Breaking Out from the Prison of Religion
By Paula Kirby
In my previous article for The Hibernia Times I described how I came to question my Christian beliefs and, ultimately, concluded that there was no reason to think they were true. Now, I am going to consider the reasons why, for many Christians, such questioning is hard to do.
Many Christians don’t wish to question their beliefs, of course. Many genuinely feel to get something from their faith which they fear they would lose without it. For many believers, faith is a comfort: they find comfort in the thought of not really dying, of being reunited with loved ones in an afterlife, of a benign and powerful being watching over them and “working all things for the good.” Someone who derives comfort from such thoughts may well prefer not to question the truth of them too closely. Besides, in a community where the majority are religious and censorious of non-belief, there is huge social pressure to conform.
Another reason lies in the lamentable fact that even now, in 2011, lack of scientific understanding is the norm in many societies. Not only do most people not understand even the basics of science themselves; they often have no idea of the huge range of questions that science really has begun to shed light on. People unschooled in scientific knowledge or methodology may quite genuinely be baffled about why there is “something rather than nothing,” or how life could possibly have arisen from non-life and then developed into the vast array of forms we see around us, and be unable to conceive of any answer other than God.
So there are reasons for not questioning belief that many Christians may themselves be fully conscious of and even happy with. However, I would suggest that there are other reasons, too: reasons arising from the way Christianity actively manipulates its followers and suppresses the natural spirit of enquiry.
The first is Christianity’s emphasis on faith. Faith is the acceptance of claims for which there is no good evidence; when someone invites you to take something on faith, they are actively telling you not to challenge it, not to question it, not to enquire whether it is really true: they are telling you to simply accept it on their say-so. And this “accepting it on their say-so” is at the very heart of Christianity. It is the only absolute requirement for salvation: that you accept — on faith — that Jesus died for your sins and took the punishment for them on your behalf. Faith is incompatible with genuine questioning. The moment you begin to question faith-claims, you are told you must stop, that to continue will be to lose your faith. And this is a dire threat indeed, for in Christianity everything you hope for is dependent on faith — on simply taking someone’s word for it, on simply accepting a particular set of claims as true.
Churches certainly pay lip-service to asking questions, of course; but never doubt that there are limits to the questions that are acceptable. “Does this verse mean this or does it mean that?”: this kind of question — the unthreatening kind that stays within approved boundaries — is smiled upon. But be careful not to voice questions that suggest doubt! That question the truth of Christian dogma! It is no coincidence, I would suggest, that Doubting Thomas is second only to Judas in the Recalcitrant Disciple stakes.
Closely linked with faith is authority. It is there in the structures of all churches, but explicitly so in the case of the Roman Catholic Church, which claims infallibility for the pope when speaking on matters of dogma. (How does he know he’s infallible on these matters? How do you?) Authority reinforces the demand for blind faith, insists that you remain in your role of passive recipient of priestly wisdom. But these claims to authority are not always overt: they are also concealed within the very structure of church services. You are told when to sit, when to kneel, when to stand; when to pray, when to sing, when to say Amen, when to be silent. And you are told, in the creed, in the hymns, from the pulpit, what you are required to believe. There is no discussion, no Q&A, no opportunity to ask, “But how do you know?” Church services require congregations to be passive and unquestioning. (Have you ever wondered why the Church puts so much emphasis on obedience?)
All this is reinforced through ritual. When was the last time you actively stopped to think about how you drive? Unless you are newly qualified, the answer is almost certainly so long ago that you cannot remember it. After a while driving becomes automatic, reflexive, something you do without much conscious thought. This is what happens when we do something over and over again: we stop noticing the details. And churches — especially those, like the Roman Catholic Church, with set liturgies — exploit this to the full. In service after service there is the same rhythm, the same pattern, the same order of the individual components. The effect? We can switch our brains off; we don’t need to think; we are lulled into a state of passivity in which the words wash over us and we barely even register them. If you don’t believe me, see if you can recite — without looking! — the third verse of your favourite hymn. Or see how much you remember of the content of last Sunday’s sermon.
