Book Plunge: Bamboozled

Are the Christians bamboozled, or is it the reverse? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

I have a kindle as a gift from someone I was in Seminary with and I get a list of free books that come out regularly. One of my subjects of interest naturally is religion and so when free books on religion come out, I get notified. One such book was by a man named Timothy Aldred called “Bamboozled.” I amusingly told a friend who is in apologetics as well and he downloaded it and read it before I did.

I was told to expect something incredibly bad from him. He could not believe what he was reading. I was thinking “It cannot be that bad.”

After all, in my time of apologetics, I have made it a point to read what I disagree with regularly. I have been online for more than a decade doing debate and I have seen a lot of really strange ideas.

I do not think I have seen anything as crazy as this. I kept thinking throughout the book that I would love to find a good psychologist who would read this book and try to give an assessment of the author. The material I find in here is insane.

Aldred says he was a born-again Christian. I do not doubt him. Then about 50 years later he abandoned his faith and now argues against it. As I have argued elsewhere, all he did was change his allegiance. He did not change his mode of thinking. It would be difficult to give examples, but it is not because there are too few. There are too many! In fact, I stopped using the highlight option on the Kindle after awhile or else I would have been highlighting most everything. To reply to all the mistakes in this book would take a book ten times the pages in length, and that’s because there are so many false assumptions all throughout.

Aldred regularly makes statements about God speaking telepathically and has an obsession with talking about an “invisible God” and says that the answer to any objection is “God can do anything.” You will not find arguments given why some people think the Bible is reliable in this book. In fact, with his own sourcing, at best, he tells you a book he found the information on. There is no citation with a page number so you can check it up yourself.

Not to mention, his sources when he uses them are regularly not scholarly sources. The Encyclopedia Britannica is cited regularly on Constantine, leading me to think that’s all Aldred read on the matter. In the chapter on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Baigent and Leigh are the main sources, a source no historian would accept, although Aldred lists them as historians. In the chapter on Billy Graham, Wikipedia is his main source.

Aldred tells of how biblical history is blindly accepted but a look at real history shows otherwise. What is the real history? Sumerian history. What is the reason given to accept Sumerian history? None. Aldred accepts it with the same blind faith that he accepted biblical history.

So what Sumerian history are we talking about? Oh just the usual. You know, stuff like aliens establishing space ports on Earth and that there was one in Canaan and that YHWH is not the real deal but that there were alien overlords working with humanity. This takes place all throughout Genesis.

Do you not believe me?

From page 22

“the Anunnaki maintained outposts at the gateway to the space facilities; Jericho is one of them.” (This is started in mid-sentence to be fair, but any reader can look at this for free and see it changes nothing.) One is reading this and thinking “Is this serious?” The sad reality is “Yes. Yes it is.”

Aldred has an obsession with the KJV Bible and with Rome. For him, everything is a big Roman conspiracy. Dead Sea Scrolls? That was a Roman cover-up to keep us from seeing what was in them. John Allegro tried to expose the cover-up, but he failed. Never any mention that Allegro’s own publisher apologized for releasing the book Allegro wrote called “The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross.”

The conspiracy theory runs constant throughout the book. Indeed, it takes a lot of faith to believe what Aldred is selling. I was even thinking at one point that Peter Joseph of Zeitgeist would have told him that his theories were crazy. Aldred ignores all evidence opposed to his theory and his biblical interpretation is horrendous. (Has anyone heard of an interpretation of the parable of the ten virgins where the bridegroom is coming to marry all the virgins? Note that that is said to be “light paraphrasing.” (Page 111)

Aldred came from a background apparently that fostered faith as belief without evidence and did not consider that perhaps, not everyone is that way. He has not changed that belief. He grants full faith to the Sumerian accounts as accurate history. He grants full faith to Baigent and Leigh. He grants full faith to Wikipedia.

Most amusing is an account of him on trial against D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge. I am no fan of Kennedy. Still, reading this, it seems to escape Aldred’s attention that the problem could have been him. He goes to a church and causes a disruption and gets indignant when he is told to leave and when he doesn’t the police are called. Aldred sees himself as a hero standing up and exposing Coral Ridge instead of realizing they did exactly what would be done anywhere. It seems to be Aldred’s position that he could not be at fault and perhaps, what was the real problem was his fundamentalist way of thinking.

