Noah's Odyssey Continues: Exposed Dick Leads To Slavery

In my earlier Noah episode, I had discussed at length about the ridiculous flood story mentioned in Genesis; as far as biblical bullshit goes, Noah was really the epitome of the "virtuous", holy man of the gospels: A supercentenarian who prided piety and faith to the OT God, he shared a common virtue that was to become the hallmark of biblical code of conduct: Misplaced justice and utter stupidity.

As a continuation of what I wrote in the previous post, allow me to once again journey through the life of this somewhat obscure holy man, Noah, and the aftermath of the ecological disaster which the OT God had supposedly unleashed; a deluge of rain that blanketed the Earth's surface and obliterated almost all land creatures on Earth.

After the Flood: Funky Time for Noah?

Genesis Chapter 9:1-17 is more or less related to the immediate aftermath; God gives the sole survivors of the massive flood instructions, some rehashed and drummed repeatedly(Such as the "Go forth and multiply" command), others pertaining to the resuscitation of life on the devastated planet, some dietary (eating meat minus the blood.....hmm, I wonder if God has anything to do with the Eucharist.......) and a mishmash of other nonsensical diatribes, such as establishing a covenant with Earth via a rainbow (Rainbows, it seems, never existed before Noah's Ark......perhaps prisms didn't exist before the deadly flood?).

At this point, Noah had three sons, Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, and a grandson, who was the Son of Ham (Maybe he was the guy who coined the hamburger???).

It is a tad difficult for us, as affluent as we are living in the age of technology, to comprehend this sheer expanse of wasteland that may have startled Noah more than he would have liked: He was, according to the bible, 600 yrs old at the time of the flood. An extremely patriarchal old man, with a bunch of stinky, noisy creatures, stuck in a boat with his entire family for 150 days, that must be one hell of an ordeal.

At 600 yrs of Age, Noah thought he was 600 yrs "young"; Bring on the wine!

By the time the Flood had supposedly receded, this old relic of a creature has survived some pretty amazing odds thus far (Not to mention that he was already 600 yrs old!!!); he probably was counting his lucky stars and yes, he could not have forgotten the one benevolent God who, in his divine and infinite wisdom decided to obliterate almost everyone and everything except him, his family, and some million-odd creatures on his putty boat!!!

Yes, the old man had reason to cheer and celebrate, and let his hair loose for the first time in a hundred years. And so it was, he created the first "party-time" bonanza in the ancient world:

Genesis 9: 20-21 explains rather too candidly:

20And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:

21And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.

While the bible did not state the extent of his alcohol abuse or the rate he abuses the seemingly innocuous drug-cum-beverage, he did have a jolly good time. And when drunk men sleep, oh well, they tend to go naked, don't they?

That would be fine, really, considering the old dinosaur was sleeping naked in the privacy of his own tent. But alas, fate had something quite more humiliating for the old twit:

Genesis 9:22-24 explains this rather embarrassing moment:

"Cover up, Daddy! Ham's Taking a DVD record of free willy!!!"

22And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.

23And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.

24And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

Sniggles sniggles! Father exposed his "intimate" parts to all and sundry.....and one has to wonder what Ham must have spoken about his Daddy. Maybe he chided Noah's slightly flaccid penis? Or Noah's burgeoning beer belly? Well, the bible doesn't have anything to say with regards to the exact nature of Ham's "treachery", but he had unwittingly provoked the ire of his old man. Jesus Christ!!!

Ham Catches Peek of Noah's Wee-Wee, Grandson Canaan Suffers Curse on Behalf of Daddy's Voyeurism

Noah Puts Curse on Noah, and Presto! Slavery is Now Justified for Another few Millennial. Sorry Niggers. The Lord made Me Do It!!!

