JPH's Skeptic Tanking!
Scoping on JP Holding's cite today, and thought I might take his online quiz for Skeptics. This should be a tough one, since its actually meant for mentally retarded Skeptics:
Being that many Skeptical sites seem fond of obnoxious "questionnaires" for believers, we decided that it was high time to do one of our own. Nearly all of the "bogus" answers (that are not obviously for entertainment purposes only) represent the sort that I have seen come from a variety of Skeptics of varying levels, ranging from the Acharya S crowd to C. Dennis McKinsey to Dan Barker. For extra challenge try to figure out which camp each answer came from. I've also added links to essays (where applicable) that expound on the correct answers, in case you want to learn more, or in case any enterprising Skeptic thinks he has the ability to write a refutation. Have fun and grade yourself at the end.
You walk into the home of a friend in the Ancient Near East. He says, "You have extremely honored me by coming into my abode. I am not worthy of it. This house is yours; you may burn it if you wish. My children are also at your disposal; I would sacrifice them all for your pleasure." What do you do?
Burn down his house and kill his children, just like the man says.
Call the police and the mental hospital to pick up this obviously sick man.
Run screaming from the house.
Reply, "I am unworthy of your honor and of being a guest in your home." Eh but of course :).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to know something about the social world of the New Testament. Who should you ask?
No one, because you don't plan on listening to what anyone has to say anyway.
Farrell Till Oh, lets just go straight to the Infidels! Real bright.:~)
One of your Skeptical friends who once attended a speech by Marcus Borg, and even helped set up his sound equipment
Bruce Malina or Richard Rohrbaugh Yeah, I think this is the right one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is evidence that the pagan deity Mithra was thought to have been crucified and resurrected, but the evidence dates around 400 AD. What does this mean?
Obviously, Mithra was an influence on the story of Jesus, and the Christians destroyed or tampered with all the evidence showing this.
You have to find a liberal professor of history who will date the evidence earlier. i.e. my History Professor Dr. Sellars (firm supporter of Israel Finkelstein and Bart "Erdman") :)
Christians must have been actually followers of Mithra at one time.
Mithraism was influenced by Christianity, if anything. Peter Kirby almost got this one right :).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke 14:26 has Jesus saying we should hate our family. What is the meaning of this?
That's obvious. We're supposed to hate our family. Any other interpretation is an excuse for what the text plainly says. Maybe if I was a Muslim.
We're supposed to hate our family, but love God. That's kind of masochistic.
It's God's 'freebie' because it is the only commandment that I can keep.
It's extremist language typical of ancient writers like Poimanes, who said: "If you do not hate your body first, O child, you will not be able to love yourself." In other words, it's hyperbole. YUPPERS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why did God order the Amalekites exterminated?
Because if left to exist, the Amalekites would later provide scientists with genetic evidence of the 'missing link.' AHHHHH an Emo Evo would love this answer :).
Because Israel wanted their land (called "Amalekiteland"). "God" was just a sick excuse to take it. If I had a mental disorder, I'd chose this one.
Because God is a vengeful and spiteful idiot.
Because the Amalekites were ruthless warriors and had a long and violent history of aggression against early Israel (and other nations as well), raiding, plundering, and kidnapping them for slave trade. YES!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What sort of religious practices did the Canaanites engage in for hundreds of years?
They didn't need to practice because they were already good enough.
It doesn't matter. Their religion was as good as anyone else's. (DERRR!)
They went to church, right? Ignorance exposed.
Orgiastic rites, incest, bestiality, and child sacrifices. yeah, all that bad stuff. Steve Angel (Super Scholar) of course taught my Young Adult group this one (well-equipped).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew 2:15 cites Jesus fulfilling a verse in Hosea in his trip to Egypt. But Hosea was talking about Israel. What's up?
Hosea mistakenly called Israel God's son when he really should have said God's daughter Israel. Right, or his far off relative Israel Finkelstein. Of course.
