Christianity | Way of the Mind

Tag Archive for 'christianity'Page 4 of 7

An experiment

Published

on March 21, 2007

. 7 Comments

I want you to picture yourself performing the following experiment:

1- Pick about 30 books at random. Really, randomness is important. The books are supposed to be of varied genres, authors, and so on, and it doesn’t matter whether you’ve read them before or not. The sample is supposed to include many different kinds of books: technical, political, fiction, children’s, philosophical, erotic, poetry, whatever. Don’t restrict yourself to books you figure you will like, or authors you think you agree with. As I said, randomness is vital. The best way would be for a computer to pick books from a huge catalog, randomly.

2- Read them all. Whenever you find something you agree with, or something you find inspiring or insightful, remember it. Bookmark and/or underline those parts, or copy them somewhere else.

Note: there’s no need for artificial “fairness”. Don’t feel like you have to pick at least one thing from each book, or that you must take equally from each. It’s perfectly OK to take a lot from a book and nothing from another.

3- Forget about everything you didn’t mark or copy. From now on, think of the parts you marked or copied as the “core” of those books, as the truly meaningful parts of them.

4- Use the parts you collected as a “guidebook” for your life, as a wonderful source of wisdom, knowledge and morality. (Ignore the fact that you picked whatever you already believed or agreed with.) Follow that guidebook for the rest of your life. Defend it, if necessary.

Strange experiment, isn’t it? But you probably already know what I’m getting at. I’ve just described, in a way, what virtually every Christian does with the Bible. (Those who actually read any of it, that is.)

The “random books by different, random authors” part was important, because the Bible isn’t only one book, it’s a collection of several, written by many authors who never met each other, sometimes separated by centuries, and who sometimes contradict each other. Not to mention that some parts are song lyrics, some are proverbs, some are (highly biased) history accounts, and some are laws or moral rules.

So, most Christians pick the parts they already agree with, ignore the rest, and call their favorite parts “the core of the Bible”. You’re a nice person? Pick the few love / forgiveness parts (mostly in the Gospels). You’re a bigot? Pick Leviticus, or Paul’s books in the NT. You’re suspicious of science and secular knowledge? Pick Genesis, along with some parts from Job. Want to believe God is good, loving, and just? Ignore virtually all of the Bible, and invent your own God in your mind, with the traits you want him to have (but keep calling yourself a “Christian”).

And, no matter what you do, defend the parts you’ve picked as if they represent not only the entire Bible, but Christianity itself.

Who ends up in in "heaven"? Something to think about…

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on March 10, 2007

in christianity, intelligence and religion

. 5 Comments

There have been several studies in the past whose conclusions were this: that the more intelligent and/or educated you are, the less likely you are to be religious.

Now, let’s imagine, for a minute, that the Christians are right. About everything. In other words, not only is there a God who judges people and either sends them to heaven or to hell, but he also likes/wants what Christians say he does; in other words, blind faith = good; honest doubt = bad. The Bible says as much, and quite often, too.

What’s the only possible conclusion? That heaven is full of morons! Rednecks, bigots, fundamentalists, anti-intellectuals, and the like! If the Christians are right about what their god wants, then only idiots will go to heaven; anyone with a functioning, questioning brain… anyone who says “wait a minute, this does not make logical sense!…” will surely go to hell.

Assuming the above, my question is: can a place full of idiots truly be called “heaven”? A place where you can’t have a single intelligent conversation? I don’t think so.

Much like the Muslim “72 virgins” vision of an eternal reward (which really was the greatest reward some primitive desert nomads could conceive of…), the Christian version of heaven totally fails to “sell itself” to anyone who actually takes a few minutes to think about it.

As someone once wrote, if heaven is a place full of Christians, I’d rather be in hell instead. Not that I believe either exists, of course… it’s that pesky “evidence” thing, again.

(Note: I’m not implying something like “if you’re a Christian, you’re a moron”. I’m just following on the fact that, as has been shown again and again, the more intelligent you are, the more likely you are to be a non-theist. If you go from that, then the dumber you are, the more likely you are to be a true believer… so, statistically, most idiots go to heaven and most geniuses are, supposedy, burning in hell for eternity.)

