Now, let us consider the manners in which she attempted to vilify Christians for not following laws that were not meant for them.
3) A third tenet prohibits men and women from wearing each other’s clothing (“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). Funny thing, two female Jehovah Witnesses came over this morning, they coffee clutched [sic] with my neighbor Jenny, a fellow Christian and ALL THREE of these women were wearing pant suits!
This is confused on various levels: primarily the aforementioned attempted application of the Old Testament to Christians. Although, the spirit of this law still stands in that males are to appear as males and females as females. She refers to her neighbor as a fellow Christian of Jehovah Witnesses yet, Jehovah Witnesses are “Jehovah Witnesses” and not biblical Christians due to their denial of Jesus’ divinity, the Trinity, that Jesus created “all things,” they are basically polytheistic, and deny virtually any and every biblically Christian doctrine as the Bible itself defines it.
12) Lastly, Jesus, who clearly is of greater importance than Paul, said the Old Law was to remain in force until heaven and earth passed away and all is accomplished (“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven”-Matthew 5:18-19 RSV).
This leads Charlotte to comment thusly,
Heaven and earth still exist and many prophecies are not yet fulfilled. How many times have you heard some lame ass Christian say “the Old testament doesn’t matter, Jesus was the lamb and abolished it”? Don’t let them get away with this **** for even the bible says that they should still be following the Old Law.
It is from here that the rest of her “sermon” fallacy progresses (or regresses).Charlotte is a tricky one; not tricky enough to trick the discerning biblical skeptic (as per Acts 17:11) but just tricky enough to trick pseudo-skeptical atheists and even trick herself. Note how she argues that “New” testament/covenant Christians are supposed to follow “Old” testament/covenant laws. Yet, she argues that “many prophecies are not yet fulfilled.” What about prophecies, I thought that were discussing laws?Moreover, note that she is missing the point even while quoting it and commenting on it. Note her comment and quotation,
until heaven and earth passed away and all is accomplished (“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished_
Did you note both the manipulation and also the solution?
She wrote that it would be “until heaven and earth passed away and all is accomplished” but the text does not state that the law will be in place until both heaven and earth pass away AND all is fulfilled. Rather, the text states that it will be until “till heaven and earth pass away_until all is accomplished.” Is the difference clear? In Charlotte’s reinterpretation the law being fulfilled and heaven and earth passing away go together but in the biblical text it hinge is the law being accomplished. This is how the hyperbole works: for all of time “till heaven and earth pass away” the law will not pass away “until all is accomplished.” Thus, when all is accomplished the passing away of heaven and earth are not relevant as they were mentioned to denote until such a time-as the accomplishment occurs.
Lastly, note that Charlotte wrote that “Christian say ‘the Old testament doesn’t matter, Jesus was the lamb and abolished it’?” Well, I would love to have a word with such Christians since Jesus specifically stated, “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.” The word “destroy” is precisely indicative of “abolish” which He did not do.
After her above quoted misunderstanding, rewritings, and propaganda Charlotte wrote “Among the scores of verses they enjoy and employ are those which teach the following:” and so on we go:
13) Contact with mediums or wizards is forbidden (“Do not turn to mediums or wizards; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God”— Leviticus 19:3 1 RSV, see also: Leviticus 20:6 & Deuteronomy 18: 10-12). Here’s an interesting little stat; Christians more then [sic] any other faith consult mystics and self-proclaimed oracles.
Again, she is equating the Old Testament with the New Testament (hereinafter OT=NT). Although, she is quite right that Christians ought not do such things. Note that she asserts that “Christians more then any other faith consult mystics_” while not providing any citations to the effect. Christians are less likely to do such things.
The Wall Street Journal provided the following report:
“From Hollywood to the academy, nonbelievers are convinced that a decline in traditional religious belief would lead to a smarter, more scientifically literate and even more civilized populace. The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won’t create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that’s not a conclusion to take on faith – it’s what the empirical data tell us.’What Americans Really Believe,’ a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians_
While 31% of people who never worship expressed strong belief in these things [dreams foretelling future, existence of Atlantis, haunting, necromancy, Bigfoot and Nessie], only 8% of people who attend a house of worship more than once a week did_In fact, the more traditional and evangelical the respondent, the less likely he was to believe in, for instance, the possibility of communicating with people who are dead.
This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book “The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener,” skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.
Surprisingly, while increased church attendance and membership in a conservative denomination has a powerful negative effect on paranormal beliefs, higher education doesn’t. Two years ago two professors published another study in Skeptical Inquirer showing that, while less than one-quarter of college freshmen surveyed expressed a general belief in such superstitions as ghosts, psychic healing, haunted houses, demonic possession, clairvoyance and witches, the figure jumped to 31% of college seniors and 34% of graduate students.”1
Charlotte continues thusly:
14) People should give one-tenth of their income to the Lord, which Biblicists equate with church (“And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lord’s…And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the Lord”–Leviticus 27:30-32)
I was unaware that “Biblicists equate” “Lord” “with church.” She again discredits herself while leaving Christians unscathed. Had she knowledge of the subject she is writing about she would have noted that the one-tenth tithe was not only of income but all sorts of goods; grains, herbs, etc. This is OT=NT; even though some still, un-problematically, consider it a good guide while others, problematically, demand that it is the law for Christians.
The fact is that the New Testament presents a scenario according to which all you have is yours and you decide how much to give. With particular reference to the money gained from the sale of property which a couple sold and pretended to give all the money to the church, it is stated, “While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own authority?” (Act 5:4). The answer to the rhetorical questions is clearly, “Yes.”Then there is the story of the poor widow who conceptually gave more than others when she “threw in two mites, which is a farthing”-fractions of a penny. Jesus,
called His disciples and said to them, Truly I say to you that this poor widow has cast in more than all those who have cast into the treasury. For all cast in from their abundance. But she, out of her poverty, has cast in all that she had, all her livelihood (Mark 12:42-44).
Her little bit was worth more than lots more from those who had lots more.
Next time we will bring our dissection of evilbible.com and Charlotte to a conclusion.