Ep. 83: Questions for the atheist

[Exrev]

Pluralistic Christians probably don't evangelize as the evangelicals/fundies do, maybe less likely to talk about their beliefs. From my experience it seems that even liberal pastors will preach more to the right to appease a moderate or conservative audiences.

I agree with the facts, but I disagree with the interpretation. Most experts will simplify ideas on which they have expertise when explaining those ideas to a lay audience. Theologians and clergy are no different.

Moreover, liberals tend to be pro-multiculturalism. Even though we believe that more moderate or conservative audiences are probably wrong about a bunch of stuff, we tend to leave them alone if we think they're not harming anyone.

Conservative ideas aren't essentially simpler than liberal theology. But I think most pastors are just afraid to speak up for fear of losing their job. So instead of directly dealing with these issues... seems pastors preach from a safe-zone.

[mitchellmckain]

"3) In science we can separate the principles of science from any erroneous conclusions that scientists may have had at one time, so why can't we do the same for Christianity and seperate the ideals of Christianity from various irrational beliefs and behaviors that Christians may support at the moment or in the past?"

False comparison. Doesn't work. Come on, Mitch.

Incorrect. The comparison works fine as long as you don't step outside the point it is making to make absurd claims with a lot of muddled thinking -- like claiming that the comparison means that if you accept the conclusions of science then you must therefore accpet the conclusions of religion. Nevertheless, you can compare something in chess to something in checkers without becoming confused about the very distinct difference between the two. Religion is not science -- the two could not be more different, but they do have this in common that they both pursue ideals which are uniquely their own and it is on the basis of that similarity that this comparison was made.

"4) What would happen if you approached Christianity looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?"

Now this, to me, is really the question. Why should I approach Christianity with an attitude of looking for anything of value? Why?

Why should you approach Christianity looking for excuses to condemn it? You can of course do neither and simply ignore Christianity altogether much the same way I give 0 time in my life to spectator sports and reality tv shows.

[Pseudonym]

Conservative ideas aren't essentially simpler than liberal theology.

Even if my area of expertise isn't essentially simpler than your (different) area of expertise, I may still have to simplify my ideas to get them across to you.

But I think most pastors are just afraid to speak up for fear of losing their job. So instead of directly dealing with these issues... seems pastors preach from a safe-zone.

This may be true where you live. I do understand that in the USA, clergy tend to be employed by the local church community whereas elsewhere, they tend to be employed by a central organisation. If you are speaking to an audience composed of those who are responsible for paying you, I can envisage a reluctance not to rock too many boats.

[Rian]

"3) In science we can separate the principles of science from any erroneous conclusions that scientists may have had at one time, so why can't we do the same for Christianity and seperate the ideals of Christianity from various irrational beliefs and behaviors that Christians may support at the moment or in the past?"

False comparison. Doesn't work. Come on, Mitch.

Why not? People did a lot of this after 9/11 - many people said that Muslims were all a bunch of crazy killers, and others pointed out that many Muslims weren't like this. What's your objection to what Mitch said?

[Exrev]

Conservative ideas aren't essentially simpler than liberal theology.

Even if my area of expertise isn't essentially simpler than your (different) area of expertise, I may still have to simplify my ideas to get them across to you.

But that isn't what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about making it simpler i'm talking about specific doctrine. Many Pastors will pretend to believe something they don't! I know this is a shock, but it happens.

But I think most pastors are just afraid to speak up for fear of losing their job. So instead of directly dealing with these issues... seems pastors preach from a safe-zone.

This may be true where you live. I do understand that in the USA, clergy tend to be employed by the local church community whereas elsewhere, they tend to be employed by a central organisation. If you are speaking to an audience composed of those who are responsible for paying you, I can envisage a reluctance not to rock too many boats.

Yeah most evangelical churches are set up this way. In fact, I think even some of the mainline churches are asking the local congrations to raise the pastors salary and funds.

[Rian]

All the churches that I've belonged to (since becoming an adult) have had totally open books - including the pastor's salary. And these pastors have lived in modest, middle-class homes.

Bummer that they aren't the ones in the news.

[humanguy]

"4) What would happen if you approached Christianity looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?"

Now this, to me, is really the question. Why should I approach Christianity with an attitude of looking for anything of value? Why?

Why should you approach Christianity looking for excuses to condemn it? You can of course do neither and simply ignore Christianity altogether much the same way I give 0 time in my life to spectator sports and reality tv shows.

I don't look look for excuses for anything, Mitch. But look, you asked, "What would happen if you approached Christianity looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it." And so my question remains this: why would someone look for something of value in Christianity?

[mitchellmckain]

I don't look look for excuses for anything, Mitch. But look, you asked, "What would happen if you approached Christianity looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it." And so my question remains this: why would someone look for something of value in Christianity?

Yes that was my question and that is exactly why I respond to this question with "why go looking for excuses to condemn it?"

Either you are interested or not. That is for you to decide. But given that interest, my query applies. If you really want to pursue that interest then it is only natural to find out what there is of value in it rather than gratuitiously seeking its destruction which is just senseless.

