religion = mental gymnastics

for my birthday this year we spent the weekend at my parents' timeshare in escondio. we did a bunch of things but the thing i really wanted to do was visit the Creation & Earth History Museum & Bookstore and the Unarius Academy of Science. i purposely didn't do much research before going and i deliberately planned of us to visit them back-to-back. 

the Creation & Earth History Museum & Bookstore was very interesting! it has a surprising amount of science for a place that denies a lot of science, lol. and there was a lot of dinosaur stuff! basically tho, it was "this science stuff proves this stuff in the bible." and the science stuff that disproves the stuff in the bible is either wrong or not mentioned. there is also a big room full of physiology and human anatomy, basically using the watchmaker analogy to prove the existence of god. 

after that, we went directly to the Unarius Academy of Science which had much much less funding but was no less interesting. we were lucky enough that the man staffing the place was very happy to explain their beliefs and to give us a tour of their space. in a few words, this is a space cult that believes in reincarnation.

we really ran into to a full spectrum of belief that day! a number of the people in the creationist museum seemed to fully believe in it. and while there were only two people at the unarius place, we only interreacted with one, but he was definitely a believer in his religion. 

of the four in our party, it was t, who is some sort of christian (i don't know what sect, this is not a knock on her, just my lack of knowledge) and fairly devout; her bf i, who seems to believe some of the major tenants of christianity; j, who is agnostic and believes there may be some kind of creator; and me, an atheist who believes in neither creator nor afterlife.

i think besides learning about the religions themselves, it was really interesting to see what people accept and what they reject. t made some comments about how the museum got some things wrong in the bible, but the creationists would say the same of her, as they do say it about science! i think we all were a little more skeptical of unarians but like... why? give it 3000 years and it may become the most widely accepted religion, who knows? 

what i think is most interesting is how people scoff at other beliefs when they are only very short step away from the same thing. the mental gymnastics one must go thru to believe one branch of science but not another, one random book but not another, or to look at it all and sill turn away is really something. i am also closer to creationists that I'd probably like, because religious belief isn't so much a line as it is a circle. I don't believe in the bible, but i do fairly blindly believe in science that i don't at all understand.

really, as long as you really believe in something, you will believe in it, "facts" be damned. 

truth in acting

at small group we've been talking about charismatic churches*. rock harbor, the church our life group is associated with, is trying hard to be a middle of the road church, not too charismatic or the other way round.

our leaders asked us what we thought of very demonstrative people. most of them seem to be in agreement that they view more dramatic reactions are show, and are not genuine. more than one person said they were suspicious that these people were doing it for the attention.

as an atheist who doesn't remember ever feeling the stirring of god, any higher power, or anything supernatural, i'm fairly neutral towards the subject. everyone's different: some people never cry, not even at a death, others start bawling and ripping out their hair over split milk. so one person not being physically moved by god makes just as much sense as a person "over-reacting" for god.

personally, i'm less comfortable with charismatic churches. tho i say this having never been to one. but i'm a fairly reserved person anyway, so the fainting or faith healings is a bit too much for me.

*from what i understand, charismatic churches are the churches where the people are more demonstrative when they feel god. this could be anything from raising your hands in the air, to shouting "hallelujah", to speaking in tongues, to rolling on the ground. non-charismatic churches tend to stay away from that. i think they're more structured in general. so less going with what you feel than going to what's on the schedule.

proof

a friend recently asked me why i don't believe in god. i responded that it's because i don't believe in a soul. no soul, no afterlife, no need for religion, i.e. no god!

so why don't i believe in a soul? 1. because i just don't believe. and belief cannot be commanded. 2. there's no concrete evidence of anything supernatural. sure, science doesn't have explanations for everything, but maybe it just doesn't yet.


btw, the science i'm talking are the physical sciences. so biology, archeology, astronomy, chemistry... stuff that can be proved with hard math and physical evidence. so currently unexplainable psychology stuff or cognitive science doesn't count. (for example, why some studies show that prayer seems to heal the sick faster even when the sick person doesn't know they're being prayed over [of course, other studies show just the opposite so who knows?]).

but if you had a real "miracle" then i'd have no choice but to believe! my friend suggested something like jesus feeding 5000 people with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish. that would totally do it. tho a statue "weeping blood" will not. ...not unless it's actual blood and scientists really can't figure out where it's coming from.


btw, tho i'm not religious, i do have respect for religion. and i think it can work hand in hand with science. and i think it's so weird so many religious people outright deny legitimate science. for example, the most widely accepted scientific explanation for the beginning of the universe is the big bang theory. but there's no explanation for what came before that, or even why it happened. so why not god? science hasn't at all disproved the existence of god (and honestly, science can't disprove something doesn't exist. it can only prove that something does), so why not believe in actual facts and fill in the rest with religion? there's little to no overlap!

