Beck tells audience to "read the last part of the Bible" to answer "what are we doing as a people"
November 13, 2009 11:09 am ET
From the November 13 edition of Premiere Radio Network's The Glenn Beck Program
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
You may also mean "Read Leviticus and go back into the 10th century like much of the Islamic world is, at least socially."
I don't support either idea.
Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Matthew 5:18
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Luke 16:17
And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
Try reading Matthew 6-7 to get an idea of what Christ actually taught.
Geez, that must make your head hurt when you see all those silly contradictions in the bible when those divine words are supposed to come from one almighty source. But I suppose you will blame that on mans translations and interpretations of god's word, right? There goes god's "all powerful" ability since he can't get a few people to get their stories straight in "his" book.
Christ's teachings, whether you accept his deity or not, are that we should love and care for each other . . . that ALL people have worth . . . that ALL people have rights. The people who angered him were the exact people that you are denigrating in your post.
I'm not asking you to believe in his deity, but his teachings are worth reading. Try reading the Jefferson Bible . . . he deleted all references to Christ's deity from it and left the philosophy.
In college, I took a course called "Religion and Society" [now called "Spiritualism and Society"] . . . the majority of all of the world's philosophies and moral teachings are the same.
As I said, you don't have to accept Christ's deity.
You mean like a horoscope? I could read one from a 7 days ago, 70 years ago or 700 years ago and could apply some vague meaning from it to my life. It doesn't make it prophetic or powerful, does it?
To me the bible is no more powerful or prophetic than a horoscope. And its the LAST book I would turn to for moral guidance. Selling your daughter into slavery/prostitution, stoning your children and murder are not my ideas of good moral guidance (and yes that is all in the bible).
If you have true faith in god, you can't pick and choose what you take from the bible. You either believe it ALL as the word of god (like a man living inside a fish for days), or just admit your god is not omniscient or all-powerful and its just an antiquated guideline you pick and choose what is relevant to you to feel comfort.
And the heart has nothing to do with acceptance. I respect your views and opinions, but it doesn't mean I have to accept them as credible. The heart makes emotional decisions that can be swayed, not rational decisions based on facts and logic.
As for religion, I have none. Dogmas and blind faith to me is ignorant and cause more harm than good, despite people claiming the "moral values" contained in thier religious books. History is full of attrocities claimed in the name of "god." So I do agree with your comment that, "there are many moral delemmas that have been redressed by time but remain unchanged" because people are still killing others because of thier faith.
As for faith, I have faith in facts and common sense. You say, "Faith is not based on facts or logic" to justify your belief in a space creature overseeing your life and creation. What if I say I have faith the sun will rise from the east tomorrow? Is that not based on facts and logic? I can't see the sun when its set, but I know based on facts that it will appear tomorrow morning. What facts do you have for your faith in your god besides a book with questionable moral values in it? Will you say because you are here that is proof of your god? That is a GREAT argument.
I was not forcing my "religion" on you. I was merely asking you a question and stating my beliefs. How is that forcing anything on you? That is a typical response from religious types. I ask a question you can't answer logically so I am obviously attacking your beliefs. How sad.
"Your refusal to accept how I see things is the force" I accept how you see things, I just don't see the logic or reason in how you see things. I never said I refuse to acknowledge your view on life, I just don't choose to live my life by that standard.
"Now, you may consider it sacriligious" How can I, someone you says has no "F"aith or religion think something is sacriligious? But I do find your comparison to Star Wars hilarious. I'm laughing outloud, thank you.
And I love how you didn't capitalize "faith" before until you were trying to expalin the difference between "Faith" and faith. Ummmm, its not a proper noun, its always lower case. It's Christian faith, not Christian Faith. Do you also capitalize "belief" when refering to religion? And by the way, faith has three basic deffinitions, and they all pretty much mean the same thing...loyalty to a belief.
I do have faith that my view is correct and logical, and I have faith that I will not sway you, nor will I try to sway you, from your beliefs. I don't go to third world countries armed only with bibles to convert the poor and hopeless like people of "faith" do.
Again, I was asking questions. Not instigating a theological debate (which you would lose handily).
I capitalized the word Faith to make a point about something that is real and tangible for many people, if not for you.
