I found these video's to be very interesting. I like his open mindedness. I like his patience as he researched the Christian mind to see where they were coming from. I see however that he hasn't talked to to many Christians with a Dr. degree. Appologetics can be viewed as the easy way out for Christians, maybe it is, but let's scrutinize the details of his basis.

He pulled specific passages/lines out of the Bible and said they're just as radical as other religious beliefs. First, I say if you're going to be that critical of the wording, then look at the original Greek and Hebrew. The Bible was translated by people into English. I'd like to mention there are over 23 different English translations of The Bible. Why? Well, there are many Greek and Hebrew words/phrases that cannot be translated into English, so we have to use the best possible subsitute. Each Bible translator of course has their own opinion of what substitute would be the best. e.g. There is a word in Hebrew that means past, present and future. We do not have one word to represent a period of all times. Most translators will use a past tense wording in that case.

To pull out some of his examples just on the basis of translation, let's look at Ecclesiastes 1:5, where he said the sun moves itself... uh... well my translation says, "Also, the sun rises and the sun sets." hmmm. i could be mistaken, but I believe us as Americans use that wording in our daily lives. Do we believe that the sun is moving itself????

To look at another reference, turn to Psalm 104:5. He says that God put the Earth on it's foundations so it will not ever move... ok, my translation happens to read, "He established the Earth upon its foundations, So that it will not totter (or the alternate wording could be 'move out of place' ) for ever and ever." With this wording in mind, does the Earth not have a place it's suppose to stay, or a track if you will that it's suppose to stay on??? If it "tottered" even just a tad in universal terms toward the sun, we'd all be fried!!!!

Appologetics aside, I think translational issues could be a larger issue. Unless you're taking a story as a whole, you would need to reference to the original language to get literally what it was saying.

Just to put a counter twist on this as well. Another argument was made that we don't have enough brain power if you will, to understand God. Ok, is that not the same excuse scientists are using for understanding the Universe and our world? There is so much scientific theory out there. It's theory because we as humans cannot comprehend how it's possible and yet either cannot disprove it's possibility, or are afraid to discredit it. You have to admit, Christians and the rest of the world are guilty of weak minds when it comes to understanding something greater than ourselves. It's a poor excuse to discredit Christianity with that one, unless of course you want to discredit science as well.

Hi Caposkia, and thanks!

I don't believe I use the word "radical" anywhere. What I did mean, just to make it clear to all, is that just like every other ancient religion, the Bible reflects the limited knowledge of man.

True, but in the case of modern Americans, it's just a convenient expression: we KNOW the earth is turning on its axis. And in our modern world, that information is everywhere (textbooks, all science material, etc.). But such information is nowhere in the Bible. And if the Author of the Universe and the Author of the Bible are one and the same, I would expect such something more in the way of Divine Insight.

When it comes to reading stories in non-Christian religions, and you see that the stars are described as tiny, the moon as shining its own light, the sun orbiting the earth, and the earth as flat, do you think they're just using metaphors? My guess is no: you would say that ancient non-Christian stories reflect ignorance about the universe because ignorant people wrote these stories.

To quote from my book (pages 69-70):

Of course, it’s possible that the non-Christian explanations are scientifically inaccurate because ignorant humans wrote them, while the Christian explanations are scientifically inaccurate because our Divine Architect chose to dictate the Bible metaphorically … and I have no quarrel with anyone’s choice to believe this (as long as it’s not included in school curriculums). I just personally find it more plausible that the Bible’s description of nature reflects the limited knowledge of ancient humans because ancient humans were its sole authors.

But the earth does "wobble" . . . and being that I live in North America and we're now in September, the part of the planet I live on is tilting further away from the sun, while those on the opposite side of the equator are tilting closer. And a Creator of the Universe would know this story behind the seasons.

But in the Bible, the amount of fair weather & good crops that come your way are largely a matter of how well you're obeying holy commands (Leviticus 26).

