Newsweek recently had a cover story on the religious case for gay marriage. I heard about this while listening to an NPR program where they had the author as a guest. Most of the callers were fundamentalists, and I was starting to wonder why. Then I heard Al Mohler’s voice, who was the dissenting guest. So that’s why. They were listening because of Mohler.
One of the callers in particular made me laugh in frustration. Here’s my paraphrase of the call:
Caller: My life has been transformed by Jesus Christ. He’s changed my life. I’m a different person! Praise God!
Host: So… how does that affect your view of gay marriage?
Caller: Well, in Deuteronomy the Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination against God. So I’m against it.
Host: The Bible also condones slavery — does that mean slavery is okay?
Caller: Well, not necessarily. Slavery is actually based on the work of a man named Charles Darwin, who said the negro race came from monkeys. But that’s against Scripture, which says we’re all equal in Christ.
Host: Thanks for your call.
Caller: Jesus Christ bless you!
In-fracking-sane. Someone give that man some meds!
I can’t really even say that this the fault of religion. This is the fault of the American education system. (Darwin created slavery? Good historical grief.) Though I have been disheartened to learn from several public educators that the actual point of public education is not to educate but to socialize.
I’m reminded of that wonderful phrase, “fractally wrong.” Wrong at every conceivable scale of resolution. So wrong that it’s impossible to find a place to begin correcting that wrongness. So wrong that it would be impossible to find a basis of agreement on which to hold a discussion of that wrongness. A Gordian knot of wrongness, and me without my Occam’s saber. Just really, really wrong.
Yow.
Daniel,
This illustrates the problem of trying to use the OT as a moral standard. It is fraught with pitfalls and problems.
In my upbringing we used the OT for 3 things: Tithing, condemn homosexuals, and condemn women wearing men’s clothing.
The caller’s last comment betrays that there is a lack of critical, rational thinking in some expressions of Christianity. The caller couldn’t make the connection about using the OT to condemn homosexuality means you must accept what ELSE the OT teaches.
His Darwin reply is classic……..and sad.
While I am a follower of Jesus, I do appreciate reading your blog.
Bruce
@cello: If it’s not the fault of religion (specifically Christian evangelicalism), why do only evangelicals claim such nonsense? They are taught these things in their churches and in email forwards. Many tell their children to ignore what they are taught about evolution and Charles Darwin.
Not that I disagree that our educational systems need reform. They can certainly be better — I am frustrated with my own public schooling experience.
But I do feel that religion is at fault for this man’s ignorance — if you tried to edu-ma-cate him and tell him he is wrong, I doubt very much he would change his mind.
@Bruce: Thanks for your comment. I’m always glad to hear from more rational Christians, and am encouraged when we find common ground.
I wonder this: If homosexuality is so terrible a sin as to be more important to fight than poverty, why isn’t it’s prohibition a commandment rather than two or three short references?
And, like everyone else here, the Darwin reference is insipid. Especially to a believer in the very pre-Darwin OT (Israelites and Egyptians, anyone?).
@Daniel,
Well my initial reaction is that this caller is just plain ignorant and there are ignorant people from all theological stripes. To baldly imply that there was no slavery prior to Darwin is embarrassingly dumb by any philosophical standard. That said, I guess I’d have to think about if American evangelical Christianity actually *encourages* ignorance. Maybe some strains do encourage “knowledge myopia”. But, honestly, I don’t think all Christians are quite this ignorant.
@cello,
I don’t think all Christians are this ignorant, either. I know many intelligent Christians who would scoff at this caller. But I also seen many churches encourage “knowledge myopia” (great term BTW).
I can’t imagine an atheist making this kind of assertion and not being open-minded to being corrected. But, I suppose they exist somewhere. Maybe if it was reversed and most of the nation were atheist, we’d see more of this kind of fringe behavior.
@ Cello,
“I guess I’d have to think about if American evangelical Christianity actually *encourages* ignorance. Maybe some strains do encourage “knowledge myopia”. But, honestly, I don’t think all Christians are quite this ignorant.”
