Happiness in Slavery
Last night, I was watching a rerun of The X Files, and the Smoking Man said something that started me thinking. Here is a snippet of dialog from the episode I saw:
Smoking Man: “Well that doesn’t matter. Most of them have ceased to believe in god.”
Jeremiah Smith: “Why?”
Smoking Man: “Because god presents them with no miracles to earn their faith.”
Jeremiah Smith: “You think when man ceases to believe in miracles he rejects god?”
Smoking Man: “Of course.”
Jeremiah Smith: “You rule over them in god’s name.”
Smoking Man: “They don’t believe in him, but they still fear him. They’re afraid not to because they’re afraid of freedom.”
He’s absolutely right. 80-85% of Americans are nominally Christian, but how many of them actually believe in god, and how many are just afraid not to? Some of that fear is because of societal pressures, but I think there is a fundamental fear of freedom, innate in human nature, that provides a broader explanation for this phenomenon.
There is, alongside the fear, a desire for freedom. When desire overcomes fear, slaves are freed, democracies are formed and theists become atheists. When fear wins out, the weak are willingly oppressed, dictatorships arise and religion waxes. The balance between the forces reaches an equilibrium somewhere in the middle. Humans want to be free, but not too free.
Gods are, as they always have been, tools of domination. However, they are more insidious than other such tools. Weapons and economic tools are external. If you shoot me, it doesn’t matter if I believe in the bullet. If you take my money, I don’t have to believe I’m poor to be unable to feed my family. However, religion is different. It is a seed, planted in the victim, that grows into an internal control system. It must be accepted, or it doesn’t work.
So, why do people accept religion? It’s easier than responsibility. If you have a set of rules by which you live your life, you don’t have to make as many decisions. Many of your actions can simply be ascribed to your faith, and the repercussions of those actions aren’t your fault. Gods make for excellent scapegoats. However, there are some things we want to do that gods don’t allow. True believers would refrain from doing those things, but most people don’t.
It’s terribly obvious to anyone who examines the facts and evidence (or lack thereof) that god is a fable. In fact, in the modern world (at least in the west), most people live as though god were a fable. Think about the “Christians” you know. Would they behave the way they do if they actually thought, deep down inside, that there was an all-powerful, vengeful god watching their every move? If the threat of hell were truly tangible and present, would self-professed believers lie, cheat and steal like almost everyone does to some extent? Isn’t it more likely that these people don’t really believe, but have some motivation to hold on to god that is so strong, they can’t even admit it to themselves? Perhaps this is why Christianity has been so dominant. A forgiving god removes much of the cognitive dissonance. If you can sin all week and then ask for and receive forgiveness on Sunday you can reconcile your behavior and your religion. The Christian god became popular because he’s easier to “believe in” than many others.
Don’t open your eyes. You won’t like what you see.
The devils of truth steal the souls of the free.
Don’t open your eyes. Take it from me.
I have found you can find happiness in slavery.
- Nine Inch Nails, “Happiness in Slavery”
Most men, after a little freedom, have preferred authority with the consoling assurances and the economy of effort which it brings.
- Walter Lippmann, A Preface to Morals
Freedom is the will to be responsible to ourselves.
- Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols
~I AM~
February 9th, 2006 at at 10:24 am
Actually, orthodox Judaism is 100 times worse I AM. Their entire lives are regulated down to the most minute details in order to please the deity that their priestly ancestors constructed for them. They even say a prayer to god after they take a dump thanking him for giving them an orifice out of which they can pass their bodily waste. They don’t allow themselves to eat a dairy product and a meat product in the same meal (that means no meatball pizza for you!), they don’t shave their beards, there is gender segregation at prayer services, if their homes are baking hot in the summer, they can’t turn on the AC during shabbos. And this is just scratching the surface. Thus, while Christianity is more of a socially imposed conformity, orthodox Judaism is a self imposed totalitarianism. If I wasn’t an atheist, I would thank god I wasn’t born into an orthodox Jewish family.
February 9th, 2006 at at 10:34 am
Yeah, I think you’re right in that probably very few christians in the US actually believe in god. Society has simply told them that it’s one of the things that they’re supposed to say. Those who get involved in bible studies and stuff are more likely to have some sort of real belief, but often those people get involved with that because it’s a way to meet other people their age and who society tells them are “good”. I’ve talked with some chinese students before who told me that they go to bible study every week, but they don’t believe in any of it (”there’s no evidence to back anything up at all” they told me) but that they simply go in order to learn better English.
February 9th, 2006 at at 11:50 am
I recently read a pretty good book that relates to this subject:
God Against the Gods: The History of the Way Between Monotheism and Polytheism
by: Jonathan Kirsch
He discusses how during the 4th century (according to both pagan and christian historians of the time) there were an inordinate number of ‘death bed’ conversions to christianity. The idea was that pagans wanted to get as much ’sinning’ in as possible before being absolved. An example of this is Constantine, who ended the persecusion of christians, he converted the day he died. This came after he spent a lifetime killing most of his blood relatives and anyone who could remotely threaten his hold on power. The pagans priests held that some of his sins were so great that no pagan god could forgive him, but that christian god was perfectly willing to forgive the most horrific of actions.
this is how I view most current christians. They may not buy into the whole ‘heaven/hell’ concept, but they can’t let go of their ‘insurance policy’ just in case it is all true.
as a side note, do you know who were first referred to as atheists? The pagans during the 4th century started calling christians atheists since they denied the existence of every other god.