Again, the poor communication method, the lack of Quality Control---all this smacks of something unworthy of a Creator powerful enough to create everything from the orbit of galaxies to programming web-spinning know-how into spiders.

Think about the communication efforts from today's CEOs in worldwide corporations. If they have a message that they want sent to every employee, they send something to the effect of a read-only file, make sure it's properly translated for every country that it goes to, and they have strict control over it: no unauthorized editing permitted. And these CEOs are just puny humans. A communication effort from the Biggest Boss of All—the Creator of the Universe, SHOULD be infinitely superior. But instead, the Bible's history of manual copying and translations and translation discrepancies is comparable to what we see with every other ancient text, whether religious or secular.

I want to respond to the rest of your post as well, but I may not get a chance to get to it for a few days. Thanks again for your post---I'll be back with you soon.

- Todd

 I appologise.  I know you didn't use the word "radical".  That was definitely my word.  I did not mean to misrepresent your intentions.  It's comparable to others, we're on the same page there. 

Why? Why is that so important to people's lives in Biblical times?  Their biggest concern was God and their crops.  The Earth spinning on its axis wasn't exactly needed knowlege for life... actually, it still isn't.  

It seems that the biggest argument from non-believers is (...but the Bible doesn't say this, the Bible forgot to mention that) and then they conclude (...well, that's not there, so it can't be real).  Right.  ok.  So would you carry around a book that had every little detail about the universe in it?  I would like to point out that even John said that just the stuff that Jesus did was more than anyone could handle or write.  John 21:25 

well no... that's really not what I would say.  Actually describing stuff as we see it is perspective science.  It's not going against scientific proof unless the person is saying 'the star is 1/100th of an inch wide and you must believe it.  Though, I'm guessing it's not the perspectives that's an issue here.  

I guess we should focus on the bigger issue then.  Like maybe what the story is trying to say???

Honestly, you'd have to agree that is Christian explanations of the universe in the Bible were so concretely inaccurate according to science, then there would be no dispute that there is no God, but you and I both know that's not the case.  Even Einstine logically came to the conclusion that God must exist due to... (I honestly can't remember the examples he used), but he was saying that through science most of it didn't make sense without a God to control it.  

I agree the Earth wobbles.  I agree the seasons change because of the tilt of the Earth.  Just to clarify some science here though, the Earth doesn't actually change it's tilt for the seasons, it's orbit around the sun is what changes the seasons.  The tilt stays the same thus changing the seasons in accordance to the angle of the tilt toward the sun.  If the Earth constantly changed the tilt while it orbited, there's a great theoretical possibility that the seasons on Earth would never change becasue the two would cancel themselves out!  But that's a sidenote...

I think simply put does the Earth stay on track? Or are we constantly at risk of floating off into random space?  Also, your reference to Leviticus is only talking about weather and has nothing to do with seasons or the Earth's tilt.  Just because the seasons happen does not mean the weather will be permitting.  The story also suggests that the peoples enimies will eat their crop; again having nothing to do with the Earth's track in space.   

Well, as far as communication goes, I guess one would have to change the English language as we know it to accomodate thusly.  Understand as well that the English language is man made and can be proven man made through history.

The discrepency is what you choose to see.  You're all worried about God not doing his job on getting all the facts out there and strait, and yet I an English only speaking citizen, have an understanding of the original intent.  Why, because I wanted to know.  If you don't want to know, the Bible makes it abundantly clear that God will not force you to know.  If you want to sit down and whole heartedly seek God out, then he will find you.    

You use a comparison of CEO's needing to make sure that paperwork is explicitly and properly translated, no editing alloud.  God first of all does say to not change the words of the Bible, Revelation 22:18-19.  There are severe punishments for doing so.  Does the government have similar laws about the paperwork?  I'd be surprised if they didn't.  