Christianity: "It makes no sense"

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on March 9, 2007

in christianity

. 25 Comments

Quoting from Daylight Atheism (I made some text bold, though):

It makes no sense whatsoever that an infinite, omnipotent god would need to incarnate himself as a human and then subject himself to an agonizing and bloody death just so he could persuade himself to forgive us and save us from the cruel fate he created for us. It makes even less sense that the all-wise creator of the universe would manifest himself in an isolated corner of the world during a primitive age of its history, teach proverbs identical to those of the other belief systems of the day, promise to return quickly to destroy the world, and then vanish utterly for a span of time now going on two thousand years, leaving behind no trace except for a few hazy memories and anonymous writings that he had ever been here at all.

I don’t think I could have said it better myself.

Making the world a worse place: the other side of the coin

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on February 7, 2007

in christianity and religion

. 11 Comments

I mentioned the “Rapture-ready” Christians in the previous post; how they actually want the world to get worse, because, according to Revelations, it’s supposed to get worse before Jesus comes, and so, by trying to make the world a better place, you’re interfering with God’s plan.

Oddly enough, there is another group of Christians whose goal is, apparently, the opposite of the previous group’s, but who end up doing mostly the same. They’re the Christians who believe that the world is God’s, and, so, it’s impossible for us “mere mortals” to really ruin it.

To them, global warming, for instance, isn’t a problem; if needed, God will just intervene, because there’s no way he would allow the earth to become uninhabitable for us, his greatest creation — indeed, his main reason for creating the ~~world~~ universe, according to many.

And, so… what do they end up doing? Exactly the same as those who say that the world should get worse! Fight global warming? Nah, God will take care of it; besides, global warming is “just a theory”, because not every single scientist in the world agrees on it. Wars? They’re minor things. Epidemics? Not a problem, they’re always minor and localized. Pollution? Again, this is God’s Earth — it’s incredibly arrogant to believe that we mortals can ever ruin God’s work. And shows a lack of faith, too: don’t you trust God?

And so, there are pages like this, or this, whose main message is “there is no global warming”, and, therefore, there’s no need to worry or do anything about it.

Making the world a worse place. Whether you actually want it, or simply don’t believe it can happen.

Making the world a worse place: the ‘Rapture-Ready’ Christians

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on February 4, 2007

in christianity, religion and war

. 27 Comments

I just followed this link from The New Atheist: The Troubling Worldview of the ‘Rapture-Ready’ Christian. If it doesn’t scare you at least a little, I don’t see what could.

The article is written by a Christian pastor, by the way. And even he is disturbed by the “Rapture-Ready” Christians.

I have never met any in person (it seems to be a mostly US-based phenomenon, and I live in Portugal), but I’ve read their writings, web pages and forums. And they’re a crazy bunch indeed - not really different from a “death cult” like Jim Jones’. The problem is that, unlike those cults, they’re not seen as obvious lunatics by other Christians; they see them as more devout, with different priorities, but, since they say the words “Jesus Christ” so often, people are reticent to say that they’re actually a problem.

And another problem is that, like the article above says, they have the ear of the White House, and influence foreign policy.

According to those people, the world is supposed to get worse and worse, until all Christians are “raptured”; then the real End Times will follow, according to Revelations; it will be pretty bad for those still on Earth, but eventually Jesus will come back.

So, if it’s supposed to get worse before it gets better, then trying to prevent things from getting worse is… going against God’s plan! After all, by trying to have any semblance of peace in the Middle East, or by fighting disease, pollution and global warming, you are simply delaying the Rapture.

Let me say it in another way: according to that kind of Christians, there is no reason to try and make the world a better place. Either for them, or for their children (actually, they tend to expect the Rapture during their lives, so there’s really no need to think of the future, since, to them, there isn’t one). There’s no point in peace talks, medicine, “green” power, and all that. The world is supposed to “go to hell”, but Christians are “raptured” to a safe place, and the ones who remain on Earth are mostly damned anyway.

And, if you disagree with them, you’re not a “real Christian”, of course.

Now, I don’t want to (re)start any conspiracy theories here, but just think about how conservatives have, for decades, denied the reality of global warming, for instance. Or how they’ve started a war in the Middle East, and are already talking about the next one (Iran). How they ban many promising avenues of medical research, due to their religious beliefs.