February 9th, 2006 at at 1:18 pm
Quoting Trent Reznor always gets a thumbs up from me, I AM.
One NIN song/lyric always makes me think of the retardedness of religion and theism:
“Wish there was something real, wish there was something true. Wish there was something real in this world of you!”
February 9th, 2006 at at 2:19 pm
Quoting Trent Reznor always gets a thumbs up from me, I AM.
It’s a shame the last album sucked. Apparently, he has to go back to New Orleans and start doing drugs again. Living clean in California has sucked the life out of his music.
They actually used a track off the new album in an episode of CSI New York. Try that with a song off of Broken or PHM!
Sorry to go off topic.
February 9th, 2006 at at 2:50 pm
Well, I’d say you wrapped that one up quite nicely. I see this all the time. Most people I know, family and the like, won’t come right out and say they believe in a god or not. It’s quite obvious that they’re scared shitless not to. I think this alone is what clearly distinguishes an antheist from all others. No fear of such fantasies and fairy tales. . .
February 9th, 2006 at at 4:32 pm
Sometimes I’m afraid of other people’s freedom. Because so many of them seem not all that intelligent and not all that ethical.
February 9th, 2006 at at 5:23 pm
Many people are convinced that to get along in society, you have to believe what you are told. Religion is about inclusion by conformity.
Another nice ruse is prayer–an easy way to pretend you are doing something about a problem without having to anything at all.
February 9th, 2006 at at 7:49 pm
It astounds me that people such as atheists who shun church and Christians can presume that they know the innermost thoughts and intentions of other people and in particularly Christians. There is no fear of dying and going to hell among Christian converts this is nonsence that you’s have imagined in your own minds. before my conversion as an adult (as my parents were not Christian and did not bring me up as one) I never gave God, heaven, hell or any other aspect of the Bible even a passing thought, after all why would I when I didn’t believe in any of it? I have known thousands of Christians over a period of 19 years as a Christian and have not yet met one who converted from atheism out of a fear of hell, neither have I met ones that maintain their Christian beliefs because of this fear. If they are not living the life of a Christian anymore they usually just backslide back into atheism or agnosticism, a life changing and life long commitment like Christianity cannot be maintained by fear, no one who was not committed, happy and believed in God could do it.
February 9th, 2006 at at 8:40 pm
[Insert mindless sucking up to I AM here]
And SS, of course you can be forced to live your life a particular way out of fear, but as to the amount of theists that actually do this, no one can ever really know.
I have no idea what the correct number is, so lets just be vague and assume there are several million Christians in America. If you speak truth in saying that you have met only mere thousands, than you really have no more right to assume what goes on inside their heads than I do, having met almost as many in my pre-atheist days.
February 9th, 2006 at at 9:58 pm
Having grown up in the household of an Episcopalian priest (my Dad), I can say unequivocally that my observations agree with ~I Am~. Most of the Christians I have met do not really believe 100% in their religion, and are in fact in a constant state of aspiring to a higher level of piety. Fear of “backsliding” is what drives them forward. Otherwise, they are resolved to a vague hypocritical apathetic agnosticism, coupled with a nostalgic longing for belonging and conformity. It is not often a specific fear of Hell or dying, but rather a more general fear of “failure” in their religion and of becoming an outsider.
February 9th, 2006 at at 10:51 pm
SS, many of us atheists, like myself, were once Christians, so we have a pretty good idea as to what Christians think.
February 9th, 2006 at at 11:14 pm
Aeger says
” If you speak truth in saying that you have met only mere thousands, than you really have no more right to assume what goes on inside their heads than I do, having met almost as many in my pre-atheist days.”
Exactly right Aeger, this was my point how can aethists who have only ‘met’ Christians as you put it presume to know the thoughts or intentions behind belief in God, when someone like myself who more than met but knew Christians and has heard them speak openly about their beliefs and conversion and was present at some of their conversions ‘has no right to presume what goes on in their heads’ (and their motive for being a Christian) any more than you do, as you put it.
LBBP says:
It is not often a specific fear of Hell or dying, but rather a more general fear of “failure” in their religion and of becoming an outsider.
I think the ‘fear of failure’ is a valid point. But having a fear of failure in anything important is not unique to Christians and I warrant atheists are also driven forward by a fear of failure in areas that are important to their life (e.g. fear of being a bad father, husband, empoyee or provider etc.). I believe that fear of becoming an outsider is more relevant to the atheist than the Christian in that Christians in many countries have to accept they will be rejected by and lose a portion of their unbelieving friends or family if they convert to Christianity, it is nothing new to them. The atheists however and in particular the agnostics I have spoken to fear being rejected by friends or family if they were to commit to Christianity, in that if they give up drinking, drugs, sexual promiscurity or whatever will have nothing in common with their friends and will be swimming against the tide of the culture of those they were formerly close to.
