Sunday, August 19, 2007

Behind the Scenes No. 1

Hey folks.

I want to try something new. For the first time since the start of this blog, I've received a couple of anonymous comments that challenge what I'm saying.

I'm fine with it. I'd be foolish if I didn't expect a public blog be challenged by people who have differing points of view. I'm not going to be some kind of nazi and police comments based on their content--but I'm also not going to let them just sit there in some dusty corner for someone else to find and wonder why I didn't address them.

With that in mind, the first (and I'm thinking, less serious comment) of the two is found in the entry Breaking Boards For The Glory Of God. Here the comment is in regards to masturbation:

Anonymous said...

masturbating relieves stress, helps prevent prostate cancer, and provides for better fertillity in the future. you should tell him to beat it all the more if he wants to feel better


Ok. Well the downside is that it misdirects the focus of sexual pleasure from your current (or future) spouse to yourself. Worse yet, he'd end up probably equating sex with what he gets out of it, rather than treating it as a giving of himself.

The first two reasons for continuing have holes in the logic. First of all, you do not need to masturbate to relieve stress. The stress relief comes from a release of endorphins upon orgasm, so it's more likely that the "stress" is caused by a light withdrawal from the endorphin rush that's caused by an orgasm. The problem with this argument is that whatever is causing the stress is still going to be there after you're done, but your body isn't going to be responding to it since it's had its fix.

If it's actual stress, then a better way to relieve it is to just fix whatever is stressing you out instead of wasting time beating off.

The second--preventing prostate cancer... Whoever wrote this probably isn't in danger of prostate cancer at his age, so if he's using this as an excuse then it's a total cop-out. But if you're that worried, then a foolproof way to catch this is to have regular check-ups. Prostate cancer is not dangerous if it's caught in time. It's the slowest growing cancer that a man can get and doesn't get really dangerous until late in the game. Personally, I'd rather know about it and have something done about it, rather than taking my chances by "reducing my chances".

The final reason, while not wrong, is still redundant. Yes, it may make you have more virile sperm, but you already have means of weeding out ineffective ones anyway. Your body absorbs sperm that aren't used so that "fresh" ones are always available.

You will not die of cancer, or go crazy because of stress, and your balls will not explode from not masturbating. So it's not something that needs to be done, and with that in mind, if all the positives are cancelled out, leaving only the negatives... then don't do it.

The second comment was left in an entry titled Finally:

Anonymous said...
I have actually gone to school as a bible critic and have studied extensivelly what parts made it in and what was left on the cutting room floor. I believe what that "quasi athiest" as you put it was getting at is there are hundreds if not thousands of little mishaps that have occured in the bible ending up in the different translations we have today. If even one word is changed in a passage it completely, and has completely, changed the meaning of what is being said. I don't think that you should renounced what "good" things you've learned from the book, but I would advise that you do some unbiased research of your own about the origins and contents of the "trusted" word.


Anonymous, I can tell you're a relativist. I see that you assume that my research is biased, with (I'm guessing) the reason being that you don't like the conclusions I've made.

Let me ask you this simple question: What makes you think you're right?

I've heard so many attacks against the Bible that aren't even backed up by examples. I would think that if the Bible is full of so many flaws and contradictions that, first off, Christianity would dwindle to extinction because of people becoming more intellectual, and second, people would at least present something instead of straw men and blanket generalizations.

I have actually gone to school as a bible critic and have studied extensivelly what parts made it in and what was left on the cutting room floor.

So you went to school and other people told you that the Bible was hacked, edited, and compressed for time and content to fit your tv, and you believed it. I can guarantee you that nobody who makes these claims was present at the time even one of the books of the Bible were written. How did they get their information then? Who told them? Who told the people who told them?

I believe what that "quasi athiest" as you put it was getting at is there are hundreds if not thousands of little mishaps that have occured in the bible ending up in the different translations we have today.

What I said to the person mentioned here was that there is no way to make a simple change to such a complex book as the Bible, and have it still be logically sound. There are still no contradictions in there. It's a conditional statement, and it implies that if a change would cause a contradiction... and there are no contradictions... then there have been no changes.

I'm not saying there aren't variants that DO have changes that DO change the meaning--those ARE the ones I'm decrying. But just because some of those exist doesn't mean that all Bibles, everywhere, printed at anytime, are flawed because of "guiltiness by association".

If even one word is changed in a passage it completely, and has completely, changed the meaning of what is being said.

That's true, but again, just having the possibility of that doesn't mean that every Bible is broken. And there are examples of a one-word change that totally uproots the true meaning of something. The Jehovah's Witnesses have re-worded the passage in John 1:1 from:

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

to:
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a God.


See? They've added a simple word--just a letter, really--and changed the whole idea of God's triune nature and made it seem like a polytheistic religion.

