Thanks from a former inmate...
I cannot recall a definite time when my mind became experienced enough with itself to understand it was always wrong for it to accept the experiences of other minds without sufficient evidence. Neither can I remember how many years ago my first issue of The Skeptical Review arrived. I can, with clarity, though, say I have benefited immensely from that and each subsequent issue.
When I wrote you 6-7 years ago for a copy of TSR I could barely afford the price of a stamped envelope. If you had not responded, like so many, many others did over the following years, without prejudice and with generosity (sending me TSR free), my mind would have remained on its "own"! I'm not sure I could have survived those years alone. The personal feelings of being alone coupled with the ostracism and hate from supposedly god-loving peers were extremely suffocating. All of you free-thinking individuals and groups alike that donated literature provided my mind with the information it needed. From this blossomed the courage and fortitude to live each day without the comforts of my childhood myths. I developed a proud tenacious sense of moral integrity towards human life. The caring, compassionate, thinking, sacrificing person that I am today I owe to all of you who have stood on the shoulders of others and passed this knowledge on to me.
After 11 years of incarceration within the Texas State Penal System, I am scheduled for release during the month of May. Please discontinue my free copies of TSR. When I am able, I will pay for a subscription. Mr. Till, there still is no way I could afford to write everyone thank-yous. Will you please print this so that they will know I have not and will not forget all of you. My free world home address is included in case anyone wishes to write. I will continue to answer all mail.
In closing, allow me to add to the feelings of many other prisoners, both those inside prisons of steel and razor wire and those of mental construction, a deeply felt thanks to you, Mr. Till, for all the free copies of TSR. My personal gratitude knows no limits.
(Franklin D. Nichols, 1292 VZ CR 3816, Wills Point, TX, 75169)
Editor's Note: One of my main regrets in discontinuing the publication of TSR in a hardcopy version is that most prison inmates will not have access to the internet. I have received other expressions of gratitude from inmates for being sent TSR at no cost to them. Many have told tales of harassment by prison "ministries" that work continually to try to convert them. Many have also told me that there isn't much difference in religious beliefs on the inside from those on the outside. Most inmates express belief in God, so those who view religion skeptically are continually subjected to attempts by other inmates to evangelize.
I wish Mr. Nichols the best of luck after his release, which will have taken place by the time he receives this. I will continue to send him TSR through the remaining issues. I am publishing below, without comment, some more letters that I have recently received from inmates wanting subscriptions to TSR.
A god that kills children?
I am currently at Ross Correctional Institution in Ohio and will be for the next six years. I am writing because I received The Skeptical Review off another inmate who is here with me. As I was reading through it, I realized that it's pretty well interesting. It told me a few answers to questions I had about religion. I have many, many more questions about this subject. I don't really read the Bible that much, but when I do, I just don't understand how people could worship some god that would kill children and even babies, and has no sympathy at all for the wicked. I am no religious person. I do study about the history of witchery, but I don't call myself a witch.
When I had finally read to the end of The Skeptical Review, I saw one article on how prison inmates could receive it for no price. Anyway, I would appreciate really much if you would sign me up for the first twelve-month period, and we can go from there.
(Oren R. Apple #416965, Ross Correctional Institute, P. O. Box 7010, State Route 104, Chillicothe, OH 45601)
A believing inmate...
This is my first letter to you in '02. I do apologize for taking so long to write, and I am sure that I have no real excuse. However, I do want to thank you for your newsletter that you so graciously send me.
Your newsletter challenges, motivates, and provokes me to righteousness. It challenges my present beliefs and opinions, motivates me to search and study for myself, provoking and reminding me to keep building my faith, to live by faith--not in someone else's faith but my faith. To know is higher truth than to believe.
(Ricky W. Smart, #081902/J2-118-L, G. C. I. Annex, 699 Ike Steele Road, Wewahitchka, FL 32465)
Put me on the mailing list...
I heard of your publication in The Book Your Church Doesn't Want You to Read. I was wondering if you could be of help to me and put me on your mailing list for your publication. If you cannot, I will understand.
I must let you know that I have no funds. I am indigent. I am also in AD-SEG (the hole), where I do not get a lot of good reading. I like to read very much to learn, to search for the truth, and to pass my time with some worth. I thank you for your time and understanding.
(Bill Hanner #201139, J. C. F. B-27, 3510 North Elm Street, Jackson, MI 49201-8877).
Can I help?
Would you be kind enough to add me to your mailing list. Mr. Al Kynwolf told me about your publication. Can I help in any way?
(Jill Coit #86530, P. O. Box 392005, Denver, CO 80239)
Lapsed subscription...
