data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/40a02/40a022a13624af658d74fbd03e3992487d682d6b" alt=""
Jiekai was responsible for this.
Addendum: Part 1, Part 2. I have also re-uploaded the images to imageshack since the original versions were lost when their server went down years ago
Page 12 - Silly flowchart, irrelevant evangelism
How silly; it has many glaring omissions. Here is my own flowchart:
As you will note, it's much more comprehensive than the one above, less colourful though it might be.
As John Beversluis comments on CS Lewis: “One of Lewis’s most serious weaknesses as an apologist is his fondness for the false dilemma. He habitually confronts his readers with the alleged necessity of choosing between two alternatives when there are in fact other options to be considered. One horn of the dilemma typically sets forth Lewis’s view in all its apparent forcefulness, while the other horn is a ridiculous straw man. Either the universe is the product of a conscious Mind or it is a mere “fluke” (MC. 31). Either morality is a revelation or it is an inexplicable illusion (PP, 22). Either morality is grounded in the supernatural or it is a “mere twist” in the human mind (PP, 20). Either right and wrong are real or they are “mere irrational emotions” (CR, 66). Lewis advances these arguments again and again, and they are all open to the same objection.”
And then on the right is a strong suggestion to pray a prayer - wth?! This is almost entirely irrelevant to the stated purpose of the pamphlet.
The afterword claims that the pamphlet has put Jesus on trial. What it doesn't say is that this trial has been in a kangaroo court, with the assumption (not only the presumption) of innocence and without any cross-examining or counter-arguments by the prosecution at all. As a piece of critical writing, I would give it 1/10, and hope never to get any of the people behind the pamphlet defending me in a court of law (though I would certainly welcome their presence on the other side of the courtroom).
Certainly, as they hoped I have enjoyed browsing the magazine in that I've been able to tear their so-called arguments to shreds with nary an effort. After all the FUD put out by the CCC, I really hope that readers have been able to find some real answers as they sort through the lies and half-truths contained in this pamphlet.
Page 14 - Pamphlet tie-ins and contest
This page promotes many apologetic publications to the reader, with no mention of any opposing or contrary views. Fie, fie. There is also a contest where those who send in their feedback to beneath_that_smile@yahoo.com.sg stand a chance to win an iPod Shuffle. I am almost tempted to send them my blog posts about this shitty pamphlet, but the iPod Shuffle sucks anyway, so.
Inspired by the pamphlet, here I present my review of "The Da Vinci Code (Companion Guide)" by the Campus Crusade for Christ
In A Nutshell
The companion guide is not produced by the people behind the Da Vinci Code but instead by the fundamentalist Christian group "Campus Crusade for Christ". It aims not to enlighten you about the truth behind "The Da Vinci Code" but to convert you to their strain of Christianity by presenting you with lies and half-truths without any counterarguments at all, ending with an appeal to emotion - not what you were promised on the cover.
What's Hot
This pamphlet is excellently marketed, presenting an example of the classic bait and switch strategem. Its distribution also attests to the power of using unpaid volunteers to spread your wares.
What's Not
Just like "the Da Vinci Code", this probably contains only one true line.
Our Say
The money used to make this pamphlet should've been used to feed starving children in Africa. Or at the very least they could've made a more convincing case less likely to piss off thinking people with half a brain.
Vital statistics
Gloss and polish: 5/5
Tie-ins with other apologetic literature: 5/5
Historical accuracy: 1/5
Disingenuousness: 1/5
Contribution to the littering problem in NUS: 5/5
Quiz!
In this era seeing the resurgence of Christian fundamentalism,
are you a fundamentalist Christian or a truth-seeker? How does the
notion of 'biblical inerrancy' figure in the last 2 centuries? We dare
you to take this test to find out!
1. How old is the earth?
a) Less than 10,000 years old, despite all scientific evidence to the contrary
b) 4.5 billion years old
2. Is the bible inerrant?
a) Yes, even when it contradicts itself it must be because we have cataracts floating in our eyes.
b) No, some parts clearly contradict each other.
3. What do you think of Catholics?
a) They worship Mary! They're the spawn of Satan! The Pope is the Anti-Christ!
b) Just another Christian denomination.
4.
