Silly Christian Morals

In a blog last week I wrote that "modern adults realize that Christian 'morals' are a bit silly." Those are strong words. I should have realized that this would offend many people, and I started to think maybe I should retract it.

But on reflection, I can't retract it. I know it's offensive to Christians (and Jews and Muslims, because I'll add them to the mix), but I stand by this assertion. What I will do is amplify so that it's clear exactly what I mean.

Christians are for the most part a moral group. But their morals can be divided into two parts: The morals that all people share, and the morals that are uniquely Christian.

The morals that Christians share with all civilized people are not silly. Be faithful to your mate. Don't murder. Follow the golden rule. Don't steal. Protect children. Honor our parents. These are good morals that all civilized people share. But these are not Christian morals. They are human morals that arise from nature. Jewish, Christian and Muslim authors merely incorporated these into their holy scriptures thousands of years ago. This isn't unique; every civilization does this. Christians can't make some claim to exclusivity on these universal morals. (See Atheism IS Where Morality Originates.)

What about "Christian morals," the ones that are unique to the Christian faith?

Christians Beaten by Atheists, Jews and Mormons on Biblical Knowledge

The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life just published an interesting new survey about how much Americans really know about religions. Much to everyone's surprise, the atheists and agnostics came out on top!

The headlines are filled with stuff like Atheists Outdo Some Believers (NY Times) or Atheists and Agnostics Know More About the Bible than Religious (National Public Radio).

But not so fast! It turns out that Atheists didn't really win, it was more like Christians lost. The atheist/agnostic category got the best score at 20.9 out of 32 questions. But look at how it really went down:

Bible gets Lampooned: Kissing Hank's Ass

Life is keeping me busy today (in a good way!), so I'm going to leave you with something funny. Really funny – this is one of the best parodies I've found. It's really hard to tell the difference between Hank and God ...

Kissing Hank's Ass, by Jim Huber

This morning there was a knock at my door. When I answered the door I found a well groomed, nicely dressed couple. The man spoke first:

John: "Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."

Mary: "Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me: "Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His ass?"

John: "If you kiss Hank's ass, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the shit out of you."

Me: "What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"

John: "Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His ass."

Me: "That doesn't make any sense. Why..."

Mary: "Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the ass?"

CONTINUED ... CLICK HERE to read the rest of this great story on JHuger's web site. Enjoy!

Christian Cross to Honor Jewish Soldiers? Scalia says yes!

I try to have respect for our Supreme Court justices even when I disagree with them, but Justice Scalia has once again shown a callous and contemptible insensitivity for religious minorities, and a shocking lack of understanding of the principles on which this country is founded.

Scalia can't see why the Christian cross, the very symbol of Jewish persecution down through the ages, might not be considered pleasing to Jews who died for their country:

"[The Christian cross] signifies that Jesus is the son of God and died to redeem mankind for our sins," [attorney] Peter Eliasberg told the justices. ... Justice Antonin Scalia sharply disagreed. "It's erected as a war memorial. I assume it is erected in honor of all the war dead."

This is so idiotic it makes my head spin. How could anyone, especially a Supreme Court justice, think that a cross is anything but a Christian symbol, and worse, think that Jews would feel honored by this symbol that to them represents hatred and persecution?

This isn't the first time Scalia has shown his true colors as a Christian bigot. In an interview recently, he admitted openly that he doesn't believe atheists and humanists deserve the same protection as religious people, according to his twisted view of the United States Constitution.

Justice Scalia is missing that essential element that every judge should have: empathy, the ability to put yourself in the other guy's shoes. He is so immersed in Christianity he can't even recognize that the cross is a symbol of Christianity, not a generic god-symbol.

Scalia reminds me of that idiotic Kentucky lawmaker who argued that, "God is not religion. God is God!" It's laughable when a backwards hick says something like this, but what Scalia is saying is every bit as dumb.

How did this man get on the Supreme Court?

Darwin: The American Boogy Monster

As a follow-up to yesterday's blog ("Education, the Enemy of Religion?"), I found a story in USA Today that would be funny if it weren't so pathetic. Creation, a new British film about Darwin's life, has been sold to distributors in virtually every country in the world ... except the United States. Here, in one of the most technologically-advanced countries in the world, Christians are afraid of the truth.

This is not some flaky television show, or a blatantly anti-Christian propaganda piece. It is a top-notch story of the personal struggles of a scientist. Reuters calls it "one of the best delineations of intellectual and emotional struggle seen on film in many a year." It stars Paul Bettany as Darwin, and the wonderful (and Oscar-winning) actress Jennifer Connelly, who is Bettany's wife in real life, too.