(want to learn more about the world's religion? here's some stats)

in line

i was at a store the other day with one checkout line leading to multiple registers. one woman was called to a register but the cashier was called away to something else; he said she would be right back. another register opened up and that cashier asked me to come forward. i told her that the other customer was before me. she tries to, but cannot, get the attention of the customer and tells me she's on the phone. so i go over and tell the customer that a new register has opened. i go back to my place in line. as i get into line, a lady in line tells me "there's a special place in heaven for people like you."

what am i supposed to say to that?

"if your god is correct, i'm going straight to hell. but you remember this: atheists do nice things too!" or maybe "hey, fool, read the bible better; people aren't rewarded for good deeds!" (and nowhere does it say that god would segregate heaven by random acts of kindness) gah. seriously, i appreciate that you appreciate that i'm not a line cutter, but you don't need to tell me incorrect things about your religion by way a "compliment."

charity

(lol, this site has become a bit of a atheist propaganda site)

Why You Don't Need God to be Good: the Rise of Atheist Charities

"Charitable organizations geared towards non-believers are growing. "Good without God" has become a catch-phrase of the increasingly vocal atheist and freethinker movement -- from books to billboards, the non-religious are asserting the strength of their humanist ethics. As atheists emerge from the closet and stand up for themselves, one message they're bringing along is that charity is far from an inherent monopoly of the religious."

“skeptics and humanists are frustrated that so many charitable organizations, especially those that help people afflicted by natural or human disasters, have efforts coordinated by religious organizations. These organizations sometimes proselytize to the people in need of their services. This is entirely unacceptable.”

as much as i like helping people / organizations, i always try to picks secular ones. it is really disconcerting when you go to a thing and the organizers are like "let's do this for god!" or whatever. i mean, i'm here to go good because i think it's the nice thing to do, not because some deity told me i should.

giving and helping should really be about the end goal, not about the motivation for why we do it. but, of course, many who don't agree with the organization's reasons for giving are understandably uncomfortable with contributing. so i'm glad there is a rise of secular charities. i know i am much more open to supporting secular causes.

air force

"air force removes 'god' from logo", bunch of assholes get pissed

"Jason Torpy, president of the association, said the word "God" had no place in the logo because not all members of the military are religious. "We just hope (the Air Force) can provide more equal opportunities for atheists and humanists in the military.""

makes good sense to me! a lot of atheists get freaked out / turned off by pro-religion talk being brought up in places that have NOTHING to with god / religion... like forever21 printing "john 3:16" on the bottom of it's bags. it's kind of creepy. they have the right to do so, clearly, since it's a private company. but the air force is funded through our taxes so...

""The action taken by the RCO suggests that all references to God, regardless of their context, must be removed from the military," the congressional letter states... "We ask that you reverse this perplexing decision."" ...are you an idiot? how is this a "perplexing decision"? not everyone believes in god, therefore they're uncomfortable with those words plastered on every damn air force motto sign.

"courts consistently have upheld the constitutionality of our national motto, 'In God We Trust,' despite the obvious mention of God.... Religion is a part of this history." ...so is atheism, dumbass! and btw, tradition doesn't make something correct, duh. slavery was legal for a long time, wasn't it? so was segregation. and women not legally being allowed to vote, work, own property. and interracial marriages were illegal too. should we go back to that because of tradition? and btw, the past supreme courts have clearly been in wrong when they upheld non-secular laws. our first amendment that says clearly says it's illegal to do so!


btw, "Doing God's Work with Other People's Money" is a pretty damn funny motto, lol.

assume nothing

rabbi adam jacobs - the god test: why everyone believes

this guy really pisses me off. i think he's a fucking idiot. seriously. he assumes way too much (and incorrectly a that).

