Sigmund Freud is no longer the revered figure he once was. A recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education noted that Freud is no longer routinely assigned even in psychology curricula. In a way, Freud is following the downward path of that other great totem of the last couple of centuries, Karl Marx. It's hard to believe so many intelligent people spent their lives studying these two thinkers. Intellectuals, we have to conclude, are often fatally attracted to far-out theories that tease the mind but that bear little relation to what's actually going on in the world.
Marxism worked well in academic laboratories and only failed miserably when it was actually tried. Similarly for decades Freud spun out his elaborate theories, and they sounded so scientific and so modern and so avant garde. Depression? Well, that's because your sister abused you when you were four, and you have concealed from yourself the memory of it, but if you do hundreds of hours of therapy, you can excavate the source of your anxiety, and by coming to terms with it you can slowly overcome it. But today when you go to the doctor and are diagnosed with depression, he gives you a pill and you feel better. No need for most people to visit the therapist's couch.
Freud also argued that what we are secretly attracted to, we make into a taboo. Freud explained the "incest taboo" by saying that we secretly want to have sex with our mothers and our sisters, and so we repress those feelings and outlaw them. In Freud's words, "The strength of the incestuous wishes can be detected behind the prohibition against them."
The cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker pointed out the shortcoming of this theory. Pinker notes that by Freud's logic the fact that humans are averse to eating cow dung shows that we secretly want to eat it. Pinker's point is that there are sound evolutionary reasons both for avoiding cow dung and for avoiding incest. The former is unhealthy and attracts disease-carrying insects; the latter results in biological abnormalities. So natural selection produces humans who avoid both. Once again, Freudian fantasy is replaced with a much more plausible scientific alternative.
I've been reading Freud's The Future of an Illusion, where Freud makes the case that religion is a form of "wish fulfillment." Freud writes that for the individual "life is hard to bear," and beyond this there is "the painful riddle of death, against which no medicine has yet been found." And so to "make helplessness tolerable" man invents God and religion not because they are true but because we wish them to be true. " For Freud, one may say, Christianity is adult Disneyland. We forget that Freud is the author of this portrait of religion that is widely espoused in our time.
Well, let's examine this Freudian explanation in an entirely secular and rational way. Imagine a bunch of people who have gathered in a room because they want to avoid life's difficulties--sickness, suffering, death--by making up a religion that will make them feel better. I can entirely see how such a group would come up with the concept of heaven. Heaven is a place where there is no suffering and no death. Eternal bliss would surely fit into my wish-fulfillment scheme.
But I don't see why this group would come up with the concept of hell. (We are not talking about why priests might later use the concept to enforce doctrinal obedience or institutional loyalty. We are talking about why wish-fulfilling humans would invent the concept in the first place.) Hell is not only worse than sickness but also worse than death, because death is merely the end, while hell implies eternal separation from God.
I also don't see why seekers of wish-fulfillment would come up with Christian morality. Who needs the Ten Commandments or other such rules which make our lives more difficult by asserting a series of "Thou Shall Nots"? Even Christians recoil from the severe demands of their ethical code. Recall the church father Augustine, who kept putting off his conversion to Christianity, praying to God, "Make me chaste, O Lord, but not yet." In other words, a project of wish-fulfillment would seem to dictate a much more libertine social morality than the one we find in the Old and New Testaments.
Bottom line: Judaism and Christianity, not to mention the other great religions, hardly look like they are the product of mere wishful thinking. In fact, they posit a God and a moral universe that makes some fairly stern demands on humans. It's almost wishful to think that God does not exist, so that we can escape those demands. This is a point that does not seem to have occurred to poor Sigmund Freud.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 17)
1. Is the point of this that since Frued was wrong about the whole odipus complex he must have been wrong about everythging else.
Could it be the Disneyland comment had more to do with both being fantasies and less about both being about fullfilling wishes? (fullfilling wishes? have you been to disneyland?)
I (a secular person, I suppose) always interpeted the quote that way.
