The Cost of Atheism
It's hard to be agnostic, even more a "becoming atheist." Christians often self-congratulate their experiences of "persecution" and "the cost of discipleship," but the cost of agnostic/atheism high, perhaps higher, than any Christian ever imagined.
I have been on both sides of the table. There is no question that discrimination and rejection are experienced by many Christians. Unfortunately, most of it - at least in Western culture - is earned. Rather than demonstrating the love, unity, acceptance and forgiveness that the New Testament proposes as the model of Jesus' life and the expectation of those who are his followers, most contemporary Christians are mean-spirited, self-righteous and hypocritical. Most Christians I encountered during my sojourn through the Land of Oz (ie, Christianity) deserved just about every bit of distrust and disrespect they received.
But a fact often overlooked is that agnostics and atheists are similarly despised and rejected, especially in this psuedo-born again culture of America, that makes some bastardization of Christianity and patriotism synonymous. Listen to the blowhards on any radio talk show or the FOX News network, and you will quickly understand that in the "culture war" of these days, atheists are the "evil empire."
But - actually - I am not thinking of that kind of thing when I talk about the cost of agnosticism/atheism. I am talking about something else, possibly a spiritual dynamic (and certainly psycho-social) that resists the notion of denying or questioning the reality of God. It's really a question of the head versus the heart. My head has always doubted the reality of God - my heart yearns for his reality. Rationally, reasonably, I can question (at least) and deny (at most) the existence of a Divine Being. But my heart wants magic, mystery, and the sense of wonder that can be part of the journey of faith and belief.
I don't have much respect for those on either side of the God debate who deny the role of the aching heart in the agnositic/atheist community. Of course, I admit that not all have the emotional resonance with Christianity that I have as a former Christian. But anyone who denies the role of emotion in the formation of faith and belief is a liar and a fool. We are not just thinking animals...we feel, and our feelings are often a far more powerful reality than our reason.
I miss God. I often want to fall back on easy believism. A recent commenter on this site reminded me of the rules of "easy believism" - God says it, I believe it, that settles it. No questions asked. I wish! My heart wants - indeed, aches - for a trust in a Heavenly Daddy who loves me, desires the best for me, has a plan for me, and will help me accomplish that plan if I put my trust in him (and give his church my money)!
A few days ago, I saw a guy wearing a religious tee-shirt. It showed a knight in armor, kneeling, with his sword in front of him. Over the picture were these words" "The difficulty of what you face is not as great as the Power behind you." It nearly brought me to tears. How I yearn to believe - simply, as a child - that there is God who stood behind me, held me up, helped me through. Alas...and forsooth.
Remember the movie "Pitch Black" - the sci-fi movie that introduced us to Vin Diesel as Riddick, the space cowboy? In that movie, a mullah challenges Riddick, saying "you don't believe in God." Riddick responds - "No, I absolutely do believe in God. And I absolutely hate the M---F---er!"
It's hard to believe. It's harder to choose not to, especially when your heart - your emotional life - yearns to believe.
But there is a reason I choose not to believe...and the cost of atheism is high.
49 comments:
I know where you’re coming from. I’m a former evangelical fundamentalist Christian myself and I went through a lot of that kind of thing in the initial years after my de-conversion. I still feel it some, but not nearly as much, and I’ve learned that following your head rather than your heart is always the best path in life – for all areas of life.
"Most Christians I encountered during my sojourn through the Land of Oz (ie, Christianity) deserved just about every bit of distrust and disrespect they received."
Ye, definitely. In the office environment, for instance, almost every time you find a rule-keeping, finger-pointing person, that probably is a Christian.
"I miss God. I often want to fall back on easy believism."
Yes, same here. But, do we need to believe in a god in order to add mysticism to the fact that we are human and part of a greater unit called the universe? Do you think it is too theist to celebrate the fact that we are part of the human race and that we play a role in it?
My questions aren't daring or confrontational. They are real. I have been asking this myself for a few days, and I still haven't found an answer that I am comfortable with.
and yet - the rewards of atheism are greast as well. since giving up on god to make things happen and fix things, i am more self-reliant, self-confident, and also, have forged closer relationships with other people that i have learned to trust and rely on. I have spent more time studying human behavior and psychology and sociology and the science of the natural world and find the gain in understanding to be interesting and full of wonder.
i do find that i engage my head a lot more seriously in understanding people and things, but i also feel that in understanding human behavior more deeply and learning to rely on friends and family while at the same time, becoming a stronger more capable person myself, my heart is more engaged as well. more engaged in real world relationships where an actual hug or or phone call for help or note of thanks are possible and happen frequently. yeah, there are some costs, but they are far far outweighed by the rewards. i think if you really do a balance sheet, you will find the same to be true.
life is like gas station landscaping: real is better than fake any day!
Easy believism...I like that!
(JH)
actually, goprarie and lorena, I agree with what you say. I guess I was just ruminating a bit. I do think the reward for this path is great, as well. Like you, goprarie, I am more self-reliant, less inclined to disappointment because I have a more realistic expectation...and as a result, I am more self-confident (some Christian somewhere is going to say "see how much SELF you are talking about...we told you so!!").
And lorena, while I struggle a bit with the mysticism, I do experience a greater sense of oneness with the universe, a part of something big and amazing and mysterious (not a sinner who can only grovel in appreciation for something). So, thanks for your comments, and know that I am firmly aimed in the same direction.
