"The 'biblical view' that's younger than the Happy Meal"

[krispos42]

The ‘biblical view’ that’s younger than the Happy Meal

February 18, 2012 by Fred Clark

In 1979, McDonald’s introduced the Happy Meal.

Sometime after that, it was decided that the Bible teaches that human life begins at conception.

Ask any American evangelical, today, what the Bible says about abortion and they will insist that this is what it says. (Many don’t actually believe this, but they know it is the only answer that won’t get them in trouble.) They’ll be a little fuzzy on where, exactly, the Bible says this, but they’ll insist that it does.

That’s new. If you had asked American evangelicals that same question the year I was born you would not have gotten the same answer.

That year, Christianity Today — edited by Harold Lindsell, champion of “inerrancy” and author of The Battle for the Bible — published a special issue devoted to the topics of contraception and abortion. That issue included many articles that today would get their authors, editors — probably even their readers — fired from almost any evangelical institution. For example, one article by a professor from Dallas Theological Seminary criticized the Roman Catholic position on abortion as unbiblical. Jonathan Dudley quotes from the article in his book Broken Words: The Abuse of Science and Faith in American Politics. Keep in mind that this is from a conservative evangelical seminary professor, writing in Billy Graham’s magazine for editor Harold Lindsell:

God does not regard the fetus as a soul, no matter how far gestation has progressed. The Law plainly exacts: “If a man kills any human life he will be put to death” (Lev. 24:17). But according to Exodus 21:22-24, the destruction of the fetus is not a capital offense. … Clearly, then, in contrast to the mother, the fetus is not reckoned as a soul.

{more}

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/02/18/the-biblical-view-thats-younger-than-the-happy-meal/

In other words, it's bullshit.

[gratuitous]

1. They HAVE to use the Bible this way

The difference between "My reading of this is . . ." and "God said X" is all the difference in the world. They must appropriate the God voice or they're just arguing their opinion, which is usually not well-grounded in science, fact or reality. You libruls are playing totally unfair by depriving the repressives of their number 1 tool. "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it." No fair questioning whether God really did say X and especially whether I believe it.

[Ferrets are Cool]

2. It always amazes me that god stopped saying ANYTHING over two thousand years ago

There are so many inconsistencies in their teachings that it boggles the mind, but EVERYTHING changed when Jesus came and gave his life on the cross. Why is that the LAST time that god made changes to his teaching? I know they don't believe in evolution, but dayum, even a god should evolve their thoughts after 2000 years, right?

[IronLionZion]

5. It's almost as if the whole thing was made up

by people who didn't understand science to explain things they saw way back in the day like locusts, floods, disease, and burning bushes. A lot of these idiots still don't understand floods and disease today.

[Ferrets are Cool]

6. Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

don't dare say such blasphemous words out loud!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm still waiting for an explanation of how Noah got ALL the animals on the Ark. I won't hold my breath.

[Buckeyeblue]

17. That is one of my arguments for atheism

I can't imagine an omnipotent god that created a universe, that used to show up regularly (according to the Bible) to let its will be known. This god went to far as to impregnate a woman with his child (without consent...but who would say no to a god) only to let humans sacrifice him. And then this god just disappears. It seems that a god would pop up in the sky from time to time to share its thoughts. In the mean time, humans have turned out to be the most vile creatures ever. Sure we are smart and have figured out a lot. But we treat each other horribly. Always have.

Maybe if I was the god who created this mess I would walk away from it too. Like a father who loses interest.

[Mr.Bill]

8. The clergy relies on the idea

that most people have never read much of the bible and many wouldn't understand it if they did. This is evidenced by the fact that they come to a building once a week and pay someone else to read it for them. This system has worked for thousands of years.

[Ferrets are Cool]

14. Amazing isn't it. It's almost like they are unable to think for themselves.

[BlueIdaho]

3. Zygote - Embryo - Fetus - Birth - Child...

There is no such thing as an unborn child no matter what tortured logic the christofascists insist on.

[COL Mustard]

13. Man Woman Elephant Grass TV

Oh wait…wrong game.

