Journey of an Atheist - Part V: Omega
In college, I majored in Religion. When I tell people that, they assume I’m some kind of zealot. No one understands an atheist who majored in Religion. While I also took a few survey courses and one class in Islam, I mostly focused on Buddhism and Hinduism. When I started college, I was a Wiccan. When I finished, I was an atheist. I have to believe my major played some part in that.
I saw that Hinduism, one of the oldest and most respected faiths on Earth, was a schizophrenic hodge-podge of conflicting beliefs. I covered Vodoun in one of my classes and saw very little difference between it and Wicca. I read the Quran and had nightmares. I also dated a Jewish girl for a while, and found nothing of value in living several thousand years in the past. (We have pasteurization and antibiotics now. Get over it.) Nothing turns one off to religion quite so much as learning about it.
My involvement with religion was finished by the time I graduated. Well, I’m a minister in the Universal Life Church, but who isn’t? I have been known to reread the Principia Discordia from time to time. I hardly think that counts, but it may be why this wound up being 5 parts. I did experiment a bit with Buddhist philosophy (not religion) during and after college. I found the idea that peace follows the surrender of desire sensible. I wanted to achieve that. I desired it. Crap. Quite a Catch 22.
I dated a few Christian girls after college, and I couldn’t stand it. I eventually met my wonderful, atheist wife and formed what I suppose could be called an unholy union. We were married by a minister, because he was all we could get, but he was willing to do a totally secular ceremony without so much as the mention of god. The wedding was in a cathedral of geology: Valley of Fire state park in Nevada.
For some time, I was content to disbelieve quietly. I knew the truth. Who cared if all those other fools wasted their time on god? September 11 changed all that. I had always believed that religion was harmful, but it was suddenly so tangibly dangerous that I could not ignore it. I went from atheist to antitheist in one horrible day. I began to speak out against religion with people I knew, but that was all. However, when I learned about Dominionism and the insidious danger it poses to the American way of life from within, I could no longer remain inactive. This site was born shortly thereafter.
I’m not sure whether or not I’m doing any good here. I’m certainly having fun, and I guess that’s good enough. There is so much more I want to do to promote atheism and combat the new wave of ignorance and superstition gripping the United States. I have big dreams, but a small bank account and little time. I need to reach a wider audience of narrow minds. The promise of the future lies in rejecting the empty promises of the distant past. And the promise of the present? I can make only one. This blog will not be a flash in the pan like so many others. Stick around.
~I AM~
August 17th, 2005 at at 7:57 pm
Yeah, I’m sticking.
Do you mind if I make a shrine to you in my closet?
August 17th, 2005 at at 9:30 pm
I read your site every day and find it very insightful. Glad to read that you are in it for the long haul.
August 17th, 2005 at at 9:31 pm
“Oh…oh yeah…WAIT! PULL OUT NOW OR ELSE IT’S A SIN!!”
…Sorry, I couldn’t resist!
August 17th, 2005 at at 10:48 pm
“I’m not sure whether or not I’m doing any good here. I’m certainly having fun, and I guess that’s good enough.”
I feel the same, I think. It seems most people who read your blog or my blog are people who… pretty much already agree with you. I haven’t had any, but I’m sure you’ve had completely ignorant Christians (Note that I don’t mean all Christians) come to your blog and post nonsense. In most cases (with other blogs), I’ve noticed the person doesn’t change their views or they disappear too quickly. It makes me feel that just blogging isn’t going to cut it, but as you said, it’s fun, and I think it’s why I’m going to continue my blog.
Even if you don’t change many people’s views, you offer me and other people new insights and things to use against people who spout off ignorance (as with the “God is a Dick” series). So keep it up!
August 17th, 2005 at at 11:26 pm
You’re doing great, I Am. Keep it up. Eventually the word will get out there someway or another.
August 17th, 2005 at at 11:45 pm
Your certainly changing my views. I’m moving closer towards atheism each day I read this.
Do you mind if I steal seth’s shrine and use it as my own?
August 18th, 2005 at at 12:15 am
You’ve been a big help to me. And your posts lend inspiration. I too am in for the long hall methinks…
August 18th, 2005 at at 1:26 am
I love reading your site. It’s very informative and entertaining. Please keep writing - you ARE making a difference.
August 18th, 2005 at at 8:15 am
I eventually met my wonderful, atheist wife and formed what I suppose could be called an unholy union.