And joe holman, don't you think much of what passes for christianity in this culture is easy believism? I heard that term in seminary.
actually, goprarie and lorena, I agree with what you say. I guess I was just ruminating a bit. I do think the reward for this path is great, as well. Like you, goprarie, I am more self-reliant, less inclined to disappointment because I have a more realistic expectation...and as a result, I am more self-confident (some Christian somewhere is going to say "see how much SELF you are talking about...we told you so!!").
And lorena, while I struggle a bit with the mysticism, I do experience a greater sense of oneness with the universe, a part of something big and amazing and mysterious (not a sinner who can only grovel in appreciation for something). So, thanks for your comments, and know that I am firmly aimed in the same direction.
And joe holman, don't you think much of what passes for christianity in this culture is easy believism? I heard that term in seminary.
Funny you mention "Pitch Black". I just watched that movie a few days ago, and probably the first time as an atheist ( I deconverted last December). As lame as this sounds, the way the characters play against each other is very telling about the various kinds of people in the world now. You got the religious parodied in the imam and his three guys. Then you got Riddick who seemed much of a naturalist or even Darwinian "survival of the fittest", though he wasn't as much ''animal'' as I had hoped. Anyways, great mention.
Brother Crow said...
"And joe holman, don't you think much of what passes for christianity in this culture is easy believism? I heard that term in seminary."
My reply...
Yes, I do. Couldn't agree more. I just liked the term and hadn't heard it before.
(JH)
i have a fresh atheist friend falling into backslide over christmas - missing the tradition and all sentimental and well-maybeing about it all. but i think we can still celebrate carefully with family and friends by treating it as a CULTURAL event and participate in the social feasting and the giving of gifts as a sign of affection and/or appreciation - and we don't have to believe the 'story' is literal or anything other than badly corrupted history or even mere myth. we don't have to be rebelliously loudly atheist among the family of christians. we can respect their belief, participate in what has cultural and symbolic and personal meaning to us, pass on the rest, and only reveal our true beleifs to those we trust to respect back. none of that is 'selling out' or 'caving'. christmas doesn't have to be a religious holiday to us, but it can still be a cultural thing we participate in to our own level of comfort. thought??
Maybe that is the reason that I have never gotten past agnostic.
If my mind is in the right spot, I can still feel awe and wonder at many of the myths and rites of the Catholic Church especially at Christmas. Maybe it is just some evolutionary adapdation that causes me to react that way or some emotional response from childhood, but I figure it is just as real as anything anybody else is experiencing at church.
have you ever been to a Native American PowWow? the drumming and dancing and sharing and caring can feel just as mystical and awesome and wonderful as all that. some of it is just tradtition, but some of it is the drama and the hugeness. some of it is the sharing in an intense way with other people. but that does not make they 'myths' that the drumming and songs are based on any more 'real' than the bible 'myths'. come to think of it, if that is your thing, you can get pretty much the same feelings of awe and being part of something really big and magnificent at a rock concert. that does not mean the stories in the song or the persona of the rock band are 'real' either. i am fine with involvement in such ceremony and in fact can maybe enjoy it more for what it is and experience it purely in a sensory (sensual?) way without beleiving a lick of the 'religion' of it.
But my heart wants magic, mystery, and the sense of wonder that can be part of the journey of faith and belief.
Maybe it's because I have never believed in a god or any type of supernatural phenomenon (other than the silly stuff you grow out of after childhood), but I have never needed any sense of faith and I don't feel I'm missing out on anything. Now maybe you will consider this a "cost" that I'm not aware of but I guess I'll never know it. And like Christopher Hitchens, I don't want there to be a god watching over us. I think it would be a truly awful thing to have some omnipotent being watching over your every move and knowing every thought and feeling throughout your whole life.
Maybe you miss God because you have a lot of good associations with that concept because you were raised in that environment, but for me at least, a lifelong skeptic and nonbeliever, the only feelings I associate with God are not positive.
Call me a liar and a fool then because I don't miss religion in the least. Perhaps it is because my particular sect never celebrated holidays or had elaborate rituals.
If anything I feel an overwhelming sense of relief when I think about my days being a Christian. I feel an odd sense of giddiness when I visit my former church, like I have secret knowledge the rest of them don't.
There is plenty of mystery and wonder in the natural universe to keep my spirits buoyed without reference to any creator. What my heart yearns for is greater knowledge of the cosmos, not an afterlife of supplication to some all powerful deity (although if I had been told the afterlife included a beer volcano and a stripper factory all bets are off).
The other day a pair of Jehovah's Witnesses came to my door with good news. They were carrying their bibles and after their introductory spiel I asked them, borrowing a line from Julia Sweeney, "Have you actually read that thing?" "Well, no" they responded which I considered an invitation to offer them a bit of "bible study."
Meanwhile I remembered back to my days canvassing, being in the same position as these two were now (well, perhaps not, usually the door was slammed in my face, often accompanied by expletives). I saw how they would continue to fall back on the same tired answers. "Well, we believe our bible is true." "But you haven't read it. So you believe it is true because someone told you it was. How does that make you different than, say, muslims or Mormons?" Is that the easy believism? It sounds to me more like "easy shut-off-the-critical-reasoning-portions-of-my-brainism."