Is there a possibility, however slight, that St Paul suffered from
Temporal Lobe Epilepsy given that his description of his conversion fits
the symptoms of the disease?
a) No! You will burn in hell for this!
b) Yes.
5. Can the massacre of the Midianites in Numbers 31 ever be justified?
a) God can never be questioned, even when he causes more suffering than Satan!
b) This raises troubling questions that we must at least consider.
6. Can women become priests/pastors?
a) Yes
b) I don't know/care
c) No
Wonder what the results will show? Here goes! Are we describing you right?
Mostly As
You are a Fundamentalist who believes that the bible is inerrant and that when your or your denomination's interpretation conflicts with reality, our perception of reality is flawed. If the bible told you to commit genocide, you would.
Mostly Bs
Congratulations! You are not a fundamentalist. We can't say anything else about you though, since this is a stupid quiz fundamentally flawed in its format.
One C
You're Catholic! Every sperm is sacred.
-End of Part 3 and the whole review-
Moral of the story: Just because Agagooga is not in Singapore doesn't mean that fundies can spread their trash freely.
A repackaged version of BibleTrash.zip with truncated and resized scans of the pamphlet and my flowchart is available for downloading:
YouSendIt link - expires within 7 days/25 downloads
MegaUpload link - expires after a long time of inactivity
Addendum: Neither of these works anymore, obviously.
Addendum: Part 1, Part 3. I have also re-uploaded the images to imageshack since the original versions were lost when their server went down years ago
"The Bible was written by more than 40 different authors, and across a period of 1,600 years. Yet amidst the diversity of authorship, there emerged a single unified story - the salvation plan of God for a sinful humanity."
This is patently false. A small catalogue of Fatal Biblical Flaws will swiftly put paid to the CCC's groundless assertion, and the same author also provides a list of Biblical Inconsistencies. Besides which, most of the Old Testament is irrelevant regarding "the salvation plan of God for a sinful humanity."
And then near the bottom of the page, we see an example of a circular argument: "Therefore, only because God inspired the OT and NT writers, as 2 Timothy 3:16 proclaims "All Scripture is God-breathed...", the Bible that we have today is not only a historically accurate work, but it is a divinely inspired account"
Frankly, I was expecting to see this earlier in the pamphlet, and in much greater quantity. Some small modicum of credit can be given to the writers of the pamphlet from not, as they are wont to doing, using the bible to prove the bible all the time.
There is also a quote from Simon Greenleaf about "the NT documents": "You may choose to say I do not believe it all, but you may not say there is not enough evidence." Not having access to the quote in context I cannot comment about what he was referring to, and if he was justified in his assertion, but one might note that this quote is from the mid-19th century or earlier, and if he studied the documents today he might come to a different conclusion.
No complaints except for:
"BTS: Was there really a debate over the deity of Christ?
Mr Josh McDowell: ... No one believed or debated if he was merely a man or prophet."
This part is not quite correct. In reality, some of the earliest followers of Jesus did believe that he was merely a man. For example, the Ebionites and Carpocratians denied his divinity.
The footnotes on the page describe Josh McDowell as "a former skeptic who believed that Christianity was a hoax and went on a personal search to discredit the church and Christianity. Yet in the process of hundreds of hours of research, his doubts turned to faith in Christ." I have not read an account (preferably by him) of his religiou journey, but I'm willing to bet that it was like that of the other famous so-called skeptic turned believer - Lee Strobel (ie An act of Intellectual Suicide, probably motivated by some other extraneous factor).
Page 7 - This page deals with 2 of the "3 Most-Misguided-Theories"
1. Mrs Jesus: "Dan Brown's dubious 'sources': The Nag Hammadi texts (Which contain the Gnostic Gospels) an unreliable source: Written neither by apostles, nor by companions of the apostles, the Gnostic Gospels were written under a pseudonym - that is, the author used the names of the apostles just to gain credibility."
Odd, considering that this describes at the very very least 3 out of 4 of the canonical gospels as well! Matthew, Mark and Luke are just names traditionally given to those gospels, not an indication of authorship.
2. The 'Secret Gospels': "Why are Gnostic Gospels not included in today's Bible? Only books and letters that were associated with an apostle or associate were considered acceptable into the New Testament Cannon"
Besides the point above about authenticity, there is also the question of which apostles or associates were considered reliable, and it basically boils down to Church politics, internecine factional warring and such rather than any objective measure of authenticity or veracity.