I think it’s great that you married an atheist. I sort of figured your wife would be one, too… I know I couldn’t be married to someone who was a believer.
It’s sort of weird to say, but sometimes the way you say things reminds me of my own husband. I think that’s probably why I “flirted” with you early one ;).
Anyway, I know you’ve made a difference for me… before this blog, I was far more accepting of religion, and yet increasingly frustrated by the feeling that it’s fast closing in on us atheists. It’s nice to know that there are people willing to stand up and educate us, so we learn how to stand up for ourselves. I think you’re doing a great thing out here, and I’m glad to read that you’ll keep it up!
Your “journey” was a fascinating one… seems, though, maybe it’s not quite over yet :).
August 18th, 2005 at at 8:24 am
I don’t have too many readers of my websites, hip-poh.com and memesandexperience.com, but I still do it for the fun and in the hope that someone is learning something useful about the world.
I don’t think it matters that we are preaching to the atheists and almost-atheists. I think the most important message we can get out is that it’s okay to criticize the beliefs of others. That is something most atheists have been afraid to do for the longest time. I was inspired to take my evangelism to greater heights by Richard Dawkins, James Randi, Austin Cline, The Raving Atheist and most recently Sam Harris. Your site does for people what these people did for me.
Also, from another point of view, we may not know each other, but isn’t it nice to be part of a community of intelligent people who seem to have come to the same conclusion more-or-less independently? The reinforcement that yours and other blogs provide is useful to me, anyway.
August 18th, 2005 at at 9:15 am
911 was my trigger to go from silent atheist to vocal anti theist too. Cost me a few friends who could not handle an email i sent just a few days after 911. The gist of the email was: so you think Chritianity is better than Islam?So why does a plane load of christians screaming for their god, still plow into a building when piloted by a few islamists screaming for theirs?
The simplest answer is there is no god, just crazies hijacking planes.
In hind sight my email was over the top, true, but still way over the top and in poor taste too.
But if it made one person just stop and think of all the insanity they wish to inflict on others(from ID in classrooms to jihad,its just degree that varies) in the name of some imaginary god(or mental illness as I have come to see it) then it was worth it.
So too is your site worth it.
The god infected keep posting and unless we as atheists post too, they will be able to claim that they have won. That is too horrible to contemplate.
So yes, you ARE doing a good thing.
August 18th, 2005 at at 9:28 am
Your blog is a great counter balance to the troublesome stories I read in the paper, Judgement Sunday for example. I check in every day for a laugh. I do however have a growing need to confront Jesus Freaks head on. I catch the 4/5 in and out of Brooklyn and always see people reading the Bible or the other self improvement through Jesus literature. I should print off the God is a Dick series and hand them out.
Keep up the spendid work
August 18th, 2005 at at 9:38 am
For some time, I was content to disbelieve quietly. I knew the truth. Who cared if all those other fools wasted their time on god? September 11 changed all that.
Exactly!! There is no reason why we should continue to put up with such worldwide nonsense. I’m with you for the long haul. Keep up the good work!!
August 18th, 2005 at at 11:06 am
September 11th had a depressing effect on me.
I no longer felt welcome in my own country.
Hearing “God bless America” on the radio daily, having it become a routine greeting, seeing plastered on signs and billboards, I found myself assaulted by a theistic statement that meant nothing to me. And then when the President said that religion, a belief in god, was the mark of the civilized, I felt as though, as an atheist, I was being told I didn’t belong.
I don’t feel that way now, fortunately. The daily exhortations of “God bless America” faded away. The President’s religious talk continued, but I learned to tune out his bleatings.
One thing September 11th convinced me of, though–religion is a dangerous thing.
August 18th, 2005 at at 11:38 am
I also looked into Buddhism. But I totally completely reject the notion that desire leads to misery. I think its the opposite. A lack of desire leads to death, which is the ultimate abstinence; the ultimate misery.
Desire to live, to eat, to be happy, to acheive goals, is the stuff that life is made of. Desire is totally beneficial and totally necessary for happiness.
August 18th, 2005 at at 12:02 pm
I disagree withy you Aaron. I think death the ultimnate happieness, the ultimate release. To leave this dimension and enter oblivion would be heaven to me, after I’d lived out my life of course.
But I do agree that we must desire. It is impossible not too. But to over-desire, and to desire to greatly what we cannot have will lead to ruin.