In other words, it is a biography that should find a ready market in America, and would find a market if it was about any important scientist in history except Darwin. This is so ironic, that "father" of Evolution Science, arguably the most important, best-proved theory in the history of science, is the only one who is vilified by the religious right.

The only reason Evolution Science is singled out and rejected by religious people is because it disagrees with some ancient oral histories, stories that were finally written down by Jewish scholars 2,500 years ago, and declared "the word of God" by a self-appointed committee of rabbis around 2,300 years ago.

I sincerely hope that Creation eventually finds a market here in America. I know I'll watch it if it does.

Education: The Enemy of Religion?

Why do so many conservative Christians, Jews and Muslims insist on home schooling or private schools for their children?

They often mask their educational choices under the guise of "better schools," but most are up front about the real reason: Public schools teach science, evolution, and secular morality, which they view as directly opposed to their religions. A widely-believed rumor says that 80% of children who attend public schools will abandon the faith of their parents.

I don't get this. Truth should not be fragile.

If you believe something, if you are utterly convinced of its truth, then you shouldn't be afraid of knowledge. You should be willing to open your mind to all ideas, to learn about all viewpoints, to expand your knowledge. You should embrace the wonders of the world, and learn how your religion fits into the amazing, complex world that God created.

And, of course, you should want the same for your children!

Shunning education is an admission that your religion can't withstand scrutiny. If learning simple, well-established facts about science and nature is a threat to your beliefs, then you don't really believe, do you? How strong is your faith if you have to protect it from exposure to facts?

Children are very malleable, their minds can absorb vast quantities of information when they're young, and evolution has equipped them with a strong desire to do so. That's what makes us humans different from the rest of the animals: That we pass most of our knowledge from generation to generation via memes (cultural knowledge) rather than genes (instinct).

Deeply religious people have incorporated this very knowledge into their own culture. They know that their beliefs are fragile and vulnerable, that science has made fantastic progress while their religions have retained their ancient, mythical explanations of the world's origins. They know, in their hearts, that evolution science makes much more sense than creationism.

That's why, when someone tells me that their child is being home schooled because of their religion, what I really hear is their fear of the truth.

Convert Atheists on a Game Show??

This is almost too funny to be true. The title alone is enough to make your head spin: Penitents Compete! They're putting a panel of twelve atheists (which sounds Biblical to start with), on a TV show that tries to convert them to believers, using face-to-face talks with holy men and visits to mosques, temples and churches!

And there's a prize! Those who convert and become believers will get a free trip to their new favorite holy place! But the real prize, according to the producer, is even better: "We're giving the biggest prize in the world, God Himself."

The arrogance of religious people never ceases to amaze me. This TV program is so laughable it's kind of embarrassing. I will offer my own version of the religious arrogance: If any of those atheists are converted to belief in God by this program, I'm going to suspect a setup. I hope they've picked twelve atheists with a long and public history of atheism, otherwise the whole thing will look like a fraud.

Congressman Forbes: Another bogus claim that we're a "Christian Nation."

US Congressman Randy Forbes (R-Virginia) once again repeats the myth that America is a Christian nation. It's really quite sad that such a well educated man, one who obtained his Juris Doctor degree from the University of Virginia School of Law, could let his religious desires so badly color his understanding of American history. (I've written about this before.)

The historical facts are so clear and unambiguous: The United States is a secular nation, with a Christian majority. And indeed, the very reason Rep. Forbes is able to attend the church of his choice, worship Jesus and God in the manner he believes is correct, and educate his own children as to his own beliefs, is because we are a secular nation, not a Christian nation.

The specific statement that Rep. Forbes objects to is, ironically, the famous Article 11 from the Treaty of Tripoli, which was written under George Washington's supervision, ratified by the United States Senate, and signed by President John Adams. These are some of the very men we call our "founding fathers," and here's what they wrote and voted on:

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Got that? Do I have to repeat it? "... not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..."

Just once, I'd like to see one of these people who claim we're a Christian nation to clearly and unambiguously distinguish between these two ideas: First, that we're a secular nation, and second, that we're a nation with a Christian majority. Why is it so hard for Rep. Forbes to admit? He's a well educated, intelligent man, and surely must understand the difference.