February 9th, 2006 at at 11:54 pm
SS, are you suggesting that atheists are drug users, alcoholics or sexual libertines?
I can’t speak for everybody else, but I am a happily married man with a beautiful wife, two beautiful young children, I hardly ever drink alcohol anymore, and I don’t use drugs.
It is much harder to be an atheist in America than a Christian. We’re the ones who are made to feel like were less likely to be accepted because we don’t fit in.
February 10th, 2006 at at 12:33 am
Uh, ditto, hate to break your stereo type, but I also am married (almost 20 years) have one beautiful daughter, drink little and have never done drugs. The only fear I have about my atheism is the possibility of my writings putting my father the “Father” in an uncomfortable social circumstance if discovered by a religious associate of his. Fortunately, he retires soon so that concern will become a non-issue.
Given that “Christians” far out number atheists in this country, no potential convert should fear any “persecution”. In fact it should be quite the opposite. The truth remains, most Christians profess belief without actually feeling it. Thus when they encounter someone that claims to truly feel the “Lords blessings” or whatever, those people are shunned, not just by atheists, but by Christians because most of them do not really believe in a personal relationship with “God”. Why, because it’s just superstition, and those that claim to have spoken directly to “God” are self indulgent attention seekers or con-artists, and deep down most people know it.
February 10th, 2006 at at 6:45 am
Tommykey & LBBP:
To be fair to SS, some of us fit this description. For example, I am a gay, vegisexual alcoholic. That’s right. It’s early in the morning, but I’ve already downed a fifth of scotch, and I’m fondling some male celery as I type this. I’ve had to purchase some genetic testing equipment, because it’s otherwise very difficult to figure out which stalks are male.
As for drugs, those of you who have read much of my writing can probably tell that it all streams onto the page directly from a mind ravaged by a decade of daily LSD use. In fact, I used to believe in god, because I had a vivid image of him sitting on my loveseat for the first three years. One day, god was replaced by a seven-foot tall mauve duck who frequently performs songs from South Pacific, and now I believe only in her.
In all seriousness, I have not yet had an exchange with Social Scientist, and I would like to thank her for keeping things interesting while I wasn’t blogging. She has written at least ten times as much as I have this month, and she is my favorite kind of Christian to attract to the site. Sure, she’s generally deluded and usually misinformed (sorry, just an observation), but she actually tries to build an argument, occasionally concedes a point and remains civil throughout the process.
February 10th, 2006 at at 10:04 am
It’s okay I AM, we won’t hold it against you.
February 10th, 2006 at at 10:28 am
As a born and raised catholic im inclined to agree with most of you.Fear is a huge factor in any organized house of worship. The born agains are the worst with the mormons a close 2nd.My truth lies in the belief that there all full of shit..There are very few truths in there fables (the bible)..Sorry this is short but my born again boss gets pissed when i go to sites that arent of his moral right..
February 10th, 2006 at at 12:05 pm
It astounds me that people such as you presume that you know the innermost thoughts and intentions of other people and in particularly Christians.
For the record, I have had numerous theists, mostly Christian, but also Muslim and other more vague theistic people express these exact kinds of fears to me. And when I was a Christian I was afraid of OTHER people that I cared about going to hell. Very much so.
Heaven/Hell does indeed serve as a source of fear for many, either fear for their own hides or for the well being of their firends and loved ones. It doesnt happen to all the theists, but it happens to plenty of them. Ive witnessed it and exprienced it firsthand.
February 10th, 2006 at at 12:15 pm
Uhmm…I don’t want this to be awkward or anything, but is there anyway I could get some pictures of that? It is legal right?
February 10th, 2006 at at 12:24 pm
Sorry, SS… but you are wrong. Most atheists don’t come from atheist families. There just aren’t that many of us around. So the idea that we’d have to give up our “culture” is hardly a problem. In fact, being an atheist often makes us the outsiders… we have more to lose by NOT believing than we do by believing. Which, when you think about it, is why there are so many so-called theists who really don’t believe. They are afraid not only of fear, but of being social outcasts - and with good reason.
By the way, when I was a Christian, I met a lot of drinking, drug-using, sexually free “believers”. I was the last of my friends to have sex, and the only one who was (at that point) an agnostic. The rest would’ve said hands down they believed in god - even the chick who by the age of 17 had slept with 45 guys (most without birth control, of course). Her father was the organist at the church we attended.
Frankly, the atheists I’ve known have all been “better” people than the Christians I’ve known. Odd…
As for drugs and sex, I stick to pot (it’s an herb, I believe that makes it okay according to the Bible), and while I enjoy wild monkey sex, I only have it with my wonderful husband.
Mauve ducks, I AM? Really? Who’s your dealer?
February 10th, 2006 at at 12:25 pm
Uhmm…I don’t want this to be awkward or anything, but is there anyway I could get some pictures of that? It is legal right?
Unfortunately, while it’s legal to do (except in Hawaii and Idaho), it’s not legal to photograph. Besides, with all the LSD, I may just be imagining the celery.
February 10th, 2006 at at 12:27 pm
even the chick who by the age of 17 had slept with 45 guys. Her father was the organist at the church
I know there’s a joke there, but I can’t quite find it.