And LJ, that’s brilliant. “So why does a plane load of christians screaming for their god, still plow into a building when piloted by a few islamists screaming for theirs?” Absolutely brilliant. Makes perfect sense. . . Do you mind is I quote you in my blog? (www.quailitude.blogspot.com).
Anywho, great post I Am. Really wonderful writing and an excellent telling of ur life.
August 18th, 2005 at at 12:08 pm
I’m an atheist, first of all.
But I don’t get the feeling like you don’t belong because of a few songs.
We DON’T belong. That should have been obvious before 9/11. For most people we are scary and incomprehensible. Accept that fact and move on (perhaps to Sweden if it really bothers you). A thin-skinned atheist is a sad atheist.
And it’s not religion per se that is dangerous. It’s a totalizing ideological belief structure combined with the all-too-common disregard for the individual that is dangerous. Need I remind you that over a hundred million people died at the hands of atheists in the last century? That it was atheists who were killing and oppressing a billion or more people for most of the 20th century?
Of course I think those atheists replaced the more traditional religion with an equally ridculous one: communism. But the fact remains: being an atheist doesn’t mean that you are a good or humane person.
And it certainly doesn’t mean you aren’t horribly dangerous and evil.
August 18th, 2005 at at 12:28 pm
“Nothing turns one off to religion quite so much as learning about it.”
This is exactly what is happening to me. The more I learn about the faith I was “taught” growing up (Christianity), the more disappointed, disillusioned, and disgusted I am. This is one of the sites where I learn about religion. Without this site, I never would have realized how much of a dick god is. And I am grateful.
August 18th, 2005 at at 12:42 pm
Okay, okay, you have persuaded me to stick around. *sigh*
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading this testimonial series.
August 18th, 2005 at at 1:36 pm
JCoke,
You are right, but I would add something: The atheists never said god gave them the moral right to do what they did. They did it because they were led by manipulative immoral vermin.
There IS a difference.
Bin ladin is different to Stalin. Like rape by ones father is worse than rape by a stranger I would think. It is an inversion of values and a betrayal of trust on top of the violation.
Aeger, its the internet , linking and quoting is what its all about; but realize this,it was not a unique idea at that time.
August 18th, 2005 at at 1:41 pm
I have to agree with JCoke to a certain extent. It is not religion in and of itself that is evil. Rather, it is ideological fundamentalism, where ever it may be found, that is the real danger to everyone. My father, who is a very good person, also happens to be an Episcopal priest. For those not familiar with Episcopalians they are like Catholics but without all the self hatred and less of the arbitrary 16th century hang-ups. Episcopalian priests can marry, women can be priests, contraception is not a hated concept, heck they even have a gay bishop. Most importantly, most Episcopalians believe that the bible is just a collections of stories and not a literal rulebook. While the Episcopalians believe themselves to be as pious and spiritual as anyone else, odds are you are never going to hear of a radical Episcopalian committing a suicide bombing.
Personally, I have rejected religion, including that practiced by Episcopalians. But, I have no fear of them and don’t really care if they continue because their beliefs are not forced on anyone and they are no danger to society. Fundamentalist groups, like those that perpetrated 911 or those that would cast the US back to the dark ages, that openly promote segregation, subjugation, persecution, censorship, and separatism, should not be tolerated by society no matter what divine providence they claim.
August 18th, 2005 at at 1:54 pm
I AM,
I am a former minister of the “Good News” of Mithra, Jesus, Iesous, Osirus, and the other entire fun loving god-mans out there.
I am new to your blog. Great stuff. I too share your quest to get the Truth out to the open-minded masses.
One of my problems with the church was that they preached about winning the lost souls of the world. Fulfill the Great Commission and bring in the harvest of Jesus. The funny part is, we/they/I preached that in the comfort of the church walls. At best, you would have one or two “unsaved” souls in the audience and yet the Sinner’s Message would go out. The church neglects to be with the lost of the world were they are… in the world. Instead, they would ADVERTISE on the marquee to the passers by, with clever slogans.
“Got Jesus?”
“What’s missing in CH__CH? …UR”
“No Peace? Know Jesus, know Peace”
Surely, these clever bits would bring in those sinners by the droves. If you want to get the word out, go to where the religious are. They are not going to come here, when this place is “of the devil”. I encourage you to keep writing and “persevere”… LOL god that shit still comes out of my mouth so easy. Keep the faith, uh er, the way, DOH! Keep yer hand on the plow, no that’s not it either. Just go man!
