It seems like a lot of people are having trouble with this for some reason, so here's the thing.
I'm an atheist.
I'll let you recover from that shock for a moment, and let that sink in... Good? Okay. So, for those of you who didn't swoon in disbelief, faint from shock, or run to the hills fleeing my godless blasphemy, let me explain:
Once upon a time (which incidentally, is how I think The Bible should have opened), I was a Christian. Yes, really. I didn't come to Atheism and Anti-theism by accident, or from being jaded, abused, mocked, tossed asunder, or looked on with disdain. All those things happened coincidentally, and have no relevance on my chosen lack of religion. Those things still do happen from time to time, and that is just human nature.
So how did I come to Atheism? I did what a vast majority of Christians still don't do: I read The Bible. Cover to cover. I read it... well... religiously, at one point. After I read it, I read it again. And again. I read multiple versions of it. I still have several incarnations of it on my bookshelf... in the fiction section... under Lord of the Rings, and a plethora of R.A. Salvatore novels. No matter how many times I read it, and regardless of how many adaptations of it I read, it still does not make sense. Not at all. Not a whit. Not as proof of an indisputable series of facts to believe in without question. Nope. Though I will concede that as an allegory, it does have some valid points, and as a fable, it does have merit, it is also filled to the brim with violence, hate, bigotry, incest, bloodshed, famine, rape, and atrocities that if filmed for any modern day movie would instantly be grounds for branding it with an NC-17 rating.
From a very young age, I had questions. I had questions in spades. I had more questions than there were satisfactory answers, and that made me a sinner, which is okay, because according to that book, everyone is a sinner. According to that book, everyone is absolved already, even for sins they haven't yet committed. We're even absolved from the sins of our fathers. Where, then, is the logic that we are offending this wizard in the sky if we don't ask for the forgiveness that we are supposed to already have, because he descended from heaven and washed our sins away already? By way of comparison, if I decide to cook dinner for my wife because I love her and want to show her my love, I don't demand afterwards that she beg me to make her dinner. I've already cooked it. It's on the table, and being eaten (incidentally, I love my wife too much to ever subject her to my cooking, but the analogy stands).
I have found, by way of extensive research and empirical data collection, that The Bible is fiction. There is no evidence to back any of its claims. You're asking me to believe in a single book written by dozens of humans which, as stated in that very book, are fallible. No.
The Bible tells me that homosexuality is an abomination, when science and provable evidence demonstrate before my own eyes that it is a genetic variant.
The Bible tells me that the entirety of the human race was created from a handful of dust molded into one man, and a woman created from one rib of that one man. Science and evidence give me tangible proof that this is a physical impossibility. That evolution is the truth.
The Bible tells me that black people are black because of the curse of Canaan. Science and genetics show concretely that melanin, not voodoo, is responsible for skin tone.
Belief in the Christian god is as archaic now as belief in the Roman gods that it usurped and assimilated. We are human. We evolved, and we continue to evolve. Part of that evolution is unraveling the mysteries of life, discovering new things, and understanding things we didn't before.
We once believed that illness was caused by a small troll or gnome living in the stomach, but science has taught us otherwise.
We once thought that bloodletting would balance the humors of the body and restore it to health regardless of the ailment, but science has taught us otherwise.
We once thought that blood sacrifices would ensure a bountiful harvest, but science has taught us otherwise.
It is my hope that someday we can say, "We once thought that a magical sky ghost molded the vast universe and everything in it in six days, but science has taught us otherwise."
The unfiltered, unabated, unabashed ramblings of a man in a state of perpetual righteous indignation.
