Carv's Thinky Blog I'm an author with a focus on satirical science fiction.

Rereading the Good Book, Part 4: Revelation

Before I finish this long missive, allow me to list ten scary things I didn't use it to say:

1. There is no God.
2. There is no afterlife.
3. Organized religion is purely destructive.
4. Atheists make better leaders.
5. All Christians are fools.
6. All Christians are bigots.
7. Christianity is evil.
8. The Bible is evil.
9. The Bible is completely untrue.
10. We should ban religion.

I didn't say those ten things because I don't believe any of them are true. I suspect there's no afterlife, largely because I've never seen compelling evidence for it; "wouldn't it be great" doesn't constitute proof. I don't believe in Zeus. I roll my eyes at Marduk worshipers. I have serious issues with Kali, less serious issues with Loki. I'm a total agnostic when it comes to Vishnu. And for very similar reasons, I find the Biblical description of YHWH preposterous. Stephen Roberts put it perfectly: "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." But that's not to say I don't believe in God at all. I don't know. I wonder sometimes if evolution had help. I wonder if the Big Bang was really an accident. I believe there may be a force that runs counter to entropy. But Yah the ancient Hebrew war god? Not so much.

I don't think atheists are inherently better or smarter people than Christians. Perhaps we're a bit braver when it comes to nonconformity; we do, after all, pay a price for our differences. I wish I could say atheist leaders have done a better job ruling the masses, but no, they're subject to the same greed, unkindness, and violence as any other human being. I don't think the Bible is nothing but a pack of lies; some of it is honest history, and some is among the most beautiful prose and poetry in world history. I quote the "Samaritan woman at the well" story extensively in my book; it inspires me, and the closer I read the more inspiring it gets. Religion, too, has been an agent of kindness the world over. I love Handel's Messiah and MacLeish's J.B. For every Torquemada there's been a Maksymilian Kolbe.

(Perhaps you've never heard of St. Kolbe. If not, Gentle Reader, get ready to reach for some Kleenex: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximilian_Kolbe)

I know most Christians are good, kind, intelligent, hardworking people who would never use their religion or some verse in a sacred text to justify cruelty. I watch who reads and comments on my blog, and I love many of you as dear friends. I smile as you comfort each other in Christian compassion, nod respectfully when you say grace, visit your churches on major holidays, and appreciate your Jesus-fish tattoos. I also smirk a bit when you laud Biblical standards I know good and well you've ignored in the past, but hey, nobody's perfect, and I certainly don't claim the moral high ground.

So what is my game? Why am I doing all this? Is it just to stir up trouble? Is it because I "need to get out more?" Maybe. Is it to attract attention from potential book buyers? You betcha! Lightfall may not be flying off the shelves, but it's doing okay, and I still permit myself the hope it'll catch fire in the market someday. But there's another reason, which I'll get to in a minute. I guess you might say it's my agenda, one I've stated before. It's the biggest reason I wrote that particular novel in the first place.

The Bible is not flawless history. We doubt the idea that Herod murdered the firstborn of Judea--it isn't mentioned by Flavius Josephus or in any other gospel--and we suspect the Deluge in Genesis is actually a reworking of the Mesopotamian legend of "Utnapishtim." Of the Battle of Jericho, archaeologist Bill Dever once said, "If you want a miracle, here's your miracle: Joshua destroyed a city that wasn't even there." The Bible's science is downright ridiculous. It claims humanity is only six thousand years old, even though the Jiahu settlements in China can be reasonably dated some two and a half millennia before that, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of years of hominid fossils that predate written history. It believes in a flat (Isaiah 11:12), immobile (Psalm 93:1) earth with a radiant moon (Genesis 1:16) under a solid dome (Job 37:18), the Firmament. It requires lepers to be "cleansed" in animal blood (Leviticus 14), and says some insects have four legs (Leviticus 11). You could even make a case that Biblical engineers thought pi was the rational whole number 3, based on 1 Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2. Really, Bible writers didn't appear to know any more about science than anyone else who lived in their time or place. There's certainly nothing in the Bible that would stagger us with its divine scientific insight, and there's much that is flat-out ludicrous.

You might point out, as others have, that it doesn't matter whether Adam and Eve existed. If so, then some of the New Testament writers disagreed with you. Luke, for example, goes to great pains to claim Jesus was a direct descendant of Adam. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul says Jesus's martyrdom was necessary to effect "the resurrection of the dead." If there was no historical Adam, it becomes difficult to explain the Crucifixion in a positive way; instead, we begin to wish Jesus had lived longer and spoke more. I certainly do. You may not accept my self-description as a "Christian agnostic," but I am a Jesus fan, born and raised. He's my hero, the greatest man in all of western civilization, an unreachable example to us all. The Bible is not all bad. It's not all stupid. It's not all irrelevant. And it's not all mythology. But it ain't perfect, even though it claims to be.