I'm sorry I let my subscription lapse. I'm enclosing a check
for
$15. If you can apply $8 to some back issues, that would be nice
otherwise, just renew for two years.
If you have
discontinued or do so, don't refund. Just apply it to your expenses.
You've had plenty of them. You have done the freethought community a
great service and especially those finding their way out of
bibliolatry. I'm embarrassed that I could let my support for this slip,
but it was a case of general slippage, which I'm getting over (slowing
down, accepting being older, etc.).
The last issue I read was September/October 2001, in which you announced your broadened scope, which I thought was a good move. The last issue I received was March/April 2001, but Chuck Brennecke passes on his copies of TSR to me to place on our literature table. I have his copies for May/June and September/October 2001, so I'm missing July/August and November/December 2001 and on.
(P. H. St. Paul, MN 55126).
One of the delinquents...
I was one of those "delinquents" who did not send my renewal in on time. I am enclosing $42 for 5 years plus $2 for the late postage. I last receive the January/February 2002 issue and would like to receive any missed issues. Please prorate accordingly.
I apologize for the inconvenience. Thank you as always for your
continued good work.
(L W., Placentia, CA 92871-0514)
Editor's Note: I will publish below some letters that have already arrived to express disappointment at my decision to stop publishing TSR in a paper edition. One of the reasons for this decision was the constant need for me to spend time on clerical work that took me away from writing articles and replies to letters. In a one-person operation, the one person has to do everything, such as updating address files, bookkeeping, printing and affixing address labels, sorting and bundling by zip code for bulk mailing, answering the telephone, etc. For several years, these demands had taken more and more of my time away from research and writing.
An address label can be affixed to a copy for bulk mailing within seconds, but when subscriptions lapsed and letters were received after the mailing to renew the subscription and request that missed issues be sent, this required me to find the back issues in the storage room, put them into an envelope, and mail them by first class. Even though most--but not all--such requests were accompanied by money to pay for the special mailing, this could not compensate for the time required to meet the request.
In addition to lapsed subscriptions, after each mailing, issues would almost always be returned marked that the addressee had moved or was temporarily away. Often, those who had moved would later write to ask that the issues they had missed be sent to their new addresses, and to do this would require as much time as mailing back issues to those whose subscriptions had lapsed. In this case, there was also a return fee of 60¢ that the post office charged, so getting the copy to the person who had moved cost 19¢ (original bulk-mailing fee), 60¢ (return charge), and 55¢ (first-class postage on replacement copy). Each returned copy, then, resulted in a cost of 50¢ (publishing cost of the first copy) + 50¢ (publishing cost of replacement copy) + 19¢ (bulk-mailing cost of first copy) + 60¢ (return cost) + 55¢ (postage for replacement copy). An original cost of 69¢ skyrocketed to $2.34 each time a subscriber asked for a back issue that he/she had missed because of not notifying me of an address change.
The letter writers above should not think that these comments have been directed just to them, because lapsed subscriptions and unnotified address changes were a regular problem. I am just trying to explain to those who are writing or calling to express disappointment and ask me to reconsider why I have decided to discontinue the paper edition of TSR. Bookkeeping and clerical problems like those above will be eliminated and allow me more time to write and research.
State promotion of religion...
Please accept the enclosed check for a one-year subscription to The Skeptical Review. Use the additional funds for the upcoming increase in postage and to help in the free subscriptions you send to prisoners.
May I include my opinion that although your newsletter is primarily for the purpose of debating biblical inerrancy, I vote for more material that discusses the existence of a god and the negative impact organized religion has on our society. The reason for this opinion is that this country is at a critical juncture where our president is attempting to subvert the constitution he swore to uphold in order to promote his own form of religion.
I also admire your sense of fairness vis-à-vis the amount of valuable publication space you allow those who disagree with you. To me, this policy only increases the probability that your opinions are correct and that you arrived at these conclusions through scientific methodology.
Thank you for your efforts in attempting to correct an egregious, harmful wrong.
(Dennis P. Bernier, 1170 Steere Farm Road, Pascoag, RI 02859-4007)
Editor's Note: Unfortunately, I can renew Mr. Bernier's subscription only through this year, because, as announced in the May/ June issue, the paper publication of The Skeptical Review will change entirely to an electronic format after the last issue of 2002. After that, TSR can be accessed at <www. theskepticalreview.com>, which will be on line by then and probably before.
From the moment that I started publishing TSR, I thought that the most effective way to show readers the absurdity of the biblical inerrancy doctrine would be to let them see articles written by biblicists who twist and distort to postulate how-it-could-have-been "explanations." I have maintained this policy, because I believe that it is a good way to give inerrantists enough rope to hang themselves. This policy has been in stark contrast to Robert Turkel's (see pages 8-11), which is to hide on a closed internet forum and refuse to let his readers see how he could fare in a face-off with informed opposition in an open forum. The cowardly tactics of inerrantists like him tell me that they really know that the inerrancy doctrine cannot be successfully defended.