I didn't feel a trace of longing to "do God's work" talking with the pair, but I did feel a sense of something missing. What I missed was all of the other things we would do in our congregation: feeding the homeless, manning the soup kitchen, visiting with the elderly. What I find missing is the satisfaction found in helping my fellow brother and sister. I don't miss being comforted in the Lord, but being comforting to others in need.
So no, I don't miss God in the least. I find I can get all of the emotional fulfillment I need right here, no God required. I don't need magic, there's plenty of mystery and wonder to keep me in awe for the rest of my life. In all my years of Christianity I was too busy thanking and praising God, too busy saving souls, to appreciate what is precious here and now. In a manner of speaking, God was always in the way of truly experiencing all the joy life has to offer.
But don't listen to me, I'm just a liar and a fool. :)
If you miss those chances to help others through your former church, why have you not found volunteer opportunities on your own? There are a thousand groups out there that need help, from historical societies to conservation groups to things like Habitat for Humanity. Try out a half dozen and pare it down to the few that meet your needs for helping others and being part of something good. There are many ways to be charitable and have a possitibe influence on the world, people, the environment, outside of a church!
Brother Crow,
You may or may not be interested in writings by Neil deGrasse Tyson (Astrophysicist). He finds great wonder and mystery in the universe and revels in it. To him, the universe is magical, but not in a supernatural way... it's just that complex and exciting to him. His latest book is "Death by Black Hole". I hope this helps.
Affirmations generally have some detractors but lack of the faith is huge for some. When my only child took a wife... she couldn't cope with dad's lack of faith and not only never embraced, but took my son with her.
No religious discussion ever occurred, the simple awareness that my son shared was all it took to drive the emotions of division. I doubt there are few clashes such as faith and non faith that drive such division without a shot ever being fired.
I don't however view this as a cost of atheism as I see atheism as benign. The Christian message however actively promotes the separation of families where a variation of faith - non faith exist, and encourages the faith based to seek a surrogate family among believers.
Our situation follows that model... the division is completely her choice.
Dear Brother Crow,
When I began reading your article here, I worried that you might be wheeling out the "victim card," you know, the "we're-victims-too" gimmick that works so well in pop-culture. I am really glad to see that you have not offered us such an infuriating cliché.
A quick note: I don't think "the cost of discipleship" (I am thinking of Bonhoeffer's great book by that title), is synonymous with persecution as you seemingly imply in ¶1. It is no big deal, but I believe the idea is really more akin to this: The Cost of Discipline. For surely discipline of any kind demands something of us; self-discipline sure does, and most of us know that it ain't easy to pay those dues.
Just a minor point.
It is refreshing for me to hear an atheist/agnostic admit to having, not just a head, but a heart. No doubt the heart is that indescribable something, that pre-rational or trans-rational "thing" some call the "gut," the viscera; maybe even the "intuition," no? What do you think it is, this heart? Do only some people have a heart; are there really heartless people? And why is it associated with the sort of longings you have here, namely longings for magic, symbolism, transcendence, God? Can the heart long for materialism; can the former-atheist-turned Christian experience the inverse of what you have suggested, a longing for the good-old-days of plain existentialism, for a material world with no God that loves us or cheers us on; a life free of any expectations that are not self-derived?
I wonder. I really do. I have already made an effort at this site to explore this "heart" of which you speak. Is it our true center? Is it the true self that has no language? Is the head indeed estranged from its core, and vice versa?
I understand the longing, my friend, I really do. It would be interesting to see how many readers here would be as honest as you, admitting to this sense of loss, of missing something.
You are to be admired.
Peace,
Bill Gnade
Dear Bruce,
Greetings! I bid you well.
I am confused -- which is my habit. You've posted something here that has me stumped.
You said:
Maybe it's because I have never believed in a god or any type of supernatural phenomenon (other than the silly stuff you grow out of after childhood), but I have never needed any sense of faith and I don't feel I'm missing out on anything.
I have nothing to say about this statement in isolation (which is where they keep me, by the way), but it strikes me as problematic when I note that you also said this moments later:
Maybe you miss God because you have a lot of good associations with that concept because you were raised in that environment, but for me at least, a lifelong skeptic and nonbeliever, the only feelings I associate with God are not positive.
I wonder: if you were not raised with any idea of God or the supernaturalism, then how could you associate God with anything, and how could those associations be "negative?" Is your atheism nothing but a lingering effect of having been raised a certain way; do you hold to atheism merely because you have nice associations with that idea?
But my biggest stumbler is this that you wrote:
And like Christopher Hitchens, I don't want there to be a god watching over us.
How can you NOT desire what you've never known? And what does this REALLY suggest here? It seems to me that you've made some other decision: you don't want God to exist.
You need not explain yourself here. I just thought you'd like to know how a theist -- and a person not only given to skepticism but one prone to be skeptical of even skepticism -- is confused by your position.
Peace to you,
Bill Gnade
Bill Gnade, I read about a study (this was several years ago, late 90's) where people were asked where their center of being was. Some defined the frontal lobe area of the brain, some defined the center of the chest, some defined an area just above the sternum but below the shoulder blade, and some defined the abdomen. An interesting issue...what is the center of self? And does it (obviously) differ from person to person, and why? We are all different, with a differing personal orientations...so one's center (say, the head, or reason) may be quite different than another's (say, the heart, or emotion).