All I can conclude is that Rep. Forbes is doing what politicians do: Saying what the voters want to hear, and to hell with accuracy. I know he comes from a conservative state, maybe it's just one of the things a politician has to do to get reelected. There must have been howls of outrage from his constituency when Obama repeated the words from the Treaty of Tripoli. Am I a cynic if I think that Rep. Forbes was deliberately ignoring the facts in order to play the crowd?

Here's his video in case you're interested. It's a bit long and repetative, but I want to present both sides.

How to Go Crazy: Just Read the Bible

I started to write about Biblical morality and homosexuality, but after two frustrating hours of research, today's blog is instead about the tragedy of Biblical apologetics. The Bible has diverted Western humanity from real ethical progress for far too long, by forcing Christians and Jews to defend the indefensible.

It started with Sisyphus Fragment's blog about morals and the Bible. From there, I headed over to Religious Tolerance: The Bible and Homosexuality. I thought the Bible's stance on homosexuality was a slam-dunk ("It's an abomination!"), but I ended up quite dizzy trying to follow all the convoluted details, mistranslations, and contradictions. It turns out the Bible is quite ambiguous and contradictory. How can this be, if it's the word of God?

Then I ran into the story of Jacob's wives, concubines and children, something that God seems to have had a direct hand in, and was dumbfounded — how can Christians and Jews take this stuff seriously? A man lusts for a teenage girl, whose father agrees to the union but then slips the older sister into Jacob's bed? And then he argues that Jacob should sleep with her for just a week, and then he can have the younger sister too? Jacob ends up with two wives, but one can't have children, so she forces various of her slaves to have sex with Jacob, who doesn't protest about this arrangement. Wait a second, I thought Jacob was one of the good guys!

Still dizzy, I dug around a little more and found Homosexuality and the Bible, by the Rev. Dr. Walter Wink. Finally, one sensible essay! My sanity started to return. Rev. Wink thoroughly debunks the idea that Christians can or should take the Bible literally on matters of morality. First of all, it's plainly contradictory in many areas, and second, there are many Biblical laws that are just plain immoral.

But by the time I finished Rev. Wink's excellent essay, I was sad and angry about the Bible. It is a sucking quagmire of contradictions, but one that is believed to be God's word. This forces intelligent, honest, sincere Christians to defend the indefensible. Since it's indefensible, they have to spend a huge amount of time and energy concocting "work-arounds", convoluted arguments that purport to explain the inexplicable.

This is a very sad thing. If the Bible were instead plain, to the point, and self-consistent, these same sincere, moral, honest people could devote their time and energy to so many more meaningful activities. If you think in economic terms, we're probably talking about more wasted man-hours than any other single activity in history.

My favorite example of this is illustrated by Bart Erhman. In the Introduction to Misquoting Jesus, he recounts how he spent many hours writing a a complex and convoluted term paper for a class about the Gospel of Mark, trying to justify why Jesus said "when Abiathar was the high priest" when in fact 1 Samuel 21:1-6 plainly says Abiathar's father Ahimelech was the high priest. Ehrman writes that he was quite proud of his contorted logic; the Bible couldn't be wrong, and he'd figured out an explanation for this glaring contradiction! But his pride was deflated when his professor wrote one short sentence at the end of his paper: "Maybe Mark just made a mistake."

Islamic Cleric: Boycott Starbucks, it's a Jewish Front!

This just in: Starbucks is a Jewish Front! All good Muslims should boycott Starbucks worldwide, and urge all their friends and relatives to do the same!

And how does Egyptian cleric Safwat Higa know this? Why, it's right there on the Starbuck's cup: That woman in the center? Starbucks claims that she's from Greek mythology, half woman / half fish, nothing more. But cleric Safwat Higa saw right through that ruse – it's clearly Queen Esther, queen of the Jews in Persia, from the Book of Esther in the Torah!

Do any Muslim people really take this seriously? Sometimes I wonder if these sorts of proclamations are just some sort of big joke that the whole Muslim world "gets", and they are secretly amused that the rest of us take it seriously. It's like some city boy wanders into a camp of cowboys, and one old cowpoke starts telling tall tales about the wild horse that threw him thirty feet in the air, but he managed to land right back on that horse, which surprised the horse so much he stopped bucking and became the quietest, most obedient horse on the range. And the stranger is wide-eyed, amazed by this tale, while all the other cowboys are laughing up their sleeves.

