An elderly lady was well-known for her faith and for her boldness in talking about it. She would stand on her front porch and shout "PRAISE THE LORD!"
Next door to her lived an atheist who would get so angry at her proclamations he would shout, "There ain`t no Lord!!"
Hard times set in on the elderly lady, and she prayed for GOD to send her some assistance. She stood on her porch and shouted "PRAISE THE LORD. GOD I NEED FOOD!! I AM HAVING A HARD TIME. PLEASE LORD, SEND ME SOME GROCERIES!!"
The next morning the lady went out on her porch and noted a large bag of groceries and shouted, "PRAISE THE LORD."
The neighbor jumped from behind a bush and said, "Aha! I told you there was no Lord. I bought those groceries, God didn`t."
The lady started jumping up and down and clapping her hands and said, "PRAISE THE LORD. He not only sent me groceries, but He made the devil pay for them. PRAISE THE LORD!"
In my last post, I promised to start this post with a knock-knock joke. As you have likely realized, the above joke is not of the knock-knock variety. There is a knock-knock joke in the post... but not until the very end. The above joke was included to tide you over and prevent unnecessary incidences of bad-joke withdrawal.
(clears throat)
Regardless, speaking of believing what we want to believe:
The Rev. Ron Carlson, a popular author and lecturer, sometimes presents his audience with two stories and asks them whether it matters which one is true.
In the secular account, "You are the descendant of a tiny cell of primordial protoplasm washed up on an empty beach 3 1/2 billion years ago. You are a mere grab bag of atomic particles, a conglomeration of genetic substance. You exist on a tiny planet in a minute solar system in an empty corner of a meaningless universe. You came from nothing and are going nowhere."
In the Christian view, by contrast, "You are the special creation of a good and all-powerful God. You are the climax of His creation. Not only is your kind unique, but you are unique among your kind. Your Creator loves you so much and so intensely desires your companionship and affection that He gave the life of His only son that you might spend eternity with him."
First of all… STRAW MAN and FALSE DICHOTOMY!
(blinks and readjusts self to former state of calm dignity)
Truth isn’t a popularity contest. Sure, it sounds pretty to live in a world where meaning and goodness are predefined by a wrinkled man with a beard. However, wanting to believe something (i.e. your pet bunny Foo Foo will never die) doesn’t make it an accurate representation of reality (rabbits have a life-span of approximately eight years and, to date, there has never been a recorded instance of an immortal rabbit).
I have no problem with the concept of making meaning. It’s like the life-review equivalent of good writing techniques; you sort through the mess of details of an event to identify, define, and present the essentials. However, when we decide try to randomly ascribe cause to our selected sentences, we’ve crossed the line from good technique to bad logic.
The article quoted above then moves to the ever-popular hobby of atheist bashing:
Across the globe, religious faith is thriving and religious people are having more children. By contrast, atheist conventions only draw a handful of embittered souls, and the atheist lifestyle seems to produce listless tribes that cannot even reproduce themselves.
Have you ever been to an atheist convention? I have, and between the engaging speakers, dinners with crowds of participants, and dancing at a three level club, there wasn’t time to be embittered. Sure, sure, atheists should continue to work to improve their general PR. However, the false idea of atheists being uniformly dour and boring is perpetuated mainly by articles and misrepresentations like this.
Lacking the strong Christian identity that produced its greatness, atheist Europe seems to be a civilization on its way out. We have met Nietzsche's "last man" and his name is Sven.
(blinks) Was the greatness you were referring to simple imperialism or to the tendency of the Christian Europeans of the past to murder and enslave the “heathen” natives they would encounter?
Based on my experiences, I’m pretty sure the more secular version of European civilization isn’t on its way out. We’ve already established that you’ve likely not attended an atheist convention. Have you been to Europe?
The real difference is that in the past, children were valued as gifts from God, and now they are viewed by many people as instruments of self-gratification. The old principle was, "Be fruitful and multiply." The new one is, "Have as many children as enhance your lifestyle."
Or, “we have access to birth control and careers and thus have other options to pursue if we wish.” Not to mention, “seeing as the world population continues to grow and we have limited resources, it doesn’t seem like such a tragedy if some people chose to have one or even (heaven forbid) no children.”
The prophets of the disappearance of religion seem to have proven themselves to be false prophets. Even though the world is becoming richer, religion seems to be getting stronger. The United States is the richest and most technologically advanced society in the world, and religion shows no signs of disappearing on these shores.
Richest?? Well, perhaps if you ignore Luxemborg and Norway. Then again, they are part of that silly, declining Europe, so we can just ignore them anyway.