I think you’re right that all Christians are not that ignorant (a low bar to set). But I think the religion itself encourages not only ignorance, but proud ignorance. The texts make a point of praising the people who believe without evidence. “Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.” (John 20:29)
People are stupid all over, but when a person’s religious beliefs shield their point of view from scrutiny, they’re more likely to stay ignorant.
It’s very simple, actually:
http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1055
The point about the lack of education in American evangelical Christianity is well taken. There are far too many of us that simply focus on devotional time in Sunday School and refuse to focus on reality.
This, however, is not the case with historical Christianity. Historically, Christianity has been at the forefront of promoting advances in philosophy and even science. From Origen to Aquinas, Christian teaching has actually been a healthy intellectual shaping influence on the Western world.
@Jeremy:
If Christianity was at the forefront of science, then I’d have no problem with it!
Though I think it might be better said that “early Christianity” was better at promoting science & philosophy rather than “historic Christianity” (that might be what you meant since you cite Origen and Aquinas). During the Dark Ages and after, it seemed Christianity was usually fighting against science and philosophy.
I tend to agree with Sam Harris on some of his points about moderate Christianity’s more progressive moves. While it’s certainly true that some denominations of Christianity have been at the forefront regarding the increase of human knowledge at some points in the past, it does not follow that Christianity itself is a motivator of this pursuit. I believe quite the opposite is true in the vast majority of cases (I’ll grant a few notable exceptions).
The point I’m trying to make is that (and I’m paraphrasing Harris here) the doors of literalism do not open from the inside.
Most instances of progressivism one might point to in the history of moderate Christianity were made in spite of, not because of, dogma and doctrine. In most of the cases I can think of off the top of my head (women are not chattel, slavery is bad, etc.), these changes come only after the society in which the church finds itself has (through no thanks to the church) decided that the old stances are indefensible (e.g. the current movement towards increased acceptance of gay marriage in the U.S.).
The faith then has to make a choice to dig in its heels (fundamentalism) and risk opening itself to unwanted ridicule, or decide that “Hey Presto!” there’s a new interpretation of Scripture that just so happens to have always supported this new thought after all! Those who choose the latter path become moderates.
Mind you, I prefer moderates any day of the week over fundamentalists. But, I find the common claim by moderates to be sources of progress a bit hard to swallow.
“Christian teaching has actually been a healthy intellectual shaping influence on the Western world.”
I’m curious–what developments were specifically discovered by Christians that couldn’t have been discovered by atheists? What was the bonus of their being Christian? (aside from not getting burned as heretics or witches?)
I think the confusion you’re experiencing has its roots in the fact that most schools were attached to churches. Therefore everyone tugged their forelock to superstition while engaging in actual research.
I feel sure one could make the same arguments for Islam. However, Christianity has had five hundred extra years to have its sharper edges blunted by politics.
Isn’t stringing quotes together that make Christians look bad on the same level as stringing Bible verses together to make sinners look bad?
Isn’t ridiculing Christians the same as Christians condemning atheists?
Isn’t spending time discussing how wrong Christianity is the same as Christians gathering to discuss how awesome God is?
You’re going to see what you want to see. You’re going to believe what you want to believe. Nothing can convince you of what you defy.
Just random blurbish thoughts. We’re all sinners. I’m a Christian, but even I believe the majority of Christians are idiots when it comes to dealing with those who aren’t. It sucks, really. I honestly that while many Christians believe in God in a right way, over 90 percent are freakin’ awful at conveying that in the way Jesus Christ truly would have if he lived today.
If you say much of today’s Christianity is based on superstition and rituals and traditions….you’re right. But I think …. and I’ve done this …. if you approach God with an open heart the way we all wish Christians could approach others with an open mind, we’d be pretty surprised at what we’d discover.
About ourselves. About Christianity. About life. About God.
There’s a ton of doom and destruction and condemnation splattered throughout the Bible. God’s not a meek being. But there is a context to it all. It’s simply a matter of exploring it fairly.
I’d like to apologize for all Christians who have offended any of you. It’s easy to do. Many intend to offend. Others do not.
Just please …. don’t act like you’re better than any of them if you’re going to react to them in the same fashion they speak to you. When it all comes down to it, ain’t none of us got it all figured out.
Sorry for writing a chapter in a book here….I’m done.
