10 Things You Miss About Christian Fundamentalism

December 15, 2011 By Daniel Florien 84 Comments

So you used to be a Christian fundamentalist, but now you’ve been born again in the fires of hell and baptized in the cold water of atheism. Congratulations.

And while you appreciate all your new free time and ability to think through a situation without superstitiously invoking a deity or fleeing to church, there are also some things you miss about your old faith…

10) Carrying Your Bible

Also known as your “sword,” you were never a moment without that precious cargo. It might have even had a handy carrying case (mine did).  In a moment’s notice you could whip it out and get daily insight from anonymous authors or set your friend straight about the theology of predestination.

Now you just have the internet and the LOLCat Bible.

9) “Free” Weekly Concerts

It was so nice to relax, praise your precious beautiful cutsy-wootsy invisible Jesus, and listen to a band play repetitive, simplistic, sappy praise songs. There was never a better time to let your mind wander and think about all the other things you could be doing right now.

And remember that one girl who shouldn’t have been singing? Everyone felt too bad to say anything about it. At least she was hot.

But even though there wasn’t a cover charge, they always passed that pesky basket around asking for 10% of your income… and you sure don’t miss that.

8) The Superiority Complex

There’s something wonderful about feeling like you’re better than everyone else around you.

Whether being too good to watch a certain movie (“they take my precious Savior’s name in vain!”), go to a concert (“is it Christian music?”), or just being weird (“sorry, I have to go to soul crushing witness training class tonight!”), it’s really a shame to feel like you’re just a regular person who doesn’t really know what the hell is going on. :(

7) Potluck

Holy fuck, just that word alone got your mouth watering, didn’t it?

Remember the long tables filled with pot roast, mashed potatoes, sweet potato casserole, cornbread, fried chicken, cookies, cake, cupcakes… ok I’m a believer again! Sign me up and pass me the food!

6) Community

I mean it’s cool and all to sit at home in your underwear and talk to other enlightened atheists on the internets, but there’s something nice about meeting regularly in a sacred place with people who think similarly.

Plus, chicks in dresses.

5) Free Daycare

Admit it — sometimes church was worth it just because they took care of your damn kids.

4) Being Told What To Think

Thinking is hard. Remember when a guy in a suit got up on a stage and told you what to think? Life was so much simpler back then.

3) Christian Cosplay

Who doesn’t love dressing up in a costume and pretending to be something you aren’t? Putting on some nice clothes, smiling, and spouting memorized Bible verses is a nice change for a lot of people.

Unfortunately, too often things went back to normal on Monday and you found yourself sniffing coke off a hooker’s ass (like Ted).

2) Christian Bookstores

…because where else can you get the latest PRAIZIN’ GOD VOL 23 CD, a “God’s Gym” t-shirt, a framed naked baby angel, and testamints?!

1) Jesus

Yeah, you miss the 2,000 year old mythical man-god. He was your make believe friend — he always listened to you (though never talked back), never judgmental (except when you ate too many M&M’s), and best of all, he was always on your side (mostly because he was a figment of your imagination).

Yet even though these are all things you might miss…

Reality is better.


* * * * *

Like Unreasonable Faith on Facebook!

Filed Under: Articles, Christianity, Fundamentalism, Humor 84 Comments

He Took Offense

October 6, 2011 By vorjack 8 Comments

Natalie Angier has a science column up at the New York Times about a concept being called “pathological altruism.” She’s working from a new book about the topic, containing essays from people like neurologist Dr. Robert A. Burton:

As the new book makes clear, pathological altruism is not limited to showcase acts of self-sacrifice, like donating a kidney or a part of one’s liver to a total stranger. The book is the first comprehensive treatment of the idea that when ostensibly generous “how can I help you?” behavior is taken to extremes, misapplied or stridently rhapsodized, it can become unhelpful, unproductive and even destructive.

Selflessness gone awry may play a role in a broad variety of disorders, including anorexia and animal hoarding, women who put up with abusive partners and men who abide alcoholic ones.