[AA/PK]

A sheltered life because it is my experience that the vast majority of Christians I come in contact with don't hold pluralistic ideals?

I'm being over-dramatic, but yes. The key point here is that the Christians that you come into contact with is probably a biassed sample.

The same is true of myself, incidentally. The vast majority of Christians I know in real life don't believe in a literal hell, and are happy to tell you this if you ask them. It wasn't until I was an adult that I realised that this was a biassed sample.

I mean where would the religions of the world get their power to convert if those that adhere to them didn't really believe they have it right?

Believing that you "have it right" is not the same thing as believing that everyone else has it wrong, and it is also not the same thing as believing that you have everything that is right. Does that make sense?

You are being over-dramatic. And I concede that a large number of people who call themselves Christians will deny there is a hell. I think they do this because the only value Christianity has for them is as a pacifier, and the idea of hell doesn't exactly have a comforting effect.

Secondly, I think that I may sort of see what it is you might be trying to say. But it logically follows that if a Christian believes Christianity is the right, or is the truth about God, that they therefore believe that other definitions are not. 2+2=4. Should I also believe it equals 5 because there is a definition out there that defines parameters in which it could be? I think the difference between our opinions may lie here - I don't view faith in a religion as a buffet where I go from dish to dish waiting to find something to eat that won't give me diarrhea, and then simply eat that dish which makes me most comfortable. If a god exists I think there is an absolute truth about what that god would be, and if a god exists I think its highly likely that our buffet would still give it diarrhea.

[NH Baritone]

All the churches that I've belonged to (since becoming an adult) have had totally open books - including the pastor's salary. And these pastors have lived in modest, middle-class homes.

Bummer that they aren't the ones in the news.

One of the safety nets provided by a larger denominational structure (at least among the mainline protestant denominations) is the requirement that there be a finance committee made up of members of the congregation, and that the denomination audit the books.

When I was 11 years old, I happened to look at the church budget that was included in the Sunday bulletin. In it was a line marked "Pastor's Salary." That year my father made $6000.00.

I remember it because it was such a round number. Of course, it was 1966, and we were supplied a furnished 3-bedroom house, too. But he received no travel budget and had to pay for his own car.

[NH Baritone]

What would happen if you approached Christianity looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?

Hmmm.... Let's look at this in another context:

• What would happen if you approached Rastafarianism looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?
• What would happen if you approached Communism looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?
• What would happen if you approached worship of Athena looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?

Each of these has its parallels with Christianity: each has their dogmas, adherents, schisms, and defectors.

But the difference is that none of these in our current culture are being shoved up our noses. We can go days, weeks, years, or sometimes a lifetime without dealing with anyone who wants to sell us the bill-of-goods associated with these belief systems.

I would love it if could similarly ignore Christianity. In this culture, however, none of us are afforded that opportunity.

[mitchellmckain]

What would happen if you approached Christianity looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?

Hmmm.... Let's look at this in another context:

• What would happen if you approached Rastafarianism looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?
• What would happen if you approached Communism looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?
• What would happen if you approached worship of Athena looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?

Each of these has its parallels with Christianity: each has their dogmas, adherents, schisms, and defectors.

But the difference is that none of these in our current culture are being shoved up our noses. We can go days, weeks, years, or sometimes a lifetime without dealing with anyone who wants to sell us the bill-of-goods associated with these belief systems.

I would love it if could similarly ignore Christianity. In this culture, however, none of us are afforded that opportunity.

I have as yet no interest in Rastafarianism either way.

I have taken a close look at Communism. I read both the "Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx and "What is to be Done" by Lenin, and far from finding anyting of value in them, I found only enormous reasons to be contemptable of them. I can say the same of many other things I have read (although to a lesser degree), such as A. N. Whitehead's "Process and Reality", some of the writings of Plato, and some of the ideas of Nietche.

I do find Greek and Roman mythology and culture quite fascinating and if you could point me to something of substance on the subject of Athena then I might very well take the time to read it and consider it quite seriously. But frankly I rather doubt that this ever had a great deal of theological depth to it and the philosophical explorations of that culture can be taken quite seperately from this mythology and that I certainly have explored and found much of value in it.

As for Christianity I quite admit that I never had your experiences of having it shoved up my nose and if that had been the case I admit that I may very well have had the same reaction -- this is why I have repeatedly expressed a great deal of sympathy for the sentiments, rationality and moral indignation of the atheists on this forum. But that should show you that we can go beyond the limitations of our experiences to understand the thoughts and sentiments of those who have had different experiences. If I can do it -- can't you?

[NH Baritone]

What would happen if you approached Christianity looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?

Hmmm.... Let's look at this in another context:

• What would happen if you approached Rastafarianism looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?
• What would happen if you approached Communism looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?
• What would happen if you approached worship of Athena looking for something of value in it rather than looking for excuses to condemn it?

Each of these has its parallels with Christianity: each has their dogmas, adherents, schisms, and defectors.