Ham had unwittingly committed the worst possible crime against humanity (This may be a torturous task, but try imagining this: Everyone on this planet is dying or already dead, your only option to stay alive is to stick with your family, which your father lords over): Stuck with no one else but his family members and a strict, disciplinarian of father-figure who is now Lord of the remaining homo sapiens, he could not have chosen a worst time to taunt his 600-yr old father, who in this grand age still had enough fire in his belly to invoke a curse in the name of God, not at Ham the offender, but Ham's son, Canaan! (In the bible, it is not uncommon for sons to be punished on behalf of their father's misdeeds. Talk about a gross miscarriage of justice....).

Genesis 9:25-26:
25And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

26And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

The biggest winners out of this odyssey of lewdness and opulence? The two brothers, Japheth and Shem: Both get to reap the rewards of Canaan's voyeur-inspired stupidity by covering up their father's itsy-bitsy bits in a bid to "mask" the shame:

But alas, the damage was already done.

Genesis 9: 27:-

27God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

And as for Noah, the old gaffer still had a further 350 yrs going for him!!!!

Genesis 9: 28:-

28And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years.

The Noah Odyssey: A Justification for Slavery?

A Biblical Justification of Slavery?

Besides other OT laws which justifies slavery, this particular story is often used to explain the three major "races" in the Old World (Remember that Noah and his family were the only human beings who managed to survived the catastrophic flood): Japheth pretty much became the alpha male of the White Europeans, Shem became the patriarch of Asians and the poor Niger bastards became spawns of Canaan, who had to bear the indelible mark of his father's lewd deeds, hence, the dark skin of the Negroes! How very convenient.

How a tale of peekaboo can snowball into one huge mega-disaster is beyond me, not to mention the gross misjudgment of a totally insane, super-centenarian who got so pissed drunk that he couldn't even notice his son taking a peek at his naked, shriveled body. Add to that, eternal damnation in the form of slavery for his grandson's lineage long after the incident is over. What kind of morals do we want to attribute to such an atrocious, irrational and amoral story????

Reading the Bible as A Moral Book?

It is difficult for me, and I am sure the same goes for other atheists, to fathom how the bible can get away with such nasty little anecdotes of misplaced morals and ethics and still be heralded as a moral code.

If you want to learn about morals and virtue, the bible is a little too far-fetched for such an endeavor. Try the book of Marquis de Sade instead. At least it isn't third grade porn.

The Greatest Man in History

The "Greatest Man" in History....?

One of the most controversial accolades ever to be bestowed upon any person, the somewhat ubiquitous title of "the Greatest Man" in the world, let alone History, is often given to individuals who have, at some point in time, performed great deeds or sacrifices.

And it doesn't get more controversial than this: Ask the Christians, and they'd say that their supposed Son of God, Jesus, is the greatest man ever. The average Buddhist will vote for Buddha, and the Muslims will tell you that Muhammad, the dessert warrior cum Prophet, deserves the "greatest man" tag. Historians might get too obsessed with war and vote for Genghis Khan. Boxing fans will no doubt idolize Muhammad Ali or Bruce Li and call them "great", and so the list goes on.

All of these men (and possibly more) were enigmatic in their own ways; from baptizing armies with blood and slaughtering human beings by the cattle load along the way, to forging whole empires and religions, these are men, who for good or for bad, have left their legacy for posterity.

Yes, there have been suitors and pretenders for this inspiring title, but one man probably deserves this title more than anyone else.

Norman Borlaug

A great-grandchild of Norwegian migrants in USA, Norman Borlaug was born in 1914 in his grandparents' farm house.

Growing up in the Borlaug household, Borlaug was accustomed to earning his own keep; like many victims of the Depression era, poverty was a constant menace and threat for a young man who desired for himself a decent education. One of his stints included working in the Civilian Conservation Corps in Depression Era America, and that left a profound, indelible impression in the young Borlaug: The importance of living on a full stomach.

"At the camps they were able to recover some semblance of health and self-confidence. I saw how food changed them...All of this left scars on me."

Surmounting the terrible realities of poverty, a brave Norman managed to finish his studies and acquire a Bachelor Degree of Science forestry degree in 1937.

