OVO

Some groups and individuals oppose legal access to same sex marriage.  This includes homosexual groups and individuals, some from the left, some from the right.  I predict they will be displeased if legal access to same sex marriage occurs in the United States.  There is no right to happiness.

According to the General Accounting Office [pdf], “as of 31 December 2003 [there are] a total of 1,138 federal statutory provisions classified to the United States Code in which marital status is a factor in determining or receiving benefits, rights, and privileges.”  Due to the Defense of Marriage Act, these federal statutory provisions are available only to hetero married couples.  If legal access to same-sex marriage occurs in the United States, some or all of these federal statutory provisions will have to change.  I predict they will not change at the same time. I predict that they will not change to the same degree or in the same way.  I predict that sometimes a federal statutory provisions will cease to exist rather than be extended to same-sex couples.  I predict that they will not all change at the federal level, but rather at both the state and the federal level and that they will not be uniform in all states.  During the time these federal statutory provisions change, some same-sex couples will lose out while other same-sex couples will benefit.  Attentiveness now to these benefits, rights, and privileges might make their transitions more smooth.

Interracial hetero marriage was banned in some states as late as 1967.  The Loving v Virginia decision of the Supreme Court that year found miscegenation laws to be unconstitutional. Interracial marriage has been legal for over forty years. But it is not the case that interracial marriages occur with the same frequency as same-race marriages. According to the US Census for 2000, around 97% of whites married whites and around 96% of blacks married blacks. I predict these statistics will remain constant if legal access to same sex marriage occurs in the United States.  The State has no role in encouraging or discouraging marriage diversity.

Citizenship in the United States can be conferred by marriage.  I predict that legal access to same sex marriage will confer citizenship to some men and women who otherwise could not be citizens.  I predict this will be a small number and will not influence society much at all.  What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Domestic violence occurs among same-sex couples as well as hetero couples.  According to the American Bar Association [pdf], “seven states define domestic violence in a way that specifically excludes same-sex victims.” I predict that legal access to same sex marriage will include an increase of reports of domestic violence.  This increase in reports of domestic violence may be caused by a change in the ability to report domestic violence as much as or more than an increase in actual domestic violence. Domestic violence among same-sex couples does not occur with the same frequency among all sexes.  According to the U. S. Department of Justice, 11.4% of same-sex cohabiting women report being victimized by a female partner while 15.4% of same-sex cohabiting men reported being victimized by a male partner. Men raping men occurs much more frequently than men raping women.  According to the U. S. Census Bureau, 78.3% of murder victims are male and 21.4% of murder victims are female.  According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics [pdf] 65.3% of murders involved a male offender and a male victim while 2.4% of murders involved a female offender and a female victim.  I predict that legal access to same sex marriage will show more domestic violence among men than among women.  Acknowledging a difference between men and women and funding State services accordingly might lessen the problem of domestic violence.

Same sex couples cannot conceive children.  Same sex couples who wish to raise children are limited in their ability to adopt in the United States.  Some states allow it, some forbid it, and federal law has said only that an adoption in one state must be recognized in other states.  (Compare this with the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal law stating same-sex marriage in one state need not be recognized in other states.)  Many states that forbid adoption by same sex couples base their law on same sex couples being unable to legally marry.  I predict legal access to same sex marriage in the United States will cause changes in adoption laws.  I predict some states will make it no more or less difficult for same sex couples to adopt than for hetero couples to adopt, while other states will make all adoptions more difficult to make adoption more difficult for same sex couples.  Same sex couples who wish to raise children are limited in their ability to use birth surrogates or artificial insemination in the United States.  Legal limits on birth surrogates exist for hetero couples as well and vary by state.  There is no legal limit on artificial insemination but some insurance companies will not compensate single women who use artificial insemination.  I predict some states will make it no more or less difficult for same sex couples to use birth surrogates or artificial insemination, while other states will make using birth surrogates or getting artificial insemination more difficult to make these procedures more difficult for same sex couples.  I predict the number of children adopted will increase if legal access to same sex marriage occurs.  State by state differences in adoption, birth surrogates, and artificial insemination will be similar to the legality of abortion.  Abortion is legal at the national level but access to services varies by state and is not a service the state is compelled to offer.  Adoption laws should be inclusive of same sex parents.

Advocates of legal access to same sex marriage want treatment under the law identical to hetero marriage, and that includes legal access to divorce.  Making predictions about legal access to same sex marriage must include predictions about legal access to same sex divorce.  Statistics relating to hetero divorce have a limited value in making predictions about same sex divorce. According to the National Center for Health Statistics [pdf] “Approximately 61 percent of the divorces in 1988 were petitioned by the wife, 32 percent by the husband, and 7 percent by the husband and wife jointly.” More hetero couples are divorced today than in the past, and differences exist between the percentage of divorced men and divorced women.  According to the US Census Bureau: “Of the first marriages for women from 1955 to 1959, about 79 percent marked their 15th anniversary, compared with only 57 percent for women who married for the first time from 1985 to 1989. People born in the leading edge of the baby boom experienced high divorce rates in the 1970s and 1980s. About 38 percent of men born from 1945 to 1954 and 41 percent of women in the same age group had been divorced by 2004.”  The trend for women to initiate divorce more than men is also found in Denmark, where legal access to same sex marriage has been available since 1989. Male same sex married couples in Denmark seek a divorce 14% of the time, while female same sex married couples in Denmark seek a divorce 23% of the time. I predict legal access to same sex marriage in the United States will reveal that women seek divorce more than men in both hetero and same sex marriages.  According to the US Census Bureau [pdf], among hetero divorced couples in 2008 56.9% of mothers were awarded child support and custody while 40.4% of fathers were awarded child support and custody.  I predict custody and child support issues among divorcing same sex couples will incur less legal fees and occupy less court time among men than women.  I claim that some discontent to legal access to same sex marriage is caused by discontent with hetero marriage.  Discontent with hetero marriage comes in part from the prevalence of divorce.  No-fault divorce has existed in every state since 1985.  Discontent with hetero marriage comes in part from the disparity of who initiates divorce and who benefits from divorce.  Women initiate divorce more often than men, and benefit from divorce more often than men.  Divorce and women’s rights are largely spoken of as having only benefits, never any cost.  Divorce and women’s rights are largely spoken of as bringing about only equality, never inequality.  For these reasons, what might have been a debate about women and divorce has become a debate about homosexuals and marriage.  I predict legal access to same sex marriage will not bring about the former debate.  Acknowledging a difference between men and women and funding State services accordingly might lessen the problem of divorce.

See also: Three Predictions Part One, ‘Who’s That Girl?’

Jim Goad: Planet Islam

For the past 1000 years, the Muslim world has given us almost nothing in the way of math or science. It has, however, given us a slave trade that predated the Atlantic slave trade by seven centuries and shackled nearly twice as many black Africans as the Europeans did – a fact that continues to get lost on black Americans who cozy up to Islam.

Yahoo! News: Afghan Girls Fall Ill After Apparent Gas Poisoning

About 40 schoolgirls became ill and were taken to hospital after a suspected gas poisoning in the Afghan capital Wednesday, another apparent attack by hardline Islamists opposed to female education.

SSC Times: Alshabaab Cuts Tongue

The Mother of Ahmed Ali Shuuke has told the media that her son receives all food through injection and according to her statement he gets fed using the needles often used for injecting Camel herds. [includes photograph of a man with his tongue cut out.]

New York Times: In Bold Display, Taliban Order Stoning Deaths

The Taliban on Sunday ordered their first public executions by stoning since their fall from power nine years ago, killing a young couple who had eloped, according to Afghan officials and a witness.

BBC: Taliban ‘Kill Adulterous Afghan Couple’ in Marketplace

Two witnesses from Mullah Quli told the BBC that the Taliban asked the villagers to attend the stoning through an announcement on loudspeakers in the mosque.

Reuters: Iran Stoning Case Lawyer in Turkey, Seeking Asylum

The lawyer who defended a woman sentenced to death by stoning in Iran is in Istanbul and has applied for asylum in a third country, a source at the United Nations’ refugee agency said Thursday.

canada.com: Muslim Women’s Group Opposes Addition of Honour Killings to Criminal Code

The Canadian Council of Muslim Women opposes the addition of “honour killings” to the Criminal Code on the grounds “murder is murder” and a special category could stigmatize new immigrants and some ethnic or religious groups.

Middle East Quarterly: Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings

Although Sikhs and Hindus do sometimes commit such murders, honor killings, both worldwide and in the West, are mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. In this study, worldwide, 91 percent of perpetrators were Muslims. In North America, most killers (84 percent) were Muslims, with only a few Sikhs and even fewer Hindus perpetrating honor killings; in Europe, Muslims comprised an even larger majority at 96 percent while Sikhs were a tiny percentage. In Muslim countries, obviously almost all the perpetrators were Muslims. With only two exceptions, the victims were all members of the same religious group as their murderers.

All articles continue at links. Part of a series that never ends… [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] and etc. Cutting out a man’s tongue is in compliance with Islam. Stoning those accused of adultery is in compliance with Islam. Honor killings are in compliance with Islam.  These evils co-exist with Islam, and I’ll venture a guess they are related.  Perhaps the secularization and reform of Islam will cause a reduction in these evils.  Pending the complete withering away of Islam under the twin suns of reason and scorn, I’d like to give that a try.

Sometimes people scowl at me when I talk about religions like Islam or Christianity withering away to nothing.  But the evidence is on my side.  All religions die out, given enough time.  If we learn from our mistakes (if) then religion itself may also wither away, given enough time.  If.

OUTLAW CHRISTIANITY! DEATH TO ALL CHRISTIANS!

The above does not reflect the intention of OVO, and in fact stands opposite to it. The above is provided to feed the presuppositions of those who will not actually read this issue of OVO. Any review of this issue that quotes the words above is likely to have been written by someone who never read beyond them to learn what OVO actually states. This issue of OVO has a purpose, but the likelihood that it will be misrepresented is great enough that a clear statement of what the purpose is not is in order.

OVO does not advocate the criminalization of Christianity. Existing criminal law suffices to address what is harmful, and law is among the least appropriate means of addressing what is merely mistaken. Christians deserve equal sanction by the law, and voluntary and informed activities among consenting adults (including religion) should not be outlawed.
OVO does not advocate the murder of Christians except in self-defense. Because of the potential for legal error, capital punishment is immoral in all cases. War and murder are immoral in all cases except in self-defense. Except in self-defense, it is always immoral to kill (including killing Christians).

OVO does not advocate the replacement of the Christian God with another God, a Goddess, a pantheon of deities, nature worship, or similar substitution. OVO does not advocate worship, be it of the Christian God or any other. To any reader who uses OVO to build up their own superstition: your faith is equally contemptible.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because it does not understand it. Many years research went into this issue, and along the way misunderstandings about Christianity (whether in its favor or against it) were abandoned. OVO criticizes Christianity not because it does not understand it, but because it is worthy of criticism.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because the editor had a traumatic experience with Christianity. The editor had a generally positive experience with Christianity while growing up and has Christian friends today. It is a silent admission of defeat that Christians use this psychological, secular explanation for why someone might criticize their superstition. The editor came to reject Christianity the old fashioned way: by reading the Bible.

OVO is not critical of Christianity because the editor is possessed by Satan, demons or evil spirits. Such ghosts have never existed.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because it is a socialist publication. OVO is not a socialist publication.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because Christianity is false. Christianity is false, but that is not in itself sufficient reason to advocate that it wither away. There are many non-fiction books, films, plays, poems and recordings that are also false but serve to inspire humanity. But these false stories do not claim to be true, are not taught to impressionable children as true, and are not used to support legislation that meddles in the affairs of non-Christians. No one is arguing that the epics of Homer be taught as history; no one is legislating that Aesop’s fables be posted in courtrooms. These stories, though false, serve to inspire those who seek them out and are rightly preserved. It is the secular power of Christianity that is the problem, not merely its falsehood. Christianity does not attempt to identify and lessen its falsehoods: it revels in them as ‘tests of faith.’ Christianity is holding back science and art, culture and philosophy, tools that actually can and actually have improved humanity’s lot in an indifferent Universe.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because it is a good religion perverted to bad ends. It is much more the case that a few good people (Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, perhaps) have perverted the bad religion of Christianity to good ends. All the good done in the name of Christianity could and does occur through entirely secular means. What remains distinctly Christian if such duplication of labor is removed? Threats of eternal damnation, denial of the pleasures and wonders of this short life, confusion and deception. When Christianity has supported individual rights it has done so only after a ‘revelation’ that (a) goes against its own history and (b) miraculously is in harmony with contemporary public opinion. For example, many Christians opposed slavery in the United States; but many more supported slavery and did so for much longer. Even today the Bible contains many passages supporting slavery and not one passage condemning it. Christianity is a slave religion, a misogynist religion, a queer-killing religion, a nonsense religion, but good people keep twisting their bad faith to good ends. Wouldn’t it be better to just do good deeds without wasted efforts to placate an invisible monster that lives in the sky?

OVO does not criticize Christianity to criticize individual Christians. It is often the case that an attack on a person’s unconsidered beliefs is perceived as an attack on their person. If a person’s beliefs are profoundly unconsidered, to merely state that one holds differing beliefs is perceived as an attack. For example, Christians who see other superstitions get equal time in the eyes of the law sometimes complain that their freedom of religion is under attack. Those who hold considered beliefs are secure when challenged and (hopefully) willing to admit error. Those who hold unconsidered beliefs, who repeat what they have been told without deliberation, are more likely to confuse who they are with what they believe. Christianity, like all religions, encourages strong belief but also encourages a lack of consideration. Posturing, bullying and stubbornness are substitutes for consideration of belief among most Christians.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because its claims contradict the evidence of our senses, science, history, archeology, astronomy, mathematics, common sense and the like. It is true that Christianity is incompatible with all of these, but science progresses by way of challenges to all our claims. If Christianity challenges the evidence of our senses, all the better: let the challenges be considered and considered again. If the Bible contradicts science, science can be tested to see if the Bible has a better explanation for reality. Where the Bible holds true, the Bible holds true. Where the Bible is found to be false, it should either be re-written or re-classified as folk tales. Resolving contradictions between the Bible and the evidence of our senses can be of value to us all, and so the contradictions between the Bible and the evidence of our senses are not in themselves why the Bible should be criticized. Internal contradictions in the Bible, and holding on to falsehood when falsehood has been identified, are worthy of the greatest of criticisms.

OVO does not criticize Christianity as an argument for atheism. The editor is preparing an argument for atheism that is distinct from this argument against Christianity.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because Jesus Christ was a good person whose followers have gone astray, or because we do not have the secret teachings of Jesus, or because Jesus was a complex person with both good and bad qualities. Jesus never existed.

In 1991, the editor published A Call to Heresy on a BBS in Knoxville, Tennessee USA. The document found its way onto BBS’ around the world as well as other formats, including an Internet domain in Hong Kong and a CD-ROM of public domain texts published by Palm Computers. Various editions of the text can be found on the Internet today. Some of the research done for that text has found a new home here in OVO 16 AntiChrist.

OVO criticizes the Bible. Some Christians say that it is an error to overly attend to what the Bible says, and one should rely on the Bible as inspiration rather than fact. But the Bible itself makes claims of perfection, and so taking it at its word in claims of perfection are as justified as any other perspective; perhaps more justified than some ‘inspired’ interpretations. If any interpretation of the Bible is as good as any other, then Christians in no way can distance themselves from the worst among them. Having failed to amend the contradictions, atrocities and absurdities in the Bible with over two thousand years to do so, it is reasonable to conclude that the Bible is considered factual among Christians. Some Christians (called Dominionists or Fundamentalists or Conservatives or the Christian Right) are explicit in their claim that the Bible is factual, while the rest hold it to be factual but requiring ‘interpretation’ (often by way of asking the reader to simply ignore parts of the Bible).

But this issue of OVO does not limit itself to criticisms of the Bible. The Roman Catholic Church claims a history pre-dating the Bible. Martin Luther, founder of Protestant Christianity, wrote inspired texts. The Church of Jesus Christ Latter-Day Saints and the Watchtower Society claim to have Christian revelations in modern times. All of these Christians are well deserving of criticism and contempt.

There are a set number of responses offered by Christians when confronted with their own beliefs. The first and most common is to be told that these Bible verses have been taken out of context. It is claimed that the verses surrounding these quotes give them a meaning other than their apparent meaning. If this is the case it will be easy to demonstrate; full citations for each quote are given throughout. The reader is encouraged to read the Bible. There is no more sure path to rejecting Christianity than understanding it. Some claim that the contexts of the times change how we should understand the Bible. But does the Bible say it is relevant only until the time of Job (the last time God speaks directly to humanity), or does it claim to be relevant to all times? Some claim that one translation of the Bible offers a more accurate account than another, but existing fragmentary early Christian texts contain their own contradictions, atrocities and absurdities.

The second common reply made by Christians when confronted with their own beliefs is that the Bible, God, Jesus and the rest are not to be understood by reason in the way math or science is. Christianity is to be understood by faith, by the heart, by the spirit, by the soul. Therefore any apparent contradictions, atrocities or absurdities should be ignored because those are all ‘reason’ and not ‘faith.’ But there is no ‘alternative to reason’ as faith is said to be. One can hope, one can wish, one can pretend and ignore, one can scream or run away or kill one’s critics, but none of these are alternatives to reason. Even if there were an alternative to reason, how is the ‘feeling’ that Christianity is true (and all other religions false) different from the ‘feeling’ that Islam is true (and all other religions are false)? Why is it that Christian ‘feelings’ are so regional – does God not inspire such ‘feelings’ everywhere equally? Why don’t children have that ‘feeling’ until an adult tells them to say they do, and why do adults spend so much effort making sure that ‘feeling’ is planted in children?

All religions claim to be the only true religion. Even the ecumenical religions claim to be the only true religion, by claiming that the non-ecumenical religions are false. But since all religions contradict each other at most only one can be the only true religion. Since all religions by definition put themselves outside what can be demonstrated as true, it would be unjust to establish any religion as secular law because the likelihood of error would be too great. Suppose Mithrism became the law of the United States when actually it was Ah Pook that was the real living God? Those countries that have a legal assumption of atheism serve freedom the most. At times this has been the case in the United States, where OVO originates. Christianity threatens the legal presupposition of atheism in the USA, necessitating this issue of OVO. Christianity is the superstition behind the US support of Israel, the war in Iraq, lack of access to Plan B and a vaccine for two strains of cancer-causing HPV, the removal of science from public education, the ongoing imprisonment of the West Memphis Three (among others), blue laws, laws forbidding atheists from holding elected office and more. Reform from within should occur in Christianity. Civil discourse should occur between Christians and non-Christians. But should Christianity elect to ignore the opportunities of positive reinforcement, let it learn the sting of negative reinforcement. OVO is not reforming Christianity from within, nor is it a civil discourse. It is an attack – using only Christianity’s own beliefs as weapons. When Mithrism or the faithful of Ah Pook establish their superstition as law in the USA, they will be equally worthy of criticism. Readers in countries where Islam or Judaism are the majority superstition are encouraged to make similar efforts.

This issue of OVO advocates the withering away of Christianity through reason and scorn. Reason alone withers Christianity to a hostile party guest that has long overstayed his welcome; scorn provide us with laughter and satisfaction as we show him to the door. Perhaps reason alone, or reason and compassion, might be a more noble endeavor. But any belief that cannot withstand a little mockery is perhaps not worth holding in the first place.

Subject religious organizations to the same requirements as secular non-profit organizations: demonstrate they perform a quantifiable public good to receive tax-exempt status. Do not donate any funds, labor or resources to Christian organizations: there are secular equivalents to any Christian organization for those who seek to aid others. Do not vote for politicians who make their Christianity a part of their platform. Oppose ‘faith based’ funding and theocratic laws. Learn more about Christianity than the Christians themselves. Confront Christians with their own claims and history.

OVO is fortunate to originate in the United States, where Christianity and other superstitions may be legally practiced and criticized. The United Kingdom, Holland, Sweden, Italy, Turkey, Norway, Canada and other countries forbid criticism of religion as a form of ‘hate crime,’ while China, North Korea and other countries forbid religion as a form of ‘thought crime.’ In the United States religion may be both practiced and criticized – for now. If Christianity continues to become the state religion of the United States, this may not be the case much longer.

OVO is a tool kit to disabuse the reader of Christianity.

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

This essay makes the case against tax exemption for religious organizations in Oregon. The amount of revenue lost as well as the harm caused by religious organizations is not compensated for by the social good they are alleged to provide (this alleged social good being the justification for their tax exempt status).

Tax exemption for religious organizations in Oregon brings about three problems for Oregonians. First, there is no definition of religion to differentiate ‘real’ religious organizations from ‘fake’ ones, thus making any decision for or against tax exemption on the part of the government arbitrary. Second, religious organizations are not compelled to make contributions to their community that are comparable to the amount they are awarded in taxes breaks, nor is there any effort or means to hold them accountable for aiding the community. Third, the revenue needs of Oregon could be met by taxing religious organizations at only a fraction of the rate other organizations are taxed.

It is helpful to delineate what is under discussion in any argument. In this case, the topics under discussion are Oregon, taxes exemption and religion. Oregon is the state to the North of California and Nevada, to the South of Washington, to the West of Idaho and with a Western boundary of the Pacific Ocean. Tax exemption means that the agencies in question are not compelled to pay taxes. The definitions for Oregon and tax exemption are easy to find, confirm, and understand. But the search for a definition of religion is doomed to failure.

There is no legal definition of what a religion is, be it on the international level, the national level or the state level. Although many nations define religion as something deserving of political protection, there is no legal definition of what a religion is in international law [1].

There is also no legal definition of what a religion is in United States law. The First Amendment of the Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that the religion of a US citizen cannot be used to deny them public accommodation, equal protection under the law, segregation in public education or college education, the right to vote, or employment [2]. While the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ensure protection of religion, neither define what it is they are protecting. The United States has never offered a definition what a religion is, although it has offered a definition of what a religion is not. In Thomas vs. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, the Supreme Court determined that “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection [3].” In the eyes of the law, a religion is anything that declares itself a religion.

There is no legal definition of what a religion is in Oregon law. ORS 128.620 (4) states a “religious organization means any organized church or group organized for the purpose of divine worship, religious teaching, or other directly ancillary purposes [4].” ORS 307.140 states property owned or being purchased by religious organizations is exempt from taxation [5]. ORS 65.001 (39) states that a religious group “is designated a religious corporation by a statute or is organized primarily or exclusively for religious purposes.” The Department of Revenues states that exemption from property tax is available for any religious group that has a constitution, bylaws, or charter which states its mission and purpose [6]. Religious organizations in Oregon are clearly given exemption from property tax, and are clearly expected to ‘be religious.’ But there is no legal definition of what a religion is or how to ‘be religious’ in Oregon law.