I don't go into third world countries and try to convince them of anything. Most of the faithful don't. The best of the faithful people go to third world countries to comfort and to heal and to spread God's love through their actions of caring for the poor and they expect nothing in return.
Let me try to explain this to you in terms you might understand. If you were born blind, there is nothing that I could ever explain or do that would allow you to see the world as I do. You could be hostile and aggressive (as you have been with me here) and it would still not give you sight or explain how to perceive it as sight. The physical world is no less real to the blind than it is to the sighted but each perceives the physical world in very different ways, and neither can make the other fully experience the world as they do. There is no common ground. Some of the sighted use their sight to create horrors, and others only beauty, the rest muddle through doing both. Would you have the whole world to be blind to avoid seeing the horror?
It causes no harm for someone to spend their life praising a non-existant God, but it could be harmful to ignore an existing one. That is the crux of Pascal's Wager. If I have wasted my life, trying to be a better person in the "eyes" of a non-existing God, well, then so be it.
By the way, you should have attributed the quotes you posted below. I am betting they are Mencken or Beirce. And the fact that you would choose to quote them, shows your lack of respect for my belief and your aggression towards it. Tone, in the world of color is a blending of gray and a color, printed words can have tone. It is also a term commonly used in writing courses, and I used to teach English.
Lastly, your world view may be logical, it may even be correct. But remember this "Logic is a wreath of pretty little flowers that smells BAD!" Mr. Spock in "I, Mudd"
I have talked about facts, and you have quoted scripture and science fiction movies and shows. I think that is fitting since both are make-believe.
And you keep trying to use blindness as an analogy. Again, that is fitting because those with a monotheist view of life are blind to facts presented to them. That is why an argument would be no contest, because you would just keep hiding behind "Faith" and your inability to prove the existence of god for your arguments. Believe me, I have had this discussion with Catholic priests and nuns and they couldn't provide logical answers to my questions.
I also find it very amusing that you think you can explain the bible and faith to me better than some of the most influential and brilliant biblical scholars have been able to do in centuries.
As for the quotes I provided, you seem somewhat smart, I think you can find out who said them quite easily. But your guesses are wrong.
And I see your English teacher and raise you my PR and Journalism credentials. I believe in reason, fact and common sense. I never said I didn't respect your faith, I have said over and over again, I am asking questions and stating my views. Because you don't like them you think I am attacking you. That is your wall being thrown up, not mine. I'm willing to listen if you have something rational to say.
Tell you what, since I never tried to force you to believe what I believe, and I never labeled you or judged you like you did to me, I will make a deal with you. Religious people see everyday things as miracles of god that happen through faith and prayer. The first time an amputee grows a limb back because of prayers, I will believe a god exists. Fair enough?
You didn't judge and label me?
"Why so defensive about your faith? Is it wavering and you need to reassure yourself?"
"What facts do you have for your faith in your god besides a book with questionable moral values in it?"
"That is a typical response from religious types. I ask a question you can't answer logically so I am obviously attacking your beliefs. How sad."
"If you have true faith in god, you can't pick and choose what you take from the bible. You either believe it ALL as the word of god (like a man living inside a fish for days), or just admit your god is not omniscient or all-powerful and its just an antiquated guideline you pick and choose what is relevant to you to feel comfort."
"you seem somewhat smart"
Your posts reek of contempt for God and faith! You didn't try to force me to change my belief? Read what you wrote again! I don't really care what you think or believe. I don't really care what happens to your soul. That is on you.
I tried to tell you that I am a person of Faith, and I can't explain it to you beyond that because you don't have Faith, you don't want it and you can't understand it as I do. That is all I have said repeatedly.
I also said that I am not a dogmatic person and I don't argue theology because it doesn't interest me. I know there is a God, that knowledge comforts me and helps me go about my day. I merely sought your acceptence of the fact. I accept the fact that you have no faith in God or religion (other than facts, logic and atheism) and in someone else, I might respect that.
I mentioned that I used to teach English, because in English, we talk about the tone that words have on a regular basis, and you had made snarky remarks about my use of a word often associated with sounds for written communication. You are refusing to agree to a common vocabulary when you do this, it does make it hard to argue a point if you won't accept someone else's use of a word as legitamate. And I am capable of looking up quotes, but my background in teaching History and English tells me that it is unethical to print quotes without attributing them to their author. That would be a "fatal error" on a paper in any Middle or High School. I would think that someone with a journalist or public relations credential would know that.