See what I mean?

Why do Christians hate homosexuals (but not shellfish-eaters)?

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on January 19, 2007

in bible, christianity and religion

. 108 Comments

There’s a recent post at The Atheist Ethicist, The Source of Hatred, where Alonzo explores the question of why theists hate homosexuals.

According to him, religion is not the cause. It’s the excuse. It’s what bigots use to rationalize their bigotry: “the Bible says it’s an abomination.”

But… Leviticus also says that eating shellfish is an abomination! Yet most Christians probably eat shrimp, and, anyway, there was never any persecution of shellfish-eaters. Why is that? Why is one sentence taken as “God’s law”, and another just as “ancient dietary laws”, when they’re both forbidden in the same book, and the condemnation for both (”abomination”) is the same?

The answer, of course, is that people are already bigots (though an important source of that bigotry may well be church sermons). Saying “It’s God’s command” instead of admitting to their prejudice makes them feel better.

I loved this part in the article:

If biblical prohibition were the real source of condemnation, we would find ourselves in a society where shellfish eaters and bankers would be prohibited from participating in youth organizations like the Boy Scouts. Those who insist on such a ban would argue that those who so flagrantly violate God’s law cannot possibly be moral, and clearly cannot be considered good role models for our children.

What type of message does it give our children to be a member of a troop whose troop leader is known to be a practicing shellfish eater or banker – when the Bible so clearly identifies these acts as a violation of His law? These children will no doubt come to think that all of God’s law are open to question. This type of moral relativism is the last thing that we need to be teaching impressionable young minds.

Intelligent Design, PR and fallacies

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on January 18, 2007

in christianity, intelligent design and religion

. 36 Comments

Lord J-Bar has a post called Intelligent Design Is Actually Quite Clever (from a PR Standpoint) (see what reading PA prevents you from missing? :)), whose reading I recommend, and which probably deserves a printout to give to any friend of yours who believes that “there may be something to that ID thing “.

Some excerpts:

Since most of the public has no idea that scientific theories must be falsifiable, ID advocates can push a “theory” that is impossible to falsify, and the public accepts it out of a lack of knowledge. When actual scientists or people who understand science speak out, IDists turn around paint themselves as victims of scientific dogma, saying that science is a religion that refuses to allow new ideas and will never let go of its evolution “myth.”

and:

Finally, Americans like to encourage free and open discussion. It’s an essential part of our culture. When ID advocates pop up demanding equal time and debate, Americans feel inclined to support that debate, regardless of the fact that no actual debate exists within the scientific community. Now, I’m all for freedom of thoughts and discussion, but that debate should not occur in a high school classroom. If we were to let every fringe idea that comes up have “equal time” in science classrooms, then schools had better include ghosts, Bigfoot, and the Hindu creation myth in their curriculums.

What am I getting at? Even though most scientists scoff at those who support ID, we need to realize that ID advocates have actually been extremely clever. They’ve done an excellent job disguising the scientific shortcomings of ID by relying on public ignorance. Furthermore, they appeal to Americans’ sense of freedom and equal opportunity to demand equal time in science classrooms. Since most people are confused about the nature of ID, it sounds like a reasonable demand. Plus, the straight-up lies that IDists tell by claiming that there’s a debate within science over the validity of evolution certainly helps their case. To the average layperson, it might sound like evolution is not accepted just because a few people with science PhDs, regardless of whether or not they are biologists, speak out against evolution.

That is, indeed, a tactic I’ve seen used on the web. IDists present their creationism as an “alternate theory”, using some big, scientific-sounding words, and not mentioning God too obviously… and when scientists, naturally, say “that’s bullshit”, they turn to the people and say “see, it’s just dogma! They worship evolution like a religion, and are too closed-minded to consider alternatives! But don’t YOU want both sides of the story?” People, naturally, say yes.