Matthew obviously used the text dishonestly. Who could ever trust a tax collector anyways right?
Matthew was using Hosea carelessly.
Matthew was using a typical Jewish exegetical procedure. Ya think ;).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to Gen. 30-31, what was the actual cause of Jacob's goats being striped or spotted?
Oil paint.
Sympathetic magic. (the liberal cure for everything, right? Life is but a dream.)
Stock market trends.
Direct divine intervention as a means of countering Laban's trickery against Jacob.
Thats the one :).--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OT law has a rule about having barriers around your roof. Why?
It was to prevent injury to would-be, sue-happy robbers.
Because it's just some stupid rule they thought up.
It was to make money for the priests, who had a roofing business on the side.
It was because ancient people went out on their roof for work and recreation; the barrier was like a balcony railing. right again :).--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Matt. 6:19-34 Jesus talks about not storing up treasures on earth. This means:
Nothing, because Jesus didn't exist. (Ya hear that Dr. Sellars?)
Jesus irresponsibly encouraged us not to save for our retirement.
Benny Hinn is in big trouble.
Jesus was giving his contemporaries the same advice as other sages of the time, which was the only sensible alternative in an era prior to mutual funds and safe deposit boxes, and when the average lifespan was 35. YES!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you think of Luke 6:29-30? ("Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.")
I think it means I'm gonna find me a Christian and take all his money.
I think it's a little unreasonable.
I think passages like this make Benny Hinn very joyful.
I think it makes sense in a time when there were no police to administer justice for the average person and the only recourse would have initiated a cycle of violence. sure why not?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lev. 11:19 says that the bat is a bird. This means:
The Bible is clearly in error. A bat is a mammal. Go on Panda's Thumb!
Bats are actually birds, or secretly want to be.
Jesus didn't exist. (
Translators have unwittingly anachronized by imposing a category of distinction upon the text that didn't exist at the time. There we go.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What was a primary source for language and concepts describing the doctrine of the Trinity?
Pagan religions.
Overactive imaginations. (Or the Greeks did it, right Dr. S?)
The Nicene Creed.
Pre-NT Jewish Wisdom traditions. Yes again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1999, a Biblical scholar wrote a paper for a peer-reviewed scholarly journal of Biblical studies in which he argued for a new and better understanding of a certain Hebrew word. How should we react?
Ignore it, because it is obviously impossible that anyone could have new linguistic insights into an ancient language. (oh....wow, and we can't know the object in itself right?)
Ignore it, because the 1611 KJV says what the word means, and that's good enough for me.
Check to see if the author teaches at a fundamentalist Bible college. Yeah thats relevant
Attempt to find contrary evidence if we can. YES!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does Proverbs 26:4-5 tell us?
The writer was suffering from bipolar disorder (Or maybe he had Anti-Social Disorder like I did, right Dr. Sellars? Any Christian has to have!)
The writer was a mean-spirited person who called people fools
Proverbs was written by at least three sources: the Mind Your Own Business source, the Loud and Obnoxious source, and a later redactor, all dating to at least to after the Council at Carthage.
The passage is describing a dilemma, not two absolutes. Yes again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Bible, how big are stars?
It depends on the size of their egos.
About 2 foot by 4 foot.
They're tiny objects that could easily fall onto the ground of Earth.
Some of them are tiny objects that could fall to Earth, because the ancients also used the word for "stars" to refer to meteorites, but the Bible doesn't offer a detailed cosmology otherwise that shows it to be in error (though it does use non-literal, poetic imagery and language at times). Yes!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Bible, when was Jesus born?
He wasn't. He didn't exist. (I'm just hearing those bells ringing again Dr. S).
0 A. D.
6 or 7 A. D.
8-4 B. C. (Of course, Josephus wouldn't steer us wrong now would he?)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One Gospel says that Heli was Joseph's father. The other says Jacob. What's the deal?
