Your options: You can either give in and possibly live out your life bowing and scraping to the alien leaders and doing humiliating service, or you can rebel and face the consequences. There is no “right” choice. However, if you’ve seen ANY alien invasion scenario movies EVER MADE, you’ll note that the heroes refuse to be dominated and find a way to destroy the attacking alien hoard. They are courageous, and say things like “for humanity and freedom!”

Scenario TWO: God is coming down to gather his faithful, who will be required to sing his praises day and night forever. If you were raised in a Christian family you’re probably safe. Everyone else must deny their culture, family, faith and upbringing and accept God and Jesus as their savior. Those who do not will face terrible punishment; plagues, attacks by giants scorpions, earthquakes, death… by fear and pain they will be forced to accept God. Those who STILL refuse will be burned for all eternity.

Your options: You give in. God is clearly omnipotent. Who cares if he’s just, good, kind, forgiving; you accept him because it hurts too much not to. You give up your ideals, your freedom, your uniqueness, all of your own wants, desires and goals. You give up your own happiness, your own responsibility, courage, valor and independence. But it’s worth it, because you can’t imagine suffering any more pain. OR – if you’re crazy enough, angry enough, or stupid enough, you say “Screw You” and let the dice roll.

This may sound horrendously blasphemous. It might make you angry. If so, you probably believe that God loves you. But do you love God? One of the reasons I love my best friends is that they aren’t afraid to tell me when I’m being an asshole. They also aren’t afraid to tell me to fuck off – either playfully or in genuine anger. That freedom is based on the fact of power equality. I would never say that to a teacher or a boss, because I would get in trouble. There would be consequences. They don’t love me enough to forgive me, and I don’t love them enough to trust that I could express myself freely around them. However, if a teacher or boss is being unjust, unfair, cruel, or picking on other co-workers or classmates, you need to stand up and tell them they better clean up their act. The only God I can believe in is one who listens to input and changes accordingly, who isn’t an asshole, and who I don’t have to be afraid of.

Incoming search terms:

• test your courage (3)
• test on your humanity (3)
• a test of your courage (1)
• simple test (1)
• if u blashemy does it mean your an alein (1)
• how to test your courage (1)
• how do you test your courage (1)

“Some say we believe in God because our intuitions about how and why things happen lead us to see a divine purpose behind ordinary events that don’t have obvious human causes. This led us to ask whether the strength of an individual’s beliefs is influenced by how much they trust their natural intuitions versus stopping to reflect on those first instincts.”

Interestingly, the way they tested these individuals was to give them math problems with unintuitive answers, such as “A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?” The intuitive answer to that question is 10 cents, since most people’s first impulse is to knock $1 off the total. But people who use “reflective” reasoning to question their first impulse are more likely to get the correct answer: 5 cents.

Sure enough, people who went with their intuition on the math test were found to be one-and-a-half times more likely to believe in God than those who got all the answers right. The results held even when taking factors such as education and income into account.

Another way consequence of the results might be that religious people are worse at math than atheists/agnostics. My guess is that if you rounded up all the people who took the SAT test and asked them if they believed in God, those who said “Yes” would statistically and consistently have lower scores in math, reasoning, and logical ability.

Based on the study, you could convincing argue (citing proof from a Harvard-backed study) that religious people are “dumber” than those who are not-religious. However, instead I would simply point out that religious people are probably lazier. They don’t need to be right. They don’t care as much. (Screw this test, I’m going to heaven). They also don’t need to use their thinking or problem-solving skills nearly as much because a) they are presented with a complete belief system in which questioning is frowned upon b) when they face difficult problems in their lives, they ask God to solve them for them and deal with the consequences by saying “Oh well, it’s God’s will.” Religious people are God at accepting the world as it is and making due; Non-religious are determined to fix, change, understand and overcome.

I’m not sure which lifestyle choice leads to a “happier” or more fruitful life, but based on the study, I’m pretty sure we can guess who will have the higher test scores.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/belief-god-boils-down-gut-feeling-104403461.html

Incoming search terms:

• Belief in God Boils Down to a Gut Feeling (6)
• who is dumber religious people or atheists (3)
• what type of beliefs does islam have (3)
• the first instinct bat and ball test (3)
• belief in god (2)
• belief in god dwindling (2)
• religion gut feeling harvard (2)

So begins the hype over Penn Jillette’s new book “God, no! Signs You May Already Be an Atheist and Other Magical Tales.” I just saw Penn on a TV interview and the kindle version of his book will be delivered tomorrow, when it becomes available. What I’m afraid of is that “God, no!” will be mostly about the everyday existence of being an atheist – which Penn says is defined by “not knowing” the answers to Life’s Big Questions like “why are we here” or “is there a God” (I would call this agnostic… but to each his own). Hopefully it will have some funny stories, but in Penn’s words it’s more about showing that an atheist can be good – for example that they can love and raise children well – rather than dealing with philosophy, rational arguments or historical criticisms of religion. The main selling point of the book so far is Jillette’s own infamy and personal history, as well as his close relationships to Red Carpet Atheists like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens.

Coming soon: Review of Penn Jillette’s “God, no!”

