Atheist Nexus Logo

Information

Atheist Humor

This is the place to post that hilarious irreligious YouTube video, an irreverent, anti-religious cartoon, or other humorous bit of media. Posts that do not reflect an atheist/irreligious theme will be deleted. (Don't make me go Old Testament.)

Members: 2121
Latest Activity: on Saturday

Lewis Black: The Flintstones is not a documentary.

A slightly longer version of the clip that used to be here. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGrlWOhtj3g

Discussion Forum

Jesus vs Jeezus

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Grinning Cat Feb 23. 7 Replies

BBC Black books comeday recommendation

Started by Christopher Cosgrove. Last reply by rockytij Sep 19, 2014. 1 Reply

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Humor to add comments!

Comment by Grinning Cat on February 6, 2015 at 7:09pm

Back to our regularly scheduled atheist humor:

God's mysterious plan, now revealed!

(Crying, grieving young man) "It was such an unnecessary accident... and now she's dead! Why?! Why?! It makes no sense... it's all so random!" (Gray-haired, bearded man with skullcap) "I know it's hard to see it now, but there is order and meaning to the world, God has a plan." Meanwhile, in God's secret lair: [large tablet standing in the clouds] PLAN - KILL EVERYONE (God, seen from the back, with long silver hair) "So simple, so brilliant" www.cheerlesscomic.com

(from cheerlesscomic.com)

Comment by Joseph P on February 6, 2015 at 8:58am

Joseph, I just read a little from the site you noted about Wm F. Albright that stated ...

Yeah, I read the whole article, myself.  It was quite an enlightening read, although I already knew most of it, having read a lot of Israel Finklestein's work.  That's why I stuck in the link, even thought I only quoted the most pertinent little snippet.

What's funny is that you'll get evangelicals coming back with the fact that Finkelstein's conclusion isn't the dominant view in the archaeological community, although it's gaining in popularity.  But the evangelicals don't even understand what their statement means.  The part of Finkelstein's conclusion that isn't yet held by the majority of the archaeological community (as far as I'm aware) is that the entirety of the Old Testament prior to the reign of King Josiah is a blatant fabrication, composed as a piece of propaganda.  The archaeological community isn't entirely behind that, however ...

The archaeological community however is behind the position that Abraham never existed; the Jews were never in Egypt, as described in Exodus; the exodus never happened, as described in the eponymous book; the real-life King David and King Solomon were nothing like what is described in the Bible; and Genesis is completely fabricated or at least cobbled together from myths borrowed from other surrounding cultures.  The only holdouts are the fundamentalist, evangelical, modern-equivalents of Albright, and their bias is nakedly on display for everyone to see.

Guys, put that thing away.  No one in a serious scientific field wants to see that sort of thing ...

It seems biblical archaeology has many problems, least of which is tracking down primary sources.

Yeah, that Reddit thread was an interesting read.  Kind of disturbing.

This is a major problem with damned near everything the evangelicals do, particularly in the field of apologetics.  As Logicked has put it in some of his videos debunking creationist nonsense, you can find the claims copy-pasted all over creationist websites, but you can't find anything about it anywhere on real websites.  Some idiot quote-mines the living hell out of something or possibly even just makes it up from scratch, and all the rest just pass it around, figuring that if someone else said it, it must be true.

Logicked is great if you want heavily-documented sourcing of information and a good dose of mockery and abuse in your creationist debunking.  He has three primary series that he's done so far, play-listed on his home page which I linked: Hello, I'm a Scientist, Science in the 12th Century, and Hello, My Name is Kent Hovind.

Joseph, you just offered me a good clue ...

Yeah, that's one of those things that I'm sure I picked up from listening to some atheists show or other.  Damned if I can remember which one, at this point.

I guess they get at least one bonus point for admitting their bias up front — although they then lose that point and a couple more, for hiding it in the back section of their site on the pages almost no one ever reads.

It's clear that they don't understand what a statement of faith really means, though, if they expect anyone to take them seriously, after they present something like that.

Comment by Joan Denoo on February 5, 2015 at 10:43pm

Joseph, you just offered me a good clue:

" An organization with a statement of faith isn't engaging in a scientific endeavor and probably doesn't understand science."

Comment by Joan Denoo on February 5, 2015 at 10:41pm

Joseph, I just read a little from the site you noted about Wm F. Albright that stated,


"William Dever claims that "[Albright's] central theses have all been overturned, partly by further advances in Biblical criticism, but mostly by the continuing archaeological research of younger Americans and Israelis to whom he himself gave encouragement and momentum ... The irony is that, in the long run, it will have been the newer "secular" archaeology that contributed the most to Biblical studies, not "Biblical archaeology."[15]"

I just now went on a hunt for William Dever,

"What Remains of the House that Albright Built?" The Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 56, No. 1 (Mar., 1993), 464.

I found lots of references to this work but never did find the actual journal and article. I ran across this site: 

"R/atheism: 'So, I'm studying Biblical Archaeology, and I was disheartened to find this. "
http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/wo8v9/so_im_studying_bibli...

It seems biblical archaeology has many problems, least of which is tracking down primary sources. 

Comment by Patricia on February 5, 2015 at 6:13pm

Collected enough days to need score keeping, huh? Very impressive.......NOT!

Comment by rockytij on February 5, 2015 at 5:12pm

Comment by Joseph P on February 5, 2015 at 1:01am

And on the subject of this group's actual theme, does anyone else find the one row label under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Israel#Statistics to be amusing?  I'm sure that World Jewry percentage is a technical term for what it's describing, but it still feels like that table was labeled by an anti-Semite.

Comment by Joseph P on February 5, 2015 at 12:56am

An agreement by winners of WWII placed the Jews there, with the supposed intent o returning them to their "Promised land".

Well, it's a bit more complicated than that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Israel#Birth_of_Zionism_187...

Read from about there, then down through section 6: British Mandate of Palestine (1920–1948) ... or at least skim.

We often get taught that, in US history classes, that the Jews were just all picked up out of the German concentration camps and dropped into their ancestral homeland and made into a country.  The Jews had been trying to return to their holy land for quite a while, since they had been experiencing a little bit of persecution, from time to time, in Europe, for the previous millennium or two.  The big event after WWII was recognition of Israeli statehood by the US and almost all of Europe.

Comment by Joseph P on February 5, 2015 at 12:30am

@Daniel

I should say, no credible evidence. There may be bogus evidence.

Or as is more often the case, it's a matter of some fundamentalist nut rummaging through excavated Israeli ruins, saying, "We have a story of King Solomon's Temple, and here's a ruin of a big city with a temple, from before 500 BCE (not that they would use that acronym).  Looks like Solomon's Temple to me!!!"

Early biblical archaeology was dominated by the likes of William F. Albrightadvocat[ing] "biblical archaeology", in which the archaeologist's task, according to fellow Biblical archaeologist William Dever, is seen as being "to illuminate, to understand, and, in their greatest excesses, to "prove" the bible."  You don't have any chance in hell of coming out with an honest interpretation, when you go into an endeavor with that kind of mentality.

It's just like when some religious person comes to me with a website purporting to have all of this amazing scientific evidence for the existence of their god (and strangely, no others).  All I have to do is flip over to the site's About page and point out the Statement of Faith.  And you're done.  An organization with a statement of faith isn't engaging in a scientific endeavor and probably doesn't understand science.

Comment by Joan Denoo on February 5, 2015 at 12:19am

well ... not the same gene pool ... but they are both of the same species. 

 

Members (2120)

 
 
 

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service