Excerpt taken from Laura Knight-Jadczyk's article:
Part I: The Ark of the Covenant and the Temple of Solomon



The Bible is an Extraordinary Book: A book which claims infallibility; which aspires to absolute authority over mind and body; which demands unconditional surrender to all its pretensions upon penalty of eternal damnation, is an extraordinary book and should, therefore, be subjected to extraordinary tests.

But it isn't.

Neither Christian priests nor Jewish rabbis approve of applying to the bible the same tests by which other books are tried.

Why?

Because it will help the bible? It can not be that.

Because it might hurt the bible? We can think of no other reason.

The Truth is that The Bible is: A Collection of Writings of Unknown Date and Authorship Rendered into English From Supposed Copies of Supposed Originals Unfortunately Lost.

So wrote M. M. Mangasarian, former Congregationalist and Presbyterian Minister, who studied at Princeton Theological Seminary, and very early in his life renounced his Christian affiliation and pursued a remarkable career as a proponent of Free Thought.

Recently, Richard Dawkins, author of the Blind Watchmaker, suggested that religion was a virus.

Dawkins argued that the widespread presence of religion —despite its lack of obvious benefits—suggests that it was not an evolutionary adaptation. [...] Society provides a breeding ground for the “virus” of religion by labeling children with the religion of their parents. Children, in turn, absorb these beliefs because they are conditioned to do so.

Though it is universal, Dawkins said, religion is not widely beneficial. Rejecting the theory of many of his contemporaries, Dawkins argued that religion has not helped people to adapt or to survive. Beyond acting as a source of solace, religion provides no protection against diseases or physical threats.

“A person who is faced with a lion is not put at ease when he’s told that it’s a rabbit,” Dawkins said. Religion, in Dawkins’ view, not only provides false comfort—it is actively divisive and harmful. Designated as Christians or Muslims by their parents, children are apt to face the discrimination associated with these labels, Dawkins said. Dawkins pointed to the example of Protestant fundamentalists in Belfast spitting at young Catholic girls merely because their parents labeled them Catholic. [1]

Dawkins is right in many respects. Even if I do not agree with his ideas that promote existence as solely the consequence of the "accidental mechanicalness of the universe," I have to say that he has zeroed in on the crucial element of religion - or cult - as it is known in our day: that it is a virus, and a deadly one at that. One thing that Dawkins said that I disagree with is: “A person who is faced with a lion is not put at ease when he’s told that it’s a rabbit.” As it happens, that is exactly the problem we face when we consider our reality. Many people are "put at ease" by being told that the lion is a rabbit. It doesn't help them to survive, or to solve the problems of humanity, but it distracts their attention away from asking uncomfortable questions about our reality that the Powers That Be do not want them to ask. As to why people believe the lies of the Monotheistic Cults, Dawkins points out rather succinctly that religion is a societal norm that stems from children’s psychological tendencies. “It is their unique obedience that makes them vulnerable to viruses and worms,” Dawkins said.

Their unique obedience. Religion is a form of coercing obedience a la Machiavelli.

FULL TEXT HERE