The Sindicate
There is a criminal organization running a protection scheme that can only be described as racketeering. This group is present in nearly every country in the world and operates under many different aliases. When its operatives in black first infiltrate a new area, they bring with them a book of rules to be imposed on the populace. They issue a flat-out ultimatum to all that they encounter: “Obey our rules and give us money to support our activities or you will be tortured and thrown into the fire by our enforcer.” The rule book contains horrific accounts of how those who have failed to comply in the past have suffered.
The group I speak of is, of course, Christianity. The moral or philosophical difference between these activities and an organized crime syndicate demanding protection money from individuals and businesses escapes me. The mafia and is hunted down and prosecuted by the federal government for racketeering. When individuals are captured, they serve long prison sentences. However, Christianity is granted immunity from taxation and Christian groups that continue to spread the faith through subtle threats issued while providing social services receive more and more federal funding.
What explains these contradictory responses to identical problems? Infiltration is the only logical answer. The mafia has never had any more than a toe hold in the halls of power. Sure, they’ve bought some dirty politicians and judges. They’ve muscled and blackmailed others into acting on their behalf. All that was small potatoes. The Christians have taken over the majority of the American government, all the way to the very top of the power structure. They have a stranglehold on all three branches, and they will never let go willingly.
Given the amount of power it now wields in the United States, it seems impossible that we will ever be able to escape from the tyranny of Christianity. I assure you that it is not impossible. I bring you a message of hope. The Christian syndicate has a deep, dark secret. In fact, the mere mention of this secret is treated as the worst offense possible against the group.
There is no enforcer.
It’s that simple. They are selling protection from an empty threat. If the mafia didn’t really have anyone to break your kneecaps or fit you with cement overshoes, it would disappear. The word would get out and fear would vanish. Those who try to spread the truth about Christianity’s empty threats are called heretics – traitors to the “faithful.” In many places in the world, they are expelled and exiled. I have heard rumors that in some places they are still stoned to death for crossing the syndicate. The Christian hierarchy will stop at nothing to keep this secret from getting out, because without it, they have nothing. The yoke on the necks of the oppressed would dissolve without the fear of the enforcer. To the deluded I say “Throw off your chains; the truth will set you free.”
While Christianity is the Gambino family, there are other, smaller groups using the same or similar techniques. Mormonism’s scam is almost identical. Islam takes it a step further. They reserve the right to turn you down and punish you even if you want to comply. It’s all at their enforcer’s discretion. Buddhism’s racket isn’t exactly a protection scheme. It’s a hostage situation. Obedience and a ransom earn you your freedom. At least they give you as many chances as you want. Most of these groups describe themselves with the term “religion,” so if you see any evidence of “religion” around you, be aware and be safe.
~I AM~
September 14th, 2005 at at 2:33 am
Fearful people make bad decisions. Its easier to control people that are scared out of their minds than it is to control compose, logical people that are not ruled by fear.
Religions based on fear, hate, violence, and preachiness are the worst. They must be dismantled for the benefit of humanity.
September 14th, 2005 at at 2:39 am
ALL religions are based on fear, even the ones that have nothing overtly threatening, the ones that promise you great things, the followers of that religion are FEARFUL of NOT attaining these pleasures.
“fear is the mindkiller”
September 14th, 2005 at at 4:20 am
True enough. I firmly believe that fear is the prevailing force behind religion, eclipsing even neediness and guilt.
Quite well written, Yam. I’m on the fence about the lack of an enforcer. I feel the essence of the proclamation, and wholeheartedly agree that it needs to be stated for people to wake up to it. It’s sorta like the crafty serpent telling Eve that she won’t “surely die” if she eats of the tree.
On the other hand…psycho-ass nutcases aside, and crimes of the past left firmly planted in the past, I do see an enforcer. Social exile and ostracizing are definite impacts, although ones that may be overcome with a strong sense of self. Related to this is psychological terror. Seriously. Religion can be the ultimate Operation Mind Fuck. This too can be overcome, and we are convenient examples of this, but the human psyche is rather fragile. The strongest bodies and greatest minds have fallen to mind-fuckery. When you sit and ponder the depths of psychological mischief religion plays…damn.
But people stood up against La Cosa Nostra (as a Sicilian-American, this is rather hard to admit) as well as religion (as an atheist, this is rather obvious).
Looking back, it’s rather amusing that the three reasons for religiosity I listed were fear, neediness, and guilt - all of which are implicitly related to the enforcers I proposed.
September 14th, 2005 at at 8:09 am
You have hit the nail on the head. Well written. Maybe we can look at the decline of religion in Europe as a hopeful sign. Maybe even what we see in America today is the last desperate gasp of a dying belief system. Maybe. Of course we have the extremists and frauds pushing their agenda hard and with some success. But there is also the vast majority of christians who are just very good people and as individuals do no (or little) harm but unwittingly support the evil that is organized religion. These are not great thinkers. Not dumb, but just not interested in intellectual debates. They would rather talk about their children, grandchildren, or deer hunting. If we could communicate the harm of religion to these people the extremists and frauds would disappear, but I have had zero success in this effort.
