published as the “official” Church of England (Protestant) version. (Not to be confused with the first English version of the Roman Catholic Bible, fully completed in 1610, but of little real use because the RC Church prevented the masses from reading it in case they came up with different interpretations than HQ in Rome).
Anyway, the upshot of this that the god in the Bible is, indeed, both manish and womanish since he/she/it is formed from an amalgam of many both male and female gods. The Roman Catholic Church, however, has ruled: “We ought therefore to recall that God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman: he is God.” (Catechism No. 239). I say “helpfully” thanks to the word “he” in “he is God”.
A number of Biblical passages have been interpreted as showing the Biblical god as female, a mother eagle and a mother hen. Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_of_God. It seems well referenced.
Whilst gender is not one of my interests, the origins of the Bible is so take a look at 101 Myths of the Bible: How Ancient Scribes Invented Biblical History by Gary Greenberg.
What is the basis for the assertion that the Catholic Church forbids circumcision? There are millions of Catholic males in the US that are circumcised.
In fairness, Roman Catholicism has become somewhat “à la carte” of late. Let’s face it, it’s quite difficult to police the activities of a business the size of the Roman Catholic Church when the CEO & MD, Joey Ratzinger, is having damaging personal documents leaked by his PA, sorry, “butler”, his bank is being investigated by the Italian feds for breaches of money laundering legislation, many of his employees are being revealed as having a problem with taking “friendship” with little children “a bit too far” by sticking their dicks up various of the kids’ orifices and, to cap it all, members of his middle management team are being rounded up and prosecuted for covering up his employees “difficulties”.
I just don’t think Joey has enough time to worry about male mutilation, especially when, in the case of Catholics, it’s probably an adult decision made voluntarily.
Oh, I need this as a poster!!
Needs three more columns: Mormonism, Fundamentalist Xianity, Scientology.
Thanks, I feel much better now.
Wholly inaccurate.
Straw man anyone?
If this poster is a straw man, I’m the pope, the queen of heaven, and a Nobel laureate as well.
Curious–what do you think is straw-mannish about it? It’s perhaps a little simplified in places, but by and large quite an accurate delineation.
I thought the apocrypha was a Catholic thing. We sure as H didn’t use those fake added books in Southern Baptist Sunday school…
Fake “added” books? What about all the other ones?!
Hey, you guys are posting on the picture page, not on the main page! Feel free to repost on the main page.
CC
Under ‘Allah’ for character you have ‘Compassionate and Merciful’; I contest that; Allah was a bit like the late Kim Jung-Il in that he awarded himself these benign titles yet when you actually read the Koran he is damning all to hell, as any King, despot, dictator and God is want to do. I think the term character should be split with into a ‘self-described’ character for each God and an ‘Actual’ character for each of the Gods. (under Catholism we have only JC’s word that God is a God of love, but in reality he is a twisted sado-masiochist who comdemed us, then send his only son who is in reality himself to be tortured and die and reborn to redeem us. I wonder where he put his gimp-suit?
They changed cannon law so you can’t write a letter to leave the catholic church. There used to be a good site in Ireland, countmeout.ie that goes into the details, but the relevant articles are posted below.
Can. 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.
Can. 1364 §1 An apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication, without prejudice to the provision of Can. 194 §1, n. 2; a cleric, moreover, may be punished with the penalties mentioned in Can. 1336 §1, nn. 1, 2 and 3.