Train metaphor…

Incoming search terms:

• god no review (42)
• god no penn jillette review (26)
• penn jillette god no review (25)
• penn jillette god no (11)
• god no penn (8)
• Penn god no review (6)
• penn god no (6)

And actually, I’m not against any of those. In fact I’m a passionate believer in and supporter of all of the above, and I strive everyday to become a better person. Meanwhile, when I say “Anti-Christian”, I’m only thinking about those things that Christians overlook or ignore about their own faith. These are the things I am firmly against:

• Salvation is very easy, just accept it
• Salvation was given in Jesus, who came 2000 years ago to Israel because God doesn’t give a shit about the rest of the world
• The world is ending soon and we will be judged for eternity – not based on our actions or accomplishments or even if we were good or bad, but based on our acceptance of Jesus
• God is a mystery – we just have to accept the Bible and believe in it cuz God says so, and because God says he wrote the Bible in the Bible so it’s true

Now if you accept those things – that doesn’t make you a good person. It doesn’t necessarily make you an idiot either (I used to believe them, and I’ve always been very intelligent). If you want to keep believing in those things, and if they make you happy, if they make you kinder and more generous, and if they don’t make you bitter, angry and violent, then power to you. I won’t interfere. However if you’re looking for something else, if you have problems with those beliefs but still call yourself a Christian, you might want to rethink your definition.

A lot of modern Christians basically believe in self-empowerment, freedom, actualization, and other new-age stuff like the Secret and the Law of Attraction that has extremely little to do with Jesus… and they say things like “well I’m not interested in the historical Jesus, but I know and love Jesus and God, etc”. That’s bullocks. You could be using another term, a more universal term, to express your spirituality which doesn’t automatically ban salvation from half of the world’s population (yes, Jesus did that… actually much less than half are currently Christian. Do the math.)

Today I got the following comment on one of my blog posts. I’ve left the spelling errors:

if you don’t believe in him, why make this website? Why read the bible to get your so called “Facts”?why do you tear your hair out if some one say that they are believers?don’t you believe in anything? if your answer is no, you are a liar.you must in some way or a another believe in something.Lets just say, you believe in this, and other believes in that. I’m not judging, im just saying, you must be really heartbroken to write this crep

It wasn’t even an inflammatory post. Am I heartbroken? No. Ok, I’ll admit when I was a teenage Christian I was filled with meaning, hope, inspiration and joy more often than I am now (maybe that just comes with being a teenager – I was also infinitely more heartbroken, depressed, sad, and lost than I am now). Do I believe in something? Abso-goddamn-lutely. I believe Jesus wasn’t a historical person; that religions like Islam and Christianity are founded on violence and left to their own devices (without education and science) would keep the world in a violent, misogynist, land of punishment and terror; that everyone needs to be fully responsible for their own actions and accountable for their deeds (not someday in heaven; here, now); that the world desperately needs saving and religion isn’t helping.

And by the way, I think religion probably has positive psychological benefits – maybe some people need religion. If I was in charge I might make everybody religious…. but I would never let religion grow powerful enough to make important decisions, stop science or education, or implement 2000 year old rules based on an ancient book of mythology.

What is Atheism and Am I an Atheist?

Atheism is a lack of belief in Gods or having no beliefs in supernatural deities; but this definition is unclear. What are “Gods”? If I stick only with the “supernatural” part – you could call me an Atheist. I don’t believe in something outside of nature. Everything that is, is – that’s nature; but we don’t understand it. We don’t know what “matter” is really capable of. There may be lots of things going on in the universe that we don’t understand. There may be big, superpowerful, intelligent beings from other planets or planes of existence that appear like “Gods” to us. Do I believe in One, Father God above everything, who is the end and the beginning, and who consciously interferes with history? No. What’s more – if He exists, then I refuse Him; because his actions are ethically questionable and I will not be bullied into submission by tyranny.

But is it possible that what many people mean by “God” actually refers to some natural condition that I am completely open-minded about? Yes.

Let’s go back to the comment I mentioned above:

if you don’t believe in him, why make this website? Why read the bible to get your so called “Facts”?why do you tear your hair out if some one say that they are believers?

These are excellent questions that need to be addressed. I’ll assume that the writer is talking about the Christian God.

If you don’t believe in him, why make this website?

Christianity offers a comprehensive, totalizing worldview. From inside the belief system, it has set up safeguards which make it difficult to turn away from your belief. Christians who are having trouble accepting the miraculous claims of the Church will feel guilty and may do penance. They will suffer tragically – and they will believe that suffering is good, healthy and righteous. This will make them angry at others (like myself) who are not going through this wearisome process of suffering and being guilty all the time. Christians will feel morally superior and angry (not all of them, of course – many Christians are amazing people.)

The purpose of this website is to offer another world view, that also makes sense, that is firmly established with evidence, support, reason and argument, to allow Christians or any one else the chance to move away from the belief system they were taught (usually against their will as children) into something else, something potentially more beneficial for their lives.

The hardest thing about leaving Christianity is that it feels like the whole world has lost meaning – and worse, you may constantly worry that you’re making the wrong choice. I’ve found that research, education and community help fill this void – eventually leading to far greater spiritual/intellectual heights than those offered in Christianity.

The specific agenda of this website, however, is to stand up in defiance against the idea/literary character of God. The God of the Old Testament, of Christianity; the God who refuses human expression, freedom, individualism, autonomy, pleasurable excess; the disapproving, frowning God who warns us against life – this is a hateful, tyrannous character. Just because I don’t believe he is real, doesn’t mean I can afford to ignore him – even if he doesn’t exist the idea of God is immensely and penetratingly influential on all of humankind. The future of mankind – our very survival – hinges on how we define God and our relation to this world we life on.