You did pick up on my own ambivalence. the "heart" is not just an emotive center, but may have more to do with an ability to experience transcendence or numinosity. Read an interesting book years ago, "Distance Haze" - a Crichton like novel about the search for the brain's capacity to experience transcendence, and whether or not that implies a metaphysical or supernatural reality.
I am rambling. Except for some of those battered among us, I would think most have emotional and transcendent centers...God-shaped holes?...that long to be filled by something. Not sure if we are born with it, develop it as infants, or have it shaped by culture (probably some combination of the three)...but I THINK I have come to the conclusion that there is nothing there to fill it.
Pretty sad, huh? Even as a Christian, I felt that emptiness. Like Bono, I still haven't found what I'm looking for.
I don't see it as a god-shaped hole. i see it as human need for connection with others, for connection with the universe, e.g. the natural world. just because we invented religions to fill those instinctive needs does not mean the things we made up to fill it are real. it just means we hijacked something that has evolutionary advantage and answered it with something else.
just because we crave potato chips does not mean we have a need for them or that they are 'real food'. we instinctively crave foods in certain combinations and we instinctively eat all we can get out hands on to fend of potential future famine, but how we fulfill that instinctive craving says nothing about its evolutionary 'purpose' or advantage. looking at the 'desire' in terms of how it served the evolving human and then looking how it can be honestly today fulfilled by they atheist is a more productive way of looking at it. me? I get it all by volunteering in various capacities to restore prairie. I get a community to socialize with and bond with in the natural landscaping club and the work days, i get connection to nature working on restoration and planting projects, and so on. It isn't a 'god-shaped' hole. it is a connections-with-the-universe shaped hole, and the two i see as most important are the people part of the universe and the natural world part. anywhere those things intersect are where i find awe and feel complete.
goprarie, well said. I agree with the "connections with the universe" shaped hole. What has made agnosticism/atheism hard for me has been trying to think of that hole as something OTHER than a god-shaped hole. That "god-shaped" part is what was placed upon me by my upbringing, and later my experience in religion (I was told that religion was the key to filling that hole). I think the atheist community does not do a good job of recognizing the power of that hole in people's lives...but Christians have. If we used the same "evangelistic" techniques as Christians, we might do a better job of debunking and "deconverting". But, for me, that would be a violation of integrity.
But I agree with you that the "connection" issue is what is there, and what drives so much of what we do. Great point!
Dear Brother Crow,
Thanks for the thoughtful and refreshingly honest reply.
My sense is that the heart is our intuitive self, that portion of our consciousness which is and must be devoid of a known language. Every poet, every writer worth a penny strains to express the heart's groanings; there is not a single true lover that has ever announced, "These words I've sent to you express exactly and totally how I feel," for if he believed his own words, he would not have also sent flowers. In fact, the very use of the word "feel" in the above statement intimates that we do not THINK our way into love with our lovers; love is not even maintained by the cool ratiocinations of the intellect. Love is mute in it's own native tongue; the heart prompts the mind, and out of the mouth spills meager translations. We speak in shadows; every word is a symbol.
But I think most rationalists who claim to be atheists ignore this whole aspect of the human life. Most rationalists I have known believe that language -- properly formed in grammatical and logical structures and infused with empirical evidence -- does indeed express all. True materialists cannot really allow that there is a part of the human psyche that is primary and yet beyond language, beyond expression; nor can they permit that all language is symbolic. It opens them up to too much doubt; and it portends that perhaps the cosmos is open and not closed, or that "knowing" is more than a matter of the reasoning mind. After all, each of us (perhaps) remembers sitting in our college dorm rooms and debating into the early morning hours whether, in fact, the existence of the table in front of us could be proved. Alas, we screamed in complaint, it could not be proved absolutely! Our language could not get us to what our hearts knew, for we knew that the table DID exist, and yet we could not express through language what our hearts "knew" plainly.
And we also knew in those debates that this fact of the weakness of language can be a very effective hiding place: we can DEMAND evidence we know cannot make a damned bit of difference, for the heart makes its own choices, its own concessions. If my roommate chooses to deny the existence of the table he barks his shin on every dawn as he heads for the bathroom, then I cannot help him -- ever. He has chosen.
Peace to you, and thank you for your honesty.
Bill Gnade
Dear Brother Crow,
Allow the obsessive-compulsive in me to dot every i: In ¶2 of my last reply, it should read "Love is mute in ITS own native tongue…" Perhaps I here apologize to no one but myself, but I am sorry for suggesting that the possessive form of it was that easy poseur, it's.
Peace and mirth,
Bill Gnade
Dear Mr. Holman,
Hopefully this gets kicked over to your email in time, but your fine comments regarding Jesus' alleged bigotry are posted on the wrong thread. You've meant them for Mr. McCall. Alas, right now they rest inside the thread of Brother Joe's interesting -- but unrelated -- post.
Peace,
Bill Gnade
But my heart wants magic, mystery, and the sense of wonder that can be part of the journey of faith and belief.
Whether it's my "heart" that wants it, I'm not sure, but I know it's my being, my self that wants it and often gets it, just by looking around. This world often appears to me as though here by magic. It didn't have to be here, I often feel. In fact, it's often amusingly absurd! Is this existentialism? Perhaps. But it's also reality, to me.