August 18th, 2005 at at 2:29 pm
I’m glad that you intend to stick around I AM, your blog entertains me almost every morning while I drink my morning coffee. And with respect to reaching people, I can’t imagine too many christians reading your blog daily, but perhaps someone who was “on the fence” would and it would help them out. But amongst the atheist blogs, I think you have a very high readership compared to most. This gives you the influence of very quickly alerting atheists all over the country (some of which have blogs themselves) to an issue important to the atheist community. I think this is important because theists vastly outnumber nontheists, plus they are organized. I think it’s time that atheists start coming together and working toward a better tomorrow.
August 18th, 2005 at at 3:36 pm
Delta, I am with you…
JCoke, the problem is that religions don’t stay free of fundementalism. This is why they are all dangerous. It’s taken me a long time to realize that. Before September 11th, I too, was far more tolerant. It changed me in a way I simply cannot explain. The very essence of who I am was forever altered that day. I can still smell the smoke (yes, I was in NYC).
In the religious fervor that followed, I felt lost and unwanted. I still feel that if people knew I was an atheist, if you could wear it as a badge, I’d be ostracized and chastised. My closest friends know… but I only know two other people in real life who call themselves atheists. One is my husband, the other my best friend.
My family doesn’t practice religion in any way, but they swear they all believe in some “higher power” or “god”. Gag me, please.
I’m so much happier as an atheist than I ever was as a Christian… I wish I could make others realize this is possible!
August 18th, 2005 at at 5:24 pm
There is no right way or wrong way to say this. but here goes:
Everybody believes in something. Or nothing. I prefer to believe in something. It doesn’t matter what your inner self believes because most people don’t share that inner self. To bad. As for you having faith in nothing, atheist if you will, i’m sure you believe in yourself. If it makes you happy, good for you. Anything can be destructive. Anything can be constructive. It is the person and what that person believes that makes the difference. So you see christian, buddest, hindu, muslim it’s all the same in the long run. The long run is all any of us have in this short life of ours. Do the best you can and try not to hurt anybody….
Michael M. Cain…..
August 18th, 2005 at at 5:47 pm
I’m curious about your journey. Did you meet any Christians who were intelligent, compassion, or at least not extreme fundies? It seems pretty easy to villify a whole group of people if you attach a label and act as if they are all represent one monolithic voice.
I’m asking from the perspective of a Christian who frankly does not relate at all to the stereotypes I read in this post or in the ensuing comments. (Understand, I relate them to some wacko extremists I’ve met but none that I am personally associated with who don’t even consider ourselves “religious” in the traditional sense.) I respect what you as an atheist have to say and would love to have more of an opportunity for the discussion forum to cross-over those lines.
August 18th, 2005 at at 5:59 pm
I guess I was wrong about not many Christians reading your blog, haha.
August 18th, 2005 at at 6:34 pm
Not everyone was an atheist who was a communist. In fact, most of the communists were closet theists. Religion simply went underground. Though atheism was the official communist stance, I doubt over 30 % of them were actually atheists. And those people were atheists before communism took over, meaning it wasn’t necessarily their idea in general to fuck up everything through communism.
Blaming atheists for everything done in the name of communism is not fair and an overgeneralization. I’m not saying there weren’t some atheists who were part of the problem, but it should appear obvious that most atheists are better than that.
August 18th, 2005 at at 9:40 pm
I Am, this is great stuff. I think many of us are in agreement with your mission statement:
There is so much more I want to do to promote atheism and combat the new wave of ignorance and superstition gripping the United States. I have big dreams, but a small bank account and little time. I need to reach a wider audience of narrow minds. The promise of the future lies in rejecting the empty promises of the distant past.
I’ve always liked the name of your site, which speaks to this goal. It highlights that reality is a pretty difficult sell compared to traditional religious belief, doesn’t it? I get a funny image in my mind of standing on a street corner asking passers-by: “Have you heard the bad news about Jesus Christ?” The truth–that it’s all made-up silliness–is not something that people are generally eager to embrace.
On the other hand, responses like Chad’s and michael cain’s show that there’s common ground that decent people can find together. Probably none of us will live long enough to see belief in gods fade away. But maybe it’s possible that we can, for starters, wake America up to the realization that “people of faith” is not a useful concept to use when thinking about morality and about right and wrong.