Your last four paragraghs are about as relevent as Marx.
tmo at 2:22AM on Aug 12th 2008
2. Freud, everything.
I really should proofread sorry.
tmo at 2:23AM on Aug 12th 2008
3. You seem to mistake that morality is an ideal only held by the Christians DD. Is there or has there ever been a religion where much of what we believe is moral, thou shall not lie, steal, murder, etc., was not part of their beliefs? In truth every religions feels that they hold the moral high ground while all the rest are headed for hell. I think Freud was only commenting on the major religion of his day and age and the fact that so many fall short of these perceived ideals. Yet they doggedly continue in saying one thing while doing the complete opposite. So it would seem that Christians are secretly attracted to what is taboo.
JimCO at 2:30AM on Aug 12th 2008
4. In fact, they posit a God and a moral universe that makes some fairly stern demands on humans. It's almost wishful to think that God does not exist, so that we can escape those demands. This is a point that does not seem to have occurred to poor Sigmund Freud.
So when you do the right thing it's to avoid the wrath of an all powerful supernatural being and hope for a wonderful reward when you leave this world. When I do the right thing(once in a while I actually do) it's because it is the right thing.
Who has the moral high ground? (To be fair if I thought I could just fold my hands and say I was sorry to an invisible man in the sky and be absolved of any terrible thing I did I might be a lot worse than I already am).
tmo at 2:35AM on Aug 12th 2008
5. Aw, Diddy, This is a repeat....
Are you upset I posted the criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder?
Freud didn't write the DSM-IV, and you can't deny that you qualify for 5 or more of the qualifying criteria -
Sorry bud, but when the shoe fits...
ex-christian at 2:47AM on Aug 12th 2008
6. More grand obfuscation from Dinesh D'Souza, yet again with his habit of digging up the graves of men (Freud, Marx, Darwin) who's knowledge had long since been modified and added to in light of more modern, scientific understandings.
Dinesh can't refute the mountains of modern scientific evidence, so he keeps tip-toeing back to the beginnings of modern scientific understandings to build his antique straw man clued together with antiquated ideas. Dinesh D'Souza has become a man defined by his self-delusion that he consistently triumphs. All Dinesh really keeps doing is exposing himself as a charlatan with no concrete arguments and only half-baked abstractions and distractions as his tools.
WhatzInAName at 3:03AM on Aug 12th 2008
7. Anyhoo, christianity didn't invent the concept of god. When people worshipped multiple gods, they didn't threaten people much, as they could always go to a different one that didn't threaten, or ask one to intervene on their behalf.
Enter monotheism. There is only one god, and if you DON'T BELIEVE, you will be PUNISHED FOR ETERNITY. Tortured for eternity, to be more exact.
That's an eye opener. For a person who had many gods, being told there's only one true one who will torch you for eternity would definitely get people to convert. Pascal's wager - the sad little argument you always drag out is the natural reaction of any susceptible to religion's spell.
Had they said there might be lots of gods, and this one will punish you, who would buy that?
In short, the people who came up with christianity are alot like you. Always using the fear card. Only they didn't drag it out with a vengeance every 2 years, it was constant.
ex-christian at 3:07AM on Aug 12th 2008
8. Dinesh D'Douza proudly boasts that he can't see a reason why a religious group would come with hell???? Does he realize how profoundly stupid that sounds?
Even Freud knew a hundred years ago that in order to make people do good there has to be positive and negative motivations - either motivation for reward (candy, sex, heaven, etc.) or motivation to avoid punishment (prison, banishment,hell, etc.) - DUH !!!!!!!!!!!
In primitive cultures, their equvilents of "hell" is often something unknown such as the dark, an invented monster-god (devil), etc. Even parents today tell their children about "the boogey-man" in order to get them to them to be quiet and go to sleep.....much the same way as Dinesh's Catholic over-lords got him to sleep walk through life.
WhatzInAName at 3:39AM on Aug 12th 2008
9.
DoubleD reruns? The wish fulfillment of something has to be better than the good and bad of life on Earth. Everything that is good is in heaven, everything bad is in hell. Since we are good people we should be in heaven when we croak, our enemies are bad and should be in hell.
DoubleD you are turning into a stiff as an intellectual.