The combination of the insistence on faith, authority and endlessly repeated ritual all combine to lull our brains into unquestioning, passive acceptance. And as if this weren’t enough, believers’ confidence in their own judgement and ability to deal with life on their own is constantly undermined by the teaching that their every success is down to God’s goodness, their every failure firmly down to their own weakness.
Yet there still remains one more weapon in the Church’s armoury: a powerful weapon, a desperate weapon; you might even say a diabolical weapon. That weapon is hell. “Accept our authority; accept our claims on faith; believe and don’t doubt — or burn for all eternity.” How many generations of children have been psychologically scarred by this obscenity? How many adults still harbour lingering fears that this sadistic fabrication might just be true? How many cling to their faith for fear of eternal torment if they don’t? And how much must the Church fear the act of questioning, if it has to resort to such monstrous and perverted threats in order to deter you from doing it?
The forces arrayed against the believer who dares to question, dares to challenge, are formidable indeed. Small wonder that many believers never truly stop to reflect on their beliefs from the perspective of asking whether they are really true.
And yet an increasing number of us are doing just that. Increasingly we are shaking off the hobgoblins of belief, and in so doing we are discovering the joys of a life where no question is off-limits and where we no longer have to make do with pseudo-answers based in faith, authority or threats.
Abandoning religious faith is like waking after a deep sleep. Good morning! It’s a beautiful day…
Paula Kirby is a writer based in Scotland. This is the second of a two-part article on atheism for The Hibernia Times. The first, Atheism Is the True Embrace of Reality, can be accessed here.
Another is community. Just being able to be a valued part of a warm, accepting community–like everyone together rooting for the same team. The church ideally provides tangible evidence of community support, particularly at critical moments in life (birth, death, marriage). Many pastors and priests effectively (or ineffectively!) serve as psychotherapists, particularly in places and communities where it’s not socially acceptable to get psychological or psychiatric counseling. Many people discover, of course, that the rules for community acceptance feel too rigid and inflexible and require some of us to try to be something we can’t be, but the dream of having a fully accepting, unified community is I think a motivator that goes beyond active belief in any particular dogma–most of which aren’t that important to the typical human being struggling to find acceptance.
Right on, Laurence! Religious communities often offer real support and meaningful ritual. Both are important in many people’s lives. Paula is very articulate and while I agree with most of what she says, she finds only the bad and none of the good in religion and only talks about Christianity. I like James Fowler, a developmental psychologist, who did research on the stages of faith development. Some of the people who have commented seem to have gone thru the stage Paula is in and gotten beyond it. Perhaps she will too and then not need to be quite so critical of other people’s beliefs.
Annamarie,
Of course churches provide community. But they are also by definition divisive; you can join if you share our beliefs…..and if not, you are an outsider. I can tell you that I wouldn’t be welcome in your church because I would be trying to question you all the time, I’d disagree; it would be seen as disruptive, and I would politely be asked to leave. It is perfectly possible to have community that’s genuinely inclusive, questioning and without supernatural beliefs, and Paula’s point is that we should get on with it. If we are not critical of each others beliefs, I feel we are in a very dangerous territory where we just think and do what we are told by others.
Community can also be found among friends – real friends, not Sunday acquaintances. Yes, it takes time and effort to develop lasting friendship and meaningful community, but going to church takes time and effort too, and the only difference in terms of difficulty is changing your habits.
In other words, there are no upsides to religious community, but there are real downsides. Tacking religion onto your community of friends just adds an unnecessary layer of muddle-headed woo and bronze age rules, and those barbaric and outdated ideas associated with more conservative strains of Christianity will be a part of Christianity as long as the bible remains a part of Christianity – i.e. forever.
How can she not be critical? Religion dictates legislation and wars. Organized religion is terrible. So what comes off as harmless or at least beneficial in most ethical cases actually molds an entire train of thought. We give too much credit to religion and not ourselves. One example, learning to read. I didn’t pray to God to teach me how, I learned it myself. Same thing applies to ethics , values and the will to overcome adversity.
Clinging to the religious community is to remain in a dysfunctional family. There is no need. There are communities that do not lie, and threaten their members.
Paula Kirby continues to be critical of other people’s beliefs precisely because it could help those people be free of the delusion that is religion.
It’s is not that Paula finds only the bad, I think she cares about the truth more than she cares about the benefits of a consoling delusion.