September 14th, 2005 at at 9:29 am
I liked this post, but have a question/thought to go along with it: In drawing the comparison between the mafia and religion, I turned immediately to the solution to the problem. How has the activity of the mafia been curtailed? And are there any lessons that can be learned from such activities?
My first thought was that members of the mafia were basically hunted down and killed or put in prison. But I don’t think that is really true. What’s more, and this is really my major point, I think Christians (and members of other religions, for that matter), do really well when persecuted. They see that as a sign that their enemy (Satan or whomever) is actively working against them. In short, violence or other forms of persecution do not seem to be the answer.
I would submit that two things led to the substantial decline in the mafia: (1) infiltration and betrayal by law enforcement and its own members (similar to apostates speaking out, but more effective). (2) A co-optation of said tactics by large corporations; there is no need for a mafia when you can make gazillions of dollars fleecing the poor by running a mega-corporation (probably not a popular position, but so be it).
Again, what lessons can be learned from the downfall of the mafia if: (1) organized religion is similar to organized crime; and (2) the goal of atheists is to rid the world of organized religion just like the goal of law enforcement was to rid the world of organized crime?
September 14th, 2005 at at 11:17 am
Very creative post, the similarities between these different groups are remarkably similar.
September 14th, 2005 at at 11:58 am
Wow wow wow!!!! I really, REALLY love this post. That part where you said “There is no enforcer” hit me like a ton of bricks.
I never thought of Christianity as a racketeering/mafia-esque organization, but you are totally right! This is an excellent comparison, and it is one that I will try to bring up when I am on “The Atheist Hour” at Unchained Radio this Sunday (Ive been looking for material and analogies for use during my appearance).
September 14th, 2005 at at 1:41 pm
I would love to see a post discussing the tactics and behavior of this syndicate’s operatives. What part do the operatives play? Do many realize there is no enforcer, like spies within spies?
Also, most readers were former operatives who deserted the syndicate. How does that feel? Do you feel any danger?
September 14th, 2005 at at 1:52 pm
Brilliant. Fucking brilliant post.
Psssst. Hey buddy. There is no enforcer. Pass it on.
Uberkuh, I think there is a feeling of fear rather than danger when leaving the syndicate. Getting up the nerve to tell a loved one, a spouse, that you no longer believe as she does is nerve wracking. I supose the danger feeling can come later as two people on opposite sides of the fence try to coexist. You never know when you might step on a land mine and set the other off.
Now that’s a big bang theory I can believe in!!
September 14th, 2005 at at 4:55 pm
….*syndicate?
But yes, you continue to say what I am thinking, and say it much better.
September 14th, 2005 at at 5:31 pm
Exmoron:
But if you persecute them enough, they will be wiped out! Oh, if only the Romans had kept the heat up…
Great post, I Am. I’ve always thought of Christianity as a rather passive-aggressive religion — Mock me all you want, but I’ve got this guy who’ll beat you up for me, and then you’ll be sorry!
I mean, just go read any page of Normal Bob Smith’s hate mail — somebody will be threatening him with burning in hell. Always fun to watch disciples of the God of Love threatening someone with harm.
Tertullian did say one of the advantages of heaven would be getting to watch sinners burn in hell forever, after all.
September 14th, 2005 at at 6:41 pm
I had never considered the analogy between the mafia and christianity. There are some intriguing similarities, but it is not a perfect comparison. Most Christians would probably agree that they felt no coersion to join the “family”. They may not know or understand the subtle nuances and psychology involved in getting them to believe Christianity, but the point remains that they will tell you they willingly chose Christianity.
Conversely, you don’t “join” a mafia. Most of them are exclusive to particular ethnic groups. Also, someone being manipulated or threatened by the mafia is not a part of that mafia. They are the victim. Christians may be threatened with hell or alienation, but they are still a part of the fold. Only competing mafias would be comparable to competing sects of Christianity.
Other than scams, the mafia is pretty straightforward with what it wants and how it gets it. Christianity is subversive and secretive.
I agree it is a decent analogy, but someone had to point out a few of the differences.
September 14th, 2005 at at 7:13 pm
I thin he named it “Sindicate” on purpose.. you know… “sin”?
September 14th, 2005 at at 7:36 pm
After homework and school and other extra curricular stuff, I have 2 hours to myself, and I spend it reading this blog. At this rate I’ll never get time to write something for the GoN
September 14th, 2005 at at 7:53 pm
Ah, I get it. I’m like Aeger, school is killing my brain.
Although in better news, a judge in California ruled that it’s unconstitutional for kids to recite the pledge of allegiance at school, because of the “under God” portion.
September 14th, 2005 at at 8:27 pm
I knew california would get there eventually
September 14th, 2005 at at 8:30 pm
AK, I was aware of the purposeful misspelling of the title. Does that make my previous statement irrelevant? Everyone who commented was in complete agreement with I Am’s post. I wanted to make sure everyone knew that there were indeed major differences between the mafia and Christianity. Perhaps everyone here already knew that, but that was not the impression I received from reading the comments thus far. So if you want, call me “Mr. Obvious”
September 14th, 2005 at at 8:52 pm
Absolutely tremendous.