I have a lot of respect for your beliefs, or lack thereof, however you want to look at it, and devotion to it. And I can completely relate to growing up christian and being disenchanted by the dogma, as most people with a talent for critical thinking do at some point. However, we still seem to be living in a world built on the "all or nothing" philosophy that has been propagated by the stranglehold that the church has on our culture. The least bit of evidence for spiritual concepts and the bible thumpers jump to "see, the bible's right", and the least bit of evidence against the bible and most skeptics jump to the conclusion that all spirituality is just charlatans trying to control people. The same way that when the "age of reason" dawned a lot of "pseudosciences" like alchemy, herbalism, and astrology, got thrown as superstitious nonsense that probably shouldn't have.
ReplyDeleteI fully believe in the concept of intelligent design. It's hard to look at the beauty of nature and not imagine that there is the skilled hand of a talented artist at work. But it's a quantum leap to jump from that to believing that the earth, which is the center of the universe (sheesh, it's not even the center of the solar system), was created in six days, and humans were created from dust to be the dominant species of the planet and representatives of the image of god (white anglo saxon men nonetheless, which even most biblical scholars place the garden of eden somewhere in africa, so Adam was black and Jesus was Hebrew, deal with it Nazis).
By that same token, Pagan practices, attuning oneself to the cycles of the planet and phases of the moon, and the natural life around you, are entirely compatible with Gaia Theory. And a lot of concepts introduced in New Age/New Thought/New Spirituality (which aren't in fact so new) are proven by Quantum Mechanics and Thermodynamics. Everything is the same (We're all one). Energy can neither be created nor destroyed (You can't kill a soul). The observer affects the outcome with their expectations (As you believe so it is). I believe that we are moving into an age of using both sides of our brain simultaneously and reconciling science and spirituality. Whether you believe in Indigos, Star Seeds, and Rainbow Children, or not, the sudden increase of genetic anomalies cannot be denied, and I believe that they are the harbingers of this new age.
But that's just my belief. And as you frequently point out, which is another thing that I have a great deal of respect for, everyone is entitled to their own beliefs.
With all due irony: A-MEN!
Delete"It's hard to look at the beauty of nature and not imagine that there is the skilled hand of a talented artist at work."
DeleteThat's only hard because you lack knowledge. The more you understand about biology, chemistry, physics, etc., the easier it is to see that there is no designer.
Bete has a talent for making statements in an infinitely more tactful and politically correct manner than I do. Holy shit, "sheesh"? But unfortunate vocabulary notwithstanding, I largely agree with him. I also agree with you, with a few notable exceptions. And since fainting/swooning, and fleeing are emphatically not my style, (but now I have Iron Maiden stuck in my head, damn you) I'll proceed:
ReplyDeleteThe Bible DOES begin with once upon a time. "In the beginning" is merely an extremely long "once upon a time" ago. The first "once upon a time" ago, in fact. At least, if you're inclined to believe the story that follows "in the beginning," or, "once upon a time".
"Violence... atrocities," and the ensuing NC-17 rating aren't necessarily good reasons for taking issue with a good allegory or fable. There are a plethora of books that fit that description and are chock full of those things: Aesop's Fables, Lord of the Rings, Lord of the Flies, Lord of This World (okay, so that last one isn't a book -- but it's still a good allegory). Incidentally, I believe that Lord of the Flies is completely true AND scientifically proven as fact. Just ask any goth kid who ever survived high school -- or not.
I vehemently oppose you referring to the Christian God as a "wizard in the sky" on the grounds that it is slander -- you are causing grievous harm and emotional damages to all the REAL wizards... mostly the "...of the coast" variety.
Why not believe in a book written by fallible humans, fiction or not? I personally believe in: The aforementioned Golding, Illusions, The Dao, Leaves of Grass, The Art of War, Thus Spake, and most of D.H. Lawrence and Donatien Alphonse Francois. Some are fiction, others are not... but my choices in life and sense of morality (such as it was, eh, is) are influenced by them all.
This point is the one on which I most strongly disagree with you. Homosexuality is absolutely an abomination! Empirical proof, require? 1) The mysterious depletion of funds in my wallet while I was still with my ex. 2) The plates flying at my head whenever she had PMS (V=IR)+(F=ma).3) The miniature Atom Bomb after we broke up. Ground Zero? My cell phone. Also, hysteria (the real meaning) from when we tried monogamy and the scratchy record player that was her vocal chords kept skipping on "I don't feel like it." Also, there was the beautiful woman who briefly took her place. But once a month, she drastically changed her appearance and demeanor. I'm sure you've seen her in the movie she starred in -- The Exorcist.
Continued:
ReplyDeleteWhoa, now. The rib came later! They were BOTH created out of dust/mud (cue Scientology) and Adam said, "Lie down on your back." And Lilith (cue Paganism) was like, "Oh, HELL no! Missionary is boring... we're doing Cowgirl." So Adam thought that her better grasp on the physics of pleasure somehow detracted from his manhood. So Adam goes to God (cue Judaism) and is like, "Look, you gotta get this chick to be a sub." And God laughs in his face. So Adam says, "At least get her to do Doggy!" And God is like, "Bro, I do NOT want to deal with the paperwork when you try to get THAT girl to do anal if she's not in the mood." And Adam says, "Fine. I quit." But God doesn't want that because if there are no more people to create more people... well, that kinda screws with the Grand Design. So God takes a deep breath, counts to ten thousand years and says, "I'll make a deal with you: Lilith can go off and have her orgies with all those bad-ass boys with horns and hooves that all REAL women will always find so much hotter than you and I'll create a new chick for you. I'll even make her out of your rib. That way, she'll always be part of you -- so she'll do what you tell her to. And -- because it's such a small part of you, she'll never have as much willpower as you AND she'll forget all about clitoral stimulation." So God did that. And Adam said, "Bitchin! Eve, make me a sammich!" And Eve complied. She made him a nice apple sandwich. (Cue Christianity).
Dude! People STILL believe in the Roman Gods, although, personally I'm only a big fan of one of them. Archaic it is, but so is Christianity, and Science... umm, Earth flat, anyone? And science will always be archaic because until we know it all, we don't know it all. And it's feasible to have both belief "The Wiccan Rede" and proof "The Universe in a Nutshell".
I don't know about illness, but my health and sanity are preserved by the small troll and gnome who are both living in my stomach. Respectively, their names are Jack Daniels and Jim Beam.
The notion of bloodletting balancing the humors of the body may be both archaic and "disproven" by science. But there are legions who still believe in it. I believe the colloquial term for those people is "Emo".
If the planet as a whole and the other plants and animals on it can no longer live and thrive due to the callous greed, arrogance, and over-consumption, of humanity. And if, to protect the planet as a whole, humans are delivered summary justice in the form of natural disasters or gradual extinction... Well, THAT my friend, would be 7 billion+ blood sacrifices that WOULD ensure a bountiful harvest.
I respect your beliefs and your hope. Mostly, I hope that someday we can say, "I believe x and you believe y. Cool!"
In the meantime, I, personally, believe "that a magical sky" deity "molded the vast universe and everything in it in" approximately 13.75 billion years and "science" reinforces my belief (x). You believe in Atheism (y). Bete believes in a similar, but slightly different brand of spiritual soup than me. Cool! :-)
Okay, a couple things here: 1) Thank you, sincerely, for the counterpoints, and alternate angles, as well as (again, very sincerely) the humor and implicit respect in your light-hearted and well-put comment(s). B) However, Atheism is not a belief. It's not even a belief system, it's a lack thereof (my apologies do go out to practicing wizards, though). TRIANGLE) Couldn't agree more with your second to last paragraph, but for one caveat: I have, and will always say that while I DO respect your right to believe as you wish, there is no requirement for me to respect the beliefs themselves. It's when faith interferes with scientific discovery that it becomes a hindrance to humanity. When people lobby to have scientifically proven ideas removed from education on the basis of believe (as opposed to improvement on scientific discovery, see the roundness of the Earth), it is then in violation of the constitution. That being said, I repeat my thanks for your input, and do hope to see more.