Once you realize Santa is not real, you don’t go back to believing in his magic just because it made you feel good as a child.
It’s time to grow up.
It is possible and indeed is occuring, to have community without religious dogma. Religion has provided it for so long and we are all used to it but there are options.
For what it is worth at my last attempt at going to church I was largely ignored for months. I did approach people but I was single and it was mostly families. Finally just stopped going out of boredom.
I find this an interesting article that puts some of my own ideas into a different perspective.
I would agree that Faith is an indication of weakness: with Faith you are hoping something will or will not be true and have no evidence to base your hopes on. Knowledge, on the other hand is quite different: the evidence shows you what is true. I abhor authority that puts itself beyond question. Rules and dogma that reinforce that control are to be rejected out of hand. But I feel that the author may be in danger of throwing our the spiritual baby, with the bathwater of religion.
For me, there still is a God, I just don’t want someone else telling me that they have the only key to get me an audience. I abandoned religion a long time ago because I had found spirituality and I knew the religions I had met offered none.
It seems to me that people who just take what they want and abandon the rest are doing just that. Picking and choosing and just making stuff up.
I hope that’s the first step, but you cannot (or should not) invent your own beliefs… you just said “… the evidence shows you what is true.” So… what I think you are doing is just struggling to get our of that comfort zone paula is talking about.
I am sure it might be difficult, but I am also sure, that once you take that step, it will be a lot more liberating.
“Churches certainly pay lip-service to asking questions, of course; but never doubt that there are limits to the questions that are acceptable.”
Absolutely. The Catholic Church, for example, has long and detailed doctrines about how science must be constrained. The image of the Church as a moderate religion because it accepts evolution is very misleading.
“Churches certainly pay lip-service to asking questions, of course; but never doubt that there are limits to the questions that are acceptable.”
Steve Zara wrote:
Absolutely. The Catholic Church, for example, has long and detailed doctrines about how science must be constrained. The image of the Church as a moderate religion because it accepts evolution is very misleading.
***
Like what Pope John II said: Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes.
I thought…are you freaking kiddin’ me?! Science…idolatry? Absolutes?
Talk about a scientific illiterate!
When confronted with people who discourage questions and criticisms of their religions, I counter that any faith that cannot stand up to scrutiny is a weak faith indeed.
In fact, most people I meet are weak in that category. They focus on the ritual and don’t even realize why they believe what they believe. I have more respect for the theists who can withstand those questions and make me think in return.
Your article is on the button. An intelligent young relation of mine, from an enlightened family actually, went to a convent from 5-10 (geographic reasons) and had nightmares for may years because of the fear of dying and of torture in hell that the nuns instilled in her. Nowadays if one asks her probing questions about religion her fearfull response is ‘No, you must not question these things. You will get into trouble!’ With fear of questioning or doubting religion so great in Catholicism I hate to think how intense it must be in Islam. The extreme indoctrination is child abuse in its worst form ie psychological and how countries like UK and USA that place so much emphasis on human rights can allow faith schools etc is difficult to understand UNLESS one realises that the leaders of today were themselves indoctrinated/abused in their youth and do not dare to seriously question it. Where they do realise it eg Nick Clegg and Obama, they do not dare to admit it because of the extent of the ongoing religious indoctrination among their voters. Chicken and egg! Politicians will only be secular and abolish faith schools when voters demand it. Voters, who are brainwashed in faith schools will not vote for politicians who question religion.
Thanks for an interesting article. I`ve made the journey in the opposite direction from unbelief to faith in Jesus. My bible teacher actively encourages questions and discussion as in Berea ( Acts 17:11 ) . When God made us He programmed us to worship but gave us free will, therefore we all worship something or somebody ( 2 Peter 2:19b ). I would say that in Britain the social pressure to conform is to follow the religion of money and possessions. Sadly, this has infiltrated the Christian church which you can read for yourself in 2 Peter 2.
Doubting Thomas, according to the late Roger Price a respected bible teacher, went on to found 15,000 churches in India!
Jesus spoke more about Hell than He did about Heaven, because He wants to save us. If sin was allowed into Heaven it would be just as bad as Earth. The only way back to God is through the cleansing Blood of Jesus, which we`re free to accept or reject.