Why read the bible to get your so called “Facts”?

This is a very perceptive question. I’ll give two answers. First, Christians base their entire faith on the Bible. The Bible is the “Proof” that Christianity is True, that Jesus is God, etc. But the Bible is a collection of ancient literature, some written in Hebrew, some in Greek, devised over a period of almost 1,000 years and incorporating wildly differing belief systems. It is full of mythical (supernatural) events that are no more amazing than the feats of other pagan mythology – except that Christians continue to believe that they really happened. Frankly, as a former Christian and ex-seminary student who has studied biblical history and archaeology in Europe and the Middle East, who is now currently getting a PhD in Comparative Literature, I find the Bible fascinating. And it’s frustrating to me that – as a “sacred book” – I’m not supposed to do any research or investigation into its history, because “religious tolerance” should make it off limits and above question.

Secondly, while I don’t get my “facts” from the Bible, it is true that I regularly use biblical evidence and citations in my various arguments – which puts me in an awkward position. (If I don’t think it’s “True”, how can I use it to justify my beliefs or argument? Why is my interpretation any better than the “normal/Christian” one?) I suppose the Bible has a special place and resonance in Western Culture, and our perception of and response to the Bible continues to shape Western ideologies and policies; hence it is a pivotal text which must be engaged with.

Why do you tear your hair out if some one say that they are believers?

Christians like to believe that atheists or other non-religious are deliberately out to get them; trying to attack or abuse them. Honestly I don’t give a damn if you are a believer. However when someone says that, there’s a few things I know automatically:

1. They are close-minded
2. I will have to be careful what I say around them
3. We can have no fruitful conversations
4. They will continuously be looking for opportunities to save me
5. They will constantly make references to their faith and its benefits

If you’re a believer, you are probably automatically on guard and sensitive about point #1. You’re probably thinking “I’m NOT close-minded”. I don’t have time to stand around arguing with you. Let’s agree that you aren’t going to listen to anything I say, you aren’t going to be persuaded by any of my arguments or evidence, but will inevitably fall back on “well, that’s what I believe…” The difference between you and me is that I am not prevented from changing any of my beliefs. I have not been commanded to keep them. I don’t need to be loyal to them. I will consider any new evidence to the best of my ability and eagerly sacrifice old idea to new, better ones. I’ve done this several times in my life and continue to do so. Maybe I’m wrong – maybe you’re right. But the term “open-minded” will be more readily attributed to me.

What atheists and non-believers are doing these days, on a massive scale, is fighting for the rights of people who don’t want to believe in God. This is not about Christians right to believe – you’ve had that right, for a long, long time. This is about the right of non-Christians NOT to believe; to speak out without fear of condemnation or violence; to share their message and recruit members (as churches do!) in public places; to stand against religious groups who want to burn books, teach creationism, jail women who have accidental still births, and other forms of religious extremism without being villainized as intolerant assholes. It’s about the right of me, you, and everyone to find out our meaning and purpose in life, and to discuss it freely, without massive repercussions (yes of course you may disagree with me – people will always disagree! But are you disagreeing with my words or are you unleashing your fear and angry in the form of venomous tirades and abuse?)

Am I tearing my hair out? I’ll admit it is extremely frustrating, after over a decade and two graduate degrees, to be told things about Jesus, the Bible and God that I know are categorically and historically untrue. To be looked down upon because I just don’t get it, or am being led astray by my intellect (God made me smart because he wanted me to go to Hell). To have people raise arguments and proof that are unverified, unchecked, forged or fabricated; and to be called names and get hate mail because I’m interested in comparative religion and religious literature. But – I’m only frustrated when dealing with frustrating individuals. I try to avoid them as much as possible; when they aren’t around, I enjoy my life and love what I do.

Incoming search terms:

• what does it mean to be a christian (181)
• difference between atheist and christian (11)
• what does it mean to be a christian? (11)
• whats the difference between an atheist and a believer (6)
• what does it mean to be Christian (6)
• whats it mean to be a christain (3)
• diferrences between christian and athists (3)

I would go so far, in some cases, as to argue in favor of the myth, rather than against it. (If something is true 80% of the time, is it worth arguing that it isn’t always true?)

So here is an edited short list of my responses.

7 Common Myths About Religions that Might Actually Be True

1. Atheism Isn’t a Religion

This myth depends on what your definition of a religion is. If it is similar to what Dictionary.com calls it: “a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies,” chances are atheism might fall into the religion category. However, this decision from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in 2005 that it was a religion only adds to the myth that atheism isn’t one.

I’m not someone who cares to argue over what the definition of what an atheist actually is; but I’m aware enough to know that most atheists don’t consider atheism to be a religion because it is a lack of a belief, rather than a belief. Even if we amend Atheism, capitalized, to refer to the modern movement against organized religion, it still doesn’t fit the bill. Is environmentalism or the green movement a belief? Is democracy? The modern movement of Atheism is focused on teaching everybody to use reason and science to solve humanity’s problems – without deferring to a “superhuman agency”. However, the Supreme Court recognized that only by falling under the category of “Religion” could it be afforded its constitutional rights

2. Most Christians are Conservative

As with most things, Christians and conservatism changes with time. However, in the most recent presidential election, the opposite would seem more true. In the 2008 election, The Daily Mail reports that 54 percent of Catholics voted for liberal Barack Obama, with only 46 percent voting for more conservative opponent John McCain.