Or maybe not. Maybe the cleric is serious, actually believes this. But my real bet is that this is somehow a political move, not a religious issue. Cleric Safwat Higa stands to gain something by this proclamation, or one of his rivals stands to lose something. Or perhaps it's part of the broader economic war against the Western economic invasion of Egypt. Either way, I don't believe for a second that he really thinks the Starbucks logo is Queen Esther. The man is well educated, and far too wise and clever, to believe something that silly. I may not agree with him, but I'd never make the mistake of thinking he's stupid.

LOL! Roadside Crosses Declared "Secular" by Utah Legislature

Ha, here's a good one. Apparently in Utah, the state legislature has the ability to convert the Christian cross into a purely secular symbol! Why didn't we Atheists think of that years ago? Instead of being offended every time we see a religious symbol sponsored by the government, all we have to do is have the government vote to make it non-religious, and all our worries are over. No more discrimination!

That goes for Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and everyone else, too! Now the government can put up crosses, and they're merely secular symbols. How can that offend anyone?

The cross is ... just a cross, right? An instrument of Roman torture. Say the Romans had chopped Jesus' head off in a guillotine (yeah, I know it wasn't invented yet, but go with me on this), and the Christians had made a guillotine their symbol, and Christians started marking their graves with little guillotines, so that pretty soon everyone knew that if you saw a guillotine by the side of the road, why, you'd think, "death," and you'd know someone had died there. And then the government couldn't put guillotines on public property, right? Because that would be government sponsorship of a particular religion. But hey, then we could just have the legislature declare that guillotines were secular, and that would be that!

Those Utah Mormons, so forward thinking, always one step ahead of the rest of us. Or maybe they're always good for a laugh.

F18 crash reveals that God's hand is ... not there

Yesterday I made my lunch and sat down to enjoy the noon news. But when I flipped on the TV, I was greeted by the tragic videos of smoke billowing from a neighborhood just a few miles from me, where an USMC F-18 fighter jet had crashed just two minutes earlier. Sadly, four people were killed: A mother, two very young children, and their grandmother. Four wonderful lives, snuffed out in an instant, by utterly random chance.

Years ago, I remember reading about a couple on a canoe trip in Canada for their honeymoon. A beaver just happened to be gnawing a tree as they paddled by; the tree fell and killed the woman. Utterly and completely random.

I did a lot of camping at Yosemite National Park when my kids were young. One year, we heard that a monstrous branch from an ancient sequoia tree broke off and fell on the open upper deck of a tourist bus, killing a number people. When those people woke up that morning, would any of them have guessed they wouldn't live to see the end of the day?

If you believe, as millions do, that God is omnipotent and omniscient, then God knew these people were going to die, and in fact these deaths were somehow part of His plan. For some reason yesterday, God decided to kill a baby, a toddler, their mother, and their grandmother. God decided to leave behind a widowed grandfather, and a father who not only lost his wife, but also his two tiny children.

And you have to believe that, for some inscrutable reason, God had that beaver cut the tree down right when the happy couple were paddling by, leaving her husband a young widower. The same goes for all those people on the bus in Yosemite – God decided to kill them, too.

There are many far greater tragedies unfolding across the world every day, but these simple, small tragedies hit me much harder. Maybe it's because a million starving people are too much to grasp, but a dead family in my own neighborhood is something my brain can understand.

Jews, Christians and Muslims who believe that God is really in charge, and deliberately causes all of these random, horrible deaths, have resorted to some of the most inscrutable and indefensible logic in the history of humanity. The pinnacle of this "logic," the phrase that I find deeply offensive, is: "God works in mysterious ways." In other words, none of this makes any sense, but God is smarter than us, and uses a superior logic that is far beyond human comprehension. God has a plan, and God is good, so killing some babies, their mother, and their grandmother, must be a good thing. But we poor humans are too dumb to grasp the logic that helps God realize why this random killing was for the best.

As for me, I prefer a much more sensible explanation: Random stuff happens, and sometimes you're in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Tags: F18 crash christian jew muslim death atheist atheism religion

Religulous: The Joy of Being With Friends

Like all good Athiests, I had to see Bill Maher's commentary on religion. All I can say is: Brilliant! Well done!

But what really made me happy was not the movie, but the audience reaction. It was like a huge, communal exhalation, a massive sigh of relief, a place where sensible, rational people could all simultaneously feel free to finally laugh out loud, to express their true feelings about what's going on in the world today.