Second, explain to me how a CEO would translate from ancient Hebrew or Greek to English representing all three periods of time?  Obviously it cannot be done in this language without changing detrimental parts of it.

well, I have to admit, I was very surprised to hear directly from you!  I'm very happy to see you take the time to respond as well.  I appreciate it and thank you for it.  Many people I've talked to it seems will say something and let everyone else duke it out.  Your action to respond personally is commendable.  

I understand time constraints.  As I said to another RRS member, we all have lives outside this site, so by all means take your time.   

Ouch. Somebody buy that man a microphone. Seriously, I want to listen to this, but I'd have to pop some aspirin first.

The God of Sibilance vistedeth me in a dream, and showeth me how to fixeth the problem (see Video 5.3).

True, but you said everything I was thinking!

I DO mean to return to this page to respond further to Caposkia, but am too squeezed for time at the moment. Thanks, Veils of Maya, for covering for me!

- Todd

...so... are you questioning the reason why the Bible needs to be translated or what the tower of Babel is all about and why he confused the languages there?

I'll try to answer the language thing simply and if there's more that's not understood, please let me know.

Again, I'd like to point out that English is a man made language, so regardless of what happened at Babel, English was not a factor yet. (this is based on the origin of this topic; English makes it difficult to translate)

Also, the languages were confused so people would spread over the whole Earth. If you take in the whole story, you'll see that God's original intention of us reproducing was for us to "cover the whole Earth". God didn't want people to make cities, he wanted them to spread out. So to make sure that happened, he confused the languages.

uh... yea! Does a parent not take away the distraction from a child if they aren't finishing their homework???

Just a quick response on the video series 5.3.

Almost right of, Todd mentions how Christians would have a completely different perspective of what he's presenting. I must ask then, what was the purpose of the videos? Was it just candy for the Athiests?

Second, I'm a Christian, and I wouldn't say I don't have a completely different perspective. I in fact have told people many times I hold onto our scientific knowlege today as more proof of this God. Yea, people of the old times in other beliefs blamed the god's for bad weather. It's a well balanced system we found out in science. Did anyone reading this blog ever do the research on what would happen to our planet if we didin't have severe weather? Just a thought to consider.

Also, if there is a God, then of course we'd have to conclude the truth about the Bible that there are "spirit beings" if you will out there that are against this spirit God.

1. Why wouldn't other spirits use weather and sacrifice as a distraction?

2. Spirits that are against this God would of course logically want to distract people into thinking this God doesn't exist. Why? They want to be in control. With the Christian God around, they have no power. The dates Todd references to are after most of the books of the Old Testiment were written. Why can't it be concluded that they were ideas copied from the Bible?

yea, I know that was a weak, vague response, but it's hard to respond to a video that imediately acknowleges that Christians would have a completely different view.

A man made language in my understanding is a language we can historically prove was formed from human effort. English is of course not the only man made language out there.

The Bible has in fact been translated into over 5000 different languages. There's always potential for mistranslation of course. You blame the language barrier, I blame human error. Each translation was done by a person not God. If you would expect there to be no translational errors, then you would expect humans to be perfect. No where in the Bible does it say people are perfect. Anyone claiming to be perfect is hiding something.

I know you'd figure God should have taken it upon himself to translate for us if he was so inclined to confuse our language. The catch is, God gave us this Word. It is clearly stated in this Word that it is up to us to spread it. Translational errors aren't that big of a deal if you're willing to sit down and figure out the discrepency. If one did, they'd find out that the errors aren't exactly translational errors, they were the best translation that was understood.

If anything, this was a smart "ploy" on God's part. May I ask, do you remember something better if it's clearly stated, or if you have to figure it out? Science shows that figuring things out sticks in your mind much better than just reading something and then trying to remember it. God didn't have these books written to be forgotten.

yes, God did want to confuse the people so they wouldn't achieve their plans.They of course were concerned with being spread across the whole Earth... as you stated below... because they knew that was God's plan for them.