P.S. Sorry about the typos. Maybe I should have proofread.
@Brandon:
Thanks for your comment. Most of us here have not been too offended by Christians — but if we have, that’s certainly not the reason we reject Christianity. It is because it is intellectually bankrupt. There is no evidence for the supernatural claims of the Bible. That is why we reject Christianity.
As for apologizing for other Christians, that’s very nice, but it doesn’t amend any damage that might be done. The person who offends is the one who needs to apologize, not someone who doesn’t even know about what happened. But I appreciate the gesture (even though I haven’t really been offended by anyone).
“Isn’t ridiculing Christians the same as Christians condemning atheists? ”
That depends, is the ridicule justified? Do the complaints hold merit? Are they just and reasonable? If the complaints stand up, then it is our responsibility and yours to air them.
“Isn’t spending time discussing how wrong Christianity is the same as Christians gathering to discuss how awesome God is?”
Isn’t that the whole point of religious worship? “Come, let us magnify the Lord” Worship means Worth-ship, after all, proclaiming and praising God’s worth. And yet, do you see us complaining about where you go on Sunday morning? Knock yourself out, tell each other what a really great guy God is. The worst we’re going to do is laugh at how silly you are.
“But I think …. and I’ve done this …. if you approach God with an open heart the way we all wish Christians could approach others with an open mind, we’d be pretty surprised at what we’d discover.”
*sigh* Back to this. Look, three-quarters of the atheists you meet in the US are going to be de-converts. We DID approach God with an open heart for years. Many of us passed through several stages looking for God. Fundamentalist, evangelical, mainline, modernist, postmodernist. We kept an open heart and an open mind, searched and searched … and here we are.
Please click on the “read more” link on the upper right side bar. Read about our good host’s story. Then come back and talk to us about “open hearts.”
Will do.
“There is no evidence for the supernatural claims of the Bible. That is why we reject Christianity.”
Doesn’t it take faith to reject something when there is no proof against it. People have been trying for years and years (and when I say people, I mean a shit load of people, smart people) to prove that God doesn’t exist, that there is no “higher” being.
The fact that no one can do that, amazes me. It takes as much faith, if not more to believe that nothing has a purpose, that everything just feel into existence and just worked out the way it did. Humans simply live their lives for what? to just keep living, what’s your purpose, to keep from dying. I know I’m exaggerated, and I’m not arguing, I wouldn’t really call myself a Christian, but to say there is no supernatural claim/evidence is nonsense. I’ve read the Bible, I’ve researched the Bible. I don’t believe it all, a lot of it I find stupid and nonsense. But nothing in the scripture contradicts what has been recorded in history.
But I just can’t even begin to understand what you think when you are standing on a cliff overlooking the water or looking at all the beautiful things of this Earth. No way in hell you can tell me that was science, things just didn’t form.
@Jordan,
“Doesn’t it take faith to reject something when there is no proof against it.”
No, it doesn’t. Faith is belief in a positive assertion without proof. Alternatively, Dawkins puts it as follows: “faith is blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence.”
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and that which can be asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence. So you see, Jordan, it is not take faith at all to reject something if there’s no proof against it … assuming that it is extraordinary and that there is also no proof in favor of it. A supernatural event of any sort is certainly extraordinary, and to my knowledge, there is no positive evidence of a supernatural event that has ever been unambiguously shown.
If you have some positive evidence of the supernatural events alleged in the Bible (or from any other source of religious revelation), please produce it. I’m sure all of those that read this blog will be very interested to listen to what you have to say. I’m not just being pithy. I, for one, would be fascinated if such evidence were to come to light. But, please understand that most of us here have been asking for such evidence for a very long time, and simple appeals to emotion or your own appeal from incredulity are unlikely to be seen as positive, unambiguous evidence.
Also, you said:
“But nothing in the scripture contradicts what has been recorded in history.”
Are you sure you meant that? Is there nothing in the Bible that contradicts anything in recorded history? Really?
Just an update….I have read through Daniel’s story (again, already read it once), and am currently composing an open letter which I will post on my blog in the next few days. I would like to extend this as an official invitation to all to check it out then.