Norman's Turning Point

Norman Borlaug's turning point came when he attended a Sigma Xi lecture held by Elvin Charles Stakman, a professor who would soon become the head of the plant pathology group in the University of Minnesota. The talk was titled: "These Shifty Little Enemies that Destroyed our Food Crops", and after attending the talk it dawned upon him that humanity was in a constant battle with Mother Nature, and Borlaug was immediately hooked by the immense possibilities of creating crops that were resistant to fungus.

Under the advice of Stakman, Borlaug abandoned Forestry (his post was eliminated anyway due to budget cuts) and undertook another education odyssey, this time earning him a Masters Degree in Science in 1940 and a subsequent Ph.D. in plant pathology and genetics in 1942.

Norman's Great Achievements

Feeding Empty Stomachs and Empty Dreams

Despite the advent of the Industrial Revolution and its prevailing technological advances, Mankind has to grapple constantly with Mother Nature in order to fill up empty stomachs, and it is to this end that Norman Borlaug dedicated his whole life to.

Heralded as the pioneer for the "Green Revolution", Norman Borlaug worked extremely hard in third world countries, ranging from the harsh terrain of Mexico to war-torn countries in Africa, bringing with him the expertise and know-how to increase food crops dramatically, and by some estimates, he managed to stave off hunger and saved the lives of 1 billion people.

1 billion people..... there aren't that many philanthropists or great men who can make what seems like a boisterous claim, but one man, moved by the plight of a starving generation, strove on, without the fame, the glory and the riches that accompany men aspiring for greatness and in the process saved so many lives.

Living in squalid conditions, dinghy hotels, mosquito-infested areas, Norman Borlaug put his heart and soul into his work, against numerous odds: Environmental nutcases, bureaucratic bullshit, and sometimes political problems, and through it all, his determination was stoic and unyielding.

Some of his achievements include:

1. Turning wheat dependent nation such as Mexico and India into wheat exporters by using genetic engineering to dramatically increase product.

2. Creating disease-resistant crops to avert famine.

3. Creating an awareness with regards to feeding a population of human beings which have already crossed the 6-billion mark.

4. A Recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Gold Medal.

Such is the nobility of his accomplishments, that it is difficult to imagine anyone opposing it, unless, of course, you are one of those Green Peace morons who worry about whether your food is "organic" enough for your stomach. A hungry person is an angry person, and one can hardly expect peace and order in countries which are often living on the edge of famine and death.

Norman Borlaug: The Greatest Man on Earth

The Greatest Man on Earth: Norman Borlaug

Such is the humility of Norman Borlaug, that few, if ever any, outside the field of Science has ever heard of this man. At 94 yrs of age, he is still continuing his work, hoping to fill the stomachs of people living in atrocious, inhumane conditions in war-ravaged, poverty-stricken countries.

Norman Borlaug symbolizes the epitome and noble qualities of mankind: Kindness, endeavor and above all, a conviction to save the lives of his fellow human being, regardless of race, creed and religion.

Jesus, Muhammad, Gandhi, etc........none of them added together, in their insignificant, yet slightly alleviated statuses, had ever achieved what Norman did in 6 decades.

In sum, Norman Borlaug is The GREATEST MAN in the history of civilization. And you'd probably never heard of him.



"You can't build a peaceful world on empty stomachs and human misery.. "
-Norman Borlaug



"When he (Norman Borlaug) won the Nobel Prize in 1970, they said he had saved a billion people. That's BILLION. "BUH!" That's Carl Sagan billion with a "B". And most of them were of different race from him. Norman is the greatest human being. And you've probably never heard of him."

-Penn, the Biggest, louder partner of the magician duo, "Penn and Teller"

"It gives me great pleasure to add my voice to all those paying tribute to Dr. Norman E. Borlaug on his 90th birthday. As we celebrate Dr. Borlaug's long and remarkable life, we also celebrate the long and productive lives that his achievements have made possible for so many millions of people around the world. And as the United Nations continues its efforts to reach the ambitious but achievable Millennium Development Goal of reducing, by half, by the year 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger, we will continue to be inspired by his enduring devotion to the poor, needy and vulnerable of our world. Dr. Borlaug, for your many contributions to the work of the United Nations, please accept my best wishes on this happy occasion."