Page 8 - This page deals with the last of the "3 Most-Misguided-Theories" and has a sidebar about Leonardo da Vinci, the Knights Templar and the Priory of Sion. I have no comments about this page.
Page 9 - A quiz about if you're a Relativist, Skeptic or Truth-seeker. Given that this is a shameless ripoff of brainless female magazine quizzes that don't tell you anything, I can't say that they could've done much else with this format.
Page 10 - Setting up the False Trichotomy
"No man in history has ever claimed to be God, much less a God who died for mankind."
Only a very specific and strict interpretation of this statement would render it technically correct. The god Osiris came down to earth in Corporeal form and after his death and resurrection, delivered salvation. Dionysius was born of Zeus and a mortal woman, and his cult gave out wine which brought "humans into communion with the divine realm". This is to say nothing of the various gods in mythologies all over the world who came down to earth in corporeal form. POCM lovingly documents various other permutations in other mythologies of divine-mortal blending.
The false trichotomy will be dealt with when the silly flowchart appears (wait for it!).
Page 11 - Straw man arguments, which will be addressed later
-End of Part 2-
Addendum: Part 2, Part 3. I have also re-uploaded the images to imageshack since the original versions were lost when their server went down years ago
My ever-resourceful and hardworking Little Bird scanned in the contents of a CCC (Campus Crusade for Christ) pamphlet targetted at Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" for me, zipped into an appropriately titled "BibleTrash.zip".
Now, I am no fan of Dan Brown, since his allegedly well-researched book is full of rubbish. As I often say, there is only one true line in "The Da Vinci Code" ("The Bible did not come by fax from heaven"). Yet, 2 wrongs do not make a right, and this pamphlet is annoying. And so I present what is probably an exclusive feature: not only scans of the pamphlet but a walkthrough the specious arguments contained inside.
Cover - "A companion guide to the movie or novel!"
The cover of the pamphlet looks innocent enough. It is glitzy and official-looking, complete with the barcode at the bottom left hand corner of the magazine. In fact, one would be led to believe that it is an official piece of "Da Vinci Code" merchandise; I believe the customary practise is to say that you are writing a "totally unauthorised guide" - Dan Brown should sue the CCC for copyright infringement. The Mona Lisa's enigmatic smile hardly prepares one for the horrors inside, yet a hint of it can be found in the promise of an interview with a skeptic-turned-believer (no word about believers-turned-skeptics).
As is the case with much evangelical-fundamentalist material, the cover of the pamphlet is innocent, only truly revealing its contents when one flips it open - a pamphlet they gave out about the Tsunami was similiarly deceptive, and IIRC contained numerous back-handed insults to the memory of Tsunami victims.
When one opens the pamphlet, one's baloney detectors start to go off. Looking at the content area on the right, one sees 2 forewords written by Reverends from Christian groups, purporting to present information to help readers realise "the Truth". Now that in itself is not sufficient to disqualify the pamphlet, but it is an important clue - one wouldn't expect a publication of the Flat Earth Society to conclude that the earth is round. Further, since the pamphlet promises not to toss logic out of the window, we can turn on our scrutiny-lamps to full power.
One also sees that the good ole "Lord, Liar, Lunatic" false trilemma makes an appearance. Really, you'd think that 35 years after CS Lewis's Mere Bullshit Christianity, they'd get their logical fallacies sorted out.
Page 2 - "novel & movie review"
No comments, other than the very suspicious rating system - giving the movie an eye-boggling 5/5 stars for "Suspense" and "Entertainment", but 1/5 for "Historical Reliability" and "Accuracy of purported facts". Given that the movie is slated for a May 19th release, one wonders what privileges fundamentalist Christians are privy to that ordinary mortals aren't. There is also a curious complexity worthy of a close reading: as the "movie" review itself reads, "Dan Brown makes it clear to all that 'The Da Vinci Code' is "just fiction"." If this is the case, the "purported facts" would not have to be graded - I'm guessing that they mean that Dan Brown admits that his story is made-up, but his so-called facts are false. This smacks of shoddy writing.
This page comments that the Da Vinci Code and Bible both "purport to tell the truth about the life of the historical Jesus (we just can't escape his influence, can we?)". The little comment at the end irks me, so I'll just add that we can't escape the influence of Adolf Hitler and the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse either. At least, as a friend points out, we should be grateful that the "h" in "his" is not capitalised.
This page also makes the point that in Borders, one can find "The Da Vinci Code" in the "Fiction" section. It might interest readers to know that in the Library of Congress Classification System, one can find the Bible in the "BS" section.
Since bestsellers are going up against each other, they might like to compare the Bible to the next best-selling book of all time - Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung (aka The Little Red Book). The 2 have more in common than one might think:
"If they [the Kuomintang] fight, we will wipe them out completely. This is the way things are: if they attack and we wipe them out, they will have that satisfaction; wipe out some, some satisfaction; wipe out more, more satisfaction; wipe out the whole lot, complete satisfaction." - "On the Chungking Negotiations" (October 17, 1945), Selected Works, Vol. IV, p. 56.
"And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males. And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword. And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire." - Numbers 31:7-10
Page 4. On this page, it starts to get dirty.
For one, we are told that "The Bible is written by more than 40 different authors - Moses". Wait a minute. Moses? This is really strange, considering that although in the biblical tradition Moses wrote the first 5 books of the bible (the Pentateuch), he actually writes about events occuring *after* his death. Indeed, the lack of consistency, jumps in tone in 2 sets of narratives for many events have led mainstream biblical scholars to conclude that 5 people, codenamed J, E, D, P and R, were responsible for writing and compiling the Pentateuch.
The next part of the page ("Fact #1") claims that since so many copies exist of the old and new testaments, they must be reliable. Yet, this is like saying that since the Blaster worm affected 8 million PCs worldwide, it must be a good program. Just because many copies of a document exist does not mean that it is reliable; one can merely compare the copies for copying errors - if the originals from which the copies were made were suspect in the first place, no number of copies would redeem the veracity of the original documents. There is also the question of when the copies date from - if 13,000 copies exist, but 1 dates from 100AD while 12,999 come from the 12th century or later, the numbers don't mean anything.
"Fact #2" is that a short time elapsed between the publication of the original and the date of the earliest surviving manuscripts. Again, as with "Fact #1" the significance of this would depend on the veracity of the original in the first place. The conclusion is that "Most historians accept the textual accuracy of other ancient works on far less adequate grounds than that of the Bible's".
Not so fast. First, we must examine the cute table drawn up below:
"Livy - History of Rome"
Historians accept this text as genuine, yet they do not accept its contents at face value, contrary to the approach in some other fields. Corroborating evidence in terms of archaeology and other documentary evidenc is sought, and no one takes his word about "the kindness of the gods". Indeed, in studies of the text, a critical eye is cast upon Livy's bias and point of view as a Roman citizen, and the possibility that he could have romanticised Roman history.
"Caesar - Gallic Wars"
One must note that coins struck in Caesar's likeness exist. We also can find remnants of his fortifications at Alesia, which correspond to Caesar's descriptions. On the other hand, we have six heads of John the Baptist.
"Homer - Illiad"
The people who wrote this must be joking. Like some other entries in the table, the Illiad is clearly a work of mythology relating how petty, vengeful, imperfect and very human gods interfere in human affairs; a work traditionally ascribed to an individual and yet was written by multiple authors over a long period of time.
One might also consider that more than 20 million copies of L Ron Hubbard's "Dianetics" have been sold worldwide, and that the earliest extant copy likely dates from the year it was published.
It must also be borne in mind that writers of ancient documents frequently invented dialogues for their characters that they'd have no way of being privy to, like Thucydides in "The Peloponnesian War" (despite his otherwise stellar record as a historian). This is curiously reminiscent of someone writing about events occuring after his death.
-End of Part 1-
Parts 2 and 3 will be up in due course.
I like to think of myself as a Renaissance Man, who champions the values of the Enlightenment and aspires to the Cardinal Virtues of Prudence, Temperance, Justice and Fortitude.
I am also a student of the Misery of the Human Condition.
"君子报仇,十年不晚"
[more]
![]()
|
(or send mail to gabrielseah[AT]hotmail[DOT]com - your ability to interpret this will be a test that you're not a spambot)
Use my Feedback Form
Sign / View the Guestbook
This space is currently empty