Science is ordered and has laws. If it was chaotic we might get the Earth changing direction and the sun would rise in the west, just for a change. When people think there`s no purpose for their lives and we just happen to be, then there`s no wonder there are suicides and murders. Acts 17:22-34 will tell you that your time and place was predestined by the Creator.
Best wishes to you and your family and next time you accelerate your car you`ll be putting your faith in your brakes!
Peter
RE: Your last sentence. I’m pretty sure you’ve confused “faith” with “blind faith”. We observe regularly the trustworthiness of brakes, therefore it’s not out of the question that they will work fine when you use it. Christianity inspires blind faith in an invisible sky man who is his own son whom he sent to earth to be murdered by people to forgive people he created in his image. He’s also omnipotent/omniscient, so he never really had to do all that in the first place.
So please don’t try to trick people into thinking that trusting that your brakes will function properly is the same as believing in an all-powerful invisible sky man.
RE: other person named “steve”:
You say, “I’m pretty sure you’ve confused “faith” with “blind faith”. We observe regularly the trustworthiness of brakes, therefore it’s not out of the question that they will work fine when you use”
Making a judgement call about your brakes based on the previously observed evidence about them is not any kind of faith, blind or otherwise. It’s evidence.
This distinction between “faith” and “blind faith’ you try to make is non-existant because you are making the mistake of using the word “faith” to apply to something that isn’t faith (your car brakes example).
Peter, one does not have faith in their brakes, or anything else in the real world. We have reasonable expectations based on previous, provable, repeatable experiences. I have reasonable expectations that my brakes will work, not faith, because they have worked previously, and repeatably in the past. The POSSIBILITY of them not working does exist mathematically, but at the same turn, the mathematically PROBABILITY of them failing(taking into account proper maintenance and such) is extremely low. Amazing how science, once again, eradicates your flawed logically reasoning in assuming faith is the same as reasonable expectation.
Come on Peter! Surely you are not really comparing faith in god with faith that the brakes of my car will work! We have been shown how brakes work, from the moment you press the brake pedal until the shoes press against the inside of the wheel. It can fail of course, but that is an acceptable risk which we take when we drive. And you are never going to convert me by quoting verses from the bible; one has to have faith already in order to believe what is written in the bible.
Pretty garbled thinking there, Peter.
Have to take issue with your ‘respected bible teacher’, as well.
It would have taken Thomas over forty years, founding a church a day, to reach the 15,000 figure quoted.
And that’s working Sundays, too.
because i know ive had my brakes fitted by a trained mechanic and tested for their function.
Peter, you’re missing the point: we have good reason to trust our brakes. They work according to the principles of physical laws and if you have your brakes checked once and a while, you know that you limit the risks considerably (the operative words being “checked” and “know”). The same goes for science: all claims are questioned, scrutinized for flaws and revised. I’m not in favour of putting people in danger (yes, indeed, atheists can be very ethical people) but it seems to me that if you want to follow through the “brakes metaphor”, all true believers should maybe consider driving theirs cars without ever having their brakes checked… Same as religion. Never question whether the engineers and technicians did their work as they should, just trust them… Really, your god will certainly look after you. You can trust him! Have a safe trip.
Yes but we know how brakes work. We can hold them in our hands and take them apart. Improve on them and meet the person who designed them. To say that faith in brakes is equivalent to faith in an omnipotent being is just silly. And it is not faith in brakes it is reasonable expectations. It is reasonable to expect the brakes to work is it not?
Peter Blood of Jesus? Human sacrifice? Really?
Amazing! That in the land of my birth which I left at age thirteen back in the 1960s, one of the leading newspapers is now seriously raising questions that, heretofore, would never have been discussed (except by me!). And, so I must ask: If Jesus is the answer, then what-the-hell is the question?
Peter, Peter, Peter…. oh dear.
“If sin was allowed into Heaven it would be just as bad as Earth. The only way back to God is through the cleansing Blood of Jesus.”