Recently, I've been back reading about the latest theories of cosmology, about the hot big bang and the multiverse. And since I've been trained as a physicist, long retired, I'm tackling a paper by George Ellis, Issues in the Philosophy of Cosmology. Talk about your mysteries! These are definitely out of this world. :-)
Comment moved. Thanks, Bill.
(JH)
Dear Goprairie,
Thank you for this wonderful comment. I love that you are working to save and rebuild prairie land (some of us are trying to save prayer-ry land, but that is another matter altogether, and proof that I make dreadful puns). Seriously, thanks for what you do.
Perhaps, for fun, you will permit me to note that you do not have a "God-shaped-hole" in your heart; you've got a "prairie-dog-shaped-hole" in your heart. I mean, such "Dog-shaped-holes" dot the prairie, no?
I, for one, being a real fan of that little creature, do have something of a prairie-dog-hole in my heart. Who wouldn't? I mean, I'm sorry, but they've got my heart.
Forever indebted to you for your kind service,
Bill Gnade
bill gnade wrote:
I wonder: if you were not raised with any idea of God or the supernaturalism, then how could you associate God with anything, and how could those associations be "negative?"
How can you NOT desire what you've never known? And what does this REALLY suggest here? It seems to me that you've made some other decision: you don't want God to exist.
I'll answer these questions together. Suppose I told you that there is a power greater than God (I'll call him Super God, or SG) and SG isn't as nice as God. In fact, SG enjoys causing pain here on earth and in the afterlife and there is nothing you can really do about it. Rather than Heaven awaiting you once you die, you've got nothing but misery and heartache, at least until SG gets bored of tormenting you and kills off your soul into nothingness. Would you believe me? Why not? Probably because I have no evidence whatsoever as to the existence of SG. How about if I said that instead of being evil, SG is even nicer than God, would you believe me then? It has nothing to do with how you feel about SG. There is no evidence to convince you that SG exists and thus you don't believe in SG.
Now, would you want to live in a world with SG (the evil SG)? I'm guessing you probably wouldn't. But not wanting to live in a world with SG has nothing to do with your disbelief in SG. You don't believe in SG because nothing convinces you that he exists. Your not wanting to live in a world with SG is just a statement of your opinion but has nothing to do with your belief about his existence.
And you weren't raised with any belief in SG, so what gives you the right to make any negative associations with SG in the first place? Obviously, you can listen to my description of SG and draw your own conclusions. If you aren't sure, you can do further research about SG until you are satisfied. You are still capable of thinking about supernatural beings even though you don't believe in them.
I think maybe the reason you are having trouble with these questions is because your default assumption is that God exists and thus you think that everyone else should also think that God exists and if they don't then there is something that is making them not see the obvious. But the obvious for me is that there is no God because there is absolutely no evidence that God exists. The burden of proof is on God and he has not met it. No matter how I feel about God, it does not change the lack of evidence. Obviously, you don't have to have negative feelings about God to not believe as Brother Crow has demonstrated.
"Dog shaped holes" - I fear it is a trick - you are trying to get me to agree to that then will claim i am dyslexic and not an atheist after all - but I have SEEN the t-shirt -
"Untied, Dyslexic Church of Dog" so you cannot fool me in that way.
The prairies I work on thus far are much too small to serve as home to them, but I do take delight that in Wiley Park Zoo in South Dakota, they have escaped their zoo enclosure and now freely inhabit the wild lawn between the zoo and the RV park.
bill - your attempts to characterize various 'kinds' of atheists and define their 'flaws' does not ring true to my experiences. atheists are not certain of what is. they are merely certain that SOME things are NOT. namely god. they are specifically certain that the religion they were raised in it not true, or that the religions they have been exposed to are not true. and they 'know' this by using logic and reason. but they do not know all of everything else about what is still mysterious about the universe with certainty, and do not claim to.
for example, i 'know' that prayer cannot work as taught to me because the god i was taught was supposed to be all knowing, including the future, and all powerful. so if god could answer my prayer, therefore changing the future, god did not know that future. if i pray, and god can answer the prayer, god must have free will to change things, and therefore cannot be all knowing about the future. and god would not favor only those who had the selfishness to ask for help if he were the kind and merciful god i was taught. I 'know' that version of god cannot exist.
i look at a red glass that has been sitting on the table. i am not 'certain' that i know everything about it. i know only what my senses tell me. i know it is red and NOT green. i can feel its shape. I can know that it will hold water. it feels cold to me, but i would not claim it to be actually colder than the wood table under it because i 'know' all things in the same space are the same temperature. i cannot see if it has colors in the ultraviolet range that a bee might see, and i cannot smell the last thing that was in it before it was washed like a dog might be able to, but I can, within the realm of my senses and the laws of nature and phsyics, 'know' certain things about it. I can slso know certain things are NOT true about it based on laws of pysics that I know and on what I can observe based on the limits of my sense. I cannot rule out other thngs about it that i cannot sense. I do not have the arrogance to do that.
most atheists i know patently reject all defined religions, but are open to the possiblity of yet unknown or yet undetectable forces but we usually assume they will be scientific in nature, and not gods or spirits.
Dear Goprairie,
No, no trickery here. Just "plain" fun. I couldn't resist, especially since I, too, have seen that very funny t-shirt.