DeleteP.S. You're welcome for the iron Maiden reference, and I thank you for catching it. :)
DeleteIt was my pleasure. The only thing I enjoy more than being a foul-mouthed, sardonic individual is running into other foul-mouthed, sardonic individuals. The fun quotient in the previous statement is increased by a power of ten when the ratio of attitude:intelligence in both parties is sufficient enough that, upon mental impact, said parties both momentarily get to view ultra-black.
DeleteThank you, as well -- for not typing TL;DR. I wouldn't have blamed you. I realized that my comment was getting a mite long, but it wasn't until after I actually posted that discovered I had passed the word count of "War and Peace".
My apologies. I realize that Atheism is a lack of belief in a deity. I have, however, run into both atheists who were fine with lack of belief being considered a "belief in the lack of deities" and those who weren't. While I wasn't sure which type you fit into, I admittedly should have been able to sort it out through inference.
A pause here, while I relate the following facts: A) I am functioning on over 24 hrs. without sleep. B) Presently, I have a much greater amount of blood in my alcohol system than my safety parameters dictate. The former, isn't nearly as detrimental to me as one would think. The latter, however, I must rectify immediately. I mention these things, only in an endeavor to ensure that in my fuzzy-brained and (more) tactless state, my following questions are taken as, "inquisitive, mostly liberal, pagan...ish, person making queries," and not as, "DICTATORIAL, TEA-PARTY MEMBER, FUNDAMENTALIST ESCAPED FROM ARKHAM!"
In further support of this aim, I'll attempt to make the following inquiries without a trace of sarcasm *deep breath*:
Do you identify Atheism as a lack of belief in deities, or a lack of belief, period? For you, personally, or for Atheism as a category?
If it's just in deities, is it safe to say that you believe in science? If it's lack of belief, period, what phraseology do you prefer be used to describe your ______ in science?
I reiterate, I intend NO malice with these questions and I would sooner model for The Gap than try to convert someone. However, I DO have the "why" syndrome of a small child stuck in a twenty-five year old body. So, if you're game, and depending on your answers, I may have more questions.
Phew! I did it. (my)God(and your lack thereof)Damn! Maintaining a serious tone in conversation is freaking taxing as Charon!
I couldn't agree more with your caveat to my second to last paragraph. In stating my respect for your _______ and hope, I in no way meant to imply that you were required to respect mine. My point was more along the lines of: Person a is Christian. Person b is Atheist. Person c is a shaman. Hey, how about they DON'T fight a war over it?
And while I happen to respect your philosophy(?), there are philosophies out there that I DON'T respect, nor am I obligated to respect them. Example: Racism. However, I would be negligent if I did not (oh, the myriad ways in which this sucks) support their right to have a racist philosophy... provided their expression of that philosophy did not impinge on the rights of another individual. It would be so much easier if I could merely beat people in the head with my hardbound edition of Thomas Paine.
"It's when faith interferes with scientific discovery that it becomes a hindrance to humanity." QFT^^
Oh, I'll definitely continue commenting. But, technically, my previous comments on this post were already part of more. I've been wreaking merry, anonymous, hell with your blog via the comments section for a while now. Not through any particular craving for anonymity, I'm just lazy.
Bete: I was going to comment on your comment, but upon re-reading it, I don't have much to say. I agree with you, except for your previously mentioned (lack of) language. ;-)
It's dark, I don't have my contacts in, and propping the laptop up this way against my forehead so I can see the keys is really uncomfortable, but I will definitely address your questions tomorrow, as they do have significant merit.
DeleteTake your time. Wow, propping a laptop up against your forehead to reply... The devout Atheist SOUNDS like an oxymoron.
ReplyDelete-- Shawna Laird
It does, doesn't it? Perhaps "staunch"us a better word choice.
Delete