My conclusion is that it is not religion but atheism that requires a Darwinian explanation. It seems perplexing why nature would breed a group of people who see no purpose to life or the universe, indeed whose only moral drive seems to be sneering at their fellow human beings who do have a sense of purpose.
No darling, I just sneer at people who write poorly researched articles accusing atheists of having no moral purpose.
Here is where the biological expertise of Dawkins and his friends could prove illuminating. Maybe they can turn their Darwinian lens on themselves and help us understand how atheism, like the human tailbone and the panda's thumb, somehow survived as an evolutionary leftover of our primitive past.
- God knows why faith is thriving by Dinesh D'Souza.
Yes, logic is clearly a vestigial trait.
***
Oh, and...
Knock, knock.
Who's there?
(silence)
(silence)
(silence)
(peers outside at the friendly darkness)
(shrugs)
Who's there? Well, nothing supernatural as far as I can see, but is that really so scary?
(shrugs)
I'm okay with getting my meaning from humanity and my groceries from my neighbor.
(cross posted at The Atheist Mama)
8 comments:
STRAW MAN and FALSE DICHOTOMY!
What, you don't want to capitalize the 'and'?
However, the false idea of atheists being uniformly dour and boring
Sorry, I'm ruining the image. T_T
Luxemburg and Norway, eh? Goose must be happy to be in the #2 country.
What, you don't want to capitalize the 'and'?
I didn't want exceed my capital letter limit for the week.
Sorry, I'm ruining the image. T_T
;P You'll have to use a pun or two to make up for such.
Luxemburg and Norway, eh? Goose must be happy to be in the #2 country.
Goose is from the oh-so-secular, rapidly declining Europe, eh?
Argh ! I'm declining, and I didn't even know it ! Somebody or somegod, SAVE ME !
About the two stories, I sincerely prefer the first one, the other one sounds very pretentious to me.
Poor snoow. Perhaps you could start a wave of religious movement to revitalize desolate, declining France. I’ll be looking for plenty of huge crosses by the freeways and billboards with the 10 commandments when I come visit in December… only then, will I know that you guys are as cool as the US.
As for stories, I agree that the second sounds pretentious... but I also think that most people would prefer it to the first. People, on average, crave a sense of self-importance. I certainly don’t think atheism precludes this. In fact, humanism is very much about promoting positive in change in the human condition through action. To me, those sorts of actions are what truly give me a personal meaning and self-worth… rather than just the knowledge that some invisible critter in the sky loves me. I don’t want unearned self-importance. (grumbles)
;P You'll have to use a pun or two to make up for such.
I don't have any on me today. How about blatant sarcasm.
Goose is from the oh-so-secular, rapidly declining Europe, eh?
Yep, its surprising. He even works with computers if you beleive his profile.
I don't have any on me today. How about blatant sarcasm.
(nods) That shall be acceptable.
In the Christian view, by contrast, "You are the special creation of a good and all-powerful God. You are the climax of His creation. Not only is your kind unique, but you are unique among your kind. Your Creator loves you so much and so intensely desires your companionship and affection that He gave the life of His only son that you might spend eternity with him."
"And since the alternative is an eternity of indescribable torment, you really really want to go for option #1. We're not kidding around here. Remember what we just said this guy did to His own son? Hardcore."
I could see a New Ager or an über-liberal Christian of the type I grew up with in Berkeley ("Everybody goes to heaven, except Hitler and Stalin, who have to spend a little while somewhere else until they're rehabilitated") legitimately arguing that their faith is more comforting than atheism. But why D'Souza of all people would make that claim...I mean, the man is Catholic. Catholicism is famous for making people unhappy. Hell, Catholic guilt has its own Wikipedia entry.
I was never religious, so I don't know if I'm naturally a happy person or if it's a permanent atheist high. But almost every ex-Christian atheist I know is incredibly relieved not to have to worry about endless suffering for themselves or their loved ones after death. And Dawkins, far from being "bitter," always seems like a very cheerful guy in interviews and appearances.
--Anton Mates
I was never religious, so I don't know if I'm naturally a happy person or if it's a permanent atheist high. But almost every ex-Christian atheist I know is incredibly relieved not to have to worry about endless suffering for themselves or their loved ones after death.
Absolutely. Mainly, I’m relieved to no longer have the various contradictions of some sort of omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, etc. deity running around in my head. To me, there is more sense and meaning in a world devoid of a confused, possibly bipolar deity.
But hey, Catholocism isn't so bad! Guilty, unhappy Catholics are a sizeable portion of my dating pool. ;)
Post a Comment