I got you now, I was just a little confused. Thanks for the clarification.
Dr. Deth, if a Christian faith healer is engaging in deliberate fraud, that’s a “Christian hoax.”
If a bunch of Christians carve human footprints into rocks in order to prove that a literal reading of Genesis is true, that’s a “Christian hoax.”
The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Americans are Christians, and they believe in false things that can do a lot of harm. I thought it would be appropriate to try to debunk some of the more prominent examples of deliberate hoaxes, for a target audience of Christians.
If you want to argue semantics, then I suggest you start your own thread. This thread is meant for debating whether it is more appropriate to focus on the Paluxy footprints vs. the Satanic Panic- not for quibbling over the precise application of “Christian” and “hoax.”
As for whether the two hoaxes I listed were on the original list, who cares? Faith healers were subsequently suggested, and I decided that they deserve a high priority. And contrary to your claims, creation science accounts for fully half of the items on the list!
I still have my old copy of “The Satan Sellers” on my bookshelf, to remind me to be a little less gullible now that I’m a grown-up.
I am sorry, I thought we were here to FIGHT ignorance…
Are the “vast majority” of Dopers Christians? Do even a small % of them believe these “hoaxes”? ( I sincerely doubt THAT!) If not- who is your “target audience”? Some “drive by reader” from some Xian board who will read your marvelous list and tear his bible up on the spot? :rolleyes:
Why only “Christian Hoaxes”? Why not any hoax perpetrated by organized religion?
And, although I have not been around as long as you have, it seems like many GD center around semantics. Nor do I think that the OP can control exactly where the debate goes- as long as it isn’t hijacked- and my arguements are certainly on topic, even if you don’t like them. If you don’t like arguements that disagree with your OP, then this does not seem to be the place to post them. Maybe you can start a radioshow, and have your own “dittoheads”. But us Dopers tend to not let dudes get away with much- without a good debate.
Let’s look at your line here “if a Christian faith healer is engaging in deliberate fraud, that’s a Christian hoax”. So if a Muslim is doing that same, it is a “???”. Or if someone claims to be a Christian, but operates a Ponzi scheme- does that make it a “Christian hoax”? And if the Faith Healer really beleives in his healing- even if we both know it is mainly the “placebo effect”, does that make him a fraud?
“This thread is meant for debating whether it is more appropriate to focus on the …”- so in order to post here, we have to concede & agree that your postulate is correct, that there is widespread and harmful “Christian hoaxes”, we can’t say your arguement is dead coming out of the chute? If all we are going to do is come here and agree with you, then there is no “debate”.
IMHO, in order for it to be a “Christian Hoax” it would have to be something that others were taken in by, that did some harm, and is perpetrated by Christianity only. Don’t see any of those on your list, except in the most specific meaning.
Now look, I don’t believe in Creationism either. Or LGM, BEMs, UFO’s, Crystal healing, the “Hoxley treatment”, Uri Geller, tarot cards, ghosts, phrenology, or anything else along those lines.
However, if what you REALLY want is a bunch of dittoheads to come here, agree with you, and provide you with material for your book/comic, then I think GD is not the place.
DrDeth, I am asking you to be polite and leave this thread to those of us who think the comic is actually a good idea, so that we can debate what the contents of the comic should be. Similar threads have taken place before- for example, people who wanted to debate whether evolution could have a Lamarckian component have asked creationists to stay out, and generally they have been polite enough to do so.
If you don’t think GD is the appropriate place for people to debate which frauds perpetrated in the name of Christianity have done the most harm to society, then I suggest you complain to the moderators. Personally, I don’t see where else one could have such a debate, even if there were no religious component.
If it would make you happier, you could certainly start your own thread. As is, your constant harping and your inability to even get the basic facts right suggests to me that you’re just trolling.