This is mainly for the religious commenters and lurkers. It’s an obvious point, but I’ve found that a lot of people don’t think much about it. When you talk about “people of faith,” you’re talking about a group that includes Osama bin Laden and the 9/11 terrorists right along with the nice people at your church–and excludes many, many ethical and good-willed people who share the practical content of your values and convictions.
Yet how often do we hear politicians and religious leaders talking about “people of faith” as a synonym for “everyone who is good and wholesome” or for “everyone whose opinion matters.” It’s insulting and offensive, and just plain wrong, when you stop to think about it. I’m not going for discrimination sympathy points here, just mentioning a minor everyday illustration of why some of us have come to the conclusion that we have–that godbelief is, at best, an irrelevant distraction from ethical thinking, and, at worst, a source of destructive identity politics and division.
August 19th, 2005 at at 12:33 am
Seth:
Normally, I would vehemently oppose a shrine. However, since it’s to me, I’ll make an exception.
Matt:
I could hardly ask to be listed in better company. Thank you for the flattering comparison.
Aaron:
I think desire is a double-edged sword. Too little will kill you, but too much will make you wish you were dead anyway.
JCoke:
I agree with you that blind ideology is dangerous in all forms. Let’s start with the type of blind ideology that’s most common in the world and work from there.
LBBP:
Any religion, no matter how harmless it seems, can and will mutate into dangerous fundamentalism. The only way to stop that cycle is the complete elimination of religion.
Mithra:
I’d love to go to the Christians. Have you ever noticed that all of the Christian sites requre approval and / or quickly ban any dissenting opinions? I can’t imagine deleting a comment that disagreed with me. It would have to be incredibly offensive. Unlike the Christians’ beliefs, mine can stand up for themselves in the face of contradictory opinions.
Delta:
The traffic levels have been doing pretty well. I’m getting about 5,000 visits a week, now. I don’t know what anyone else gets, but I have to assume that’s good. I could make it sound really impressive by talking about “hits”, but it drives me crazy when people use meaningless numbers like that.
Michael Cain:
First of all, happiness is great, but there’s something to be said for reality. Second of all, religion provides a socially accepted sheild for the destructive aspects you mention. That protection from criticism provides the perfect environment for the gestation of fundamentalism.
Chad:
I’ve met plenty of theists who were good people. Not many of them were good as defined by their religions, but that’s another story. I’m not attacking “you.” I’m attacking your beliefs. Just because you’re a nice person and you happen to be religious, the two things aren’t necessarily (or even likely) connected. Would you be an asshole if you were an atheist? I doubt it. However, I do believe that a lot of people who fall into the crazy fundie category could have been perfectly normal human beings if it weren’t for their religious convictions.
worldcitizen:
Well said. Why don’t you have a blog? Fix that.
everyone else:
Thanks for your positive comments. If you didn’t offer any, screw you. No… just kidding. Civil disagreement is always welcome and encouraged here. Thank you, also.
August 19th, 2005 at at 1:51 am
I AM
Ultimately, you and I have a fundamentally similar belief systems. I believe that GOD is an imaginary friend that people pull out of their psyche whenever they can’t cope with or understand what is happening around them. I believe that if more people put their faith in themselves, science, and reason, and less in myths, superstition, and fairy tales that this world would be a much better place. I believe that all of the “great” religions have been abused by the powerful to dominate and manipulate the gullible and oppressed. I believe this and I gather from your site that you believe it also.
However, just because we believe it does not make us right. No one knows without question all aspects of the nature of the universe (or multiverse if you prefer). If we did there would be no science and sites like yours would not exist. There are aspects that can be known, we know for example that the world is older than 10,000 years. We know that the Earth revolves around the sun, etc.. But, we don’t know if there is any other life outside of our solar system. We don’t know if there really are additional dimensions wrapped up into a tiny speck and if there are what might that mean. If there is no “soul” how do we explain consciousness? Nobody really KNOWS. My point is that there is an awful lot of room for doubt about the ultimate nature of our existence.
It is therefore no less unreasonable for you to state that religion should be eliminated than it is for the religious to say that non-believers should be eliminated. Tolerance, and I don’t mean the “keep your ideas to yourself and I’ll keep mine” variety, is the only real answer. Anytime you try to eliminate a group of people they are going to fight back. Nothing is more horrifying than having to admit that your understanding of the universe is wrong. People would rather believe made up crap than admit that what they “feel” is true is really a bunch of hooey.