JefFlyingV at 5:02AM on Aug 12th 2008
10. In Matthew 5:22 Jesus states, "whosoever shall say, 'Thou fool', shall be in danger of hell fire".
Yet, like blind-follower-and-hypocritical Dinesh, Jesus said "thou fool" repeatedly, as in Matthew 23:17-19 and Luke 11:40 & 12:20.
Clearly Jesus put himself in danger of "hell" and was very hypocritical, also just like Dinesh, but D'Souza choses his hell here on earth by lying to the world and pretending he gets away with it.
But at least in this respect, Dinesh proves he is a follower of the so-called "Christ", because D'Souza goes lower than just implying that Freud and many others are "fools". As just one example, Denish dehumanizes Dawkins by referring to him as an "intellectual invertebrate".
If Dinesh's Jesus is real, then in he is in danger of hell fire...how's that for Freudian motivation? I forget, the threat of punishment doesn't work on that Freud's brilliant (at the time) concept of the "ego" that belongs to D'Souza.
Freud has been proven incorrect on many things, and in my courses in Psychology in the 1980s and 1990s he was hardly mentioned. And I know of no one today who has spent "their entire life" devoted exclusively to Freud - so that's just two more Dineshian lies right off the bat, which prove...
SOME of Freud's ground-breaking concepts about the ego, transference and denial were right on the mark - we see the evidence in many of D'Souza's self-congratulatory blogs.
WhatzInAName at 6:28AM on Aug 12th 2008
11. #10 - If Jesus, indeed, did sin, why didn't the scribes and pharisees pick up on that? You'd think folks that studied Jewish law day and night would have noticed something like that. And now you're the guy that's discovering this, 2000 years later?
Pontius Pilate and Jesus' enemies acknowledged no basis for a charge against Jesus before the crucifixion (John 19:6, Matt 27:23, Mark 15:14, Luke 23:22), except for blasphemy, John 19:7. But, if Jesus is the Son of God, he had not just a right, but a responsibility to say it.
The scripture says there is only one sin that can't be forgiven men, blasphemy of the holy spirit, which means rejecting Jesus Christ.
Dave at 7:24AM on Aug 12th 2008
12. Um....#11 - Dave, I'm only quoting the bible in it's own words, and not out of context - I don't make the Christian rules...the bible says what it says.
If the bible is your moral compass, you have my sympathy if you need an ancient book of fairy tales to tell you what is good. I've worked with children most of my life, and most of them have nurturing instincts and know how to cooperate long before being indoctrinated by divisive religious factions. Behold the book you defend, courtsy of Chris "Ali BAba":
Prophecies to Identify the Messiah, Which Jesus Does Not Fulfill:
1) Matthew 1:23 says that Jesus (the messiah) would be called Immanuel, which means "God with us." Yet no one, not even his parents, call him Immanuel at any point in the bible.
2) The Messiah must be a physical descendant of David (Romans 1:3 & Acts 2:30). Yet, how could Jesus meet this requirement since his genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show he descended from David through Joseph, who was not his natural father because of the Virgin Birth. Hence, this prophecy could not have been fulfilled.
3) Isaiah 7:16 seems to say that before Jesus had reached the age of maturity, both of the Jewish countries would be destroyed. Yet there is no mention of this prophecy being fulfilled in the New Testament with the coming of Jesus, hence this is another Messiah prophecy not fulfilled.
Prophecies Christians Use to Verify Jesus as the Messiah, Yet Clearly Fail:
4) The gospels (especially Matthew 21:4 and John 12:14-15) claim that Jesus fulfills the prophecy of Zechariah 9:9. But the next few verses (Zechariah 9:10-13) show that the person referred to in this verse is a military king that would rule "from sea to sea". Since Jesus had neither an army nor a kingdom, he could not have fulfilled this prophecy.
5) Matthew (Matthew 2:17-18) quotes Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:15), claiming that it was a prophecy of King Herod’s alleged slaughter of the children in and around Bethlehem after the birth of Jesus. But this passage refers to the Babylonian captivity, as is clear by reading the next two verses (Jeremiah 31:16-17), and, thus, has nothing to do with Herod’s massacre.