"...so many of their choices and thinking patterns seem to suggest that they believe something quite unlike that which they profess." isn't everyone at some point hypocritical? people are complicated, dumb ass! and btw, the religious are as contradictory as the rest of us. e.g. are atheists the only ones afraid to die?

"Often, I've inquired of non-believers if it at all vexes them that nothing that they have ever done or will ever do will make the slightest difference to anyone on any level? After all, one random grouping of molecules interacting with another has no inherent meaning or value." ...just cause i don't believe in god doesn't mean i don't think that life has value. if anything, i might find it more valuable because it's so random. i know how lucky we are to be around because some things had happened just a little bit differently, humankind might not ever have existed. and if something went horribly wrong there'd be no stopping it since i don't believe that someone can step in to stop it (i.e. no god to preform miracles!)

jacobs makes a huge mis-assumption. he believes in god and that gives his life meaning. but just because i believe there is no god doesn't mean i find life worthless.

this isn't an "if an only if" situation. and how incredibly pompous of him to even think so!

in regards to his questions: 1. no, because i don't have a dog. but also because i love my parents enough to want to honor their wishes (as long as they don't really hinder my life in any way). but if i needed money and someone offered me some for either sex or my parents' dead bodies, you'd better believe i'm not going become a prostitute.

2. i'm not going to kill him because there's simply no reason to. what would be the point of killing someone who's going to be dead in a hour anyway? for my personal satisfaction? well, i'm not a murderer and i get squeamish when killing bugs so i doubt i'd have the stomach to kill a person. having a gun would make it easier, but again, why bother?

3. it can be. art, love, beauty (and religion) make some people think life is worth living. and if it isn't hurting anyone, why destroy it? music doesn't feed my body, and it certainly doesn't feed my "soul", but it makes me happy. so that's cool.


alo, btw, atheists aren't non-believers. we are believers. we believe there is no god.

church or jail?

Bay Minette Lets Offenders Choose: Jail Or Church

how the fuck can this even be legal?! i'm not even going to rant much about this because it's so obviously unconstitutional!

...tho it is interesting. as offended as i am, i wonder which i would choose? one one hand, i don't want to go to jail!! but on the other hand, i don't want to go to church either! and not because i'm afraid i'll burst into flame or anything, but because i feel very strongly that the government shouldn't force me into any religion. especially if i can't even choose that religion! (if the govt could force me to attend religious services, i would probably try to visit a new one each week. that might be interesting.)

also, even if this were legal, the idea behind the whole thing is just bullocks. in the article, pastor robert gates is quoted as saying, "You show me somebody who falls in love with Jesus, and I'll show you a person who won't be a problem to society but that will be an influence and a help to those around them."

right, cause religious people never commit crimes. ...

ashamed

the other day my neighbor asked where i find the organizations that i do drives for. was it through my church?, he asked. so i replied that no, i find the organizations online. i don't go to church; i'm an atheist. he made a face and said that i "shouldn't say things like that." i didn't ask, but i figure "that" is that i'm an atheist.

WTH?

religious people are now offended that i'm an atheist and ask me to not say what my religious affiliation is even though it basically came up in the conversation? well FUCK you! i didn't ask for christmas or "under god" in our pledge of allegiance and i sure as hell don't appreciate it when homeless people i give money to tell me "god bless." that makes me want to snatch my money right back. it also makes me want to yell at every religion pushing person that "goddamn it, atheists do nice stuff too!" but that would make me a bigot, just like you!

keep your fucking religion to yourself, and i'll keep my heathen ways to myself. don't bloody preach at me and then tell me to not talk about how i don't believe in any of that shit you do. btw, i didn't even fucking talk about it! all i said was that i don't go to church since i'm an atheist. that's it. it's like you telling me telling me that you go to synagogue cause you're jewish. i don't ask you to keep that info to yourself because it's nothing to be ashamed of.

you ought to be ashamed of yourself! you shouldn't silence others just cause they disagree with you. let's all just be loud and proud together, okay?

god changes you

from abc's primetime nightline: beyond belief - the miracle mysteries (7/13/11)

"well, we certianly know that there are differences in the brain between people who are religious and those who are not. and that implies that there are people who are more likely to be predisposed to having religious beliefs or spiritual beliefs compared to those people who don't." (as said by dr andrew newberg, author of how god changes your brain)

two things. 1. is your brain already that way so you're predisposed to believe in religion (as he says), or do your religious belief change your brain (as is the title of his book)?