My blog is brandonsneed.wordpress.com. (Forgive some of the silliness on there — I’m a random guy.)
Some of my older posts on that blog are much more ignorant than I am now, but I felt them important to leave up there as a testament to growth. I’m only 21, but learning a lot.
A few folks have found it interesting. Maybe you will too. But I won’t be offended if you don’t.
I would simply ask that all who do decide to read it approach each posting with a gracious spirit. As I just said, I’m a learning guy, and much of what I post on there is often just thrown up there on a whim.
I’m working on that. Self-editing is a skill for which I’ve yet to develop patience.
Though I am implementing it for this letter, which I think may be only the first of many.
Love y’all.
Oh, and a brief note on the Bible — it’s frackin’ old. It’s been translated into a billion different languages a billion times over and over again. Like a hellaciously huge game of telephone.
No way did all the translators get everything right each time through. Errors are unavoidable, even large ones. I’m a Christian, and even find it ridiculous sometimes.
(Sshhh, don’t tell on me….Christians aren’t supposed to say stuff like that!)
Don’t worry about it — no one here cares what Christians or agnostics or atheists or anyone is supposed to say: at least I don’t care.
Think for yourself, right? That applies to all of us, no matter what we may believe or not believe.
Word.
@Jordan,
“But nothing in the scripture contradicts what has been recorded in history.”
Except for all of Genesis…. and Exodus…. and Leviticus…. and Numbers…. and Deuteronomy…. and Joshua.
If I remember correctly the first event that is close to historically verifiable is somewhere in Kings….
Well, except for the Great Flood, the Hebrew exodus from Egypt, people living for a thousand years…
@Jordan:
Just to repeat the consensus: No, it’s doesn’t. Does it take you faith to not believe that an evil gremlin named Garmigule lives beneath your left shoulder? Can you prove that he doesn’t? Did I mention he’s invisible (made of spirit, of course) and only lets me see him, not you?
Really it shouldn’t. There is no way to prove a negative like this. God could always be hiding. You can’t prove his nonexistence, you can just assign probability to it. The question we have to ask is, “Is there any evidence FOR the existence of God?”
And all of us atheists say, no.
This doesn’t make sense to me. You find alot of the Bible “stupid … nonsense” yet you claim all of it’s historical? Really?
What about the Garden of Eden? The tower of Babel? The global flood? The slavery of the Israelites in Egypt? Moses miracles? Joshua defeating Jerico by some trumpet blasts? Prophets rising people from the dead? The sun stopping in the sky for Joshua (which would mean the earth stopped rotating!)? Herod killing the male children (which nobody except hardcore fundies think actually happened in history)? Jesus changing water into wine, raising the dead, rising from the fracking dead and living to this day? Dead prophets walking around after the resurrection of Jesus?
You believe all of these things happened historically, even though there is NO evidence for any of them? Why? Especially if you agree the Bible is mostly stupid nonsense?
@brandonsneed:
Ah, another budding atheist … Walk farther into the light, old son.
The inability to disprove the existence of a god gives no weight to believing in one. It only makes it more ridiculous. Because if you’re going to belive in a Christian (though apparently non-Biblical) deity, you must justify why you chose that particular deity and not, say, Zeus, or Allah, or His Holy Noodliness the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
After all, they all have a roughly equal chance of actually existing.
This has been said before,but me,being the selfish attention hog I am,still want to type it out.
To anyone,believing in anything that has no factual way of proving itself,amuse me and answers the following questions:
Do you believe in Scientology?
Do you believe in Intelligent Design?
Do you believe in Santa?
Do you believe in the Easter bunny?
Do you believe in the tooth fairy?
Do you believe in any other personal god besides your own?
If you answered no to any of these questions,you’ll understand why people dismiss your own beliefs based solely on faith.
Disclaimer:Matt L is not a scientist,professor,teacher,doctor,holder of any credible degree,or any other person with a reliable and proven track record.
P.S. Not that it matters to anyone but myself,it makes me happy to see everyone typing without vulgarity and name calling.
Education FAIL
But I just can’t even begin to understand what you think when you are standing on a cliff overlooking the water or looking at all the beautiful things of this Earth. No way in hell you can tell me that was science, things just didn’t form.