Now, having looked up your quotes, you are borrowing from Sam Harris, someone with whom I was completely unfamiliar...until now. Remember, his whole thing is "benign, corrective form of intolerance" he doesn't want people to believe and tries to correct their perceptions because they can't justify their faith with a factual or logical answer that meets his standards! At last, your agenda is revealed!
Here is something from me to consider, maybe the person needing correction and intolerance is you, because people are entitled to believe what they want and it isn't your place to force them to change. Forcing someone to stop believing in God is just as wrong as trying to force someone to believe in God. Pax Vobiscum
You are just proving Mr. Harris' points. There is no discussion with someone of faith. I know and understand what your definition of "faith" is. You seem to ignore that I have said I know where you are coming from. But since I don't have your view of it, I must not comprehend it. Again, its your narrow, judging view of me that is blind.
People of faith, religion and dogma get so offended if I question your beliefs, or say I don't believe what you believe. I am not offended by your beliefs as you are of mine. I am merely asking you questions and you get all defensive and upset. Again, point out where I am telling you to not believe what you believe. I merely asked questions and stated my views. I can deal with your views and understand them, but you can't deal with mine despite what you say, because you have been offended. I am not offended by your "faith."
As for attributing quotes, nice try, but this is a blog. Rules go out the window. If I was writing a paper or story or document, I would attribute all quotes. But its a blog! Deal with it. Do you go around correcting peoples spelling, syntax, style and grammar here too when you can't properly debate? I have an old AP Style Guide. Do you want it to better critique people on blogs with when they don't write things properly? Then maybe you will know faith isn't capitalized.
You are so offended by my words that you attack Harris as being in a "sad little world." How ignorant a statement that is based on your DOGMA. Yes, you have it despite your best efforts to say you don't. You might want to look up the definition of it.
As for what Harris is about, if you actually paid attention or did real research, you would know he wants there to be an open and free discussion about religion. People of faith have put up so many barriers about their beliefs it makes it almost impossible to have rational dialogue about religion, as you are proving here.
And just so you know, I have a pretty good life without "faith." I'm sure you wouldn't understand that, but I am a very moral person, and not because of religion. If you have a soul by your definition, I would care about it, even if you don't care about mine. Your uncaring sounds like hate. How Christian of you. Gizensha.
I realize the whole purpose of your attack is to make me question my belief and give it up but because I have no facts or logic to back up my faith. Dr. Harris states that faith is the only thing that is set aside and unquestionable. Well, he is wrong. I have no facts or logic as to why I favor a certain shade of rose as my favorite color, or why I prefer the sour of grapefruit juice over the sweet of orange juice. I prefer raspberries and blackberries to blueberries, I like my steak thick and rare, and my asparagus firm. I have no facts to support those opinions either, but they are mine. Are you going to divest me of that or make snotty and demeaning remarks about how trivial my preferences are?
Here's another one, I love my husband and I love my children. I can't prove that to you with facts or logic. So, according to you, I must be devested of that, too. There are no brain patterns to prove it. And, yet, I have spent 30 of my 49 years with this man, and logic, would argue directly against the success of our union. And, my children, well, I am sure you would say rude and petty things about loving them. Love isn't a factual or logical thing either.
I wonder, do you love? If your world revolves so much around facts and logic, how do you manage? Would you stay up all night with a sick child? Would you give up something that mattered incredibly for you because your child or spouse needed something and your sacrifice was the only way to get it? It isn't logical to put someone else before yourself.
My errors, in spelling, grammar, and typing annoy me, for more than the errors of others. I don't generally go around correcting much since I left teaching. I told you, I capitalized it to make a point, this is a blog, deal with it. By the way, I still have a cherished copy of Strunk and White on the shelf near me. E.B. White was always considered a writer's writer.