I read somewhere, I wish I could remember where, an opinion that the single best way to eliminate religious fundamentalism would be to require every high school student to take a “Religions of the World” course. I agree with this. For example, if everyone really understood just how much of the bible was stolen from other religions and had exposure to the vast range of disparate beliefs in the world, it might put their own beliefs into a different and hopefully less bigoted light.
It is a common mistake made by those who appose religion to assume that the religious are stupid or just ignorant. In many cases I am certain that it is true that ignorance fuels fervor and that fervor fuels bigotry and bigotry fuels hatred etc… But, a surprisingly large percentage of people faced with the “truth” about religion will still bury their heads in the sand and continue to believe whatever the f*&% they want. Ostracizing these people will not make them go away, it will make them into suicide bombers. In our lifetime we will not be able to change this. (I personally think religious tendencies are hard coded into human DNA, but that’s another topic.) What cannot be tolerated is fundamentalism and bigotry. No matter on which side of the argument it resides.
August 19th, 2005 at at 10:52 am
Just a clarification: I didn’t take anything as an attack against me (as a follower of Christ). What I was trying to ask was more in the mindset of what LBBP said above:
“However, just because we believe it does not make us right. No one knows without question all aspects of the nature of the universe (or multiverse if you prefer).”
Of course, we all believe what we believe is right otherwise we wouldn’t believe it. I may have misinterpreted what you were saying, but it seems like more often than not atheists portray Christians as people who don’t really think and just need to open their eyes. Again, I’m not easily offended so I point this out not because it bothers me personally, but because it’s not completely honest in that it does recognize the existence of a lot of thinking Christians and is more of an attack on a fundie/anti-intellectual strawman.
August 19th, 2005 at at 11:02 am
There are plenty of intelligent Christians, but they do need to open their eyes. You can be intelligent and deluded at the same time. I was when I was practicing Wicca. The difference between your beliefs and mine is that there is no evidence for yours.
There is a semantic dance that happens between theists and atheists. The theist says “Well, there’s no evidence that there ISN’T a god.” True. However, there is no evidence that there IS. There’s no evidence for (or against) Yahweh or Zeus or Osiris or fairies or unicorns or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Why do you believe in one, but not the others? If you can give me an honest and sensible answer to that question, I’ll be very impressed. If not, I think you need to reexamine your beliefs.
August 19th, 2005 at at 11:57 am
In terms of “evidence”, it’s always going to be sketchy, hence the reason for needing faith. For me, I was only able to believe in Christianity when I decided that it was every bit as plausible logically as atheism on a purely intellectual basis.
So, more specifically to your point, I would argue that Christ is a very different case than believing in Zeus, the Easter Bunny, or Santa Claus. In that, Christ was a historical figure, much of whose life was documented by historians such as Josephus who had no skin in the game. I won’t equate the story of Christ with Mohammed having a vision in a cave because no one was privy to Mohammed’s experience. There were no witnesses to that event, just one man’s word.
I realize the onus is not really on you as a nonbeliever to disprove the existence of God. However, it does seem you’d have to weave together quite a conspiracy theory to discount all portions of the Christ story (from ancient prophesies fulfilled to all events surrounding the resurrection to disciples willingly tortured and giving up their lives for the cause). It’s would have to be one enormous, elaborate lie we’re talking about that is actually based in history. Were it not true, shouldn’t the holes in the story be a little more glaring?
August 19th, 2005 at at 12:50 pm
…except there is no credible secular evidence that Jesus was a historical figure. In fact, most scholars hold that the texts you mentioned by Josephus were forged; it contains several hapax legomena (a word that only appears once in a text) and the single passage aboutu Jesus seems to have been written from a Christian perspective. Josephus was a Jew.
Read the Wikipedia article about this here.
August 19th, 2005 at at 1:39 pm
Chad, just a point: Mohammed is a real historical figure, real historians accept that fact, even christain ones. Jesus, there is so little evidence for his existence would be regarded as the type that stands up in court, few real historians acept him as a historical fact unless they are also a Chrsitain where their FAITH overides the lack of evidence. Read some unbiased accounts of it.
BTW, that does not make mohammed a profit, just makes him real with ascribed powers to know gods rules for us are. Jesus, ascribed power PLUS ascribed existence.
I would be fascinated to know on what basis (and there is no shame in admitting you are just following what your folks/local society told you was true, most people do) you rejected all the thousands of other faiths but thought Christianity best explains the observable realities around you. Did you actually do the comparative shopping? What were the observable realities that could be best explained by it and no other faith or explanation?
