One of the most common general subjects that distinguishes Neocons from Paleocons is the theocratic thrust of the Neos. While the United States were originally formed as a secular nation (simply the fact that the revolutionaries opposed the "Divine Right of Kings", that is, a King is a King because God wants it that way, shows the fact that they did not accept the major European belief of mixing government and religion), there has been considerable disagreement between Neocons and others as to whether certain principles were part of the formation. Not likely is the creation of "a christian nation", as most of the Founding Fathers were either non-christian (Deists, as exemplified by Thomas Paine's writings, including The Age Of Reason) or most who were actually members of known christian churches tended to be less than heavily involved with religion).
Christians, Xians and christians
Naturally, most American Xians are in one sect or another of alleged Christianity, which also is handled in two different ways, depending on what they need to 'prove'. Either some eighty to ninety percent of Americans identify themselves as 'Christian', that is the number used when high numbers are needed to push for the theory of a "Christian Nation", but when dealing with who are 'real' christians, only their particular sect is acceptable. It is, I believe, the Southern Baptists who have an actual list of who the 'saved' are, which is NOT, obviously, the full eighty to ninety percent.
This is also the case in Neocons' use of the terms "Democracy" and "Republic" in referring to the government of the United States. DEMOCRACY, you will notice, refers to when a majority of a poll agree with the Neocon/Xian view, while REPUBLIC is used to refer to situations where the Neocon/Xian view is not a clear majority.
In addition, even in each sect, there are the fundamentalists, and more liberal and open groups. Most importantly is the distinction between Christians and Xians. Christians tend to be quiet, unassuming people who are willing to allow others to live as they wish, with most Christian teaching done by example rather than preaching. Xians are the opposite, the noisy, pushy groups who try to impose their version of 'morality' on others. Xians would more accurately be described as Pauline Yahwists.. they read and quote the Old Testament, and the books of Paul (Saul - more on this pivotal figure later), but you will never hear a quote from Jesus or the Gospels. The Bible is best understood as three sections, rather than the simple Old and New Testaments, with the New being divided into two basic sections, the Jesus stories and Paul's writings.
For a view of what happens when various Xian sects collide, look at Northern Ireland, where Catholics fight Protestants, both followers of christianity, but neither considers the other to be "the true faith". It's a variation that repeats in every formative religion, becoming derivative within generations at most.
[suggested reading: If This Goes On ... by Robert A. Heinlein]
Moral Choices, cherrypicking-wise
There are three different items I want to distinguish from one another, that is Religion, Morality and Ethics. Each has a basic core and source that determines, if examined in a scientific fashion, how legitimate the source can be.
Religion requires a Parent (God or Goddess) who hands down proclaimations, orders actions and creates 'sin' to keep people away from certain activities, which the Parent says are not good for the Believer. These rules can be totally arbitrary, with little if any explanation of why the activity is 'wrong', or 'sinful'. One quote that shows the arbitrary nature of Religion is from Robert A Heinlein: "The traditions of my tribe are not laws of nature"[from Tramp Royale]
Morality is a bit more open, with reasons for the outlawing of certain activities. It usually pulls the Parent/God for the legitimacy, but goes beyond unquestioning obedience. A set of rules, be it the Golden Rule, The Ten Commandments or Jesus' Two Commandments, is in place and consistently obeyed or enforced.
Ethics are derived more from experience, not necessarily from a person's own life, but from information gathered over years to centuries. The most common source for Ethics is a kind of Enlightened Self-Interest. For instance, killing a person is not a 'sin' ethically, but is wrong for several reasons. First, it is a violation of the rights that each person should have from simple fairness, plus in a non-ethical/moral situation, the family and/or friends of the victim could take revenge (which, BTW is Moral under Biblical Xian beliefs), leading to an ongoing feud. (Have you hear of the infamous Hatfield-McCoy Feud? Years if not decades of revenge that never balances).
Undercover Saint
Anyone familiar with the basic stories knows that Paul never met Jesus, unless one accepts the story of his 'conversion' while on the way to Damascus. However, as anyone involved with 'undercover' work knows, having a person in a group that is under investigation is best damaged or destroyed through infiltration and disruption of the organization. The U.S. Government has tried similar things with various organized crime groups, and it is hardly a new idea.