When I began TSR, I considered myself an agnostic, but since then I have come to see that the existence of a god is so unlikely that I now call myself an atheist. On the internet site of TSR, there will probably be some discussion of the existence of this god that biblicists believe in.
Another Amityville horror...
I have been reading excerpts from your magazine on the web. You seem to have a grasp on the Bible and biblical issues that is miraculous (do I dare use that word in this context). I am a hell-bound nonbeliever surrounded by in-laws, my parents, cousins, etc. who praise Jesus at every opportunity. My wife and I have a daughter, and my in-laws occasionally apply pressure on my wife to start bringing our daughter to church. I steadfastly refuse. Having been raised Anglican, I realize that this is when the brainwashing begins. My refusal to go to church, pray at gatherings, and my self-description as an agnostic have been met with scriptural platitudes and comments about my risking hell for me and my family.
I have decided to fight fire with fire, so please send a one-year subscription to The Skeptical Review. I have started to reread the New King James Version of the Bible and will occasionally debate believers. I am really amazed at how little most of them know about the book they tell me is the word of God. There have been times, however, when I have met the well read Christian who throws a passage at me that I don't have a response to. This is where your magazine comes in. Keep up the good work.
(Orville Ottey, 21 Carrol Street, Amityville, NY 11701)
Editor's Note: One of life's biggest mysteries is why so many people think that the Bible is the "inspired word of God," but rarely take the time to read it. That the Bible just sits collecting dust in so many "Christian" homes is a pity, because if some of these people would just take the time to read it, they might come to the conclusion that so many others have who did bother to read it. They too just might decide that they want nothing to do with the barbaric, vindictive, racist god depicted in it.
Fully recovered...
Please extend my subscription to The Skeptical Review. Your work continues to inform and encourage me. I consider myself and my wife now fully recovered Church-of-Christ fundamentalists. I'm now the coordinator of the Birmingham (AL) Atheists, an active group of about 20.
(Ken Cornelius, 600 Sanders Road, Hoover, AL 45216-1509)
Editor's Note: I recently received an e-mail message from Mr. Cornelius's niece, who informed me of the help he had been in her deconversion. She requested a subscription to TSR and said she had recently given birth to her first child, whom she did not want to be subjected to "all the religious crap" that she was. I'm always delighted to hear of people who finally break the bonds of biblical fundamentalism.
A follow-up letter from K. C...
I will miss the paper copy of your excellent publication and understand your decision to make this its final year. I am your age and was amazed several years ago to learn that you have no assistance in producing TSR.
Your work was influental in my decision to abandon the Church of Christ and then all religion. My wife and I are now happily engaged in evangelistic atheism in Birmingham, AL. What a joy. We regret not doing it sooner.
I came across your autobiography on the net some weeks ago, but now can't get back to it. You and several others were profiled in connection with an errancy discussion site. Where might I refind that?
My TSR expiration date is 3-03. Do not send any refund.
Your "Lesson in Basic Hermeneutics" is a classic.
(Ken Cornelius e-mail,KROSCornAL@aol.com)
Editor's Note: I assume Mr. Cornelius is inquiring about "Long Day's Journey into Light," which can be accessed here, or here. My old Midwest e-mail address, which is no longer in use, is on the second site. I can also e-mail copies. Requests should be sent to jftill@theramp.net.
Subscriptions are still free...
I received my copy of The Skeptical Review in the mail. Being new to the publication, I was disheartened to hear of your troubles. I hope the website is a boon to you and the Review.
I am quite ashamed to be getting a free copy of the Review only to find out you are discontinuing the printed version soon. If you could think of a way I could appease my conscience without disrupting your accounting system (I read about that too), it would be most helpful.
May Darwin smile on you.
(Wayne Duck, 191 Jeanie Lane, Pell City, AL 35128 e-mail, duckster@mindspring.com)
Editor's Note: There is no need for Mr. Duck to feel that he must do something to appease his conscience. The initial subscription to TSR has always been free, and I intend to continue that policy till publication ceases. Then TSR will be free to everyone who has a computer on line.
Rational old goat...
I am sorry to hear that this is the final year of TSR. It has been a real pleasure to have been receiving your publication over the last few years. I wish you the very best in the future. At your suggestion, I will try the internet for future information as you indicated in your publication. My subscription will run out on 06-03, but you certainly do not owe me or anyone else a refund. You have always undercharged for all of your long hours, and putting up with religious nuts.