Posts like this represent the reason why I visit this site so frequently.
“They are selling protection from an empty threat. If the mafia didn’t really have anyone to break your kneecaps or fit you with cement overshoes, it would disappear. The word would get out and fear would vanish. Those who try to spread the truth about Christianity’s empty threats are called heretics – traitors to the ‘faithful.’ In many places in the world, they are expelled and exiled. I have heard rumors that in some places they are still stoned to death for crossing the syndicate. The Christian hierarchy will stop at nothing to keep this secret from getting out, because without it, they have nothing. The yoke on the necks of the oppressed would dissolve without the fear of the enforcer. To the deluded I say ‘Throw off your chains; the truth will set you free’.”
That’s my message precisely. I used to be a Catholic. I was enslaved to a God, trying to live my life according to his whims. My fear of Divine retribution for sinful acts was palpable. When I embraced atheism (my route was through scientific and philosophical study), I felt as though a weight had been lifted. I was no longer a slave to anybody. The Mafia heavies, so to speak, vanished from my doorstep. I was free. It’s indescribably wonderful.
September 15th, 2005 at at 4:24 am
You’ve drawn a wonderful parallel between the two, I Am. Keep it coming.
September 15th, 2005 at at 10:53 am
For those who don’t know, the pledge has been deemed unconstitutional…again.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002495841_pledge15.html
p.s. it’s good to be back
September 15th, 2005 at at 11:39 am
Boywonder, my spelling correction was in reply to Seth.
September 15th, 2005 at at 11:44 am
“Most Christians would probably agree that they felt no coercion to join the “family”.”
We all know that is no true. I never meet somebody who became a religion “slave” by choice. They all are conditioned from childhood, brain washed when weak, with fear from “what everybody else does”, “because everybody else believe” and nobody have enough courage to show the elephant from the room.
Like with the mafia, many peoples don’t agree with it, but fear is very powerful and nobody want to be the first to start to fight back because is immediately punished by “society”.
All religious peoples I know have “tricks” to obey the religious rules (in the eyes of others) and still get a piece of “cake” (life), have a personal “sins scale” where some sins are not so important (it means “stupid rules”). My opinion: very few true believers.
And like with the other plagues of the society, the only solution is education.
September 15th, 2005 at at 7:07 pm
Intresting way to put it. Though there are big differences between the two, they do have some spooky similarities. Nice post.
September 15th, 2005 at at 8:08 pm
AK, I wasn’t aware you were talking to Seth. I’m blushing from embarassment :p
ro, your writing is eerily familar to that of ’simbol’ from the Raving Atheist. You aren’t one and the same person are you? Just wondered.
September 15th, 2005 at at 8:16 pm
“You’ve drawn a wonderful parallel between the two, I Am. Keep it coming.”
I second that!
Posts like this are why I visit here!
September 16th, 2005 at at 10:39 am
If anybody would like to see a good example of the Christian Mafia, may I suggest that you take a look at http://www.ianpaisley.org For those who don’t know who he is, this man is the leader of the largest political party in Northern Ireland and is almost single-handedly responsible for the destruction of the so-called “peace process.” Apologies for going off subject a little, but if you take a look at the above site you may well see why I think it relevant to this thread.
Best wishes to all.
September 16th, 2005 at at 2:43 pm
Wow, great site. Found you through Libertarian Defender. You are so getting blogrolled!
September 16th, 2005 at at 8:23 pm
Yes! Evangelical’s relationship with me pays tangible dividends! Sweet.
September 18th, 2005 at at 12:08 am
exmoron, Uberkuh:
I feel a follow-up post coming on. You both raise interesting questions that I’d like to address.
Uberkuh:
Do you feel any danger?
Yes, but I believe it’s been well established that I’m paranoid.
boywonder:
I view the syndicate as the clergy and the congregation as the victims, so I think we’re mostly on the same page. Anyone who believes in hell and “chose” Christianity chose it the same way a shop owner “chose” to buy protection. The flaw in the analogy is the fact that the Christians tell you they work for the enforcer instead of the other way around.
Aaron, boywonder:
Thank you for picking up the subtlety of the title. I rarely misspell things unintentionally.
September 18th, 2005 at at 4:14 am
Carnival of the Godless
Welcome to this biweek’s Carnival of the Godless. I forget what number it is, it’s late, I’m too tired to look it up, but cheer up: as a result of my staying up so late tonight, those of you who want your carnival at 5 a.m. will find it. Enjoy.
September 18th, 2005 at at 11:59 am
Twisted minds think alike.
http://www.graveyardofthegods.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2553&highlight=
You have done a great job of fleshing out the premise. The threat is not so empty as it might appear however. There are any number of fanatics that take it upon themselves to do what they perceive to be the “Master’s” bidding.
September 18th, 2005 at at 12:58 pm
breakerslion:
True, but that part’s not in the brochure.
