ExChristian.Net - Articles

“He’s a great science teacher, but he doesn’t believe in evolution.”

2009-11-25T03:59:00.002-05:00

by Valerie Tarico

It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. – Charles Darwin

Last week, as I was driving a carload of middle-schoolers to a movie, the kids started talking about their teachers. I couldn’t help overhearing, “ . . . He’s a great science teacher, but he doesn’t believe in evolution.” Two days later, a friend reported that her 15-year-old daughter had just returned from at a junior government retreat. “They argued the pros and cons of teaching intelligent design in schools, and she said there were some very compelling arguments on the pro side.” When I repeated the story at the dinner table later, my own daughter mentioned a school mate who feels conflicted about his biology curriculum because his family doesn’t believe in evolution.

Charles Darwin published his world-changing work, On the Origin of Species, 150 years ago this week. What he proposed was breathtakingly simple. It can be reduced to three parts: variability, heritability, and differential survival. Variability means simply that creatures are different from each other, even within a species. Heritability means that those differences are in part handed down from parent to child. Differential survival means that not all of us live to produce the same number of offspring, and that those who have more offspring are better represented in future generations. Once you concede these three points, evolution becomes inevitable.

Even so, for 150 straight years, fearful Abrahamic literalists have been trying to deny the facts about natural selection or at least to keep them away from young minds. Reality threatens their belief that the earth was created in six days and then re-created in an ancient flood (young earth creationism), or their belief that it evolved but was tweaked regularly according to some divine blueprint (intelligent design). More to the point, reality threatens their belief that we -- stinky, mean, bipedal-primates-with-bad-backs who love and hate and make cool stuff and then destroy it -- are the pinnacle of creation and center of the universe.

Generations of scientists have subjected Darwin’s theory to tests that weren’t possible back in 1859. These include computerized reassembly of fossils, radio carbon dating, core samples of geological layers, DNA sequencing, even laboratory experiments that create distinct bacterial species out of a single ancestor. Mountains of evidence have confirmed that, with some adjustments, Darwin was right. Today our understanding of natural selection provides the foundation for the life sciences – genetics, biology, biotechnology, medicine, animal husbandry, and more.

And yet unbelievably, some religionists still labor to create the illusion of confusion. Unfortunately, this forces them to cast aspersions on the whole scientific enterprise. They love the fruits of science in the form of mammography and cell phones and airplanes. But they reject the obligations of the scientific method, which say that before making truth claims you must ask the questions that could show you wrong. And they are deeply suspicious of scientists themselves. (Why would scientists keep getting the answers so wrong unless they were deliberately trying to undermine faith?) Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we labor to deceive ourselves.Reality threatens their belief that we -- stinky, mean, bipedal-primates-with-bad-backs who love and hate and make cool stuff and then destroy it -- are the pinnacle of creation

If nothing else, creationist efforts to undermine science and science education should teach us something about our species, about our impressive capacity for delusion. Given enough motivation and community support, we humans seem to have an almost boundless ability to cling to a story regardless of the evidence. Without religion, there would be no such thing as a good science teacher who “doesn’t believe in evolution.” But given the right ideological filter, this paradoxical teacher becomes perfectly possible.

We all are prone to “confirmation bias” which is a tendency to seek information in support of what we already believe, disregarding any contradictions. Religious orthodoxy over the centuries has refined confirmation bias into an art form called “apologetics.” Apologists start with a set of handed down conclusions and then reason backwards from there, drawing in logic and evidence only as these support their foregone conclusion.

These people, in my mind, worship an idol with clay feet. They don’t worship a Power that is actually great enough to create the intricacies of the natural world, but rather a golden calf called the inerrant Bible or the inerrant Koran. (Call it bibliolatry—text worship. In an age of widespread literacy and printing presses, what better golden calf than a literally perfect book?) They don’t trust that all truth is God’s truth, and that nature really does have something to say about her creator. They minimize the fallibility of our ancestors who wrote and assembled our sacred texts and church leaders who interpret them. Consequently, they don’t see that they have made a god in the image of man.

When it comes to Darwin’s theory, some of the most sophisticated apologists in the country are housed in a Seattle institution called the Discovery Institute. They use the language of science to undermine the work of science. That may be why, in one of the most secular parts of the country, we can find teachers who think that disbelief in evolution is somehow compatible with the obligations of the scientific process.

The creationists will be shown to be on the wrong side of history, but in the meantime, they have the power to do serious harm. In the service of their idol, they undermine the cutting edge education and research that have let us attain our current cultural/technological nexus. In doing so they also undermine our ability to innovate and solve the great challenges we now face: climate change, population pressures, weapons of mass destruction, and resource depletion.

When Darwin first noticed evolution, it flew in the face of everything he, as a Christian, had been raised to believe. It flew in the face of his theological training. It flew in the face of his beloved wife Emma’s devout faith. And so, working almost alone, he spent twenty painstaking years assembling logic and evidence before he finally went public with his suspicions. Through all that time, he had the integrity to follow the evidence where it might lead and ultimately the courage to challenge the apologists. Those of us who care about the future of our species cannot afford to do any less.

You Can Be Healed!

2009-11-25T03:33:00.003-05:00

by David J

Pastor Billy Joe Daugherty

"You Can Be Healed: How to Believe God for Your Healing" is a book by Billy Joe Daughtery, founder of Victory Christian Center (VCC), Victory Christian School (VCS), and Victory Bible Institute (VBI). Daughtery was also the interim president at Oral Roberts University (ORU) of which he and I are both alumni. In addition to being a graduate of VBI and ORU, I am also a founding member of VCC and a former student of VCS. In VBI, we had a class that was so important to him that he taught it himself. It was on healing. To summerize a semester in a few words, the premise was that Christ died for our sins and also our healing. Not only is salvation a free gift for all who accept it, healing is also a free gift for anyone who believes. I won't claim to know who wrote the various parts of the bible or why, but a plain text reading of several of the authors would lead to this interpretation.

Last month, Billy Joe Daughtery was diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma. Thousands of people around the globe (VBI has schools in over 85 countries) began praying for his recovery. The church web site listed several specific things for which to pray, white blood count, cell count etc. Last Sunday morning at around 4:00 AM he died at the age of 57. I feel horrible for those he preceded in death including his wife, several adult children, and even his mother.

My question as a recovering Christian is: If Christ does not heal everyone who asks him, why should we believe that he saves everyone who asks him? It is a sobering thought to those that still believe in a hell/lake of fire. Perhaps this is the one time that the true peace that passes understanding is left to those of us in recovery. His theology was clear that salvation and healing were both paid for at the cross. If healing, that we can witness, is not available to everyone, why should we believe in salvation?

I am glad that knowledge (not faith) has delivered me from the fear of death that his theology instilled. For those left behind, I am sure they will continue to pray and believe and ...?

Uncluttering

2009-11-24T03:20:00.004-05:00

by Carl S

Image by bondidwhat via Flickr

First off, for any Christian reading this, what do the words “Lead us not into temptation” mean? I know that’s from the Lord’s Prayer, the Perfect prayer, of which there are two versions. It means that, out of all those fruits in Eden, the lord deliberately pointed out that you shouldn’t eat those of that particular tree he deliberately planted there, according to your beliefs. It also means that the hands placed so close to certain organs are not allowed to touch and play with them. In fact, there are many examples of the lord’s tempting. You can blame Eve and the serpent all you want, but guess who put the boiling pot of water just where the child would tip it over onto himself?

There is a line in the movie “The Princess Bride”, where the serf tells the padre, “I’m not buying what you’re selling.” All those reverends, popes, rabbis, imams, seers, etc. are selling. In a free market for religion they’re out with sales pitches, putting up advertising in front of churches, on billboards, and broadcasting 24/7.

“People will buy junk when they can’t afford the necessities.” Give them credit; they’re making money up the caboodle, usually tax free, no surprise there. They have also managed to create consumers from childhood, the way McDonald’s and Mattel do. And they get their consumers to endorse and push their products, despite the fact that their products are intangible, like all those other entertainments of TV, movies, magic shows, comedy routines, etc... What they sell is more akin to those “as seen on TV” gadgets. Lacking substance, what they sell, as Lee Iacocca put it, is sizzle. So much depends on keeping up the illusions, expectations, and hope, through slogans, constant trumpeting (the vaguer, the louder), and florid sales pitches and deceptive advertising that “there is more than meets the eye, trust me.”

The beauty of the product is that the fantasy is what the buyer makes it to be, like Barbie, G.I. Joe, that Nemo stuffed toy, that have their own lives plus the embellished lives the owner gives them. Religions try to meet the expectations of all of those who want the toy.

Religions’ stories (and they ARE only stories), and their “need to know” doctrines exist to keep their businesses in business. Another thing they do is adapt, like fast-food restaurants, adding new items to their menus from time to time. They use videos, movies, rock music, etc., all the high-tech available. But, they’re still selling junk you don’t need. You might wonder if many of them care.

They’re selling outdated, unworkable, complex and dangerous contraptions even they aren’t aware of being so, because it’s a living, it’s tradition, and there is ALWAYS a market for hope, of sharing in their versions of the Home Shopping Network, of a nationwide fascination with buying. Why, I know people, as you do, who have bought so much of that junk they don’t need that it’s overflowing their storage spaces. Their minds and psyches are so overloaded that they can’t find the facts and reason to make sense of it or put it in any order, why they hang onto it, or their reasons for purchasing in the first place. And they keep adding still more. It’s like a drug addiction, like alcoholism, aided and abetted by law, where the pushers are the spokesmen of supposed deities.

Well, the consumers are so taken in, have so much of the mutual support they demand, have so, so much invested, that they even swear by these pushers and defend them. There’s little chance they’ll change their mind; after all, that would involve facing the fact that they’ve been had.

There are so many salesmen out there, with so many dubious, conflicting claims and testimonials. What they have in common is that they want your money, even if they can’t use your mind and emotions to serve their power purposes. They CRAVE your trust. And even if you don’t trust them, they’ll welcome the money anyway, please, and thank you.

JUST SAY NO!

And seriously, they shouldn’t be allowed to claim that if you, your family, friends, neighbors or nation won’t buy their products, you will be punished beyond measure. (Or that you had better be punished here and now, and nuts to waiting for later.) All religions should, by law, be required to post the disclaimer: “WE DON’T KNOW.”

I worked with a man who would often quote from his father’s wisdom. One of those sayings was, “People will buy junk when they can’t afford the necessities.” Now that you are “ex”, and you have your life back, where will the money go, and the time, the effort, the emotions you had given to religion?

