I used to think that Al Gore was the biggest hypocrite in the world as he flew around in his private jet, and the inconvenient truth that he bought an $8.875 million dollar oceanfront property, after scaring the sellers into believing the oceans are about to rise and drown everyone on the coast.
For Al to really believe his own nonsense, he’d have to understand geography about as well as Congressman Hank Johnson, who once thought the addition of eight thousand Marines to the island of Guam might cause the entire island to capsize.
Surely Al didn’t think the oceans would rise twenty feet on the east coast while sea level remained the same on the west coast. He couldn’t possibly be that dumb, could he?
Remember, for eight years Gore was only a heartbeat (or impeachment conviction) away from becoming the 43rd President of the United States.
Personally, I think famous hoaxer P. T. Barnum would have been proud to call Al his son, I think, because it would be absolutely stupid to pay millions of dollars for oceanfront property if you really think it will be underwater in a few years. Nobody that stupid has millions of dollars for very long.
But I think Al has nothing on Hector Avalos, an atheist college professor with some really big cohones.
Avalos is (allegedly) a professor of religious studies at Iowa State University. The need for qualifying his professional title should become quite obvious, by the very next sentence.
Almost eight years ago Hector Avalos wrote a book called The End of Religious Studies.
Yet Avalos continues to draw a hefty paycheck from Iowa State for where to buy Pregabalin teaching ‘religious studies.’ What irony! Now is this a great country, or what?
On the other hand…if that isn’t hypocrisy, what is?
His most recent published book isn’t available though Barnes and Noble, Smashwords, or Amazon. It seems to be exclusively offered through the publisher’s web page, apparently considered an academic work intended for young skulls full of mush. Nothing else could explain to me what would make this “scholarly” book worth a whopping $95 for the hardcover copy of The Bad Jesus. (even $35 just for the paperback?)
Avalos has a long history of cherry-picking verses from the Bible and weaponizing them against Christians as it suits his purposes — for example, to justify his support for gay marriage and suggest the Bible condoned polygamy.
I’m struggling to wrap my mind around this glaring contradiction. Why has this man kept his job? And why does he even want it, considering he’s the guy arguing for evolution theory in a debate about creationism? Does he need the easy paycheck that bad?
Unless I am misunderstanding something, as many as eight long years ago, Hector Avalos wrote a book effectively arguing that he shouldn’t have his job — that his job shouldn’t exist. I believe him, and wholeheartedly agree that taking his course would be useless.
Therefore Professor Avalos should resign. Immediately.
There isn’t a nice way of putting it — a guy who’s an atheist taking a paycheck to teach religious studies (that he has admitted he doesn’t believe is worthwhile) is committing academic fraud.
Avalos might know something about the Bible, but he obviously knows nothing at all about God.
I almost pity the charlatan.
Mr. Leonard,
This is a most humorous post, and I hope it was meant that way. After all, “the biggest hypocrite in the world” seems just a bit hyperbolic, given the number of other much more famous figures one could name (e.g., Josh Duggar and his parents, Jimmy Swaggart, Bristol Palin, Jim Bakker, Dinesh D’Souza) who have made millions of dollars (I assure you my salary does not approach what they have made).
If you are serious, then it may be profitable for you to actually read The End of Biblical Studies, which argues for the end of biblical studies AS IT IS CURRENTLY PRACTICED, something that should be obvious to anyone who reads a book before pontificating about what it says.
“As it is currently practiced” refers to the fact that biblical studies is mostly still permeated by Christian apologetics, and aims to prove the historicity and ethical superiority of the Bible.
As it is, the title is a double-entendre. The word “end” refers to both a. termination, and/or b. “purpose” as in “the ends justify the means.”
See further: http://www.bibleinterp.com/opeds/termsal.shtml
and http://www.bibleinterp.com/opeds/wars357902.shtml
As for “religious studies,” you apparently also don’t understand what the academic study of religions entails. It is about describing what people say they believe and practice, and does not require that you believe or practice what you describe.
That is why both atheists and Christians can also teach about ancient Greek religions without having to believe in their tenets or practices.
May I ask:
Did you actually read The End of Biblical Studies prior to posting this thorough misrepresentation of that book?