But the difference is that none of these in our current culture are being shoved up our noses. We can go days, weeks, years, or sometimes a lifetime without dealing with anyone who wants to sell us the bill-of-goods associated with these belief systems.

I would love it if could similarly ignore Christianity. In this culture, however, none of us are afforded that opportunity.

I have as yet no interest in Rastafarianism either way.

I have taken a close look at Communism. I read both the "Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx and "What is to be Done" by Lenin, and far from finding anyting of value in them, I found only enormous reasons to be contemptable of them. I can say the same of many other things I have read (although to a lesser degree), such as A. N. Whitehead's "Process and Reality", some of the writings of Plato, and some of the ideas of Nietche.

I do find Greek and Roman mythology and culture quite fascinating and if you could point me to something of substance on the subject of Athena then I might very well take the time to read it and consider it quite seriously. But frankly I rather doubt that this ever had a great deal of theological depth to it and the philosophical explorations of that culture can be taken quite seperately from this mythology and that I certainly have explored and found much of value in it.

As for Christianity I quite admit that I never had your experiences of having it shoved up my nose and if that had been the case I admit that I may very well have had the same reaction -- this is why I have repeatedly expressed a great deal of sympathy for the sentiments, rationality and moral indignation of the atheists on this forum. But that should show you that we can go beyond the limitations of our experiences to understand the thoughts and sentiments of those who have had different experiences. If I can do it -- can't you?

Mitch,

I am repeatedly struck that you and I are engaging in quite different conversations. At least your responses to me seem to reflect little on what I have said.

If I am reading your response correctly, you appear to seek the right to be a Christian, and somehow seek that I confer that right. I don't know where (in a free country) that wish emerges from. But let me here and now permit you and anyone else on the planet who wants to lose themselves in the desert of Christianity, go right ahead. The sun is bright, the sand warm, and the mirages bountiful.

However, even with that said, neither you nor anyone else has the right to expect that I simultaneously cease believing that you have, on this matter, become a raving lunatic with judgment akin to a follower of Jim Jones. The mythologies of Jerusalem and Jonestown have equal claim on the description of reality, and equally violate rational thought.

[AA/PK]

I have an idea why this isn't given as much attention. Pluralistic Christians probably don't evangelize as the evangelicals/fundies do, maybe less likely to talk about their beliefs. From my experience it seems that even liberal pastors will preach more to the right to appease a moderate or conservative audiences. Yes it does seem that the church is more conservative than the clergy.
I have to say that I am impressed by the emergent movement. Which seems to view the world as postmodern. They see the older generations church stuck in modernist ways of thinking. They seem to be loosing conservative Christianity up. Even some of the Pentecostal are moving toward this movement (aka foursquare). So it will be interesting to see where this grass roots Christianity goes. I think we will be hearing from more moderate/liberal voices in the future.

I couldn't agree more. When I take these things into account it often raises questions of societal evolution. Do you think this movement from conservative Christianity is a social evolution toward secularism, or is it solely an internal evolution of Christian beliefs becoming less and less conservatively fundamental within the church? Although, I suppose it is probably both. I have seen anecdotal evidence and polls I couldn't even begin to remember that point toward this secular movement of a society's population as that society develops and evolves. I'm not sure I feel comfortable saying it is a consistent trend, I think many of the ancient Eastern religions and societies would take issue with me if I did, as they should. But there does seem to be a trend toward secularism in Western culture. What do you think?

[Pseudonym]

You are being over-dramatic. And I concede that a large number of people who call themselves Christians will deny there is a hell. I think they do this because the only value Christianity has for them is as a pacifier, and the idea of hell doesn't exactly have a comforting effect.

Sorry, you're accusing me of being over-dramatic?

Secondly, I think that I may sort of see what it is you might be trying to say. But it logically follows that if a Christian believes Christianity is the right, or is the truth about God, that they therefore believe that other definitions are not.

Religion is studied in the humanities faculty, not the science faculty. In pretty much all of the humanities, from sociology to political science, from art to philosophy, "I'm right" doesn't imply "you're wrong".

(Yes, it's true that there is a large subset of religious people which don't understand this, in much the same way that there is a large subset of political people who don't understand this. It's unfortunate.)

I think the difference between our opinions may lie here - I don't view faith in a religion as a buffet where I go from dish to dish waiting to find something to eat that won't give me diarrhea, and then simply eat that dish which makes me most comfortable. If a god exists I think there is an absolute truth about what that god would be, and if a god exists I think its highly likely that our buffet would still give it diarrhea.

I try to avoid any view which over-simplifies anything that is inherently complex.

To understand what faith is, or what religion is, you have to understand it as it actually is, both by those who engage in it on the ground and by those who study it, throughout all cultures and all time. The Dunning-Kruger effect applies as much here as everywhere: the more that you learn, the less you realise that you know.

Reality has this nasty habit of never conforming to human-invented categories and ontologies, and never confirming our personal biasses, regardless of what they are. Especially where humans are concerned, reality is messy, confusing and, above all, breathtaking.