You might consider UNICEF. I received a newsletter from them thanking me for contributing to an African widow with five children. Her loan enabled her to become an independent entrepreneur, and she eventually took in other children orphaned by parents with AIDS. You might contribute to micro loans to third world citizens, enabling girls and women to be educated and freeing them to become independent businesspeople or doctors, lawyers, etc. You might write letters to the editor of your local newspapers protesting civil rights and moral violations and the ridiculous claims of religion. Some of them might not be published, but some will, and at least the editor will have to read them and think about your points.

There is a whole world to put your free mind to pursuing and discovering. You might think about the trust of your beloved and the tender responsibility you have for her or him. There’s an astounding amount of space created when you throw out all the junk, isn’t there?

UnChristian Gratitude

2009-11-23T18:23:00.007-05:00

by Dr. Marlene Winell

Image by Te55 via Flickr

Recently I had a very short, but encouraging little dream right before waking up. I had been feeling burdened by all the problems in the world. In my dream I got the message that “the butterflies are working to lift our spirits.” I woke up surprised and delighted. Later I shared it with a couple friends who also liked it, amused by the image.

Then I mentioned it to a Christian I know, who responded, “Maybe that’s why God made them.”

Perhaps some of you who are also “recovering Christians” can help me understand my irritation. My guess is that I’m tired of this pattern of making everything good one step removed from our direct experience. In the typical Christian view, nature’s beauty is always “God’s handiwork.” When you look at a sunset or the intricacy of an orchid, you have to give credit to God and be thankful to Him. Nothing is simply beautiful or amazing for its own sake.

This Thanksgiving, lets enjoy and reclaim our gratitude for what IS. I do believe that when we experience directly, without the intervening “author,” we can appreciate more.Two stories from former clients come to mind. As part of their recovery, they were letting go of the Christian mindset and discovering a secular point of view. Much to their surprise, it was an enormous relief and emotionally powerful.

In Australia, “Catherine” woke up one morning and walked into her living room where she heard the early morning bird sounds outside. She opened the doors to the yard so she could hear more and was stunned by the beautiful sound. She realized she had heard these songs many times but never truly noticed them because she always attributed them to the work of the “Creator.” On this morning, she lay down on the carpet to listen. Her husband and kids were still asleep and she had time alone. Soon she was overwhelmed and began weeping. She felt like she was hearing the birds for the first time.

Dr. Marlene Winell

“Natalie” grew up in a sheltered fundamentalist environment in Virginia where everything had to be “of God” and the only art or expression had to be for “His glory.” So when she met a young pianist who could play great musical classics, she was enthralled. She found she loved music, and not just “worship music.” As a gift to her, her new friend played and played on a grand piano while she lay underneath, transported. It changed her life.

So this Thanksgiving, lets enjoy and reclaim our gratitude for what IS. I do believe that when we experience directly, without the intervening “author,” we can appreciate more. We can look at the amazing night sky and let it permeate our being. The smell of jasmine, the taste of pomegranate, the feel of a feather, the rush of a waterfall, the design of a snowflake. The list is endless, and our capacity for awe and wonder can be endless if we open ourselves up. If we must use any spiritual words, I prefer to say these things ARE God, rather than made by God.

Happy Thanksgiving.

The Things You Learn In Sunday School (Part 5) - Elisha Delivers Death to Children By Way of Bear

2009-11-23T07:56:00.001-05:00

by MtlRedAtheist

The Holy Bible tells a story of how Elisha cursed some children to be destroyed by wild bears, because they mocked his bald head. Apparently killing children is not immoral when you do it by evoking God's supernatural powers.

Why are we allowing our children to be taught this stuff?

All music in this video is written and performed by MtlRedAtheist.

Why don't my words REGISTER with them?

2009-11-23T07:26:00.000-05:00

by summerbreeze

It's nice to be "courted," isn't it? But, not when you are asked to return to something that caused you so much unhappiness to begin with.

Amongst other bible studies, I was enrolled in Community Bible Study (CBS) when I was a Christian. I jumped ship after I realized that Christianity was a lie, and it made me feel so beat-down.

After I left, CBS ignored me for several years. Now this past year, they have been continually sending me news letters and forms galore to fill out and rejoin. A few weeks ago, I got fed up and decided to write on the form WHY I left Christianity (I was hoping something just might "register" with someone).

Today I received a two-page letter from Mr. Pat Robertson, Executive Director of Community Bible School. I'm sure that he's not the doofus who we're familiar with. Anyway, at first I tore it in two and tossed it in the kitchen waste basket. After a while I decided to fish it out and read it (it was a slow day).

Have any of you ever been asked to come back to Christianity, in spite of your "well explained" protests?

A two-page letter is way too long to bore you to tears with, but these lines stood out to me:

"I realize you said that for you God does not exist. Many disagree with you but your future will be determined by your own decision "

*** in other words, " Lady you is going to Hell ! ***

"I challenge you to pray if God exists, that He would reveal himself to you -- to open your eyes and heart to understand His love for you. What have you got to lose by doing that? You may gain a lot!"

***I waited for years for him to "reveal" himself! The postman never rang ! ***

"God created a perfect environment, but man in choosing to disregard His will has created a fallen environment for us to live in. We suffer the consequences of sin in our own lives and in the world around us."

*** Dang, I knew that what Billy Jones & I were doing in the back seat of his 57' Chevy wasn't right, but I never dreamed that Hurricane Katrina would be the result !***

"Only by having the righteousness of Christ imputed to us can be hope to have eternal life and produce the fruits of a righteous life. That's why we need a savior because we are incapable of earning our salvation. Yes, there are plenty of good, kind people who do not believe in God. But they are not good enough to earn salvation so that without belief in Jesus Christ they will not experience the Kingdom of Heaven."

***hmmmmm, eternal life and Heaven, there's two words that put together give me the creeps. Just what I want -- kissing God's feet (that's the nice version) forever and ever and ever and ever***

I am toying with the idea of sending him a copy of The God Delusion -- but maybe not. It just could be used as a classroom example of "what happens when we let our minds run amuck in that scary secular world out there... BEWARE!"

Taking the "super" out of "supernatural"

2009-11-21T17:34:00.005-05:00

by Nathan

I no longer consider myself a Christian and told my wife, her parents and my parents earlier this year. However, I still go to church with my wife (a “non-denominational, a cappella” congregation with about 10-12 members) because we have three little ones and it doesn't seem right to make her drag all three out the door and drive 25 miles alone.

So I have been sitting in church every Sunday listening to a particularly conservative, literal message and it has driven me nuts. Sunday's sermon was particularly egregious and so I thought I'd write something just to get things off my chest.

The guy bringing the message started by saying science is a religion in and of itself, then moved on to saying that god is like wind and gravity; you can't see wind or gravity, but can prove they exist by the effects around you. He moved on to say that the defining characteristic for Christians is the resurrection of Jesus and if you can prove there was no resurrection then there would be no reason to believe in Christianity. The reasons cited for believing the resurrection include writing that people saw Christ afterward (up to 500 people at once) and also because the disciples turned from fearful introverts to outgoing preachers of the gospel. The speaker even cited Pinchas Lapide, author of The Resurrection of Jesus: a Jewish Perspective, as writing that the disciples' change is a very powerful argument for the historicity of the resurrection.

I rolled my eyes as I sat listening to this. I took a course called Persuasive Communication and one of the textbooks assigned was Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini. In the book, Cialdini cites the study by Leon Festinger, Henry Riecken, and Stanley Schachter (written in 1956 titled When Prophecy Fails) of a UFO doomsday cult that went from an inclusive sect to open and disciple-seeking when the end of the world didn't happen as predicted. So is the resurrection the only explanation for why the disciples started preaching after Jesus' crucifixion? And it wasn't just the UFO doomsday cult.

From Cialdini's book:

So it was with the Montanists of second-century Turkey, with the Anabaptists of sixteenth-century Holland, with the Sabbataists of seventeenth-century Izmir, and with the Millerites of nineteenth-century America.

The preacher then asked why would people suffer for their faith if it was a lie? I find that question to be equally answerable without the supernatural. There are innumerable instances of people who suffer for some group. Cialdini's book cited research showing that people feel a greater attachment to a group if there has been some personal price to pay. So the idea that a person wouldn't waver even if they were incorrect is perfectly reasonable. From the chapter on Commitment and Consistency, talking about hazing and initiation rites:

There is another striking similarity between the initiation rites of tribal and fraternal societies: They simply will not die. Resisting all attempts to eliminate or suppress them, such hazing practices have been phenomenally resilient. Authorities, in the form of colonial governments or university administrations, have tried threats, social pressures, legal actions, banishments, bribes, and bans to persuade groups to remove the hazards and humiliations from their initiation ceremonies. None has been successful.

And later in the chapter:

A pair of young researchers, Elliot Aronson and Judson Mills, decided to test their observation that "persons who go through a great deal of trouble or pain to attain something tend to value it more highly than persons who attain the same thing with a minimum of effort." The real stroke of inspiration came in their choice of the initiation ceremony as the best place to examine this possibility. They found that college women who had to endure a severely embarrassing initiation ceremony in order to gain access to a sex discussion group convinced themselves that their new group and its discussions were extremely valuable, even though Aronson and Mills had rehearsed the other group members to be as "worthless and uninteresting" as possible. Different coeds who went through a much milder initiation ceremony or went through no initiation at all, were decidedly less positive about the "worthless" new group they had joined. Additional research showed the same results when coeds were required to endure pain rather than embarrassment to get into a group (Gerard & Mathewson, 1966). The more electric shock a woman received as part of the initiation ceremony, the more she later persuaded herself that her new group and its activities were interesting, intelligent, and desirable.

So my view of the “resurrection” is the following: It's made up because that's what people do and people believed it because that's what people do.

Thank god not everyone believes...

Parenting Beyond Belief

2009-11-19T21:03:00.003-05:00

Image via Wikipedia

I have not read the actual book (Parenting Beyond Belief: On Raising Ethical, Caring Kids Without Religion), but I thought it was an apt title for my own story as a parent, because in the end, even with everything I dealt with as a child myself, I somehow managed to parent beyond belief, at least beyond belief in Evangelical Fundamentalist teachings. This also included beyond the trappings I still had to pull my own self out of as an adult too. I do not know how I did it, but I seemed to have done it.

When I was little, I made a vow to myself not to do to my children what my parents, grandparents, and other relatives did to me. This also included on the religious front too. Now of course I did not have children yet, but like every little girl I had dreams about adulthood and family. To this day, I believe I kept that promise to myself and the other day, a conversation with my older son, seemed to confirm that I did in at least one area.