Alas, if God were as cute as a prairie dog, well, I'd choose dyslexia in a second.†
Blissings!
Gnade
†This sentence makes no sense whatsoever.
"Blissings!
Gnade
†This sentence makes no sense whatsoever."
Footnotes? Wordplay? Joking around? This is a SERIOUS site about SERIOUS topics; do you want us to get BANNED for horsing around, man???
I heard John is out of town, so we might get away with it JUST THIS ONCE!
Goprairie,
Thank you for the kind reply to my statements. Of course, I had no intention of defining experience for different types of atheists. My point, really, is that we have heads that are quite clearly estranged from our hearts. And that, or so I believe, is just one of the many places we find that we are indeed estranged.
RE: your thoughts on prayer
I don't believe that if God "knows" the future it precludes the possibility of His changing it. Fore-knowledge is not the same as pre-determination, or so I believe. But this is a topic for another place and another time. Christianity at least claims that God knows the beginning and the end. But I don't think that my simple statement means that everything in between must be determined and immutable.
ON LOGIC and FAITH
I appreciate that you use logic and reason to reach some if not all of your ultimate beliefs or conclusions. But I am certain that you must also know that countless Christians also use logic and reason in the formation of their own beliefs. I believe it was the Protestant Luther who decried reason, calling it a whore. Why? Because he hated that the Catholic Church was overly-wedded to reason in its metaphysics and its polemics. That is why some folks believe that Protestantism is the forebear of atheism in the West, for it divorced reason and faith and placed them in isolation from each other. I have raised the question elsewhere on this blog whether the self can prove its existence to itself. So far, not a single person has disagreed with my assertion that it can't. The self in this sense is indeed estranged; this estranged and isolated self I would call the heart, that part of us that posits -- by faith -- that we have selves that exist. Faith, at least to me, is the first act of any living person; everything we call knowledge is faith-based.
That you trust your senses regarding the red glass is true; that your senses cannot tell you that the glass is red is also true. All you can say is that you have the sensation of red; all you can say is that you feel something -- and from that effect infer a cause, namely, a glass. But all you can be sure of is the sensation. Across the chasm from sensation to cause, we find a bridge called faith.
FOR FUN: THE SPEED OF LIGHT AND YOUR EXISTENCE
Let me note this: If the speed of light is finite, and yet it is the fastest thing in the universe, then it follows that there is no present; there is no present tense. Every perception MUST be delayed; we only know the past. From object to eyeball, from fingertip to glass, there is a delay. Hence, we only know a present by inference; but such an inference is rooted in faith.
Let me go with this further. If the speed of light is finite, then know that when you look at the stars in the night sky over Wisconsin none of those stars exists. Only their light "exists." Every single one of them may be gone. We CANNOT know they are there.
Now, go with me even further. All your life light has been bouncing off of you, traveling about the earth. Imagine for a moment that the light from your skin travels out from the earth and into space. Assuming that you are only about 40-years-old, then you are, in a very real sense, 40-light-years old, too. What does this mean? It means at least this: to the overwhelming majority of the universe, YOU DO NOT EXIST! Anyone 100 light years away CANNOT know you exist. But, and here's the rub -- YOU DO EXIST! So, alas, we have a problem: Most of the universe cannot even know that life on earth exists -- and yet it does. Nearly every quadrant of the universe could never -- ever -- be shown ANY evidence of your existence, and yet you do in fact exist.
What does this say about our sense of knowledge? What does this say about our demands for proofs for the existence of God? For if you exist and yet the universe cannot and does not know it, then perhaps God exists and you cannot know it -- or do not know it -- yet!
Lastly, you ask for proof for God's existence, but I have none. But what if I said that the sun is God? You might counter that the sun is nothing more than a fusion reactor where the helium atom is smashed about. But what if I said this: How do you know God is not a fusion reactor? How do you know God is not a big ball of gas?
What I am saying to you is that just because some scientist has explained something, it does not follow that the scientist has not described the evidence which points to God. God may be proved by my pointing to a prairie dog. How do you know that such evidence is not evidence?
Peace to you,
Bill Gnade
Goprairie,
Thanks for noticing "blissings." I think I coined it; I surely have never seen anyone else use it. The word was born in my on-line friendship with a person who first visited my lonely, disheveled "other" blog, Peace and Mirth. It marks my hope that I can join with others in the pursuit of bliss.
Yes, I believe John is away. Quick, pass me another note!†
Be well, dear soul.
Bill Gnade
†Shamelessly flirting with detention hall, no doubt ...
Brother Crow:
Good post. I too have that sense that I wish I could go back and believe. My family believes, most of my friends too. It would be nice to be "in" again. But alas, it is not to be. Since there isn't a Big Daddy there's nothing for me to go back to.
Oh well. Just have to face life as we always have. On our own, with help from friends, family, etc. But without a big, powerful, invisible friend. After all that what we have done all along. It's just that now we know it.
no time now for notes, but here is some GUM - try to chew it discreetly - later
Bill:
For if you exist and yet the universe cannot and does not know it, then perhaps God exists and you cannot know it -- or do not know it -- yet!
Or from your POE posts at your own site:
For all any one of us knows, an all-wise God would say to us, "You know, I am destroying evil, I am alleviating suffering; and this is the ONLY way for me to do so. This is omniscience intervening."