If not, do you feel it is intellectually honest or even ethical to characterize something you have not read?
If you have not read the boo, then why not show you are not a hypocrite by issuing an apology for this lapse in the ethics of professional writing.
Mr. Avalos,
It’s true; I do have a pretty good sense of humor.
For example, I find it hilarious that you cite Bristol Palin as a hypocrite — what has she done lately?
If you were going to go political and attack a woman, why not Hillary Clinton, who wanted $275k to speak for less than an hour to speak at a charity? Or Chelsea, who took $60k from the same charity?
Then again, Jimmy Swaggert is ancient history and Jim Bakker’s been dead for more than ten years, and you needed to throw a couple of names out there that another reader might remember.
Apparently you couldn’t think of Joel Osteen (who I “affectionately” call the prosperity pimp), Rick Warren or Rob Bell — though you might like Bell, because he says you don’t have to worry about hell. As an atheist, I know you don’t worry about it too much as it is, but Bell will tell you hell doesn’t exist, because he thinks that’s what people like you want to hear. Or maybe it didn’t occur to you that I agree some people who call themselves “Christians” can be pretty serious hypocrites, but I’d probably go with the BTK killer as my “go to” example. What does that have to do with you?
If your quibble is that you aren’t as big a hypocrite as any of those guys I mentioned, I’d have to concede you’re probably no worse than Osteen or Bell. And that super sleaze ball…Robert Tilton, you’re probably not as bad as him, I think. Certainly, you’re no BTK killer.
Therefore, I’ll concede that in retrospect, given the examples I thought of, “world’s worst hypocrite” was a SLIGHT exaggeration. But you’ve got to be in the top 10.
However, I’m being completely serious when I say you have no business teaching classes about Christianity or the Bible if you believe, as your book suggests, that “The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the needs and concerns of contemporary human beings.”
Quite frankly, if you teach that about the Bible and Christianity in your classes, you shouldn’t be teaching about anything related to the Bible or Christianity.
You might be well educated, but you’re not as smart as you think.
Hello, Mr. Leonard,
The first thing I noticed is that you did not answer my simple questions:
1. Did you actually read The End of Biblical Studies prior to posting this thorough misrepresentation of that book?
2. If not, do you feel it is intellectually honest or even ethical to characterize something you have not read?
In case you have not heard. Ms. Palin is pregnant again, while being an advocate for abstinence. Her pregnancy was “planned,” which seems inconsistent with preaching abstinence. See: http://www.people.com/article/bristol-palin-pregnancy-planned I have no problem with calling Hillary Cllnton a hypocrite.
As for teaching the Bible while deeming it irrelevant, you again only demonstrate that reading The End of Biblical Studies would have been helpful.
For one, I show how the Bible is irrelevant even for most Christians who claim to be following it. This is based on repeated surveys that show most Christians either don’t read the Bible very often, or would fail a test on basic biblical knowledge.
Christopher Bader’s study showed that 21.9% of Mainline Christians and 33.1% of Catholics (the largest Christian denomination on earth) “NEVER” read the Bible.
As I also show that the parts that Christians do follow amount to a very small percentage of the Bible (and that includes evangelicals who have higher rates of reading the Bible). In effect, most self-described Christians treat most of the Bible as irrelevant.
See further, Christopher Bader, et al., American Piety in the 21st Century: New Insights into the Depth and Complexity of Religion in the U.S. (Waco, TX: Baylor University Institute for Studies of Religion, 2006), especially p. 14, table 2.
Similar concerns about biblical literacy are raised in The Last Christian Generation (2006) by Josh McDowell and David H. Bellis and in UnChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity…And Why it Matters (2007) by David Kinnaman.
My book is about how to make biblical studies relevant again, but that must have escaped your attention.
You may not like how I wish to make biblical studies relevant—-e.g., by educating people about the harm of using even the the small bits of the Bible that people still do find relevant as a moral authority today.
But it would not make a case for hypocrisy if I am trying to reverse an irrelevance that exists for biblical studies today. Indeed, your argument for hypocrisy fails because you have misunderstood what I mean by “irrelevant.”
In general, I also find your level of apologetics to be lazy and incompetent because you wish to speak on issues without having to do the actual relevant homework or research.