It’s a much better explanation than what you’re offering: an invisible, all-powerful entity that hasn’t shown himself directly to human beings for 2000 years snapped his fingers, and it was done.
At least science proposes actual mechanisms and processes for how those things actually formed. Your answer amounts to nothing more than “it was magic,” which explains absolutely nothing.
I might as well say the the Valar did it through freakin’ singing a bunch of stupid songs and their harmonies brought creation into existence.
Oh, but the Christofascist isn’t gonna buy THAT, because they’ll read JRR Tolkien’s Silmarillion and dismiss it as utter and complete fantasy…but the story of the Imaginary Sky Fiend (seriously, Yahweh in the Hebrew Bible’s a right bastard) doing all of it in six 24-hour periods and then being exhausted and needing a rest on the seventh is TOTALLY true and logical.
Oh, and the Imaginary Sky Fiend totally doesn’t like it when two dudes get it on…for some utterly arbitrary reasons that have nothing to do with logic nor common sense.
Here is factual evidence to the contrary of what the uneducated,miss guided caller stated.
From my copy of The Voyage Of The Beagle,Darwin,in his own words:
“While staying at this estate,I was nearly being an eye-witness to one of those atrocious acts which can only take place in a slave country.Owing to a quarrel and a lawsuit,the owner was on the point of taking all the women and children from the male slaves,and selling them separately at the public auction at Rio. Interest,and not any feeling of compassion,prevented this act. Indeed,I do not believe the inhumanity of separating thrity families,who had lived together for many years,even occurred to the owner.Yet, I will pledge myself, that in humanity and good feeling he was superior to the common run of men. It may be said there exists no limit to the blindness of interest and selfish habit. I may mention one trifling anecdote, which at the time struck me more forcibly than any story of cruelty. I was crossing a ferry with a negro,who was uncommonly stupid. In endeavoring to make him understand, I talked loud, and made signs, in doing which I passed my hand near his face. He,I suppose,thought I was in a passion , and was going to strike him: for instantly, with a frightened look and half-shut eyes, he dropped his hands. I shall never forget my feelings of surprise,disgust,and shame, at seeing a great powerful man afraid even to ward off a blow,directed, as he thought, at his face. This man had been trained to a degradation lower than the slavery of the most helpless animal.”
Brandon, You remind me of myself a little at age 21. You are a smart and caring dude, and you obviously have a love for the truth, despite having been raised to cherish Christian traditions.
You have a very good point about hard-headed, judgmental, and loud-mouthed atheists being in some ways, just as bad as hard-headed, judgmental, and loud-mouthed Christians (and Jews, and Muslims, and Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Zoroastrians, Etc….)
I was 27 when I finally gave up trying to reconcile the actual universe, the one in which I live and interact with things, with the one described in the Bible and in Hymns and sermons and Sunday School lessons (I was teaching a Sunday School class for high-schoolers at the time). I was incredibly fortunate to have a wife who was reasonable enough to follow me into accepting reality without imaginary beings, who love us very much, waiting for us to die to talk to us face to face.
I suspect that you will go through a similar process of reality-acceptance at some point in your life, and hope that the process goes even easier for you than it did for me.
I looked on your blog for the “open letter”, and didn’t see it. I did see the news of your engagement, though. Congratulations, and may the Flying Spaghetti Monster reach out his noodly appendage and richly bless you both! (Just Kidding; there’s no such thing as the Flying Spaghetti Monster!)
@Frank:
I was with you until the part about there being no Flying Spaghetti Monster. I’d like you to prove that assertion. I believe in him, as his wet noodle has touched me. Unless you can prove his non-existence, I hope you’ll realize the futility of saying he doesn’t exist.
Frank, he loves you and has been cooked for you. Won’t you believe in him?
:)
I have to agree with cello, those comments display just as many faults with the American educational system as with religious bigotry! Darwin actually became an agnostic because he saw how slaves were treated in South America and (justifiably) wondered why any god would so much as permit (let alone condone) this unfortunate practice.
My question is: “Has this guy even read the bible?” to which the probable answer, as is the case for most fundies, is “no”.
Pingback: » Blog Archive » Please Don’t Be Dumb…