Are you not insulted that whoever told you this dismal fiction actually thought you were that dumb you’d actually believe it? It reads like an answer given to childr…
eek o\ nice troll, gratz
Thanks for another magnificent article Paula….As someone who grew up in a fanatical catholic home(daily mass for 8 years,a brother a priest,etc) the relief from finally letting go of god and religion was immense…..I was indoctrinated from an early age……prayed the rosary each day (…..”save us from the fires of hell”….)……………..once you escape the clutches of the church,life takes on a whole new meaning…………….keep up the good work Paula…you have helped so many people with your exceptional insights.
Peter, if you were to worship something, wouldn’t it make more sense to worship something you can see and have proof of, like money and possessions, rather thansomething you can’t, like a god?
Interesting article on the view point of faith and its purpose, but when examining true purpose young jedi, you must consider the mass good that comes about from a society that believes in consiquence for their actions, there are individuals on this planet unswayed by the law but swayed to do right and live a just life because of the beliefs embedded in their heads as a child. Remember if you tie a baby elephant with a chain when he gets older a mere rope will hold his power, simply because of the beliefs instilled in him as a youngster, so in this regard religion has an unforseen purpose that this author has not contemplated, being focused on the detail she misses the main purpose of what a true religion delivers. My altered approach to answering the existance of faith and the obvious conforming mentalities of religion and science, is to always question. That is my natural design as an advanced engineer and scientist, which obviously conflicts with my deep Baptist up bringing. But in the complexity of science, faith and God, the existance of a hire power remains steadfast to me like the obvious existance of gravity, it too can not be seen, scientifically proven but we deduct it exists because when i drop an apple it hits the ground. why do I believe simply because we all know that the universe was created in one instantaneous moment, an infinitesimally small burst of energy formed the ever expanding universe, and yes scientist dont have an answer energy, pressure, matter, gas, and gravity all born from nothing began to exist so this inprobable occurence could begin. I believe in different planes of consciousness, the ant works and lives everyday, but his tiny ant brain is to small to understand our reality or more plainly, the existance of mankind. So theoretically why couldnt this type of plane exist for us as well. There may be an alternate universe, plane or dimension with a higher energy, spirit or being that we cant see but agree is there simply by faith, or either what a guy like me would call deductive reasoning. So in response to her article, scientifically having faith can be easily justifiable whithin this theoretical concept.
tekskills- if you are an ‘advanced engineer & scientist’ I’m a born again christian.
Sounds like an argument from ignorance and wishful thinking to me. You must know of Occam.
Why don’t you just worship Gravity? Where do you get Jesus from?
Absolutely beautiful, Paula. You articulated so concisely what my very thoughts have been for years. Brava to you, Paula Kirby
Ron
( ;-} >
Think of how often special costumes are used to induce conformance to authority. Queens always dressed regally to show they were the unique power.
Judges wore silly wigs. Policemen wear uniforms. But the masters of this are the clerics. I think of Fellini’s clerical drag show in Roma. When you have no true authority, all you can do is bluff.
>Yet there still remains one more weapon in the Church’s armoury: a powerful weapon, a desperate weapon; you might even say a diabolical weapon. That weapon is hell.
Imagine being a school teacher and a little boy told you his parents had threatened ho burn him alive if they ever caught him touching his penis again. You would would call the authorities. However, if the parents merely threatened hell, it would be considered perfectly acceptable. To the little boy, the psychological abuse is almost identical. We have become so inured we put up no protest.
When I was a about 8 years old, I was waiting for my mom to get me after swimming. A Christian man took advantage of my inability to leave by regaling me for several hours with hellfire. When my mom finally arrived, and found out what he had done, she was ready to kill him. I think that is a completely appropriate response to this form of Christian child abuse.
This article and the previous one are fascinating to me. I am a christian and I have been for 29 years. I have had many long discussions with an atheist friend of mine and last weekend we discussed Paula’s first article.
The first article, to be frank, raised more questions for me than this one. Basically I don’t recognise the “christianity” that Paula is describing. There is a difference between Faith and when someone suggests you take this on faith. I don’t know that there is any evidence to suggest that Doubting Thomas is second only to Judas in the Recalcitrant Disciple stakes. Jesus is not chastised by Jesus for his doubt. Jesus actively encourages him to test the evidence by putting his fingers in the holes. Paul understands the need for proof.In 1 corinthians he writes:
“After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. ” What he is saying here is that there are over 500 people most of whom are still alive who can be questioned concerning the reality of the resurection. Don’t take my word for it, ask those who were there. This is quite different to the “Don’t ask questions” attitude.