The best way to deal with Xians is to actually read some of the best works about the Bible, as well as the book itself, since the majority are more familiar with the interpretations of the Bible than the actual book.
Here are examples that have been distorted over the years and centuries:
Once more, from the Beginning
The Creation is usually described as six days, then one day of rest, so you can challenge the Xian as to when Humans were created. Reading the Bible, you will discover there are two separate mentions of humanity's origins. The first is on day 6, when it is generally mentioned that humans were created. It again refers to the creation of Adam, after the seventh day when Yahweh rested. (Remember that "flashbacksa" did not exist in ancient manuscripts, they usually were written in the same order as the events). Thus, the dual creations have gone into some traditions as separate, one of the sources of the less-than-humans treatment of various non-tribal members. The reason for the dual creation is because the Old Testament is composed of multiple books that were integrated into one, but with some obvious errors in a careful reading (and this does not require a knowledge of Hebrew or Greek for the details, English translations can be used as well). For more information, check the Reference page under Xians.
The well-known but erroneous story of Adam and Eve also shows how most Xians are using an interpretation of the words, rather than the source material. Here's the summary of the standard story, followed by the errors that anyone can find in Genesis.
God created Adam, then decided that he should not be alone, and thus used a rib to create Eve. (an irony for the anti-science sects in that anethesia is clearly outlined before the surgery takes place). Once Eve is created, she is lied to by Satan in the form of a snake to eat from the tree of forbidden fruit. As a result, both Adam and Eve are embarassed, and are thrown out of Eden for disobedience.
Reading the actual story, the only part that is correct is the first three words of the previous statement - God created Adam. Check before the creation of Eve, and you will see that God considered having Adam mate with a previously created animal, but none of them were appropriate (that is, Adam didn't want to mate with any of them - thus avoiding the first case of bestiality). As a result, God created Eve.
Next, the tree and serpent are derived from picking parts of other sections of the Bible, since the actual story in Genesis says that the serpent is a beast, (the most subtle of beasts) not a manifestation of Evil personified. In fact, what the serpent tells Eve is true - that if she eats from the tree, she will gain the ability to understand Good and Evil. That is why the couple is embarassed by their nakedness, and the fact that they know they violated the order of God. When they are discovered, they are thrown from the Garden, not from Eden, which is a larger area. Because of their violation? Check out the next verse, where the GodS (elohim, the plural) say they had to toss the couple out because they might also eat from another forbidden tree, and gain immortality.
Armegeddon tired of this end of the world stuff
Day after Chrstmas, 2005, History Channel ran The Antichrist, with a look at the general End Times myths. I always say that if there is anything to Biblical Prophecy, I follow:
Matthew 24:36, Matthew 25:13, and Mark 13:32.
However, consider the psychological effect of the fear of dying and the almost continuous claims of our being in "the end times" since the early days of Christianity. After all, do you really care that the world will go on after you die? It's the fact that there have always been wards and rumors of wars, epidemics, poverty, etc. that makes the silliness of setting a date so obvious.
Summary
As can be seen, only a minimal knowledge is needed to overthrow many of the interpretations of the Bible. The knowledge of how it was created, and the sources for many of the stories from other cultures allows the debater to demonstrate a far vaster knowledge than the Xian who uses only interpretation.
Some more of the standard Xian claims, and rebuttals:
"We don't preach hate, we hate the sin, but we love the sinner"
The use of terminology is the giveaway on this. For instance, ask the Xian what he/she thinks of any particular person who is considered an enemy - Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Bill Clinton - and what they think of the person. The likely answer is that the person is "an evil person". That response to that disproves their claim, because if they really "loved the sinner and hated the sin", they would say that the person DOES EVIL THINGS. Instead, they place the basis of the evil on the person themselves, rather than the actions that person performs.
This also shows the prevalence of the personification of Evil,as in the Antichrist (above).
The killing done in the name of God such as the Crusades, etc. are not the fault of God, but misinterpretations of God's Word.
Actually, even if we skip the classic story of Sodom and Gomorrah as evil (see above) people receiving their just deserts, we can still pull actual work by God in destroying people. Check in 2nd Kings, 2:24-25. After several children mock the prophet's baldness (not unusual for children, even today), God directly orders bears to rip apart the 42 children.