IDers cleverly make use of a common fallacy: that, between two opposite positions, the truth is probably in the middle. As Dawkins (I believe) said, that’s not always the case - sometimes, one side is simply wrong. If you say that 2+2=4 and I say it’s 5, the answer isn’t 4.5, but still 4. There’s no “evolution debate” among biologists; the amount of evidence is large enough so that anyone who managed to disprove evolution would have a huge amount of explaining to do. In other words, there is a lot of evidence for evolution, and zero for creationism. In yet other words (as J-Bar suggests), if all you have to do for people to consider your side as “equally valid” is present an “alternate theory”, never mind the evidence, then the Flying Spaghetti Monster is equally deserving of mention…

8 questions for so-called Christians

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on January 14, 2007

in christianity and religion

. 37 Comments

Here’s a short test for Christians (and anyone who wants to understand them). Just answer the following questions, in your mind, with a “yes” or a “no”.

Do you believe homosexuals should be killed? Not just “they’re going to hell”, but actually executed?
Do you believe women are inferior to men, should remain submissive, and can never be allowed to teach men or have authority over them?
Do you believe slavery is OK?
Do you believe disobedient children should be killed?
Do you believe that, when waging war, it is proper to commit genocide, killing every man, woman and child in the enemy nation — except for, in some particular cases, female virgins, who can be taken as “spoils”?
Do you believe that anyone who suggests to a Christian that he follow other gods should be killed?
Do you believe that an old grandmother, who lived a life of caring for others, bringing joy to dozens, will be condemned to an afterlife of eternal suffering if she didn’t accept Jesus as her savior?
Do you believe that there are cases in which a raped woman should be killed along with, or even instead of, the rapist?

If you answered “no” to even one of the above, you’re not a real Christian. You believe you know more than the God you say you worship (and you call atheists “arrogant”?!?). You’re guilty of picking and choosing from your divinely inspired holy book, ignoring more than half of it. You only follow the teachings you already agree with. In effect, you’re creating your own religion.

If you answered “yes” to even one of the above, then you are a repulsive, evil monster. Please never visit this blog again, and go play in traffic, or at least don’t reproduce.

A virtual cookie to the first who spots and identifies the implication of combining the previous 2 paragraphs.

The Blasphemy Challenge

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on January 12, 2007

in atheism, christianity and religion

. 11 Comments

I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin.

- Jesus, Mark 3:28-29 (NIV)

I’m a bit late mentioning this one, but better late than never, right?

You may have heard of the Blasphemy Challenge. It’s a site that asks people to create a small video of them saying “I deny the Holy Spirit”, and upload it to YouTube.

According to Jesus, blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is the one unforgivable sin. Anything else may be forgiven, but not that. Anyone who does so is damned.

Well, I’m too lazy to create a video, and I don’t have anything better than my cell phone’s camera to do it, so I’ll have to skip the video. But believe me when I say the following:

I, Pedro Timóteo, deny the Holy Spirit, and every other made-up supernatural crap.

And, no, I’m not afraid. Not because I’m “incredibly brave” or anything. Unlike Christians love to say, I don’t “know deep inside that there is a God”. I’m not denying his “obvious” existence because I’m “angry at God”, “want to rebel”, or “want no moral rules” above me.

I’m not afraid, because I have every reason to believe that there’s nothing to be afraid of.

"Proofs" of God’s existence

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on January 8, 2007

in christianity and religion

. 6 Comments

In Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, there’s a link to a hilarious list called “Hundreds of Proofs of God’s Existence“, which are nothing more than simplified, clearer versions of common arguments by theists for the existence of God.

It’s a long list, but I think it’s worth reading. Some of my favorites are below (if you’re not using the RSS feed or email subscription, you may have to click on the “Continue reading…” link to see them all):

11. ARGUMENT FROM CREATION, a.k.a. ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL INCREDULITY (I)
(1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true, and therefore God exists.
(2) Evolution can’t be true, since I lack the mental capacity to understand it; moreover, to accept its truth would cause me to be uncomfortable.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

14. ARGUMENT FROM INTELLIGENCE
(1) Look, there’s really no point in me trying to explain the whole thing to you stupid Atheists — it’s too complicated for you to understand. God exists whether you like it or not.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

15. ARGUMENT FROM UNINTELLIGENCE
(1) Okay, I don’t pretend to be as intelligent as you guys — you’re obviously very well read. But I read the Bible, and nothing you say can convince me that God does not exist. I feel him in my heart, and you can feel him too, if you’ll just ask him into your life. “For God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son into the world, that whosoever believes in him shall not perish from the earth.” John 3:16.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

Continue reading ‘"Proofs" of God’s existence’