September 18th, 2005 at at 2:19 pm
Lion has a point– most of the *actual* enforcers are just members who volunteered to work with the mafia, who are eager to do a little enforcing now that they know the “right way to live.” These enforcers will tell you, just before harrassing/hurting/killing you, that they speak to the invisible Leader of the Enforcers, but will only admit they’ve never actually spoken to the Head Enforcer in person after you grill them a while. So God is like Charlie, on Charlie’s Angels, but working for the other side?
September 18th, 2005 at at 6:16 pm
Well, I would draw the distinction between Christians and mafia in the fact that the members of the mafia are the ones who are both making the threat and carrying out the punishment. They constructed the evil system in the first place. Christians, on the other hand, are not carrying out the threat - God is. They have no control over what God does. The comparison to the mafia would be more accurate if the members of the religion were actually carrying out punishment (and there are certainly places and times where Christians have put people into a position of “convert or die” - e.g. the Inquisition, at times in the Americas, the Cathars; Mormonism has some history of “killing the unbeliever”; and these tactics seem to be more prevalent in Islam). However, most religious people aren’t using these “convert or die” tactics - which would make them both the threat-maker and the threat-inforcer. Most religious people would be more like an insurance salesman offering insurance against God’s wrath/punishment. They don’t control the disaster, they just offer a way out of it. Of course, as a good agnostic/atheist, I think they are selling hurricane insurance in the desert.
September 18th, 2005 at at 10:10 pm
There are very good reasons for all of the parallels. The Mafia was structured on the model of the Roman legions, and since the first popes were also Caesars of the Byzantine empire, so was the Roman Catholic church. I’m willing to bet that some of the mob’s enforcers got their ideas for leg breaking and finger smashing from the treatment they received from the Nuns in Catholic school. If they weren’t taking the example a step further, then it was at least desensitizing.
Modern day Christianity even more closely resembles the Mafia in that the various factions, I mean “denominations”, really do get into turf wars over who gets to distribute the “opiate of the masses”.
Enforcement might not be up to the standards of the human bonfires of the “good old days”, but devout Christians can still make other people’s lives miserable as they strive to put forward their agenda, including a few shootings and explosions around the old abortion clinic. Besides this, when drawing your parallel, remember that the Godfather seldom gets his hands dirty. The job of whacking usually goes to the subordinates.
September 21st, 2005 at at 9:09 am
Ah, yes, the tyranny of Christianity. After hurricane Katrina, tens of thousands of Christians emptied their wallets and donated their time to help complete strangers. They are doing it out of love, not fear. Is this what you mean by “fleecing the poor?” Oddly, I don’t recall seeing too many atheist organizations lined up to help.
Most of the Christians I know, myself included, came to faith as adults after examining the evidence. We weren’t brainwashed as kids. In fact, we typically rebelled and rejected Christianity as children.
Sadly, it sounds like many of you had “Christians” in your life who didn’t behave like Christians at all. Are there lots of “Christians” who are hypocrites? Yep. Only God knows their hearts. Jesus warned that there would be fakes in the church. That doesn’t mean it is ok, just that we shouldn’t be surprised to see people with bad motives drawn to positions of power and wealth.
September 21st, 2005 at at 11:32 am
Neil:
http://tinyurl.com/cvwbx
http://tinyurl.com/dksg9
http://tinyurl.com/augm8
http://ffrf.org/news/2005/katrina.php
http://tinyurl.com/78mop
Do you need more? Please recall what a small percentage of the population we are. I have no data to support it, but I would venture a guess that atheists gave more per capita than did Christians.
September 21st, 2005 at at 9:41 pm
My primary point was that Christianity is not about fleecing the poor.
I acknowledge that Christians in the U.S. don’t give much more or less than non-Christians (at least most studies I have seen say that). But I live just outside of Houston, and I must say the local churches have stepped up in an amazing way. They make the governement look like they are standing still (insert punchline here).
The only sub-group of Christians that gives more than average are those with a “Biblical worldview” (I forgot the exact questions, but they are along the lines of believing the Bible is reliable, Jesus is the way, etc. . . . basic early Christian creed stuff). Sadly, many “Christians” in the U.S. are pretty nominal. Only God knows their hearts, but they sure are biblically illiterate. That doesn’t indict Christianity, it just goes to show that everyone who calls themselves “Christian” on a survey isn’t necessarily one. I wonder how many U.S. Christians would remain so if they woke up in China, Iran, or some other country where Christians are persecuted for their faith?
It is a pretty sad commentary that “Christians” in the richest nation ever give so little relative to non-Christians. I figure that if God expected the poorest Israelite to tithe, that might make a decent starting point for U.S. Christians.
September 21st, 2005 at at 11:10 pm
Only God knows their hearts, but they sure are biblically illiterate.
I do my best to fix that on this site every Sunday.
It is a pretty sad commentary that “Christians” in the richest nation ever give so little relative to non-Christians.