You certainly have no expertise in biblical studies (as your comments on the Bible show), and it is never “smart” to speak on issues on which one has no expertise. If I am wrong, then please answer the questions you conveniently avoided before:
1. Did you actually read The End of Biblical Studies prior to posting this thorough misrepresentation of that book?
2. If not, do you feel it is intellectually honest or even ethical to characterize something you have not read?
If I may add another:
3. Is it “smart” to speak about a book you have not read?
Please do give us a YES or NO on each of these.
RE: “His most recent published book isn’t available though Barnes and Noble, Smashwords, or Amazon. It seems to be exclusively offered through the publisher’s web page, apparently considered an academic work intended for young skulls full of mush.”
Again, you show how incompetent your research is. We have something called “Google,” and it is now possible to check a simple fact such as this.
The book is available on Amazon, and it was available on pre-order before it was published in April. It certainly was fully available on Amazon by the time you wrote this post.
See: http://www.amazon.com/The-Bad-Jesus-Ethics-Testament/dp/1909697796
Please answer this question:
How do you excuse such poor fact checking?
Wow…apparently I struck a nerve.
My “incompetent research” was exactly as you describe — this thing called “Google” took me right to the book with the other publisher, but the link on Amazon was not visible at the time I wrote the article, at least not in the first two pages of search results. While I freely admit that I don’t always put significant effort into research for a “free” blog article posted on my website, I will always put for the minimal effort required to do the job.
Thanks for the laugh…it was worth going to the Amazon page just to read the reviews by Dan Barker and John Loftus. I’ve written about Barker a couple of times in the past, and know who Loftus is, so the reviews didn’t persuade me to shell out $35 for a paperback.
Why aren’t your books in digital form? Every book/novel I’ve written is available in paperback and every ebook format, because those are most cost effective for readers. Given that your “readers” are largely captive audience (students) that have no choice, that’s a pretty good racket for something that doesn’t cost more than a $2 to print.
How much is your cut per copy?
You seem obsessed with my fact checking. I’m actually a bit better at it than you seem willing to give me credit. For example, I took your buddy Dan Barker’s open Bible test, and I think I did okay.
http://www.examiner.com/article/dan-barker-s-challenge-to-christians
and, of course, I also self-graded it.
http://www.examiner.com/article/grading-dan-barker-s-open-bible-test
And for the record, there’s no way on earth you could con me into buying a paperback for $35. Tell you what — when something really interests me, I can produce some pretty impressive research, if I may say so myself. I won’t ask you to pay anything out of your pocket — you want to read my book “Counterargument for God”, give me an email address and a preferred ebook format (PDF, mobi, epub, etc.) and I’ll email you a copy. Here’s the link, so you can see it’s a real book, available on Amazon…
http://www.amazon.com/Counterargument-God-John-L-Leonard-ebook/dp/B00C4MFBYC
Read it, and you’ll realize why you’re stealing money to perform the work you call a job. You are an atheist purporting to teach religious studies, and I repeat, you know nothing about my God.
Ask a direct question, I’ll give you direct answers.
1. No. The title alone, and the advertising blurb, were enough for me to form an opinion that was already well in development. You see, I’m familiar with your dealings with Guillermo Gonzalez in regard to his tenure. So I have issues with the idea of putting money into your pocket. However, if it happens to be available in my public library, I’ll surely borrow a copy.
2. Yes. I didn’t review the book. Didn’t claim to review the book. The title alone, and your job title, were enough to inspire the blog. You do understand the nature of blogs, don’t you? Stuff not worth the expense of professional editing gets published there…my thoughts and opinions on things that interest me. In my case, the primary purpose my blog serves is to draw attention to my writing ability. I’d have to say “Mission Accomplished” on that point, given this sudden flurry of correspondence between us.
3. Yes, I believe that what I wrote was acceptable. If you read my original post again more carefully, you’ll see that I barely ventured beyond the title of the book and your professional title as justification for my opinion. I didn’t really attempt a full critique of the book. I daresay you would enjoy a review even less.
Do I really need to read the book to know that you advocate the end of teaching religious studies as it is currently taught and the remaking of this useless elective (assuming the goal is a real job after college) of a course that really has no business outside of seminary so that it proselytizes your atheistic worldview?