Whether it be international law, United States law or Oregon law, there is no legal definition of what a religion is. What if legal sanctions and prohibitions for other issues were left similarly vague? For better and for worse, there are legal definitions to who is and is not a Native American; what is and is not an endangered species; which chemicals are and are not legal to ingest. If there were no definition of who is a Native American, anyone could collect federal benefits reserved for Native Americans. If there were no definition of what an endangered species is, any species could be declared no longer endangered and hunted to extinction. If there were no definition of who is authorized to sell morphine, anyone who would like to make some fast money would do so. The reason legal definitions exist is so that laws may be fairly applied to all, and so that exemptions from the law may be justified. But a religious group is a religious group merely because it claims to be a religious group. Religions exempt themselves from definition, aside from the definition of ‘that which is tax exempt.’

Because there is no legal definition for religion in Oregon, there is no way to determine if religious tax exemptions are being fairly applied. Some religious organizations may be tax exempt but not deservedly so, while other religious organizations may not be tax exempt and deserve tax exemption. There is no way to determine if religious tax exemptions are being fairly granted to all applicants because there is no way to determine which applicant is ‘being religious’ and which is not. Whatever ‘being religious’ means, religious organizations are exempt from paying taxes. This includes taxes related to their property, businesses, income, and donations.

The justification offered for religious tax exemption is similar to that of secular groups that qualify for non-profit status (501c3). Secular non-profit organizations earn their tax exempt status by providing services that might otherwise be provided by the state, such as housing or medical care. Since the state does not have to pay for these services, no taxes are gathered from organizations that offer such services. Since the perceived need for taxes is thereby reduced, secular non-profit organizations can justify their tax-exempt status.

But there is an important difference between the tax-exempt status of secular organizations and the tax-exempt status of religious organizations. Secular non-profit organizations are held accountable for their work. They must demonstrate that the service they provide is necessary, that they have provided that service, that the service they provided was taken advantage of, and that the cost of lost taxes is less than the benefit of the services provided. If a secular non-profit organization cannot demonstrate each of these characteristics, they do not retain their tax-exempt status.

The standards that secular non-profit organizations are held to makes them very different from religious tax-exempt organizations. Religious tax-exempt organizations are not held to these standards or to any other standard. A religious organization may deliver food to the hungry, offer shelter to the homeless and counseling to the troubled – or they may do none of these things, or it may do these things to a standard far outside accepted norms (such as offering “prayer” as a substitute for medical care or counseling). Religious groups are exempt from taxes whether or not they serve their community and lessen the tax burden. There is no legal obligation on a religious group’s part to demonstrate they have delivered food, shelter or other tangible services; there is no legal obligation on a religious group’s part to do anything to retain their tax-exempt status other than filing or re-filing the proper forms. It is not possible to measure measures how much religion Oregonians need, how much religion religious organizations provide, how many people take advantage of religion, whether one form of religion is more beneficial than any other, or whether or not religion is cost effective. While is it possible to state how many people claim religious affiliation, it is not possible to state what that means. It is not possible to determine if a two-year-old just as religious as an adult. It is not possible to legislate how often or in what way a group must be religious to qualify for tax exempt status. Because there is no oversight to determine how much a religious group serves its community, there is no justification for tax exempt status for religious organizations in Oregon.

Oregon law does not state what religion is. Oregon law is also not consistent in when individuals are exempt from legal punishment due to religion. Sometimes activities are forbidden by law irregardless of religion, other times they are allowed if religion is said to be involved. In the case of Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon vs. Smith it was determined that the state of Oregon is not compelled to allow the use of peyote [7]. Although peyote has been a part of Native American religions for centuries, and although the plaintiffs were themselves Native Americans and were using peyote for what they claimed were religious reasons, the state Supreme Court determined they were not entitled to unemployment compensation after being fired due to using peyote. The legal injunction against peyote use trumped their religious claims. This is an example of an activity being illegal whether or not it was ‘religious.’

Conversely, Oregon law provides immunity to many charges if the crime occurred as religion. These crimes have included homicide by abuse or neglect, first and second degree manslaughter, criminal mistreatment, requirements for children to wear a bicycle helmet, and nonsupport of children. Until recently, all of these crimes could be excused if the defendant claims they were committed as religion [8].

All newborns in Oregon are given a drop of vitamin K by law, but parents can prevent their children from receiving protection against spontaneous hemorrhaging for religious reasons.

The Followers of Christ Church in Clackamas County took advantage of religious exemption for murder by allowing nearly eighty children to die since the 1950s from treatable medical conditions. In over half of these deaths, the state did not attempt to establish the cause of death, the record was lost or their deaths were listed as due to ‘natural causes.’ Even when an Oregon medical examiner brought these deaths to the attention of the District Attorney’s office, the prosecutor declined to file charges. In the words of Rita Swan, “a parent may be beating or torturing a child, but if he or she can show that the child was prayed for, criminal charges must be dismissed [9].” Oregon House Bill 2494 revised criminal exemptions for parents who treat children only with prayer in 1999, after hearing opposing testimony by Oregon churches [10]. While child sacrifice in Oregon now carries some consequences, other criminal exemptions such as not requiring a religious child to wear a bicycle helmet remain [11]. These are a examples of an otherwise illegal activity being legal by calling it ‘religious.’

One of the larger religious organization in Oregon is the Archdiocese of Portland. The Archdiocese of Portland is under the direct orders of the Roman Catholic Church, led by the Pope of Rome. In 1962, Pope John XXIII gave his approval to a document outlining the policy of the Roman Catholic Church in the event of child abuse by clergy. The policy was to keep child abuse by clergy secret and to transfer abusive priests to new parishes. The policy itself was to be kept secret but was revealed in 2003. The policy has never been retracted [12]; in fact, the current Pope stated in 2001 that the policy was still in effect [13]. More than one hundred and sixty nine victims of clerical child abuse have sued the Archdiocese of Portland for child abuse, and more than $53,000,000.00 has been assigned to settlements so far. While the Archdiocese of Portland filed for and received permission to delay paying its victims, it did have the funds to make building upgrades costing $1.6 million dollars [14]. The Archdiocese of Portland is estimated to own between $300,000,000 and $500,000,000 in property, none of which is taxed. It also owns special-purpose funds, investment funds, and loan funds, none of which are taxed. In 2003 its revenue was no less than and perhaps greater than $8.2 million, none of which was taxed [15]. The Archdiocese of Portland is only one out of 6,862 religious organizations claiming ORS 307.140 tax exemption in the state [16]. To quote the Oregonian, “The Catholic Church operates not by secular law, but by church law [17].”

Religious organizations in Oregon are not compelled to follow the same standards of education and employment as any other educator or employer in the state. Fundamental facts of nature which are part of the basic curriculum for any other school in the state may be omitted or deliberately misrepresented in religious schools. Any secular employer who hires and fires based on gender, ethnicity, sexuality, marital status or beliefs is subject to legal sanctions, but if the employer is religious they may hire and fire at will are protected by law in doing so.

Non-profit organizations (both secular and religious) are forbidden from endorsing political candidates. But some religious tax-exempt groups want to have their cake and eat it too. The Sonrise Church of Hillsboro lost its tax exempt status after partisan campaigning on its property [18]. The Christian Coalition has published the same sort of voting guides that cost the Sonrise Church its tax exempt status [19]. The New Hope Community Church of Clackamas has held partisan campaign meetings on its property [20]. The campaign to elect George W. Bush solicited the support of hundreds of religious organizations [21]. To further blur the line between state and superstition, the House of Representatives has initiated a bill that will merely fine religious organization that engage in partisan politics rather than revoke their tax exempt status [22]. Religious organizations can now avail themselves to federal funds through George W. Bush’s ‘faith based initiatives’ law – but apparently this money is made available mainly to Christian organizations, as few other religious organizations that have applied have received such funds. Under faith based funding, tax dollars can go to agencies that refuse to hire or serve minorities, women, homosexuals or anyone else for any reason.

In 1998 the Audits Division of the State of Oregon Department of Revenue conducted an audit of property tax exemptions. It determined that among religious organizations claiming tax exempt status under ORS 307.140, the sum of $2,010,492,000.00 was lost in tax year 1995-1996 [23]. This figure represents only revenues lost from property taxes, and does not include other lost forms of revenues connected to employment, businesses, museums and other sources of income for religious organizations. The audit states that 41 of the 154 organizations audited that were granted tax exempt status did not even meet the minimal state standards for tax exempt status (whatever those might be). The audit does not specifically state how many of these organizations were tax exempt under ORS 307.140. but the fact that one third of the organizations that claimed (and were granted) exemption totaling seventeen percent of $170.9 billion dollars in property taxes [24] were not qualified to do so suggests that Oregon religious tax exemption law is in dire need of supervision and revision [25]. Among other recommendations, the audit suggested that Oregon needs a clear definition of what a religion is to be able to fairly evaluate applications for ORS 307.140 tax exempt status [26]. This recommendation was not mentioned in the Department of Revenue’s reply [27] nor in a 1999 report on their progress in implementing 1998 audit [28]. Religion continues to go undefined, but religious tax exemption continues to be granted.

At what cost does Oregon grant tax exempt status to religious organizations? The state deficit for fiscal year 2004 was between $950,000.00 and $1,267,000.00 [29]. If religious organizations were taxed only for their property and only at half the rate of any other organization, the state budget would be all-but balanced within a single year.
Being religious, the defining trait that has no definition, is in the main an excuse to do as one pleases without consequence in Oregon. The majority of religious organizations in Oregon do not abuse and sacrifice children. Instead, they do nothing. Doing nothing and ruining children’s lives should not be rewarded with tax exemption.

Notes:
[1] Gunn , T. Jeremy: The Complexity of Religion and the Definition of “Religion” in International Law. Harvard Human Rights Journal Volume 16 Spring 2003. http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss16/gunn.shtml
[2] Civil Rights Act of 1964. Document Number: PL 88-352. http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/laws/majorlaw/civilr19.htm
[3] Thomas vs. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division. 450 U.S. 707. http://laws.findlaw.com/us/450/707.html
[4] ORS Chapter 128 http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/128.html
[5] ORS Chapter 307 http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/307.html
[6] Property Tax Exemptions for Special Organizations. http://www.dor.state.or.us/InfoC/310-664.html
[7] Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon vs. Smith http://laws.findlaw.com/us/494/872.html
[8] Children’s Health Care. http://www.childrenshealthcare.org/
[9] Swan, Rita. Letting Children Die for the Faith. Free Inquiry, Volume 19, Number 1. http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/swan_19_1.htm
[10] Larabee, Mark. Shield-law bills face easy win in House. Oregonian, March 5, 1999 http://www.rickross.com/reference/foc/foc9.html
[11] Children’s Health Care. http://www.childrenshealthcare.org/
[12] BBC News. Excerpts: Vatican document. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3157859.stm
[13] Pope ‘Obstructed’ Sex Abuse Inquiry. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1469055,00.html
[14] Funds are Released to Florence Parish http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/111813879118220.xml&coll=7
[15] Sunday Oregonian, May 23, 2004, Page A-14.
[16] State of Oregon Department of Revenue Property Tax Exemptions. March 24, 1998. Page 51. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[17] Sunday Oregonian, May 23, 2004, Page A-14.
[18] Americans United Reports Eight Churches to IRS for Distributing Christian Coalition Voter Guides During November Elections. December 10 1998. http://www.au.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6112&abbr=pr&JServSessionIdr012=i6cieg36h2.app1b&news_iv_ctrl=1502
[19] Christian Coalition of Oregon http://www.coalition.org/
[20] Dobson speaks to NW pastors about same-sex debate. KATU April 5 2004. http://www.katu.com/news/story.asp?ID=66042
[21] Bush Campaign [...] To Forge Church-Based Political Machine. Americans United, June 2 2004. http://www.au.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6692&abbr=pr&security=1002&news_iv_ctrl=1241
[22] House steps into church-politics debate. USA Today. June 8 2004. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-06-08-church-politics_x.htm
[23] State of Oregon Department of Revenue Property Tax Exemptions. March 24, 1998. Page 51. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[24] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page 56. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[25] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page iii. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[26] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page 44. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[27] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page 55. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[28] State of Oregon Department of Revenue Status of 1998 Audit Recommendations as Reported by State Agencies. November 17, 1999. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1999_year.html
[29] State Budget Shortfall Map http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/budgetmap.html

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Between April 11 and April 15 of 2004, I hosted an atheist table at Portland Community College in Portland, Oregon. This is an account of what I did, how I did it, and the response to what I did.