It doesn't fly. Just look at it from another angle:
Perhaps God does not exist and you don't know it yet.
OR
For all any of us knows, an all-wise God would say to us, "I’m not destroying evil. It would only take me less than a nanosecond if I did decide to. You’re on your own. This is omniscience not intervening.”
Bruce put it simply in saying that your default assumption is that God exists. This is a presupposition. It forces you to direct all consideration toward upholding the presupposition. As long as you hold it, you won't be able to grasp what we see.
I know this because I was there. Only a couple years ago I could not grasp the concept of there not being a God. Atheism was, from my point of view, just impossible. It seemed like a form of brain damage.
I can't point to a magic moment when I shed the presupposition of God's existence. But it happened. And it was just so flaming obvious. Years of apologetic scales fell off my eyes. And now I can't understand how I was so blind for so long.
I'm not really inviting you over to the "dark side". It is NOT a pleasant journey. I don't really wish it on anyone. Like Brother Crow said in the original post, there's a cost, and there is distress, and there is loss, and there is longing for the comfort you used to feel.
Dear Leopardus,
Hello!!!
Ahh, to the contrary, it flies very well. Your inversion of my argument is fallacious. I have offered premises -- and drawn a conclusion -- based on real evidence. You cannot do this. My speed of light analogy is absolutely true -- if you accept the premises as given. Do you doubt them? I have at least shown that something can indeed exist that cannot be KNOWN to exist. You can only show me that I am wrong about something. That is a big difference, my friend. One is a paradoxical fact of the universe; the other is a mere mistake on my part. Your position is that something doesn't exist and I am mistaken about it. Mine is much more frightening: SOMETHING DOES EXIST AND WE CAN'T KNOW IT. Yours is rooted in epistemology -- my epistemology. The other is rooted in the very fabric of the cosmos. If the speed of light is finite, then we can only be humble about what we claim to know -- and not know.
Besides, I am not here in any way attempting to show that God exists! I have not assumed Him at all; Bruce's criticism is wrong and is itself presumptuous. Nowhere have I attempted to "prove" God's existence. Look around, you'll find no such attempt.
As for the quote you pulled from my series on the Problem Of Evil, a series I have claimed at DC has solved that problem, I thank you for the reference, but it is misplaced. You see, look again at what I wrote:
For all any one of us knows, an all-wise God would say to us, "You know, I am destroying evil, I am alleviating suffering; and this is the ONLY way for me to do so. This is omniscience intervening. [emphasis mine]
Please note what I've said in bold. I've taken a passive, even humble position here; I am making no claim other than this: If we posit God as omniscient and yet none of us even knows what omniscience is like, or what it means, then we cannot pronounce judgment on the Problem of Evil in relation to God. We have instantly ended the "debate" because we have agreed that we do not know how omniscience MUST behave.
What I have really done is shown in abstraction -- without presupposing God's existence -- that the argument from evil (or lack of evidence) fails on simply rational terms. In my POE series, I even show that if God is the author of evil, the Incarnation absolves Him -- it forces us to make a choice -- and I do this without presupposing that He exists.
I have now shown in several different ways at this site that "knowledge" is rife with difficulty. And I've done this without once citing scripture; I have taken premises as given to me and I have shown the variety of conclusions drawn from them are entirely problematic -- even for atheists. Most people here have never considered that they cannot prove themselves to themselves: it is so strange that it has eluded them. Most people have never considered that if the speed of light is finite, then there is no present, and the universe -- its existence -- is posited by faith.† That idea, too, is so strange it eludes most people. Most people here have not noticed this overwhelming problem of estrangement, estrangement from BEING, from self, from language, from our senses, and from the universe. Please note that I point out these oddities of being, or the lack thereof of BEING, without Christian verbiage, Bible-thumping or appeals to magic.
So, I defy you to show that my default position is that God exists. My first step in everything I've done since coming to DC is to begin with the fact that we posit our own idea of self by faith. That's it. THAT is my default position, one that comes precariously close to saying that the self does not exist to itself: it has no proof. Moreover, my position includes this secondary idea that the senses are estranged from nature.
But we have another issue here, one that you and Bruce have not apparently noticed: You both have presuppositions too! And you know what? I believe that they HAVE TO BE identical to mine. Or can you prove to yourself that you do, in fact, exist? If so, please, I beg of you, please share it with me. I truly want to know; I want the gift of certainty. But please be careful, for if you do say you can prove yourself to yourself but can't share that with others, then you admit to estrangement between yourself and the rest of us. You are a solipsist.
Please know that I am honored that you would take the time to visit my website and read all of my POE series. You are too kind to do that. I mean it. I can tell that few here have shown me that courtesy (thanks to statcounters, I can "tell"). I am sorry you found the series incomplete and uncompelling, though I don't think you have told me why. But I have made another claim at this site, in this comment here, that a certain former Christian now turned atheist could not have written the book he did on the POE had he seen my argument. This is probably unbelievably conceited of me. I will take that risk. I am saying that the POE that is still being presented in the newest books is passé and, essentially, over. (The comments made by the author - the ones you'll find if you follow the above link -- simply fall short of how Christendom has answered the POE. His book is -- at least to me -- rendered pointless.) In the end, all I can offer you is myself (assuming I exist), my words, my way of looking at things, and the arguments shaped by my experience. But most of all I can share with you my doubts. For that, really, is what I am doing.