It is a pretty sad commentary that this fact doesn’t demonstrate to you that “Christians” aren’t better people or morally superior.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 9:24 am
I think you are missing my point. I’m saying that just because someone says they are a Christian doesn’t mean they really are. Sorry if that gets in the way of your little straw-man arguments. Christian theology is pretty clear: We are all sinners in need of a Savior and are saved by grace, through faith, not by works (Ephesians 2:8-9). If anyone thinks they are saved through their own moral goodness, they aren’t getting it.
Did lots of people have bad experiences in church? Yes. Does that mean Jesus isn’t who He said He was? No.
Let’s just say that I think we both get irritated by inauthentic Christians. The church has been infiltrated by false believers who achieved leadership positions and now say you can’t trust the Bible, Jesus didn’t really rise from the dead, etc. Yet the general public still refers to these people as Christians!
I do think an authentic Christian worldview is morally superior. List out all the alleged evils of authentic Christian behavior (not of those who did things in Christ’s name which were against his teachings - after all, if I misquote you, is that my fault or yours?). It is an empty list. Now look at the list of evils done in the name of an atheistic worldview. Once you get through the 100,000,000 people slaughtered by Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse-Tung, you can meditate on the evils done by other adherents of atheism in practice. No, I’m not saying all atheists are evil, just that the logical consequence of this worldview is not pretty. People are not inherently good.
Having said that, I find it amusing that atheists even talk about morality. I mean, if you take the “life came from non-life and evolved into the hyper-complex structure we see today” Darwinian evolution point of view, then we are nothing but random creations. How can you even talk of beauty or morality if it is just the result of random chemical reactions? How can you criticize someone who puts “survival of the fittest” into practice?
September 22nd, 2005 at at 9:51 am
Christian theology is pretty clear: We are all sinners in need of a Savior and are saved by grace, through faith, not by works (Ephesians 2:8-9).
Faith alone? JER 17:10, MAT 16:27, JOH 5:29, 2CO 5:10 Etcetera
Crystal clear.
Did lots of people have bad experiences in church? Yes. Does that mean Jesus isn’t who He said He was? No.
No, the absurdity of the story and the lack of evidence mean Jesus wasn’t who he sad he was. The rest is just icing on the cake.
adherents of atheism
There are no adherents of atheism. It’s not a religion. When are you people going to get that? Hitler was a Christian, by the way.
Having said that, I find it amusing that atheists even talk about morality. I mean, if you take the “life came from non-life and evolved into the hyper-complex structure we see today” Darwinian evolution point of view, then we are nothing but random creations. How can you even talk of beauty or morality if it is just the result of random chemical reactions?
Having said that, I find it amusing that theists even talk about morality. I mean, if you take the “life came from a magical omnipotent being 6,000 years ago” Christian point of view, then we are nothing but slaves to god. How can you even talk of beauty of morality if it is just the result of the dictates of a being who will punish the crap out of you for eternity if you don’t follow the rules?
September 22nd, 2005 at at 12:53 pm
You win. You set up straw men faster than I can knock them down, and you completely ignore points of common ground (i.e., I would think the Christians and atheists would both agree that it is disengenuous to do things in the name of Christ that go against his teachings). I mean, your “Hitler was a Christian” line shows your desperation and weak arguments. The Grand Wizard of the KKK can apply for membership in the ADL, but I doubt anyone will take his claims too seriously.
Do you realize the absurdity of your “noble” quest to educate the unenlightened masses? I mean, if atheism is true, who cares about any of this? Why waste your time? Methinks thou dost protest too much.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 1:53 pm
Neil wrote:
If anyone thinks they are saved through their own moral goodness, they aren’t getting it.
My friend, the bigger concept to “get” here is that sin does not exist. Once you start thinking for yourself, you will understand this. Until then, you will continue to try to convert people with no religious beliefs to those that you have adopted for your own personal comfort at the expense of truth and a clear view of reality. Be well.
“If really man is the purpose of the universe, the preface seems a little long” - Bertrand Russell
September 22nd, 2005 at at 2:29 pm
Ah, more arrogance disguised as compassion.
Sin doesn’t exist? So you’re ok with what Hitler did? Pedophilia isn’t a sin? (And you think I don’t have a clear view of reality?) How would you react if someone stole your stereo? Hopefully I have misunderstood your position on sin. Otherwise, please tell me you don’t live in my neighborhood!
If sin doesn’t exist, then I suppose it isn’t a sin to try and convert someone to my religious beliefs.
By the way, it appears to me that you are violating your own belief system. My religious beliefs state that I should spread the truth and love of Jesus to others, yet here you are trying to change those religious beliefs!
I find it odd that you accuse me of not thinking for myself. My path to Christ did not involve coercion, though I can see how that would be a neat little straw man for you to attack. Please note that I don’t make grand assumptions about why you reject the existence of God. If it makes you feel noble and brave because you can clearly face the “truth” of our meaningless existence, then please go release some more endorphins and enjoy yourself. But spare me the self-righteous condecension.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 2:42 pm
Neil, I am no more arrogant than you in presuming that Christianity represents reality. I look at you and think what Sam Harris noted, that here is another person who believes in his heart of hearts that God wrote a book.