6) John 19:33 says that during Jesus’ crucifixion, the soldiers didn’t break his legs because he was already dead. Verse John 19:36 claims that this fulfilled a prophecy: "Not a bone of him shall be broken." But there is no such prophecy. It is sometimes said that the prophecy appears in Exodus 12:46, Numbers 9:12 & Psalm 34:20. This is not correct. Exodus 12:46 & Numbers 9:12 are not prophecies, they are commandments. The Israelites are told not to break the bones of the Passover lamb, and this is all it is about. And Psalm 34:20 seems to refer to righteous people in general (see verse Psalm 34:19, where a plural is used), not to make a prophecy about a specific person.
7) "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." Hosea 11:1. Matthew (Matthew 2:15) claims that the flight of Jesus’ family to Egypt is a fulfillment of this verse. But Hosea 11:1 is not a prophecy at all. It is a reference to the Hebrew exodus from Egypt and has nothing to do with Jesus. Matthew tries to hide this fact by quoting only the last part of the verse ("Out of Egypt I have called my son").
8) "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Micah 5:2 The gospel of Matthew (Matthew 2:5-6) claims that Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem fulfils this prophecy. But this is unlikely for two reasons.
A) "Bethlehem Ephratah" in Micah 5:2 refers not to a town, but to a clan: the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb’s second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chronicles 2:18, 2:50-52 & 4:4).
B) The prophecy (if that is what it is) does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from Micah 5:6. This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did. It should also be noted that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make this verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan.
Statements Jesus Made Which Are False:
9) Jesus in John 14:12 & Mark 16:17-18 said: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth in me, the works that I do shall he also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father." This implies that Jesus’ true followers should be able to routinely perform the following tricks: 1) cast out devils, 2) speak in tongues, 3) take up serpents, 4) drink poisons without harm, and 5) cure the sick by touching them and MANY other of Jesus’ "works". Curiously I have yet to see a Christian that can do any of the above on demand.
10) In John 14:13-14 Jesus stated: "And whatsoever ye ask in my name I do, that the Father may be glorified in the son. If ye ask any thing in my name, I will do it." In reality, millions of people have made millions of requests in Jesus’ name and failed to receive satisfaction. This promise or prophecy has failed completely.
11) Paul says Christianity lives or dies on the Resurrection (1 Corinthian 15:14-17). Yet Jesus said in Matthew 12:40 that he would be buried three days and three nights as Jonah was in the whale three days and three nights. Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning is only one and a half days, so he could not have been the messiah by his own and Paul’s admission.
12) Jesus’ prophecy in John 13:38 ("The cock shall not crow, till thou [Peter] hast denied me three times") is false. Mark 14:66-68 shows the cock crowed after the first denial, not the third.
13) In Mark 10:19 Jesus said: "Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother." Jesus needs to re-read the Ten Commandments. There is no Old Testament commandment against defrauding. The only relevant statement about defrauding is in Leviticus 19:13 , which says : "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbor." This is an OT law, but is not listed with the Ten Commandments. Surely, if Jesus was god incarnate he would know the commandments.
14) "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven" (John 3:13). If Jesus is in heaven, how can he be down on earth speaking? Moreover, according to 2 Kings 2:11 ("and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven") Jesus was not the only person to ascend into heaven, nor was he the first. Elijah preceded him and apparently Enoch did also ("And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him"--Genesis 5:24).
15) In Luke 23:43 Jesus said to the thief on the cross, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise." This obviously has to be false, for Jesus was supposed to lay dead in the tomb for three days following his crucifixion.
1 6) Jesus says : "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy" (Matthew 5:43). This statement does not exist in the OT either. In fact, Proverbs 24:17 says, "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth…"
17) Jesus is reported to say: "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it" (Luke 16:16). Certainly every man is not pressing to enter the kingdom of God. The very fact that I am an atheist (one third of the world’s population does not believe in a god) proves this verse to be false.
18) "Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless?" (Matthew 12:5) Nowhere does the OT state that the priests in the temple profaned the Sabbath and were considered blameless.
19) "Yea; have ye never read, 'Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise'" (Matthew 21:16). Jesus is quoting Psalm 8:2, which says, "Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies…". "Perfect praise" has little to do with "ordaining strength because of thine enemies." Another misquotation!
20) "But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him" (Mark 9:13). There are no prophecies in the OT of things that were to happen to Elijah.
