So there are two debates here: 1) that allele frequencies change in breeding populations over time (which we call biological evolution) and 2) that survival of the more fit is the means by which evolution proceeds. Since #1 is just a plain old fact (you’re not a clone of your asexually-reproducing parent, are you?), all that’s left is #2. And claiming that, for instance, rhinos with LESS fur survive better when the climate gets colder, marks one as having a distinct lack of tissue north of the top end of one’s spinal cord.

My only conclusion is that those who can’t accept reality shouldn’t be allowed out in public without a leash and keeper, let alone be allowed to debate the direction in which society should head.

I agree, and additionally I contend that this is a major plot hole.

God is all-knowing; the Bible says that he is “Perfect in Knowledge” and views everything there is under the heavens (All of that is in Job, I think, probably elsewhere). This all-seeing God has even declared the end from the beginning (thats Isiah 46:9-10).

However if this is the case, why does God (seemingly) change his mind? In fact, why does god screw up at all? His first humans were able to go behind his back and eat some fruit, so he had to guard some other fruit from them with a sword-wielding angel. (Genesis Ch 3, often titled “The Fall of Man.” My favorite chapter in the Bible!) And God got angry when he found out, too. Almost all displays of emotion are quizzical, since if he was omnipotent he should have known precisely what was going to happen, eons before it did! He could have devised a world where Jesus was unnecessary to kill, but he didn't! Poor planning, God.

Really its not poor planning, though. Its just poor writing and poor editing. But I'm not about to blame a handful of ancient sheep herders for their plot-making skills.

“Upholding the laws and punishing those who do not uphold them are two entirely different things. Perhaps this is what Maxo was talking about.”

Even if one of God's laws was to punish people for him?


Let me clarify on what I mean by Jesus having a meaningless death.

First let me offer an example of the language I mean that I hope you will agree with:
Let us say that the president of a company was engaged in a scandal which made the public furious. They demanded that he resign. After speaking with the Board of Directors, the president resigned and the public was happy. Then, three days later, the Board of Directors hired the ex-president back, as president again! The public was once again furious.

This is an example of a meaningless resignation: It happened, but it lacked any significance (which is the definition of 'meaningless' according to Webster's dictionary), since the Board just re-hired him after three days.


Now on to Jesus. Let us consider:

1. Jesus was the son of the Biblegod
2. Jesus was also a man
3. Because he was God, he was perfect and free of sin, as opposed to everyone else, who has been cursed with orginal sin
4. Jesus allowed himself to be crucified, so he could suffer all the sins of humanity
5. Jesus needed to die to nullify #4

That Jesus could be punished for our sins, allowing us to avoid being punished (thanks to Jesus we can go to heaven), is of dubious moral standing. No modern moral system allows someone else to be punished in place of another. It's an insult to modern justice and morality.

That God demanded human sacrifice at all is also against modern justice and morality.

But wait: was the death of Jesus even a sacrifice? Look at the story of the company president above again. In precisely the same way, the death of Jesus is meaningless. The significance of giving up your life is rather diminished when you are in fact not giving it up, but coming back to life three days later.

So Jesus didn't have a meaningful death: He had a bad weekend, faced death knowing he would return(!), came back to life, and then went into Eternal Paradise forevermore afterwards. That's not a sacrifice, that's a pretty sweet deal!

So what did he really give up? Whats the point of giving up your life if you don't stay dead? Ultimately, nothing was sacrificed.

At this point we have to wonder what the rationale is for the whole existence of Jesus. Did God really need to manifest himself so he could sacrifice himself, in order to satisfy himself so he could then forgive a problem that he created himself?

Why didn't omnipotent Biblegod just forgive mankind, instead of demanding the – meaningless as I have shown – human sacrifice of an innocent god-child? It is clear that by devising this plan, God was ready to forgive us anyway.

So you see? The whole Jesus plot line is just remarkably poor writing. Jesus' sacrificial death wasn't really a sacrifice, and it wasn't really death. The only thing meaningful that came out of the story was the Biblegod's apparent willingness to go against what we all consider to be morally right.

You say the death of jesus has significance to me. It does, in a way: I am writing my thesis on how morality is NOT derived from religion, and how in fact the Abrahamic religions largely present a moral black hole, though we as a culture generally do not try to observe them very hard and point out this fact. I intend to do just that.