2. i'm a big believer in evolution, so this is interesting since there are so many more spiritual people than not. assuming that it's mostly not people killing people because they're not religious, and instead religious people really do just breed better or whatever, it adds a whole new dimension to pascal's wager.

james frey

i recently reread james frey's "a million little pieces" and i can't help but wonder why everyone was so mad that some parts were exaggerated. well, okay, i don't know how much of it isn't true, but i remember reading that most of it was and that just a few things were not (he shortened the time line, the length of time he spent in jail, how lilly killed herself...). if that's really the case then who really cares?! it was marketed as a memoir, not an autobiography (which, while not too different, is totally different). and even in many autobiographies certain names or details are altered in order to protect privacy. importantly, the main story of frey's book, the addiction and the recovery, are true. also most of the incidents are fully true (as corroborated by others). and most of the narrative are actually his own thoughts, and who's to say that he wasn't thinking those things?

yes, he might not have been as heroic or even as derelict as he said he was but the point remains: he got over his addictions without the help of a 12-step program. 

a friend of mine went to alcohol counseling after receiving a dui. and she said that they also pushed aa and it's 12 steps. as with frey, she also said that the 12-step program felt like replacing one addiction with another. and i've heard it from others too, they've been told that without the 12-steps they are bound to relapse. 

should i then, an athiest, be especially worried if i were to become an addict? apparently i will NEVER become sober! it's simply not possible! it's not just one or two of the twelve, but seven (seven!!) of the twelve steps mention something to do with a spiritual being outside myself. 

even the first time i read frey's book i really liked and identified with his philosophy of taking full responsibility for one's own decisions, actions, and addictions. maybe some people need a holy power to help them get over their addictions, but surely not everyone does. 

frey's story is a parable. just because it's not 100% accurate doesn't make it any less profound. even most christians don't believe that jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, but they don't then discard the entire bible. 

of course, i'm not saying that frey didn't do wrong when he lied in his memoir. certain changes to specifics (names, locations, dates) are allowed, and it's to be expected that some events will be downplayed or exaggerated but apparently he majorly altered the truth in certain parts of his book, which is a big no no in a work of what's supposed to be non-fiction. but he didn't deserve the massive public condemnation or oprah publically humiliating him on national tv.

deep down

"I wish I could believe in God god because I feel like I am missing out on a lot of potential happiness or comfort. Unfortunately, as good as it may make me feel in some ways, the part of me that I respect most is the part of me that won't allow me to believe."

- postsecret comment

godless

from simon winchester's the professor and the madman: a tale of muder, insanity, and the making of the oxford enligh dictionary: "Since the laws of nature could quite satisfactorily explain all natural phenomena... he could not find any logical need for the existence of a God" (191)
amen!

good god...

i'm tired and have yet another page to update so it's a short one here. did you ever wonder about [the christian] god? how come he's all-powerful and all-benevolent and yet he hasn't gotten rid of all the evil in the world? well, fear not. there is a reason. and a damn good one if you understand it. the website posted here is a good one. it's pretty clear and outlines the major arguments. it also solves the problem of theodicy (basically the problem of evil). it's pretty long tho. and if you're not totally interested in this, skip the soul making stuff (i've always thought it a whack argument anyway. he could've just made us moral): augustine, irenaeus, hick, and madden & hare. i rather like jl mackie's argument and it's a good set up to the 'free will defense' which is generally used to prove that god is consistant cause it's damn good. rowe of course argues against that still (he could've made us good and still wit free will [i agree]). then last is cs lewis. his is really long and not a popular argument so if you're interested, read it for fun. but really. the good ones are makie, rowe and the free will defense. the whole site is good reading tho. if you were to take a phil of religion class you'd go over all these arguments except for maybe lewis (we didn't, and after reading it i can understand why). anyway. damn... this was supposed to be a short update. but if you kno me, you kno how much i love talk about god. the problem of evil. enjoy! and please let me kno wat you think. or if you're confused. i kno a bit of this stuff so we can talk :)