Sample clip of my debate with an
atheist on the issue of morality.
Find the whole debate at this link
Positive Atheism - Cliff Walker : Weak Bible Week Poster, part 1 of 7
In honor of National Bible Week (Nov 23-30) I thought it relevant to present a daily seven part consideration the "National Bible Week Poster" which was composed by Cliff Walker of Positive Atheism.
His poster, which he informs us is "suitable for framing,"1 is meant to be a Bible-skeptic-atheist argument against the Bible. It is a phantasmagoric cut and paste concoction of random quotes, self-servingly selective Bible texts, attempted quips, and the typical mixture of non sequiturs, arguments from outrage, and general lack of historical, cultural and grammatical context.
The segments will be parsed as follows:
Part 1: Introduction
Part 2: Quotes to Note
Part 3: Women: Property, Silence, Rape and Booty
Part 4: Children: Beatings, Stubbornness, Mockers and Sacrifice
Part 5: Slavery: Spurns and Property
Part 6: Uncut & Unsubtle: Bikinis, Sweetness, Magic and No Comment
Part 7: Jesus Christ: Peace and Stupidity and In Conclusion
Introduction: The poster begins thusly, "Many become Atheists after reading the Bible." Of course, this is a firmly ensconced well within the box thinking that is utterly meaningless. We could simply retort, perhaps just as meaninglessly, "Many become Christians after reading the Bible" or "Many Atheists become Christians after reading the Bible."
The "Introduction" section in the poster states, in part:
POSITIVE ATHEISM now urges an 'If you can't beat 'em, join 'em' approach. We encourage non-Christians to examine the Bible and contact the local press. Celebrate National Bible Week by showing the Bible's barbarity…Let's take to the streets and shout these Biblical obscenities from the rooftops!
The intro also states, "people think the Bible is good simply because they never read it." [italics in poster]. Of course, this is another utterly meaningless statement and typical of Cliff Walker's self-serving within the box generalizations. Again, we may simply retort, "people think the Bible is good simply because they have read it" or "some people think the Bible is not good simply because they never read it but instead rely on un-contextual pull quotes peppered with fallacious pseudo-skeptical assertions."
Yet, rather than merely presenting assertions myself, we shall see if I can substantiate my claims as we go on.
It may be republished in part or in its entirety on websites, blogs, or any
print media for whatever purpose (in agreement or in order to criticize it) only as
long as the following conditions are met: