On a masterpiece of failing to connect the dots

Greetings.

Jewish date:  20 ’Iyyar 5770 (Parashath Behar-Beḥuqqothay).

Today’s holidays:  Day 25 of the ‘Omer (Judaism), Tuesday of the Fifth Week of Easter (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Rodney Allen Rippey (Church of the SubGenius), Beltaine (Wicca).

Worthy cause of the day:  “Save BioGems: Take Action: Put an End to Commercial Whaling”.

Topic 1:  “Corrections, Clarifications, and Outright Obfuscations”.  More anti-Semitic, bungled reporting of the news, including blaming Israel for the death of an Arab kid who was really quite alive and well and in Egyptian custody for illegally crossing the border.  (Oops.)  You would think reporters would do a little fact-checking.

Topic 2:  “Religion’s Summer of Discontent”.  Rav Shmuley Boteach discusses current public perception of religion, noting its perceived “uselessness” and “irrelevancy” to many due to scandals and focusing tightly on one or a few issues to the exclusion of other, often more pressing concerns.  His solution is concentrate more on those pressing concerns, such as through his initiative “ Turn Friday Night Into Family Night”.  Definitely notable is his asking Pope Benedict XVI to work with him.

Topic 3:  “Some profit from wives despite French polygamy ban”.  There was no way your humble blogger was going to not mention this article.  Here is a little exercise for the reader.  This article deals with the problem of polygamy—or to be more specific, polygyny, marriage of one man to more than one woman simultaneously—among immigrants in France, which is subject to abuses, both of the women involved and the welfare system.  (This sort of thing should be offensive even to those who see nothing wrong with polygyny itself; plural marriage does not justify lying, cheating, stealing, and treating one’s wives and children badly.)  Now, this article goes into great detail of what is wrong (practically) with polygyny.  It even says a little what countries the abusers are from.  But what religion do they belong to?  Take a few minutes, look over the article, and see what it says.

Have you found the answer?

The answer is:  the article never says.  It starts off mentioning the issue of Muslim immigrants wearing burqas, but the subject of religion is quickly dropped and not addressed at all regarding polygyny.  Which is notable since there are only two major religions in the West which are problem-children when it comes to polygyny.  The first is Mormonism, primarily in its non-mainstream varieties.  Mormonism, while having spread beyond the United States, is barely ever mentioned as having a presence in Europe; your humble blogger has never heard of the pro-polygyny variants as having reached Europe at all.  The other major problem-child religion when it comes to polygyny is Islam.  Unlike mainstream Mormonism, which repudiated polygyny, Islam still allows men to have up to four wives.  The spread of Islam in Europe and the difficulties in integrating Muslims into general European culture are also major worries over there.  The perpetrators of polygyny mentioned in this article are almost certainly Muslims, yet the author of the article completely fails to acknowledge any connection.  Yes, blaming Muslims for problems which are created by Muslims but not members of other religious groups (including agnostics and atheists) might be considered politically incorrect, but failing to recognize something clearly relevant to the problem is not going to do anything to fix it.

Topic 4:  For today’s religious humor: “Honey, call the exorcist.”׃


Peace.

Aaron

What the gezornenblat was Jesus thinking?

Image of Yeḥezqe’l’s tomb via Wikipedia

Greetings.

Jewish date:  20 Ṭeveth 5770 (Parashath Shemoth).

Today’s holiday:  Epiphany (Christianity, Gregorian Calendar).

Topic 1:  “Reports: Iraq De-Judaizing Ezekiel's Tomb”:  Hint to the Muslims:  Destroying evidence does not change facts.  There were Jews in what is now Iraq centuries before the rise of Islam, and nothing is going to change that.

Topic 2:  Other religious oppression:  “Algerian Muslims Block Christmas Service” and “Beijing imposes harsh sentences on Tibetan monks and lama”.

Topic 3:  As I have noted previously, I am working my way through the New Testament in the original Koinē Greek, and yesterday I ran across a passage which is totally baffling.  Thus is it written in Mark 12:18-27 (KJV translation with extra punctuation and annotation given here):

Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying, “Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave his wife behind him, and leave no children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.  Now there were seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and dying left no seed.  And the second took her, and died, neither left he any seed: and the third likewise.  And the seven had her, and left no seed: last of all the woman died also.  In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven had her to wife.” 

