aldenswan.com

I would guess that most people know someone who has, at some point in their life, made a major change in their belief system, such as from atheism to Christianity, or vice versa. You may have made such a change yourself.

I’ve known several people who have for a time professed one belief system (sometimes adamantly) only to abandon their beliefs at some point. One of my high school classmates, an extremely intelligent girl, was a hard-core atheist well into her college years, became a Christian. There were many friends of mine who “got saved” during the Jesus Movement, only to drift off into ambivalence (not necessarily a change in belief systems, but definitely a change in level of enthusiasm).

One friend lost his faith in God after a series of very hurtful incidents, including being shunned by his father for no apparent reason, and then divorced by his wife. He decided God couldn’t exist, based on his personal experience. He suffered from clinical depression, and eventually committed suicide (not because of atheism, mind you). Another guy I know left Christianity in favor of Judaism, and eventually became an atheist (he was also mentally unstable, as he suffered a rare form of brain cancer). However, I have known others who have left Christianity for atheism or other philosophies (Buddhism, for example), who are (as far as I know) rational, intelligent people, and who are no more depressed than I am.

What makes someone abandon one belief system for another? It’s an interesting question, and due in part to the people mentioned above and others I have not mentioned, something that I’ve occasionally pondered. The New Testament does speak - although not to any great length - of those who seemingly abandon the faith. What are we to make of this?

Scot McKnight, author, teacher and blogger, is just starting an interesting blog series called Finding Faith / Losing Faith, which should prove both interesting and enlightening. While I have, as I said, pondered the past and present spiritual status of those who have left Christianity, I have not done any serious study on the issue. I look forward to hearing what McKnight will have to say on the issue.

Dear “Christian” Nation:

Please pay attention: You are not being persecuted if people hate you because you’re a jerk.

Almost daily, as I visit the blogs of Christians and Atheists, scan and delete e-mails, and read the occasional Christian newsletter, I see examples of obvious stupidity on the parts of Christians. It is, it seems, rampant in American Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, and other para-Christian isms. If you’ve taken a look at Sam Harris’ $16.95 Letter To a Christian Nation, you’ll have seen that it was prompted by the large amount of “hate” mail he received, much of it from folks claiming to be Christians.

Harris writes:

Since the publication of my first book, The End of Faith, I have received thousands of letters and e-mails from religious believers insisting that I am wrong not to believe in God. Invariably, the most unpleasant of these communications have come from Christians. This is ironic, as Christians generally believe that no faith imparts the virtues of love and forgiveness more effectively than their own. Please accept this for what it is: the testimony of a man who is in a position to observe how people behave when their faith is challenged. Many who claim to have been transformed by Christ’s love are deeply, even murderously, intolerant of criticism. While you may ascribe this to human nature, it is clear that the hatred these people feel comes directly from the Bible. How do I know this? Because the most deranged of my correspondents always cite chapter and verse.

Harris has a good point. However, it must also be pointed out that anti-Christians are even worse… All you have to do is visit the same atheist / Darwinist blogs to see how absolutely vicious, obnoxious and stupid some (not all, or even most) atheists can be. (And, of course, Harris doesn’t appear to be bothered by viciousness when it’s directed toward Christians.) Self-righteousness is an ugly thing, whether it’s an atheistic self-righteousness or a pseudo-Christian self-righteousness.

You may note that I said “pseudo-Christian self-righteousness.” The reason is simply this: self-righteousness is simply the antithesis of Jesus’ teachings, his example and of the Christian Gospel itself. Remember things like “love your enemies,” “bless those who curse you,” and “turn the other cheek?” Remember also “take heed, he who thinks he stands, lest he fall?” What about “without love, you are as irritating as off-beat tambourine” (my interpretation). Do you understand that if you fall into any sort of self-righteousness you have, at that point, completely lost the Gospel? All of your foolish, arrogant, stupid “you atheists should rot in hell” comments are in a very real sense, un-Christian.

But wait, there’s more: Pithy sayings are an embarrassment to thinking people everywhere.

You can’t impress people with a smug, “God said it, I believe it, that settles it.” In fact, it’s my guess that there’s a very good chance that you’d completely embarrass yourself in any intelligent conversation with a non-Christian. Now, I have nothing against someone with a quiet, simple faith; some of these are, in fact, some of my favorite people and I don’t mean to offend them. But, a simple faith in the Flying Spaghetti Monster won’t do anyone any good; faith must be based in Truth as Paul points out:

For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. Romans 10:2,3

Again, we find ourselves back to self-righteousness.

The people I am really speaking to are the smug, obnoxious folks who think that a bumper-sticker slogan is a great thing to yell at an atheist. A month or so ago an atheist friend of mine was confronted by a number of these obnoxious folks, who uses such witticisms as:

1. “Thank God for the Atheists!”
2. “I’ll pray for you!”
3. “I don’t believe in atheists!”
4. “God bless you!”
5. “So, do you, like, believe that the world just poofed itself into existence with no Creator?”

To you, I ask simply that you please shut up and start trying to use that brain (and heart) that God gave you.

Now, I know that there are stupid people everywhere, and that stupid Christians are no more stupid than stupid non-Christians (I mean, after all, you do believe in God, so I give you credit for that). But seriously, go back to my first point (about the persecution of jerks) and give it some thought. If an atheist is a stupid jerk, it’s nothing to me. However, if you say you’re a Christian and you’re a stupid, loud-mouthed jerk, it embarrasses all of us, and just gives a sense of credibility to people like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and others who hold you up as the example of the social devolution that religion causes.

Okay?

As I have said before, I have wondered, reading The God Delusion, whether Richard Dawkins is ignorant, delusional, or intentionally deceptive. I am presuming that he is not unintelligent and that he understands basic logic, which is what has confused me as I’ve read through the book. I would have expected something more polished and well-argued, something to actually make people think, and perhaps doubt. This, however, is not the case.

Today I followed a Telic Thoughts link to a May 12 article by Dawkins on TimesOnline entitled “How dare you call me a fundamentalist” where he, in that winning way that he has, attempts to rebut some critics of his book. It is an interesting read, and if you haven’t read any Dawkins in the past, this is perhaps all the Dawkins you will ever need.

He starts by responding to criticism by other atheists that he uses “shrill, strident, intemperate, intolerant, ranting language,” then moves on to criticism that he is ignorant of the religions he criticizes. As in the book itself, his response to this 2nd question is nothing but rhetoric, and then he avoids having to make any real response by sending folks to read “‘Courtier’s Reply’ on P. Z. Myers’s splendid Pharyngula website” which he says “he cannot better.” If he cannot do better than “Courtier’s Reply,” then he should probably just give up; it is nothing but an attempt to justify Dawkins’ repeated straw man arguments, and it’s just ridiculous. Of course, Dawkins has no valid rebuttal and no excuse for failing to understand things he attacks. Saying things like “[t]here is no such thing as a Christian child: only a child of Christian parents” and “[m]ost believers echo Robertson, Falwell or Haggard, Osama bin Laden or Ayatollah Khomeini” can only be attributed to either ignorance or lying (and these quotes are from his rebuttal!).

He also objects to being called a fundamentalist, and tries to draw a distinction between passion and fundamentalism (fundamentalists apparently don’t change their minds). As a scientist, of course, he will change his mind if confronted with evidence. Of course, he doesn’t mention that fundamentally he believes that only evidence that can be scientifically verified can be considered.

Last week I was leaning toward the conclusion that Dawkins’ use of bad logic, mis-characterization and outright fiction was intentional. However, after reading this rebuttal, I’m starting to believe that he is, after all, simply delusional.