When my sons were little, I did not allow anyone to take them to an Evangelical Fundamentalist church, not even their own grandmother, to her dismay. That was part of my vow and I did pretty well with that because neither knew what it was like to attend one until they were teens. They only knew from my rantings that I did not agree with the beliefs of their grandmother or any of my other relatives.

I would "censor" everything my mother gave them that was religious, making sure it did not talk about "hellfire and damnation", before I allowed my sons free access to them. One Christmas she gave them several Children's Bible story books and saw me inspecting them. She asked, "Is what I gave them OK?" I sort of gave her a white lie and said, "No, they are fine." They were only fine in the respect that they did not preach any particular Christian doctrine, but told the stories in a manner more appealing to children. For all I knew, some Episcopalian wrote the stories to suit children, because it did not appear to be by any Evangelical author.

While I took my sons to an Episcopal Church until they had no interest in attending anymore and only to appease my mother, they had no actual interest in the stories, except for two- one a piece. My older son recently told me that he liked Samson and Delilah, only because Samson had long hair and “kicked ass” when someone cut it. I reminded him, that that did not happen until his hair grew back. My older son said, “Yeah, but he still kicked ass!” My younger son liked the story about "Joseph and the Coat of Many Colours", although I am uncertain as to why.

Regardless, my older son had no clue what it was like for me until he attended my grandmother's funeral. Up until that time, he only heard my rants on various things concerning Christianity, including in a priest's office. The funny thing was, just like myself as a young person, he wanted out of that church as fast as reasonably possible. I thought it was rather ironic, but when we got home, he said, "Mom, I am beginning to understand you."

The sermon was on "The Path of Salvation" and even my mother and aunt, who requested their minister preach on the topic, thought she was going to have an altar call during the funeral. She did not, thank goodness, because I did not want my son exposed to that, even if he was eighteen at that time. However, he felt ripped off, not because the sermon made no sense, but because he wanted to learn something about his great grandmother, who he hardly knew thanks to a few family disputes over religious stupidity. He did not learn a thing about her. Instead, what he got was some bizarre religious concept, which neither one of us can actually explain, because neither one of us understand what the hell they are talking about. We only know such a concept exists and it has to do with how one gets to heaven by following Jesus, Wesleyan style. This means being a "Perfect Christian", whatever that is.

Then the other day, we were once again talking about my mother and my teenage years, when my mother dragged me to church regularly, whether I wanted to go or not. This was after her last “born again” experience. Before that, it was very sporadic that we went to church. Even so, when we did go, I always found it a frightening experience, especially her behaviour after the first two times she was “born again”. She only got worse as I got older and my teen years were not much fun at all. Up until recent years, thanks to her forcing me to go as a teen and calling people heathens if they did not go, I worried about what other people would say about me not being there if I missed church for any reason, even as an adult. I did not want to deal with people telling me this or that all because I did not attend every time the church doors were open.

I also told my son that belief was not a choice, which it was not, and it took years for me to realize I did have a “choice”. He had no clue what I meant by that, so I explained that it was a case of "believing" whether you did or not and IF you said you did not, you caught the wrath of the adults, which I did not want to deal with. So, I said I did when I did not, just to keep them from getting angry with me. As long as you said you did, regardless if you did not, everything was fine and you did not catch hell from the adults.

This is not to say I did not believe some things about it. I did, but it was not what they believed nor did I believe it as strongly as any of them did and do. If any of us kids (my step-cousins and I) said anything that did not stick to what the adults wanted us to believe, we got the Inquisition and my mother still tries to give me the Inquisition to this day, if I say something she deems not to be Christian. Which is becoming more and more frequent and quite a challenge to deal with. There will come a day, probably soon, in which I will confirm to her, I am not a Christian, but rather a humanist and “the Inquisition” will be worse than ever, I am sure of that.

He still did not quite understand, except he remembers the anger my mother spews when we say something contradictory to her beliefs, so he too tries to avoid it. I further explained to him that every piece of information that came my way was censored, adding that we did not have the internet back then, so it was very easy to censor things. I did not get to read anything unless it met the adults' approval. My son jokingly said, "Thank God for the internet." He knew I knew he was joking, because he knows I usually go on rants that humans actually did it, but I did not that time. Instead, I proceeded to tell him about the time when I was fourteen or fifteen years old, in my room, and minding my own business as I read with great interest some information about humanism. I forgot exactly what was now, but I remember it was on humanism and when I stumbled onto humanism as an adult, it all seemed very familiar to me.

I was so intrigued by what I was reading that I did not notice my mother had walked in unannounced, until the humanist reading was suddenly snatched out of my hands. Her face was so red with anger as she shouted, "THAT'S NOT CHRISTIAN!", which she still screams to this day, if something contradicts her beliefs.

I had no idea what I had done wrong, but she walked out with MY reading material without any explanation. I never saw that particular reading material again. To this day, I have no clue what she did with it, except maybe threw it away, like she did so many other things that did not fit her dogma, including Jehovah Witness material.

When I was finished telling him about the censorship and invasion of privacy, he said, "I am so glad you did not do that to us." I agreed with him, adding that is the worst thing you can do a teenager. As a teen, I knew there was a bigger world out there than just my relatives' religious world, because I spent most of my childhood in it, but I was not allowed to learn anything about more about it. The door was slammed shut on the real world and the only thing I was to learn was their religious beliefs, the Bible, Billy Graham, and other like approved reading.

Instead of an occasional foot into the religious world, it was now a 24/7 ordeal, which made life even more miserable than just living with it only when we visited her relatives. I went from a miserably abusive world, in which we had to stay in, due to her relatives religious beliefs, to a miserable religious one after she finally left my father. While I was glad to be free of him, I was not so glad that my reading activities had suddenly become limited and I was forced to believe what they taught, rather I wanted to or not. It was not a choice, unless I wanted to face their primitive anger over it.

Music was a different story, even if they preferred I listened to Christian music. However, it was not censored as much as the reading material was. What I read was more important than the music I listened to as a teenager. I do not know why reading was more important than music, but to my relatives it was. Regardless, I still had to parrot them, if I wanted to get along with them, no matter what I thought. As long as I kept my thoughts to myself, I was fine.

However, my language was censored too. I could not say any bad words or say “God” unless I was talking about Him and in a respectful manner. I had to respect my elders, regardless of what they did to me. This included my bio-father too, for they were/are certain that God will deal with him appropriately and I should not be angry with the man, because anger is a sin.

Thus even my emotions were censored, but even my sons know that is not what the Bible says about anger. Still, any display of emotion beyond happiness or joyfulness, was a sin. I am sure if I had always grown up in that religious environment on a constant basis, my life would have been even more miserable than it was. Even worse if she had not left my abusive father and constantly enforced religion on me at the same time. However, that does not mean some of these beliefs were not imposed on me before she left him. They just were not a constant, except for the one where we were forced to stay with my abusive father due to their religious beliefs. Again, none of it was a choice. It was do or else.

Obviously, I did not take any of this crap to heart, for if I did, I would have raised my sons in a similar manner. Instead, I taught them the Bible was filled with stories and were not meant to be taken literally, there was no talk of Satan, hell, or alike in our home, and above all, I taught my sons to think for themselves, instead of blindly following others. They know the Bible is very errant and that it is filled with myths, but they are not afraid to read any of it. My sons have also been free to read anything else they want to read. If they had questions I could not answer, I would get them the appropriate reading material. Sometimes I would even take them to the appropriate person, like a doctor when they hit puberty, to answer their questions. All of this has made for some very lively discussions between my sons and me because almost no topic has ever been off limits in my home. They expressed their thoughts, even if we did not agree and sometimes I would express mine, if I felt like it.

The moment my older son said, "I am glad you did not do that to us," I felt as though I had done something right as a parent and knew that in at least one area, I managed to keep the vow I had made to myself as a child. I know I was not a perfect parent. What parent is? However, when your adult child says to you such things as, "I am starting to understand you" and "I am glad you did not do that to us", it gives you a good feeling and an acknowledgment that whatever parent you had set out to be at the start, you succeeded, at least in the one area they are referring to at the time.

In this case, with one son who claims to be “Tao Buddhist” and another who states he makes his own rules with no religious affiliation, I would say that, without any help from other non-theists, I managed to parent "Beyond Belief". I do not know how I did it, except to do the exact opposite of what my relatives did to me. My sons are now eighteen and twenty and to this day, no one has indoctrinated them into Evangelical Fundamentalism and I hope no one ever does. They are not even Christian for that matter. So, I must have done something right as a parent.

Big Butter Jesus

2009-11-19T20:49:00.004-05:00

King of Kings (Also known as "Touchdown Jesus" or "Big Butter Jesus"), is a 62-foot-tall sculpture of Jesus just outside of Cincinnati. Jesus appears to be rising from the waters behind the amphitheater at Monroe's Solid Rock Church.

Music by Heywood Banks, the version originally broadcast on the syndicated Bob & Tom radio show.

All images except the first three reproduced with the permission of the web creationists at jeeebus (www.jeeeb.us).

Accept no imitations!

Ever Notice... ?

2009-11-18T16:44:00.003-05:00

by Neal Stone

Image by benuski via Flickr

Ever notice that the Creator of the Universe always needs money -- money that is a monetary system created by man?

Ever notice that when one out of 100 is cured of cancer it's considered a miracle? What about the other 99?

Ever notice that Christians like to say “Christ is the Answer” followed by “No one can understand the Lord's ways?” So what's the point? Are we supposed to find the question?

Friends don't let friends convert to Christianity. Ever notice that those who reject God are “lost,” yet many Christians are still looking for God's Will?

Ever notice that Salvation is supposedly free, yet you are expected to tithe 10 percent of your GROSS income after being saved?

Ever notice that the amount of money, time and help you give to a church or religious organization is far more than it either ever give back?

Ever notice how churches preach about seeking the lost, but once you leave church no one comes knocking on your door?

Ever notice that many of the promises made by Jesus go unfulfilled? Maybe He's too busy carving His image into Cheetos?

Ever notice that even though Christians have access to the wisdom and knowledge of the Creator of the Universe, they still give canned generic answers to tough questions? Apparently, “God has his reasons” is an acceptable answer to why someone got abused as a child?

Ever notice that when someone makes a prophecy they claim to be filled with the holy Spirit, yet when the prophecy proves wrong or false they claim to be only human and made a mistake? But, still they expect you to still believe in their next prophecy!

Ever notice that when a prayer goes unanswered you are blamed for not having enough faith, even though answers to prayer are a way for God to prove himself? Jesus did it many times to prove who he was to doubters! Hmmmmmm.

Ever notice that in the Bible it says a Christian can't be harmed by poison, but if you ask a Christian to drink Drano they will refuse? They won't put their life in God's hands, but still they expect you to do it.