The troubling thing with this passage is the leap from “Christians” to “Catholics”. Comparing 46% and 54% is like asking “Is the glass half full or half empty?” Can you really say that “the glass is mostly full?” No – neither are Catholics “mostly liberal; and I would bet that if you took into account all Christians in America you’d get a different story. And who cares who they voted for? How about checking whether they support gay marriage, freedom of Atheist advertising, abortion, and health care? While there are some liberal Christians, I’ll keep my myth about most Christians being conservative.

3. Only Christians go to Heaven

While everyone may believe that his or her religion is right, do they believe only “their kind” will be allowed into heaven if they are Christians? The little discussed matter is actually debunked on Beliefnet. Using a quote from the Pope, they report that “those who live in accordance with the Beatitudes–the poor in spirit, the pure of heart, those who bear lovingly the sufferings of life–will enter God’s kingdom.” Other Christians are reported as giving similar answers.

Do I think it’s true that only Christians go to heaven – or that anybody goes to heaven? No. One of the main reasons I left Christianity was because of its unfair exclusion of peoples based on purely geographical or cultural incidents of birth. However, despite Beliefnet’s article or even the Pope, it is a fact that many Christians believe everyone else will go to Hell. It is ridiculous for Catholics to say “See – we don’t believe this, so what are you fighting against? Oh – those fundamentalists? But they’re wrong… so just ignore them.” Rather, I ignore Catholics because they are often smarter, more open-minded and don’t cause trouble. The problem – even if in the minority – are the very real hundreds of thousands of Christians who believe I and everyone else not Christian will not be saved, and that God chose them to save us.

4. Dinosaurs Didn’t Exist

With creationism and evolution seemingly clashing on the battle of the true titans, the issue of the dinosaur’s role in Christianity is ironically taken on by Answers in Genesis. How they came to be and there ultimate extinction is discussed with many quotes from the Bible.

The fact that anybody in the world believes that dinosaurs didn’t exist, and that this is a “religious debate” rather than a case of ignorance, blind stupidity or mental illness, makes me feel like pulling my hair out – as does the answer given: basically, dinosaurs DID exist and are mentioned in the BIBLE, but existed less than 6,000 years ago, fought with humans, and were too big to go on the Ark! (I’m hitting my head into the desk now.)

5. Jesus was Married

Although the story of the son of God getting married should have made it into the Bible, believers of this possible myth say that it was edited by those who opposed the union. In a lengthy response, Revered Dr. Mark D. Roberts takes on the topic. He uses biblical references and even the history of the era to discuss.

This one is more tricky: it is a common modern myth that Jesus and Mary were intimate or possibly married, thanks mostly to the Da Vinci code. And there is evidence for it – however there is more evidence that Jesus and Mary are literary characters rather than historical figures. So were they actually married? Not if they never existed. But did the authors of the story see their literary characters as married? Not really – but as spiritual personifications of the Logos and the Sophia, they are destined to be rejoined, and it is that mythical rejoining which predicated Christian ritual (of being married to Christ, dying to the old self and putting on a new body, etc.)

6. Islam Doesn’t Allow Other Religions

Among other religions, Christians are often referred to positively in the Islamic holy book, the Qur’an. According to Huda, the About.com Islam guide, Christians are “people who have received and believed in previous revelation from God’s prophets.” There are also several other relevant quotes regarding Christianity.

Yes Muslims believe that Jesus was a prophet and that Christians have some good teaching. This does not mean Christians are not infidels, and that it is not OK to kill Christians if they won’t convert. Islam is kind of like a dominant form of aggressive plant life. It is in its nature to grow and reproduce. Even if Islam “Allows” other religions (and I’m pretty sure it doesn’t) it would continue to try and convert unbelievers until there are none left. So “allow” isn’t really the right phrasing – what we need to ask is whether Islam can peacefully coexist with people of other faiths. The answer, every where and for all of its history, has been No it can’t.

7. Buddhists Believe in God ; Buddhist Believe in the Soul

The short answer to this according to Ven. S. Dhammika is “no.” Because religious ideas and especially god have an origin in fear, this is one of the main reasons Buddhists do not believe in god. He also uses quotes from The Buddha and other teachings.

This is more of a half myth. Using karma as more of a basis, they believe that it is the driving factor when undergoing reincarnation. The thinking that a person’s soul goes with him or her after death is not believed in by Buddhists.

I’m taking these two together. If we mean “God” as in the angry Old Testament Yahweh, then it is true that Buddhists have a more enlightened idea of divinity. However many modern New Age Christians talk about God in terms of “The Universe” or “The Source” – ideas that they are actually borrowing from Buddhism and Zen, which became popular in the US hippie movement. If we look at the beauty and invisible relationship between all things and call it “God” (as I’m also inclined to do sometimes) then the Buddhist’s God is no different from ours.

Likewise, with the concept of soul Buddhists are not that different from other religions. They believe that they will come back in a different form and that something survives after death and that their identity may sometime join the All. I fail to see the distinction: Christians believe their soul will go with them? As in, they are their body and both their body and soul will be saved? The idea of an eternal body is a perversion within Christianity, rather than a mistake in Buddhist thinking.

