Religulous review

Bill and I just came back from Bill Maher's new documentary Religulous. If you haven't heard of it, Bill Maher, who is not an atheist, but is very critical of religion, went around the world interviewing people of various religions. He was non-denominational in his disapproval. He skewered (crucified?) Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, Mormonism, Evangelical Christianity, Creationism, Scientology, Cantheism, and some guy who believes he's descended from Jesus.

The two funniest parts were Evangelical Christian Senator Mark Pryor from Arkansas saying that you don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the Senate, and someone's hair catching on fire. I won't say who, so it won't ruin it if you see the movie, but I will say no one was hurt. I especially liked the interviews with the priests at the Vatican who more or less said that most of the stuff in the bible was obviously all just stories, but what can you do when so many people believe them as fact? The giggling, raspberry blowing priest was actually more than a little weird.

They filmed a reenactment of the crucifixion of Christ at the Holy Land theme park in Orlando Florida, and I, like Roger Ebert, found the people clapping when Jesus fell down and was whipped and kicked by a Roman soldier to be a bit disturbing.

I was a little apprehensive going in because this town is in the mini-bible belt of California. The audience applauded at the end, which I think is a little odd, considering it's a movie. Who's going to hear? I guess they liked it, though.

On our way out, I overheard a conversation behind me.
Man: Well, that wasn't too offensive.
Woman: No, not at all.
Man: I would like to see it again. Actually, I would like to see a part two.

Considering that this town has churches on every other corner - several of them megachurches - chances are they are a somewhat religious couple.

Unfortunately, I think that most of the people who should go and see this movie won't.

Bill actually chuckled out loud in a couple of places, which he rarely does. I give it a thumbs-up, and Bill gives it 3 out of 4 stars. He subtracted a star because it wasn't Sci Fi.

Is it Christian or Egyptian mythology? Apparently sometimes it's hard to tell

I found this on the Atheist Nexus. In my best Arty Johnson imitation - Very Interesting. I have only researched some of it so I don't know if it is all true, but he comes to some of the same conclusions as I did in this post. Sorry if you have dial-up (Pater)...

Watch them in order:
He indicates that the Christian cross is a pagan adaptation of the cross of the Zodiac. I thought it was kind of sick that Christians use a torture and execution device as a symbol of their religion, but given the history, it is more understandable.

Thoughts on Wafergate

Most people in the atheist blogosphere have probably heard of the PZ Myers consecrated wafer saga. To recap, Dr. Myers posted a rant on his blog regarding an incident where a college student left a Catholic mass without actually eating the eucharist, but taking it with him, and has since been getting death threats.

At the end of PZ's rant, he asks people to send him eucharist wafers and he will "treat it with profound disrespect and heinous cracker abuse, all photographed and presented here on the web." Now, of course, he is getting hate mail and death threats, too. A Republican delegate has even asked for extra protection at the upcoming Republican Convention because PZ only lives 150 miles away.

I don't necessarily agree with what PZ threatened to do to a consecrated cracker, because many people really do believe that this is the body of Christ. Even if I personally believe that this is just silly, blown completely out of proportion, and it really is just a cracker, obviously many people are extremely upset over this. Several people have called it a hate crime and the Catholic League press release states “It is hard to think of anything more vile than to intentionally desecrate the Body of Christ." Um...I can think of a couple. How about Catholic Priests intentionally violating trusting young children for one?

I just have a couple of questions:

1. Shouldn't an omnipotent god be able to take care of himself?
2. Are the wafers that were consecrated by the (evil-in-my-opinion-but-forgiven-by-Jesus) child molesting Catholic Priests still consecrated? I think I just answered my own question.

Did Jesus even exist?

I had an argument with my friend David the other day. I seem to be having a lot of arguments lately. I think I'm just getting obstreperous in my old age. We were at a party, and our son (David is my ex-husband AND a very good friend) had just had a minor altercation with David's born-again Christian sister. After we had both given our son the high five (neither of us would have dared get into an argument regarding Christianity with her), and David's sister was out of earshot, I mentioned that Jesus probably hadn't even existed.

David said, "Yes he did."

I said, "No, I don't think so."

He said,"Yes he did."

I said, "No, there isn't any evidence that he did."

He said, "Yes, there is."

I said, "No, there isn't."

It went on like this for a while.

His point was that although he believed that Jesus more than likely was not the son of God, he believed he was a "minor" historical figure and that he had probably been a rabbi (in the sense of a Hebrew title of respect for a Jewish scholar or teacher). He also pointed out that Jesus is considered a minor prophet in both Islam and Judaism.

Honestly, I had always thought that Jesus was a real person until I started reading a little about it. I mean, we live in 2008 Anno Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, right? I certainly never believed that he was supernatural in any way, but I assumed he had existed.

The trouble is, there is no evidence that he existed at all. He supposedly lived for thirty some-odd years and did some pretty amazing things, but there are no contemporary (to his time) writings that even mention him. The first writings about him - The Gospel of Mark - has been dated to 30 to 80 years after he died. Granted, it was 2000 years ago, but there are many surviving writings about and by many people who DID live at that time. If he did exist, he certainly didn't do anything extraordinarily noteworthy.

As for the assertion that Jesus was a minor prophet of Judaism; some people believe that the Yeshu mentioned in the Talmud is actually Jesus. According to Judaism 101 website, the Talmud (oral Torah), was not written down until about the 2nd century C.E. In addition, Jesus is considered a minor prophet of Islam, but Islam didn't even exist until well over 600 years after Christianity. As Jim Walker says in his article Did a Historical Jesus Exist?, "after-the-event writings [cannot be used] as evidence for the event itself."

Many people believe that the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John are eyewitness accounts. Jim Walker and Earl Doherty do a very good job of explaining why these are not reliable sources.

I don't think it is possible to know for sure whether he existed or not, but 2000 years ago, if you wanted to make up a superhuman figure who would awe superstitious, gullible people, setting the story 50 years B.P. makes sure you are not likely to have anybody alive to contradict you. Nobody will stand up and say, "Hey! I knew Jesus, and I don't remember him walking on water, turning water into wine, etc." Or, "I lived in that town and I don't remember this Jesus guy." Your assertions are pretty safe. The stories only get better and more amazing over time.