Information coming soon.

20 responses to “About

  1. Tuomo

    You are really interesting person Art…

    • kelly hearn

      Hello. I am a journalist who writes for a variety of publications including The Nation, Yale 360, The Washington Times and others. I am looking into the story about the murdered shaman. Might you have a moment or two to speak with me via Skype, phone or by email. All off-record. Thanks, Kelly Hearn (kwhearn4094) (hearn.kelly@gmail.com).

  2. Code Punk

    Arthur I sincerely appreciate your unique and thoughtful analysis. I intend to check in regularly to benefit from your insightful perspectives. If you are on Twitter I would love to follow you. @Code_Punk

  3. Hello, you have a lot here, would really like some info as to your education/credentials etc. Have been making my way through your blog for a few weeks now.

  4. April Hart

    Your article about Marcus Bachmann is wonderful and fully-researched. However, you undo yourself with your frequent unedited run-on sentences that lose their way—and their message. There are also some spelling, and a few grammar, mistakes as well. If this piece were properly edited, it has the potential to be a powerful weapon to be used against these hypocritical frauds. “God” knows, their thinking is as twisted as it gets.

  5. Jonas Malos

    Hi, Arthur! I discovered your blog, your articles are really fascinating! Not only the ideas, but your well documented information and a lot of graphics which I haven’t seen before. I will follow your blog. Just keep it this way! Warm greetings from Sweden! Jonas Malos

  6. Allen Paul

    Hello Arthur. I needed to make a correction to a statement made within your “Dakota Ary” entry. Moreover, the following statement is false: “There is no condemnation of homosexuality in the early Christian community before the Council of Ancyra (314, and it was not a council of all bishops–there were only a dozen who attended–and was called to deal with certain “apostacies”): Canon 16.
    As you likely know, the apostle Paul, chief planter of the first Christian churches, lived from AD 5 – c. AD 67. In his letter to the Romans, Paul, directly inspired by God, wrote the following in regards to the homosexual activity occurring during that time:
    Romans 1:18-27
    “18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
    24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
    26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.”
    Dakota Ary was partially correct in his statement, “‘Gays can’t be Christians; homosexuality is wrong.” Individuals partaking in homosexual activity can be redeemed and accepted into Christ’s kingdom. However, it is clear from the verses above, that homosexual activity is an abomination to God and therefore morally wrong. Homosexual activity is sin, just like adultery, covertness, lying, etc. However, anyone can be forgiven of their past, present, and future sins along with receiving eternal life. This is the gift of grace by God. However, one must redeem this gift by applying Jesus’ death on the cross to themselves personally, as full payment for his or her sins:
    Romans 9:8-11
    8 But what does it say? “THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes,]resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.”

    • There are many errors in your comments, and you are using a corrupt mistranslation in a current English edition. The Bible, as it is known today, did not exist in the first century. What existed were fragments, and the only true “scripture” was the Papias of Hierapolis that were entitled “Sayings of Jesus”. These have been identified with the Q gospels and none were before the end of the first century. Papias of Hierapolis (c 60 – 130 AD). an early “Bishop” of Hierapolis in Anatolia, wrote the “Expositions of the Oracles of the Lord”, in which he stated that “Matthew compiled the logia (τὰ λόγια) in the Hebrew language, and each person interpreted them as he was able”, survives only in quotations made by Irenaeus and Eusebius and this comes in the third and fourth centuries.

      There is no record of a Paul/Saul of Tarsus, and the writings are in various hands and a combination of poetry and prose, the majority of which are plagiarisms done poorly. The first Gospel (John) does not appear until the second century after Jesus allegedly lived and died. Jesus never condemned anyone for same sex relationships–even in the area of adultery, he told the adulteress “to sin not again.” The word “homosexual” appears no where as it is a end-of-the-nineteenth century CE invention, and what you quoted in your letter is the ramblings of eight different writers taking tracks from the scriptorium in ancient Judah as found in Leviticus. Evenmoreso, the “abomination” was not same sexuality but rather the use of sex to worship a foreign god–which was common among ancient Habiru (Hebrews) when the field god Yah(weh) had wed the Canaanite (Palestinian) goddess of the moon Asherah.