- Kofi A. Annan, former Secretary General of the United Nations

Fan Mail

From time to time, I do receive comments/fan mail with regards to my specific posts; Christians, agnostics and other philosophical creeds drop me a note, telling me how well, or in some instances, how crappy my writings are.

The truth is, I appreciate fan mail. I really do, and it is heartening for me, not from a solipsistic point of view, that people are actually thinking about religion and not taking things at face value. The purpose of this blog is, after all, to give a different perspective of religion from a different point of view.

Good reviews aside, I take negative or sometimes ad hominem comments seriously; I am only human, and humans err, and I stand to be corrected if I have made an error on my part. Sometimes, Christians or religious folks send comments to address a whole spectrum of issues, and I regret to say that so far I have not been able to address a majority of them on my blog.

At this point, I would like to address one of the readers, who happens to call himself/herself a "Child of God" (Makes me wonder if this is Jesus I am actually addressing to!).

"Child of God" Replies

In addressing my previous post, "Of Talking Snakes and Talking Asses", "Child of God" takes aim at atheism's anti-religious stance:

"You "atheists" really aren't who you claim to be. You claim not to beleive in God, but all you do is talk about him. You know, there are plenty of gods out there and other religions other than christianity, so I don't understand why you would want to talk so much about something you supposedly don't beleive in. I don't beleive in getting drunk. So I don't do it. I don't go around talking about getting drunk all the time, that's just stupid. Just like the atheist religion. Lol...yea, that's right. You have found yourself in a religion here...something you speak against? Haha. Hypocrosy is a terrible thing."

To sum up his or her arguments:

1. One should not talk about God if one does not believe in God.
2. This blog only criticizes Christianity and pretty much nothing else is ever addressed.
3. Atheism is a religion.
4. Hypocrisy is a "terrible thing".

A Non-Sequitur Argument

Right off the bat, Child of God makes a fallacious, non-sequitur accusation: He or she insinuates that in order to talk about God, one must believe in God. If that were true, children's book authors must therefore believe in fairies to write about fairies for their juvenile clients!

Of course, Christianity is not the only religion I have addressed: Islam has also been touched on even if it has been regarded as a strictly taboo subject, and I have written about Scientology, Fengshui and a whole host of other religions and their respective charlatans. It is only with regards to Christianity and Judaism that I am capable of dissecting their holy books in such exquisite detail; I come from a Baptist background, so the bible is certainly not alien to me.

Why Religion?

"Child of God" uses a very weird analogy to define the atheist stance: A person who doesn't get sloshed out on alcohol should not be harping about the ill-effects of alcohol abuse. This may be the case, but if you have a close relation or friend who is an alcoholic addict, or if you are an ex-abuser of alcohol yourself, wouldn't you want to help others who have trotted down the same path as you had?

The reason why atheists talk about religion most of the time (well, not all the time; I do talk about human rights issues, for example. I am sure atheists are not all inept and dull and dreary to repeat the same drivel on religion!) has more or less got to do with the intrusive, abrasive nature of religion and their legions of believers. Ideally, beliefs, be it religious or philosophical stances and dogmas, are personal stances that constitutes part and parcel of what secularists deem as human rights. In layman's terms, you have your right to belief, and no one should be able to stop you from your right to belief.

That right of belief, however, does not entail the following:

1. The right to force or shove down your beliefs down the throats of others through intimidation, threats, or violence of any sort.

2. The right to infringe upon secular government or education to endorse your unscientific, baseless beliefs.

3. The right to get tax-free relief to uphold your religious belief.

For example, you may believe in the existence of elves. No one can stop you. Sure, some folks might snigger about your odd little belief behind your backs, and some people might even make snide remarks in front of you, but no one should be telling you, or even enforcing any rule of law, to stop you from believing in anything, regardless of ridicule.

