Creationist Wisdom #651: Get Back to the Bible

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the State Journal-Register of Springfield, Illinois, the state capital. It’s titled America is faltering because we strayed from Bible. The newspaper has a comments feature.

Because today’s writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name. His first name is William. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

When a city changes the source of its water and poisons its people, we call it criminal. When a country abandons the Biblical foundation of its legal and educational systems and poisons a generation of its people, we call it evolution.

Egad — the educational system is poisoning us! William explains:

America bars the Bible from the classroom and indoctrinates an entire generation in the belief (pitched as “settled science”) that we are not each a unique creation of God, not each a temple of the Holy Spirit and a unique potential expression of God’s will for us to love our neighbors as ourselves, but are merely the highest form to ascend from the evolutionary petri dish, next of kin to and one rung up the ladder from the chimpanzee, and then marvels when people grow self-absorbed and regard for others declines.

Of course. That’s our problem. It makes perfect sense! Let’s read on:

Shootings and suicides grow commonplace, racism abounds, addictions and overdoses reach epidemic proportions, and the 2015 Woman of the Year has not even been a woman FOR a year. This is progress?

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Teaching evolution is responsible for shootings, suicides, and racism. And it’s also Darwin’s fault that the person once known as Bruce Jenner was named GLAMOUR’s Woman of The Year. William continues:

Educating people to believe they are but unaccountable animals, and acting surprised when they begin to listen, is reprehensible.

Indeed! At the end, William provides us with a killer quote:

As Noah Webster said, “No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people. All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.”

Noah Webster, the lexicographer and textbook writer? Wikipedia says:

Webster’s Speller was entirely secular by design. … There was no mention of God, the Bible, or sacred events. “Let sacred things be appropriated for sacred purposes,” wrote Webster. … Later in life Webster became intensely religious and added religious themes. However, after 1840 Webster’s books lost market share to the McGuffey Eclectic Readers of William Holmes McGuffey, which sold over 120 million copies

So there you are, dear reader. If Noah Webster said it, then no one can deny it. Great letter, William!

Copyright © 2016. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

17 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #651: Get Back to the Bible

  1. we are each a unique creation of God

    Once again, an argument against reproduction masquerading as an argument against evolution.

  2. Anyone who says we have ‘to get back to buyBull principles’ you instantly know 3 things. 1….he has never read it, 2…he has never tried to really live that way, & 3…he’s dimmer then a box of rocks, and that is insulting to the box of rocks!!!!

  3. Noah Webster, yada, yada…

    I’ll stick with the author(s) of the First Amendment, thanks.

  4. BTW, I tried to find a full citation for this quotation from Webster. I found it attributed to him in several places, but I didn’t find exactly where he said it.
    Not that it makes much difference, but I’m curious.

  5. William is another of the many people who apparently has read nothing about the foundation of the United States, and probably not much of the buybull.

  6. Nothing original here, just recycled Jack Chick material.

  7. I believe students are free to read their bibles on their own time, not class time. Teachers may not lead them in bible studies or prayers or even participate as an objective observer. But of course that’s all ignored in the South and other conservative states.

  8. Dave Luckett

    Actually, as I understand the Constitutional position (and remember I write as a foreigner) it is a flat lie that “America bars the Bible from the classroom”.

    There is no objection to study of the Bible in public schools – as a religious text in comparative religion studies, as a literary document, or as a historical source. In fact it makes perfect good sense to use it for those legitimate educational purposes, so great an influence has it had on western culture generally. The King James version especially is held by consensus to be a great literary masterpiece in its own right. Understanding English literature from “Piers Ploughman” to Shakespeare to “Lord of the Rings” is vastly facilitated if the student can at least recognize when the Bible is being referred to, or invoked – or quoted.

    What schools may not suggest is that any religion or religions – Biblical or not – are preferable to any other, or to no religion. If William were to give that just a tiny moment of thought, he would realize that he doesn’t want it any other way. For what if he were to disagree with the specific religion or religions being preferred?

    But the falsehood continues when he suggests that suicide or murder is more common now than in the good old days. On the contrary, all the statistics agree – per capita, both are less common. All violent crime has been declining slowly for a generation now.

    And as for Caitlyn Jenner not being a woman for long enough to receive the Woman of the Year award – I doubt very strongly that this is William’s real problem. I think it’s far more likely that William thinks he gets to decide who’s a woman, and who isn’t – not the individual concerned, and not Glamour magazine either, the sponsor of the award.

    Well, he doesn’t.

  9. The whole truth

    “The King James version especially is held by consensus to be a great literary masterpiece in its own right.”