Thus far I think the top priorities, in terms of harm, would be:
-
Faith healers, specifically one of Randi’s exposes,
-
Satanic Panic
-
ex-gay ministries, but are they actually a hoax? Specifically, what evidence do we have that one of their spokespeople/leaders was actively gay during his tenure?
-
The Ark hoaxes and Paluxy
There are a number of frauds that aren’t nearly so harmful- i.e. the Shroud and the “recording of hell” tape.
Does anyone disagree? Is there anything that should go in there?
I think that televangelical wrongdoing probably deserves a tract of its own. McJohn, could you email me some high points? I’d love to include Oral Roberts, but it’s not as if I could prove he was lying. Swaggart and Bakker are much easier targets.
FisherQueen, could you tell me about “The Satan Seller”?
I still don’t see a "debate"here, but you have every right to start a threat whither thou wantest, and i am not the dude to call you on it. But when you start a thread “Spiderman- Threat or Menace”, then dudes are also within their rights to say “neither, he is a hero”. Or maybe we can start a thread “Have Christians stopped eating babies yet” where no one can argue that Christians don’t eat babies, just have they stopped or not. :rolleyes:
Nor do I see what “facts” I have gotten wrong or crooked.
Astorian also agrees that these “hoaxes” are hardly important.
Not to say that Christianity, along with every other major faith, hasn’t had it share of lies, untruths & propaganda.
It also seems that accusations of trolling are not very polite. Nor is my disagreeing with your premise “trolling” as I have certainly backed my thoughts up with facts and opinions. Nor is it “hijacking” as I am debating the subject. I am simply not accepting your postulate… “Spiderman is neither threat or menace”.
Where’s Monty? heh, heh, heh.
Cite?
I think the animal in question might be a yak.
Since the Shroud is forged, i.e, not the real thing, it’s pretty much up there on the list.
It was a book written by one Mike Warnke, alleging he was a satanic high preist in California in the mid 60;s.
He supposedly led rites over 1500 people in his “coven”.
I read it and believed it.
Then these 2 guys from Charisma magazine investigated.
They found out the time he had been a “satanist”, with waist length hair and long black fingernails he was dating this cute college girl who was with him all the time (they had a picture and he looked so square it wasn’t funny).
They even found out chronologically, it was impossible for the events he said happened to have happened during his college stay.
It was an expose and they wrote a book called Selling Satan, The Tragic History of Mike Warnke.
You can search google for it.
Thanks, vanilla! I’ll check it out.
He’s baaack. Christianity Today Weblog reports “Former Christian comedian Mike Warnke is returning to the spotlight with his second autobiography.”{Friendly Fire: A Survival Guide for Believers Battered by Religion} Presumably, CT means Warnke was formerly a comedian, not that he was formerly a Christian. “His first, readers will recall, was exposed as a hoax by Cornerstone magazine in 1992.” His first chapter is supposed to be available for free at his publisher’s website. A quote from Warnek: “Was I a fake, a charlatan, a deceiver, and a liar? No. I never lied about my testimony and I never ran a fake ministry.” Wow - is he that self-deluded, or that much of a liar? I don’t suppose it makes a difference to his publisher, as long as his book sells.
For debunking, I highly recommend, The Satanic Panic by Jeffrey Victor and Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis.
They take the whole legend apart and show what happened. Excellent material.
i’d love to help you distribute your tracts.
Even CSICOP does not refute that Faith healing works on occasion. When it does, the most likely reasons are the placebo effect and the possibility that the “disease” was psychosomatic, as opposed to organic. Occams razor would refute the likelyhood of a deific “miracle”. Of course, saying that doesn’t “prove” there was no deific intervention, but I think most of us here are Skeptics.
The power of the Placebo effect is well known & documented. If I can cure your headache and drop your fever with some sugar pills, do you doubt that "laying on hands’ has been as effective? Do you want a cite that the Earth revolves around the Sun? :rolleyes:
If the “healing” succeeds, even thru quackery, homepathy, placeboes or faith healing, then it has “worked”.
Speaking of skeptics…