This brings me to comments by Steve, Steve and Peter about brakes. As a driver I have can make a judgement call about my car’s brakes based on the previously observed evidence about them. But I cannot know for sure that they will work. Likewise as a Christian I have 29 years of previously observed evidence about God. I’m not 100% sure of what I know about God. In fact I’m 100% sure that a lot of what I think I know about God is incorrect.
Finally, Paula suggests that ” Abandoning religious faith is like waking after a deep sleep. Good morning! It’s a beautiful day…” Whereas I would say that embracing belief is truly the abundance of life..
Lollard- you obviously have no concept of what proof actually is. There has never been the tiniest shred of evidence presented that could lead an objective mind to the conclusion the God of Abraham exists, as is the case with the many thousands of gods that litter human history. Religion is specifically designed to get around this with its emphasis on faith.
You cannot get around the fact that if there was genuine proof that could be independently verified by every human at all stages of history then faith would be unnecessary. The very existence of faith as a prerequisite to believing in gods demonstrates the absence of proof.
Furthermore, I find it impossible to understand how you can remain blind to the obvious convenient contradictions in the teachings you purport to follow. These contradictions provide excellent proof that what you are reading is a load of tosh on almost every level. Does it not strike you as odd that some humans have supposedly been provided with undeniable proof a few thousand years ago & yet the rest of us born later have to rely on faith alone. Why did they get special treatment? Why doesn’t god provide us all with an equal chance of getting into heaven?
Hi Herbie,
How you doing? Actually I have a pretty clear idea of what proof is. It is evidence supportive of a view beyond reasonable doubt. I’m not in agreement with your statement that there has never been the tiniest shred of evidence presented that could lead an objective mind to the conclusion that the God of Abraham exists. I regard myself as being of an open and objective mind and I conclude he exists. In fact there have been many objective minds that have concluded that the God of Abraham exists. Of course this is not proof that he does actually exist – I write this for the sack of clarity. The number of people believing a certain thing does not constitute evidence for the veracity of that belief.
Indeed I have to agree with you that if there was genuine proof that could be independently verified by every human at all stages of history then faith would be unnecessary. I hold as irational any one who would expect that such proof could exist. After all if such proof did exist it would not be proof of God.Yet there is a whole raft of evidence that it is not reasonable to lightly ignore. The existence of the universe itself, the existence of sentient beings, the existence of the church, the testimony of many who believe in God as to his influence on their lives.
As to contradictions. They are not proof of anything. Please use the same standard for your definition of proof on both sides. If the supposed contradictions are “proof” that what I read is tosh then the evidence for the truth of Christianity is unequivocal.
Why would you hold it irrational to think absolute proof of god could exist? After all it is the religious who claim omnipitence for their god. Surely according to that idea absolute proof would be a wave of a magic wand away.
I’m sorry if i come across as rude but the proof you offer up is utterly pathetic by any standard. Not a single thing can be read into any of your list as to the existence of a supernatural being.
I agree these things cannot be lightly ignored and believe me I don’t ignore them, but to make the leap to the Abrahamic god, or any other god for that matter, is beyond preposterous & illustrates a general ignorance that is inexcusable in the western world today.
We know the best method for increasing our knowledge & we can say with all reasonable certainty it doesn’t involve revelation & the unverifiable ‘testimony’ of individual membersof a species notorious for its ability to be fooled.
As for contradictions within the supposed infallible word of the lord, they are perfect proof that that tawdry rag called the bible is nothing but a jumbled mess, cobbled together over centuries. Obviously, you choose to delude yourself & ignore the total incompatability of many parts of the bible for whatever ends you care to dream up.
Lollard,
The things you cite as “a whole raft of evidence” are merely your beliefs and beliefs are NOT evidence. Unless, of course, my sincerely and strongly held belief that you owe me £10 million is evidence of that debt.