August 19th, 2005 at at 1:41 pm
Sorry Seth, I posted before I saw you Wikipedia link!
August 19th, 2005 at at 2:17 pm
Just as a disclaimer on the whole ‘communists were atheist.’ During the rule of Stalin, the USSR govt. just substituted the state for religion and more procisely they substituted Stalin for religion. I wouldn’t really consider a govt. who claims infallibilty for its leader(s) as atheistic.
August 19th, 2005 at at 2:21 pm
*cough*1984*cough
August 19th, 2005 at at 2:46 pm
Chad:
First of all, I’m not sure why you put the word evidence in quotation marks, but I think that speaks volumes.
Second, you’re telling us honestly that you think an invisible, all-powerful father figure in the sky is every bit as plausible as… well… not one? Is that really an argument you want to make?
Third, Muhammad was a real person. Santa Claus is based on a real person. There is as much evidence for the Buddha and Krishna as for Christ. Hell, we know for a fact that Hirohito was a real person, but I’m pretty sure he wasn’t a god.
Finally, as for the enormous conspiracy that would have to be perpetrated to explain Christianity, I would compare it to every single other religion in the history of the world. You can make the same statements about all of them.
August 19th, 2005 at at 3:40 pm
The last several comments are very interesting to me. Until about a month ago I (like most people) assumed that Jesus was a real person. I did not think that he was a GOD or even the he is/was the son of GOD but rather a very persuasive leader. I stumbled across something in my web travels that made look into the topic further. I was very surprised to realize just how flimsy the “evidence” for a real Jesus is.
August 19th, 2005 at at 4:15 pm
I won’t equate the story of Christ with Mohammed having a vision in a cave because no one was privy to Mohammed’s experience. There were no witnesses to that event, just one man’s word.
Okay, first I believe Jesus was likely a real man. Do I think he believed he was the son of god? Not sure. However, why do Christians believe this… wait, let me think…
Oh, RIGHT! An Angel of the Lord appeared before Mary and told her she was carrying a baby despite the fact that she was a virgin. No one was there to witness that, but you’re still a Christian, huh?
Maybe you should check out Islam, too. You could be a Christlam.
August 19th, 2005 at at 4:21 pm
Why do you believe Jesus was real? There’s very little evidence to that end.
August 19th, 2005 at at 5:25 pm
The idea that the central figure of Western Civilization (surely many of you will pick apart this phrase, but humor me here), the one that has been the source of countless sufferings of his followers, cathedrals constructed all throughout the world, the great divider of time into the B.C. and A.D. components, was not real is quite a stretch it seems. I would assert that all of you who subscribe to this idea have a lot of faith - way more faith than me - to believe this. The idea of Jesus’ nonexistence also seems somewhat akin to what C.S. Lewis dubbed ‘chronological snobbery’. That due to a wikipedia article and a few other relatively recent new theories attempting to disprove Jesus’ existence, you will readily ignore/discount the previous 2,000 years of history to the contrary. Afterall, none of those folks were as enlightened…
Addict-no-more: Do you really think that the sole rationale for Christ being considered the Son of God BY BELIEVERS rested on an angel’s visitation to Mary? I would consider the resurrection to be an enormous factor. As well as Christ’s own words as outlined in the Gospels. Neither Buddha nor Mohammed claimed to be God and certainly their followers did not claim that they rose from the dead.
August 19th, 2005 at at 5:54 pm
Chad, Christ as a figure does not need to exist for Christianity to exist. All that is necessary are his alleged teachings and a story about his life. We have all that in the Bible.
August 19th, 2005 at at 7:01 pm
Do you really think that the sole rationale for Christ being considered the Son of God BY BELIEVERS rested on an angel’s visitation to Mary? I would consider the resurrection to be an enormous factor. As well as Christ’s own words as outlined in the Gospels.
Well, yes and no. There was the angel that went the shepherd, too. But who told Jesus he was the son of god? Uhm, his mother? And who told her? Right, the angel.
At this point, I feel there’s enough plausible evidence for the idea that Jesus was an actual person. Maybe he thought he was the son of god, maybe he just wanted people to. Maybe he just believed in the things he taught, and years later it was finally written down with a whole hell of a lot of hyperbole thrown in for good measure. Might even be that those who finally wrote it down are the ones who declared him the son of god, and that it wasn’t ever believed when he was alive. “Christ’s own words” were hardly written by him.