Getting the table was not difficult: I submitted the same paperwork that the religious groups on campus submit every other week of the year and my request was approved right away. I only asked for an hour a day for four days, due to other school obligations. Most religious groups have their tables out all day for weeks on end.

I spent about $40 printing some pamphlets I made. My pamphlets consisted of quotes from religious sources such as the Christian Bible and the Quran. The idea was that direct quotes from the source presented without comment would speak louder than any criticism I could offer. The quotes were gathered according to themes such as science, women, prophecies, etc. I also requested literature from atheist groups and several generously answered my request: Campus Freethought Alliance, Center for Inquiry, Council for Secular Humanism, and United States Atheists. I decided to keep the effort ‘ecumenical’ in that I wasn’t there representing any particular organization. By the end of the week I learned that the professionally published literature is taken more readily than the home-made photocopies, and that everyone loves stickers. I decorated a second-hand tablecloth with the word ATHEIST in large, black letters – no missing this table, no missing what this table was about (or so I hoped). PCC specifically forbids collecting personal information on campus, so I didn’t have a sign-up sheet as the Campus Freethought Alliance suggests. Nor did I primarily promote humanism rather than critique religion, as the CFA suggets. For this first effort on campus I want it to be clear that religion itself, not just particular groups or people or claims, was not exempt from criticism. I also set up a simple Web page for those who wanted to get or share more information.

Many people had questions about the atheist table. Some wanted to know if there was an official atheist club on campus, and what the club did. I said that there was not school-sponsored club because I knew that some students wouldn’t feel comfortable if their student activities fee went toward such a club. PCC offers up to $500 per group per year. There are at least five or six religious clubs on campus at all times, and no limit to the number of clubs that could exist. Two people said ‘but the Christian groups don’t hesitate in taking my money.’ I said that was a decision that PCC and the Christian groups made, and suggested they take it up with PCC and the Christians if they disapproved. I said many times that while there was no club, we did have a Web page and that I hoped in the future to either bring in or be a guest speaker on atheism, religion, church/state issues, and the like.

Some who stopped by the table had questions not about what I was offering but what I wasn’t offering. Why not have a separation of church and state table instead of an atheist table? Why aren’t there any pamphlets on creationism versus evolution? Why are there only pamphlets about Christianity and Islam, and not other religions? The general answer was that there was only so much I could do on this first attempt at an atheist table but all of these issues had relevant links and information at the Web site.

Some people had philosophical questions such as why we are here, where the first life came from, what happens when we die, whether or not there was a spiritual world, and ‘how do you live’ (which seemed to mean how can an atheist have ethics and a joy in living while remaining unconvinced by claims of God or an afterlife). I replied that I have read several theories as to how the earliest life appeared on Earth but I don’t consider myself versed enough in science to have a deep understanding of the subject, so I didn’t know for sure how life first formed. But I said it is more likely that there is a natural explanation than a supernatural one. Regarding ‘how I live’ I said I was not convinced by claims that there was an afterlife or a spiritual world or God. I said people can have the purpose they give themselves, and that can be its own reward. I have worked at a homeless shelter and as an American Sign Language interpreter for many years. I’ve taken classes on how to teach children with learning disabilities and how to be a better counselor. I am a member of Amnesty International and donate to charitable organizations. That’s some of ‘how I live’ without God.

A few people offered their unsolicited analysis about why I was hosting an atheist table. They said I must have had a bad experience with religion, or I must have never read the Bible, or I must have never really read the Bible, or I must have never had someone explain the Bible to me in just the right way. I replied that I had an entirely positive religious experience growing up, and that part of my religious upbringing was being encouraged to read the Bible. I started reading it as a child, and I have read from it ever since. The more I read, the more problems I find. Is it possible that the right explanation from the right explainer will make it all true again? It is possible, but I think it is very unlikely this will happen. Some claim atheism is obviously false because it claims to have ‘all the answers,’ but I suggest it is religion that has a one-size-fits-all answer (‘God did it’) and it is atheism that keeps asking questions.

People asked me what atheism was. I gave two answers: that atheism is what is left over when the claims of religion are found to be false, and that atheism is a rejection of the supernatural. The former explains why atheism is not ‘just another religion,’ the later explains what atheism is against. It might have been less confrontational to have a secular humanist table instead of an atheist table, but I confess I enjoyed tweaking the noses of the religious on campus. The worst I can say about them is I don’t believe their claims. Their holy books say I should be put to death (the Christians have Deuteronomy 13:6-10, the Muslims have Quran 2:191). I think they can stand a little confrontation.

I managed to distribute nearly all of the literature I had, but the experience wasn’t only one of being a teacher. I also learned from the experience. I learned there was a uniformity in how non-Christians perceived Christians: without exception, non-Christians spoke of Christians as liars and bullies. I was asked seven times if I was ‘serious,’ if I was really an atheist. I was asked this more than anything else. The reason why people asked if I was ‘serious’ was they thought the table was a trick by Christian. Five times I was asked if any Christians had harassed me yet. Christians are clearly are not viewed favorably on campus outside of their own circle. Non-Christians see Christians as people prone to misrepresent themselves to ‘win souls’ and to abuse those who disagree with them. I hope Christians reading this do not use this as evidence they are a persecuted group; being disliked is not evidence of being put down, and there may be entirely valid reasons for their being disliked. If anyone reading this who is not a Christian has thought in the past they were alone in mistrusting Christians, that they are in a critical minority, they might like to know that instead they are the majority. But it is a majority that has been deceived and bullied into silence.

The dislike and mistrust for Christians on campus was one thing I learned from hosting an atheist table. Another thing was how clearly divided Christians are in their behavior based on gender. Of those who identified themselves as Christians, wore Christian jewelry or carried Christian Bibles, the men and the women acted entirely differently. The Christian women both asked questions and gave answers. They spoke and listened to me and to other people at the table. The Christian men, however, were angry and condescending. I was told by the Christian men I ‘must live an empty life,’ that I ‘didn’t know what I was talking about,’ that I ‘should read the Bible before I quote from it,’ and more. Men also tended to exhibit a ‘rant and run’ behavior – they would bark out a comment or a judgment, sometimes in the middle of my listening to someone else, then literally run away. Sticking around to hear anything I had to say in reply was not in the cards for these Christian men. It was a man who asked the confusing question ‘Why are you pointing out all the things that are wrong in the Bible that are true anyway?’ It was a man who said that asking Christians to defend their claims, as I did in my pamphlets, was saying Christians are stupid. If the bad reputation of Christians is based in experience, I suggest it is Christian men and not Christian women who are to blame. No other categorization of Christians, such as age or ethnicity, was apparent.

A few Christians of both genders came to the table more than one day. And both a male and a female Christian gave the same reply to what turned out to be the most popular pamphlet I offered (see below). Regarding the fact that Jesus said that He would return and the world would end ‘soon’ (a ‘soon’ that came and went two thousand years ago), they said that a day to God was like a thousand years and a thousand years was like a day. Although one Christian mistakenly said this was a quote from Psalms, I found the quote in 2 Peter 3:8. The unknown author of 2 Peter references the letter of Jude, which was written around 80-100 CE. Thus the 1=1000 claim could only have been made after Jesus was already one or more generations late. In fact, the main point of 2 Peter Chapter 3 is to answer those who were asking, all the way back then, why Jesus hadn’t returned in their lifetimes as He had promised He would. People were asking if Jesus had lied (or been a lie) two thousand years ago. People are still asking today. But some aren’t asking anything: they just accept that when you put God into the picture, you don’t have to mean what you say or say what you mean. Jesus promised (thirty times or more!) to return within the lifetime of those who saw Him; He didn’t, but His followers claim He said that, He never lied, He is coming back, and somehow at the same time He is coming back two thousand years ago. Might all this confusion contribute to the perception that Christians are liars?

Based on conversations, repeat visits, and other signs of apparent interest it seems that my pamphlet questioning Christian prophecy was the most popular. It is possible that the topics presented in the pamphlets I offered were not the main reason people selected some and not others. Perhaps they picked up what was closest to them, or what was the most colorful. For whatever reason, here are the topics covered and how many of each pamphlet were taken:

Thirty Failed Prophecies: 28
The Bible Condones Slavery and Racism: 20
Women in the Bible: 16
Antisemitism in the Bible: 14
Papal-sanctioned Child Abuse: 10
Antisemitism from Martin Luther: 9
Fantastic Claims of Islam: 9
God Hates Homosexuality: 8
The Bible on the Origins of Life: 8
The Bible on the Origins of the Earth: 6

Only one person mentioned Islam at all (saying he had seen a table for an Islamic group before). Although there is no small Islamic presence on campus, no Muslim identified themselves to me, sought to understand what I was doing or challenge my claims. Nor was any other religion defended during this week. Instructors at PCC seemed to neither entirely avoid from nor come to the table: a few did each. It was only the Christians and those who have been cowed by the Christians who engaged me.

Some of those who came to the table were sympathetic but had concerns with atheism. One said ‘I understand the importance of the separation of church and state, but when they start banning Christmas in public grade school that’s going too far.’ I suggested that because not all religious holidays enjoy the same investment of tax dollars that celebrating Christmas was an instance of government establishment of religion and thus a violation of the First Amendment. One person said they liked what I was doing but ‘most people think atheism means evil’ (Devilishly, I said that’s why I did it). Another said I was just pushing my faith on other people: I reminded him that he came up to me and started the conversation, and that disbelieving the claims of religion was not a matter of faith.

A small number of people looked at the Web page. For all of four hours, there was a freethinker on campus that people could ask questions to and hear answers from. But what I value most out of the experience was the words of encouragement I got from the non-Christian majority who stopped by. Most of them appeared concerned about being seen talking to me but they each quietly said something nice. ‘Thank you for doing this!’ ‘I’m always trying to explain these things and it’s hard, can I take two pamphlets?’ ‘It’s good to see everyone get a chance, not just the religious groups.’ ‘I look forward to discussion with you.’ ‘This is great, I’m a recovering Catholic.’ ‘My boyfriend is an atheist.’ ‘This is interesting!’ Three people gave me the ‘thumbs up.’ And my favorite vote of confidence: ‘Good on you!’