You did misunderstand my position on sin. As an atheist, I have no reason to believe that sin exists given that no god exists who allows sin. Also, the fact that I do not believe in sin does not imply that I am immoral or that I have no basis on which to understand and practice morality. Every religious adherent believes that his or her religion provides the basis for morality, but this is blatantly false. Morality is part and parcel of humanity. Any examples you find to prove otherwise might show that people can act immorally, but it does not prove that immorality is the norm or that Christianity has exclusive claim to morality.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 4:21 pm
How did you arrive at the conclusion that “morality part and parcel of humanity?” Where did it come from, if we evolved randomly from a bunch of chemicals of undetermined origin? Wouldn’t we just be completely random chemical blobs who “think” we sense morality? How can you call anything immoral? Wouldn’t that just be your randomly generated personal opinion?
P.S. Yes, you and Sam Harris are right: I think God wrote a book. A really good book.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 4:47 pm
Neil, I suspect that you are young. You have a great amount of energy and this suggests that you have time to learn new things.
You might start with evolution. Evolution is not completely random. One book that I enjoyed, although it delves a little to deeply into the subject for beginners unless you care to put in the effort to stop every few pages, is What is Evolution? by Ernst Mayr. Mayr died earlier this year at the ripe age of 100 and published prolifically until his death on evolution and biology in general.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 6:57 pm
I guess condecension is easier than actually explaining your position. I ask for the basis of your worldview, and all you can do is try to belittle me and point me to some atheistic book which presupposes that God doesn’t exist? You completely ignored my question about where you think morality comes from. Perhaps you have run out of energy.
I haven’t been to an atheist web site for a while. You guys disappoint me. I mean, using arguments like “Hitler was a Christian” to denounce Christianity? That is such lame and inaccurate reasoning on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin.
Uberhuh, how old were you when you found the scientific evidence that there was once nothing - no universe, no God - then the universe sprang into existence without a cause, then life came from non-life, then evolved to where you can sit around and think thoughts like this?
I find it wildly ironic that atheists believe something came from nothing, that life sprang from non-life, etc. - all without evidence! - and then they accuse Christians of having a “blind” faith for believing in the evidence for the resurrection.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 7:17 pm
Since you are “evangelistic atheists” here, I assume you are funding atheist missionaries to go into dangerous places like Iran, N. Korea and the like so you can spread your “gospel” of the good news of atheism. You seem very sincere about wanting to help mankind, so I’m sure you’ll want to spend your resources and risk your lives just like those unenlightened Christians do. You seem to spend all your time bashing Christianity, but I think it is fairly easy to show that Islam represses people more than Christianity ever did.
There must be a billion each of Muslims and Hindus, so get to work!
September 22nd, 2005 at at 7:37 pm
Neil wrote:
You completely ignored my question about where you think morality comes from.
You actually posed five questions, not one, and only one of them, the second, seems to ask for my explanation of an atheistic origin of morality. That question was, “Where did [morality] come from, if we evolved randomly from a bunch of chemicals of undetermined origin?” Logically, you are asking, “If evolution is random, then how do you explain morality?” This presumes a glaring non sequitur, so I felt that you should first learn about evolution, since you made it clear with your multiple references to randomness in evolution that you are completely unaware or, at least, ignoring that natural selection is diametrically opposed to randomness and that this process forms the foremost part of the evolutionary process as a whole.
The book I recommended is a standard textbook on evolution. Not all atheists lie all the time, so it is possible that an atheist can write about which some Christians agree. Besides, one can certainly be a Christian and believe that evolution explains the origin of life. Many Christians do.
An atheistic morality can be explained through evolution, but of course the details are not suitable for a sentence of paragraph, unless, perhaps, you already understand and accept that evolution happens. For instance, I could simply explain that morality is a result of homo sapiens having to coexist and reproduce. In other words, morality is a psychological extension of physical evolution and of cultural development. As I mentioned in another post here on the topic of morality, self-preservation and, with it, the minimization of suffering are two inherent desires that form part of what might be called an objective moral standard. Notice that these desires do not require a divine being or any other authority figure to command that humans have them.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 7:49 pm
I mean, using arguments like “Hitler was a Christian” to denounce Christianity? That is such lame and inaccurate reasoning on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin.
Funny, but I didn’t read where I AM or Uberkuh denounced Christianity by calling Hitler a Christian. What I read was this:
Now look at the list of evils done in the name of an atheistic worldview. Once you get through the 100,000,000 people slaughtered by Hitler…
Right, that’s the part where you came to an atheist blog and tried to denounce atheists by referring to the crimes of a man who WAS a Christian. Geesh. Talk about confused.
Neil, you are clearly and badly brainwashed, but yet unable to make a cohesive argument. You’re pompous, arrogant and clearly think quite highly of yourself while judging the non-Christians or the ones whom you think fail to live up to the true Christian standard (which, if I recall, is not something Christians are supposed to do - you’re supposed to leave the judging to your god).
The thing is, Neil… you are the straw man.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 7:56 pm
Neil, after further thought I’ve come to the conclusion that you are a nudge. I’d blame it on god, if I believed in him, but since I don’t perhaps the problem lies in your childhood. Maybe you were dropped on your head or something.