That said, you cannot demand that your odd little belief be turned into standard curriculum in government schools, nor should you be forcing secular government institutions to endorse your quaint beliefs.

The reason why atheists feel aggrieved is this: Religious folks want to have the cake and eat it whole: They want us to respect their beliefs, but they have no qualms when it comes to criticizing other creeds, such as gays, lesbians and atheists. They want to enact laws to limit the rights of other groups, such as gay marriages and in some countries, the right to sex between two consensual, adult same-sex partners. They have lobby groups which attempt to discredit Science and other forms of secular education, while at the same time trying their darnest best to smuggle quasi-religious topics, such as Creationism and Intelligent Design, under the veneer of "alternative Science" or other equivalents into secular education programs.

And on the worst possible end of the spectrum, religious folks are quite inclined to commit violence on the hopes of getting prime tickets for a seat in paradise: Muslim males, driven by the horny desire to screw 72 virgins in heaven, are often too willing to subject themselves to indoctrination and subsequent martyrdom, and in the process killing scores of innocent people in their quest for a piece of the divine. This is religious mayhem and genocide at its worst.

Is Atheism a Religion?

If only it was true: Atheism lacks the decisive, cohesive trait to form any sort of institution like what the Christians and other theists do not find lacking. As a result, herding atheists is kind of like herding cats, and it gets worst when one of the basic, well-acknowledged fundamentals with regards to secular free thinking encourages independent thought.

To call atheism a religion is kind of an oxy-moron in any case; there is no elaborate religious ceremony (such as the Eucharist), no deity, no enigmatic figure (some religious folks may concur that Richard Dawkins is some sort of a mythical high priest of atheism; I find this to be more of a tribute to the great work of the scientist than anything symbolic) and no united philosophy or common ground other than a distinctive absence of belief in any form of deities or the supernatural.

Is Atheism Hypocritical?

It depends on how you see it. If you believe that our beliefs are religious in nature, you'd probably call us hypocrites of the worst possible nature for denying the religious aspects of atheism.

That said, atheists do have their own beliefs, but it doesn't stem from atheism: I am an atheist based on one single premise that I do not believe in God. I am also a secular humanist, a communist sympathizer (No, I am not a communist. Frankly, I think communism is not practical), and most importantly, I advocate Science because it works (for good and for bad). These are my core set of beliefs, and I do not expect every atheist to share all my beliefs and with it, my opinions. We atheists are too individualistic to behave like androids, or sheep in a farmer's pen.

Most atheists are not overtly offended by personal belief, as long as it stays personal and does not infringe upon the rights of others. Most of us don't have a tendency to judge other folks, no matter how absurd their beliefs may be, but all it takes is a flying circus of religious hucksters, murderous barbaric hordes of criminals eviscerating themselves in the name of God, to get us into an angry frenzy of words and denounciations. And even then, we don't generally bear arms, nor do we go on a spate of riots to prove our points.

Atheism in a Nutshell

While it is very easy to lambast "Child of God" for his somewhat lob-sided comments, I do appreciate this opportunity to highlight the misconceptions of atheism, and also the level of mistrust against atheists in general.

To sum it all up, atheists are folks who simply do not believe in your God, or anyone else's God. All we ask for is to keep your religion to yourselves, and in the process of doing so, try doing away with the flying grenades, time bombs and the occasional torture.

Beast FCD

One Less God = No Gods?

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

Stephen Roberts

Of Talking Snakes and Talking Asses

Science and Religion: Two Distinct, Separate Institutions of Philosophy and Thought

More often than not, Christian fundamentalists claim that the Bible is a literal, rather than allegorical, factual book, aligned with the standard tenets of Science. Such ridiculous claims can be gleaned by morons, such as the Ken Ham from "Answers in Genesis", an other unctuous religious morons who actually construe Science to fit into their narrow, biblical worldview.