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Those Mormons sure are friendly. But are they friendly to all of God’s children? The following quotations from Nephi, Jacob, and Alma are from the Book of Mormon. In modern editions of the Book of Mormon the word ‘white’ (skin) is often changed to ‘pure’ (character); the original text is quoted here. As the Book of Mormon is said to be inspired by God, dictated by angels and faithfully transcribed by Joseph Smith, any modern changes are less accurate than these original quotes. Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Bruce McConkie, Mark Peterson and Orson Pratt were or are all leaders of the LDS. African-American men were not allowed to be clergy in the LDS until 1978, nor were African-American men allowed to lead LDS Boy Scout troops. Like the Mormon revelation that polygamy was not to be practiced on Earth (only in Heaven), the revelations to white-wash the Book of Mormon and allow African-American leadership came at exactly the same time as human discontent (and lawsuits) arose against them. What a miracle!

• And the angel said unto me: Behold these [Native Americans] shall dwindle in unbelief. And it came to pass that I beheld, after they had dwindled in unbelief they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations. – 1 Nephi 22:23
• And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people before they were slain. – 1 Nephi 13:15
• And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people before they were slain. And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities. And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed; for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing. And the Lord spake it, and it was done. And because of their cursing which was upon them they did become an idle people, full of mischief and subtlety, and did seek in the wilderness for beasts of prey. – 2 Nephi 5:21:24
• And then shall they [Native Americans] rejoice; for they shall know that it is a blessing unto them from the hand of God; and their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people. – 2 Nephi 30:6
• Behold, the Lamanites [Native Americans] your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father – that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them. [...] O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God. [...] Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers. – Jacob 3:5,8-9
• And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men. [...] And this was done that their seed might be distinguished from the seed of their brethren, that thereby the Lord God might preserve his people, that they might not mix and believe in incorrect traditions which would prove their destruction. [...] And it came to pass that whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed. – Alma 3:6,9
• “Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species and put them on a national equalization.” – Joseph Smith
• “Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.” – Brigham Young
• “…after the flood we are told that the curse that had been pronounced upon Cain was continued through Ham’s wife, as he had married a wife of that seed. And why did it pass through the flood? Because it was necessary that the devil should have a representation a upon a the earth as well as God… ” – John Taylor
• “The negroes are not equal with other races when the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned [...] As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed with a dark skin; he became the father of the negroes [...] Cain, Ham, and the whole negro race have [been] cursed with a black skin, the mark of Cain, so they can be identified as a caste apart, a people with whom the other descendants of Adam should not intermarry.” – Bruce McConkie
• “At least in the cases of the Lamanites and the negroes we have the definite word of the Lord Himself that He placed a dark skin upon them as a curse – as a punishment and as a sign to all others. [...] If there is one drop of negro blood in my children, as I have read to you, they receive the curse. There isn’t any argument, therefore, as to intermarriage with the Negro, is there? Now we are generous with the Negro. We are willing that the Negro have the highest kind of education. I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it.” – Mark Peterson
• “The Lord has not kept them in store for five or six thousand years past, and kept them waiting for their bodies all this time to send them among the Hottentots, the African Negroes, the idolatrous Hindoos, or any other of the fallen nations of the earth.” – Orson Pratt

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Protestant Christianity was founded by Martin Luther. What did Luther have to say about Jews? Maybe Luther wasn’t such a great moral leader after all. Maybe these proposals bore fruit in Luther’s country four hundred years later.  The following are quotes from Luther’s book The Jews and Their Lies (1543).

I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that these miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure to themselves even us, that is, the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them. I would not have believed that a Christian could be duped by the Jews into taking their exile and wretchedness upon himself. However, the devil is the god of the world, and wherever God’s word is absent he has an easy task, not only with the weak but also with the strong. May God help us. Amen

My essay, I hope, will furnish a Christian (who in any case has no desire to become a Jew) with enough material not only to defend himself against the blind, venomous Jews, but also to become the foe of the Jews’ malice, lying, and cursing, and to understand not only that their belief is false but that they are surely possessed by all devils. May Christ, our dear Lord, convert them mercifully and preserve us steadfastly and immovably in the knowledge of him, which is eternal life. Amen.

What shall we Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews? Since they live among us, we dare not tolerate their conduct, now that we are aware of their lying and reviling and blaspheming. If we do, we become sharers in their lies, cursing and blasphemy. Thus we cannot extinguish the unquenchable fire of divine wrath, of which the prophets speak, nor can we convert the Jews. With prayer and the fear of God we must practice a sharp mercy to see whether we might save at least a few from the glowing flames. We dare not avenge ourselves. Vengeance a thousand times worse than we could wish them already has them by the throat. I shall give you my sincere advice:

First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians. For whatever we tolerated in the past unknowingly – and I myself was unaware of it – will be pardoned by God. But if we, now that we are informed, were to protect and shield such a house for the Jews, existing right before our very nose, in which they lie about, blaspheme, curse, vilify, and defame Christ and us (as was heard above), it would be the same as if we were doing all this and even worse ourselves, as we very well know.

Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them that they are not masters in our country, as they boast, but that they are living in exile and in captivity, as they incessantly wail and lament about us before God.
Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them.

Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb. For they have justly forfeited the right to such an office by holding the poor Jews captive with the saying of Moses (Deuteronomy 17 [:10]) in which he commands them to obey their teachers on penalty of death, although Moses clearly adds: “what they teach you in accord with the law of the Lord.” Those villains ignore that. They wantonly employ the poor people’s obedience contrary to the law of the Lord and infuse them with this poison, cursing, and blasphemy. In the same way the pope also held us captive with the declaration in Matthew 16 [:18], “You are Peter,” etc, inducing us to believe all the lies and deceptions that issued from his devilish mind. He did not teach in accord with the word of God, and therefore he forfeited the right to teach.

Fifth, I advise that safe conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let they stay at home.

Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. The reason for such a measure is that, as said above, they have no other means of earning a livelihood than usury, and by it they have stolen and robbed from us all they possess. Such money should now be used in no other way than the following: Whenever a Jew is sincerely converted, he should be handed one hundred, two hundred, or three hundred florins, as personal circumstances may suggest. With this he could set himself up in some occupation for the support of his poor wife and children, and the maintenance of the old or feeble. For such evil gains are cursed if they are not put to use with God’s blessing in a good and worthy cause.

Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an axe, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam (Gen 3[:19]). For it is not fitting that they should let us accursed Goyim toil in the sweat of our faces while they, the holy people, idle away their time behind the stove, feasting and farting, and on top of all, boasting blasphemously of their lordship over the Christians by means of our sweat. No, one should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants.

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

The Bible sure likes the number twelve: twelve sons of Jacob, twelve tribes of Israel, twelve golden dishes for the dedication of the alter, twelve baskets of bread, twelve Apostles, twelve stars on the woman’s head, twelve gates and foundations of new Jerusalem, the tree of life bears twelve manner of fruit, and the twelve apostles of the Lamb. What an amazing coincidence that the ancients also held that there were twelve signs of the zodiac. The Bible states clearly that there were more than twelve apostles, but echoes of the twelve houses of astrology are what people remember when counting the apostles. The Bible supports astrology: God made the stars “for signs” (Genesis 1:14), a star was the sign of Jesus’ birth (Matthew 2:1-2), and Jesus condones the use of stars for divination (Luke 21:25).

Who Were the Twelve Apostles?

• Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed Him. – Matthew 10:2-4
• And He [Jesus] ordained twelve, that they should be with Him, and that He might send them forth to preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils: and Simon He surnamed Peter; and James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and He surnamed them Boanerges, which is, the sons of thunder: and Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, which also betrayed Him: and they went into an house. – Mark 3:14-19

No, Really, Who Were the Twelve Apostles?

• And when it was day, he called unto Him His disciples: and of them He chose twelve, whom also He named apostles; Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor. – Luke 6:13-16

Wait, Say That Again, Who Were the Twelve Apostles?

• And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. – Act 1:13

Were there maybe Thirteen Apostles?

• Am I [Paul] not an apostle? – 1 Corinthians 9:1

How About Fourteen Apostles?

• Other of the apostles I saw none, save James the Lord’s brother. – Galatians 1:19

Do I Hear Fifteen?

• He was buried and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures: and that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve. – 1 Corinthians 15:4-5

Could There Be Seventeen Apostles, Including a Woman?

• Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. – Romans 16:7

Should We Count Judas’ Replacement? Make it Eighteen, Then.

• And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles. – Acts 1:26

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

No way, no way, nowhere in the Bible does it say that God demands human sacrifice. That’s utterly false. You’re just making stuff up because you’re mad at God for not existing. What a lie! Nobody can take you seriously when you publish nonsense like that. Have you ever even read the Bible? Prove it, show me where it says God demands human sacrifice – you can’t! Go on! Show me, show me where it says that!

• And He [God] said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. – Genesis 22:2
• Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto Me [God]. Likewise shalt thou do with thine oxen, and with thy sheep: seven days it shall be with his dam; on the eighth day thou shalt give it Me. – Exodus 22:29-30
• No devoted thing, that a man shall devote unto the LORD of all that he hath, both of man and beast… shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy unto the LORD. None devoted, which shall be devoted of men, shall be redeemed; but shall surely be put to death. – Leviticus 27:28-29
• And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Take the sum of the prey that was taken, both of man and of beast, thou, and Eleazar the priest, and the chief fathers of the congregation: And divide the prey into two parts; between them that took the war upon them, who went out to battle, and between all the congregation: And levy a tribute unto the Lord of the men of war which went out to battle: one soul of five hundred, both of the persons, and of the beeves, and of the asses, and of the sheep: Take it of their half, and give it unto Eleazar the priest, for an heave offering of the LORD. – Numbers 31:25-29
• And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the LORD thy God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee: So that the man that is tender among you, and very delicate, his eye shall be evil toward his brother, and toward the wife of his bosom, and toward the remnant of his children which he shall leave: So that he will not give to any of them of the flesh of his children whom he shall eat: because he hath nothing left him in the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee in all thy gates. The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter, and toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them for want of all things secretly in the siege and straitness, wherewith thine enemy shall distress thee in thy gates. If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD; then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance. Moreover He will bring upon thee all the diseases of Egypt, which thou wast afraid of; and they shall cleave unto thee. Also every sickness, and every plague, which is not written in the book of this law, them will the LORD bring upon thee, until thou be destroyed. And ye shall be left few in number, whereas ye were as the stars of heaven for multitude; because thou wouldest not obey the voice of the LORD thy God. – Deuteronomy 28:53-62
• Then the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah… And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon to fight against them; and the LORD delivered them into his hands… And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances: and she was his only child… And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said, alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art one of them that trouble me: for I have opened my mouth unto the LORD, and I cannot go back. And she said unto him, My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth unto the LORD, do to me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth… And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed. – Judges 11:29-40
• Then there was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David enquired of the LORD. And the LORD answered, It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites… The king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul… And he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the LORD… And after that God was intreated for the land. – 2 Samuel 21:1,8-9,14
• And he cried against the altar in the word of the LORD, and said, O altar, altar, thus saith the LORD; Behold, a child shall be born unto the house of David, Josiah by name; and upon thee shall he offer the priests of the high places that burn incense upon thee, and men’s bones shall be burnt upon thee. – 1 Kings 13:2
• And he slew all the priests of the high places that were there upon the altars, and burned men’s bones upon them. – 2 Kings 23:20
• Wherefore I [God] gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live; And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the LORD. – Ezekiel 20:25-26

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Christians consider “The Ten Commandments” a moral guide, one that should be displayed at tax-payer expense in public places. But do the thing no Christian ever does – read the Bible – and you will see that following the Ten Commandments is not only immoral but impossible. Not even Jesus could do it!