As to your quotes you do neither yourself nor Dr. Harris any credit by hiding their source. Unless of course, you did mean to deceive. Dr. Harris' work isn't without controversy, you know. Why does he hesitate to give personal details when he is so intrusive towards others? Is it because he has no life or does he fear his fellow human beings so much that he feels the need to hide? (Those are all questions, by the way, those things with "?" at the end.) He does, after all, find some ideas so dangerous that the holder must be killed to protect society. That is a very anti-social judgement. (Yes, that is a judgement on my part.) Who gets to make that decision, anyway? Where does he get his authority from? Have you ever heard a child ask another the ag old question: "Who died and made you God?"
No, I am not dogmatic. My beliefs are actually pretty broad and open. (They include Hillel and Aristole's Ethics, which I prefer to the similar teachings of Buddha and the Eightfold Path.) I have no authority beyond my own thoughts, emotions, and experiences. I merely tried to tell you that you were treading in an area where I will not yield or argue. Your response has been pretty belligerent for someone who merely wants to have a conversation. You are deceiving yourself if you think you want to converse, really you want to convert, and yet you despise missionaries.
I'm bored now. I don't find you worth any further effort of considering an answer. You are of course, welcome to do whatever you would like with this response. You can even consider this a victory for your intellectual superiority, which I am sure you will do. I expect that from you, based on your previous expressions. A parting shot, there are no atheists in foxholes. May you never have to face the question in need. Live Long and Prosper.
I will just say this...I can actually see food, your husband and children. I know they exist so I don't question your feelings or opinions about them.
I can't see god, you can't produce god to show me, so I find your faith in an invisible god irrational. What if I told you I believe in Zeus, or Ra, or Shiva. How would you look at me then? Why would I be wrong, but you are right? You wouldn't be able to discuss that because you already believe what you believe and you can't be swayed with reason and facts. Its a lost cause, but its fun to see you give all the answers you have been told to give and believe what you have been told to believe by generations of people who don't question their blind faith. Thank you for fitting into the stereotype, its been fun.
"The problem with faith, is that it really is a conversation stopper. Faith is a declaration of immunity to the powers of conversation. It is a reason, why you do not have to give reasons, for what you believe."
You know his and my future. Hmmmmm, why is that? Because of faith? Or you read horoscopes and are a fortune teller? Need to hold my hand? Lol
Here's a documentary about it. A bit long, but very informative.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6439295521791525424#
I believe that may be regarded as a "messiah complex", with a healthy dose of narcissism.
I used to be a raging fundamentalist myself, so I'm very familiar with their type.
I've come to think of these types as, "So heavenly-minded, they're no earthly good."
Your crack staff really should learn to use "The Google". Maybe they told you about it a year and a half ago, and since your brain works like no other brain I know of, it took a year and a half for you to process it. It could be just one of those flashbacks hallucinogen users experience.
I know you'll be shocked at this, but the "they" that Glenn Beck says "they're talking about it!!" evidently amounts to just one guy: a Lord Smith of Finsbury.
But hey: it's enough for a card-carrying fear-mongerer to build a ridiculous case on.
is the mormen bible the same as the Koran or the christens or any other religion that did not like the way it was written so they started there own and made up there versions.
So just a little more info pleases
Well, we're not British, Glenn, so, what we're doing as Americans is likely something different from what they're merely theorizing about doing on the other side of the Pond. Just because they speak the same language, don't mistake them for the same country, okay? And be wary of doing topics related to foreign relations or other governments. You'd be way out of your depth.
Beck has for sure become the Poster Child for the Secular Government Movement
Also, giant grasshoppers with people-faces and multi-headed dragons who spew rivers.
If you really want to know "what we are doing as a people", you should watch Part VI of Monty Python's 'The Meaning of Life'...
Actually, the documentary (link posted above) proposes that the person who wrote Revelations (may not be John at all) was probably high on magic mushrooms that grow on the island of Patmos.
If it were true, that would definitely explain a lot.
It's the degenerates favorite Book.
Actually, the book of Mormon is his favorite book. And it was created by a guy claiming to be able to interpret "seer" stones in a magic hat.
You can see the South Park's take on this at:
http://www.videosift.com/video/History-of-Mormonism-by-South-Park
Who are you referring that to Becky? Do say all the kooks who been going town halls yelling because they were un-informed, going to tea party protests, protesting about something they were un-informed about, or claiming all muslims are not worthy to live on this earth. Is that who you are referring to??