This experience made me realize that, even though I think of myself as an out-of-the-closet Atheist, there is still discrimination all around. I'm surrounded by Christians who think of me as peculiar and misguided at best, and evil at the worst. I can't really be myself most of the time. Normally I just live with this repression, and I didn't even realize I was doing it. It wasn't until I was suddenly among friends, free to really express myself, that it was clear just how much we Atheists have to suppress our true opinions.

My wife is Jewish, and I always wondered why the Jews stick together so much. Now I have a better idea – it's not because they don't like their Christian friends and neighbors. It's because when they're together, that's the only time they can truly relax and feel free. We Athiests are ten times their numbers, yet we're still an oppressed minority. It took Religulous, and being among friends, to bring that message home, to make me realize just how much I feel the repression on a daily basis.

Tags: atheism atheist maher christian christianity discrimination jewish judaism religulous tolerance

Abraham was a Pagan?

Were the Jews actually pagans?

I was watching an old TV rerun of The Bible the other day, and my eyelids started to get heavy. Suddenly, I was shocked to find I'd been transported back in time, four thousand years, to the very village of Abraham and Sarah. What an opportunity, to meet the patriarch of all Western religion! I was so excited. Not only is Abraham the spiritual father of all Muslims, Christians and Jews, but Abraham and Sarah got to personally meet God. And there was Abraham, right in front of me! I was so full of questions, I hardly knew where to start.

"You must have been overwhelmed in the glow of God's love and kindness!"

"Actually, he was pretty harsh," said Abraham, stroking his beard. "You know, you have to be pretty careful what you say when He is around. He's got quite a temper."

"A temper? But He is a forgiving, loving God!"

Abraham gave a chuckle. "Who told you that, son? You should see what He did to Sodom and Gomorrah! And that business telling me I had to sacrifice my son, and only stopping me at the last second? That wasn't much fun."

"No, I suppose not. But he is God Almighty, and who are we to question His reasons, right?"

"Almighty?" Abraham looked a bit perplexed. "What's that supposed to mean?"

"You know, He is the one and only God, He created the universe, and His infinite wisdom and ways are sometimes too mysterious for us poor humans to understand."

Abraham looked at me like maybe I was crazy. "Are you sure we're talking about the same Lord?"

"Of course!" I replied. "You are Abraham, right?"

"That's me. But my Lord never said anything to me about being almighty, or really smart. I mean, he couldn't even find Adam and Even in the Garden when they hid from Him! Did He tell you He was almighty?"

"No, but everyone knows it!"

"Well, son, it's news to me. Around here our Lord helps us with wars and such. He's pretty good at a raining down burning sulfur, confusing our enemies, spreading plagues, you know, stuff like that. But that's about it."

"But, wait!" I was confused. "Doesn't he help you with all of your prayers?"

By now, Abraham seemed to be pretty convinced I was loony, but he was my host and kept humoring me. "Actually, that's a bit of a problem. Our Lord is pretty jealous, and he doesn't want us worshipping the other gods. But that's kind of tricky. I mean, what are we supposed to do when we need some rain?"

"Pray to the Lord, of course!"

"And what good would that do? The rain is one of the other god's jobs."

"Other gods?" I was shocked. "You mean, you worship other gods?"

"No! A deal is a deal. But that's the problem. We have all sorts of gods who could help us. Sometimes we need rain, fertility, love, all sorts of things. But our Lord put us on the straight and narrow. I made a covenant with Him - we're to pray only to our Lord, and ignore the other gods. In return, he's going to take good care of us. But it's hard, we've been worshipping those other gods for so long..." He looked kind of wistful.

"But ..." I didn't quite know what to say. This was shocking! Could Abraham be a polytheist? I had to ask. "You don't believe in those other gods, do you? I mean, they're false gods!"

"Who told you that? Of course we believe in them! They've protected and helped us for time immemorial! That's why it's been hard for me to get my people to worship only the Lord. They just can't see how our Lord, the God of Armies, can help us with all the other things we need. A lot of my people are afraid that if we stop worshipping the other gods, they'll take vengeance on us. But I'm in charge here, and I told everyone in no uncertain terms to toe the line. Our Lord made a deal, and He is going to keep it, so we'll keep our part too."

By this time, I was practically dizzy with confusion, and the sky began to spin. I suddenly woke up, saw George C. Scott on the TV, and realized it was all a dream. But ... what about all that stuff Abraham said in my dream? I guess the Israelites really were pagans!

It makes sense, I guess. Why would they have to swear their loyalty to Yahweh, if he was the only guy in town?