Obviously, these people can't keep simple facts straight.
It's like one of those "Heather has Two Mommies" things.
His Dad's name was "Jacob Heli Smith."
They are from different sides of the family and both are legimately used in accord with the proper ancient use of genealogies and other relevant social factors. yup
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You find a Hebrew manuscript showing a discrepancy in the number of horse stalls Solomon had between the Kings and Chronicles accounts. The obvious conclusion is:
Christianity has been thoroughly refuted. In fact, Jesus did not exist. (Dr. Sellout rises again)
This only proves Solomon did not exist.
This proves writers were beefing up Solomon's accomplishments, since having so many horse stalls shows what a great king he was and they were trying to make him look better by adding a zero.
There was a minor scribal error, in which the evidence suggests an extra zero was added. This does not affect critical doctrines. YES!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What shape is the Earth, according to the Bible?
Flat as a pancake. Hey Glenny boy! (Glenn Morton of course). Wasn't that Earth flat in Zion Illinois too?
Square as Farrell Till.
Hexagonal as the Pentagon.
The Bible's language is equivocal and non-specific about such things, as we would expect. yup. it wasn't a Science textbook, geeez!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A hypothetical group of self-styled scholars forms a seminar of sorts and, beginning with the assumption that Jesus could not have said anything eschatological in nature, uses colored beads to sift through the gospels and declare which passages are probably not the actual words of Jesus. In the end, they are left with a thoroughly non-eschatological Jesus. They are:
Gods whose word is not to be doubted under any circumstances. (Dr. Sell"out"'s friends!)
Brilliant, mainstream scholars who dispassionately and objectively glean the truth of the Bible. (Kelli, help me out with this one would ya?!)
A brave, minority voice for rational tolerance in our modern era, making contributions to the quest of finding the historical Jesus.
Probably still in kindergarten. yes!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Bible, how are we saved?
In little plastic baggies.
Faith alone. (Right, its all in our hearts).
Works. Yeah
A real faith that produces works, expressed in line with the Semitic Totality Concept. Hmmm, right on (I need to go back and review that one JP).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christmas celebrations include trees. Which of the following is true?
Jesus was crucified on a Christmas tree, just like Odin and Krishna.
Christmas is a thoroughly pagan holiday, proving that Christianity copied all of its ideas from a pagan religion. DERRRRRRRREEEEE!
Jeremiah prophesied about the use of the trees, proving it was written long after Constantine. Are you sure Constantine didn't issue the writing of this extra canonical writing as well?
This is completely irrelevant to any discussion of Christian beliefs. of course. Where do we care about Christmas trees anyways?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enuma Elish provides a creation account of Apsu and Tiamat giving birth to Anshar and Kishar, who bears Anu, who bears Ea, but Ea kills Apsu, Marduk is born, Tiamat takes Kingu as husband, Ea loses to Tiamat, as does Anu, and Marduk cuts Tiamat's body in half, forming the sky and earth. Which of the following is true?
Obviously, the entire Genesis account is copied from it.
In fact, the name Marduk spelled sideways in some ancient language is Yahweh.
Indeed, there is no way anyone could have written a creation story without copying it from somewhere.
Genesis is nothing like this story and may have even been written to counter the false notions of its contemporary pagan creation myths. I would hope so!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hume noted that a savage who had never seen ice would be rational not to believe its existence. Which conclusion is true?
Relativism is absolute truth. WHOA! That hurt my head.
Empirical truth always leads to proper conclusions. Except....when it doesn't.
Experience is a great teacher. Uhh....when its self interpreted (which its not)?
Maybe we should reevaluate his definition of "rational". Yeah...kinda. Whats rational about Hume anyways?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christians must all be wrong because they cannot agree on something like the procedures for and recipients of baptism. Applying this same standard, which conclusion is produced?
Fish cannot exist because we cannot decide whether to use English or Latin names for them.