Fortunately for me, the book was free, but finishing it was a labor. I regularly told people I was reading the most ridiculous thing I had ever read. It almost makes me think I should pick up a book by a new atheist again soon because at least there is some glimmer of reason in there from time to time.

What is sadder is that people on Amazon have frequently commented about how eye-opening this is and what great research was done. Great research will have better documentation than this and interact with much more scholarly resources. For instance, in writing on the Inquisition, there will be no interaction with writers like Henry Kamen. Of course, Aldred would reject any such scholarship as part of the great Roman conspiracy that has sought to bring monotheism to the world to deny our real history under a gospel of Jesus.

Yet he is believed entirely by some readers. I even wonder if they know what he believes. Is Aldred a Christ-myther? I can’t tell. What does he think about textual reliability of the NT? I can’t tell. Does he think Peter or Paul existed?

Sadder still than Amazon is the fact that we are responsible. When the church does not give a good focus on education, people like Aldred are the result. Aldred regularly writes about a God of love would not allow X to happen, ignoring that God is a God of justice. He writes that he can see no reason why X should be the case, as if that would settle the case entirely.

Aldred is still a man of faith. His allegiance is changed, and for those agreeing with him, it is sadly the blind leading the blind.

In Christ,

Nick Peters

Advertisements

Tags: ,

16 Responses to “Book Plunge: Bamboozled”

  1. tymecomeTim Aldred Says:

    Not knowing difference between B.C. vs. A.D. bars intellectual progress understanding structure and form of human life over time.

  2. apologianick Says:

    B.C. Before Christ.

    A.D. Anno Domini. In the year of our Lord.

    Perhaps if you come to TheologyWeb.com, you can see if your dichotomy can last.

  3. wanda Says:

    It is only ridiculous because you haven’t any knowledge of history. If only you would study some real knowledge instead you retort to simple minded thoughts to appease what you already believe.Fear of knowledge is the scourge of christianity. Once you connect with the dream world you find it impossible, based out of fear, to have a superior intellect. Why do you not use real knowledge to substantiate what you believe?

  4. apologianick Says:

    If you have no fear of knowledge, then come to TheologyWeb and see if you can back your claims with argumentation. I already came to your playground. Do you have the spine to come to mine?

  5. tymecomeTim Aldred Says:

    Natural, wise and prudent people don’t follow foolish Christians around. The worship a pantheon of phantoms written in the beginning of Genesis creation story. The truth is truth whether it is stated in a forest or in front of millions. No real honest basis exist in ancient precedence for Christianity, it’s unprecedented ~ thus null and void for Christian apologist. Christianity is fraud from the beginning, with Rome nailing Yeshua to wood alive for sedition ~ not for sins of people. Acceptance of Jesus Christ makes one a fool in the real earth-world. The jurisdiction of the bible rest only under the Romans A.D. ecclesiastical anno domini revelation, coming from an assumed phantom God, a purview of misapplied belief and faith.The A.D. bible spirit-God; Isiah 45:7 ~ made evil and infected his creatures in his heaven and earth. He predestined mankind to sin at the foundation of his fictional world ~ He God sets up he motherless son to be killed by Rome. Fact or fallacy? Go tell that imbecile spirit-God to clean up his own mess of evil man didn’t innovate evil.

  6. apologianick Says:

    Yeah. Never ever heard Isaiah 45:7 there. Yeah. Care to tell me what the Hebrew word for evil is there and tell me what you know about Hebrew parallelism in their writings? Ironic that you violate your first sentence as well. If you have a spine, you can show up at TheologyWeb, but I’m quite sure you don’t.