    Dave, I’m not part of the alleged “consensus” and I know others who aren’t. To me, the bible, in any version, is mostly incomprehensible gibberish and the parts that are comprehensible are mostly barbaric, impossible nonsense. There’s no good message in the bible that isn’t or can’t be found in other writings, verbal conversation, and/or common thoughts (e.g. the golden rule).

  10. What are you telling me now, David K?

    “I believe students are free to read their bibles on their own time, not class time.”
    Next thing you’ll tell me is that they are not free to read Donald Duck in physics class!

    As a non-native English speaker and reader I can assure that In de Ban van de RIng is totally enjoyable without having read the KJV or even a Dutch counterpart.

  11. The whole truth: What you say about the Bible itself may be true, although that comes down to a matter of opinion. Me, I find some parts and some passages to be pure gold, and I’ll defend that, so long as I get to pick the parts, and I’ll cheerfully agree that a great deal of it is as you describe.

    But I defy anyone to deny the majesty of the English of the KJV account of, say, Job, or Ecclesiastes, or even Genesis 1. Those translators were going after sonorous and impressive, and they got there.

  12. “Educating people to believe they are but unaccountable animals, and acting surprised when they begin to listen, is reprehensible.”

    And if we “educate” (/indoctrinate) them to believe that they are miserably, incurably, hopelessly tainted by something called “original sin” so that supposedly “there is no one who does right, not a single one” (Romans 3:12) — THEN how should we expect them to behave?

  13. If we tell our kids that they were purposefully designed to be most of all like chimps and other apes, among all of the countless other designs that were possible? That that was the intention of God? And that we are supposed to act according to the intentions of God?

    Then how should we expect them to behave?

  14. The whole truth

    Dave, I disagree and I deny that there’s any “majesty” whatsoever in the bible. It’s a toxic mixture of monstrous, threatening, extorting, abusive, bloodthirsty, murderous terrorism, and impossible, delusional fairy tales and lies, and incomprehensible, monotonous gibberish that would put most people into a coma if they read it. The agenda of the tyrannical lunatics who wrote or write its various versions and push their chosen version as ‘the word of God’ is to scare, control, and take advantage of people, including children. Nothing good can come from it.

  15. “Majesty” in the King James version? Damn right there is.

    “Trash” too, of course. Like any other tribal genealogy, the biblical ones are repetitiously dreary to those of us who do not belong to the tribe. And some passages are morally offensive: the rules for committing mandated genocide, for example, and the torments of Abraham and Isaac, and of Job. A great many offend logic and/or empirical observation. There are stylistic infelicities, such as “Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.”

    These deficiencies don’t justify throwing out the whole Biblical anthology, which follows the proportion in Sturgeon’s revelation: “Ninety percent of everything is crap.” The only exceptions to the revelation I can think of are the Icelandic sagas. Even there, the genealogies can be a drag.

  16. Did anyone ask this moron, er, gentleman when it was that this supposed American Biblical theocracy occurred (it never did)? We have tried theocracies in the past, many, many times, and can he point to even one time in which it worked to the interest of the general population.

    How about during the Spanish Inquisition when they pulled in ordinary people and questioned them about the fine points of theology. Of course, these folks were not allowed to have Bibles in their native tongue, even if they could read, and their churches gave services in Latin! The meticulous records of the SI showed ordinary people stolidly explicating ideas that sent them to the stake to be burned because that is what they understood of what they had been taught, which was clearly nothing.

    Can any of these idiots point to a theocracy, a time when public behavior was ruled by any type of holy scripture, when there wasn’t wide-spread corruption and terror … by the church? The ignorance of these Christian apologists is appaling–maybe we should call them appalingogists.

  17. Shootings and suicides grow commonplace, racism abounds, addictions and overdoses reach epidemic proportions, and the 2015 Woman of the Year has not even been a woman FOR a year. This is progress?

    And I suppose shootings and suicides, racism, addictions and overdoses didn’t happen in the good old days. This would surprise those who actually lived back in the nineteenth century, of the Wild West, slavery and the original KKK, routine opium addiction (extending even the use of laudanum to, I kid you not, dope up infants so they could be used as living displays in clothing store windows) and overdoses of all sorts of drugs, including alcohol.

    As for the faux-woman issue, in Shakespeare’s time (when it was actually illegal not to adhere to some sort of religion, and only those of the “right” faith had full legal rights, such as they were–ah, those were the days) all theatrical parts, male and female, were played by men, making the theater a playground for homosexuals and transvestites. I’m sure that had it been possible in those days to actually change gender, it would have been done.