In this post, I hope to highlight a few of these "enlightened facts" of the Holy Babble: Be prepared for a good hearty laugh.

The Talking Snake?

This slithery creature is the subject of vehemence in many a culture, thanks in no part to the fact that a good portion of snake species are poisonous (Even the non-venomous kinds, such as the anaconda and the python, can devour and swallow a small child), and the slithery, creepy nature of their legless, slender bodies.


In the Book of Genesis, the bible describes the beginnings of Creation, a supposedly perfect utopia which was supposedly created in 7 days: Light that engulfs the planet, the stars that light up the sky like Christmas lights, the Beasts of the Earth, and so on and so forth.

Amidst the grandeur and splendid myriad of God's wondrous Creation, the asinine Creator did let loose the one creature that was to foil all of his painstaking work: The Crafty, Willy Talking Snake!

Genesis Chapter 3:1-6 describes the chain of events:

1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"

2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "

4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

How preposterous and pernicious a creature, this talking snake! To think that the charming creature (The talking snake would, if it was alive today, charm the pants out of our modern day snake charmers) had the temerity to tempt the very first two humans, God's very own image, on this lonely planet!

As the Cosmic super godfather, Yahweh couldn't let this dastardly Creature go unpunished: Along with Adam and Eve, who were banished from paradise (Eve got a worst deal for her role as temptress; she was made to suffer the pain of child birth, and most importantly, sow the first seeds of misogyny which would plague women kind for posterity), the snake became the first, ignominious creature to suffer the wrath of the deity:

Genesis Chapter 3:14 describes the extent of this divine punishment:

14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.

Ah, the snake now crawls on its belly: Now this would seem to suggest that the original talking snake could walk (or maybe fly!)! A walking, talking snake in paradise!

Indeed, the irony of this so-called perfect utopia was destroyed by the mere presence of a creature, which really gives us a glimpse of the fallacious idea of an omnipotent, omni-benevolent deity. If anything else, this dreary episode speaks of incompetence on the part of God.

Not to mention the ludicrous idea of a walking, talking snake.

Balaam's Talking Donkey?

The donkey shares a special place in the books of antiquity: Along with other forms of property, such as the ox and yes, women, the donkey is one of the few essential items in the desert wastes of the middle east. Turn to Numbers Chapter 31, and it is clear that donkeys are considered prized commodities in the list of war booty.

But.... a talking donkey? That certainly stretches the imagination a bit, but like the talking snake, when it comes to Biblical nonsense, the sky's the limit (Considering that a host of folks, including Elijah and Jebus, did fly to the heavens)!

King Barak's Fear for His People

Balaam Whips His Disgruntled Talking Donkey

As a continuation of Numbers Chapter 21, Chapter 22 opens with an pervasive fear expressed by the King of Moab, Balak, the son of Zippor.

Having witnessed the destruction of the Amorites by the Israelites, Balak sends his emissaries to Balaam, hoping that he will put a curse on these murderous hordes of God.

Barak Seeks Help From Balaam

Numbers Chapter 22: 1-8 highlights the dire situation:

1 Then the Israelites traveled to the plains of Moab and camped along the Jordan across from Jericho.

2 Now Balak son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites, 3 and Moab was terrified because there were so many people. Indeed, Moab was filled with dread because of the Israelites.

4 The Moabites said to the elders of Midian, "This horde is going to lick up everything around us, as an ox licks up the grass of the field."
So Balak son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time, 5 sent messengers to summon Balaam son of Beor, who was at Pethor, near the River, ^[b] in his native land. Balak said:
"A people has come out of Egypt; they cover the face of the land and have settled next to me. Perhaps the6 Now come and put a curse on these people, because they are too powerful for me. n I will be able to defeat them and drive them out of the country. For I know that those you bless are blessed, and those you curse are cursed."

7 The elders of Moab and Midian left, taking with them the fee for divination. When they came to Balaam, they told him what Balak had said.