      The Bible is neither fact nor inspiration, as most of it is in plagiarized from ancient sources as I have written elsewhere. The early communities were never known as “Christian” in the contemporary terminology, but known either as “christianos” or “chrestianos” that warred with each others over Matthew 10:34–the Roman Christians (if you wish to call them that) were from Alexandria, Egypt, the others from Antioch in Turkey. Your quote of Romans 9:8-11 is lifted from Akkadian cuneiforms.

      Dakota Ary is ignorant not only of scripture as it was originally composed in the fourth century at the order of the Emperor, but shows no knowledge of the ancient languages–and Jesus did not speak Hebrew, Greek, or Latin in the New Testament, for at most he was a simple carpenter who found comfort among men. He never married, had a girlfriend, or enjoyed the company of women according to the early Gospels. As scholars are noting, especially at the University of Jerusalem, much of what is consider “Bible” today is added material that came centuries after the original works. Even the Church Fathers rejected most of the works, although the Apocrypha was canonized as Biblical at the sixteenth century Council of Trent, while rejected by Martin Luther.

      Dakota is a threat to his classmates by his intolerance, ignorance, and ready-aim-fire aspersions, as no where in any ancient Bible is there even a hint of homosexuality or it being condemned. Jesus let a man rest his head on his chest. Jesus let a naked youth follow him out of the Garden of Gesthemane before Judas passionately kissed him on the mouth (did you read those blogs I offer for your reflection?) and he was taken from the cross/pole (cross is a Justin Martyr invention in the first/second century CE from “crux”, while the original Greek fragments state pole, but then, too, it must be noted that none of the New Testament existed in a single volume–until 385 CE.

      If you read Attic Greek or other ancient languages, read the early councils of what Constantine would eventually in 322 CE create as the “catholic” [it means “universal”] church, and there is no condemnation of same-sex marriages, unions, or sexuality. Homosexuality has always existed, and we do have records of “priests” of Christianity engaged in homosexual living and sex. There is no reason to condemn homosexuality unless the person is using a bible “translated” after 1946–as even the King James Version (first in English, although there is debate concerning limited editions by other post-Henry VIII protestants in England) and is unfamiliar with original texts. Dakota Ary proves that he has a lot of learn, beginning with languages, translations, interpretations, history, and so much more. I am surprised he has advanced as far as he has advanced, but I have no idea of his grade level or scores. He would never be able to pass a course I taught, for a true student conducts rational inquiry void of any preconceptions and is open to learning what is–not what the individual wants there to be in existence.

      To condemn homosexuality is tantamount to claiming that some mythological deity physically created the universe. Even in the ancient Hebrew it does not say that–but that a force formed earth (“adamah”) and from the dust created mortals (there is that old line: from dust you came to dust you shall go”). There was no more an Adam nor an Eve any more than there was serpent or a Tree of Life. These are ancient Coptic and Egyptian legends that the mercaneries (probably the ancestors to the Habiru) carried with them, along with the ancient religious god of India known as Brahama, that, because of their language they took the final “a” from the name Brahama, and put it before the word to form the mythological Abraham.

      Thank you for this opportunity to reply to your letter. I always enjoy hearing from people. I encourage you to learn the ancient languages and study the fragments that still exist. Do, also, read my blogs, on the writing of the Bible, the four different Jesus that exist in the New Testament, and other mythologies.

      • justlookingfortruth

        your statements about homosexuality in Hebrew writings should be tempered with Genesis chapters 18 & 19. If homosexual acts were acceptable to Lot who was a man of the true God, why would he try to protect the angels that were visiting the city from a mob that wanted to have intercouse with them?