Ever notice that in the New Testament the characters Ananias and Sapphira were easily caught lying by the Apostle Peter because he was “filled with the holy ghost,” and yet many Christians today are deceived on a regular basis?

Ever notice that Christians preach love and compassion, but sing about war and conquest?

Ever notice that Christians look for the End Times, filled with death, destruction, and people burning in hell, and Atheists are considered evil for wanting none of that?

Remember: Friends don't let friends convert to Christianity.

Whose Morals Should Decide My Childbearing? -- An Open Letter to the Catholic Bishops

2009-11-17T03:45:00.004-05:00

By Valerie Tarico

Bas relief of a massage abortion from about A.D. 1150. Image via Wikipedia

Dear Bishops –

In our struggle to get health care for all, you saw an opportunity to make sure that American women can’t afford abortions, a way to be the deciders for all of us. You look at someone like me who has had an abortion, and you see a sin. Perhaps you think that those of us who terminate pregnancies haven’t thought these things through from a moral standpoint. Or maybe we are simply less moral than you are: thoughtless, selfish, or promiscuous.

On the other side of the equation, you believe you know the Divine will. You claim a position of moral authority, confident that the God of love guides your judgment. I don’t trust that this is true. Time and again your predecessors made decisions in the name of God that in retrospect are shameful.

My abortion was a profoundly moral decision A council of Christian Bishops included texts in the Bible sanctioning sexual slavery, scorched earth policies, and human sacrifice. Catholic Bishops said that God gave kings a divine right to wealth and power. Bishops oversaw the design of exquisite implements to torture infidels and prolong their dying. The Church authorities sanctioned a convert-or- kill approach to Native Americans. They endorsed the Vietnam War. They looked the other way while thousands of children were molested by priests, confident that protecting the priesthood mattered more to God than the children’s suffering. They told uneducated Africans that God doesn’t want them using condoms. Church history should be a lesson in humility to us all.

Even so, you insist that this time you are right. You are so sure God prizes every embryo that you are willing to trade on a world with more unwanted children, more women bleeding to death, more families in poverty, more extinctions, more starvation, and more desperation all around. Not only would you make this trade, you would force it on the rest of us by making contraception and abortions illegal or financially impossible. Please understand if I’m not ready to cede my moral judgment to yours.

While I’m confessing, I might as well say that my judgment differs from yours on a number of other issues:

I believe that slavery has always been evil, no matter which sacred text endorses it.
I believe it is immoral to bring more children into this world than we can care for.
Whatever God may be, I believe that putting God’s name on human words, books and institutions is idolatry.
I don’t think that burnt offerings, substitutionary atonement and incense ever fixed anything.
I don’t believe that sex is dirty or virginity sacred.
I suspect that if I can forgive those who sin against me without making someone bleed first, any perfect god can too.
I think that torturing people is wrong, even if you do it for eternity.

I can speak only for myself, but I want you to know that my abortion was a profoundly moral decision. I chose abortion because of an infection during first trimester that causes serious fetal anomalies. My husband and I weighed the decision together. We didn’t make it lightly. In your framework, my decision was immoral. But in my ethical framework, it would have been immoral for me to go through with the pregnancy I aborted. I am ever grateful for my life-loving daughter, my abortion baby who could not be alive today had I carried that other unhealthy pregnancy to term. How many other chosen children will not be here if you get to decide for all of us?

There are few decisions that have greater moral impact than deciding whether to have children, when, and how many, and so I understand your attempts to intervene in our personal lives and political processes. By forcing your priorities on the rest of us you think you are holding us to a higher standard of holiness. I disagree.

When I was a child, I thought as a child, and I bowed to authority such as yours. But now I am a woman. It is my job, in community with those I love, to decide what it means for me to be a good parent, a wise steward, a loving partner, and true to my life calling. My decisions about child bearing play a role in each of these, and so I claim them as my own. This is a privilege and responsibility I do not relinquish to you or to anyone.

Valerie Tarico
Seattle
November 2009

Finding God's Will

2009-11-15T11:38:00.002-05:00

by Neal Stone

All my life as a Christian I was told to find God's will. I had no idea in the beginning what that was or how to do it. Any attempt to find out resulted in me being pushed aside so the more popular kids could find God's Will.

So for a time I fumbled around looking for his will.

As time went on I noticed some things that happened while in church.

I recall one family who son went in the back yard to play. They called him for dinner and he never came. So they went outside to find him and discovered him face down in the mud not breathing. As I recall the child died.

At the funeral and in the halls of the church I would hear that “God had his reasons” or “It was God's will and he has a purpose for this.”

Time went on. A man in our church spent every minute not at work at the church working. Sometimes he brought his wife and kids and sometimes he just went straight from work. They never went to the movies or go anywhere on vacation. All his spare time was spent at the church.

All my life as a Christian I was told to find God's will. I had no idea [...] what that was or how to do it. His wife left him for a single man in the church. He had lots of time on his hands and it wasn't spent in church. I remember the uproar it caused and how everyone rallied around the husband after his wife left him. Supporting him and say “God has a plan for you.” and “It must be what the Lord wants.” and of course being reminded he was free to spend all his time serving the Lord at the church.

I recall one family that let their son go to church. This family wasn't a church member but their kids went. One day they went rafting. All the adults were drunk and the raft was not properly inflated. They hit a rock and their oldest son, about 8 years old, went flying into the river. His body was found a few days later.

At the funeral it was reminded that “It was God's Will” and that he sometimes calls young ones home for a reason.

I recall people dying of cancer, families being divided, women living with violent abusive husbands, but it was all God's Will.

In 1997 I was living with my parents, my health was bad, my job was min. wage and a dead end, there were major problems with my family at home and my life was going nowhere. But it was ok, as long as I was doing God's will.

Is this what I was to look for in my life? This was it? This was God's Will? Constant suffering and agony is the best he can do for me?

I have found God's Will and I don't want it. Sorry God, got better things to do.

Oh look! A Cheetos shaped like Jesus....crunch!

That's me in the corner

2009-11-14T16:06:00.005-05:00

by Jennifer

I have a vivid childhood memory from when I was perhaps eight or nine years of age. I was with my mom in our minivan. I think my younger sister was with us, but I'm not positive about that. I remember saying to my mom, "I'm scared that someday I'll reject Jesus and won't be a Christian anymore." My mother, wholesome and wonderful person that she is, told me that I'd have to be careful. "Just follow Jesus and you won't have to worry about it." I remember other times when she told me that she "worried" and "was concerned" about me, because I was intelligent. "I worry that your intelligence will lead you away from Jesus." As things stand, I suppose she had good cause for concern.

I was born into a fundamentalist Christian home. My mom was raised as a Lutheran, not one of the more liberal ones but one of the very conservative ones. My father was raised in the Assemblies of God. Somewhere along the way, my mom decided that she "wanted what they had", namely speaking in tongues. Before my birth, my parents attended AG churches for years. Beginning the year I was born, they began attending a Foursquare Gospel church, which is very similar to AG. When I was 11, we switched back to AG, because my older sister and I were involved in many of their programs with some friends who had left our Foursquare church.

I didn't do much questioning as a youngster. My child mind knew that things like parting the sea, a global flood, and a virgin birth weren't logical, but I didn't think much about it.

To protect us from the dangers of the big, bad, scary outside world, my mom began homeschooling my older sister and me when I started kindergarten. (My sister had gone to Christian school up until that point, but my parents couldn't afford for both of us to go.) Mom was a teacher by trade up until I was born, and so I did not miss out on basic knowledge, and I benefited from one-on-one instruction. The problem was that I was a painfully shy child, and keeping me home certainly did not help me break out of this mold. I believe that it has made relationships and social interaction difficult for me to this day, though I have learned how to handle it.

Keeping us at home, and restricting our social interaction to church and a Christian home school group, made it possible to indoctrinate us to the fullest extent. (I was permitted to join Girl Scouts and softball leagues, but being shy, I never tried to socialize with those girls outside meetings and practice/games.) We could not be exposed to outside ideas, so we were "safe".

I went through a great "spiritual crisis" at age 13, firmly believing that I had "committed the unforgivable sin", blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. In a rebellious moment, I had muttered under my breath that I hated him. For months, I wept and worried that I would burn forever and no forgiveness was possible. I sought out pastors for advice, and was told that nobody who cared as much as I did could have committed this sin. Nothing allayed my fears. Time finally moved it to the back of my mind, but I participated in church activities with increased fervor, in an effort to prove to God how sincere I was. From age 9-13, I had been the star of the church girls' program (Missionettes). In 6th grade I mastered Bible Quiz, where I memorized something like 536 questions and answers. At age 14, I raised money and went on a missions trip to Switzerland.

Longing to experience something of the outside world, I begged my parents to let me go to high school. Public school was out of the question. I might learn about evolution and have sex education other than abstinence - the only righteous way! (True, we did not live in a good area and the high school, with its fences and metal detectors, more closely resembled a jail than a learning institution.) They sacrificed for me to go to a Christian school, where I dutifully attended prayer group for the last 10 minutes of lunch every day. Because I had so little skill or experience in dealing with people, I was a virtual outcast my freshman year, and cried in the bathroom every day. I asked God to help me make friends, but he was deaf to my cries. I tried to tell myself that perhaps I was meant to learn a lesson from it, but I did not believe it. I was a good kid who was mocked for her shyness and awkwardness (though there were a few kind souls who occasionally reached out). What lesson did I need to learn?

Thankfully, the last three years of high school were much better. In fact, I categorize them as the best years of my life. This was due to good friends, though, not God. (Of course my friends were godly, though!) I continued to participate in youth musicals and such at church, though I felt unworthy. I still believed that everyone needed to be saved from eternal damnation, but I no longer believed that people who had a drink on occasion were awful sinners. I wondered if this meant I were turning toward a life of sin. Still, I wept when I found out that a lifelong friend of mine had become pregnant outside marriage at age 20. I was 16 at the time, and I remember crying to a friend, "People have always told me I was just like her! I wouldn't do that! Why would she do this? She was raised better!" The friend to whom I cried told me that I could mourn my other friend's lost innocence, but that God could forgive her and so must I. I did not have to follow in her footsteps. Looking back, I am astonished at how sick and twisted all this really was.

I also began to question the role of women in church during junior high and high school. I began to be angry over the treatment of women as inferiors, and was never satisfied with the pathetic explanation that we "weren't inferior, just had different roles." I remember once, around 15 or 16, listening to a sermon about how women were created to be "helpmates" and should be submissive. I sat there, clenching and unclenching my fists and taking deep breaths at how offensive and twisted and disturbing it was.