[StarryNite]

20. LOL!!!

[patphil]

4. There's never a shortage of people ready to put words in God's mouth.

They're certain they know what God thinks, and they're just helping him along a bit.
It's just a coincidence that God is "saying" exactly what they're thinking...every time...no matter how idiotic, callous, and unloving the words they put in God's mouth are.

[Act_of_Reparation]

7. Know what else is bullshit?

The Bible.

I couldn't give a flying fuck in a hurricane what a couple of illiterate bronze age goat herders thought about developmental biology -- or pretty much anything else -- and neither should our lawmakers.

Religious counterarguments to the anti-choice position are self-defeating. The problem isn't that anti-choicers are doing religion wrong, it's that they're injecting religion into public policy.

[Wounded Bear]

11. Indeed! nt

[Martin Eden]

16. "and neither should our lawmakers"

Actually, I doubt they care about the Bible at all, except how they can use it to manipulate a bunch of susceptible rubes into voting against their own interests for politicians who represent everything Jesus supposedly abhorred.

[Wounded Bear]

10. Not to mention that using Biblical concepts to design our laws is unconstitutional...nt

[TheBlackAdder]

12. Check out this post on Biblical Inerrancy.

.

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/100214055885#post8


Their adaption to mainline religion's adoption of Biblical Inerrancy is causing mental splitting.

You would not believe how strangely wired their thought processes are above traditional religions. Over the course of 3 decades, most Christian churches push concepts that even the most sheepish follower struggles with--but instead of questioning further, they have adopted the position of just accepting whatever bullshit comes their way. This is why, mainly Evangelicals and Charismatics, support Trump as they are the most conditioned to be accepting and unquestioning followers.

Unfortunately, there have been a few dramatic developments in religion that will screw us all.


1) There was a cult group that pushed that there is Biblical Inerrancy, meaning that the Bible is correct. This finally became accepted in the late 70's with the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. Many of the educated clergy and researchers were told to either accept this position, and ignore the over 300 errors in the Bible or quit or be forced out of their positions. Most left the church and their positions were filled by hacks who invented excuses to justify the Bible is without error, even fabricating backstories. Traditional Christian churches began adopting this position too. This causes people to not to question their religion, and this translates into them not questioning their political leaders they align with--they become sheep who fall in line with power.

2) The adoption of Two-Stage Baptisms, where the Holy Spirit enters a person, mainly demonstrated by Glossolalia (speaking in tongue). Charismatics believe that this is just a temporary visitation to convey a message to the person or church body. Pentecostals believe that once the Holy Spirit chooses you, it remains within you and everything you do is effectively sanctioned by God. As such, there is a big push for parishioners to speak in tongue so they can be accepted--because if the HS doesn't enter you, there must be a reason you are not worthy. This bullshit started in the early 1900s. This is why pious people think they can do whatever or that they will sit by the right side of Jesus when they die.

3) Since traditional religions place God on the outside, there is the attraction for people to feel more connected to God. Many of these traditional churches are now adopting the Pentecostal position that the HS enters a person to attract congregants. There is some resistance with older church members so you will see that many churches are holding two sets of services, a traditional one and a New/Contemporary service that pushes this bullshit.

See, the main problem is that there are a bunch of charlatans starting their own churches as a way to gain respect, have control over others, get free labor, and obtain a source of income. This, along with younger people drifting away from religion, is causing cash constraints on traditional mainly Christian churches--so they are doing everything they can to attract people to build their membership and tithings. Take notice, when you drive by churches, that they are offering multiple services and/or or allowing other churches to use their space.

.

[Martin Eden]

15. Their religious belief about the moment of conception

Comes not from the Bible, but from the political manipulation of charlatans whose policy agenda is against everything Jesus taught.

[Buckeyeblue]

18. This is interesting. But why, then, did most states outlaw abortion?

What drove the anti-choice legislation?

[Act_of_Reparation]

19. Religion.

Don't believe the hype. The Bible might not mention abortion, but it says a great deal about gender roles and sexual propriety, both of which greatly inform our own (well, our society's at least) conceptions of gender roles and sexual propriety.