      • Your knowledge of Genesis 18 and 19 are weak. The mob (as you call the people) reads “and all of the people, yes the men and the women, came before the house of lot demanding to see the strangers who crept into the city without registering”. No where in Genesis does it say that the people of Sodom or any of her sister cities Gomorrah or Zoar) were homosexual (that word does not appear until 1892 CE), but at most “were given to delights of the flesh, men with women, and women with men”–your Akaddian needs work. Unfortunately the redactions that threw out most of the original Sanskrit text is but a political plagiarizm, for the “wanderers” (what the ancient Jews were called) followed a war leader named Abraham (Brahama–the a is reversed) who was a warrior god who stole sheep, cattle, slaves, and would sell his sister/wife to whom ever he could extort money from. These “Hebrews” entered illegally into the land of the Palestinians (Canaan) as Joshua states in the book ascribed to his authorship. The Hebrews never had a legitimate or legal right to Palestinian land–as they were blood thirsty savages who practiced cannibalism and child slaughter (read the record on Abraham’s sacrifice of his oldest son (Ishmael was the oldest, but Christians in an effort to transmogrify the account claims it was the younger son). Most of Genesis is a lie, what is not is made up from far older records of other people.

  7. Greg Hils

    Excellent blog Mr. Ide. I intend on sharing it with some family as well. Best to you in the coming days.

  8. admin

    God gave AIDS, honor killings. water boardings and so on to the world — or did man grant this gift to himself? Obviously these are acts committed by men, not a god.

    • Man (and in some instances woman) (singular and plural) created god(s)/goddess(es) in his/her image to burden the world with fear, enabling the inventor to create a set of “holy writings” in honor of merciless and predatory god(s)/goddess(es) who devour children and adults, damn entire tribes, villages and nations to holocaust (very popular in the Torah, the later writings of Martin Luther, Hitler, Pol Pot, etc) and cast an unreal image of the children of the deity being heterosexual (unless it is Zeus who can “raise up” Ganymede to Olympus as his “cup bearer” while casting plagues, pestilences, and viruses upon the world. There is no god/goddess–only the mincing of minions who would be rabbis, priests, pastors, pontiffs, mullahs, ayatollahs and other self-deluding mortals intent on twisting tortured thinking to their deities so the preachers can reap rewards and financial excesses to comfort them.

  9. Kat

    Arthur, I’ll pray for you. Your hatred for Christianity is palpable, and that’s what makes it difficult for there to be any honest dialogue between people of faith and atheists.

    • Palpable means tangible or plainly seen, but I write against all superstitions, not just Christianity. “People of faith” includes anyone who believes in any god(s)/goddess(es) and that includes not only Paulinists (Christians) but also Muslims, Jews, etc. An atheist is not someone who rejects god(s)/goddess(es) but has no god(s)/goddess(es) nor sees the need for one or more such deities as god is based on hypotheses and not facts. As for prayer, that is another word for begging as an application, supplication or beseeching because of an inward individual feeling of inadequacy and lack of self-actualization. I do not trouble myself with such as waste of time, as psychologically, prayer is speaking to oneself in quest of an understanding that can be empirically realized–we are our own god(s)/goddess(es) and for that reason mortals made god(s)/goddess(es) to give form or format to a base belief in the senselessness of life so as to have structure. To pray for someone is not only a waste of time and energy but is an invasion of the individual’s mortal rights to elect what is to happen to the self–it is tantamount to the Mormons (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) praying for and baptizing Jews slaughtered under Hitler in the Third Reich (Nazi Germany) or for the dead Canaanites who were murdered in the Holocaust of Joshua and Gideon following the fanatical frenzy of their calf-god Yeh after the Apiru separated from the Akkadians and ended their forey into mercenary murders. For a true atheist to have an “honest dialogogue” with people of faith would deny the very substance and seriousness of those who understand that they are withour (what the “a” in Greek means) god(s)/goddess(es) and have no need of such whimsical and worthless connections to an imaginary world. I have far better things to do in my lifetime than to worry about some deity who defies gravity and sits on a cloud and formulates dust (Adam, as the word is correctly translated) and believe in some troubled minds menacing the bodies of the Graham family or Ratzinger in Rome. My quest is to learn, not memorize, to education and not indoctrinate. You have a similar right to believe in any fantasy that you wish and even utter prayers if that is your need, but I am secure in myself and accept the finiteness of time and life realizing that when dead I die–and do not return nor do I go to any mythological mountain, underground cavern or cave.