Many people, Christian or not, know the story of the Ten Commandments. God gives Moses the Ten Commandments on tables of stone, Moses brings the tables to his people but is shocked to find them worshiping a golden calf, Moses destroys the tables but God gives Moses another copy. Many people are familiar with this story, but that is not the story to be found in the Bible. The main difference between what many people know and what the Bible says is that the first table of the Ten Commandments is not at all the same as the second table of the Ten Commandments.

The difference between the two is problematic because the Bible does not say they are different, but the same. Exodus 20 lists the contents of the first table (called here the ‘first Ten Commandments’). Exodus 34 lists the contents of the second table (called here the ‘second Ten Commandments’). Compare these two ‘Ten Commandments’ – are they the same? According to the Bible, they should be. Exodus 34:1 claims the second ‘Ten Commandments’ contains “the words that were on the first.” The first and second ‘Ten Commandments’ are quoted here at length. Commandments are indicated with numbers in brackets (for example, [#1]).

The First ‘Ten Commandments’

And God spake all these words, saying, [#1] I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. [#2] Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. [#3] Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. [#4] Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. [#5] Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. [#6] Thou shalt not kill. [#7] Thou shalt not commit adultery. [#8] Thou shalt not steal. [#9] Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. [#10] Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s. – Exodus 20:1-17

The Second ‘Ten Commandments’

[#1] For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice; And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods. [#2] Thou shalt make thee no molten gods. [#3] The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I commanded thee, in the time of the month Abib: for in the month Abib thou camest out from Egypt. [#4] All that openeth the matrix is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male. But the firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb: and if thou redeem him not, then shalt thou break his neck. All the firstborn of thy sons thou shalt redeem. And none shall appear before me empty. [#5] Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest. [#6] And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year’s end. Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear before the LORD God, the God of Israel. For I will cast out the nations before thee, and enlarge thy borders: neither shall any man desire thy land, when thou shalt go up to appear before the LORD thy God thrice in the year. [#7] Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven; [#8] neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning. [#9] The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the LORD thy God. [#10] Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk. And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. – Exodus 34:14-27

What is a Christian to do? Should they petition for schools and courthouses to post the divine admonishment against seething a kid in his mother’s milk? Should they claim that the United States was founded on the principle of not leaving the sacrifice of the feast of the passover until the next morning? The Bible claims the (second) ‘Ten Commandments’ are the tables that served as God’s final word, the tables that Moses actually gave to the Israelites. Christians seem to know better than God, and they prefer the first ‘Ten Commandments’ to the second. Christians never talk about the real (second) ‘Ten Commandments.’

Christians also never talk about what the penalties are for violating the (first) ‘Ten Commandments.’ But the Bible is not silent on the issue. The penalty for violating much of the (first) ‘Ten Commandments’ is death. Not eventual death, which we all get, but death at the hands of Christians. The ‘Ten Commandments’ are immoral.

[#1 & #2] He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed. – Exodus 22:20. If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is of thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God. – Deuteronomy 14:6-10. And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heavens, which I have not commanded. Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing and shalt stone them with stones, till they die. – Deuteronomy 17:1-5.
[#3] And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death. -  Leviticus 24:16
[#4] Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Exodus 31:15. And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day…And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses. -Numbers 15:32.
[#5] And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. Exodus 21:15. For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death. Leviticus 20:9.
[#6] He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death. – Exodus 21:12
[#7] And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. – Leviticus 20:10
[#8] If a man be found stealing any of his brethren of the children of Israel, and maketh merchandise of him, or selleth him; then that thief shall die. – Deuteronomy 24:7.

What did Jesus Christ say about the ‘Ten Commandments?’ In Matthew 19:17, Jesus says: “But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” Upon hearing this, someone asked Jesus which of the commandments were to be kept. Jesus replied: “[#6] Thou shalt do no murder, [#7] Thou shalt not commit adultery, [#8] Thou shalt not steal, [#9] Thou shalt not bear false witness, [#5] Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Note that the commandment to love one’s neighbor as oneself does not appear in either of the two ‘Ten Commandments.’ The account given in Mark 10 is largely the same: Jesus gives five out of the ten ‘Ten Commandments’ and adds one new commandment. Jesus is said to have created this new commandment in John 13:34. But creating a new commandment is in direct violation of the commandments to not add to or take from God’s commandments (Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:34; Revelations 22:19). And so Jesus both tells others to keep the commandments and does not keep them Himself. Jesus sins against God.

This is not the only time Jesus sins against God. Luke 6:1-4 describes Jesus and His disciples stealing corn on the Sabbath, thus violating two commandments at once. John 7:8-10 describes Jesus telling a lie, saying He is not going to a feast and then going anyway. Jesus accuses God of forsaking Him (Jesus) in Matthew 27:46 – is this blasphemy from lips of the Son of God? Jesus dishonors His Own Mother by saying “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” (John 2:4).

Perhaps Jesus was only following the example of His Father in violating the ‘Ten Commandments.’ God orders Moses to kill the faithful of another religion in Numbers 25:4,5 and Moses does just that. God also covets the cities of the Midianites and the Canaanites, so He orders Moses to kill all the men and take their land (Exodus 31:1-54, 33:50-52), and again Moses does as he is told. God leads Moses to the murder of women and children in Deuteronomy 2:34. God doesn’t mind when Moses commits adultery in Exodus 2:21-22. All this occurs after God gives Moses the ‘Ten Commandments.’

There are many other commandments found in the Bible, indicated as divine by the phrase “so sayeth the LORD.” The Bible commands Christians to take slaves (Leviticus 25:44-46), not eat shellfish (Leviticus 11:10-12), sacrifice animals (Numbers 15:3, 14-15, 24), drink poison (Mark 16:17-18), sell everything they own and use the money to buy a sword (Luke 12:33, 22:36), and how many more examples does one need before it all starts to look a little foolish?

Problems with the ‘Ten Commandments’ seem unending. Were they given to Moses on Mount Sinai (Exodus 31:18, 34:4, 34:32; Leviticus 26:46, 27:34: Nehemiah 9:13) or Mount Horeb (1 Kings 8:9; 2 Chronicles 5:10; Malachi 4:4)? God commands us to not make graven images AND to make graven images (Exodus 25:18; Numbers 21:8). God commands us to keep the Sabbath AND to not keep the Sabbath (Isaiah 1:13; Matthew 12:2; John 5:16; Romans 14:5; Colossians 2:16). God commands us to not commit adultery AND to commit adultery (Numbers 31:18; Hosea 1:2, 3:1). God commands us not to steal AND to steal (Exodus 3:22, 12:35-36; Ezekiel 39:10).God commands us not to lie AND to lie (Joshuah 2:4-6; James 2:25; Exodus 1:18-20; 1 Kings 22:21-22; 2 Kings 8:10; 2 Corinthians 12:16). God commands us not to covet AND to covet (1 Corinthians 12:31, 14:39).

To follow the (first) ‘Ten Commandments’ is to violate the (second) ‘Ten Commandments.’ To follow either ‘Ten Commandments’ is to go against Jesus, who commands us to keep the commandments while also going against the commandments Himself. Neither Jesus nor God’s chosen nor God Himself follow the ‘Ten Commandments,’ but death in this world at Christian hands and eternal damnation in the next is guaranteed for those who do not follow the ‘Ten Commandments.’ It simply isn’t possible or desirable to use the ‘Ten Commandments’ as a guide for ethics or law.

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

The venus fly trap closes around its prey only when two of its triggers are touched; one trigger alone does not close the trap. In a sense, this plant can count. Some dogs and birds can be taught how to count. Children are able to count at a very early age. It seems that everyone can count except God, at least as far as the Bible is concerned. If the Bible is irredeemably incorrect in these relatively trivial matters, can the perfect Christian God really exist? And is the Bible a worthy guide for more complex issues such as morals and history when the authors clearly cannot even count the number of names in a list they just wrote? If these examples of Biblical innumeracy are as wrong as they appear to be, why aren’t they corrected?

36 ≠ 29
And the uttermost cities of the tribe of the children of Judah toward the coast of Edom southward were Kabzeel, and Eder, and Jagur, and Kinah, and Dimonah, and Adadah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Ithnan, Ziph, and Telem, and Bealoth, and Hazor, Hadattah, and Kerioth, and Hezron, which is Hazor, Amam, and Shema, and Moladah, and Hazargaddah, and Heshmon, and Bethpalet, and Hazarshual, and Beersheba, and Bizjothjah, Baalah, and Iim, and Azem, and Eltolad, and Chesil, and Hormah, and Ziklag, and Madmannah, and Sansannah, and Lebaoth, and Shilhim, and Ain, and Rimmon: all the cities are twenty and nine, with their villages. – Joshua 15:21-32

15 ≠ 14
And in the valley, Eshtaol, and Zoreah, and Ashnah, and Zanoah, and Engannim, Tappuah, and Enam, Jarmuth, and Adullam, Socoh, and Azekah, and Sharaim, and Adithaim, and Gederah, and Gederothaim; fourteen cities with their villages. – Joshua 15:33-36

14 ≠ 13
And they had in their inheritance Beersheba, and Sheba, and Moladah, and Hazarshual, and Balah, and Azem, and Eltolad, and Bethul, and Hormah, and Ziklag, and Bethmarcaboth, and Hazarsusah, and Bethlebaoth, and Sharuhen; thirteen cities and their villages. – Joshua 19:2-6

31.4 ≠ 30
And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. – 1 Kings 7:23

5 ≠ 6
And the sons of Shemaiah; Hattush, and Igeal, and Bariah, and Neariah, and Shaphat, six. – 1 Chronicles 3:22

8 ≠ 5
And the sons of Pedaiah were, Zerubbabel, and Shimei: and the sons of Zerubbabel; Meshullam, and Hananiah, and Shelomith their sister: and Hashubah, and Ohel, and Berechiah, and Hasadiah, Jushabhesed, five. – 1 Chronicles 3:19-20

5 ≠ 6
Of Jeduthun: the sons of Jeduthun; Gedaliah, and Zeri, and Jeshaiah, Hashabiah, and Mattithiah, six, under the hands of their father Jeduthun, who prophesied with a harp, to give thanks and to praise the LORD. – 1 Chronicles 25:3

31.4 ≠ 30
Also he made a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits the height thereof; and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. – 2 Chronicles 4:2

2,499 ≠ 5,400
And this is the number of them: thirty chargers of gold, a thousand chargers of silver, nine and twenty knives, thirty basons of gold, silver basons of a second sort four hundred and ten, and other vessels a thousand. All the vessels of gold and of silver were five thousand and four hundred. All these did Sheshbazzar bring up with them of the captivity that were brought up from Babylon unto Jerusalem. – Ezra 1:9-11

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

As much as the Metropolitan Community Church and other apologists want to disagree, Reverend Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church is correct when he claims God hates fags. The Bible is clear enough that with the exception of David and Johnathan (1 and 2 Samuel), all homosexuals are to be killed. Not by God, not by the death that comes to us all, but by the hands of Christians. If you are a Christian, you are personally required by the Bible to kill homosexuals. If you are a Christian homosexual, you need to understand that your religion wants you “taken out.” God said it, Jesus confirmed it, and that settles it.  When you abandon Christianity, this is the sort of cruel nonsense you leave behind.

• Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. – Leviticus 18:22
• If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. – Leviticus 20:13
• The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God. – Deuteronomy 22:5
• There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. – Deuteronomy 23:17
• And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel. – 1 Kings 14:24
• And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, as did David his father. And he took away the sodomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made. – 1 Kings 15:11-12
• And the remnant of the sodomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land. – 1 Kings 22:46
• And he brake down the houses of the sodomites, that were by the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove. – 2 Kings 23:7
• The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves. – Isaiah 3:9
• For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet. [...] who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. – Romans 1:26-32
• Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. – 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
• Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. – Jude 1:7
• [Jesus said] Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. – Matthew 5:18,19
• [Jesus said] It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. – Luke 16:17

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

A question for the ladies in the audience… suppose you were asked if you would like to live in a country in which you could be bought, sold, traded and owned, where you would be required to be submissive to the wishes of any man, where the word “woman” was itself an insult, and where guilt in a rape case was based on whether or not the woman who was raped yelled loud enough. Would you like to live in a country like that? If not, then you should be equally horrified with the thought of being a Christian. The imaginary country described in this introduction is the world that the Bible wants women to live in everywhere. And don’t think that Jesus wasn’t aware of and in support of these rules – see what He had to say Himself.

Do Christians view women as slaves to be bought, sold, traded and owned?

• And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldst have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. – Deuteronomy 21:11-13
• If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days. – Deuteronomy 22:28-29
• So I bought her to me for fifteen pieces of silver, and for an homer of barley, and an half homer of barley. – Hosea 3:2
• See also: Genesis 19:8, 29:24, 29 / Exodus 20:17, 21:7, 8 / Deuteronomy 5:21, 25:5 / Judges 1:12-13, 5:30, 14:1-3, 15:2, 19:22-30, 21:7, 10-12, 14, 20-21, 23 / Ruth 4:10 / 1 Samuel 25:44 / 2 Samuel 12:11, 13:1-22, 20:3 / Esther 1:7-22, 2:2-4 / Jeremiah 6:12, 8:10

Do Christians believe women must be submissive to men?

• Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. -  1 Corinthians 14:34-35
• Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the Saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. – Ephesians 5:22-24
• In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. – 1 Timothy 2:9-15
• But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. – 1 Corinthians 11:3
• But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoreth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, for asmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. -  1 Corinthians 11:5-10
• Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. – Colossians 3:18
• Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement. Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honor unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered. – 1 Peter 3:1-7
• See also: Numbers 30:3-16 / Deuteronomy 22:5

Do Christians consider it an insult to be called a woman?

• See: Isaiah 19:16 / Jeremiah 50:37 / Nahum 3:13

Do Christians say if a woman doesn’t yell enough when being raped she should be killed?

• If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbor’s wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you. – Deuteronomy 22:23-24

Does Jesus Support the Laws of the Old Testament?

• Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. – Mark 5:18-19
• It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. -  Luke 16:17

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

It never fails. Point out a contradiction, an atrocity or an absurdity in the Bible to a Christian and you will be told that you shouldn’t be so literal, so legalistic; that the Bible is to be taken metaphorically; or through ‘feelings;’ or understood ‘spiritually;’ or you should remember to take the Bible ‘in context’ of the time it was written. They will even quote the Bible to prove one should not quote from the Bible. But what does the Bible itself has to say on the subject? Does the Bible claim it is the occasionally true word of a sometimes correct God that applies when we feel like it? Or does the Bible claim that it is the perfect and eternal word of an unchanging, all-knowing God who is the same as (and makes the same demands as) Jesus?

The Law of God is Eternal

• God is not a man that he should lie; neither the son of a man that he should repent. – Numbers 23:19
• The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent. – 1 Samuel 15:29
• I the LORD have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent. – Ezekial 24:14
• For I am the Lord, I change not. – Malachi 3:6
• With whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. – James 1:17
• It shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations. – Leviticus 23:14,21,31
• Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth. Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever. – Psalms 119:151-2
• Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. – Psalms 119:160
• Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:18-19
• It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. – Luke 16:17
• Now are we sure that thou knowest all things. – John 16:30
• Lord, thou knowest all things. – John 21:17
• Of Christ; In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. – Colossians 2:2-3
• We ought to obey God rather than men. – Acts 5:29

God’s Law (Old Testament) is Jesus’ Law (New Testament)

• In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. – John 1:1
• And the Word was made flesh [Jesus], and dwelt among us. – John 1:14
• Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. – John 8:58
• I [Jesus] and my Father are one. – John 10:30
• The Father is in me, and I [Jesus] in him. – John 10:38
• And Thomas answered and said unto Him [Jesus], My Lord and my God. – John 20:28
• For in Him [Jesus] dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. – Colossians 2:9
• Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ. – Titus 2:13
• Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God. – Philippians 2:6
• Fear not; I am the first and the last. – Revelation 1:17
• I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. – Revelation 22:13

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Christians hold that the Bible contains factual information about the natural world. But while the Bible says nothing at all about germs (an insight that would have proven the existence of some advanced thinker, maybe even God, and would have saved billions of lives), the Bible does go on about unicorns, dragons and other imaginary monsters.

• Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps. – Deuteronomy 32:33
• Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares. – Job 40:15-24
• Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down? Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn? Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee? Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever? Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens? Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants? Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish spears? Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more. Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him? None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me? Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine. I will not conceal his parts, nor his power, nor his comely proportion. Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him with his double bridle? Who can open the doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round about. His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal. One is so near to another, that no air can come between them. They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered. By his sneezings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning. Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out. Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or cauldron. His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth. In his neck remaineth strength, and sorrow is turned into joy before him. The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved. His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone. When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid: by reason of breakings they purify themselves. The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon. He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood. The arrow cannot make him flee: sling stones are turned with him into stubble. Darts are counted as stubble: he laugheth at the shaking of a spear. Sharp stones are under him: he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire. He maketh the deep to boil like a pot: he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment. He maketh a path to shine after him; one would think the deep to be hoary. Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear. He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride. – Job 41:1-34
• Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns. -  Psalms 22:21
• He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn. – Psalms 29:6
• And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’ den. Isaiah 11:8
• Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken: for out of the serpent’s root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent. -  Isaiah 14:29
• The burden of the beasts of the south: into the land of trouble and anguish, from whence come the young and old lion, the viper and fiery flying serpent, they will carry their riches upon the shoulders of young asses, and their treasures upon the bunches of camels, to a people that shall not profit them. – Isaiah 30:6
• And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness. -  Isaiah 34:7
• And thorns shall come up in her palaces, nettles and brambles in the fortresses thereof: and it shall be an habitation of dragons, and a court for owls. – Isaiah 34:13
• The beast of the field shall honor me, the dragons and the owls: because I give waters in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert, to give drink to my people, my chosen. -  Isaiah 43:20
• They hatch cockatrice’ eggs, and weave the spider’s web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper. – Isaiah 59:5

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Leviticus 27:6 and Numbers 3:15-16 make it clear that God has no problem with the death of a fetus if the fetus is less than one month old. Hosea 13:16 even has God ordering pregnant women to be “ripped up.” The Bible has some wiggle room when it comes to abortion, yet somehow the religion of the Bible, Christianity, holds that abortion is forbidden. Maybe the problem is Exodus 21:22-23, when God contradicts Himself and says if an unborn fetus is accidentally killed then the offending party should be punished. Jonathan and David have a homosexual relationship in 1 and 2 Samuel, and David is favored by God. The Bible weighs in favorably when it comes to homosexuality, yet somehow the religion of the Bible, Christianity, holds that homosexuality is forbidden. Maybe the problem is Leviticus 20:13, when God contradicts Himself and says homosexuals are to be murdered. Fortunately, there are no contradictions in the Bible when it comes to slavery. The Bible is always and only in favor of slavery – no where in the Bible is slavery spoken against, outlawed, forbidden, condemned, or otherwise presented in a negative light. Christians should concede that God contradicts Himself regarding abortion and homosexuality. They should fight for their clearly stated, God-given right to own slaves.

• Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. – Romans 13:1
• Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God. – Colossians 3:22
• Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme: or unto governors… – 1 Peter 2:13
• … Then said the Lord to me, Go ye, love a woman, beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress… so I bought her… – Hosea 3:1-2
• The Scribes and Pharises sit in Moses seat; all, therefore, whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do. – Matthew 23:2-3
• I council thee to keep the king’s commandment… whoso keepeth the commandment shall feel no evil thing. – Ecclesiastes 8:5
• Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall be unto his bretheren. – Genesis 9:25
• I will sell your sons and daughters into the hands of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people afar off; for the Lord hath spoken it. – Joel 3:8
• He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised. [...] And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money … and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin. [...] And all the men of his house, born in the house, and bought with money of the stranger, were circumcised. – Genesis 17:12-13, 23, 27
• Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the forward. – 1 Peter 2:18
• Let as many servants as are under your yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. – 1 Timothy 6:1
• Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ. – Ephesians 6:5
• Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; not purloining, but showing good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. – Titus 2:9
• If the priest buy any soul with his money… – Leviticus 22:11
• And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee… – Leviticus 25:39
• And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. – Exodus 21:20-21
• But every man’s servant that is bought for money… – Exodus 12:44
• If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master has given him a wife, and she has born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever. – Exodus 21:2-6
• And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye’s sake. And if he smite out his manservant’s tooth, or his maidservant’s tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth’s sake. – Exodus 21:26-27
• If a thief [...] have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. – Exodus 22:2-3
• And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. – Exodus 21:7
• Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s… – Matthew 22:21
• For everyone that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death. – Leviticus 20:9
• Both thy bondsmen, and thy bondsmaids, which thou shall have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondsmen and bondsmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession… – Leviticus 25:44-45
• Then Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married, for he had married an Ethiopian woman. – Number 12:1

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Do Christians believe that the Earth is flat, that it does not move and that it rests on stone pillars? Do Christians believe that the flat Earth is somehow both shaped like a circle and has four corners? Do Christians believe that the sun and the moon orbit around the Earth, and that the sun can be stopped in its tracks – even made to go backwards? All of these claims are found in the Bible; do Christians believe in the Bible? If the Earth is roughly a sphere, as the evidence suggests, then it is not possible to observe all of its surface at the same time. Since the Earth is not transparent, it is also not possible for all those on its surface to directly observe the same sight at the same time. But if the Earth is flat, as claimed by the Bible, then everyone on its surface can be observed from a single vantage point and everyone on its surface can directly observe the same sight at the same time. The Bible claims all the Earth can be seen at once, a condition that could only occur if the Earth were flat. Modern science demonstrates that all claims of a flat, motionless Earth are false. But it doesn’t take modern science to reach this conclusion. Eratosthenes reached the same conclusion by observing the shadow cast down two wells at noon in two locations – over two thousand years ago. The Bible is not worth the paper it is printed on when it comes to describing the real world we all live in.