This paragraph caught my attention:

David Brin, a physicist and science fiction writer, argues in one chapter that sanctimony can be as physically addictive as any recreational drug, and as destabilizing. “A relentless addiction to indignation may be one of the chief drivers of obstinate dogmatism,” he writes. “It may be the ultimate propellant behind the current ‘culture war.’ ” Not to mention an epidemic of blogorrhea, newspaper-induced hypertension and the use of a hot, steeped beverage as one’s political mascot.

Boy, does that sound familiar. This has been one of Fred Clark’s major themes for the past few years. He wrote a clever piece a couple years ago titled Just Say No

He took offense.

It started out in college. You know, just experimenting with it. But he liked it. He liked how it made him feel.

For a while it was just recreational — weekends and parties and rallies and that kind of thing. But soon he was hanging out with some pretty hard-core users, with the kind of people who took offense all the time. They didn’t need a reason or an excuse, it was just what they did. It was who they were. Soon he found he couldn’t get through the day without it.

Over the years he even learned to grow his own, to take the tiniest seeds of umbrage and nurture them into full-grown pretexts for outrage. The good stuff.

Filed Under: Articles 8 Comments

Media Backlash(s) about Dominionism

August 26, 2011 By vorjack 45 Comments

Right now there’s a backlash going on about the backlash that started the backlash …

Lemme back up …

Several years ago, various mainstream sources started talking about “dominionism,” the movement within conservative Christian sects to gain control of secular government. Atheist groups and right wing watchers had spoken about it for several years before that, but books like Max Blumenthal’s Republican Gamorrah and Jeff Sharlet’s The Family helped get the idea into the mainstream.

The mainstream attention on dominionism reached a crescendo recently in the coverage of the Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry presidential campaigns, both of which has some ties to dominionist groups. See Forrest Wilder on Rick Perry or Ryan Lizza on Michele Bachmann for prominent examples. Since many people were only just hearing about dominionism, this produced a flurry of speculation. Call this the first backlash, against dominionism itself.

This flurry of activity came across as a bit paranoid to some readers. Several long-time watchers of American religion stepped in to rein in the speculation: Lisa Miller at the Washington Post, Ira Stoll at Reason.com and Jonathan Tobin at the Commentary blog. Call this a second backlash, against the media coverage of dominionism.

Now several prominent bloggers are stepping in to counter the that second backlash. Peter Montgomery at Religion Dispatches argues that Lisa Miller goes to far, and that the dominionists are more than liberal paranoia. Meanwhile, Jason Pitzl-Waters at The Wild Hunt makes the point that no one is arguing that all evangelicals, or even most evangelicals, are dominionists. But even one highly placed person who believes that all atheists and pagans are in league with demons could be a disaster.

Filed Under: Articles, Christianity, Politics 45 Comments

The Wall o' Socialist Bible Quotes

August 17, 2011 By fatemeh 91 Comments

I recently got into a minor facebook spat after a friend (who I’m sure will identify themselves here if they want to) posted a link from the Washington Post, arguing rather convincingly that if Jesus returned he’d be none to impressed at conservative Americans and pointing out the strange disconnect between denying biological evolution and embracing evolutionary economics. A rather long-winded debate ensued between myself and a couple of my friend’s more right-wing acquaintances.

Their basic argument was that Jesus was in no way a socialist, he would have approved whole heartedly of capitalism, the Liberal Left don’t know what they’re talking about, how dare you invoke the name of our pure, white, American English speaking Jesus in support of dirty socialism, taxes are evil, the government is evil, universal healthcare is evil, yada yada yada, you get the drift.

So I thought I’d do a bit of reading. Of the Bible. Ladies and gentlemen, in what is a genuine first for me, I am now going to post a giant wall of text from the Bible in support of the idea that the character of Jesus as portrayed in the New Testament was a left-wing socialist liberal, bordering on communist.

Enjoy.

44 And all that believed were together, and had all things in common;
45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.