February 10th, 2006 at at 2:04 pm
A couple of comments from an actual social scientist
First, there is a book based on a study of converts to Christianity in Canada that posits the exact point I Am made in his post - it’s called: Amazing Conversions: Why Some Turn to Faith & Others Abandon Religion by Bob Altemeyer and Bruce Hunsberger. If SS were to read it, she’d find that many people dropout of religion for a combination of two reasons: (1) their parents didn’t really emphasize it in the home, and/or (2) they were taught to seek “truth” by their religious upbringing and they found it outside of religion (thanks to science and philosophy). Those who convert to Christianity after having been raised without religion tend to do so for the precise reasons mentioned by I Am - fear and a sense of control or security. While I disagree with some of the points the authors make (I’m currently conducting some similar studies for my doctoral dissertation), much of what they say rings true.
A couple more comments are in order regarding the behavior of atheists. First, there is very little good data on the actual behavior of atheists, but if you look at religious dropouts (who are much less religious and much more likely not to believe in a god), they do tend to: (1) drink alcohol more often; (2) get drunk more often; (3) have more sexual partners than those who stay in religions; (4) have more liberal views towards pornography; (5) be more likely to have seen an x-rated movie; (6) they are more likely to have paid for sex; and (7) they are more likely to have had an affair (this is all based on GSS data). Of course, they are also more likely to get laid, but that seems to go without saying
I, too, am a “clean-living” atheist who does none of those things, but less religious people are more likely to do them. Given the sample sizes involved in the GSS, the convenience samples of “I don’t do it” and “none of the atheists I know do it” don’t hold up. In fact, in many ways it only makes sense. I would bet that all of the “clean-living” atheists who posted on here are very liberal and libertarian in their attitudes - they’re fine with pornography being legal, they’re okay with pre-marital sex, etc. If you have more liberal attitudes toward those types of behaviors, you’re also more likely to engage in those behaviors.
So, I don’t want to add fuel to SS’s fire, but if she wants to suggest that non-religious people (”religious nones” in sociological jargon) are more likely to engage in “illicit” behaviors, she’s right. The real question is, why do we care? I don’t have a problem with celery porn (or other types of porn, all veggies included) and I don’t think it’s an “illicit” behavior. So, SS can level all the silly accusations she wants. Ultimately it comes down to the point I Am made earlier - religious nones (atheists in particular) are sloughing off the slavery of religion and embracing true freedom - a freedom that includes paying for sex and not feeling guilty for it
February 10th, 2006 at at 2:43 pm
Hmmm….alright then. For some reason I thought it was legal if the celery was over 18 days from germination.
February 10th, 2006 at at 5:56 pm
I AM, how do you know SS’s a female?
I agree that most Christians don’t “Really believe”. My dad, for instance, said I should keep up with the pretention to “Make my mom happy”.
February 10th, 2006 at at 6:47 pm
I AM, how do you know SS’s a female?
I agree that most Christians don’t “Really believe”. My dad, for instance, said I should keep up with the pretention to “Make my mom happy”.
I figured it out when she said “I am a woman” on another post. If I don’t know, I default to male. It’s technically the neuter pronoun in English, and I happen to be one. Male… not a neuter pronoun.
Your father sounds much like mine. I think I was 24 before I finally got my father to admit that he doesn’t believe in god. He said that to make my mom happy, he used to avoid when possible and lie when necessary when I was a kid. She either doesn’t know he’s an atheist or has blocked it out of her mind. I’m not sure which.
It’s amazing how uncomfortable he was with the word “atheist,” when I first called him one. To this day, he’ll readily admit that he doesn’t believe in god, but will usually deny being an atheist. I guess the Cold War rhetoric about the Soviet Union made the word synonymous with “evil” for his entire generation.
February 10th, 2006 at at 7:11 pm
To Tk and LBBP,
Having re-read how I phrased that last post I realize that it does very much look like I am stereotyping atheists to be alcoholic, drug taking sex maniacs, I didn’t mean to do that but to name some strong addictions or pleasures that a person may find hard to give up. I also have clean living atheist friends so I know that they exist. Sorry for this. I myself would have fit my stereotype description before my conversion too, so no judgement meant by it ok.
Being Australian however, I have been speaking of the majority of Christians and atheists I know in Australia, and both groups seem uncomparable now after hearing people’s descriptions of their American counterparts. In Australia there are more atheists than Christians, and we are a much less politically correct nation in practice even though we have the laws in place. So if a person becomes a Christian here it is a serious commitment to Christ relationally because they are risking the scorn of their atheist family and friends and sometimes discrimination in the workforce as well.
exmoron,
I am also a Social Scientist and have a Bachelor in Social Science with majors in Counselling, Human Services and Community Development with electives in Welfare Law, Psychologhy I & II and Field Education I & II which is the equivalent of the American version of internship.
I am
Thanks for this great blog site, and for being so honest in sharing and being yourself so that others can feel that they also can be themselves too, this has created open discussion which is a rarity in Australia with many atheists I have met who are often very defensive and go for the jugular if you disagree with their worldview or debate them. Atheists and Christians and even gay people are very militant in Australia if they have a public discussion or debate, it doesn’t make for open discussion and understanding or respect for other people as this site has, even though we call each other bonkers ocassionally lol
I can live with that it is less than the bear pit I am accustomed to.