The problem with this is first of all God had a plan, and they didn't want to follow that plan. They wanted to make their own plans. God was concerned with this because first and foremost, he's a jellous God. The Bible says this. He is the Almighty, he want's his people to be dependent on him, not on themselves.

Ah, and I know where the response will go with this. How arrogant of him! Why would I want to follow an arrogant God???? Ok, do you think your parents are/were arrogant? Think about yourself at age 13 or so deciding you're going to go out with all your friends on your own and continue your life without your parents guidance. Ok, now picture your parents reaction to this when your age 13 or so. Your attempts might end up getting your video games taken away, you'd probably be grounded for a while, your parents might call the cops if you ran away. I don't know, but I do know there would be some friction from your parents. Why? Was it because they're arrogant and want all power over you??? Or was it that they had good plans for your future? Maybe college, etc. Also, maybe they know at age 13 you have no clue about life and you could be in danger out there on your own, making your own decisions.

Now picture this God in the same light as the parent of many 13 year olds out there. And this was their plan. Was he causing problems, or helping them out in the long run. Yea, ok, it's hard to see how this was helpful, we have cities now and we're doing ok.... except for all the murders and rapes... and maybe some theivery now and again. yea, I know. Those don't just happen in the cities... though who said a city was an area with a population over X number of people? I'm thinking this can apply to any united community.

yea, this has also applied to many true stories, but besides that. Another telltale sign of its mythological origin is an older manuscript with similar happenings but with different outcomes... though... I'm not aware of any at the moment. NOTE: The Pentateuch was considered to be written somewhere around 1446 to 1406 B.C.

Well, to say that I'm using an interpretation is a far assumption be it that my belief is held by in depth research and emperical conclusions.

Also, to sum up what you have said above, God in his "infinite wisdom" gave himself one weakness if you will. He gave people free will. It wasn't that he had no idea how to come up with a better plan, it's that the plan he had in place was not being followed by his people.  If you read through the whole Bible, God has always made an effort to make his plans in such a way that people have to choose to follow them.  Granted if they don't, it is also shown that God will use motivational tactics to get people to follow those plans.  (We are talking Old Testiment here by the way.  New Testiment has put all the choice in the people's hands)

You talk about homework getting harder to understand. What's so hard to understand about spreading out? the assignment was to spread out, the people were not doing their homework, so God took away the one thing he knew would convince them to "finish the homework"

> CAPOSKIA: Just a quick response on the video series 5.3. Almost right off, Todd mentions how Christians would have a completely different perspective of what he's presenting. [snip] . . . I'm a Christian, and I wouldn't say I don't have a completely different perspective. I in fact have told people many times I hold onto our scientific knowlege today as more proof of this God. Yea, people of the old times in other beliefs blamed the god's for bad weather. [snip] . . . it's hard to respond to a video that imediately acknowleges that Christians would have a completely different view.

Hi Caposkia,

Like videos 5.1 & 5.2 (and upcoming videos 5.4 & 5.5), the focus of 5.3 ("God sacrifices self to appease self--'barking mad'?" ) is not about modern science vs. the bible, but on how many of the ideas and stories in the Judeo-Christian Bible can be traced back to pre-existing religions. Video 5.1 is on Flood & Ark stories, 5.2 is on virgin births, and 5.3 is on the idea of salvation through the blood sacrifice of Jesus.

I call the phrase "barking mad" in the title, because that's Richard Dawkins's description for the premises that:

(1) God created humans in such a way that He knew, because of His Omniscience, that we couldn't help but be sinful, but was then angry at humans for our inevitable sin,

(2) that God is all-Just, but His Anger at the guilty party was appeased by the bloody torture & sacrifice of an innocent party,

(3) and third, that the innocent and tortured party was Himself, because Jesus is God—making God the judge, jury, and execution victim.