The existence of the universe, sentient beings, the church and the beliefs of others are ONLY evidence for the existence of the universe, sentient beings, the chuch and the delusions of others, unless you can show any evidence of any god’s hand in them. Once you have shown that some god or other was/is involved, then you need to show it is the particular god that you worship and not Zeus, Thor, Odin or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Tekskills, the ant sees us and believes in us. We are just creatures that are much more highly evolved. I don’t see any other, more highly evolved creatures any where. If I did (for example: extra-terrestrials), then I would probably believe in them. Here on earth, we are the crown jewel of evolution.
If you think we are so complex that we must have been created by some type of intelligence, then that source of intelligence would be more complex, and must have been created … It never ends.
If there is another plane that we understand nothing of, then why believe the folks that seem to be so sure about it all? They have clearly been wrong every step of the way with science holding the light to the reality that the world is not flat and not the center of the Universe, etc..
I agree that much good comes from religious organizations, but those same people could just do good for goodness sake -rather than a fear of hell, and we would all be better off.
We need more secular organizations that serve the betterment of out planet without the superstition.
There is also another reason that the churches ruled: because of the pleasure of the rich. The rich know that without a delusion too many tries to get power and a goof life too. So the only way to reduce the struggle for power and money is to whisper in the ear of the sheep that after dead they’ll be happy for ever. Religion, Napoleon said, is the only reason that the poor withhold from cutting the throat of the rich. Religion is also better for the sheep, because when they are not deluded the pressure of the masters must be stronger.
An excellent article from Paula. In other news, scientists discover that the Earth is actually a planet.
Sadly, I’m not so impressed by some of the comments. Community? Really? Is that all you can come up with in support of religion? Whatever happened to God, the transcendent ground of all being? Where is the ineffable essence of the, alas, only hermeneutically apprehended substance of the numinous? Guys, you disappoint me.
Enjoyed both articles Paula and I’ve enjoyed many others from you. One thing you did not touch on was the use of family terminology. Calling people father, brother, sister, mother and preying on the disinfranchized, weak and uneducated in particular. Wooing them into the family fold. After reading up on early Celtic life, I found that they established hospitals long before the invasion of the christians on the isles. Not saying the Celts were perfect but I think there may be some evidence that their ideas were co-opted. There can certainly be a better community without religious dogma and to think that it never existed before christianity came in and forced itself upon the population is nuts.
Great to read about the emotional driving and controlling forces behind religions. Once again a clear and concise article,
Lollard said:
“Likewise as a Christian I have 29 years of previously observed evidence about God. I’m not 100% sure of what I know about God. In fact I’m 100% sure that a lot of what I think I know about God is incorrect.”
I am sure the readers would wish to see your 29 years of observed god evidence, would you care to publish it for peer review purposes? I guess we are not holding our breath, especially when it seems by your own admission, you appear to have a degree of muddled thinking on the subject.
Hi Explorer.
Why don’t I give you a pint of my blood so that you can put it through some tests.
When science comes up with a way of testing life experience then I will be happy to oblige.
If you wish to review the lives of Christians why don’t you pop into a Christian book store and pick up a few biographies. You could review them? Problem is unless you actually became a Christain there would be no way of repeating the “experiment” yourself. I think that is why faith is necessary.
Hi Lollard. I passed your message on to my friend Omar. Here’s what he said:
“Why don’t I give you a pint of my blood so that you can put it through some tests.
When science comes up with a way of testing life experience then I will be happy to oblige.
If you wish to review the lives of Muslims why don’t you pop into a Muslim book store and pick up a few biographies. You could review them? Problem is unless you actually became a Muslim there would be no way of repeating the “experiment” yourself. I think that is why faith is necessary.”
Please explain to him why your logic and argumentation is completely sound but his is not.
Being released from Religion is like being released from prison – oh yes! All my life I had tried to articulate the feelings I had with regards to religion, to god etc. I read Richard Dawkin’s book, and cried at the end of it, because I had finally found someone who put so clearly what I had felt all along. I could at last safetly live my life without the feeling that I was wrong, and evil for not being able to believe.
How beautiful is the world explained by science! How wonderful that every mystery solved is another mystery created! How my mind can be expanded, trying to grapple with the concepts thrown up by scientists.