The weather does not exist because we cannot agree on accurate prediction of it.
Chocolate cake does not exist because no one can agree on how many cups of flour to use.
Evolution cannot be right because scientists do not agree on the mechanism for natural selection and ancestry of various species. Yes!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Corinthians 7:1 says it is good for a man not to touch a woman. This means:
Paul did approve of men touching other men.
We should stone men who accidentally touch women.
As they say in kindergarten, "Keep your hands to yourself."
It is a figure of speech for sexual intercourse. okay
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Samuel 20:41 says, "And as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of a place toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times; and they (i.e., Jonathan and David) kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded..." This means:
David and Jonathan were gay lovers. In Hollywood perhaps.
David and Jonathan were talking about the latest episode of The Young and the Restless.
David and Jonathan were weirdos who cried in public.
David and Jonathan were expressing the sort of intense emotion typical of Easterners even today. hmmm sure why not.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A man on the street is running around with a sign that says, "JESUS IS COMING! YOU WILL BURN!" The obvious conclusion is that:
All Christians run around with signs that say, "JESUS IS COMING! YOU WILL BURN!" Yeah, I do this all the time! Of course
Some law in the Bible requires people to type with all capital letters.
If Jesus does not come in the next 5 minutes, Christianity must be false.
One should stay a few hundred feet away from this individual, whose eschatology is not particularly sophisticated anyway. hmmm, well JPH, I kinda gotta agree with you on this one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A skeptic remarks on the intellectual bankruptcy of religions and is applauded for his rationalism. A Christian remarks on the intellectual bankruptcy of skepticism and is:
Mentally ill.
A judgmental, intolerant, hateful fanatic.
Resorting to ad hominem attacks.
Contending for rational faith. YES!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In one place Jesus says the disciples can take a staff (Mark 6:8); elsewhere he says they can't (Matt. 10:10, Luke 9:1-6). The obvious conclusion:
These people can't even keep something this simple straight.
Staves were out of fashion when Matt and Luke wrote.
Someone had stolen all of the Christians' staves at Mark's time.
We need to look more closely at the linguistic data. okay.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Christian tells you that willful sin is open rebellion that will lead to eternal damnation unless you repent. Your response is:
"Good. I plan on breaking each one of the Ten Commandments."
"Phooey! Sin is an artificial construct created by authority figures to keep the masses in line."
"Why can't God just forgive sin?"
"Well, that makes sense, because any sin is infinitely evil before an infinitely holy and just God, though at least the punishment will be according to deeds done in life." yup.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A spacecraft, clearly not from earth, is found on the moon. Some claim that it must have been designed by aliens. You respond by saying:
"That is not a scientific explanation, since there is no scientific evidence that aliens exist. That aliens exist is just some people's unverifiable belief. Science cannot comment on what is not verifiable."
"If we accept that aliens exist, then any unexplained phenomenon can be attributed to aliens and scientific progress will stop. It will literally be alien-of-the-gaps."
"Aliens are just something you imagine as a psychological crutch."
"Only aliens could have designed this, so obviously aliens exist." I suppose so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is a 'straw man'?
A good accusation to make when you become confused during a debate.
A farmer who sells it.
A man without a brain.
Something frequently burned by Skeptics. Ching!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How much of a skeptic are you? When you suddenly smell smoke, you...
Doubt that there is a fire, and to avoid dealing with the conclusion that there is one, hypothesize that you suddenly have a rare disease.
Tell the fireman who informs you that your house is on fire, "Yeah, right," and return to your TV program.
Accuse the fireman of threatening you with the fire because he told you that you will burn unless you vacate.
Assume that your wife is done cooking dinner. (Our special thanks to the woman who contributed this answer. ) not married yet, but hey...sure!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you consider sufficient proof of evolution?
It's so obvious that some animals look like other animals. That's all the proof I need.
All the scientists say that's what happened and I doubt that they could be wrong about such a thing.