So yes, adding to or taking away from the Bible is alive and well. But ask yourself this: What are they changing it from? Doesn't having a ton of variants imply that there is an original, un-fooled-around-with version?

I don't think that you should renounced what "good" things you've learned from the book, but I would advise that you do some unbiased research of your own about the origins and contents of the "trusted" word.

Again, what makes you think I'm the one that's biased? Do you feel that you should be free to do whatever you want, whenever you want, as much as you want, regardless of responsibility for those actions? If you're human, then you do--all of us have that nature deep down. So if the Bible says that you're not made to give glory to yourself, but to God... and you really want to just give glory to yourself, all the time... then it's reasonable to say that the biased one here isn't me.

Anonymous, you need to understand that there's not a single person that knows everything, and that has everything right. No one. People, instead of taking the approach of saying, "Hey, I might be wrong about this," changed it to, "Hey, YOU are wrong about this." If I'm wrong, if the Bible is wrong, that implies that there's something it can be compared to that IS right, and you haven't presented anything to compare it against.

Can you see where I'm coming from? If it's possible to say that something is wrong, and it IS wrong, then there must be some kind of standard or model to compare it against. But you haven't got anything to compare it against, just your claim that it's wrong. So... I don't know what you expect me to do about this.

3 comments:

Terry Delaney said...

Mike,

I am glad to see you are taking issues on straigh forward! Praise God! You are growing and have grown so much since I met you back in January. I praise God that He is causing you to grow in this way.

Terry

Anonymous said...

When the bible was translated from Hebrew to Greek that one word change where there was a discrepancy is the word for young woman. It coincidentally showed up as virgin and I bet you it isn't being changed in all those non-flawed bibles you talk about.

Anonymous said...

"Worse yet, he'd end up probably equating sex with what he gets out of it, rather than treating it as a giving of himself."

How can you say something like that about somebody? Its entirely speculation and ungrounded about this man.

He didn't say that you needed to masturbate to relive stress, he said that it did. It appears that your using those same holes in logic by setting up false premises and then knocking those down thinking you adressed the point. You think equate an orgasm to a "fix?" I hate to think about how sexually repressed you may be. You may call it a waste of time, but it still may be a valid and important time in someones life. Try jackinworld.com if you'd like to learn more.

All I can say with the prostate cancer is that I hope you don't get it. If eating shellfish was wrong but prevented a disease that runs in your family I can all but guess you'd find a way to make good with god about why your eating it.

If one looks at the earliest copies of scripts that are in the bible they don't say the same things. I think there is no bigger evidence that a regular show and tell comparing findings. If people were getting informed, you are right Christianity would dwindle into nothing. Unfortunately if your not looking for the information you won't find it in your church or in the library of your youth pastor. And besides, when someone takes everything on "faith" who needs evidence or proof.

Complex book? I says the world is 6,000 years old and we need to kill things that don't agree with it. Its so complex that it tell you not to kill and all the while leaves you wondering how Moses made it to Mount Sinai being around people who didn't know killing was wrong....Not to mention cultures that existed before them.

You've heard of the Council of Nicea correct? What is a bigger example of biased men picking and choosing which words are repudadly inspired? It takes a history channel special on books left out of the bible to raise questions about their authenticity. Why arn't Christians reading the gospel of judas or mary magdala?

Assuming there is an original that hasn't been changed, we obviously don't have it so making the claim that there is a famed book out there with all the perfect answers to the universe dosn't bleed over and make what people use today anymore credible.

What makes people think they are right is called evidence. When someone tests something and gets a predicted action it lends credibility. There's a reason prayers studies don't correlate with positives. There's a reason people still choose to go the hospital instead of pray to god for their sickness to go away. Its because people are persuaded by what they can see and feel.

I don't feel like I have this unrestrained right to do whatever I want and if you do I'm glad you have a hell to fear that keeps you in line. Learning from mistakes, learning about people's minds, practicing science isn't giving "glory" to yourself. If anything ti glorifying the human intellect. Who honestly believes they know everything? Why would you even say something like that? I get the feeling you try to take the arguement from what's happening to random tries at discrediting their credibility.

I mean hold the gospels next to each other and see if they agree on Jesus' crucifiction. Find all the verses about killing people and put them next to Jesus talking about turning the other cheek. If your going to pick apart which parts are more good or more perfect who's authority are you acting on to delinnate which orders to follow?

Did you know Allah inspired the Koran? Everything in there is perfect and unfortunately if you don't believe in him or the book your going to burn in hell forever. Its perfectly true. It is. Do you know what? It says so in the book. You can read it for yourself. Allah makes me a better person, he brought love into my life, you can't say anything that can make me believe that his love won't and truth can't win over.