My question is rhetorical, of course.
If you really feel that strongly that your book might change my mind, you could offer me a free electronic copy to evaluate, following my example to you in offering you a free ebook copy of “Counterargument for God.”
RE: “Wow…apparently I struck a nerve.”
Yes, anytime that someone misrepresents my work or my position, it will probably strike a nerve. I hope you are interested in truth enough to correct what you may regard as false information.
I imagine your reaction would be no different when encountering a blog post titled “John Leonard: The Most pro-Allah Writer in the World?”
And imagine concluding that on the basis of just reading the title of “Counterarguments for God.” This surely must be some Islamic theological manual. I need not read it at all to come to that conclusion. I can surmise that “God” really means Allah, for example. No need to read any further.
RE: “The primary purpose my blog serves is to draw attention to my writing ability. I’d have to say “Mission Accomplished” on that point, given this sudden flurry of correspondence between us.”
I must compliment you on your self-promotional opportunism and sense of self-importance. Sadly, I must inform you that it was not your writing that attracted me to your blog. It was your blatant misrepresentations and mischaracterizations that attracted me. I was curious as to how one could view himself as ethical while indulging in such a lack of professionalism.
Is that really the sort of attention you desire?
RE: “If you really feel that strongly that your book might change my mind, you could offer me a free electronic copy to evaluate, following my example to you in offering you a free ebook copy of “Counterargument for God.”
Thank you for your offer. As it so happens, I have read what you call a “book” (Counterargument for God). I would call it an extended pamphlet consisting of some of the flawed arguments I used when I was a Christian apologist.
The fact that you call it “some pretty impressive research” just confirms that you have confused your fictional works with your non-fictional ones.
Your offer seems to contain a contradiction with your earlier statements that the title and a blurb are sufficient to know all you need to know about The End of Biblical Studies. So, why do you need me to subsidize you any further if you already have all the information you need?
Indeed, I would not think that man of your brilliance would even consider this a fair trade. Your proposed trade is akin to trading a pamphlet for a set of The Encyclopedia Britannica (I hope you don’t mind just a bit of exaggeration, which I must have assimilated after reading your blog).
Your “book” has 139 footnotes, whereas The End of Biblical Studies has about1,000 and hundreds of different sources (in contrast to 139 footnotes with the same sources repeated often). We are not talking about just citing a Collins or a Dawkins + page number as you do, but detailed notes explaining finer points of many issues discussed in the main text. Your book contains only
I also must say that reading your analysis of Richard E. Friedman was a real treat, as I assign that book in one of my classes. Why was it necessary to say “Harvard-educated” when speaking of him? Is that really meaningful to you or the reader? If so, what does it mean?
Yes, this extended pamphlet only confirms to me that you have no serious expertise in evolutionary theory, biblical studies, and theology.
RE: “If you really feel that strongly that your book might change my mind, you could offer me a free electronic copy to evaluate, following my example to you in offering you a free ebook copy of “Counterargument for God.”
Thank you for your offer. As it so happens, I have read what you call a “book.” (Counterargument for God). I would call it an extended pamphlet consisting of some of the flawed arguments I used to use when I was a Christian apologist.
The fact that you call it “some pretty impressive research” just confirms that you have confused your fictional works with your non-fictional ones.
Your offer seems to contain a contradiction with your earlier statements that the title and a blurb are sufficient to know all you need to know about The End of Biblical Studies. So, why do you need me to subsidize you any further if you already have all the information you need?
Indeed, I would not think that man of your brilliance would even consider this a fair trade. Your proposed trade is akin to trading a pamphlet for a set of The Encyclopedia Britannica (I hope you don’t mind just a bit of exaggeration, which I must have assimilated after reading your blog).
Your “book” has 139 footnotes, whereas The End of Biblical Studies has about1,000 and hundreds of different sources (in contrast to 139 footnotes with the same sources repeated often). We are not talking about just citing a Collins or a Dawkins + page number as you do, but detailed notes explaining finer points of many issues discussed in the main text.
I also must say that reading your analysis of Richard E. Friedman was a real treat, as I assign that book in one of my classes. Why was it necessary to say “Harvard-educated” when speaking of him? Is that really meaningful to your or the reader? If so, what does it mean?