The fossil record.
A fast forward videotape of Australopithecus evolving into my next-door neighbor. (Hey, thats really giving the benefit of the doubt there :))
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you consider sufficient proof of Christ's resurrection?
No amount of evidence would be sufficient because everyone knows that dead people never come back to life. (sadly my dad said this).
A videotape that recorded the event.
All the Christians believe in it and I doubt that many people could be wrong about such a thing.
The gospel accounts, which were written within the lifespan of those who would easily be able to dispute such an extraordinary claim and which would have been seriously challenged in the social world of the NT, had it not occurred. yes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Numbers 31, Moses ordered his army officers to kill all of the male children, kill all of the nonvirgin females, but to save alive all of the virgin girls for his troops. This means:
Moses was a perverted sicko, and so is God, and so are you for believing this stuff.
Israel was letting little girls join the army.
The Israelites needed someone to cook dinner for them after 40 years of manna.
The Israelites were mercifully absorbing these young girls into their population. yes!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You live in a world with multitudes of vastly different belief systems with many different kinds of beliefs within those systems, one of which happens to be evangelical Christianity. What does this mean?
Atheism, by its rational existence, automatically renders all other worldviews false and irrational.
We should throw our hands up in the air and say, Why bother? We'll never know what is really true and what isn't.
It is only truth if you can feel it. (Argh, I heard this one a few months ago...silly Existential Christians)
We should systematically investigate the claims of each worldview, from the monotheistic religions to atheism to eastern religions and others, and deduce from the evidence which belief system is most logical and has the "ring of truth" to it.
I concur--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since there is no classical historian at all that believes Jesus Christ was a myth, which of the following is true?
Skeptic philosophers and professors of German are more qualified to comment on history than those who have spent almost a decade learning history and the methodology of assessing historical claims
Degrees in historical studies must be written on toilet paper
Christmas trees prove that Christianity is a pagan mythology!
This is a valid appeal to authority, so they are probably right that there was a historical Jesus yup.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hume taught that anything that it is irrational to believe in something that doesn't conform to personal experience. Your reaction should be:
Preach on, brutha Hume!
Hume is a god!
I certainly can't disagree with that
The "uniform experience" Hume decided on was based on circular reasoning, since in order to establish it, he had to assume a priori that miracle eyewitness testimonies where false. YES!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You find that, so far, Theoretical Physicists are unable to reconcile Quantum Physics and Relativity. What do you do?
You decide all science is bogus, and join a New Age, pantheistic cult.
You decide that science is really only a social construct designed to keep straight, white, European males in power as an excuse to oppress everyone else. uhhh okay sure :).
Look for an essay by Isaac Asimov on the subject
You decide that more research by scientists will eventually find the deeper truths underlying both theories. sure..okay!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You wish to refute material on this site or in the links above. What is the proper course of action?
Quote this site's mission statement. That proves everything on it is worthless.
Note that this site solicits financial support. That proves everything on it is worthless.
Get a bunch of your grumpy Skeptical friends together to create counter-parodies of this quiz, and ignore the other approximately 1,000 items on this site as much as you can.
All of the above, because you can't refute actually refute any of it. In the words of George Bush Sr....."Not gonna do it, not gonna do it!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scoring: Award yourself 1 point for each A answer, 2 points for each B answer, 3 points for each C answer, and 10 points for each D answer.
Grade:
43-90 points: Not bad, if you're trying to earn membership in the Ku Klux Klan.
91-170 points: You used a cheat sheet on a few, didn't you? Maybe you Christmas-treed it?
171-230 points:: Well, there's some hope for you. Get your nose out of that Robert Miller stuff and try a little Ben Witherington.
231-330 points: Now THAT is an open mind. Good show!
331-430 points: You're way too intelligent to be a Skeptic. Consider converting.
http://tektonics.org/parody/whowants.html
posted by Casey Powell @ 7:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home