However: Buddhism is a religion, with rules, ritual and dogma, which means it often suffers from righteous thinking, obstinacy, and even militancy. While I agree with most of the philosophy, I heartily oppose much of the practice.

3 Common Christian Myths That Aren’t True

It’s far easier to list things that religions believe that aren’t actually true. You could argue that everything they believe is actually a myth – but I’ll restrain myself to the things every educated person knows about Christianity that Christians themselves don’t know.

1) Jesus taught a new system of goodness and morality

Actually Jesus taught absolutely nothing new. Christianity’s uniqueness comes from the innovative claim of his followers that Jesus was the son of God in human form – with an actual body – and like him their physical bodies would be raised. (Although even this physical body part was already present in lower Egyptian cults that emphasized a physical resurrection – hence the mummies.) The truth is there is nothing in the Bible that is new, and if Jesus was a real person, he borrowed extensively on the Stoics and Jewish-pagan cults like the Essenes.

2) Jesus’ followers wrote the Bible

Not true. They were written by communities claiming to have apostolic tradition stemming from a historical founder (although the earlier writings were probably created and regarded purely as spiritual literature). Check out Bart Ehrman’s new book Forged in the Name of God, or even Karen Armstrong’s The Bible.

3. The World Will Come to An End with the Return of Jesus

This mistaken belief has caused a lot of grief recently with Harold Camping’s 5/21/2011 prediction (which has now been shifted back to 10/21/2011). Whether or not they gave their life savings to Family Radio, most Christians believe in an End of Times when Jesus will sort the believers from the trash. These beliefs came from Stoicism, mystery cults and pre-Christian systems and Christianity actually attempted quite strenuously to invert the general consensus by arguing for an internal spirituality: The Kingdom of God is INSIDE you. I will come in YOUR lifetime.

Christianity’s continued desperate reliance on this motif is necessary since it lost its connection to intimate, personal experience of “reality” (I’m conscientiously avoiding the term “God” which I usually use but is misleading). The only way it could fulfill its promises was to say “Don’t worry, you’ll see the benefits someday – at the end of time.” But this is a Pagan belief Christianity usurped, rather than a Jesus-inspired vision.

What do you think are the greatest religious myths of our time? Are some myths necessary for civilization, or can they all be discarded?

Link to original article: http://www.mastersindivinity.org/25-myths-about-religions-around-the-world.html

Incoming search terms:

• dinosaurs missing the ark (25)
• common misconceptions about religion (20)
• religions around the world (16)
• list of religions around the world (12)
• misconceptions about religions (12)
• common myths that arent true (9)
• common religious myths (7)

More recently I had the opportunity to experience anti-ungodly prejudice first hand when I was applying for an English teaching position at a private university in Taiwan. It was not a religious university, and literary theory has come to embrace notable and outspoken Atheists thinkers like Alan Badiou and Zizek (not to mention the fact that 90% of the Western Literary canon is heretical or blasphemous), so I thought it would be safe for me to “be myself”. I gave them a copy of the book I published recently “Jesus Potter Harry Christ” under the publishing imprint “Holy Blasphemy.”

I prepared dutifully for the interview and was ready to talk about my literary research (how Satan is the hero of Paradise Lost, among other things); I knew the background, history, motto and chief aims of the department; and I’d even googled the competition to see what their qualifications were. As the only PHD level applicant, I thought I stood a pretty fair chance.

I was unprepared, however, to spend the time defending myself from vague and unclear bias and barbs. On the six person board of interviewers, one woman was particularly outspoken. I pegged her early on as a fundamentalist Christian – of which Taiwan has many (although less than 3 percent of Taiwanese are Christians, that percentage goes way up in English literature departments). All of her questions seemed like cynical, jaded attacks. While I could answer her questions, I wasn’t prepared to dig through to the real problem. Rather than “Why should we hire you?” she asked me “Why should we hire you even though the other applicants have way more experience, better teaching skills, have spent more time in Taiwan and can speak better Chinese?” When put that way I found it very difficult to answer. Why indeed?

She picked up my book and scoffed “Holy Blasphemy? Did you move to Taiwan so that you could attack religion and Christianity freely without social repercussions?” “Well…. Yes.” I said. She looked like she’d won a small victory.

I’m probably blowing some of this out of proportion based on faulty memory; but the meeting was negatively charged and drained me emotionally even though a lot of the action was going on under the words.

I wanted to ask her “What are you so angry about? Why am I even at this interview if you’ve clearly decided not to hire me? Why are my personal beliefs/lack of beliefs an issue?”

I felt like I was being judged and discarded based on religious preferences. I felt like she was assuming I was a bad, immoral person. It had nothing to do with my research or teaching ability, but on her need to defend her work space from “someone like me.” (I don’t even consider myself an atheist – but I was being judged as one anyway, because I don’t believe Jesus was the magical son of God and allow myself to say so).

The funny thing is, 30 or 40 years ago a gay person applying for  a university job may have felt the same way. Since then, gay and queer studies became hot topics – the current professors in English Literature departments around the world build their careers on gay and queer studies; it has become, not only respected, but privileged. I would guess that roughly 25% of the faculty of literature departments in Taiwan is either Gay or Christian, and often both.

This is despite the fact that, as I mentioned, most of the Western Canon of great books and authors are disctinctly and sometimes overtly anti-Christian. I’d like to say the world is changing, but in fact it isn’t. Prejudice against atheists is still very strong. Campaigns are being run on a ridiculously low level of public education just to teach people that atheists aren’t sadistic, child-eating monsters.