The Flat Earth Rests on a Foundation of Stone Pillars

• He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the LORD’s, and he hath set the world upon them. 1 Samuel 2:8
• Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations of heaven moved and shook, because he was wroth. [...] And the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were discovered at the rebuking of the LORD, at the blast of the breath of his nostrils. 2 Samuel 22:8,16
• Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved. 1 Chronicles 16:30
• Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble. Job 9:6
• The pillars of heaven tremble and are astonished at his reproof. Job 26:11
• Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof. Job 38:4-6
• Then the channels of waters were seen, and the foundations of the world were discovered at thy rebuke, O LORD, at the blast of the breath of thy nostrils. Psalms 18:15
• The earth and all the inhabitants thereof are dissolved: I bear up the pillars of it. Selah. Psalms 75:3
• They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course. Psalms 82:5
• The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is established, that it cannot be moved. Psalms 93:1
• Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously. Psalms 96:10
• Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever. Psalms 104:5
• Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD. Jeremiah 31:37
• Hear ye, O mountains, the LORD’s controversy, and ye strong foundations of the earth: for the LORD hath a controversy with his people, and he will plead with Israel. Micah 6:2
• And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands. Hebrews 1:10

The Flat Earth is a Disc with Four Corners

• And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. Isaiah 11:12
• Also, thou son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD unto the land of Israel; An end, the end is come upon the four corners of the land. Ezekiel 7:2
• And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. Revelation 7:1
• It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in. Isaiah 40:22
• Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. Daniel 2:35
• The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth [...] The tree that thou sawest, which grew, and was strong, whose height reached unto the heaven, and the sight thereof to all the earth. Daniel 4:11, 20
• Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them. Matthew 4:8
• And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. Luke 4:5
• Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. Revelation 1:7

The Sun and Moon Orbit Around the Flat Earth, and Can be Stopped and Reversed in their Orbits

• Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. Joshuah 10:12-13
• And Isaiah the prophet cried unto the LORD: and he brought the shadow ten degrees backward, by which it had gone down in the dial of Ahaz. 2 Kings 20:11
• Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down. Isaiah 38:8
• The sun and moon stood still in their habitation: at the light of thine arrows they went, and at the shining of thy glittering spear. Habakkuk 3:11

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Pi is the 16th letter of the Greek alphabet. It is also the symbol for the ratio between the circumference of a circle and the diameter of a circle. Diameter is the distance from one side of a circle to the other side of a circle. Circumference is the distance around the outside of a circle. If you multiply the diameter of a circle by the square of pi, you get the circumference. And if you divide the circumference of a circle by the square of pi, you get the diameter. This formula is called Archimedes’ Constant, named after Archimedes (who lived from circa 287 BCE to 212 BCE). Archimedes’ Constant is a simple equation, but there is a catch; pi is not a finite number such as 23 or 127. The first sixty four digits of pi are 3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 50288 41971 69399 37510 58209 74944 592… and it just keeps going from there. So far, no one has demonstrated that there is a limit to how large a number pi is or that there is a pattern to the numbers in pi. Pi may be infinite.

You can ‘see infinity’ any time you want by measuring a circle’s diameter and then its circumference. Get a round plate and some string (the plate must be round and the string should not stretch when pulled). Lay the string across the plate from one side to the other, so that the string crosses over the middle of the plate. Mark the string at the point where it is the same diameter of the plate. Now take that length of string, multiply it by three, and wrap it around the outside of the plate. Three times the diameter will be pretty close to the circumference, but not exactly. You have just used simple tools to explore the relationship between diameter and circumference. Try it with any circle of any size; it always works. Maybe you don’t need to measure pi to sixty four (or a billion) digits, but you should now feel confident in stating that pi is not a finite, single-digit number. You should feel confident saying that because common sense, the evidence of your senses, and as many tests as you want to perform will confirm it every time. It works whether you measure in inches, centimeters, or even if you make up your own ‘plate units.’

Oddly enough, there are some people in the world who do not believe pi is 3.14159 26535… (and so on). They believe that pi equals three. Who believes that? Christians believe pi equals three. The Christians use a book named the Bible as the foundation for their beliefs, and the Bible says pi equals three. Not all Christians have the same interpretation of the Bible, and some of them disagree quite strongly about how it should be interpreted. But all of them, every one, use the Bible.

Long ago, the Christian Bible says, a man named King Solomon built a temple. He hired a man named Hiram to work on the temple. Hiram made all sorts of additions to the temple, including a sculpture described as a ‘molten sea.’ The molten sea was apparently some sort of large, round container of liquid. It was measured in cubits, which is believed to be the distance between the elbow and the middle finger of an adult male. The construction work of King Solomon and the work Hiram did for King Solomon are described twice in the Bible. The first time in a section of the Bible called 1 Kings (written about 586 BCE) and the second time in a section called 2 Chronicles (written about 450 – 400 BCE). Both times the Bible uses the same words to describe the molten sea. Here’s what the Christian Bible has to say about pi…

And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. 1 Kings 7:23

Also he made a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits the height thereof; and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. 2 Chronicles 4:2

The Bible says that a circle ten cubits in diameter measured thirty cubits in circumference. The Bible does not say that the molten sea was close to a circle, but that it was a circle. It does not say that it was close to ten cubits from brim to brim, or that it was close to thirty cubits round about, but that it was ten cubits from brim to brim and it was thirty cubits round about. The Bible gives these measurements once and then gives them again, using the same measurements both times. There is no way to say the Bible meant something other than pi equals three. Christians have been presented with these measurements for thousands of years, and Christians have known about Archimedes’ Constant for thousands of years. Even if you give Christians a few hundred years between when Kings and Chronicles were written and the discovery of Archimedes’ Constant, the Christians have known for thousands of years that the measurements of the molten sea are mistaken. Knowing that pi does not equal three doesn’t require modern complex mathematics or equipment: a piece of string will do. At any point over the past two thousand years, Christians could have decided to follow common sense, the evidence of their senses, and simple tests to change the Bible to make it match real life. But they never have. Why don’t the Christians change the Bible?

Because Christians believe that the Bible is not wrong. Christians believe the Bible is right. Not just close to right, or only right sometimes, but right all the time and in every way. Right in a way that no human can be right, right in a supernatural, divine way. Christians believe that God inspired the people who wrote the Bible; since God cannot make mistakes and since God knows everything, everything in the Bible is correct. The Bible is correct about the past, the present and the future: it is eternally true. How do they know the Bible is inspired by God and eternally true? Because the Bible tells them so! Read for yourself where the Bible tells Christians that it is a book authored by God and eternally true: Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel.15:29; Ezekiel 24:14; Malachi 3:6; James 1:17; Exodus 12:14, 17, 24; Leviticus 23:14,21,31; Psalms 119:151-2, 160; John 1:1,14, 8:58, 10:30-31, 10:38-39, 16:30, 20:28, 21:17; Colossians 2:2-3, 2:8-9; Acts 5:29; Titus 2:13; Philippians 2:6; Hebrews 1:8; Revelations 1:17, 22:13. And there are other verses, many others, that say the same.

Some Christians believe that one of the characters in the Bible, Jesus Christ, made changes to one part (the Old Testament, where Kings and Chronicles are found) by his appearance in another part (the New Testament). But here’s what Jesus himself had to say about that…

Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:18-19

It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Luke 16:17

Jesus said that every part of the Old Testament was just as true and eternal as the New Testament. So there you have it. The Bible says, and Jesus confirms, that pi equals three. It doesn’t matter if you measured something different with your plate and string; pi equals three. What a silly, stubborn thing for Christians to keep in their Bible when common sense, the evidence of our senses, and simple tests will demonstrate that it is not true. Why do Christians keep this easily-corrected falsehood in the Bible? Would it really change the ethics, morals and values of the Bible to make this small change? Why don’t they come clean in this least important of ways? Because for a Christian to admit that there is even one error in the Bible would mean that the Bible is not the eternally true work of God. And since all Christians, every one, use the Bible, it would mean that their religion is based on falsehoods.

The little Christian mistakes such as pi equals three don’t matter much in the day-to-day world; Christianity would not collapse if that one small change was made. But if that one small change was made, then it would be an admission that the Bible is not the eternally true work of God. And that would lead to the collapse of Christianity. That is why Christians believe pi equals three. Because to admit otherwise would be to admit much, much more. It would be to admit that perhaps the ethics, morals and values of the Bible are not what they’re cracked up to be. It would be to admit that it’s not right to oppress women (Colossians 3:18), to own slaves (Hosea 3:2), to kill people just because they follow a different religion (Deuteronomy 6:15, 13:6-10), to kill homosexuals (Romans 1:31-32), to kill children (Exodus 21:15, 17), to kill (Mark 7:9-13) and kill (Romans 5:9) and kill (Hebrews 10:28-29). Christianity has to preserve its little mistakes, such as pi equals three, so that it can perpetuate its bigger, uglier “mistakes.”

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Undisclosed Location, 9 August 2010.

Jihad Watch: Nine Years Later, Church at Ground Zero Still Not Rebuilt, But Mad Rush to Build Islamic Supremacist Mega-Mosque

The rebuilding project is mired in bureaucracy, with New York City officials being uncooperative and throwing up roadblock after roadblock. The contrast is telling with the mad rush on the part of New York City officials to build the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, sweeping aside calls to landmark the Burlington Coat Factory building, into which crashed the landing gear from one of the 9/11 planes.

Clifford D. May: Dear Mayor Bloomberg

After the 9/11 attacks, your predecessor Rudy Giuliani turned down a $10 million check from a Saudi prince who had said that America shares blame for the atrocity. Feisal Abdul Rauf, the imam behind the Islamic center project, has said that U.S. policies “were an accessory to the crime that happened.” How is that different?

Time: Afghan Women Fear Their Fate Amid Taliban Negotiations

“They are the people that did this to me,” she says, touching her damaged face. “How can we reconcile with them?”

Yahoo! News: Brazil Offers Haven to Iran Woman in Adultery Case

“If she is causing problems there, we will welcome her here,” Silva added.

Kenan Malik – How to Become a Real Muslim

A media reliant on scandal has colluded with self-promoting but marginal Muslim clerics to create a cycle of self-reinforcing myths around the Mohammed cartoons.

All articles continue at links. Part of a series that never ends… [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] and etc.

Supporters of the World Trade Center Mosque are correct in saying they have a right to build this place of worship.  It is not up to the State to prevent them from doing so.  Construction of this building should go through the same review, safety and historic process as any other building.  If it passes those tests, and if the money is there, the State should not prevent it.  But I would prefer it not be funded, not be built, not be patronized.  I’d prefer no more houses of worship be built anywhere, but not through legal roadblocks.

While some feminists in the West spend time loving themselves in the mirror, shaming the media and advocating cheerleading be considered a sport, their ‘sisters’ in Muslim countries are being mutilated and killed.  Western feminists might also advocate against female genital mutilation, but through a veil. “Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) is a horrendous, excruciating, and life-threatening practice forced upon women and girls around the world, including countries such as Canada and the United States. [...] FGM is a practice that takes place in parts of Africa, some Asian and Middle Eastern countries, and in certain communities within North America and Europe. The procedure is customary in several cultures, and is perpetuated by a mixture of cultural, social, and religious beliefs.” When described through a veil, it sounds like FGM is part of a multicultural rainbow, practiced a little bit here and there by all sorts of folks.  But if you lift your gaze from Aphrodite’s hand-mirror, you will see that it is a Muslim practice.  Are you a Western feminist who wants to do something for women?  Follow the example of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

Look at me, advocating a legal right to build a mosque where debris from a 9/11 plane crashed and the immigration of Muslims to the USA.  I must be one of those Islamophobes you read so much about.