And Jesus answering said unto them, “Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?  For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.  And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’ (Exodus 3:6)?  He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.”

To be blunt, Jesus’s answer makes no sense.  The Sadducees’ question deals with levirate marriage and the Resurrection:  which of one’s spouses in life does one have at the Resurrection.  Jesus claims that there is no marriage at the Resurrection.  But his prooftext is irrelevant.  Despite Jesus’s claims, Exodus 3:6 is part of a section dealing with the Exodus from Egypt, not the Resurrection.  Furthermore, Jesus gives no reason to infer that YHWH is the god of the living only, nor does he connect this to the Resurrection, nor does he explain how this passage somehow proves that there will be no marriage at the Resurrection.

While Jesus in general is presented in the Gospels as being such a poor exegete that his opponents’ arguments have to be omitted to make him look good, this passage has gaping holes of logic wide enough to drive a herd of camels through.  The question is how to understand this passage.  The simplest alternative, assuming this event really occurred, is that Jesus had no real answer and bluffed, and anything the Sadducees said back to him was not recorded.  However, I cannot a priori exclude the possibility that Jesus’s answer really was meant as a serious answer.  But if it was, then there are unstated assumptions, perhaps left out by scribal error, to bridge the chasm between Exodus 3:6 and no marriage at the Resurrection.  If anyone has any idea what these unstated assumptions are, please let me know.


Topic 4:  Today’s religious humor:  “Cat Spilleth Over”.

This seems to be a reference to Psalms 23:5.

Peace.

Aaron

Someone’s dreaming of an atheist Christmas...

Greetings.

Jewish date:  21 Kislew 5770 (Parashath Wayyeshev).

Today’s holidays:  Immaculate Conception (Roman Catholicism).

Worthy causes of the day:  “Save BioGems: Take Action: Protect the Redrock Wilderness” and ONE | A Global Gift“”.

Image of this absurdly alleged atheist symbol via Wikipedia

Topic 1:  “Humanists launch a godless holiday campaign”.  The American Humanist Association, an atheist group, is trying to push the intrinsically self-contradictory notion of an atheistic Christmas again.  This is despite the fact that things with the Greek root christ in them tend to be distinctively Christian.  It does not matter how banal the holiday gets in popular culture.  Everyone knows that Christmas is supposed to celebrate the birth of Jesus of Nazareth, and people wearing Santa Claus hats and the slogan “No God? . . . No problem!” only looks like an attempt to steal a holiday.  And I think it appropriate to repeat—with updates!—some sarcasm I made at the infamous atheist bus campaign a while back:

No God? How can this not be a problem???  ARGH! All life is totally meaningless! There’s no afterlife, and all life is going to end in dismal oblivion! This is the ultimate problem!!!  What a horrible, horrible situation! How the gezornenblat are we going to handle something so terrible?  How can we possibly not need a god to get us out of such a situation?

Why, why, why can’t the militant atheists get their own holiday and show people the (alleged) beauty of atheism instead of nonsense like this current lame campaign?

Also:  The irony of atheists, who often claim to be pro-reason, trying to make use of the symbol of Santa Claus, belief in whom is often pushed for children despite its well-publicized irrationality, is not lost on me.

Topic 2:  More religious oppression:  “Tibetan Buddhist nun dies. She was in prison for protesting in favour of the Dalai Lama”, “Somalia: Al-Shabaab Kills People Inside Mosque” (Sunnis against Sufis!), “MALDIVES: What do Maldivians understand freedom of religion or belief to be?”.  There is much more of this that gets reported in the news than I report on this blog.

Topic 3:  More religious humor:  “Praeing Mantis needz to prae harder”.

This picture displays a commonly repeated misconception about prayer:  that prayer itself accomplishes goals.  In reality, all prayer itself can accomplish is to make sound and some psychological effects on the worshipper and those who are aware of the prayer.  To pray is to actually praise, thank, or petition one or more gods.  Note a fundamental asymmetry of power:  one can request something from a god, but one cannot actually force the god do anything.  Sometimes the answer to a prayer is “no”.

Aaron