Yes, this extended pamphlet only confirms to me that you have no serious expertise in evolutionary theory, biblical studies, and theology.
This, of course, is not just my opinion, as you do admit to the lack of scientific credentials near the beginning. But somehow we are supposed to believe that you can evaluate scientific arguments about evolution. And that is assuming you always have represented the authors you cite correctly.
RE: “You see, I’m familiar with your dealings with Guillermo Gonzalez in regard to his tenure.”
Do you mean “familiar” in the sense that you read only the titles of some Internet postings and then divine their content and accuracy?
If your familiarity with this case is like your familiarity with The End of Biblical Studies, then I hope you understand why I might be skeptical about your claim.
RE: “How much is your cut per copy?”
I don’t usually answer personal financial questions, and I am not sure how it matters to my argument.
But since you studied business, a few basic mathematical calculations may help you understand that my books are underpriced, not overpriced, if measured by the hours of work invested.
As opposed to the spectacular indolence reflected in Counterarguments for God, The End of Biblical Studies conservatively required about 3,000 hours of work/research.
The hardcover edition on Amazon sells for 26.20 (at least when I checked), and you can assume that I receive no more than 10%, which would be a maximum of about 2.62 per book if my math is correct.
That would mean that even if I sold 1,000 copies (a very difficult feat for my academic books), that would amount to $2620 in royalties.
So, $2620/3,000 hours = a grand total of .87/hour. You can see I will be a millionaire soon on those books.
That is also why your proposed trade would not work for me. You cannot compare something that took so little effort with something that actually requires work and research that will be reviewed by experts.
The fairer comparison in terms of length to your Counterarguments for God is probably the longer blog posts that I offer for free on Debunking Christianity, some of which are over 10,000-12,000 words in length.
For example:
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2015/06/a-response-to-professor-paul-allen.html
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2013/04/alexander-great-jesus-and-david.html
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-solid-sky-in-genesis-response-to.html
But I charge nothing for those, and you charge about 2.99 for your equivalent. You must be making a killing on those compared to my blog posts.
If you have a more exact word count for your book, I am willing to adjust the equivalence accordingly.
Besides, you must be aware that publishers set the price for my book, and not I. They have buildings to maintain, a staff to pay, and other costs of their own.
I don’t write books for the money. I write books to educate. I see it as a service, not a profit machine.
RE: “Given that your “readers” are largely captive audience (students) that have no choice…”
I usually don’ require that students purchase my books, except for Health Care and The Rise of Christianity, which is sold by Baker Academic Publishing, a well-known Christian press.
See: http://www.bakerpublishinggroup.com/books/health-care-and-the-rise-of-christianity/333370.
The price does not seem exorbitant to me.
May I ask?:
A. What is your source for this information (e.g., a syllabus, a student interview, your imagination, Allah) about my book purchase requirements?
B. And does it really profit you, as an aspiring apologist, to make claims that your opponents surely will know to be false?
RE: “Yes, I believe that what I wrote was acceptable. If you read my original post again more carefully, you’ll see that I barely ventured beyond the title of the book and your professional title as justification for my opinion.”
You made my point very well. You apparently are telling us that you need not do any research to reach conclusions, and that you are comfortable with reaching false conclusions.
Interest in telling the truth should not vary because one writes a blog versus a book or something for free rather than something for sale. What kind of ethical or professional writing standards are those?
As an apologetic strategy, I frankly find this puzzling. I would think that an aspiring apologist would wish to be seen as credible and diligent about finding the truth. Otherwise, why should anyone bother to read your books (or any books) past the title or blurb?
As I indicated, you did not understand (and apparently still don’t), what The End of Biblical Studies is about or how “irrelevance” is being approached.
Accordingly, your charges of hypocrisy still don’t follow because they are based on conclusions that are false—regardless of whether you wrote them in a blog or in a book.
Hector,
For a guy who apparently takes great pride in calling himself “Doctor”, you sure have a hard time grasping the concept behind rather simple sentences. About that title, let me ask you a hypothetical question:
You and I are eating dinner at a local restaurant (not together, of course, since I want you to be able to digest your dinner) and a man in a nearby seat slumps over his plate, apparently unconscious. His dining companion becomes alarmed and yells, “Is there a doctor in the house?”