The point of my video was to present my reasons for why I don't think it's all barking mad—at least not when you look at the story from the perspective of a comparative mythologist, and trace each of these premises back to a time when each of these ideas were at not quite as irrational as they may seem today:

Divine anger – that makes sense from the perspective that ancient people used to attribute nature's utter indifference for us as the mood-swings of the Supernatural.

The demand for sacrifice – that makes sense from the perspective that ancient people were desperate to somehow get on the good side of the gods.

The hope that a scapegoat will serve as that sacrifice – that makes sense, as it's certainly more convenient than having to sacrifice your own crops or kids.

The idea of God sacrificing Himself to appease Himself – that's not really "barking mad" either, because nowhere is it specifically stated in the Bible. It IS an unavoidable aspect of Christianity, of course, once you put all the different pieces together, but that's something that's something more of an unintended consequence that happened when the Church was trying to reconcile the New Testament's contradictory storylines of (a) Jesus is God's Son, and (b) because there is only One God, Jesus is God.

As for why I mentioned that Christian apologists have a completely different interpretation, I just wanted to acknowledge that Christianity can also counter Dawkins's "barking mad" accusation, but of course not through the route of comparative mythology, but through a discussion on original sin, free will, God's Justice and punishment, plus God's sorrow and mercy and love and forgiveness and self-sacrifice, and also some complex details on the Trinity. And in Dialogue with a Christian Proselytizer, my Christian character does discuss all these things … but for the purpose of focus and momentum (the three videos already add up to 17 minutes), I decided to omit the Christian explanation, and make it a largely secular presentation.

> CAPOSKIA: I must ask then, what was the purpose of the videos? Was it just candy for the Athiests?

Strictly speaking, I never focus on atheism, in the sense that I never present arguments against "A Creator": I only present reasons for being skeptical of claims of Divine Knowledge. (I explain why I take this approach in Video 7 of 7.) But I think this is a technical point, in that you're really asking if I'm only interested in reaching fellow skeptics.

The audience I'd actually most like to reach are those on the fence---those brought up with religion as a "given," but already have their lurking doubts: those who describe themselves as "seekers."

My book & videos are also targeted at a teenage version of myself: someone who was skeptical of all claims of Divine Knowledge---whether such claims came from Christians, Joseph Smith, or Jim Jones---but whose thoughts on the subject were ill-formed and scattered. Back in my college days, there were some very aggressive Jews For Jesus proselytizers on campus, and my debates against them were spectacularly unsuccessful: my arguments were a disorganized mess.

I don't expect to convert any true-believing Christians. Back when I first preparing to write the book, I DID have my skeptic-character "win" the debate . . . but the more I studied Christian apologetics, the more I realized that the apologist can counter every charge that a skeptic makes (in fact, just about every Christian I've reviewed my book with thinks my Christian character wins every point). Whether the apologist's arguments or the skeptic's are the more convincing is up to the reader.

Also---I still want to get back to you on your earlier post comparing the mysteries of Christianity with the mysteries of science:

> CAPOSKIA: Just to put a counter twist on this as well. Another argument was made that we don't have enough brain power if you will, to understand God. Ok, is that not the same excuse scientists are using for understanding the Universe and our world? There is so much scientific theory out there. It's theory because we as humans cannot comprehend how it's possible and yet either cannot disprove it's possibility, or are afraid to discredit it. You have to admit, Christians and the rest of the world are guilty of weak minds when it comes to understanding something greater than ourselves. It's a poor excuse to discredit Christianity with that one, unless of course you want to discredit science as well.

---but I'm too overwhelmed with other obligations at the moment. Hope to get back to you by the end of the month. Once again I apologize for not being able to respond quicker and more completely: it's only because of a lack of time---not a lack of interest.

Your continued interest is appreciated!

- Todd

Theoretically.  That would be a big assumption to assume that there aren't some languages out there man made that we are not aware of from our own documented history.  Though taking that question from the point of view that there is a God, the Bible proves that indeed God did do many languages. 