This recent article in the washington post demonstrates that atheists are viewed as sub-citizens in the US. The following video is an attempt to show how many famous, smart and good people were atheists.

I’d like to believe that someday people who don’t believe in supernatural intervention or divine benevolence won’t need a special title or name, but will just be regarded as normal people; but this is impossible as long as religious people exist in the majority. For atheism to become accepted as normative behavior, without its current negative connotations, we need a system of heavy evangelism, which includes education, ridicule and opposition on a grand scale.

At same same time, what if “atheism” is just the “smart people’s religion”? Can all people get through their lives without the crutch of religion to keep them happy? Maybe not. Many great rulers and political thinkers (Plato, Machiavelli, Nietzsche) saw the need for the public to be given religion – but a religion designed by the ruling class. Maybe what we need is simply a classed society, with atheists ruling from above and creating gods for those below.

Incoming search terms:

• atheist prejudice (33)
• jesus is gay (12)
• gay christ (12)
• jesus being gay (10)
• gay atheist (9)
• ancient gay art (8)
• jesus satan gay (8)

I’m up late, procrastinating, Greek class tomorrow morning. Enjoy.

Incoming search terms:

• daniel radcliffe dancing gif (8)
• daniel radcliffe gifs (7)
• daniel radcliffe gif (6)
• harry potter dancing gif (6)
• daniel radcliffe dancing video (4)
• swing w harrym potterze (3)
• Harry & Jesus Vid (3)

What does it mean to be an Atheist? I don’t know. Although I’m aware of the contemporary movement known as “New Atheism”, I’m also aware that there is some discussion about what the word itself actually means. Some stick to a straight dictionary definition (the belief in no God/no belief in God), but it seems to me to refer to much, much more. The absence of a belief should have little effect on a person – they may demand the right not to believe but they probably wouldn’t, as many Atheists proudly do, directly confront, criticize and oppose religion.

Atheists believe many things, and I’m not sure that they can even be summed up into one catch-all phrase. They stand for a wide variety of politics and social movements. Am I an Atheist? Also no answer: I’ve always rejected the term and continue to do so, and yet for outspokenly criticizing traditional religion, I’ve often been branded as such.

Here’s what I can tell you: I don’t believe in the tyrannical, capriciously violent god of the Old Testament, and I also don’t believe in the kind and loving god-man of the new. However I don’t feel that this alone makes me worthy of the term. Do I deny the possibility of all gods? No. Yes I understand that this means I must also accept the possibility of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. So be it. I’m not affirming its existence, I’m simply refusing to deny the possibility of it – for how indeed can I prove that it isn’t true (being unlikely, irrational and even “impossible” is not in itself a strong enough case for me to conclude the matter definitively.) The god Richard Dawkins takes great lengths to undermine in The God Delusion is the one that, as an evolutionary biologist, he feels can’t exist (the complex God that appeared without developing). Fine. He’s the expert, if he says so, it makes sense to me. But what about the gods of Greek and Rome – who almost always include a backstory about their development, formation, mutation, and deification? We know that the human body is made up of many separate tiny pieces that coexist indifferently to the the fact that together, they create a conscious human being. Is it impossible that we are somehow also involved in a similar arrangement? I will even concede that it may in fact be impossible – which does not negate the usefulness of the thinking exercise. Or what if the word “God” to me signifies a non-conscious, spontaneous relationship of matter in some as yet undiscovered sympathetic community; a concept akin to quantum physics and mysticism. Am I not allowed to use the word “God” for this? Must “God” refer only to the god that doesn’t exist?

Mostly however, coming from the field of comparative mythology and literature, I am not at all concerned with the issue of the existence of God. It is a non-issue for me. What matters is not at all whether God exists, but what people do and say in his name, how the idea of God influences society and culture, and whether it plays a harmful or helpful role in the development and continuation of the species.

All this is why, on the one hand, I prefer the terms “heretic” or “blasphemer” – which is personally very meaningful (read the manifesto). However, I also count myself as part of the contemporary anti-religious movement, and that movement is coming together in the name of science, reason and human rights under the umbrella title of “Atheism”. Since I support this movement and am not willing to bicker over insignificant details about my personal ideologies of divinity, and since I passionately defend an Atheist’s right to be an Atheist without social discrimination or prejudice, I’m displaying the “A” symbol on this site.

Part II: Sam Harris Speaks on Atheism

Here are a few passages I pulled from the following speech given by Sam Harris:

As a matter of philosophy, we are guilty of a confusion, and as a matter of strategy, I think we’ve walked into a trap… the whole discourse will continue to be successfuly marginalized under the banner of Atheism… So let me make my somewhat sedicious proposal explicit. We should not call ourselves Atheists… or anything. We should go under the radar, for the rest of our lives, and we should be decent people who criticize bad ideas.

Harris goes on to talk about spiritualism and mysticism and the unknown knowledge/benefit/awareness they may bring. He warns us of refusing to do our own experiential study about the possibilities claimed by, for example meditation or solitary confinement, and ends with an appeal to “intellectual honesty.”

To judge whether certain experiences are possible, and if possible desirable, we have to use our attention in the requisite ways. months at a time, 18 hours a day, pay undivided to arising of thought. No writing, talking, etc. Our neglect of these phenomenon puts us at a disadvantage. Millions of people have experience of these, if we reject these experiences because of their entanglement with religion, we appear less wise than even the craziest of our religious opponents. Intellectual honesty will always be more durable, deeper and more easily spread, than atheism.