As for the resurrection, there are those who believe the entire thing was staged. That he wasn’t actually dead, and the burial was a sham to strengthen the support for him. If so, it sure did work, huh?
Either the followers who saw him where having hysterical hallucinations, or it was staged. Both scenerios are highly plausible. Far more so than Jesus rising from the dead. People have staged their deaths. People have had hysterical hallucinations. No one’s ever risen from the dead.
As for Jesus declaring himself the son of god… well, I’m the daughter of my dog. I can say that. It’s just as preposterous - and just as untrue.
My parents told me there was a Santa. Saying something doesn’t make it real. Too bad… I’d say I’m a billionaire!
Oh, and the suffering of his followers? The cathedrals? Okay, so then you believe in many religions? Because most followers of religions have endured “suffering” and most religions have houses of worship all over the world. So does that make their gods real? Does that make their prophets right?
August 19th, 2005 at at 8:42 pm
Addict:
Very nice points. Allow me to reiterate some of them.
Chad:
I’ll ignore the part of your rebuttal that deals with the existence of Jesus. My arguments don’t require him to be a fictional character. In fact, while I can’t say for certain (and neither can you), I think it’s more likely that he was a real person.
On another point, have you ever played the game “telephone” for two minutes? Imagine playing it for 2,000 years. It give you another perspective on “chronological snobbery.” By the way, this argument can be used to defend things like flat earth theory and abiogenesis. I personally feel that knowing more information allows one to arrive at better conclusions, but the religious never seem to see it that way.
I would consider the resurrection to be an enormous factor.
So would I. Prove it.
As well as Christ’s own words as outlined in the Gospels.
Don’t go around believing what people tell you about themselves. There’s a very good reason the private investigators are still in business. Joshua Norton said he was the Emperor of the United States. That didn’t make it so. Actually, that’s a pretty good analogy, because lots of people treated him as though he were while he was alive, even though they knew better.
Neither Buddha nor Mohammed claimed to be God and certainly their followers did not claim that they rose from the dead.
If I make an even more proposterous claim, is it more likely to be true? Let me try. I am a 300 foot tall superintelligent eggplant with the ability to travel through time and turn any bicycle I touch into plutonium. Do you see the flaw in this argument now?
August 20th, 2005 at at 3:40 am
“Nothing turns one off to religion quite so much as learning about it.”
Indeed! Probably why most religionists never learn much about there religion.
Do keep blogging, I Am. The Internet would be ever so lonely without you.
August 20th, 2005 at at 10:55 pm
It seems much of the foundation for the debunking of the story of Christ revolves around the time lapse between the actual occurrence of the events in Christ’s life and the writing of the books in the New Testament.
So, not to put words in anyone’s mouth, but it would seem you discount Biblical narratives largely because you view them as legends passed down over time. Therefore the question of how much time lapsed is a crucial one. I AM, you mentioned the game of telephone, but of course you could play this game with the account of any historical event or figure. Do you doubt the accuracy or existence of Alexander the Great? The earliest biographies of him were written nearly 400 years after his death. Though I don’t know for sure, my guess is your skepticism toward any religious history is MUCH more intense than it is toward any sort of accounting of secular history.
But to the point of time lapse in the initial telling of the Christian story, there’s a stong case to be made that it is a much shorter gap than people have thought before the story of Christ’s resurrection (in its current form) was being told and passed down. The crucifixion of Christ occurred around 30 A.D. The apostle Paul’s conversion was roughly 32 A.D. and it is believed his first meeting with the apostles was in 35 A.D.
This meeting was documented in Corinthians 1:15 wherein Paul cites a creed (already in existence at the time) that he is passing which mentions the birth and resurrection of Christ. In short, a very good case can be made that the crux of this story was being handed down verbally less than five years after Christ’s death. I realize you’ve got lots more objections, but that is a crucial one.
August 20th, 2005 at at 11:26 pm
Chad, the thing with conquerors is that you can see the physical evidence of their conquests. Like with Caesar; the majority of Europe speaks Latin-based language because a couple thousand years ago, Caesar forced people to speak Latin.
You don’t need an actual person to start a religion; a book can do all that. A single book can spread ideas and ideals to millions and billions of people, but it cannot that many people speak Latin. Jesus did not need to exist for Christianity to exist.
August 26th, 2005 at at 10:08 pm
[…] o LBBP A little over a week ago, there was an interesting comment by LBBP to my Journey of an Atheist - Part V post. I had intended to rep […]