The goal of atheists like I AM is to educate and help those who can be helped. There are some Christians - some theists in general - for whom there is no hope. With them, only death will cure the disease.
Sadly for you, I believe you fall into the latter category. Luckily for you, when you’re dead you won’t have to admit to being wrong.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 8:19 pm
Wow, you guys are really persuasive. I’ve asked several times for any fact or logic as to why you believe the unbelievable - that something came from nothing, life came from non-life, and evolved to where we are today - and you offer NOTHING! Just evasions, pejoratives and gobbledygook. Did I accuse you of being droped on your head? Did I say, “gee, you are just so young, maybe you’ll learn?” Did I say you were diseased for believing what you do? The putdowns have all come from you raging hypocrites. I didn’t ask you to live up to the Christian standard, I just asked for the reasons for what you believe.
Who have I judged? Re-read the original article and ask who is really pompous and arrogant. I’ve just asked for your reasoning and for some consistency in your worldview. I’ve asked why you don’t share risk your wealth and your lives to share the nonsense, instead of just blathering on like fools on the Internet. If you love your fellow man so much, go to the Middle East and tell them all your great theories.
The morality logic of Uberkuh falls apart when you consider how there is no reason to hold anyone else to that morality, and no reason to call anything evil if there is no God.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 8:52 pm
Re. the Hitler reference - To state the obvious, he did not lead with Christian principles. Just because you call yourself something doesn’t mean you are. And I think you all know that. My point was that his social darwinism meshed perfectly with his political ideas. How can you claim he did anything immoral if you hold to an athestic worldview? (I wasn’t saying all atheists are like Hitler). Using Hitler to diss Christianity is one of the most stupid arguments I have ever heard.
“I could simply explain that morality is a result of homo sapiens having to coexist and reproduce.”
You could explain that, but it wouldn’t make sense. Why should I even consider your definition of morality just because humans exist and reproduce? Wouldn’t I just want to exploit those weaker than me because I can?
“The goal of atheists like I AM is to educate and help those who can be helped.”
You are so noble and kind. But again, with your atheistic worldview, why bother? Shouldn’t you just exploit these beings who obviously can’t match your cerebral capacity?
September 22nd, 2005 at at 8:53 pm
You are so wrong. We simply don’t need invisible beings to hold us accountable for our actions. We hold ourselves accountable. I don’t need to follow some fantasy creature’s idea of wrong or right, because I’m intelligent, responsible and able to form my own opinions and beliefs.
You have to understand that while I may come across as sarcastic, I actually mean it when I say that I think religion is a disease or an addiction. Hence my screen name.
We don’t need to risk our wealth or lives to share our “nonsense”. We don’t have some higher power telling us we have to if we want a hope in hell of being saved. We are under no obligations whatsoever to share our beliefs - or lack thereof.
The bottom line is that you’re looking for us to stop and say, oh, wow… Neil is SO right. Until we say what you want to read, you’re going to accuse us of being evasive. People HAVE tried to answer you. By the time I stumbled upon this discussion it had become abundantly clear that any attempts to explain why I feel how I do, why I believe what I do would be wasted energy on my behalf. You simply cannot see it, because you are too blinded by your faith. You do not want to see it because you want so desperately to be right. I understand that, because once I also wanted so desperately to believe. When I finally accepted that I did not, though… that’s when the world opened up to me.
So, to answer you questions, or rather not to answer them… I can’t explain any of it to you. You don’t want to understand it. If you someday do, then you should come back to ask us again. Until then, we can’t help you.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 9:09 pm
You can say that Hitler wasn’t a Christian, but HE thought he was. He believed in god, even if he didn’t uphold YOUR ideas of Christianity. To argue that he didn’t behave like a Christian and so therefore was an atheist is one of the most ridiculous arguments I’ve ever freakin’ heard. Furthermore, it pisses me off because to do so is an insult to the atheists worldwide who find Hitlers crimes appalling.
And again, I didn’t read where anyone here dissed Christianity at large via Hitler. Your interpretation of things is absurd, but unsurprising. YOU used Hitler to diss atheists, or their “worldview” or lack of morals. You started the entire discussion… which is absurd since whether you like it or not, the man was a Christian. I’m terribly sorry he didn’t live up to your standards of what makes a “good” Christian, but nevertheless he believed in god and was NOT AN ATHEIST!
Maybe now that I have said it like six times it will sink it. Somehow I doubt that, though.
Shouldn’t you just exploit these beings who obviously can’t match your cerebral capacity?
Perhaps we should, but as I previously mentioned we are guided by our own sense of morality. I’m not going to waste my time trying to justify that to someone who doesn’t care to even attempt to understand when I could be curled up on my couch with my husband watching that oh-so-joyously sinful show CSI.
By the way, where in the Middle East are you writing from? How much of your networth have you devoted to “saving” soulds. Since you actually have to based on your worldview, I’d be interested to know.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 9:23 pm
Neil wrote:
“The morality logic of Uberkuh falls apart when you consider how there is no reason to hold anyone else to that morality, and no reason to call anything evil if there is no God.”