  7. tymecomeTim Aldred Says:

    Is this the way a Christian argue illogically jumping equivalently to when a dog goes after its own shadow, thinking another dog was carrying a bone in its mouth? Ha ha ha! Dr. NP, I don’t speak Hebrew ~ only a little English. What happened here, we don’t have consensus on English word meaning? Are you saying the translation was not up to date, is the definitions for EVIL in the English dictionary all wrong–why it’s not okay to use this spelling for message in English? Not a violation for me, you had invited me over and so I came in for good faith and registered. Let whatever can happen take place–we’re humans. However, there’s no need for you to behave like is if we decline to come something has to be negative on our side. I didn’t know about your place, until you and I met on FB. By now do have reason to think Wanda or I have cause to dread you? We know the scope of your thoughts– even Dr. David Sorrell? NP, fact is when I think of the corruption in the root of Christian beginning I want to vomit. Christianity is totally something unprecedented in the world–thus have a real disconnect with human reality. To point, nothing is left to be said for support of inscrutable biblical phantoms. I am a natural human being, since I no longer a Christian. I’m not trying to save souls. Just in for an exchange of knowledge not about belief and faith into any one thing. We are not St. Paul’s fool for the A.D. ecclesiastic Christ. I already know that your spirit-God don’t like natural, wise and prudent people ~ so what type of God you’re out sporting King? Hey don’t forget, Isaiah 7:14, 9:6 not yet fulfilled see St. John 6:15 Jesus heads for the mountain instead of becoming king/ruler as the zeal of God was to performed it ~ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -:)

  8. apologianick Says:

    Little Timmy: Dr. NP, I don’t speak Hebrew ~ only a little English. What happened here, we don’t have consensus on English word meaning?

    REply: Yep. Hebrew is a limited language. It has some 3,000 words so one word can have multiple meanings.

    Timmy: Are you saying the translation was not up to date, is the definitions for EVIL in the English dictionary all wrong–why it’s not okay to use this spelling for message in English?

    Reply: The translation is wrong. Yes. Sorry, but quoting a translation does not prove it is a valid translation. Unlike you, I have actually looked up the Hebrew word and seen its other usages. You see, I try to avoid speaking without research. You should try it.

    As for my definition of evil, I’m an Aristotlean-Thomist. Figure it out.

    Timm: Not a violation for me, you had invited me over and so I came in for good faith and registered. Let whatever can happen take place–we’re humans. However, there’s no need for you to behave like is if we decline to come something has to be negative on our side.

    Reply; Yeah there is. You haven’t thrown your ideas out to the light of scholarship. If your ideas are valid, get some scholarly sources that will back them. You won’t find one.

    Timmy: I didn’t know about your place, until you and I met on FB. By now do have reason to think Wanda or I have cause to dread you?

    Reply: I’ve thought you had since page one of your book. Sorry, but instead of the blind leading the blind, we have the insane leading the insane.

    Timmy: We know the scope of your thoughts– even Dr. David Sorrell? NP, fact is when I think of the corruption in the root of Christian beginning I want to vomit.

    Reply: You’d have to show some. Your theories have no scholarly backing and instead rely on hack jobs like Baigent.

    Timmy: Christianity is totally something unprecedented in the world–thus have a real disconnect with human reality.

    Reply: Non sequitur

    Timmy: To point, nothing is left to be said for support of inscrutable biblical phantoms. I am a natural human being, since I no longer a Christian. I’m not trying to save souls. Just in for an exchange of knowledge not about belief and faith into any one thing.

    Reply: Faith. A term you don’t understand, like every other one.

    Timmy: We are not St. Paul’s fool for the A.D. ecclesiastic Christ.

    Reply: You’re doing a good enough job being one on your own.

    Timmy: I already know that your spirit-God don’t like natural, wise and prudent people

    Reply: Oh he loves us just fine. Too bad you’re not in that category of wise and prudent.

    Timmy: ~ so what type of God you’re out sporting King? Hey don’t forget, Isaiah 7:14, 9:6 not yet fulfilled see St. John 6:15 Jesus heads for the mountain instead of becoming king/ruler as the zeal of God was to performed it ~ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -:)

    Reply: Wow. Strike out again. Sorry. Jesus was not going to be king by force and go conquer the Romans. Actually, as an orthodox Preterist, I see the passages as being fulfilled already. Jesus is king now sitting at the right hand of God as 70 A.D. established.