I would pull out my phone and call 9-1-1.
What would you do?
Back to this conversation, such that it is…I am a novelist, plain and simple. I make no pretenses about passing myself off as some sort of academic. I only charge $3 for the electronic copy of Counterargument because I want people to read it, not because I care about getting rich off it. I write novels in the hope they achieve success in the future.
I don’t pretend to have done thousands of hours of research. I certainly spent thousands of hours reading books on science and books on atheism, but yours haven’t made it into the public library.
I don’t have a day job like you do. I work for nothing, nonstop, knowing that one day there’s a chance it will pay off big time. Or I’ll die. Either way, I’m happy doing what I’m doing but I assure you, I currently make much less than you do, though I’m quite sure my work is a lot more pleasant reading than yours. I’m not looking to put an end to anything, not even atheism.
I only quoted you directly once, and then it was in a comment, not the article. Was the quote inaccurate? If not, you have no point.
You know, for a busy “educator” you sure do have a lot of free time to waste on my little website.
I’m flattered. I couldn’t get Jerry Coyne to do more than deliberately ignore me, and yet you discovered me without my even having to reach out first. I appreciate your saving me the trouble. Even Acharya S. blew me off, and yet you’ve taken the time and trouble to correspond with me.
Mr. Leonard,
Part of my job as an educator is to correct misinformation. It was you who mentioned my name, and I have the right to correct misinformation about me, just as you have a right to correct misinformation about you.
At the moment, I seem to have no trouble performing all of my professional duties, and so you should not worry about how I spend my time.
Your 9-11 scenario is nowhere analogous to what you have done. Being a novelist or not being a scholar does not absolve you from telling the truth or from being diligent in ensuring that what you write about real persons is accurate. You certainly had more than plenty of time to do that, and so it is not at all like a 9-11 scenario. And you have had more than plenty of time to issue a simple apology.
Indeed, instead of issuing a simple apology, you continue to offer poor excuses for why you can spread vile untruths about another individual. Actually, you are lucky that you are not being sued for slander, a possibility I am still exploring.
Hector,
You want me to apologize for the opinion I’ve formed by reading about you, your work, and your persecution of an actual qualified academic which practically ruined his career? I recommend that you don’t hold your breath. The last time I checked, the First Amendment protected speech in this country.
I am not “spreading vile untruths” about you at all when I say you have proclaimed yourself an atheist and use your position as “educator” to pollute impressionable young minds with YOUR opinions, which in MY opinion, are complete garbage.
Based on what little I’ve read about you personally, I believe that you grew up a child evangelist, and today you are a gay activist.
Because my true love is writing detective novels, I get to pretend I’m a private eye all day. So here’s what I think I’ve figured out:
Your overt hostility toward Christianity may be due to your inability to reconcile your personal sexual orientation with the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality. So you have condemned the Bible.
If I assume that my gay friends are telling me the truth when they claim they were “born” gay (no reason why they should lie, is there?) then there’s a decent chance God made you gay, too.
I can easily understand how, if you felt you were born gay (assuming you ARE even gay — not every gay activist is personally gay), I can easily understand why you were confused and upset that the very book you were promoting condemned you. You may have felt like a hypocrite. The difference between you and Ted Haggard was that you were a child. You were doing what you’d been taught to do, not what God led you to do.
I’m not saying God led Ted Haggard to be a liar and a charlatan. He chose his own path. You were a child thrust into the role of an evangelist, so I don’t have anywhere near the contempt for you in that role as I do for Haggard, Joel Osteen, and their ilk — people who tell their congregation what the people want to hear, not what they need to hear.
It is not my place to judge or condemn you based on sin — those are between you and God. I don’t think your sins are any worse than mine. I freely admit that I vacillate between being sympathetic toward gays when I think they are abused or mistreated, as the article below suggests,
http://www.examiner.com/article/did-god-create-people-to-be-gay
and being defensive because of people like you, and the lesbian couple in Oregon putting the Christian bakers out of business with an absurd fine of $135k from a bureaucrat. Freedom of religion isn’t dead yet.
As the article at the link below would suggest, I have not only read the Bible, I’ve also read books by religious scholars who have created some interesting theories and observations of evidence that suggests how the Bible came to exist.
http://www.examiner.com/article/encouraging-my-christian-friends-to-think
The problem is this: you believe, incorrectly, that God does not exist, because you have assumed the contradiction of your existence and natural attractions to biblical teachings are irreconcilable. But in my mind, if my gay friends are telling me the truth as I have assumed, it’s possible that we’re misunderstanding something pretty important about the Bible. Wouldn’t be the first time…
http://www.examiner.com/article/the-enigma-of-abraham-and-isaac
Many of my Christian friends question the authenticity of my Christianity because I have refused to argue that the Bible is inerrant. However, your argument seems to be that the Bible is essentially worthless. My position is somewhere in the middle.
I don’t worship the Bible, because it is only an anthology of books that I believe were written by men not all that different than me — inspired by God. But I do not claim to be God. I am human, and naturally imperfect.
I felt inspired, even compelled to write “Counterargument for God” as a response to people like Richard Dawkins. Frankly, you seem to be cut from that same mold — academic elitists who are personally extremely hostile to Christianity and the Bible.
Threaten me with lawsuits for slandering you if you want — here’s a quick summary of the case you will have to present:
1. You wrote a book with the provocative title “The End of Religious Studies.”
2. You teach and get paid to teach religious studies.
3. I expressed my opinion that this makes you a hypocrite.
4. You don’t like my opinion.
Hopefully, when you do actually consult a lawyer instead of threatening to sue me, be sure to find a good one who at minimum can advise you that written defamation is called libel, not slander.
I have a friend who is a pretty good lawyer. He’s dying for another chance to argue a case before the US Supreme Court. Defending my First Amendment right to free speech ought to be a slam dunk, but after the King v. Burwell decision, I’m not entirely sure this configuration of SCOTUS interprets the English language the same way I do anymore.
I’m not sorry I got your attention. A little humility is good for the soul.
However, I do (mildly) regret offending you so grievously — it is easier to catch flies with honey rather than vinegar. But not sorry so much that I feel compelled to apologize for anything I said. If I had actually expected you, or a large audience, to read the original post, I probably would have worded it a little nicer — emphasis on the word “little.”
This is because a) what I said seems obviously true; b) I revere freedom of speech, and c) it would make ME the hypocrite, for saying something I truly won’t mean.
I still think that based on my earlier synopsis of your potential case for libel, it stands a better chance of getting thrown out for being frivolous than winning you major bucks, I suspect. And if I eat those words in court one day, you’ll win an award for money I haven’t earned yet. You’d be in the curious position of hoping to see my future success, so you could get paid.
Is this a great country, or what? Wouldn’t that be ironic?
Hector, you say you don’t believe that God exists — here’s why I say you don’t know what you’re talking about when you say the Bible is useless. Read Matthew 7:7. Read Revelations 3:20.
God loves you, Hector. He has a lot less difficulty showing it than I do. Open your heart. See the light. It’s real. I know, because I’ve seen it myself.
I’m no better than you. You can see the Light, too.
Just open your eyes.
Dear Mr. Leonard,
I appreciate your sermon, but it is clearly meant to evade the untruths you told, which include:
A. You stated that I am acting hypocritically by retaining my faculty position, given that I wrote a book called The End of Biblical Studies. I pointed out that you have not understood what “the end” means in this book, and you have admitted that you did not even read the book before making the claim.
B. You suggested that I am somehow making some undue personal profit by forcing my students to buy my books (“given that your “readers” are largely captive audience (students) that have no choice…”). I explained to you that is not the case.
I can mention others if you wish.
Whether I believe in God or gay rights etcetera does nothing to change the untruth of those claims. You simply wish to deflect attention from those specific claims by using rambling sermons to excuse your unprofessional behavior.
So let me ask you:
A. Are you claiming that I have made some undue personal profits by forcing my students to buy books? YES or NO?
B. What do I mean by the “end” of biblical studies, and why should that mean I must resign my position? Please don’t tell us what YOU mean by the “end,” but what I MEAN in that book.
The First Amendment does not necessarily grant you the right to publish false claims about an individual. You should consult a good attorney before posting such character assassinations again.