James brought up Pascal's wager. If I'm wrong about the Bible and true believers in it are right, they gain the everlasting glories of Heaven while I burn in Hell for my dissent. I agree, that's a pretty effective bribe. But the Wager claims you lose nothing if you're wrong. Is that true? It sounds true. Perhaps it is true. Perhaps you lose nothing.

We, however, lose a lot.

Exodus 21 shows slavery was not only condoned in the Bible, but institutionalized within "God's chosen tribe." Genocide was encouraged (Leviticus 26), including acts of nauseating cruelty (Psalm 137:8 and 9; Nahum chapter 3, especially verse 10: "[Nineveh's] infants were dashed to pieces at the head of every street"). Evil is rampant in the Good Book, and sometimes at the behest of an angry, jealous God. I don't think I'm out of line when I say angry, jealous, bigoted, murderous humans have used the Bible to justify all manner of ongoing atrocity: the Inquisition, nine Crusades, the Holocaust, American slavery, even the Oklahoma City bombing (linked to Elohim [Hebrew for "God" or "gods"] City, a compound of the white supremacist Christian Identity sect). Okay, so you, my kind Christian readers, would never blow up an abortion clinic or a government office building. But you've asked me what I lose if I'm wrong, so can't I be allowed to ask, "Yeah, but what if I'm right?"

What if I'm right that Adam and Eve never existed? If Genesis is nothing more than a self-contradictory Hebrew myth (after all, Genesis does tell the story two different ways; the dividing line falls between chapters 1 and 2), then maybe we should give evolution a serious look? If you're watching Life on Discovery HD, you're familiar with the blue-spotted mudskipper, a fish that breathes air and "crutches" along on its elbow-like pectoral fins. Researches have tracked evolutionary changes in Galapagos finches over several decades, a mere moment on the terrestrial timeline. Evolution is a fact, Gentle Reader. We've watched it happening. There's a mountain of evidence to prove it, compared to...what? A charming story about a snake talking two naked people into defying God by eating magic fruit? Are you serious?

Maybe you're one of countless Christians who accept the Bible as allegorical rather than literal truth. That's fine. I agree, it's a wonderful book. But why, then, must I accept Biblical instructions to condemn certain sexual behaviors? "It isn't natural," many Christians insist. I would point out that neither is the Pill, nor oral sex between heterosexuals, nor sex toys, nor fertility treatments, nor tampons, nor Caesarean sections--the list goes on and on. If we're only allowed to do natural things, it's not just my sex life that'll be severely limited. I'll also have to give up everything from TV to Nutra-Sweet. "Okay," you admit, "but it's still a sinful behavior, just like fornication." Yet the Song of Solomon describes some hot, sweaty foreplay between a couple who give no indication of being married. Bible scholars can't even agree on what is meant by the Greek word porneia, commonly translated as "fornication." Jesus claimed even thinking about adultery was a sin; good luck enforcing that one.

Look, homophobia is just one way Biblical "morality" is still being used to condemn and exclude people, but it's a shameful one. I know the Bible bans homosexuality. It also bans the mixing of wool and linen in the same garment (Leviticus 19:19), physical contact with a menstruating woman (Leviticus 15:19-20), foolish talk (Ephesians 5:4), gossip (Leviticus 19:16), and pork. I know, I know, Jesus changed all that--but then Paul tried to change some of it back. And in John 14, Jesus asks Philip, "Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me." If that's true, then in some sense Jesus was the God of the Torah, the same deity who endorsed all the illogic, injustice and cruelty of the Old Testament.

What if I'm right? What if we should ignore all the irrational, unwelcoming, judgmental, unmerciful verses of the Bible and just focus on those verses that make us kinder people? Would civilization suffer or benefit? Is it possible to imagine a Christian faith absolutely free of racism, sexism, classism, homophobia, and the demonization of physical pleasure? You may say I'm a dreamer, Gentle Reader, but I'm not the only one. I don't want the overthrow of your religion. I want its improvement. I want it to grow past the sterling moral examples of Abram, Noah (Genesis 9:20-25), Paul, Lot (who offered his own daughters up for gang rape--geez, just read all of Genesis 19--it'll blow your mind)...all those Biblical "heroes." Like Bishop John Shelby Spong, I think "Christianity Must Change or Die," but preferably the former.

I don't reject the whole Bible. I don't think it's the only source of eternal wisdom. I think great spiritual and moral insights can be gained from Zen koans, the Koran, Aesop's fables, or for that matter, The Empire Strikes Back. But "the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace [Romans 8:6]," and what could be wrong with that?

"I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord."--Romans 8:38-39

I began all this with some lousy advice from Paul to the Ephesians. It's only fair, then, that I end with something he got right. I honestly couldn't say this any more beautifully than he did. I end with a prayer, from Paul to Timothy in Ephesians 3, and I bid you love and peace. Until next time, shalom, Gentle Readers, my brothers and sisters wherever you may be.

"I kneel before the Father, from whom His whole family in heaven and on earth derives its name. I pray that out of His glorious riches He may strengthen you with power through His Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge—that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God."