  10. Seth Davis

    Very interesting articles – you’ve gained a blog follower

  11. rick

    It is too convenient to neglect cultural aspects when considering homosexuality from a biblical context. Regardless of linguistic quirkiness and rabbinic editing over a large number of years, Jesus would have most certainly had a moral compass heavily dictated him socially by the Judaism of that time frame, which would have been at least somewhat disapproving of homosexuality…if not on religious grounds as something against the law, then most certainly on socio-political realities brought about by the rise of Hellenization. Paul too would have been as such…selective humanistic criticism is not good humanistic criticism.

    • It was far more uncommon not to be married and the father of at least one child by the age of 30 (and even before, as young as 13) as society did not approve of those who did not marry and “begat” progeny. Those who chose to live celibate lives usually went to the mountains (Essenes, for example), but there were small pockets of same-sex couples and “the love that surpassed the love of women” as the Old Testament David said when his Jonathan died. The fact that Jesus never married (that would have been recorded in some scroll, but the only time that any such artifact is found today is in a Coptic fragment that is heavily debated), was never mentioned with a woman save for the incident when a woman bathed his feet “with her tears and dried [them] with her hair” and never condemned homosexuality (a word that did not even exist until 1863 CE, and is not found in any bible before 1954) is coupled with the reality that the Jesus of the Gospels allowed a man to rest the man’s head on Jesus’ chest, was followed out of the garden by a naked male youth, etc.–all pointing to the highly probable reality that Jesus was gay. This was even the subject of a sermon by an Anglican priest (Paul Oestreicher, chaplain at University of Sussex in England) on Good Friday (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2012/apr/20/was-jesus-gay-probably) and was repeated by numerous other priests from Coventry to Edinburgh, Scotland, and beyond. There is no evidence that the Gospel Jesus was heterosexual, but plenty of conjectural information that he was gay.

      There is only in mythology the absurdity of a moral compass. Generations have debated on ethics and morality, and each changes with each generation as there is no absolute in anything or anyone. What might be considered good in one era may be condemned in another. For that reason, prior to 1970 the American Psychological Association held that homosexuality was wrong, but with the change of time and further research, the APA, the American Psychiatric Association, American Pediatric Association, American Medical Association, etc. have all published that homosexuality is but one of many facets that exist in nature and is normal and can be psychologically beneficial in the self-actualization process. Why did Judaism disagree with homosexuality–it did not! it disagreed with the worship and practice of Qadesh that was a sexual practice in the worship of various non-Yahwehistic religions, especially that of Priapus, Bacchus, and Isis. The alleged condemnation found in Leviticus is against the pretensions of priests of old religions, much in the same way as today’s archbishop of Los Angeles removed pastoral roles from Cardinal Mahoney who claimed he was just trying to protect the Roman Catholic Church from lawsuits over pedophile priests (which, in the past, were common accepted even among homosexual popes).

      Saul is another story, for the one that legend records as Paul, never met Jesus in life and it is only his word that he had a “conversation” with Jesus (as recorded in Acts), but the statements of Saul/Paul contradict the very message of Jesus, with Jesus denial of judgment to mortals (Matthew 7:1) and the plethora of denunciations and damnation broadsides found in Colossians, Romans, Hebrews, and other letters written by the various authors collectively known as Paul. Paul also had no recognizable female companions–only “close” male ones, and as I argue elsewhere, there never was an historical Paul, as no such creature erupts in the world until Constantine I establishes his “catholic [universal] church” at his Council of Nicaea in 325 CE (Eusebius, Vita Constantini 36-37). Even the Roman Catholic Encyclopedia (first edition) rejects there being any popes before the end of the first century and has only a gloss on the mythical Peter who was debated since 210 through the days of of Luther (arguing over the commission applied to the man Simon bar Jonas, or to the faith, or the community) and beyond. Your apologia is to regressive to be palatable at this time, for education and the discovery of new texts do transmogrify as well as reestablish realities, as noting is permanent and no one is infallible.

  12. Hugo Cáceres

    Muy buen blog, es una muestra de tenaz presistencia contra los demonios del fundamentalismo: homofobia, misoginia. Me invita a una nueva imagen de Dios, siempre distante.
    Hugo Cáceres – Lima

  13. Clint Harris

    Thank you for your courage, your secular position and you superb dispensing of factual data. My education is far more substantial with your insightful blog.

Leave a Reply to arthuride Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s