Abso-freaking-lutely.

Incoming search terms:

• how to spot an atheist (14)
• atheist definition (10)
• atheist terms (5)
• atheist social movements (3)
• dawkins atheism definition (3)
• atheist spot a atheist (3)
• to spot definition (2)

In my view – the (increasing) animosity between Christians and Atheists has no where to go but from bad to worse; especially when they aren’t willing to actually talk to each other – and animosity, the creation of us vs. them groups, is never healthy for a society. Moreover, the Christian perspective raised some issues that are not at all addressed by Myers; for the sake of mediation, I’d like to compose a more thoughtful response.

This is the original list as given by http://st-eutychus.com

1. Stop being so smug.
2. Don’t assume every piece of Christian evangelism is directed at you – we want the undecideds, not the decided-uns.
3. Admit that the debate about God’s existence is complex – and that it can, depending on your presuppositions, be quite possible for intelligent and rational people to intelligently believe in an intervening deity who communicates through a book.
4. Admit that the scientific method – which by its nature relies on induction rather than deduction (starting with a hypothesis and testing it rather than observing facts and forming a hypothesis) – is as open to abuse as any religious belief, and is neither objective nor infallible.
5. Try to deal with the actual notions of God seriously believed in by millions of people rather than inventing strawmen (or spaghetti monsters) to dismiss the concepts of God – and deal with the Bible paying attention to context and the broader Christological narrative rather than quoting obscure Old Testament laws. By all means quote the laws when they are applied incorrectly by “Christians” – but understand how they’re meant to work before dealing with the Christians described in point 3.

Here are my responses.

1) Atheists are smug. Sure – their views are based on reason, logic and evidence and from that basis they can be pretty confident. However, rather than trying at all to explain their views humbly, they mostly make pompous, pretentious ‘holier than thou’ statements which create unnecessary conflict. Saying “I don’t believe in God because I can find no evidence for it” is very different from “Everyone who believes in God is a stupid fool.” I have absolutely no problem with Atheism or Atheists – but their attitude of superiority (especially by young kids, with little common sense or intelligence, who are simply puppeting great scientists for shock value) is disconcerting. 

2) If I don’t agree with Christianity, and I don’t want it to take over the world and control politics, laws, and influence my society, then I have the obligation to stop you from converting the ‘undecideds.’ Standing by and letting beliefs spread which I know to be false is the same as watching someone cheat another person. Admittedly; Christians believe the same about their need to convert, but luckily, given equal opportunity, I don’t think the Christian cause is strong enough to convince a rational person (those the need for better education).

3) I’ll admit that belief in God is complex, and I’ll even admit it may be possible for an otherwise intelligent person to conceive of a Deity who writes his laws down in a book for humankind. However – I also know that the Bible is a product of varying religious cults in various episodes of spiritual reform, with little consistency, outdated cultural prohibitions, and some ghastly stories that I wouldn’t let near my kids. I’m also pretty sure it is completely a rehash of older or emerging ideas and that “Jesus” had nothing to do with it. An intelligent or rational person, will be willing to face the historical evidence surrounding the rise to Christianity.

4) I don’t know enough to comment on the scientific method, but I’d say it’s a pretty good system of finding out more about what’s real. I will admit that ‘Atheism’ as a belief, while based on evidence or logical argument, does not warrant the fanaticism shown by modern Atheists. (At the same time, I appreciate that the exasperation is simply a response to the obstinacy of Christians who continue to refuse basic scientific principles).

5) Number Five is the very purpose of this website. We try to investigate the specific claims, the historical traditions, the Biblical support for Christian faith; we treat Christians as intelligent persons who are basing their faith on erroneous ideas about the available evidence, and strive to make the actual evidence as accessible as possible.

The disagreements between Christians and Atheists are wide variations in paradigms. There exists an uneasy truce, but both sides are incapable of communicating in a way that makes the other side hear what they are saying. And so without further ado, in order to help Christians deal with Atheists, here are 5 simple rules to follow.

5 ways for Christians to talk with Atheists

…or as Myers says, “5 ways for Christians to seem more intelligent“

1) The God Atheists don’t believe in is the humanistic God of the old Testament; the one who intervenes in history to make his chosen people prosper (or suffer). Instead of talking about God like a person, talk about Him like a conscience, an inner voice of goodness, or a universal natural principle. The early Greek conception of the One, the Logos (the divine, organizing principle that animates life) is not foreign to scientific minds or basic human experience. Start with this shared notion and agree that “God” may not be the best word to convey it. (Belief or disbelief in ‘God’ is meaningless when both parties have different ideas about God).

2) Understand that there is no ‘proof’ for the existence of God; many great minds have tried and failed to provide an adequate argument for God. Belief in God is a personal choice (or a social institution). Don’t try to prove that God exists to Atheists; they are most likely much more familiar with the logical arguments than you are. Without evidence, either belief may be held as long as it is of benefit to the holder and causes no harm; the best you can do is say “I believe because it consoles me” and move on.