Acts 2: 44, 45

32 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.
34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
35 And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.
36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus,
37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.

Acts 4:32-37

31 When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory.
32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.
35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in,
36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?
38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you?
39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’
41 Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink,
43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
46 Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Mathew 25: 31-46

1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.
6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing.
7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

Romans 13:1-7

13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you.
14 You will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.

Luke 14:13, 14

If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.

Matthew 19:21

24 You cannot serve both God and Money.

Matthew 6:24.

Additions and rebuttals are welcome :-)

Filed Under: Articles, Bible, Politics 91 Comments

Case For a Creator?

July 18, 2011 By vorjack 288 Comments

The following post was submitted by Jeremy Wells, AKA the Not So Friendly Atheist, who blogs about the logical flaws in religious arguments.

The Christian argument for a personal god is the perfect example of a non-sequitur argument. They explain that at the moment of the Big Bang there must have been a “First Cause” that created the universe. The only explanation they can provide for this lack of knowledge is god. We may never know what happened at the first moment, but many models have been used to derive theories for it. Some explain it as a singularity and others claim that we are just part of a multi-verse, but it is clear that the Biblical representation is not accurate. Science is working hard to answer these difficult answers; religion claims to know the answer. Many scientists, including Albert Einstein, have conceded the fact that god created the universe. How can atheists be so arrogant to believe that this genius was wrong? The real question is how can Christians be so ignorant to confuse the words of a man that denounced the idea of a personal god.

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.

Albert Einstein and many others have stood in awe as they observed the beauty of the universe. Many physicists have mentioned god when speaking about the beginning of the universe, but their definition of god is different than the monotheistic personal god. The underlying principles that govern the universe are consistent throughout the known universe. The rate of expansion is consistent, the cosmic background radiation is consistent, and Einstein’s general theory of relativity provides consistent and precise predictions about the known universe. These principles have been tested and verified numerous times and this is why we have the Big Bang theory. If one were to call these underlying principles god then many would accept this claim, even atheists have been known to concede to this definition of god. How does this concession lead to a personal god? Here comes the non-sequitur! Because the universe was created, Jesus must be the savior of all mankind and all those that don’t believe will go to hell! WTF!!

These are two separate claims and a concession to the first claim doesn’t provide evidence for the second claim. The second claim goes beyond the underlying principles that govern our universe and seeks to prove a personal god. This claim must be supported by evidence that shows undeniably that one god listens to all of mankind’s prayers and has the ability to answer them. Since we know the criteria required to support this claim it is possible to test it. The Bible has many promises that this personal god has endowed upon believers. The Bible’s main promise states that faith in Jesus is the only way to heaven; conveniently, this promise can’t be proven or disproven, but many others can.

The Bible promises god will answer prayers, but what about the millions of unanswered prayers? If god chooses to answer one prayer then he has the ability to answer them all. If a prayer doesn’t get answered then there are only two possible explanations: 1)god chose not to answer it 2) god doesn’t exist so he can’t answer it. If god chose not to answer the prayer then he is no longer perfect because he didn’t fulfill his promise, which means he no longer exists. Either way this personal god is invalidated. Many people pray and see very inconsistent results. Out of 100 prayers they might see 10 fulfilled; these odds would convince most to get up and leave the card table, but Christians find millions of reasons to justify them when it pertains to god. Shouldn’t god deliver 100% odds; either he is very inconsistent or nonexistent. If something can be done without god’s help then why waste the effort of asking for it?

If god is all-powerful then why did he create deadly genetic disorders that evolve?

Why does he allow innocent people to die every day as their families pray for healing?

How can a just god sit back and watch people in pain as he ignores the cries of his people?

This doesn’t sound like the almighty, loving god that Christians preach about, but these are the observations reality provides. All of the evidence refutes the existence of a personal god. It is more beneficial to analyze the evidence than spend a lifetime ignoring it to hold onto one’s failed belief system.

Filed Under: Apologetics, Articles, Christianity 288 Comments
« Older Posts