Why Pick the God of the Bible? pt. 3

That is a Wordle, ranking word usage on my home page by font size. Cool! Click on it to open a new window and randomize the word placement, font style and colors, or make your own.

Now, gentle readers, the time has come to conclude our series "Why Pick the God of the Bible?" The reasons haven't been compelling thus far, and my atheism has remained intact through the first and second posts on this question.

Previously seen on Angie the Anti-Theist (in cool Hulu announcer voice)

1. A God Who is Greater than We Are
2. A God Who Can Be Known Personally
3. A God Who Can Relate to the Human Experience
4. A God Who Really Cares About Us
5. A God Who Has Things Completely Under Control
   

Continuing and concluding our 3 part series "Why Pick the God of the Bible", today we'll begin with

• The nature of God - A God Who Gives Meaning and Purpose to Life

If you think about an important task or project you completed, you probably recall the sense of purpose you had when it was all over. Is that what you want your overall life to be like? To amount to something? Could there be a God who created your life with purpose, and can lead you to experience that purpose?

Wait a second, accomplishment and purpose are not the same. I felt very accomplished for my work achievements as middle management for an internet education company, but it wasn't my purpose in life, and it wasn't what gave my life meaning. So, let's remove this false equivalency in a moment, but first I want to look at this closely. I do want my overall life to include accomplishment, pride, and jobs well done. Since I don't believe in any supernatural beings of any kind (ghosts, Martians*, and angels included) I think humans are entirely responsible for our actions, and should get the praise for our achievements. So, a god that created my life with a purpose is actually one that interferes with my ability to feel that pride and accomplishment. (How ridiculous is it to see a professional athlete, who spends hundreds of hours practicing and getting into proper physical condition, drop to his knees to thank GOD for his game-changer move?)**

Yes. The God of the Bible can. He promises that he can make our lives meaningful and purposeful. Through a relationship with him, we can "do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." We can make a positive difference in the lives of others. We can become part of his master plan.

Try this little experiment with me, if you please. Think of the most cyborg/zombified/"yes master" voice you can. Now re-read the above paragraph, with Scientology terms.

Yes. L. Ron Hubbard of Dianetics can. He promises that he can make our lives meaningful and purposeful. Through a relationship with him and the Church of Scientology, we can clear the planet of Lord Xenu's thetans. We can make a positive difference in the lives of others. We can become part of his master plan.

Ah, cults - Giving rudderless people a sense of purpose since 6,000 BCE TM

The God of the Bible also says that, in a moment-by-moment relationship with him, he can direct our steps so that we can do what pleases him, and what's in our own best interest at all times. "In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight." This is not to say that life becomes perfectly wonderful. There is still illness, problems in life, and personal failures. Life does not become perfect, but it becomes more enriching. The benefits of knowing God, he says, are "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

Anyone else find this proposition threatening to their autonomy? What can I say? After a totalitarian cult childhood, I'm commitment-phobic when it comes to omnipotent, jealous deities. (Besides, Yahweh would be the worst boyfriend ever. And if Mary was still able to claim virginity, even after he knocked her up, I'm guessing he wasn't making up for his asshole ways in the bedroom.)

I've written about the Fruits of the Spirit before (and how they're completely within the scope of non-theists and non-Christian theists to acquire). Even supposing a relationship with JC/YHW really did provide those things, would it be worth the cost of autonomy and adult responsibility? The idea of anyone "moment by moment" telling me how I can direct my steps to please him makes me want a get a restraining order, a second billy club, and about twenty hot showers. Skeezy! Talk about your controlling jealous type.

Obviously I'm not in the market for a god who "gives meaning and purpose", especially if said god wants to do this by directing my steps moment by moment in a Stalinesque dictatorial psycho stalker boyfriend kind of way. Let's move on to the next plug for Biblegod.

Oh, and the sentence should be "There are still illnesses, problems, etc." (Sticklers unite!)

• The nature of God - A God Who Offers True Fulfillment

Like love and acceptance, most of us want to find fulfillment in life. There seems to be something akin to a thirst within us that yearns to be quenched. But that thirst -- even though we try -- does not get satisfied by things such as money, possessions, romance, or even fun. Therefore, wouldn't it be great if there was a God who satisfies that "thirst," a God whose presence brings a constant level of satisfaction to life?

Most of us want fulfillment. Some are just slackers, right? Or born in poverty. I mean, it's not like Bible God gives them true fulfillment, or at least not this straw man fulfillment of constant satisfaction. Personally, I don't ever want to stop learning, thinking, and improving myself. I don't have a thirst for god, though. (More of a gagging sensation.) And for (I sincerely hope) the last freaking time, "wouldn't it be great" is not an argument. It's wishful thinking, and it shouldn't get to call itself an apologetic.

The God of the Bible offers the most fulfilling life possible. Jesus said, "I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full." He also said, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty." So, the God of the Bible promises to quench that inner longing that nothing else seems to satisfy. (And he has probably made us in such a way that that is exactly the case!)

Hang on a minute. Let's analyze what this actually says about God's supposed actions. He is all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful. He sets up a trap whereby Adam and Eve will only learn what is right and what is wrong after committing a sin that God punishes all future humanity for, with full knowledge of the outcome. He then cursed all future generations of humankind to be born with an inherent sinful nature (except his Son, who then somehow still gets lots of credit for resisting temptation). He made sin incompatible with his nature, and a sinful nature unable to reside in heaven with him. (He made hell as the only other alternative.) Then, in addition to this sinful nature he requires us to have and then rid ourselves of or overcome, he also gives each of us an "inner longing that nothing else seems to satisfy" so that we'll be unhappy unless we're doing what he says?

And you think you have free-will????

That's dictatorship. Celestial is no better than earthly. Might doesn't make right, and this is the worst plan for salvation EVER! Pile the sins on a goat or a god-man and kill it and then everything's okay? Christians like to pretend Jesus ended animal sacrifice, but Christianity just glorifies human sacrifice so much it's disgusting. (Check out these passionate Christians.)

Easter 'crucifixions'

That is not life to the fullest. That is glorification of death. (So is the after-life obsession.)

• The Ideal God

According to the Bible, there is only one true God, only one Creator of all things. But that God is an ideal God. We cannot wish another God into existence, but even if we could, why would we want to? The true God is already the best possible God.

*spit take* Huh? Okay, let me deal with this. "According to the Bible" is worth no more than the paper it's printed on, and possibly it's worth less. EveryStudent, you've given me no reason at all to suppose that the Bible is accurate, so its claims to exclusivity aren't persuasive arguments. The assertion that the Bible God is "an ideal" is problematic. First, an ideal god hasn't been defined. If I was to compile a list of characteristics and traits that I think would best describe an ideal god, jealousy and vengeance wouldn't be on my list. Nor would cystic fibrosis or polio.

I'm glad you've conceded, EveryStudent, that you "cannot wish [a] god into existence". Which is sort of the point I was making each time I objected to "Wouldn't it be nice" style "reasons" in my prior posts. And why would you want the Bible god? As Richard Dawkins aptly said,

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction.

Bah. The immorality of god is a real problem that Christians need to answer for. (Or you can deconvert. I'm cool with that, too. Might I recommend Ex-Christian.net as a place to hang out while you get used to the truth?)

If you are sincere, and if the God of the Bible is real, wouldn't it make sense that he would reveal himself to you? He says, "I love those who love me, and those who seek me find me."³⁴ "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you."

You would think so, wouldn't you? And yet I and many other atheists were sincere, and no god revealed itself to any of us. He did not say he loved us, and when we sought, he was nowhere to be found. I knocked, but no door opened. Wouldn't it make sense that this is an indication that this god doesn't exist?

Are you wondering how you can know this ideal God? Basically, beginning a relationship with God is a lot like beginning a marriage. There is a decision to willfully enter into this relationship. Similarly, with God, it's a matter of you saying to him, and sincerely meaning, "I do."

Well I don't plan on bowing before any gods before I die, and I don't plan on having another marriage, either. Both experiences sucked. And again, the EveryStudent definition of same or "a lot like" is much broader than mine. (He may have been a jackass, but at least I knew my ex-husband was real.)

God is no respecter of persons. All people have been created in his image. Thus, his eternal family is described as "a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language."³⁷ And no sin in your life can bar you from beginning a relationship with him. He took care of the sin issue on the cross, where Jesus was crucified. Now it's a matter of you putting your faith in Jesus' death on your behalf, no matter what you've done in the past.

Um, I agree that the Bible God character is extremely disrespectful of persons. (I might even go with mass-murdering fuck head.) And again, I must clarify for the Christian ignorant of their own Bible - there is one sin that can "bar you from beginning a relationship with him" and that sin is apostasy. (Ahem, I deny the Holy Spirit y'all.) And is anyone else slightly skeeved out by the phrase "put your faith in [his] death"? The glorification of death in Christianity, and the obsession with blood, is actually really weird if you step back and look at it. The Christian faith is full of double-speak about serving to be free, and dying to live forever. It's crazy talk, and it's bothersome that more people don't think about this.

The rest of the article is just the sinner's prayer and more on how Jesus saves (all others pay retail). Like I did with The Story, I'm going to be emailing the authors of this article to let them know about my response, and provide them links to my blasphemous blog. Good times :)


* A sufficiently advanced technology is essentially "magic" or supernatural. Also, I didn't say extraterrestrials. I said Martians, as in little green men from Mars, where we have the Mars Rover and zero little green men thus far.

** Sometimes I write posts a few days before I publish them. I wrote this sentence before someone sent me this Raiders story. Which just sort of shows what I mean about the whole "pathetic" thing.

Read more!

I Guess We Should Talk

So, I "came out" on Facebook about a month ago - linking it to this blog, stating my religion as "Atheist/Pastafarian" and posting updates from this blog over there. So, a couple days ago I got my first Concerned Letter from a relative. Here it is below, sanitized of names and shortened for length.

It's good to hear (through the grapevine) that you and Little Man are doing well! I understand he's liking school, I'm so glad. I would love to keep in touch.....I understand you have a second face book persona that is more specifically about you and Little Man? Can I be friends with that one? I'm very interested in seeing pics of you two, and knowing how he's progressing.
I'm more disturbed and heartbroken by the Angie the Athiest FB, and it's difficult not to take the anti-christian stuff personally - so I'm hoping we can keep in touch in a way that wont be so hurtful.

You look so very beautiful in your pictures, like you're feeling well and healthy - good for you girlie! I love you, and have loved you from the day you were born - and will love you until the day I die.

Auntie B

Here's my reply...

Hey B,

I only have the one Facebook (which is by far my least atheist of my three blogs). I don't have the ability to upload pictures (well, at least I don't have a ride to CVS to get my pics switched to a CD) so I don't have many recent ones, but I'll maybe post a picture from Little Man's b'day I took with my phone. (I think I can email that to myself?)

He's doing really great - potty training, loving school, talking, etc. Just during this email he poked my arm and said "Excuse me, chicken nuggets?" He's also able to request TV shows by name, which he really likes. He can id by sight several numbers, most basic shapes, and all the basic colors. He's starting to assign adjectives to things, but he puts them at the end. So today after he school he waved to the bus, "Bye schoolbus yellow giant".

You do KNOW you're my favorite aunt right? I love you too, very much.

On the religion thing - I'm sorry if the things I post are hurtful to you. That's not at all my intention. My objections are with the Bible, Christian doctrine, etc., not with my friends and family who happen to be Christian. I'm not exactly sure which of my posts you consider anti-Christian, but my objections apply to religion in general, not just Christianity.

Please don't be sad on my behalf about this, as I've been extremely at peace with my atheism. I can't believe the stories anymore (Jonah in a whale? Really?) and I had stopped getting comfort from religion a long time ago. I've been an atheist for over a year now, and my character is the same. I'm happy, Little Man is happy, we're doing okay.

I love you and I hope that we can continue to be close despite this difference in worldview and religion. You can ask me any questions you like and I'll try my best to answer them, or we can agree to not directly talk about religion (although, of course, I'll still be posting things to my Facebook. I don't think atheism is offensive at all - it's what I am.) Or you and I can do what my mom and I somewhat do, which is exchange books, articles, and ideas. You can give me a book by Josh McDowell or another apologist to read, and I'll read it, if you want to do that approach. I do plan on raising Little Man secularly and that's the main area where I ask the family to be considerate of my beliefs. I'm not preventing him from deciding a religion later in life, but I want to be sure it is his choice and I want to wait until he's older and has a better grasp before I introduce non-physical concepts like eternity, gods, souls, etc.

Love you,
Angie

What do you think? Maybe I should have left the Jonah thing out...

Read more!

Chatting with a Mormon Missionary: Take 8

Today I'll be posing as David, asking questions on the nature of certainty and how anyone can really know anything about "god".

You are speaking live with Katie, who is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Information provided in this session is to provide assistance only and is not an official statement of the Church.

Katie: hello

Me: Hi - I'm David.

Katie: how are you?

Me: I'm good, how are you?

Katie: I'm doing well, thanks
what prompted you to come on mormon.org?

Me: I have some questions about god in general and about lds specifically

Katie: great

Me: Why do you believe that Mormonism is the right religion?

Katie: what has led you to have questions about God and the church?

Me: I don't see how people can be so certain they're right, and I wonder what's different about them. (By calling it "different" instead of deficient, I'm allowing Katie to think she has an opportunity to tell me about the difference the Holy Ghost makes.)

Katie: great question
David, God has given us some incredible tools so that we can know truth
scriptures and prayer

Me: Do you mean like the rules of logic and our critical thinking skills?

Katie: let me share a little bit with you about the church
yes! Those are also important tools that he has given us
He teaches us many wonderful truths about who we are and His plan for us
through prophets
and we are invited to read their words
and to pray and ask Him is it is true

God has give us the Bible and in our day he has brought forth the Book of Mormon ("Our day" is the 1820s?)
another testament of JEsus Christ

Me: How do you know those are the right holy books?

Katie: because
I have read them abd pondered their teachings

Me: Not trying to be offensive, but when there are so many other religions and religious texts, how do you know which is right? (Notice how I continually make small social overtures which do not require me to concede a point, or agree with a factually untrue statement. "Not trying to be offensive" sounds polite without ever saying I respect her beliefs or that she should be offended that her podunk little religion sounds exactly like all the others - except the underwear part. You can build social capital by being overtly polite and pleasant. I'll cash in this political capital later.)

Katie: and most importantly I have asked God if it is true
sorry, I didn't mean to answer with just because :)

Me: or if any of them are right?

Katie: by using what you said earlier - our minds and critical thinking skills (Oh Katie, I love you. This couldn't be going any better if you were following a script!)

Me: That's ok :)

Katie: DAvid, let me share with you a little but about someone who had some simmilar questions

Me: Okay, but I'd like us to get back to this point later - about how we can use critical thinking to discern between religions

Katie: sure
that is actually still what I am getting at
as well
David, do you understand the role of a prophet?


Me: I think it's like the Mormon pope - he's always a man; he intercedes with god on behalf of his people; he gets divine revelation; and at least in the case of Catholics is supposed to be infallible. Am I right? (I don't know if Mormons dislike Catholics as much as fundamentalist/evangelical Christians do, but hell, the Prophet is just a less-rich pope.)

Katie: sort of...
God has called prophets from the begining of the earth- since Adam and Eve (Ouch. I remember thinking those were two real actual first humans, some 6,000 years ago.)
He uses a pattern to teach us
He calls righteous men and speaks to them directly- teaching them all about the gospel and His plan for us
HE commands the prophets to teach us
they teach us directly also record their words in scriptures

Me: What has led you to believe all this - that god exists, is concerned with humans, uses prophets, etc.?

Kaite: many things
one is the other part to this pattern that I am sharing

Me: ok (I find that non-committal agreements like this - as in, okay continue your case - are a good way of staying "nice" and keeping the person you're talking to from raising up defenses to communication - like sticking their fingers in their ears and singing "What I Got" by Sublime. Okay, probably not. But it's what *I* like to hum while ignoring the facts around me. Also, doing something "nice" makes someone feel like the owe you, which is often handy.)

Katie: so after God commands His prophest toteach us- and record scriptures
He commands us to read their words and to pray abotu it.
we read scriptures and are taught by prophets and then ask God if they are true
and God answers our prayers (This is self-indoctrination. The social pressure to "hear from God" in a tight community of true believers is overwhelming. In hereditary religion, you've got no choice but to interpret your own inner voice as God. Since you know you're supposed to reach the conclusion your family's dogma is true, the "voice of God" in your head tells you things in complete compliance with what your family and your religion have told you it would. It can feel very persuasive, if you believe it.)

Katie: however, many people choose not to believe or follow prophets
when people reject prophets it is called apostasy (Note: at least from this chat, apostasy for LDS is rejecting prophets, not god. interesting)

Me: I don't think people really have a choice in what they believe. I mean, either you think something is true or you don't, wouldn't you agree? (Here i try to cash in on social capital built up with earlier pleasantries, smileys, "is that rights" and non-committal agreements, but it fell a little short.)

Katie: no
we learn and study and ponder things DAvid

Me: Do you think for one moment you could choose to believe that the earth is flat?

Katie: we learn new things every day

Me: I agree we learn new things every day

Katie: no because I know it is not...
knowledge affects our beliefs
when we learn the gospel

Me: Absolutely - knowledge DOES affect our beliefs

Katie: and Gods teachings we can choose to find out if it is true or not

Me: so we may have a choice in how much and what kind of knowledge we acquire, but I don't think we "choose" our beliefs. You can't choose to believe the earth is flat, because your knowledge prevents that "choice"
(Is it wildly narcissistic to say "Ta-da!" to my computer screen when I think I've made an excellent point? Yes? Oh well.)

Katie: ok
I agree
when you know something you don't have to believe because you know
(Katie, I could kiss you!)

Me: Okay. I think we both totally agree on that. (This is actually pretty significant. If that germ of a worm of an idea gets into her head - that people don't choose to be apostates, but that knowledge affects beliefs - it will make punishment for apostasy unjust in her eyes and may get her to question her own knowledge. Or it might not, but I choose to remain hopeful.)
You said that one of the ways you know LDS is true is that you have studied and prayed over the Bible and BOM, right?

Katie: yes

Me: What about other holy texts, like the Koran?

Katie: let me share a scripture with you about it (Let me guess, Moroni 10? Nephi 5? In eight conversations I've been consistently given the same two passages.)

Me: Okay.

Katie: check out verse 3-5. This is a promise from the Book of Mormon

Me: The url/verse didn't come through

Katie: look for what God is promising us in these verses
let me try again
(link)

Me: Thanks - it worked that time.

Katie: great

Me: I've heard similar things before, from other religions. Ray Comfort of NZ is always talking about talking to god with sincerity, and my Muslim friends have shown me similar verses in the Koran.
Do you think Ray and Muslims are wrong in their religion?

Katie: I know that they are
DAvid, what did God promise in this scripture?

Me: That by praying you can ask him whether or not something is true and he'll tell you
How do you know they are? That's really the crux of the puzzle in my head. How do you know something you only believe? (Agh! I gotta slow myself down. When I ask too many questions, they don't all get answered as thoroughly as they should)

Katie: not something DAvid
the Book of Mormon
if you and pray and ask God if the Book of Mormon is true He will answer your prayers
and if you know that the Book of Mormon is true, you will know that what it teaches is true (Gee, and tautologies are statements that are tautologies.)

Me: Okay, so it's specifically the veracity of that particular book, not a promise to help you know what's true about other areas, right? (Because those might be testable claims!)
What if I pray and ask if the BOM is true and I feel like he's said "No"?

Katie: actually that knowledge helps you out with incredible ammounts of knowledge
that wont happen, but if it did then you would logically know it wasn't true (Okay, ouch on the logic front, but kudos to her crediting a rational reason for disbelief. This only ten minutes after conceding we don't choose to believe/disbelieve. So - excellent progress from Katie.)

Katie: David, I know that the Book of Mormon is true
I know that Joseph Smith was a true prophet (and if I say it enough times, I can make myself believe anything)
will you read the Book of Mormon and ask God if it is true?

Me: Sure. But will you do me a favor in return?

Katie: that's great!
I know DAvid, that God will answer your prayers (with "Yes", "No", or "Wait". Same as a jug of milk.)
and you will know that the Book of Mormon is true
and incredible spiritual truths will be unfloded to you!
sure, what can I do for you?

Me: Will you read the Koran and ask god if it is true? Or the teachings of Buddha? Or the Egyptian Book of the Dead?
Because if one of those is right, I want you to find it. And if they're not right and Joseph Smith is the true prophet, they you'll have even more reason and knowledge to back up and inform your belief, like we talked about before. (Or the third stealth option - all the religions are man made, just like all the gods and prophets.)

Katie: that is true ("Booyah!" yells at the monitor are probably equally self-serving, huh?)
do you have a Book of Mormon?

Me: No, I don't. I'll order on through the site today though :)

Katie: wonderful

Me: This has been a really great conversation. I still have more questions.

Katie: DAvid, we also have wonderful missionaries in your area that can come and bring one to you and teach you more about the SAvior
will you meet with them?

Me: But maybe it would better to talk again in a couple weeks, after I've had a chance to read the Book of Mormon and you've had a chance to read the Koran. Then we can talk again, and compare notes. You can help me see why you know that this one is right

Katie: sure

Me: I have a special needs child in the home, so visitors are problematic for us. (Theme music from "Psycho" is playing in my head at the thought of battling off doorstep missionaries as my marker-weilding pants-less toddler runs about yelling "Booyah!" and hitting himself in the head with a stuffed puppy.) I do most of my socializing online as a result. (True. Sad, but true.)

Katie: would you like to set up a time to talk again?
when would work for you?
I see

Me: I would love that Katie :) Weekdays before 2 EST are generally good for me - what's best for you?

Katie: that's fine
I am online Tuesday and Friday mornings from 7am to 11 am EST
come on any time and ask for me

Me: Okay Katie. Will you get a copy of the Koran from your library? I'll order the BOM now and we can talk again soon.

Katie: it has been
thanks for talking with me

Me: Thank you - have a great day. I'm really looking forward to having another conversation about knowledge, belief, and god :)

Thank you for taking the time to chat with us and for your interest in the Church. Please know that you are welcome to worship with us any time, request a visit from Mormon missionaries, order a Book of Mormon, or continue to browse our Web site to learn more answers to life's greatest questions.


What Have We Learned?
That Katie is the best Mormon outta 8 - and what her schedule is.* She was by far the most engaging to talk to, and I felt myself actually being excited to have the conversation with her. While she made a lot of bald assertions and unsupported claims, and her concept of what "knowing" something means is so inclusive as to be fairly meaningless, she could follow a chain of logic or argument from one point to the next without getting lost. So I really am planning on having a future talk with her. I'll just have to remember that I'm "David" when I do so. (For the gender-switching explanation, check out Mormon Chat #5 below.)

I also learned that I need to stick with this particular line for most of my theist/atheist discussions. How do you "know" that something is true. It's the question that got me out of religion and out of god-belief, and it's also the one I probably have the most to say about and have thought about the most. I should never talk about the historicity of Jesus (and frankly, I don't care if a Jefferson Bible-type rabbi actually was wandering around Jerusalem or if Paul made the whole thing up in a fevered dream). I should NEVER talk about the details of any science. (I *should* link people to credible sources like Scientific American, or get back up from a friend who IS knowledgeable about science.) I CAN talk about the Bible. I can't really back anything up that I half-remember from an ACA lecture about the early church or the cannon of the Bible. Now, if I wanted to learn more about those and use them in debate, I could. But for now, I'm gonna zero in on this one. I didn't know how little evidence there was Christ's life as a Christian, but I don't think it would have made a damn bit of difference if I had. I mean, I was a day-age creationist; I was capable of cramming logical fallacies into tightly compartmentalized spaces in my head.

So, I'm gonna go order the Book of Mormon. I'm going to get way too much crap in the mail as a result, probably, but anything to take money out the Mormon church (or any church)'s pocket sounds good to me. Check out their Free Media Gallery. I urge all my readers to order as many materials as they could possibly desire. I don't like the Mormon church spends their money infringing on the rights of gay and lesbian Americans. Let's let them waste it making free Bibles for every atheist that wants to debate a Christian online. And hey, I'm pretty sure you could decorate a dorm room wall with the shiny side of all those DVDs. Or, you could have your own snark-fest, debunking, debating, mocking and maligning the content of these free materials. So come on, make me happy and accept a little junk mail.

Or just have the stuff shipped to your ex-pastor's house. Whatever works for you.**


To catch up on the whole series, please feel free to browse earlier chats.
Chatting with Mormons 1 - On Mormon history and the similarities between LDS and Islam.
Chatting with Mormons 2 - On belief, first use of Moroni 10.
Chatting with Mormons 3 - On women in the LDS church. I injured myself doing faceplams.
Chatting with Mormons 4 - On Joseph Smith's history - till the missionary ran away
Chatting with Mormons 5 - On original sin, hell, and the devil.
Chatting with Mormons 6 - On death an afterlife.
Chatting with Mormons 7 - On science, feminism, and child free by choice.


Finally, here's the kind of conversation I want to eventually have with Katie and other theists like her. This video has the honor of killing my faith :) It's fun to watch now, but I can't tell you how bad I squirmed, trying to come up with justifications that didn't sound pathetic in my own head. Ex-Christian.net, "God is Not Great", and the Atheist Experience helped me through the next bit, and now I'm as loud and proud as it's possible to be. Critical thinking = good.







* Go find your own Mormon.
** DISCLAIMER: Angie the Anti-Theist is a dumb ass with an odd sense of a humor, not a lawyer or law enforcement officer. If you broke the law, I didn't tell you to.

Read more!

Theoretical Bullshit

I don't think I've yet told you how very much I love this well-thought, well-spoken (and frankly unnecessarily handsome) vlogger gets to the heart of the ethical and philosophical questions. (Check out his link in the side panel "Atheist Videos")

To those of you drooling in intellectual and sexual attraction, you're welcome.

Read more!

With Friends Like This...

Well, there seems to be a new one every week, a Christian who claims atheism is a kind of faith. So let's parse this nonsense and explain again the chasm of distinction between belief and non-belief. (You'd think it would be so obvious they aren't the same thing, but you'd be surprised.)

Irish Times Op-Ed writer Breda O'Brien claims

Atheists often appeal to science to underwrite their disbelief, but the decision not to believe in God lies ultimately in the arena of gut feeling, or hunch, or intuition. That decision is something that the scientific method cannot arbitrate on.

Oh, I see. So it's just a "gut feeling". Well, that is a good description of faith - an ultimately emotionally driven institution. When I believed I did so because I'd been indoctrinated as a child, and then later on as a young adult, because I desperately wanted it to be true. There was no evidence, no proof, no real good logical defense for my belief. I just felt it; I felt such certainty I thought I knew it was true, although if you'd asked me why I'd have been pressed to defend my belief. I probably would've have said it was a matter of faith, if forced to have such a conversation at all. I certainly would not have presumed to understand atheism.

The author goes on to assert that

The decision to live as if there isn’t a god requires a leap of faith, as does the decision to live as if there is. Religious people and atheists have a great deal in common. And now that Irish atheists are banding together, planning good works and hoping to influence Irish society, it looks more and more like a religion.

Because after all, sleeping in on Sunday morning requires so much investment! Seriously though, saying "I don't know, but there's no real evidence" doesn't require faith. Saying, "I know there's a God, and I know what he wants, and he wants me to worship him"? That requires faith. Undoubtedly. Can you see how those are not truly equivalent though? Stating a positive claim ("There is a god") asserts that something is true. And, as Tracy often says on The Atheist Experience, "Things which exist manifest in reality." Since there are NO manifestations of a supernatural all-powerful deity in our reality (zip, zero, zilch, nada, nein, none), disbelief seems only rational. It is not the same as asserting the positive claim "There is NO god". Lack of evidence is not necessarily evidence of lack. But I have to say it seems more likely to me.

That said, although I blog about it regularly here and on Atheist Nexus, I'm not so invested in my atheism I'd be unwilling to chance my stance. If I was presented with sufficient evidence, I would discontinue my disbelief, and have to accept the existence of whatever deity was proven. (Whether or not I'd worship a god would be entirely dependent on the character, attributes, and actions of said deity.) It is rather rich of the author to try to hijack secular good works as making atheism "more and more like religion". That might be a more valid argument to make if atheists were say, depriving their children of medical care or killing them for demon possession. Those actions really are more and more like religion.

Our author now claims to have many atheist friends. This gives me de ja vu thinking of racists who always preface their comments with, "One of my best friends is black!" In quoting an atheist friend, the author misrepresents Richard Dawkins by suggesting

Dawkins takes the Bible as literally as any Protestant fundamentalist. The only point of disagreement is that Dawkins finds it unreliable about science, whereas fundamentalists do not.

This is categorically false. What Dawkins does do is illustrate through a literalist, non-apologist reading of the Bible (which is what your typical American non-theologically trained Christian will do) that if the character of Yawhew was real, He'd be a right immoral prick. The quote she is almost certainly referring to is from The God Delusion

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

And you know what? He's got a really valid point going on here. (See my comment above re: Even if a god exists, it might not be worthy of so abject a thing as worship.)

The author next claims new atheists don't care about the poor, human rights, or justice, and that we are instead content to blame everything that's wrong in the world on religion. (Join Atheist Nexus on Kiva, as the largest "religious group" micro-lender!) Finally, religious atrocities are brushed aside as nothing more than a "dark side" of this era, and in no way actually the responsibility of organized religion. As a closing (clumsy) shot the author quips

With apologies to Rodgers and Hammerstein’s Oklahoma !, the atheist and religious person can be friends.

Well yes, obviously. I don't know a single atheist who doesn't have at least some theist friends. In this country for instance, over 80% of the population claims to be a follower of some kind of faith. The question isn't whether or not atheists can be friends with religious people. The question should be, why on earth would they want to be friends with Breda O'Brien?

Read more!