My path towards freedom from religion really came after high school. I went away for my freshman year and again was miserable (just like my first freshman year). I'd never been away from home, and I missed my family. I dutifully attended church weekly, and occasionally went to Christian groups on campus. Being exposed to other people, with other beliefs, began to open my mind. I still believed my way was the right way, but I think this is when I began to question it. After one year of homesickness, I moved back and transferred to the university in my hometown.

Towards the end of college, a "questioning" friend of mine (whom I met through my best friend from high school), was exploring Judaism. I went to synagogue with her and was intrigued. This led me on a journey of taking classes for conversion. I could see that Christianity had made a desperate attempt to twist Hebrew prophecies of the messiah so that Jesus would "fit" them, but they did a piss poor job of it. It was obvious. I met my boyfriend (now husband) shortly after college. He went away to go back to school; I found a job and followed him. This kept me from completing my conversion, which I now realize is a good thing. I would've been apostate from two faiths! LOL!

Over the years, as I read and sought knowledge, I came to the inevitable and unmistakable conclusion that there probably is no god or gods. If there is, he/she/they/it does not want to be known. He/she certainly isn't all powerful, and DEFINITELY not good or loving. I realized that the entire bible is full of contradictions that cannot be reconciled. How can this be the work of god? It obviously isn't the inerrant thing I was taught it was. More, the god of the bible is downright EVIL. He condones rape, child sacrifice, pillaging, conquering, slavery, treating women as animals and as vulgar, unclean, overly emotional, unthinking, vain, inferior possessions. It's despicable. I not only don't understand how people believe it, but I don't understand WHY anyone would want to. I'm not as familiar with other religions as Christianity and, to a lesser extent, Judaism. Yet the knowledge available to us says there is no god of any kind.

I have been chronically ill since I was 20, and it has reached a point that I'm not working because my health doesn't permit it. I could not go to graduate and law school as planned. Illness quite literally destroyed my life and dreams, and left me with little to live for.

I frequently am told that people are praying for me, but I wish their prayers would do some good. I know they won't. These well-meaning people tell me that if I'd just believe, then I could be healed. But plenty of people believe and AREN'T healed, and they just say that it "must be God's will." Sick god, if you ask me.

There are actually days that I consider going back to church. I sometimes long for the comfort of believing that, shitty as this life is, there will be something better after it. I know now that there isn't, and I find that very difficult. I cannot bear the thought of not being with my loved ones for eternity. The thought that we probably cease to exist after this life is horrific, because I love my family tremendously. Despite the religiosity, I had a happy childhood. I had everything I needed, and knew I was loved.

I am trying now to accept that there is nothing else, and that is hard, particularly because my dreams have been crushed in THIS life - the only one I have. Yet, painful as it is, I don't want to go back to false hope and false belief.

Sage's Wager

2009-11-12T12:50:00.006-05:00

by WizenedSage

Image by jchihos via Flickr

Pascal suggested a wager that boils down to this. Why not believe in god if it might benefit you, and at worst will do you no harm? Of course, we know it can do harm. Many have suffered for years and years over fears of hell for themselves or others. Also, most atheists and agnostics don’t really have a choice of believing. We cannot choose to believe in gods any more than we can choose to believe in fire-breathing dragons; all the evidence that we see points in the other direction.

I would like to propose a similar wager which I will call “Sage’s Wager.” In its briefest form, it asks the following. If you want to know how the world really works, why make a leap of faith to believe in a god when such leaps fail most (or all) of the time, and science so obviously works? Most Christians would agree that Christianity requires a “leap of faith” since there is no compelling, objective evidence for the existence of the Christian god. If there were, then way more than the current one-third of the world’s population would be believers. There have been a bit over100 billion homo sapiens who have ever lived on this earth^[1], and perhaps ten percent were Christian. This means that roughly 90 billion people throughout history have believed in other gods. And yes, most “knew” in their hearts that they had found god. Can you be absolutely sure that your 10% got it right - and a whopping 90 billion got it wrong?

The scientific method has been proven to hone in on truth over time. Every piece of technology in our modern world proves this -- from the apple corer to the flush toilet, the radio to the computer, indoor plumbing to the kitchen stove... everything. True, science does not have all the answers, but that it works is as obvious as the buttons on your shirt and the zipper in your pants. Because of science, we no longer live in caves huddled in animal skins.

In contrast, faith as a method for discovering truth has always - or nearly always - failed at finding the truth. There have been thousands of false gods through history, all built on faith, no more than one real one, and perhaps none are real. Science says there are no miracles, only the inviolable laws of nature, while every god ever conceived (or revealed?) is dependent on miracles. Science succeeds over and over where faith has failed over and over. Do you really want to bet on faith? History shows that’s the long-shot bet, at best ten to one against. History’s ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Norsemen, Sumerians, Aztecs, American Indians, Incas, Persians, Chinese, etc., etc., believed in false gods. Then there are all the false gods of today in India, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, etc.; all false.

True, science is no help when it comes to questions of morality, but we don’t need science for that. We all learn the Golden Rule as children, and we need little else to answer most moral questions. Besides, the Bible is really no help on moral issues either. The Bible says we should execute homosexuals, disobedient sons, and people who work on Sundays. Virtually no Christian would agree with these directives, and none act on them. Christians ultimately decide on their own what is moral when they think the Bible is wrong, just like the rest of us. And why would you expect morality from Jesus anyway? This was a man who was quite all right with a plan to torture the majority of humanity for eternity (Matt. 22:13-14).

Are you afraid to trust your own reason? Would your creator fault you for using your legs to walk, or your eyes to see? No? Then why would he fault you for using your brain to reason through a question? Why would the creator of human intelligence want blind faith from people^[2]? The bottom line is this; faith has failed miserably and consistently. The overwhelming majority of humans now and throughout history – at least 90% - have believed in false gods because they made a leap of faith and accepted miracles. You are surrounded by the successes of science, a method for learning how the world really works which denies miracles. Shouldn’t you consider the odds rationally? Human history proves decisively that your chances of believing in a real god are somewhere between slim and none, and likely much, much closer to the latter. I urge you to take Sage’s Wager, it’s never been proven wrong!
_________________________

[1]http://www.prb.org/Articles/2002/HowManyPeopleHaveEverLivedonEarth.aspx

[2] I wish this brilliant phrase were original, but I borrowed it from someone on this site and can’t remember the author. But thanks anyway – and sorry for forgetting.

Open-mindedness, anecdotes and lies! Oh, my!

2009-11-12T03:52:00.006-05:00

by MtlRedAtheist

Image by Dr Case via Flickr

Recently I had a discussion with my Evangelical father-in-law, which went surprisingly well (for a religious debate). It started with an argument between my mother-in-law and my wife and then somehow the conversation got hijacked by us (the men). I know I have to work on that one, seriously. I got involved when my mother-in-law accused my wife of being closed minded for not accepting her beliefs in Creation. Her exact words were, “I wish you could just be more open-minded!” My father-in-laws take wasn’t that we are “closed-minded”, but rather we are “less open-minded” than they are. I obviously disagreed. Here is a summary of some of the points I covered in this conversation. I will be leaving out a lot of the conversation out and focus on a few of the points that I was pleasantly surprised to have been able to make.

My father-in-law believes the Bible to be the infallible word of God. He believes it contains no errors and takes it literally. Since he suggested that we are less open-minded, I asked him if he has committed to believing the Bible to be completely true and accurate. He said, “Yes.” I asked him if he understands everything that is written in the Bible. He said, “No.” I asked him if any external evidence or ideas can convince him otherwise. He said, “No.” He is firmly committed to believing the Bible at all costs. I explained to him that my understanding of what it means to be open-minded is to be willing to modify your stance or opinion on a topic as more information is introduced, even if it involves completely abandoning the previous understanding when it has been proven to be false. He agreed that that was a good definition of open-mindedness. I explained that I cannot see how someone who has admittedly confined the scope of his mind to the parameters of the Bible can consider himself open-minded. I was really surprised to have been able to have the floor to complete that point. Praise be to Zeus!

My father-in-law tends to rely heavily on anecdotes to help encourage people’s faith, and in this case with me, as evidence for his beliefs. He expressed to me that it can be hurtful when he shares a very personal story about how he feels God supernaturally intervened in his life and I try to rationalize it by thinking of the possible natural explanations for these stories as an alternative. If I recall correctly, I believe he used the words, “it rains on my parade.” He gave me two stories this time. One about a hockey player who always had one leg considerably shorter than the other who was healed and another about a lady in his church who had Lupus (a disease for which there is no known cure) and was healed. In each story the doctors were “astounded” and proclaimed it a miracle.

For each of these stories I thought up some possible natural explanations. It bothered him that I would default to speculating about natural explanations rather than take his word that it was supernatural. I said that if the natural possibilities I put forward are plausible, then why should I default to accepting it was supernatural? Praise be to Poseidon for giving me the floor to make that point.

I also took this opportunity to boldly challenge him on his honesty. I asked him if he had fact checked these stories before sharing them. He told me he didn’t feel it was necessary, because he trusted the sources. I pointed out that he was then spreading these stories without being reasonably certain that they were true as they were told. I shared an anecdote of my own to make a point. I have a friend who has crones (a disease for which there is no cure). Many years ago, she went to a “healing service” at a church and someone prayed for her to be healed of her crones. She believed she was. She testified how the doctors couldn’t find a trace of the disease in her and that it was gone. As a Christian in those days, I was impressed. I shared with my family and friends. This story began to spread among the faithful. As the story continued to spread, she became ill again and discovered that the crones was still very present. She was not healed. The story had spread to the point where it was impossible to correct the information for everybody that heard it. For all I know, the story continues to spread to this day.

I also took this opportunity to boldly challenge him on his honesty. I asked him if he had fact checked these stories before sharing them. He told me he didn’t feel it was necessary, because he trusted the sources. I pointed out that he was then spreading these stories without being reasonably certain that they were true as they were told. I shared an anecdote of my own to make a point. I have a friend who has crones (a disease for which there is no cure). Many years ago, she went to a “healing service” at a church and someone prayed for her to be healed of her crones. She believed she was. She testified how the doctors couldn’t find a trace of the disease in her and that it was gone. As a Christian in those days, I was impressed. I shared with my family and friends. This story began to spread among the faithful. As the story continued to spread, she became ill again and discovered that the crones was still very present. She was not healed. The story had spread to the point where it was impossible to correct the information for everybody that heard it. For all I know, the story continues to spread to this day.

These points were made during a very lengthy conversation with lots of interruptions on both parts and a lot more information from both sides that were shared. It didn’t go as smoothly as it appears above, but my point in posting is to praise Jah Rastafari for the little openings he provided to slip in the above points, that I consider valuable, to an otherwise chaotic conversation.