February 11th, 2006 at at 12:20 am
Maybe I should move to Australia.
February 11th, 2006 at at 1:35 am
Tk,
Australia is the best country in the world
February 11th, 2006 at at 1:47 am
addict,
I had you picked for a guy until you spoke of your husband. I am happily married to a agnostic myself for 29 years.
February 11th, 2006 at at 1:52 am
lol
highlander, your boss sounds like a man after my own heart.
February 12th, 2006 at at 4:01 am
Well, where in the Bible does it say not to drink or do drugs? Seriously. I’m well aware that there are some proverbs that are critical of alcohol, but there are also Proverbs which are supportive of alcohol. Besides, Jesus was the life of the party because he always had the wine.
I challenge anyone who claims that humans do not generally have an innate fear of death. Please.
February 12th, 2006 at at 8:54 pm
Well, where in the Bible does it say not to drink or do drugs?
Well, the Bible does seem to be against fun in general, so it’s not too much of a stretch. And it forbids shrimp! Wonderful shrimp!
February 13th, 2006 at at 2:50 am
you are completely wrong
God is present and his Word is fixed in the heavens
February 13th, 2006 at at 1:38 pm
I would have to fully agree and disagree with this post. Just because someone calls themselves a Christian does not make them a Christian. Likewise, just because someone calls themself German doesn’t make them German. It is the individual’s willingness to buy into the belief system that that religion the are choosing forms and their willingness to obey, out of love for and want for, those beliefs.
I agree with you saying that about 80% of the U.S. claims to be Christian, but I guarentee that the people who are claiming that but not living as a Christian are no more Christians than atheists are Christians. Being a true Christian is about believing in Jesus Christ as the Son of God who came to earth to die for your sins so that you can be seen as sinless in God’s eyes on Judgement day, which is coming AND living you life following God’s commands in the Bible.
I am a Christian, and I am saddened by your comment, yet it is soberizing because I know that the term Christian is thrown around a lot in our culture and not many people actually realize and live what being a Christian is. I fully believe in the incarnation, Jesus as God becoming fully human n earth, his willful death on the cross to save me, and his resurrection, thus proving power over death. (unlike all of the other relgion’s gods who are still dead.) Now, it is out of love, not fear, that I follow Him and want to live my life for Him. Since I believe in a Creator God, and the Bible as His inspired Word, I follow it because of this: If He created me, and everything in the universe, don’t you think He knows the parameters we should abide by? It’s like a dog with an invisible fense collar. At first he hates it, because when he tries to cross the street he gets shocked. He doesn’t realize that his owner loves him and wants him to stay alive by not getting run over by a car. After some time, the dog realizes the love of the owner and sees great freedom inside the invidible fence. So it is with life as a Christian. God loves us and givs us guidelines to follow to help us live the best possible life on earth. Not all people who claim to be Christians find this freedom. Most are striving to be perfect or to acheive salvation by doing good works. This is NOT a Christian teaching. Salvation comes through faith alone, not works. I have found the freedom, but I also know it is hard to live it out. Christians are still human and still in sinful human bodies. We do fail and we will fail, there is no question about it, BUT we are forgiven when we repent because we are covered by Jesus’ blood! and God knows that we are not perfected like Jesus yet, but someday we will be. So I am sorry for my fellow “Christians” who have failed, just like you, we’re all sinners! I really hope you will someday see your need for God and a purpose in life. Just cause you don’t believe in the bullet doesn’t mean it’s not real!
In the end, we all believe in something, Christians and atheists. It is your willingness to dive in and learn about the things you want to believe to see if they hold true, or your willingness to sit on the side and let your subconscious show you what you will believe without any kind of proofof truth. I encourage you to read the book, The Case for Christ, by Stobell. It is an atheist who tries to disprove Christianity. You might find it interesting and informative.
February 14th, 2006 at at 12:09 am
I know I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but this is exactly what I went through. After I left the Anglican church, I went through several years where I considered myself a sort of “freelance” believer, in that I believed in god but not any particular religion, before I moved on to agnosticism. It wasn’t until last year that I finally found the courage to admit to myself that I really didn’t believe in god at all. And yes, that moment, when I finally took off my confirmation ring (which I had genuinely been unwilling to remove for all that time, however corny that may seem), was scary. But it was liberating, too, to finally stop lying to myself.
Besides, I figure if it turns out there really is a god after all, he just might appreciate honesty. Just maybe.
February 14th, 2006 at at 1:09 am
you are completely wrong
God is present and his Word is fixed in the heavens
So his word says, go ahead eat shrimp and have fun?
Congrats, borealys!
February 14th, 2006 at at 3:40 am
I know about the freedom that Susan speaks of, and it is hard to explain sometimes to those who have not tried it out, but here goes:
A Christian knows what it is to be an unbeliever and sinner, but unlike the atheist they also know what it is to have the true freedom that comes when God does a work in their lives and transforms their nature to be like unto Himself. This freedom does not involve an absence of free will or an inability to sin and break the Bible’s commandments, all people including Christians have a propensity to sin since the fall of Adam and Eve and have a sin prone nature.