Jesus, in all his "God incarnate" wisdom, contradicts himself:
21) Jesus consistently contradicts himself concerning his Godly status. "I and my father are one." (John 14:28) Also see Philippians 2:5-6 Those verses lead us to believe that he is a part of the trinity and equal to his father being a manifestation of him. Yet, Jesus also made many statements that deny he is the perfect men, much less God incarnate. Take the following for example: "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God" (Matthew 19:17). "My father if greater then I." (John 14:28) Also see Matthew 24:26 Clearly, Jesus is denouncing the possibility of him being the Messiah in those three verses.
22) Jesus said, "whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire" (Matthew 5:22). Yet, he himself did so repeatedly, as Matthew 23:17-19 and Luke 11:40 & 12:20 show. Clearly Jesus should be in danger of hell too?
23) Does Jesus support peace, or war? Matthew 5:39 "Resist not evil, but whoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Also note Matthew 6:38-42 & 26:52 where Jesus teaches non-resistance, Non-violence. Now read (Luke 22:36-37) Where Jesus commands people to take arms for a coming conflict. (John 2:15) Jesus uses a whip to physically drive people out of the temple.
24) Matthew 15:24 Jesus said, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of lsrael,". This would of course mean that he is here only to save the Jews. The scriptures repeatedly back up this notion that Christ is savior to the Jews and not the gentiles (see Romans 16:17, Revelations 14:3-4 & John 10). The contradiction lies in what Jesus later tells his followers: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations" (Matthew 28:19).
25) Can we hate our kindred? Luke 14:26 Jesus says "If any man come unto me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brother, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he can not be my disciple." John 3:15 "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer." Also see Ephesians 6:22, 5:25, & Matthew 15:4
26) Even many of the staunchest defenders of Jesus admit that his comment in Matthew 10:34 ("I came not to send peace but a sword") contradicts verses such as Matthew 26:52 ("Put up again thy sword into his place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword").
27) Deuteronomy 24:1 & 21:10-14 all say that divorce is allowed for the simple reason if a "man no longer delighteth in his wife". Yet Jesus comes along and breaks his father’s law by saying in Matthew 5:32 that adultery is the only way one can be divorced.
28) In Mark 8:35 Jesus said: "...but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s the same shall save it." How could Jesus have said this when there was no gospel when he lived? The gospel did not appear until after his death.
29) Matthew 6:13 Jesus recites a revised prayer and states, "Don’t bring us into temptation." God is the cause of everything, even Satan. God has been leading people into temptation since the Garden of Eden. Otherwise, the trees of life and knowledge would have never been there.
30) Matthew 12:1-8 Jesus thinks it’s okay to break his father’s laws, by breaking the Sabbath day. He states that he is basically exempt for such fiascoes and that he is Master of the Sabbath.
31) John 3:17 Jesus contradicts himself when he says, "God didn’t send his son into the world to condemn it, but to save it." Jesus seems to forget his own stories.
32) James 4:3 If your prayers are not answered, it’s your own damned fault. This is in direct contradiction to where Jesus says "seek and ye shall find, ask and it shall be known to you".
33) "If Jesus bears witness of himself his witness is true" John 8:14, "If I bear witness of myself it is not true." John 5:31
34) "I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:20), versus "For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always" (Matthew 26:11 , Mark 14:7, John 12:8) and "Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am thither ye cannot come" (John 7:34). Is this the kind of friend one can rely on?
35) "And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her" (Mark 10:11 & Luke 6:18), versus "And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery" (Matthew 19:9). In the book of Matthew, Jesus said a man could put away his wife if one factor-- fornication--is involved. In Mark and Luke he allowed no exceptions.
36) Jesus is quoted: "Judge not, and ye shall be not judged; condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven" (Luke 6:37 & Matthew 7:1), versus "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment" (John 7:24). Jesus stated men are not to judge but, then, allowed it under certain conditions. As in the case of divorce, he can’t seem to formulate a consistent policy.
37) "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Matthew 27:46, (also note the time before crucification where Jesus prays for the "cup to passeth over me") versus "Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour?’ No, for this purpose I have come to this hour" (John 12:27 RSV). Jesus can’t seem to decide whether or not he wants to die. One moment he is willing; the next he isn’t.