Peace to you, dear Leopardus, my spotted feline friend (so quick and cunning -- and cute?).
Bill Gnade
PS. Don't think I do not know the stresses of atheism. Trust me, Leopardus, I know. I know. I hurt with you. Trust me. Did you ever see the movie poster for Pink Floyd's, "The Wall?" That was me.
†I believe that if the speed of light is not finite but instantaneous, we could not know the age of the universe. (Any physicists here who could correct me on that?)
Brother Crow,
Just want you to know I sympathize with you. I was once at a place where I was ready to put aside a belief in any god and it was a very sad and achey time. I agree with everything you say about our cultural Christianity being easy and spoiled...the worst display of disrespect and greed I've witnessed was at an AWANA function...needless to say my children are not involved in AWANA anymore, for other reasons as well.
Anyway, I have to wonder if the oneness with the universe is part of God's plan. I do consider myself a Christian because I am convinced about Jesus, but when I met God there was definitely a deeper connection with nature. That's when I began to dig deeper into science. If you think of the movie The Matrix, with the binary columns running to form everything...that's how I see the physical world. It's what's behind the complex structures of atomic particles that interests me. Something is holding it all together and I definitely feel a part of it.
I hope you are able to find God. I didn't "become a Christian" to find him. I hope this doesn't sound patronizing, I sincerely ache for you and hope you find what you are looking for.
Excellent post brother crow, thoroughly enjoyed it! Although i'm not a christian- have a 'Muslim' background but don't have any religious connections whatsoever- but haven't got anything against people who prefer to adopt that stance, who abide with & adhere to the 'teachings' of that particular religion/faith. If you're a Christian, Muslim, Jew- whatever creed- so long as you derive 'inspiration' from it then why debunk it.....? After all, even when we feel there's no need to fear anything, something is lurking just around the corner to bring you back down to reality, therefore the moral is: we've only got one life, so make the most of it!
bill gnade said:
Bruce's criticism is wrong and is itself presumptuous. Nowhere have I attempted to "prove" God's existence. Look around, you'll find no such attempt.
Just wanted to point out that I never said you intended to prove God's existence and failed. I was merely answering your questions. Those questions had nothing to do with a proof of God but rather about how an atheist can have "feelings" about something which they don't believe in.
What I did say is:
your default assumption is that God exists and thus you think that everyone else should also think that God exists and if they don't then there is something that is making them not see the obvious.
Now if I am wrong about that then fine. I merely implied it from your questions, but I could be wrong. You never did respond to my answer to your questions though, so for all I know, I am correct in this assumption.
I suppose this is supposed to evoke sympathy?
For all the "cost" of athiesm seems to be, is a smug feeling of intellectual superiority, as an excuse for verbal abuse of the religious. At least on the part of the "New Atheists". I am guessing as this is a "Debunking Christianity" Blog, you would embrace that movement?
To qualify my last description, I am not trying to to apply that stereotype to every athiest, yet it seems to me like a majority do not seem to mind promoting it.
tim, I guess there are as many different types of asshole atheists are there are asshole christians. Atheist is not synonymous with "a smug feeling of intellectual superiority, as an excuse for verbal abuse of the religious." Yes, atheists are people, too. However, as you note, this site is dedicated to debunking christianity, so buyer beware, enter at your own risk, yada yada. On occassion we miss the mark, but the owner/operator of this site, John Loftus, tries to keep things respectful and focused on intelligent and civil debate.
No accounting for assholes, however.
And about evoking sympathy? Furtherest thing from my mind...I do not want, deserve, and especially don't expect sympathy from christians. Having lived among them for years, I discovered that sympathy is the least of their virtues. Well, OK - not that sympathy is a virtue.
I was just telling the truth...and trying to upset some christians with the "persecution thing". Hope it worked!
I wrote this on my blog a while back:
If I were to describe how I differentiate between my Head (rational thought) and my Heart (the emotions, and instinctual side) when I was a christian, I would have normally tapped my head thrice, and then pounded my chest, perhaps.
It occurs to me, now, that I had misplaced my faith, in where my Heart IS. Putting it where it belongs, is what I do, here.
My Head is the left side of my brain. My Heart, is my right. Somewhere in between them, in a confusing clutter (sometimes) of daily events, Big Life Decisions, and just plain moment-to-moment boredom, there is a meeting place where both my bickering voices meet and chat, and therein lies my still, small voice.
It is a painful thing, to go through life with two loud voices in your head. To learn to be rid of the clutter, and meet often, would be a Good Thing... and I can attest to the power of putting your faith THERE. That could easily be mistaken for God, in more ways than you can imagine- for OTHER people have this place, too.
I realized this while musing, or praying, the only way I know how; with a cigarette in one hand, and the moon in my eyes. I'd just started listening to Eminence Front by the Who.
If you can wrap your brains around the SCALE of the cosmic joke of it, it'll give you chills, maybe.
There was a also a time in my life when I looked to a higher power I couldn't understand. I loved and was completely focused on and devoted to everything about that higher power. I literally invoked that power in every hour of my life. I learned to call upon the power and to await its sovereign will for me and to take everything that happened in my life as if it was a message.
Then I turned two, and Mommy didn't seem quite so omnipotent. :)
Post a Comment