This freedom involves the strength for the first time in their entire life not have to sin against God because their sin nature is so strong they cannot do otherwise, as a believer draws on the strength of the Holy Spirit. For example, all of us would have to admit to telling lies at some point in your life. But why? Do we like lying and being lied to by others? No! Does our society, race or personal moral beliefs consider lying to be an admirable quality to be developed at all costs? No! We have lied because it is of our sinful fallen nature to do so. Therefore we are a slave to our fallen nature if we do what we don’t want to do and don’t like having done to us, and don’t agree with morally and neither does our race or society agree with as morally right.
True freedom in when you still have free will to choose to do what you want but also have the freedom to do what is right by others and God if you want to and are not driven as a slave by a fallen nature that leans towards sinning and is hard to rein in when you want to change. This fallen world often portrays freedom as a lisence to do everything (usually wrong things) but is this true freedom if you cannot master your own fallen nature to truly choose to do good when you want to and know in your heart you should? God has said in His word that He has written His laws on our hearts so we know them, lots of people call this a conscience, ever wonder why your conscience wars against you only when you do wrong and not when you do right? That’s why!
February 14th, 2006 at at 11:12 am
Exmoron,
Actually, there is some very good studies pertaining to the lifestyles of both the religious and atheist, done by a research group headed by a fellow named George Barna (himself an evangelical christian). He did research to help christians get a better idea of what was going ‘right’ and ‘not right’ in their lives, hoping to point out where christians were better than atheists and areas that still need improvements. His conclusion however; Atheists and religious are virtually the same in terms of lifestyle. He was scorned by the more conservative groups of christians who were looking forward, I suspect, to seizing the opportunity to say: “See… Atheists are just a bunch of immoral drunkards, etc. etc.”
February 14th, 2006 at at 1:18 pm
To Susan:
Your analogy of a dog and an invisible fence collar is interesting, because whether you realize it or not, you are basically saying that human beings are god’s pets. As for the invisible collar, that analogy fails because there is no collar on humans that prevent us from doing certain things. The dog cannot cross the street because it is physically prevented from doing so, whereas a married man can solicit an independent escort by e-mailing her and setting up a date and time to get together. Barring something unexpected, there is nothing to physically prevent the man and the escort from their rendezvous. And if they both practice safe sex, there is a very low likelihood of infection or pregnancy resulting from the encounter.
As for Strobel, while I have not read any of his books, from what I have read, I highly doubt he was an atheist or a skeptic before he wrote ‘The Case for Christ’. Rather, he brings common skeptic reasons for not believing in Christ to some evangelicals, and then writes what they say without going to any prominent skeptics and saying “Well, here’s what reverend so-and-so said about this skeptic argument, what do you have to say in rebuttal?”
It’s more likely that Strobel tried to pass himself off as a skeptic so that it makes his book more convincing to bible-thumpers so they will say “See, Strobel set out to disprove Christianity and he ended up becoming a Christian himself!”
Now on to SS: Yes, your “nemesis” is back!
There are plenty of reasons not to engage in irresponsible behavior that have nothing to do with god, religion, or conscience. A lot of it has to do with simple utilitarian reasoning. I believe that marijuana should be legal, as long as the person who smokes it does so responsibly (such as doing it in the privacy of his home, with no kids around, does not interfere with him doing his job, does not drive a car stoned etc.), but I personally choose not to smoke it. As a married father of two little kids who is alone with them five nights a week, toking on a joint is not a realistic option for me.
In any action that is optional and involves risks, a reasonably intelligent person will weigh the costs and benefits of the activity. Sure I can try sky diving once just for the thrill of the experience. But is the financial cost and the prospect of my chute failing and ending up a blood splattered mess on the pavement somewhere outweighed by the sheer thrill of the experience? Most people will probably say no, while others will argue that the chance of the chute failing is very small, and that the reward, however transient, is worth the risk.
As for lying, it is not always necessarily a “sin”, for lack of a better word to lie. Say my wife gets dropped off at a doctor’s office or is attending a family function somewhere and I have to pick her up. I brush off her attempts to give me directions (you know us men!) by telling her I know how to find the place. Of course, on the way there, I end up getting lost and being late by a half hour or so. My wife asks me “what happened to you, did you get lost?” I can be completely honest with her and say yes, and have to submit to her berating me for not listening to her directions. Or I can lie and say that there was a car accident that resulted in traffic delays so that I can save face. Such a lie is completely harmless and merely serves to avoid what I consider to be unnecessary embarassment.
Another example would be a man running for public office. At a local candidate forum, someone in the audience asks him if he has ever committed adultery. The candidate thinks back to ten years earlier when he was out of town on a business trip and had an encounter with a prostitute. It was the only time he ever did it and he felt miserable about it afterwards and never does it again. He does not tell his wife because he does not want to upset her, and since he has decided it is better to chalk it up to a bad experience, he tells the questioner that he has never committed adultery. Now, of course, the 100% honest thing to do would be to say yes, that he had committed adultery. And what would be the consequence of his admission? He would likely lose the election. Even worse, his wife will be upset not only that the husband once committed adultery, but that it is now fodder for the local newspaper and she feels humiliated.