Like Alcohol, Religion Disinhibits Violence, Doesn't Cause It

2009-11-11T06:15:00.019-05:00

by Valerie Tarico

Last week a Muslim US army psychiatrist, Nidal Malik Hasan, shot and killed 13 of his fellow soldiers on the Fort Hood military base, injuring another 29. In response to the Fort Hood shootings, some people are blaming Islam. Others are saying Islam had nothing to do with it, that the problem is our war of aggression or failure to care for psychologically wounded soldiers. I believe both are wrong.

The relationship of religion to violence is complicated. With the possible exception of Buddhism, the world’s most powerful religions give wildly contradictory messages about violence. The Christian Bible is full of exhortations to kindness, compassion, humility, mercy and justice. It is also full of exhortations to stoning, burning, slavery and slaughter. The same can be said of the Koran. The same can be said of the Torah. Believers who claim that Islam or Christianity or Judaism is a religion of peace are speaking a half truth—and a naive falsehood.

The human inclination toward peacemaking or violence exists on a continuum. Happy, healthy people who are inherently inclined toward peacemaking focus on sacred texts and spiritual practices that encourage peace. Those who are bitter, angry, fearful or prone to self-righteousness are attracted to texts that sanction violence and teachers who encourage the same. People along the middle of this continuum can be drawn in either direction by charismatic religious leaders who selectively focus on one or the other.

The world’s most powerful religions give wildly contradictory messages about violenceEach person’s individual violence risk is shaped by a host of factors: genetics, early learning, health, culture, social networks, life circumstances, and acute triggers. To blame any act of violence on religion is as silly as blaming an act of violence on guns or alcohol. But to deny that religion plays a role is as silly as denying that alcohol and guns play a role. It is to pretend that religions are inert, that our deepest values and beliefs about reality and morality have no impact on our behavior.

From a psychological standpoint, religions often put a god’s name on impulses that have subconscious, pre-verbal roots. They elicit peak experiences like mystic euphoria, dominance, submission, love and joy. They claim credit for the moral emotions (e.g. shame, guilt, disgust and empathy) that incline us toward fair play and altruism, and they direct these emotions toward specific persons or activities. In a similar way, religions elicit and channel protective reactions like anger and fear, the emotions most likely to underlie violence.

What is the role of religion in a tragedy like the Fort Hood shootings? The answer isn’t simple. From the swirl of conjecture and hype is emerging the image of a man who was lonely, who couldn’t quite seem to win at love, and who was profoundly troubled by the horror stories brought home by his soldier clients. Do therapists experience vicarious trauma? Absolutely. Does this trauma put their own mental health at risk? Absolutely. Many of them deal with this risk by seeking professional consultation, asking for support from loving family and friends, and limiting the number of post-traumatic clients that they see. It appears that Hasan made at least tentative attempts in several of these directions. But primarily he turned to forms of Islam that only deepened his sense of alienation and anger. In what must have been an anguishing conflict of loyalties, piety helped him to resolve the conflict in favor of co-religionists over compatriots. Ultimately, rage won out—righteous, sanctified rage—which came to matter more than any value he as a healer placed on his own life or the lives of his colleagues and clients.

I would argue that, like alcohol, religion disinhibits aggression rather than causing it, and that it does so only when other factors have created conditions favorable toward violence. (I might also argue that under better circumstances religion disinhibits generosity and compassion.) As many have pointed out, thousands of Muslim servicemen in the U.S. military shot no-one last week, nor will they unless they find themselves assigned to combat. Similarly, millions of people consume alcohol without insulting, hitting, kicking, stabbing or shooting anyone. Most of us are peaceful drinkers and peaceful believers. Yet, statistically we know that without alcohol assaults would be less common. So too, we all know that when suicide bombings happen, Islam is likely to be involved. And, I would add, when we hear that an obstetrics doctor has been shot or a gay teen beaten and left to die, or a U.S. president has announced a “crusade,” we know that Christianity was likely a part of the mix.

In general, as the gospel writer said, it is far easier to see the mote in our brother’s eye than the log in our own. American culture is bathed in Christianity, and even for most secular Americans, is easy to see Islam’s role in violence while missing the times when Christianity plays the same role. But the rest of the world doesn’t see us through our own rose colored glasses, and under a bare light bulb, American Christianity retains shadows of the inquisitor’s hood and implements of torture.

In recent years, the European and Australian press repeatedly have called attention to horrors being perpetrated in Africa thanks to American missionary dollars, a story that has been slow to get mainstream American press coverage. As Evangelical and Pentecostal Christianity spread across Nigeria and Congo, thousands of children are being beaten or burned or disfigured with acid after being condemned by Christian ministers as “witches.” After all, the American missionaries teach that the Bible is the literally perfect word of God, and the Bible says, “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live” (Exodus 22:18). When children are condemned by pastors and priests, exposed in the name of Jesus by the Holy Spirit himself, parents abandon them and their villages drive them out. The lucky ones find refuge in shelters. (For photos click here.)

Meanwhile in Uganda, American Evangelicals have helped to advance prison terms and death penalties for African gays. The Family, an American Christian organization with members in congress helped to convert Uganda’s president to their form of politicized Christianity. American activists attended a conference last March aimed at “wiping out” homosexuality. By this fall, a bill had been introduced that would allow the death penalty for gays with AIDS and institute jail time for parents who fail to turn in their homosexual teens. Horrors such as these don’t seem to have abated the flow of salvific dollars, Bibles, and earnest missionaries eager for converts any more than suicide bombings have dried up support for madrassas.

Was the Fort Hood murder spree caused by Islam? Are the African murder sprees caused by Christianity? A yes answer is far too simple. But the fact is that religion in America and around the world continues to disinhibit lethal violence. For us to vilify Muslims or Christians or any group of believers collectively is to engage in the familiar act of cowardice we call scapegoating. It means, ever and always, that we end up sacrificing innocents to appease our own fear, anger and thirst for vengeance. But for us to ignore the complicated role of religion in violence is a different kind of cowardice, one that has been indulged by peace-lovers among the faithful for far too long.

A devil's union

2009-11-10T13:48:00.023-05:00

by The Thylacine

Exploit or abuse your family, and end up with a fistful of air; common sense tells you it's a stupid way to live. (Proverbs 11:29, The Message)

Had a fabulous weekend a couple of weeks ago. I thought I was going to the Australian Motorcycle Grand Prix and catching up with some very old friends -- it was great but that was only a very small part of it all. It turned out that the reason behind the pressure to attend was that a couple I first met while living in a university college (1973, they insisted... a bloody long time ago anyways) was finally tying the knot and getting married. The outdoor ceremony was hilariously entertaining with, among other things the bride being given away by her eight-year-old grandson.

As there were no parents still with us to give the traditional speeches, both the bride and groom filled in. Both are professors in their 60's; their public speaking skills are well honed. With good humor the Bride answered the question we had all been asking..."Why did you wait so long?" It turned out that she was the daughter of a Methodist Minister who had absolutely refused to have anything to do with the man she "had sinned with". While she had been welcome in her parents house, her partner and children were not. In fact she was expressly forbidden to even speak of them -- something which caused great consternation when she went into labor on a visit and, as she put it, "The old bastard with the back-to-front-collar was bellowing to her mother not to ring the groom as they were getting into the car to go to the hospital". The manner of the telling made it seem very funny, but imagine the anguish it caused at the time.

She continued her speech saying that some people have different kinds of luck in their lives: some become wealthy, some famous, some get to do exactly what thy dream of. Her lucky break had been in the form of meeting her partner, from the time she invented a lame excuse to get him into her college room and clumsily seduced him, she couldn't remember a moment when she didn't feel married to him. Now, four children, five grandchildren, three mortgages, ovarian cancer, three years of surgery sessions to fix a badly broken leg (His) it was very easy for her to say "I do" because unlike 99% of brides there was no risk in her choice, She knew she had made the best. After all of that the "old bugger with the back-to-front collar"still refused to recognise their marriage and there was no way she would ever have a ceremony while he was around to witness it. That was why it took so long.

The marriage celebrant was forbidden to mention any deity in the ceremony. The Groom said that he regretted not being allowed to participate as a family but asked,"Who were the real losers? Our kids have all surpassed us and the old religious fool missed a golden opportunity to influence them with his god stuff when they were younger and impressionable. For all his judgmental ranting he ended up an impotent hypocrite". The eldest granddaughter went to her never met grandfather's burial and caused a stir by introducing herself, with the simple act of giving her mother a hug and calling her "Mum"... only after she had chatted very amicably with her cousins. This forbidden "child of a devil's union" has recently graduated as a specialist Physician. Apparently there were many murmurings that with the old padre out of the way, the family could get back together, but the happy couple are yet to receive an invitation and aren't about to hold their breath until they get one.

Peter and Robyn have been together for 40 years. Like all of us it has not been an easy journey and at times they have had to work very, very hard. How wastefully sad that this truly excellent example of a marriage had to be blighted by religious blindness and bigotry.

Here's to the Bride and Groom. As always, I wish them well.

Cold Comfort

2009-11-07T11:45:00.008-05:00

by Tony O

You all know that one thing that Xians like to put forward as their justification or rationale for a belief in gawd is that gawd provides “comfort” and “consolation” for the dying, for the grieving, or for those in crisis. I would like to tell you of something that I witnessed which gives the lie to this claim. Please note that I am not generalising to all Xians, I’m simply offering this one thing as a particularly egregious example of the lie of “consolation.” Every word of the following is true.

My wife has two very good friends. These friends had a daughter. She died from an undiagnosed heart defect. She was two years old. She was taken very ill, brought into hospital and died the next day despite the best efforts of her doctors and nurses.

The funeral was held at the Methodist church that my wife’s family attend. It was, as you would imagine, dreadful. The worst part was seeing the tiny coffin being carried into the church.

The time came for the pastor to say the eulogy. The pastor knew the family well. I waited for what he would say. Do you know what he said?

Nothing.

Not a word.

In fact, his exact words were “There’s nothing that I can say that can make anything any better at this awful time”. Then the service moved on to hymns.

I had wondered what crumbs of consolation, what scraps of the comfort of jebus and resurrection this man of gawd would offer to them at this time of their public grief. But he said nothing.

Now you and I might, as lay people, also have nothing to say to people undergoing such a terrible loss. I would imagine that we could not, unless we had been through something similarly terrible, have anything to say that would make the slightest bit of difference or make these people feel any better. All we could do is be there for them.

But this was a “man of gawd”. A man of belief. A man who gets into his pulpit every Sunday to bang on about jebus and gawd and how we will all be saved and live in eternal bliss with our lord. But he said nothing.