8 "Spend the night here," Balaam said to them, "and I will bring you back the answer the LORD gives me." So the Moabite princes stayed with him.

9 God came to Balaam and asked, "Who are these men with you?"

The idea of putting a curse upon your erstwhile enemies is, to put it bluntly, an exercise in futility. That said, what is baffling at this point is, God didn't know the identities of the elders and princes who were in the company of Balaam! An all-knowing God who doesn't know the acquaintances of his followers?

As the story unfolds, after God was informed of the ill-intentions of these visitors by Balak, God commanded Balak not to bow down to their demands.

God Changes His Mind

Undeterred, Balak sent in princes who were more distinguished than those emissaries from the first expedition; this time, Balak found it incredibly difficult to reject their pleas. Even God relents, telling Balak to "go with them, but do as I tell you".

15Then Balak sent other princes, more numerous and more distinguished than the first. 16 They came to Balaam and said:
"This is what Balak son of Zippor says: Do not let anything keep you from coming to me, 17 because I will reward you handsomely and do whatever you say. Come and put a curse on these people for me."

18 But Balaam answered them, "Even if Balak gave me his palace filled with silver and gold, I could not do anything great or small to go beyond the command of the LORD my God. 19 Now stay here tonight as the others did, and I will find out what else the LORD will tell me."

20 That night God came to Balaam and said, "Since these men have come to summon you, go with them, but do only what I tell you."

So, God changes his mind, and, to Balaam's chagrin, God's mind changes so fast that Balaam simply can't keep up!

21 Balaam got up in the morning, saddled his donkey and went with the princes of Moab. 22 But God was very angry when he went, and the angel of the LORD stood in the road to oppose him. Balaam was riding on his donkey, and his two servants were with him. 23 When the donkey saw the angel of the LORD standing in the road with a drawn sword in his hand, she turned off the road into a field. Balaam beat her to get her back on the road.

24 Then the angel of the LORD stood in a narrow path between two vineyards, with walls on both sides. 25 When the donkey saw the angel of the LORD, she pressed close to the wall, crushing Balaam's foot against it. So he beat her again.

26 Then the angel of the LORD moved on ahead and stood in a narrow place where there was no room to turn, either to the right or to the left. 27 When the donkey saw the angel of the LORD, she lay down under Balaam, and he was angry and beat her with his staff. 28 Then the LORD opened the donkey's mouth, and she said to Balaam, "What have I done to you to make you beat me these three times?"

29 Balaam answered the donkey, "You have made a fool of me! If I had a sword in my hand, I would kill you right now."

30 The donkey said to Balaam, "Am I not your own donkey, which you have always ridden, to this day? Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?"
"No," he said.

A talking donkey, it seems, doesn't seem to alarm or startle Balaam: He carries on a verbal debate with his own ass, as if it were a mundane, household affair!!!!

What is more perplexing is that Balaam was actually obeying God's command when he followed the princes; yet, God was furious with Balaam for following his very own orders! A case of severe, medical dementia for the all-important Cosmic Godfather???

Biblical Hogwash: Snakes and Asses Do not Talk

Reasonable, rational people do not believe in fantastical, incredulous tales of the biblical sort: Extraordinary claims do require extraordinary proof.

Sane, rational people also do not accept the ludicrous idea of talking snakes and donkeys: Yet, the bible is full of ludicrous creatures and events which requires a gigantic leap of faith, and when faith has to be invoked to acquire belief, it is not difficult to detect the whiff of bullshit that permeates such exaggerating claims.

If asses and snakes could talk, we'd be having mass debates with these beasts: The ass would perhaps form trade unions and demand for higher wages, and the snakes, well.........they could become hucksters and chalartans in the Benny Hinn mould!

Christians who claim that the bible is a bastion of truth should really take a real good look at what really is written by these dubious authors of scripture, and stop making an ass of themselves.

Keeping an Open Mind???



By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
-Richard Dawkins