Please bear in mind, I am not saying that lying is a good thing, but there are circumstances where telling the truth can cause terrible embarassment and harm for no good reason. Where truth is necessary is when people decide to bear a risk based upon a lie that someone has told them such as “Oh, this product is completely safe” when in fact tests showed the product to be dangerous, or “He told me he was std free before I slept with him, and it turned out he knew he was HIV+ all along.”
February 14th, 2006 at at 6:16 pm
Aaaaaaaaaaah so you subscribe to degrees of what you consider harmless and even beneficial lying then TK? Australians call this white lies and the ‘bad’ lies you mentioned are called bare faced lying. But have you ever done ‘bare faced’ lying? I bet you have. God has no such categorising of lies there is no good ‘white’ lies or bad lies they are all sin - all bad. Myself personally God aside, would not answer the question put to the senator I would say I do not answer questions about my personal life in a public forum especially since this is not relevant to my ability to be president, and to your wife I would say yeah I got lost but don’t make an issue about it ok, not a word.
February 15th, 2006 at at 12:04 am
Since I am an atheist, I don’t believe in “sin”. There are actions that are harmful, actions that are harmless, and actions that are beneficial. So, yes, I have no problem with saying little lies once in a while that are essentially harmless. But such “lies” must be used infrequently, lest people lose their trust in you. If you are essentially an honest person, an occasional little fib can be overlooked. But if every other word out of one’s mouth is bullshit, then that person will not be believed even if they are telling the truth.
And as for “bare faced” lying, everyone has likely done it at least once in their lives. As for myself, I told the truth when it mattered even though I feared I might end up losing everything that was dear to me.
February 15th, 2006 at at 12:09 am
I was just reminded me of an old Star Trek episode where Harry Mudd tells the leader of a group of androids holding him and some Enterprise crew prisoner that everything that Kirk says is a lie. Kirk then says to the android “Harry’s right. Everything I say is a lie.” The android starts to wig out because he is faced with a contradiction. If everything that Kirk says is a lie, and Kirk admits that everything he says is a lie, then Kirk is telling the truth, but he can’t be telling the truth because everything he says is a lie, but…. well you get the picture.
February 15th, 2006 at at 4:13 am
Tk,
I am a star trek fan, I think I saw that episode actually. Hey I put forth a challenge to atheists on The Uncredible Hallq to debate evolution vs creationism to all atheists and started it off by post the an assignment I got high distinction for in Academic Literacy Skills (writing at an academic skill level) based on refuting evolution I called the essay “Theoretical Science or Science Fiction?”. No one took me up on the challenge for ages, but The Uncredible Hallq himself has taken me on and made a posting of it for others to take up the challenge among the atheist camp. If any of you are scientists rush over there and support the Hallq’s postion or just come to cheer him on. I expect you my nemisis to come and highten the challenge TK. lol
February 15th, 2006 at at 4:16 am
P.s My username there is SocialScientist777 come and pay me out all ya atheists ok. lol
February 15th, 2006 at at 12:41 pm
My background is in history, not science, so I would not be a knowledgeable advocate of evolution to effectively debate on its behalf. But I recall a quote from Richard Dawkins, something to the effect that if a creationist wants to disprove evolution, then all they need do is produce the fossil of a rabbit from pre-Cambrian sediment.
If I were to put a bumpersticker on my car, it would read: “If evolution is just a theory, then creationism is just a fairy tale.”
Let’s look at Genesis. It says that God created everything in six days. But a day as we know it is measured by how long it takes for the earth to rotate on its axis, which is about 24 hours give or take a second. God allegedly created the entire universe, filled with countless galaxies, stars, planets, comets etc. Then we are supposed to believe that this creator, who apparently is formless and shapeless, operates on Earth time? And why would God need to rest on the 7th day? Was he tired? If he is all powerful, then he should not be tired, right? And how does God rest? Does he shut off like a computer? Does hetake a nap in a giant hammock? Does that mean that the entire universe operated on its own on the 7th day without God watching over or doing anything?
To me, it makes a lot more sense that the creation story in Genesis is a myth written by people to try to explain in terms they could understand at the time how the world came into being instead of being a literally true account of how the Earth and everything was created.
To be honest, I don’t have an emotional investment in evolution being a 100% accurate explanation for life on this planet. If evidence uncovered over time offers a better explanation, then I will be happy to accept it. For a creationist who believes that the Bible is literally true in every word, no amount of counter-evidence makes a difference because to admit that the Bible might be wrong in even one spot is to cause a crack in the edifice of belief that can threaten to bring the whole structure crashing down.
What makes a lot more sense, that the Earth is billions of years old, or that God created the Earth to look like it is billions of years old to test or faith or that Satan put dinosaur fossils in the ground to trick us into thinking the earth is older than it is? I know which answer I pick.
February 15th, 2006 at at 8:08 pm
Tk,
I am not a Scientist either (just a social scientist) and evolution because it is not a proven scientific fact (though it is taught in our schools as though it was) is also unscientific and more like theoretical philosophy than applied science like medical science which has to be provable, you could use the very same philisophical questions you have just raised with me now that is what Halq is doing.