Your statistics as I understand it are correct.  Though of course everyone's taking death as the end again.  So assuming again He's real, first of all, the Bible states:

1. Death is not the end

2. The final judgement will not happen until everyone has heard the Word of God

4.  The Bible also states that no one is held responsible for what they don't know.  

5.  The Bible says as well, that there is common sense proof of what is right in wrong (basically speaking) in nature.  Don't blow this one out of proportion, use common sense to figure that one out.  Get complicated and of course you're not going to learn from nature everything, but the basic needs for relating and living are given in nature.  It's scientific proof.  

Also, the "homework" we were talking about was directly given to the Babelonians.  This analogy has nothing to do with todays tribes that have no knowlege of God's Word.  

Side note:  There is also historical proof that every socially sheltered tribe has had some understanding of a higher power.  They acknowlege that they are not alone.  See the Native Americans before they were taken over.   

just for the record.  I'm not trying to bring "a silver lining" to any of this.  I'm just going with the knowlege I have accumulated or researched over the years that has led me to the understanding that this God has to be real.  The more research people make me do by asking difficult questions, the more science and history convinces me that this God is for real.  I've told people if you have proof, please, by all means show it to me. 

Heavens is the sky.  Not a place.  The literal meaning is up above.   

There are other Spirits trying to take God's place in people's lives, see Genesis! 

are you saying you have a better plan to make people  spread out?  Think about this, an omniscient God of course would have looked at all the ramifications of any decision he made.  My conclusion is this was the most effective way without causing too many issues.

did God say "here are my keys"? or did he say, "this is where I keep my keys, don't touch them"?  See Genesis Ch 1.  Following your analogy above, we stole the car.  God never gave us permission to use anything that was wrong, that was our choice and our choice alone, he just gave us the choice.   

I must ask.  If we didn't have free will, do you really think we'd have the ability to ask for it?   How willing would you give up your "free will" now?  Would you be willing to have someone else decide your every move, every word, every thought, every action?  Or do you want to make those decisions on your own?  Basically we'd be robots, doing whatever our "operator" told us, just like a computer.  The words I type now don't go on here exept with my permission.  My computer has no free will.  It cannot type what it wants when it wants.  In fact, it doesn't want.  Want is a free will action. 

 The Babelonians could have still chosen to stay together and continue to build the city.  Sounds to me like God gave them a reason. 

There are many other ways to communicate accurately besides talking.  

That was a understanding based response.  First of all, you asked the question, " So, if there is no historical record for how a lanauage was created, then God did it?"  What did you expect me to say?  The only way to answer that question for me to support my side would be to say that it's possible that God did it.

I did mention that there could be many other languages we are not aware of made by people.  I also used the phrase; IF God exists then... and you're claiming my response is ignorance.  I could respond to you with;  If you don't know how something came about, you can't claim that God didn't do it either.  The problem with that response is it's from my own opinion and brings no direction to this conversation, so it's really not needed here.  Let's try to avoid this in the future.  

not in my understanding.  There are 2 resurrections in Revelation.  One is for the people who already follow God, and the other is for everyone else who either hasn't followed God or doesn't know him from what I understand.  What would the point be to resurrect anyone who has no more choice and is already condemed, why not just burn them all?

yea, very much so.

This kind of goes along with the resurrection thing in Revelation.   I also believe from my studies, that people don't actually go to heaven right away.  The resurrections don't make sense if people do, and there's really nowhere in the Bible that says people go right to heaven.  In fact, there are many places that seem to show otherwise.  BTW, there is controversy in the Christian realm of what Jesus' words "Today, you will be with me in paradise" was actually referencing to.  Many don't see it as today like we understand it. 

Bible also states that a child that is too young to understand right and wrong does in fact "go to heaven" if they die.  

 Just because you hear it doesn't mean you have to listen to it.