3) Belief in God is very different from belief in Jesus Christ or Belief that Evolution is False: these are historical claims that can be refuted by contrasting physical evidence. And if you ignore evidence with claims that ‘reason is untrustworthy’ or ‘God is a mystery’, you cannot at the same time claim to equal Atheist’s in intelligence or logical ability. (If a genius chooses to disregard his own reason, and instead believes something on faith at a disregard for evidence, his opinions or arguments can hardly hold up against those who have not made such a choice – if this is you, recognize that you cannot participate in honest, intellectual discussion and it is right that your opinions will simple be dismissed.)

4) Educate yourself! How can you hope to support your own beliefs without looking for evidence to support them? The recycled arguments for Jesus Christ or the existence of God have no weight with Atheists; they are platitudes that do little to convince someone familiar with the subject matter. For example, I make a pretty good argument on this website, in many places, that the Jesus Christ of the gospels didn’t exist as a historical person. I can make this claim because of an abundance of historical evidence; much more than the handful of quotes used to justify a historical Jesus. Jesus existed or did not; your faith in him doesn’t sway my opinion, which is based on evidence. However – if you were familiar with all of the evidence I provide, and could put forward a theory that explains it all while being dependent on a historical founder, I’d be fascinated.

5) Understand that Christian history has been long and dark. Most Atheists disbelief in God is supported by the evils done in His name. The Christian church has done very little good for the world in the last 2,000 years, and very many travesties. Although the Christian church may hold some kernels of wisdom, the idea that the church is God’s vessel, his plan for salvation, doesn’t fit with the available facts. Someone has done something very wrong. It is no use to say “Men corrupted the church” or “All those bad things have nothing to do with the Christian message” – there would be no Christianity without the organizing body of leaders who edited and preserved the scriptures, and often drastically reinterpreted them. Explaining how God’s chosen plan was capable of such ‘perversion’ will not be an easy task for you, but it demands an answer.

Incoming search terms:

• talking to atheists about christianity (10)
• How to talk to atheists (9)
• how to talk to atheists about christianity (8)
• christians talking to atheists (8)
• talking to atheists (7)
• how to talk to christians (6)
• christians dealing with atheists (6)

There’s an article on the TIMES ONLINE today about a new kind of summer camp – where kids can go and learn how to think critically (read: skeptically) while having fun in the outdoors. It’s an atheist camp, subsidized by Richard Dawkins. As an idea, it’s faultless. Most camps that kids outdoors and having fun and religiously themed. Even the Boy Scouts of America (of which I and my similarly open-minded friends sneaked through by being ambiguous about our religious beliefs) still requires a belief in a higher power. Poor atheists kids don’t have as many opportunities to get away from their parents, make new friends and experience the splendid grandeur of living in the great outdoors. There should be a place for them, and I’m glad Dawkins is offering it.

Unfortunately, the camp sounds pretty boring. They will have a hunt for an imaginery unicorn, but rather than try to find it, kids are supposed to try and prove that it doesn’t exist. So instead of looking around for clues, listening to noises, sneaking around at night and being scared – they will have to think up philosophical theorums (and more likely than not they’ll just be frustrated, bored, killing time and waiting for the adults to teach them). We had the same game in scouts, we called it a Snype hunt. Most summer camps have some version. Campers are told about a special creature and have to go catch one for a prize. Campers don’t know whether or not it’s real, but staffers insist, and then go out and make noises or leave clues. The result is a fascinating and thrilling night-time activity.

Incidentally, I’m not convinced that kids can be taught to think critically or be open minded at all. If you teach them to believe in Jesus, son of god – they will believe it. If you teach them that there is no magic or mystery in life, that if it can’t be proven scientifically it has no merit, they will believe that too. You are still indoctrinating your kids to be a certain kind of people. While atheists and skeptics probably have the rational upper hand, I’ve mentioned before that it is much more difficult to get people to behave without threats or rewards. Teaching morality and ethics and humanism to an atheistic teenager is much harder than teaching it to a Christian. (Or… maybe not. Perhaps the prohibitions and guilt and torment and what make Christians ultimately so eager to sin and then feel bad about it later. Maybe Atheists can do without the object of their desires. Jury is out.)

The best way to create skeptical people is to keep making them believe stupid things and then telling them it was all a lie. Parents do this all the time. We teach our kids about the Easter Bunny, about Santa Claus, about the Tooth Fairy. We LIE LIE LIE. And then we say, “Honey, we’ve been lying to you for years. But now you know never to trust anything that we or anybody else says.” (And then some parents say – “except for Jesus. He’s just like those other things only he’s real.”)

What I’d like to see, is a ‘rite of passage’ camp where parents leave their kids in the wilderness, or put them in a homestay in China or Mexico, where they have to work hard and learn to communicate and fend for themselves. Or – put 30 of them on an island for a month and let them work things out. The ones who come back will be much stronger and definately free-thinking and open minded. Kids are freaking spoiled. They have too much time to think.

Finally – teenage kids are going to be led mostly by their natures anyway. They are going to want to have fun and be adventurous and have sex. Regardless of what camp they go to, kids are going to be kids. They’ll probably sneak around at night and make out and ignore the rules and rebel against their teachers.

When I have kids, I’ll send them to a different kind of camp each year. And then send them to China.

Incoming search terms:

• best site teach atheism teenager (2)
• atheist camp dawkins (1)
• teach them how to think dawkins (1)
• dawkins summer camp (1)
• dawkins sponsors atheist summer camp (1)
• dawkins atheist camp (1)
• camping reviews donald dawkins blog (1)