Later, I found my self wondering “Why”? Why did he feel unable to say nothing about the alleged life everlasting, the joy and peace that can be found in our supposed rebirth in jebus?

I don’t mean to put words into anyone’s mouth or ascribe thoughts to people which may or may not have been there. But thinking about it later, the only conclusion that I could come to was that this purported man of gawd didn’t believe a word of it himself, and he must have realised that spouting the usual hollow Xian platitudes would have been the equivalent of spitting in these poor people’s faces. So much for the consolation of belief.

Except A Corn of Wheat...

2009-11-06T04:20:00.002-05:00

by Sharon: Bachelor of Science UM

Image by ohadweb via Flickr

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit." John 12:24 KJV

This verse, attributed to Jesus in the New Testament, is glaringly wrong. Can you see why ?

Never mind whether or not Jesus actually lived, or whether or not this translation holds the "true" words of God. For the sake of argument, let us assume all of that is true, and these were the actual words spoken by Jesus, and therefore the actual words of God to us. What is wrong with the above statement ? Where does this statement fail in its assessment of both how to grow crops and how to live ones life?

For years I had an organic garden I cultivated and tended. It gave me great joy to learn the intricacies of how best to grow flowers and vegetables. I learned much about germinating seeds and spent many happy hours in my house with small containers of dirt containing all kinds of seeds under warming lights, waiting for the first hint of spring.

We have the advantage of science which explains that when you plant a seed it can do one of two things, it can die (many do) or it can germinate. So what is wrong with this statement by Jesus ?

Well first of all it shows that Jesus and those in his generation, did not know the first thing about what happens to seeds when they are planted! Apparently they thought that when you plant a seed it dies and then "springs to life" in some sort of "resurrection" event thereby producing bountiful harvests. That is not what happens to seeds when they are planted.

We have the advantage of science which explains that when you plant a seed it can do one of two things, it can die (many do) or it can germinate. Those seeds which remain alive under the ground and germinate are the ones that produce crops. Those seeds that die produce nothing. Dead seeds produce no crops.

In addition to my organic garden I was also a devout evangelical Christian. I tended my garden faithfully, as I did my Christian faith. "Laying down my life" for others was a given, as this is what Jesus commanded. So I concentrated on applying my efforts to seeing that others became successful in their jobs and careers, while not worrying about my own success, as "God" would take care of that. I also applied my efforts to seeing that the "Kingdom of God" was advanced by volunteering my time and money to make my local church successful. For decades I was certain that my devotion to the principles of Christianity would provide me with a secure future, in this world and the world to come.

Then the marriage I trusted in to secure my life ended. Suddenly I was left without job opportunities and no secure source of income or health insurance. The three children I had devoted my "career years" to raising, launched into successful young adulthood and left home for college and excellent career prospects. I had "died to myself" and the result was now I had no career, no husband, and three kids I couldn't afford to help or enjoy. A complete reassessment was necessary!

Fortunately I rebounded quickly and cast off ancient superstitious "faith based" thinking and replaced it with science supported "reason based" thinking.

This bible verse is just one of many that showcases the ignorance of Jesus and his generation regarding many subjects, which science has since that time accurately detailed.

How Finding Jesus Helped Me Deconvert

2009-11-04T04:11:00.003-05:00

by Marlene Winell

I met Jesus in Golden Gate Park many years ago and he helped change my life. He sent me in a new direction – away from Christianity.

I was reminded of it on Sunday, October 25, because it was the 40th anniversary of Woodstock, celebrated with enthusiasm at Golden Gate Park, San Francisco. I wandered through the crowd with my grown son, Ryan, as we pushed our bicycles, enjoying the sights and sounds – 60’s music coming from the bands,tie-dyed banners, the smell of incense and herb, and booths selling candles, New Age books and music, psychedelic art, and healthy food. The event was free, and so was the painting – on your face, cloth banners, or sheets of paper on the ground. Peace signs were all around. The folks with gray hair and fond memories were well represented, but so were young people who missed the Summer of Love. Young girls had long hair and headbands, flowers, and even wings.

When we arrived, the band played and people sang along, swaying and clapping:

C'mon people now,
Smile on your brother
Ev'rybody get together
Try and love one another right now

I was drawn to the message to “be here now” -- so different from thinking in terms of sin and salvation.
It made me smile and I joined in. I felt good, knowing the Youngbloods tune and helping my son a bit with the words. There was such optimism, joy, and warmth in many of the songs of that era.

BJ Thomas sang

"Raindrops Keep Fallin' on My Head" with those lines: Because I’m free, Nothin’s worryin’ me

From Seals and Crofts, we got the soothing:

Summer breeze, makes me feel fine
Blowing through the jasmine in my mind.

Then "Feelin’ Groovy" from Simon and Garfunkle was just plan fun and happy:

Slow down, you move too fast,
you've got to make the morning last
Just kickin' down the cobble-stones,
Lookin’ for fun and feelin’ groovy

And of course, the Beatles sang of the power of love:

All you need is love, love.
Love is all you need.

But the Summer of Love happened without me. Not only was I living in Taiwan, but I was taught that peace and love could only come through Christ, and that others, no matter how sincere, were deceived by Satan. When my family moved to Southern California, I found my tribe with the Jesus Freaks, who mimicked the hippie lifestyle but abstained from drugs and free love. We said we were high on Jesus.

But we were not at peace. We believed the End was nigh; it was not the Age of Aquarius. We were told the signs of Jesus’ imminent return were clear and this meant we were compelled to spread the gospel before it was too late. So, in addition to living in communes, learning macramé, sand candles, and batik, we “witnessed” on the streets and got people baptized at the beach. This included my new boyfriend.

Now picture me in San Francisco with a group called Youth With A Mission. I think I was 17 and it was spring break. We went out each day to save lost souls and warn them of the End, regrouping in the evening to get more training. I was emboldened enough by my sincere faith to speak with total strangers in the big city.

One day in the park is still with me because it was a shock to my system. I remember the trees were beautiful and the day was warm. I approached a man with long hair and asked him “Do you know Jesus?” He smiled and said, “I am Jesus.”

Well, I was unprepared for this and I was speechless. To me Jesus was spiritual and lived in our hearts after we accepted that he came to earth and died for our sins 2000 years ago. You couldn’t just BE Jesus. But I was trained to be polite and listen, plus this was interesting. “Jesus” said we were all God and just didn’t realize it. He was warm and serene. I realized I had nothing to say to that, so I hurried away.

And THANK-YOU to the song-writers who spoke to my heart and the musicians who taught me to dance. But my head was spinning and my life was heading down a different path. Could it be that people could be happy and satisfied without being born-again Christian? I couldn’t argue with this man who looked at me with quiet wisdom in his face. Who was I to claim the one and only “truth”? I knew he wasn’t just crazy and I never discussed him with the Christian group.

So last Sunday, the festival in the park was taking me back and I said to my son, “I wonder what ever happened to Jesus?” What’s he doing now? Does he still believe? Or has he changed, like me? Christians talk about “finding Jesus,” so I guess that day the answer would have been, “He’s in the park.” And I did indeed find him.

I also wandered Haight Ashbury that week and found a lot of things. The shops had beads and crystals and Indian tapestries, pictures of gurus, and information on Eastern philosophy. This environment wasn’t nearly as evil as I was taught to expect. The freedom, the color, the creativity, the sharing, the connection with nature, all appealed to me. I was drawn to the message to “be here now” -- so different from thinking in terms of sin and salvation.

We Christians thought we had a monopoly on goodness. After all, the Bible said, “They shall know you by your love.” But I was finding out the hard way about many unloving things, both in the Bible and church history, and in my own circles. I was starting to hate the constant judgment of dividing the world into saved and unsaved.

I could see love among others in “The World,” and it seemed real enough. In fact, I thought we could learn a few things about listening and diversity and caring. I liked listening to James Taylor sing "You've Got A Friend."

In church, we were taught we could only depend on God, and we sang, “What a friend we have in Jesus.” I understand now that the brain is pretty amazing and having an adult imaginary friend is powerful. But I was coming to appreciate people and real human connection. Without know it, I was becoming a humanist.

Another song about real human love was by Simon and Garfunkle:

I'm on your side
When times get rough
And friends just can't be found
Like a bridge over troubled water
I will lay me down

And speaking of lying down, we were coming of age and there was the matter of sex. The hippie slogan, “Make love, not war” made sense to me, despite the Christian anxiety about anything physical. I remember Herman’s Hermits’ song sounding pretty wonderful:

There's a kind of hush all over the world tonight
All over the world you can hear the sounds of lovers in love

I discovered sensual joys for myself eventually and married the guy I got baptized with at the beach, so I needed my imaginary love affair less. He and I even made another visit to San Francisco, indulging more this time. I liked the spirit of Haight Ashbury – it was about exploration, expression, and being aware of one’s existence. The drugs made me curious, but more than that, I was intrigued by the various worldviews and perspectives on reality held by these “heathens” who didn’t seem stupid, crazy, or evil.

I loved the song by Scott McKenzie (and it still knocks me out):

If you come to San Francisco
Be sure to wear flowers in your hair
If you’re going to San Francisco
You’re gonna meet some gentle people there

I wore flowers in my long blonde hair at my hippie Christian wedding, which was overlooking the beach and strewn with sweet-peas from my own garden. My political awareness was still undeveloped but I was listening to “Blowin’ in the Wind,” “Where have all the Flowers Gone,” and “Imagine.” I felt the impact of the words, “hammer of justice, bell of freedom, and song of love between my brothers and sisters.”

Even as a Christian, I was always more impressed with the “fruits of the Spirit” (love, joy, peace. . .) than “gifts of the Spirit” (tongues, prophecy, healing. . .) because that’s where our lives are really lived. And what a relief when I finally left the stifling cocoon of Christianity and began celebrating life with all of humanity.

THANK-YOU “Jesus” of Golden Gate Park! I hope you are still happy, wherever you are.

And THANK-YOU to the song-writers who spoke to my heart and the musicians who taught me to dance. I’ll end this with another favorite -- “Joy to the World” – the song by Three Dog Night, not the Christmas carol.

If I were the king of the world
Tell you what I'd do
I'd throw away the cars and the bars and the war
Make sweet love to you
Sing it now...

Joy to the world
All the boys and girls
Joy to the fishes in the deep blue sea
Joy to you and me

Christian Belief Through the Lens of Cognitive Science, Part 6 of 6

2009-11-03T03:41:00.003-05:00

by Valerie Tarico

"Neurons in the brain" by Hljod.Huskona via Flickr

"I had no need of that hypothesis."