Self-preservation is the desire of each person, so there is no need to persuade others to have this desire.
Neil wrote:
“Why should I even consider your definition of morality just because humans exist and reproduce? Wouldn’t I just want to exploit those weaker than me because I can?”
Outright exploitation would inhibit self-preservation, because you depend on others to live.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 9:28 pm
I was an atheist before I was a Christian, by the way. I have challenged everything I believe multiple times. Perhaps you have as well, and we disagree. But I don’t try to read your mind and say, “You don’t want to understand.” And I don’t resort to schoolyard taunts like, “You are the straw man!” (whatever that means)
I find it odd that you are compelled to tell me how wrong I am, when I have mainly been asking for the foundations of your atheistic worldviews and what their logical implications are.
I was just pointing out that if you really believed what you said - “The goal of atheists like I AM is to educate and help those who can be helped.” - then you would do more than post on a pro-atheist blog and accuse Christians of being dropped on their heads. Seems like if you possess the truth of life you would want to share it with as many people as possible. (By the way, I don’t share my faith because God makes me, I do it because I believe it and I love to share it).
I freely acknowledge that many people have been wounded by organized religion. But bad things done in the name of Christ don’t make logical arguments against Christianity if those things don’t line up with His teachings. I was hoping one of you would have the intellectual honesty to agree with that. One of the things I wrestled with when I became a Christian was why God allowed people to distort His Word and Jesus’ teachings. It is that pesky free will.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 9:54 pm
Neil wrote:
“I was an atheist before I was a Christian, by the way.”
Everyone is born an atheist. All babies are atheists.
Neil wrote:
“But bad things done in the name of Christ don’t make logical arguments against Christianity if those things don’t line up with His teachings.”
He withered a fig tree because it did not bear fruit as he passed by. You call this good?
I submit that “bad things done in the name of Christ” do reflect on Christianity. Were it clear what God considers right and wrong, then Christians would not do such bad things believing that they were doing God’s will. The fact that these things happen proves that God did not communicate effectively. He could have implanted the ten commandments in our brains, for example. He did not need to give them to Moses on top of a mountain. Because God has power over everything, he is responsible for everything. You cannot escape this unless you limit God’s power. And, by limitation, I do not mean irrational limitation, such as creating a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it. God could have created humans with free will and the inability to sin. Imagine that.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 10:33 pm
One last try on the Hitler thing: Even IF he claimed to be a Christian, that doesn’t mean he was one. Lots of psychos think they are things that they are not. Christians are people who have put their faith in Jesus and follow Him. I see very little evidence from Hitler’s life to confirm that. Would you acknowledge the possibility that Hitler would have lied and claimed he was Christian? Would lying for personal gain be keeping with the rest of his actions?
My point wasn’t that all atheists think Hitler was a swell guy. Of course we all find his actions appalling. My point was that people who are “guided by our own sense of morality” can’t complain too loudly about other people’s morality. Hitler obviouisly was guided by his sense of morality. I didn’t say you shared that morality, but from a Christian worldview it is easy for me to make the case that he was wrong. But how do you make that case from an atheistic worldview?
“He withered a fig tree because it did not bear fruit as he passed by. You call this good?”
Perhaps the God of the universe did it to make a point. You are the first person I’ve heard of who was offended by a fig tree being damaged.
“I submit that “bad things done in the name of Christ” do reflect on Christianity.”
Wow. So if I do something horrible, and say, “I do this because I’m an atheist,” should that give atheists a bad name? Have you noticed that people lie sometimes? Is it possible that people might be attracted to the power or wealth the church might provide, even if they weren’t true believers?
“God could have created humans with free will and the inability to sin.”
Sounds like a big oxymoron to me. Love is the most powerful and wonderful force in the universe, and you can’t have it without free will. Imagine that. No one can force you to think a certain way, or to love someone else. It has to be by your choice.
“By the way, where in the Middle East are you writing from? How much of your networth have you devoted to “saving” soulds. Since you actually have to based on your worldview, I’d be interested to know. ”
I haven’t been to the Middle East, but I financially support ministries like Voice of the Martyrs and others that helps persecuted Christians around the world. I have been to Kenya a couple times to share the love of Christ and build homes for AIDS orphans. I’ll spare you the rest of my good deeds and charitable contributions, as I doubt that even 100% donations would change your mind. But my real point was that authentic “evangelical atheists” would do more to spread their good news than just run blogs. Why do they fixate on Christianity at the expense of other religions? Wouldn’t love of their fellow man compel them to share with people of other faiths? If you really think you have the sole truth about God (or the lack of God), wouldn’t you be compelled to share it with as many people as possible?
September 22nd, 2005 at at 10:37 pm
P.S. Thanks for the dialogue and for all the insults (helps keep me humble!). I’ve had enough atheist fun for a while.
Have nice lives. Really.
September 22nd, 2005 at at 11:37 pm
Does anyone actually believe he’s gone?
December 8th, 2006 at at 4:26 am
Markus…
It was quite useful reading, found some interesting details about this topic. Thanks….