    You’d know about that if you read something besides Wikipedia.

  9. tymecomeTim Aldred Says:

    Oh, you can call yourself anything you want, it’s null and void for Christianity. I am a sober individual free from bible revelation of phantoms. AD religion is fiction.

  10. apologianick Says:

    I’ll be waiting. I still have yet to see an argument that should make anyone blink.

  11. tymecomeTim Aldred Says:

    Sobriety and cognition please look up those words and get talking relevantly in context with thought purpose. Caveat: B.C. is an era of natural human behavior not controlled by religion. A.D. is a religious controlled scheme. Books of ancient knowledge were burned and inhibited from common access to normalized the so-called revelation, making effeminate white men head leaders of earth ~ they comprised God, and holy spirit in the organized Christian church. What worldview do you live under, BC or AD? Please tell this issues.

  12. apologianick Says:

    I’m still waiting at TheologyWeb. Until then, I’m done with the incoherent ramblings of a mad man.

  13. tymecomeTim Aldred Says:

    My my me! And so let it be ~ between us both there is nothing left to prove our intellectual position it’s all in the public arena, what have we left to chat about ~ except to keep repeating ourselves. Thanks for this nice review, however negative you planned it, Natural people loves reality and the know truth from farce when read it ~ you review works for progress giving added interest in the book. I mean to say people have my thinking in a 244 pages manuscript and your review–that completes the ides of knowledge folks are to receive from us about Eve’s sin. I have absolutely no real interest in Christian inherent corruption. TheologyWeb.com is an A.D. Anno Domini auxiliary to advanced Christian mafia teaching. I now leave with you 1 Cor 1: 27 and 1 Cor 2:14-16, it affirms your’s and mine status: You are foolish, unwise, unnatural, weak, simple in the context of Jesus Christ the product of Roman Constantine 1, at Iznik Turkey A.D. 325. You must never forget the name Jesus Christ was given to a Jewish man named Yeshua, after his death. He was a victim of Rome’s evil act, who accused him of sedition, nailed him alive to cross. Then sell the story to the world that he came from heaven to die for sins of mankind ~ but no ancient history is extant for such precedence. Nick, AD history has the Christian gospel to be founded upon Genesis creation fiction. There you have 2013 years of Roman ecclesiastic seminary academic studies in fiction. I was not born in such fictional world,–so you please be careful not to forget that… where a fictional spirit-God cast a Devil to earth. So you can believe in the AD revelation of fictional redemption from your wrongs you commit against the fictional God. Here’s a caveat citation from the famous book, Bamboozled besieged by lies man never a sinner: page 159, chapter 6 The Roman Inquisition. A.D. 1220 Roman emperor and Popes instituted violent legislation to punish heretics against the ecclesiastical Roman regime. It was all about forcing people to believe in a bogus Jesus Christ, of which you are being an apologist for in this moment. The proof of Jesus Christ, in any scholarship, is in every way resides in evil acts from the start. It’s why the bible was written to praise folks who believe in the fictional God and Jesus Christ. Salute,…come to your senses brother. Christian theology is cancerous malignant ailment.

  14. apologianick Says:

    Your cowardice and insanity is duly noted.

  15. Thomas Bryant Says:

    Nick, this seems to be the new breed of Internet Atheist. I’m dealing with a whole nest of them on a Facebook group; they are arrogant, contemptuous and self-congratulatory in a way that would make Richard Dawkins blush, and believe some of the awfullest nonsense imaginable.

    At least the old type of IA would attempt to bolster their argument with pseudo-scholarship that tried to look like the real thing. Not these guys – the stuff they spout sounds like what you’d get if you put Deepak Chopra, Erich von Daniken and Michel Onfrey in a blender and set it on puree. Its gobbledy-goop, but if you challenge their claims with real scholars doing real work, you are OBVIOUSLY stupid, a bigot, delusional (thats my favorite – I’M the one who is delusional), and just spouting your opinion and beliefs as if they were facts.

  16. apologianick Says:

    “What does the scanner say about their hubris level?”

    “It’s over 9000!”

Leave a 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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: