Christians, Gather Your Nuts
In the short life of this blog, I have become very aware of something. The 'good' Christians love to apologize for the 'bad' Christians.
Whenever I post a complaint or criticism about religious nut-jobs or just the religious right in general, there are always moderate Christians eager to point out to me that these 'bad' Christians aren't truly representative of Christianity as a whole. If this is so, then I would certainly love to read and hear more from good and true Christians speaking out against your fellow 'bad' Christians. Or is that allowed? Can you only complain about them to atheists? Is that the rule? That would explain, I suppose, why I don't see a lot of you 'good' Christians confronting all the right-wing nut cases that are out there.
If you are going to try to tell me that you don't like the extremist any more then we atheists do or if you are going to say that they aren't following Jesus' teachings, then do me a favor. Go and tell the bad Christians rather than telling me. Something needs to be done and these people are (expletive)ing up your religion and my country.
See my post on Senator Danforth for an example of what I am suggesting.
No replies from me until Monday. Have fun, play nice.
christian
religion
atheist
politics
19 Comments:
I hate to prove your point further, but... your right. it is a bit of a catch 22 for moderate Christians. We are told to Love our enemies, and do good to those who harm us, turn the other cheek, essentially a pacifist standpoint. Another reason for this problem is that Moderate or thinking Christians really are not interested in the Limelight. I say this because most of the ludicrous right wing nut-jobs somehow end up on TV. This is due in part because they draw a good crowd. Although BTW there are plenty of Christians who are busy trying to admonish there fellow believers. When that clown pat robertson got on tv and suggested an assasination there were plenty of Christians who stepped up and told him to shut up or put up, but again i agree, there needs to be more of that.
Anyway I do hope that you know that I am not here to prove to you that I am the good guy Christian though. I am hopelessly flawed like the rest of humanity. I am simply here to correct your thinking. ;) (a little trash talk) but seriously, i agree that this is a problem and is ever been a problem. to quote a fav author of mine "the greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians. They acknowledge Jesus with there lips but deny them with there lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbleivable." Of course I realize that this is not your reason for being an Atheist, although wouldn't you say that it has something to do with it? I mean i did read how you were hornswaggled into becoming a Christian and you were a Baptist... Southern at that this had to have had something to do with your becoming a "born again atheist".
Look forward to your response to my straw men.
before i go i HAVE to refute one of the many misguided claims that you have made in some of your replies. you said
"Most scientists are atheist simply because the more you know of how the world works, the less likely you will believe in mythical deities. It makes sense really."
this is simply downright unbelievably false.
there have been more than a few scientists who have believed in God:
here is the link that lists just the famous ones. Actually i believe that these are just the ones who are and were Christians. i doesnt even include the Theists Like Einstein or Hawkings or Hubble.. Therefore to say that most scientists do not believe in God is in itself a HUGE straw man. here is the link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_scientists
Cheers.
Seth
If you haven't had a chance yet, check out Sam Harris's The End of Faith. He makes this point quite clearly. His argument is that the moderates create "space" for the fundies to exist. In a sense, they become apologists for the more nutcase followers (along with apoligists for the inconsistencies in the bible)...
ARB
wow!!! an attack on the moderates.! i love it. we are not used to that. ill check it out. not that you were talking to me but what the hey.- oh and "Cheers" is not a part of that web page.
Seth
Alan-
you rock
This post is right in line with my world view. The real problem is the fundamentalists on either side of the theological debate. Any group that can't even tolerate the existence of an opposing viewpoint for fear of having their own beliefs undermined should not be tolerated by any aspect of society. This is true of modern Nazis, Xian Wing nuts, or Muslim Jihads. Society as a whole needs to reject the extremist teachings from where ever they come.
...the greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians...
Speaking for myself, the bad behavior of christians didn't make me an atheist, but it certainly inspired me to talk about the fact that I am. :-)
Good post, it would be excellent if the moderate christians would speak up to their fundamentalist counterparts more than just tell atheists about it.
And in response to anonymous, as someone who is in a science department at a very good university, I have to correct you in that most good science professors and students are atheists. I used to live in Texas and was very used to religious talk all the time, but now that I'm at a more prestigious university I've noticed that 95% of people make religious comments that would be pretty incompatible with also believing in it. Einstein and Hawking have also made many comments that would be incompatible with being a christian, although they may have had some sort of religious belief of some kind. Check out these poll numbers of the National Academy of Sciences if you'd like to see how religious belief is falling amongst scientists here
I see your point, but what would it look like? I can point you to blogs of Christians who speak disgruntledly about the institution of the church and the religious right. For example, check out
http://justplainwright.blogspot.com/2005/07/why-im-not-republican.html
or many of the writings here...
http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/democ.htm
But I don't think the answer is to create 'religious right' bashing websites and advertisement, people don't respond to that anyway. If you really want to lead someone to an alternative way of thinking, you must first earn their trust, then show them a different path. The most effective method is a subtle one, and a slow one.
But that's just my opinion.
Also, I think Seth hit on some very key issues, especially in the misrepresentation of Christianity in the media. Certainly if you watch the History Channel or the Discovery Channel you will almost always see Christianity depicted as outdated or nullified. Actually, these types of shows absolutely love to make a mockery of faith, especially in bringing out the quircky beliefs of some random Christian sects of the past.
But mockery does nothing to make a person change their mind about their long-held beliefs. You don't 'shame' someone into thinking something else. From what I understand, that's the method you believe the fundies tried to use on you to get you to be a Christian. Pulling the reverse is just as ineffective.
And, to jump into a conversation I wasn't really part of...to my mind faith and science can ALWAYS coexist because they are answering very different questions. Science seeks to answer the questions "what?" and "how?". What happened, and how did it happen? That is all. Science is merely observation. Religion/philosophy seeks to answer the question "why?". Any stance on the existence of God is a religious/philosophical question, not a scientific one.
Thanks!
-Dave
Delta,
I am also involved teaching at a prestigious University. A school renoun for its advancements in science and the Arts. A darn good baseball team also! No, it is not a religious school and yes it is a very well known University. I happen to know many of the physics, geneticists, students, and the head of the graduate department of physics who happens to hold a firm belief in God and is, yes, a Christian. Some are Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and Agnostic. I have not met one Athiest as of yet, actually not true, one student in genetics last semester. To say that just because you started teaching or attending a school that is more prestigious and that at that prestigious school is where you found a bunch of Atheists and then in turn offer that as proof that indeed, most scientists are Atheist, is pretty shaky as an argument. The article you posted was a response to a NEWSWEEK (Newsweek (July 20, 1998) featured a cover story "Science finds God") This obviously pissed some scientists off and they did there own research and came up with different results. so who do you believe? Newsweek, or the reactionary poll where 50% of the people did not bother to respond?
The fact of the matter is that i might go to my University and find most of the professors and scientists believing in some kind of Creator. Then you might go the LHU and find a majority of Atheists. The point is that most scientists are not Atheists, and Most Scientists are not Theists. what does that tell us? That saying discovery in science naturally leads to a disbelief in God serves as a weak premise to prove the arguement.
My list as i stated was just a list of Christians. It was a quick search and i did not have the time to do an exhaustive search. The majority of my arguement with alan has been simply to argue for the exsistence of God. The point of this particular arguement is simply to prove that many great, indeed some of the greatest scientific minds have believed in God or a Creator. Right now i am a million miles away from a case for Christianity.
Yes, I am aware that there are Atheist scientists and lots of them, i dare say there are more Agnostic than Atheist, but there are also Theist scientists and not just a bunch of dummies from non-prestigious schools, i might add. The arguement that "Most scientists are atheist simply because the more you know of how the world works, the less likely you will believe in mythical deities. It makes sense really." is a gross overgeneralization.
As i posted earlier, Einstein said-"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviciton of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."
Seth
renown,
-seth
Check out this link for a Theist's poetic version of creation and evolution.
http://gardenofimagination.blogspot.com/2005/10/blooming-of-humanity-interpretation-of.html
The article you posted was a response to a NEWSWEEK (Newsweek (July 20, 1998) featured a cover story "Science finds God") This obviously pissed some scientists off and they did there own research and came up with different results. so who do you believe? Newsweek, or the reactionary poll where 50% of the people did not bother to respond?
Actually, the "reactionary poll" that you are talking about was reported in the very popular scientific magazine Nature (Vol. 394, No. 6691, p. 313). It's very hard to get into this magazine generally, but it's mostly read by scientists so it's understandable that you didn't know that it was legit.
The point is that most scientists are not Atheists, and Most Scientists are not Theists. what does that tell us? That saying discovery in science naturally leads to a disbelief in God serves as a weak premise to prove the arguement.
Actually it's not a weak argument at all. Even if assume that "most scientists aren't atheists or chritians", the fact that a higher percentage of scientists are atheists than the percentage of the general public shows a correlation between scientific knowledge and lack of religious belief.
From what you are saying it sounds like you teach at a university, but it doesn't sound like you are actually part of a science department. If you were actually in one, I think you would understand what I'm talking about then.
And in response to your quote from Einstein, here is one from his later life:
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
I don't believe my school is all that good at basketball though, so you definitely got me beat there =)
Putting in my two-cents worth, I would like to say that, in my humble opinion, the only people that are screwing up religion and our country, are US.
We have become such a judgemental human race, that we are slowly killing our spirits.
If we could, for just one moment, put our own feelings aside, quit comparing ourselves to others, and accept people regardless of the choices they make in their lives, I sincerely believe that this world would be a much better place. We are not treating people with the respect and love that we ourselves would like to be treated.
What we do instead, is put people into categories that do not fit our ideals. Who are we to say what is right or wrong for each individual person?
Everyone does this. Everyone. I don't care what creed or nationality, or even sex you are. We all do it.
It needs to stop.
It would be so easy for us to love instead of judge, yet we choose the difficult route. We choose to point out differences as though they are plagues. Like they are diseases that we can catch.
Instead of wrinkling our noses, why don't we smile?
Instead of assuming someone is incorrect for thinking differently than ourselves, why don't we just accept it for what it is? We are creating these divisions.
It's easy to try and point blame to certain groups of people. However, the truth of the matter is, we are all responsible.
Let's quit accusing others for the mishaps that occur in our world, and take responsibility for our own actions first.
Hello,
This is my first time reading through your blog. I like it a lot. Go figure, I'm an atheist.
Having discussed my atheism on my blog, I've run into many religious folks. While I will never agree with their philosophy, some of them can be okay to have a good, challenging discussion with.
That said, it is usually disheartening for me because of all of the explaining that needs to be done with things like evolution, etc. It can just wear you down.
Either way, great blog. Visit mine if you get a chance.
I am back!
Thanks to you all for a lively discussion in my absence. I will begin my replies directly.
Replies in no logical order
Dena Marie May said
...and accept people regardless of the choices they make in their lives,
I understand the sentiment in your post, but when it comes to accepting choices or behaviors that affect others, sometimes we (people) have no choice but to judge or react. An extreme example: Most of us don't 'accept' the actions of the terrorists of 9-11 or the choices they made with their lives. I am sure you can imagine many other less extreme examples.
Who are we to say what is right or wrong for each individual person?
The reality is that all of these 'personal' right or wrongs add up to group right or wrongs that invariably are forced upon others: religious right or wrongs, national right or wrongs, cultural right or wrongs.
Let's quit accusing others for the mishaps that occur in our world, and take responsibility for our own actions first.
Replace or add the word 'God' to 'others' in your quote above and you are well on your way to having an atheists' creed.
Iya Kahlo said
Alan-
you rock
Lya, you are obviously a very intelligent and perceptive person. Your post, in my opinion, encapsulates one of the universal truths of mankind. I congratulate you on your realization and hope that many more of my readers will awaken to this fact.
Reply to Seth's posts
Delta has answered most of the points in your posts more intelligently than I could have and with the benefit of first hand experience , so I am going to leave this conversation to you two so that I can concentrate on some of our previous conversations.
You said-
"Actually, the "reactionary poll" that you are talking about was reported in the very popular scientific magazine Nature (Vol. 394, No. 6691, p. 313). It's very hard to get into this magazine generally, but it's mostly read by scientists so it's understandable that you didn't know that it was legit."
I am aware that there is a legit magazine called "Nature" and i am aware that it is a magazine with a more "scientific" audience. sort of like "audio-tech" for the audio sound guys, "biblical archeology" for the bible historian, and Maxim for the sex-starved college student. (although too bad they couldn't combine the themes- "Nature" for the sex-starved scientist, that may cure the "hard to get into" problem) The mag. is not that hard to find either, your local Barnes and Noble or Borders should carry it. My point was this: i do not believe that a single poll, where less than 50% of the scientists asked to respond actually responded, taken by a scientific periodical, to be the final authority on the number of scientists in the WORLD who believe in God as infallible refuting evidence that indeed, most scientists do not believe in God-which in turn means the more scientific you become the more atheist you are. (big breath) Now, would i believe their poll over a poll taken by "US weekly"? yes, over Newsweek,?... probably leanin' toward Newsweek, Generaly i do not trust polls of any kind I think that most are hopelessly biased and will usually find the results that they are looking for. i.e. -political polls done by Fox vs. CNN always differ a bit, religious polls, ect. Impossible to get a realistic view of the real figures, (and if you apply Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle then polls become really undependable!) come on, i bet you'd rather we vote than take a poll come election time and until you can offer me some substantial evidence that their poll was absolutely definitive of the opinions of the world scientific community, i'm stickin to my guns on this one. -of course i have been wrong before...
The fact of the matter is that history has shown us (you and the procurer of this blog might disagree), that a belief in God has an ebb and flow to it. I will not exhaustivly into the history of science and the belief in God but there are periods where more believe than do not and vice versa. I personaly believe we are coming OUT of the time where more disbelieve than believe(-Precisely what the Newsweek article was proposing.)
30 years ago, Hawkings would have been taken much less seriously for saying "It is difficult to discuss the beginning of the universe without mentioning the concept of God. My work on the origin of the universe is on the borderline between science and religion, but I try to stay on the scientific side of the border." For some reason, his comments have inspired more thought than undermined science. What is more exciting than this quote of his -"Even if there is only one possible unified theory [here he's talking about the unification of quantum mechanics with an understanding of gravity], it is just a set of rules and equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe?"
My point is and has been to refute the claim - the more scientific you are the more you do not believe in God- There are MANY...GREAT.. scientists who have made incredible contributions to humanity and Science that have believed in God, and yes to the behest of many and apparently including you, Einstien was one of them.
Yes Einstein did say what you quoted, "...I do not believe in a personal God..." But as memory serves me, I do not believe that I ever argued that he believed in a PERSONAL God. Believeing in a personal God is not a prerequisite for being considered an Theist, you must simply beleive there is some one or some mind that has created or is creating the universe. Einstein said in your quote, i believe, (its been a while since i surveyed his Bio "Einstein: The life and Times") was a response to a letter written by an atheist who could not believe that the Great Einstien was believing in God. Unfortunately, there were many in the religious world who were attributing more of a belief to Einstein than was true, (actually this is more along the lines of what my definition of a Myth is, Einstein was not the Myth, what people where saying about him was) Some where even claiming him as a Christian when he was a Zionist for most of his life.
The point of using him in this arguement is to say what i have stated before, Many and I repeat Many great sceintific minds have and do believe in a God. What they believe about this God differs a great deal. Einstein and Hawkings two of our worlds greatest scientific minds differed on their belief of God based on Scientific evidence. "Well, He(God) doesn't play dice"-Einstein (later in life i might add). Hawking's response is that "God not only plays with dice, He sometimes throws them where they can't be seen." Einstein and Hawking's God, not so personal- Georges Lemaître, (big bang theory, for others reading) a Catholic priest, definitely believed in a personal God. Look, I could give you quote after quote of and scientist after scientists who believed in God and you could do the same as an atheist. (although i dare say that the majority of the most important or "popular" ones have been theists or Agnostics, with the exception of ole' charlie D.) Even if you were to prove somehow, by taking a poll in 2006 of next year and proved that 80 percent of the scientific community does not believe in God. What would you say to those stragglers who held to a belief in God, especially if one of them sitting in Newton's Chair at Cambridge?
Their is one thing that I am perfectly willing to admit- Does science make you less superstisious, yes, but less likely to believe in a Creator or even believe in the possibility of a Mind behind and or in it all, No.
Now, i would really like to discuss why i believe the more you learn the more likely you are to believe in a Creator or a possibility of one. (after, of course your response to my long-winded rant)
thanks for kind and thoughtful response.
(BTW this written at 1:00 a.m. after grading many exams so exuse any blairing grammatical errors :) )
Seth
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home