Best wishes....
(Jesse Sammons, 1420 SE 16th Avenue, Apt. 212, Portland, OR 97214-3764 e-mail, rationaloldgoat@aol.com)
Looking Forward...
Like most of your readers, I am sure, I too am saddened that we will no longer be receiving a Skeptical Review regularly in the mail after the end of the year. Being about the same age as you, however, I thoroughly understand and sympathize with your decision.
I will look forward to the on-line version. I hope (and may I suggest?) that there will be some way that readers of the on-line version can be notified when new articles are published there, perhaps an announcement-only e-mail list?
(Richard Packham, 2145 Melton Road, Roseburg, OR 97470-9320 e-mail, packham@teleport. com)
Editor's Note: I had not considered a notification list like Mr. Peckham suggested. My first impression is that this would involve more clerical work that I am trying to get away from, because the list of those who subscribed to TSR and have access to the internet would number well into the hundreds.
No refund required...
Congratulations on your decision to reduce the stress of a printed bulletin! Although I prefer the printed word, the internet version is quite acceptable. We can always print the articles.
No refund required for advance payment of subscription. I
suggest changing the date on the address label to reflect the last
issue and you won't have to think about it again.
Best regards....
(E. Otha Wingo, 126 Camellia Drive, Cape Girardeau, MO 63703-5722 e-mail, wingo@ldd.net)
Nasty old Atheist...
I am delighted to hear that you are planning to go on the internet. Jerusalem Institute of Biblical Polemics quit their hard copy magazine a couple of years ago and went to an internet publication. I used to subscribe. They mostly attacked the New Testament and their mission was to neutralize the "Jews for Jesus" movement.
The third magazine came the other day and I am looking forward to receiving [back issues] 1 & 2. Although I subscribed for two years I don't want a thing back. It is going to cost some money to get the internet publication set up.
I owe you at least a debt of gratitude for the things about the bible that I have learned from your publication. I was not completely ignorant because I had spent some time in a Lutheran seminary and had studied both the Old Testament and New Testament, as well as Christian Apologetics (how to lie for Jesus). I have had some public debates with local preachers on the existence of god and the resurrection. One of my friends is a Harding graduate and I had a public debate with him a couple of years ago. He was minister of a Campbellite church (call themselves Christians) that is opposed to using musical instruments. They just sing and my nickname for them is "moaners and goaners."
I did think you gave the fundies too much space and I got tired of reading them. Never to the extent that I would quit the publication, however. I felt that you were bending over backwards to give them a chance to express themselves. On the book of Daniel my Oxford Annotated Bible (the Cadillac of study bibles in my opinion) gives a date of 167-164 BC for its origin. Good enough for me.
Nasty Old Atheist,
(Dean E. Strand, 821 W. Locust Street, Davenport, IA 52804-3849 e-mail, dstrand@iopener.net)
Editor's Note: Harding University is my alma mater, so having graduated from their and spent 12 years preaching for the Church of Christ, I can imagine the mindset of Mr. Strand's friend. I did give a lot of publishing space to inerrantists, including two articles in this issue, but as I have said, I consider letting people see the kind of nonsense that biblicists spin to try to defend the inerrancy doctrine is the best way to discredit this belief.
Scientific Boo-Boos in the Bible...
The article written concerning Genesis, the Sun, the moon, and Light was precious. Though it does not prove anything it does establish a question which is deserving of an answer
Though article is good from a biblically non-educated view, it does indicate that it was written without the advantage of an input from a biblical scholar (not a preacher, a scholar).
God bless you all. Keep up the good work in searching, and you will find, keep knocking and the doors will open.
It has been the efforts of archeologists and scientist that have done more to prove to biblical authenticity than even the Church itself. Those that first question biblical correctness are often the ones that eventually prove its' [sic] correctness.
(Keith Dougherty, apck@thegrid. net)
Editor's Note: This e-mail message is typical of what I receive from biblicists who have happened onto the website of TSR. Mr. Dougherty was referring to the article "Scientific Boo-Boos in the Bible," which appeared in the Winter 1991 issue of TSR. Here is the reply that I sent to Dougherty.
Archaeology has, in fact, dealt a death blow to the notion that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of God. If you would read something besides fundamentalist flapdoodle, you would know this. I would love to discuss this with you, but I have ongoing written debates that I am obligated to. I can't see neglecting them to correspond privately with someone who is obviously very uninformed in biblical matters. If you would agree to discuss the issues you raised in my internet forum, where there would be an audience of about 150 to read what I put my time into, I would be glad to continue this. If you are agreeable to this, let me know and I'll send you instructions on how to join the internet list.
As This issue goes to press, I have received no reply.