Over the course of the summer I wrote a series of articles about brain science and Christianity, and I promised a final installment that never came. This is it. The series asked and--within the limits of present knowledge--answered a set of questions that fascinate students at the intersection of religion and psychology.

How does the structure of human information processing pre-dispose us to religious thinking? Given how our minds work, what kinds of religious beliefs are possible and what kinds are we immune to?

How do we know what we know? What gives us a feeling of certainty? What is the relation between reason, evidence, and our sense of knowing?

How do conversion experiences work? What makes religious conversion transformative?

How do beliefs get transmitted from one person to another? How does our social context influence or even control our religious beliefs? How does religious identity develop in childhood?

What makes beliefs resistant to change? What causes people to lose belief? When are people open to reexamining religious assumptions?

Supernatural explanations for religious experience are becoming unnecessary.If you followed the series, or better yet the rabbit trails of embedded references, you would have found that they distilled an exciting set of discoveries. Brain science is remarkably close to offering a full naturalistic explanation of individual religious experiences, everything from certain belief to moral indignation to mystical rapture to spiritual transformation.

As theists are quick to point out, understanding the psychology of religion doesn’t tell us whether any specific set of beliefs is true. I might believe in a pantheon of supernatural beings for all the wrong reasons (childhood credulity, hyperactive agency detection, theory of mind, group hypnotic processes, misattributed transcendence hallucination, viral transmission, cognitive dissonance reduction) and they might still might exist. Brain scientists can’t address the truth value of otherworldly assertions, only the mechanisms and patterns through which they occur in this the human mind.

In a similar way, all scholars of religion are bound by the methods and focus of their respective fields. Many fields can illuminate some aspect of the religious enterprise, and each has its limits. Hard scientists are limited to addressing the testable assertions religions make about natural phenomena, such as the origins of species or the causes of epilepsy or the power of intercessory prayer. Historians, aided by linguists and archaeologists, can excavate the history of a set of ideas, but – except where theologians make historical assertions-- they too cannot answer definitively whether these ideas are factually correct. Sociologists and anthropologists can examine the patterns and impact of belief on a collective. They are uniquely able to assess claims that religious belief increases love and joy or decreases crime. It remains the domain of philosophers and ethicists to examine the rational and moral qualities of religious beliefs—to examine internal coherence or the virtue of a belief system as it relates to a set of universal ethical principles. All of these are questions that lay outside the domain of brain science which, as I said earlier, limits itself to the subjective experience of the individual and the correlates of that experience in neurological phenomena.

Despite these many limitations, cognitive research, does offer what is rapidly becoming a sufficient explanation for the phenomenon of belief. If we are particularly concerned with Christianity, then we are particularly concerned with belief. And more and more, we can explain Christian belief with the same set of principles that explain supernaturalism generally. This is a serious blow to orthodoxy, meaning any religion based on right belief, and that includes most traditional forms of Christianity.

In the past, one of the arguments put forward by believers was that there simply was no explanation for the born again experience, the healing power of Christianity, the vast agreement among believers, or the joy and wonder of mysticism, save that these came from God himself. These experiences, they insisted, justified or even demanded belief in the Christian God including a personal, present resurrected Jesus. We now know this not to be the case. Humans are capable of having transcendent, transformative experiences in the absence of any given dogma. We are capable of sustaining elaborate systems of false belief and transmitting them to our children. We are capable of feeling so certain about our false beliefs that we are willing to kill or die for them.

It possible, absolutely, to assert the truth of Christian beliefs even knowing that there are now other explanations for the Christian experience. Claims about the afterlife or the spiritual realm are, after all, untestable. They cannot be proven, and they cannot be refuted. When it comes to beliefs about the “world to come,” literally anything goes.

It also is quite possible to assert that the Christian experience has unique supernatural causes. One could say, for example, that Christian joy is somehow different from the joy experienced by other religious people: It alone has both material causes (social/physiological/psychological) and supernatural causes (e.g. the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit). But this kind of claim puts a defender of faith in an awkward position, one that is at odds with how cause and effect explanations usually work.

One general principle that has worked well for humans seeking to advance or refine knowledge is called “parsimony,” also known as Occam’s Razor. It can be paraphrased thus: “Usually the simplest explanation is the best one.” or “Don’t multiply entities unnecessarily.” If we can predict storms by looking at barometric pressure and cloud formations, then there is no need to posit the existence of storm spirits or angry ancestors causing us trouble. If we can predict that an electric light will come on when a circuit is completed, we don’t talk about the additional but undetectable flow of magic that activates the whole thing. When a scholar adheres to the principle of parsimony, explanatory factors get added only when they allow us to control or predict with greater accuracy.

In every field of human knowledge except theology, if we can find a sufficient explanation within nature’s matrix, we don’t look outside. We no longer, for example, posit that demons are involved in seizures or bubonic plague. It’s not that we know for sure that the demon explanation is wrong, simply that it is unnecessary for predicting or treating seizures.

What does all of this imply for the future of religious studies? Simply that supernatural explanations for religious experience are becoming unnecessary. Eighteenth Century French mathematician and astronomer, Pierre Simone Laplace, wrote a volume on the movements of the heavenly bodies. When asked by Emperor Napoleon I why he had not mentioned God in his treatise, he replied, “je n'ai pas eu besoin de cette hypothèse.” I had no need of that hypothesis. Modern scholars of religion, more and more, find themselves echoing the words of Laplace. We have no need of that hypothesis.

If you would like to receive this series as a single Word doc, or if you would like to subscribe to weekly articles by Valerie Tarico, send your request to vt at valerietarico dot com.

Ken Pulliam on the Dave Glover show

2009-11-01T11:21:00.004-05:00

Former fundamentalist Ken Pulliam, who holds a Ph.D. from BJU, is now an agnostic. Recently he accepted an invitation to discuss the existence of God with Rabbi Shmuel Greenwald and Father Jeff Vomundon on the Dave Glover Talk Radio Show in St. Louis, MO.

God: The Ultimate Indian Giver

2009-10-31T14:20:00.001-04:00

by TruthSurge

Is it right for God to take back something He freely gives to humans? What would we think of someone if they gave us a gift, then without warning, suddenly jerked it away from us? What if someone gave you a kidney to replace your last failing one? Then, six months later forced you to give it back? What would you think of that person? What if God did the same thing? Does it make it okay just because he's "God?"

Unquestioning, blind faith is just plain stupid

2009-10-31T13:38:00.003-04:00

by Neal Stone

There is always the argument that Christians give, “You just have to have faith”. They then throw out the following.

You have faith when you sat in that chair.

You have faith when you start your car.

You have faith you will wake up each morning.

So why don't you have faith in god?

Well, let's cover this argument shall we.

You have faith when you sat in that chair.

Sure, because I know it's going to hold me. After all most of the chairs I sit in I have sat in before. So I know they will probably hold me again. But we are talking about faith in an observable, visible physical object. I can see it, test it and determine that it will probably hold me. The faith in the chair is earned based of my observations.

You have faith when you start your car.Now give me an old chair that's a little beat up, and I will have some doubt and will sit in it with a little caution and doubt, but will also test it to be sure it will hold me.

You have faith when you start your car.

Sure, after I took it for a test drive and verified it runs. It since then has started up and proven itself trustworthy and reliable. Now the other car, not so much. The battery was dead (went bad) and it never started unless jumped. So my faith in that car went away. Then I replaced the battery and behold it runs now. Faith restored. But an earned faith.

You have faith you will wake up each morning.

Sure, after I was old enough to understand faith and was able to think. As a new born baby up until now I have had a daily experience called waking up. So I have had plenty of evidence to enable me to have faith.

So why don't you have faith in god?

Haven't you been listening? Oh yeah, you're a Christian so that would be a big “NO”!

Faith in something invisible and faith in something visible are two different things. I have faith in things I use each day because I have seen them work and even understand how they work. I spent 23 years in church and god has yet to earn my faith. At times I really did have faith and prayed, read the Bible and all that stuff. How many centuries did Christians believe and have faith the sun revovled around the earth?

Faith is something that is earned. Telling me to “just have faith” does nothing but lock me into your ideas and religion. It seems silly to just believe in something without real solid evidence to support it. If I lack faith I am accused on doubting god and hit with some guilt trip. Can you say “cult tactics”?

Blind faith is a dangerous tool that ruins lives. My faith in my car, waking up or a chair is not blind, but earned from working examples and evidence I have encountered throughout my life.

Well, the Bible says.

“Lean not on your own understanding, but in all your ways acknowledge him and he will direct your paths.”

In other words, don't think for yourself but let in some dudes teaching guide you. Blindly follow what is taught you in church without question. No thanks! Been there done that and it almost ruined my life.

“Well, you just didn't have enough faith!”

Really? With the faith of a mustard seed I could move mountains according to the Bible. I am pretty sure I had much, much more faith than that. So yeah I had more than enough faith. Tons of the stuff for that matter.

So here is my question. Christians claim to have access to god's wisdom and knowledge. God knows everything therefore Christians have access to this. So why is it then that when someone asks a real tough question, they only give the same warmed over generic answers? Answers like:

“God only knows”
“God has his reasons”
“God works in strange and mysterious ways”
“We cant know the ways of god”
“You just gotta have faith”

Some old warmed over answers. Nothing really solid to hang onto. It's simple really. Since Christians aren't allowed to think they have to repeat everything that is taught them. For years that is all you hear answer wise.

I got so tired of asking tough questions just to get a stupid answer.

Here is the truth of it all. If god exists and god is who Christians claim he is hen that means god knows everything about Science, mathematics, trigonometry, geometry, algebra and the list goes on. God knows everything and controls everything according to Christian belief. So explain the way things are and the lousy assembly of the Bible?

Christians are supposed to have free access to god's wisdom and knowledge, yet they can't come up with any better answers than the same old warn out ones they give each time they are asked a tough question that demands a straight answer.

Since leaving Christianity, I have sought out those tough answers to my tough questions. I have realized that I can find answer and at the same time some things are beyond my understanding. My thinking has never been clearer and less cloudy. I feel much better about my life and have less trouble seeking and finding answers.

Jesus said, “Seek and you shall find.” I did seek and yes I did find, but it wasn't Jesus I found. It was logic, reason, and life without confusing religion. It was true freedom.

I seek evidence before I have faith in something. Faith is earned, not given blindly. And faith in something unproven is just plain dumb compared to faith in something proven such as starting my car.

Yeah, I have faith -- faith in something real and proven.

42!

Mr. Deity and the Identity Crisis

2009-10-30T04:09:00.000-04:00

Mr. Deity and Jesus try to figure out their relationship.