Thank you for this article, we need to spread the word
The best of luck to you in your new found freedom. As you obviously already know the real universe is infinitly greater in its wonders than any bronze age fantasy could ever dream up.
When I moved away from religion my great issue was not leaving the community but dealing with the embarrassment of having been a believer. It took *years* to get over this.
This is a beautiful bit of writing! Concise, accurate and to the point. Everything the Catholic church (In my case) is not. I come from an extremely Catholic family, my oldest brother a pastor, and I can tell you it’s very hard to be an atheist in this kind of family. But I made the choice once I hit college. (An appropriate time!) And my life has been much sweeter and more joyful than it ever was under the yoke of catholic dogma. I went through a stretch of great hatred for the church, because of the kind of wounds it inflicted upon me. But, I’ve put it past me. It’s people like Richard, who deserve so much credit for giving comfort and solace to people like me. Being an atheist forces one to confront ones world head on and to think for oneself. (And to live with the consequences.) What a wonderful way to go through life. Head up and eyes wide open!
As one who came to see Christianity as being roughly equal parts comfort myth and revenge fantasy, I have less respect for the ‘comfort’ part all the time. Presumably, every tyrant who ever lived took some comfort from their actions.
Many modern churches and small ministries are changing and adapting the values of former dogma’s to met new concepts of belief based on a better model. If you do decide to stand up in any church and speak out with a voice not to interfer, but to ask your questions you might find the answer’s are in the body of people who come and share the experience of communion with a mission of ministry. We are all charged with the ability to be missionaries of faith, by baptism and do not require some other “church authority” Share a coffee in a coffee shop, or in the ailse of a grocery store with someone you know and you will be able to understand the radom acts of kindness building the community of care, questions and dialogue to other’s.
I hope you all will read through the article again and view that her opinions are valid if you want to be negative in what all can be a very good thing by doing ministry as the teaching of Jesus were meant to do. Go out and share the knowledge you have, dont waste it on those who will bring you grief for believing in a better world today and in the future.
Your body will not get off the planet alive, that is undoubtedly and fact. Your spirit and rememberance of what you did, who you touched and the deeds you performed will out weight anything you could do in a pew. STAND SIT KNEEL or whatever will not bring you closer to faith. Random and frequent acts of care and doing good deeds increases with the love of coming to worship filled with the ability to say thank you God for making me, and giving me hope and the ability to seek you out without fears or reluctants to share in the peace of my life will be remembered by those I touched and gave care to.
I pray this day for giving thanks for Paula’s writings skills to seek us out to break out of the prison of sanctuary and into the Religious duty of community involvement. Your ideas are worthy and hopefully some of you will do a random act of care today because of reading this.
RMWEEKS
Her “opinions are valid” if you’re looking for reality, not nebulous comforting fictions that turn you into a pompous twit.
Do you really think the same way you write? If so, your head must be one weird place to be!
Thank you for sharing this with us paula.
I loved both posts you made. They are truly inspiring. I try to share these kind of things with my believing friends and family, just to show them that we atheists are not bad people, and are not criticizing them to make them feel bad, but because we care about the truth and because we would like for them to feel the same way about questioning everything. That is one of the main difference as you said. Religion prohibits questioning, and in contrast, lack of belief comes from questioning everything, EVEN atheism… even ourselves and our loved ones.
Again, thank you for sharing this.
The main problem here is that the kind of atheism that you are promoting Paula is closed to ‘faith’ and you are right, Christianity has faith as it’s very basis. I’m really sad you seem to have had so many bad experiences of church life and have come to view church and doctrine with so much suspicion, as my own experiences have been so very different from yours.
I came from an atheist position, and for me seeking truth led me to believe in Jesus Christ as through His crucifixion and resurrection, reconciling me to God as my Father. Jesus says “The truth shall set you free” and that certainly has been my experience. My background is astrophysics and theology so it has been an interesting journey of faith.
About the brake’s analogy,
As a former christian all I can say is bull-crap!! A lot of christians will pick and choose even their level of faith, but won’t admit it. Case in point, if christians really had ultimate faith they would be handling poisionous snakes, never checking their brakes, living completely with risks knowing their god would protect them, they don’t do that because their being hypocrites. What about all those unanswered prayers? Yup, there’s an excuse for that too.