38) In Luke 23:30 ("Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, fall on us, and to the hills, cover us") Jesus quoted Hosea 10:8 ("...and they shall say to the mountains, cover us; and to the hills, fall on us"). And, like Paul, he often quoted inaccurately. In this instance, he confused mountains with hills.
39) "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they know him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist" (Matthew 17:11-13). John the Baptist was beheaded, but Jesus was not. And what did John the Baptist restore? Nothing!
40) We are told salvation is obtained by faith alone (John 3:18 & 36) yet Jesus told a man to follow the Commandments-Matthew 19:16-18 (saving by works)-if he wanted eternal life.
41) In Luke 12:4 Jesus told his followers to "Be not afraid of them that kill the body." But Matthew 12:14-16, John 7:1, 8:59, 10:39, 11:53-54, & Mark 1:45 show that Jesus consistently feared death. Jesus went out of his way to hide, run, and attempt escape from the Roman and Jewish authorities.
42) Matthew 5:28 says to sin in "your heart" is considered a sin in itself. The messiah is supposed to be God incarnate, not able to sin, yet in Matthew 4:5 & Luke 4:5-9, Jesus was tempted by Satan in the desert, which is sinning in his heart. Jesus also took upon all the sins of the world during his crucifixion, so how can it be said that "Jesus was the perfect man without sin"? This would lead one to believe he was not the Messiah.
43) Jesus told us to "Love your enemies; bless them that curse you," but ignored his own advice by repeatedly denouncing his opposition. Matthew 23:17 ("Ye fools and blind"), Matthew 12:34 ("0 generation of vipers"), and Matthew 23:27 (". . . hypocrites . . . ye are like unto whited sepulchres. . .") are excellent examples of hypocrisy.
44) Did the people of Jesus’ generation see any signs? (Matthew 12:38-40) Jesus announced that no signs would be given to that generation except the Resurrection itself. (Mark 8:12-13) Jesus announced that no signs would be given to that generation. (Mark 16:20) They went out preaching, and the Lord confirmed the word through accompanying signs. (John 20:30) Jesus provided many wonders and signs. (Acts 2:22) Jesus provided many wonders and signs. (Acts 5:12 & 8:13) many signs and wonders were done through the apostles.
45) Jesus commands the disciples to go into Galilee immediately after the resurrection. Matthew 28:10 Jesus commands the disciples to "tarry in Jerusalem" immediately after the resurrection.
46) Matthew 28:18 & John 3:35 both tell that Jesus said he could do anything. Yet Mark 6:5 says Jesus was not all powerful.
47) Jesus says in Luke 2:13-14 that he came to bring peace on earth. Matthew 10:34 Jesus back peddles and says he did not come to bring peace on earth.
48) Did Christ receive testimony from man? "Ye sent unto John and he bare witness unto the truth. But I receive not testimony from man." John 5:33-34 "And ye shall also bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning." John 15:27
49) Christ laid down his life for his friends. John 15:13 & 10:11 Christ laid down his life for his enemies. Romans 5:10
50) Deuteronomy 23:2 says that bastards can not attend church unto the tenth generation. If Jesus was spawned by Mary and Jehovah as the Bible claims then he is technically a bastard and should not be the leader of the church.
WhatzInAName at 7:39AM on Aug 12th 2008
13. ATHEISM IS A CATASTROPHIC FAILURE
http://www.evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
JESSIE JAMES at 7:58AM on Aug 12th 2008
14. Watz in a Name
You have taken each verse out of Context and you have embarrassed only yourself in regards to your lack of Literary analysis and lack historical back ground knowledge.
Your contradiction is your brain - not the BIBLE.
Your contrdications will be cleared up when you come to the site
http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
Then click "Answers for Atheists and Agnostics"
http://www.evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
JESSIE JAMES at 8:05AM on Aug 12th 2008
15. Just in ... another MAJOR scientist now RENOUNCES his ATHEISM. Check it out On the Right-hand side panel under "In The News" section of the site below: He now declares that he has discovered God!
http://www.evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
JESSIE JAMES at 8:08AM on Aug 12th 2008