February 16th, 2006 at at 8:16 pm
The bottom line on all forms of spiritualism is the desire for immortality. This is the root of the fear of which your speak.
February 17th, 2006 at at 5:17 am
Evolution unscientific? 8O, In science, as i was thought in school, one does not prove but seeks the best explanation by evidence at hand. Even gravity that had been taken as a fact can one day be proven false (even though i certainly daubt it). If however gravity is a fact, then so should be evolution. The evidence supporting evolution is so overwhelming and even we can see some in presence. The evolution of the avien flu virus which could lead to a more dangerous form it has alarmed the international community.
On the other hand, evolution does not give you a gost to worship, and if your not a knowledge seeker, its better to stick with creationism, as it gives the simplest explanation: “god did it”
February 17th, 2006 at at 5:08 pm
I would be very interested to hear your evidence for evolution Roya, and you should have no trouble giving me that seeing as you believe the evidence is overwhelming
lol. While I am not a scientist I have read dozens of science books from the library and from what I can see there is no scientific evidence for evolution but I am sure you will enlighten me on this with your ‘overwhelming’ amount.
February 17th, 2006 at at 5:25 pm
Um… where’s Candid Camera?
February 18th, 2006 at at 12:00 am
lol
Uberkuh exactly!!
February 22nd, 2006 at at 3:13 am
Roya says:
“On the other hand, evolution does not give you a gost to worship, and if your not a knowledge seeker, its better to stick with creationism, as it gives the simplest explanation: “god did it”
Evolutionist scientists say “evolution did it” they don’t PROVE evolution did it because there is no scientific proof, they just say it lol
Don’t take my word for it go to Hallq’s site and check out the evolution debate under the heading of SocialScientist777 (which you can only access by scrolling down to the February 2006 archives and clicking on it to get all of February). I have just found out that Hallq is a uni student majoring in Biochemistry among other things yet you will see that I have defeated every statement he has made up to this point and he has not been able to produce one credible scientific fact or evidence to support the theory of evolution that can silence my reply or that I cannot repudiate with solid scientific evidence. Bear in mind I am not a scientist I am a social scientist (majoring in counselling, human services, community development etc.) this is how weak the argument for evolution is even an ametuer science buff like me can repudiate it!!
February 22nd, 2006 at at 3:16 am
That site is the uncredible hallq if you want to check it out the address is http://uncrediblehallq.blogspot.com/
February 25th, 2006 at at 4:25 am
You SS, realy didnt said more then what i said earlier. as I said no scientific theory is a proven fact. And neither did you prove that there is no evidence for evolution in Halq’s blog. Halq and others in his blog did give good arguments aginst yours.
Im not a scientist either, Im a student of political science and philosophy but I can distinguish bad arguments from good ones and a ghost argument from an unrelieable book doesnt do it for me.
I just dont have a belief that has no bases. if you can scientifically disprove evolution, ill be the first to drop evolution. Its not a belief for me.
By the way im an Australian too
February 25th, 2006 at at 11:59 am
One way of looking at the evolution of species is by looking at language. It is debatable whether there was once a common language that the earliest humans spoke. It is likely that language originated independently among different groups of people many thousands of years ago.
But there are language families, such as Indo-European, (since I am not a linguist, I don’t know the names of other language families off the top of my head and where they originated) which is believed to have its roots in Central Asia and spread to Europe and India. The earliest languages were very simple, perhaps names for animals that hunters would kill for food, and so forth. Then it became necessary to differentiate between the present, the past, and the future.
As various groups of humans settled down and developed agricultural societies, language had to become more complex to convey new ideas. As the populations of the agricultural societies increased, there became a greater specialization of labor, the need for government and for educated people to implement laws, devise a system of taxation for raising revenue. Language became more complex because it needed to be. It adapted to encompass words for new inventions, for passing on information, for calculating the movements of the stars, for developing calendars to predict the coming of the changing seasons and on an on.
Sometimes, a group of people who spoke a common language would become physically separated. While the language of the separated groups would retain similarities, over time they would grow greater as the groups interacted with other societies and incorporate some of their words. The separated groups would also develop their own words to express new things they encountered.
I am an English speaking American. If I were to go to England today, I would have no problem communicating with the people there. Sure, there are different slangs and terminology I would not be accustomed to, such as calling an elevator a “lift” or an apartment a “flat”. But if I were to go back in time to England 1,000 years ago, I would probably have a very difficult time communicating with the natives. Most of them would be English speakers, but of a much older version of the language. Go back another 1,000 years and English is not spoken in the British Isles at all, because the Angles and the Saxons had not yet invaded them. They are somewhere in Northern and Eastern Europe at this time, being one of many Germanic tribes. If I were to encounter the Angles and the Saxons at this time, our languages would probably be mutually unintelligible. But the English I speak today has its roots in the language they spoke 2,000 years ago.
The evolution of languages does not prove the evolution of humans of course, but it is analogous of it.
March 3rd, 2006 at at 4:01 pm
Brilliant blog post, I AM. Some very nice analysis of the Christian mindset. I was thinking many of the same things myself on religion.