No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the
testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more
miraculous, than the fact which it endeavours to establish. - David Hume
Dear atheists,
Do you have any New Christian friends? Do you know people that are in the business of religion, whether it be at a seminary, Christian college whether a pastor, a Christian teacher, or a youth leader? These are people that literally make a career off of their particular brand of religion (it's how they make money)... Many of you have friends and family that are still religious and see their social media light up with posts like "abortion is murder!" or "Marriage is between one man and one woman" or "#defundplannedparenthood" or whatever narrative the conservative Republican talking heads decide to push on their followers for the week.
I have noticed in reading many of my friends writings on social media, blogs, or speeches on YouTube that they often call those that do not accept their choice of a religion (Christianity) "skeptics". It's strange because it seems to be used with negative connotation behind it. They, in the same breath, would say that there is absolutely no conflict between science and religion yet seem to not understand how a term like skeptic is a positive thing if one is to think scientifically. There is no situation that being skeptical is bad. It may be unwarranted continuing skepticism like say in the new movement that said we faked the Pluto flyby or that 9/11 was an inside job or the birther movement or global warming is all a liberal hoax or whatever, but it's never bad to be a skeptic going into any claim.
We as atheists know this. Obviously, we have been presented in life with the positive claim that there is a god and this god is the god of the Bible and then throughout our lives are sloppily shown all sorts of lines of reasoning for this from a strange pieced-together ancient book mixed with a whole heaping helping of random overweight sweaty yelling pastors with bad haircuts telling us this means this and this means that and this is the right way to live and don't do that. It's a lot to take in and it's mostly began as brainwashing in children, but I digress. And I've got a little personal there! Let's just say we atheists have found the "evidence" presented for a god to be lacking on all fronts.
I would assume that not all New Christians would talk negatively on being a "skeptic". I think some would acknowledge its inherently good to be skeptical of all claims - even their religion.. then would just suggest they have evidence for this religion's validity. Evidence for the validity of Christianity hinges almost wholly on Jesus being a real human in history first and foremost. There is a small minority of Bible scholars in what's called the Jesus Seminar that are mythicists. They do not think Jesus was a real historical figure but merely concocted over time borrowing from many other myths before and during this time period when the New Testament was written.
We will just write them off as being wrong for now simply due to the fact that the majority of Bible scholars (the experts) think that the stories of Jesus in the New Testament were based on a real person living at that time. This doesn't automatically grant that the stories surrounding this real figure in history were not tacked on or embellished in any way to make this figure look more miraculous, but we'll set that aside for the time being.
Now, if you were to ask one of your New Christian friends what they think "proves" Christianity or at least gives the greatest line of evidence for it - they would say - the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. It proves the gospel. You see, first we must grant them the core "blood sacrifice" cosmic rule that demands an all-powerful God /or at least the "son" part of him/ must die to atone for the sins of all human beings throughout history and into the future is an actual thing. So whatever... let's do it... we let them have that, something there is no evidence for - it's just in an old book. So OK. We're giving them a lot already, I know, but let's keep going...
The next step is to examine if these things are true. Did Jesus exist?... we will just say yes here. He was a human being that existed in history. Did he die? We'll grant this as well. He did die on a cross. History shows it, right? Did he raise from the dead? (see, this is the apologists' slam dunk! if you can show Jesus rose from the dead this means to them that the whole message of gospel is true- thus Christianity is true) Do Christians actually believe there is evidence for this to satisfy us skeptics that Jesus rose from the dead?
Yes. Yes, they do. We merely need to look at the evidence to see!
A friend I was introduced to by another friend (both of which are New Christians) has a video I posted in the link below. Check out his stuff, he's a really nice guy. He has a video explaining how we can know the New Testament is reliable and it's not all just made up, or copied wrong, or altered like a bad game of "telephone". YouTube any lecture or debate on Jesus' resurrection from William Lane Craig. This is also where the New Christians find comfort... they can show by delving into ancient accounts that the resurrection of Jesus was true. How do they know this? - three key words - EYE WITNESS TESTIMONY. This is the defining proof for the validity of the gospel. You see, MULTIPLE witnesses saw Jesus after his resurrection. The New Testament itself was taken directly from eye witness testimony. Not just one person.. MULTIPLE eye witnesses! Also, the direct eye witness (a disciple of Jesus - Peter) who was with Jesus the whole time told the Apostle Paul and many others his stories of direct accounts with Jesus (keep in mind there is no proof for this just granting it for now - it's inferred this happened this way, no solid evidence.) So does this confirm the validity of the stories in the New Testament?
Borrowing from Carl Sagan's creed, when I've asked proponents of Jesus' resurrection for extraordinary evidence (extra evidence, more than the usual amount of evidence for a given historical figure), they say we actually have more evidence for Jesus' existence than many very well established historical figures. In other words by ways historians get information on the validity of fact-person over fictional-person, Jesus wins this compared to many other historical figures we today assume are real. Of course, this is just Jesus' existence... I don't think I've ever heard any New Christian say that we have more or even as much evidence for Jesus resurrection than another historical figure doing a specific act or deed. Maybe they will address this contention sometime for me.
Also, it seems they miss my point about the "extra evidence" I require. Even if Jesus has more historical proof than Alexander the Great or whatever historical figure we take for granted it doesn't matter - I don't have to GIVE MY LIFE to any other historical figure except Jesus ... if the gospel is true. So give me something more than shitty spotty evidence if you expect me to give more than a moment's notice of learning who you are like I would with Alexander the Great. You need to earn my following with more and better evidence!
Say it is true ... let's give the proponents of Jesus resurrection the benefit of the doubt and say ALL the eye witness testimonies are really people that are all reporting the same thing. They are real testimonies, not fabricated or falsified. It seems what we are left with is what the Christian apologist wants - accurate, multiple eye witness testimonies of Jesus after he was raised from the dead! Is this proof of the truth of the gospel?!
Well, I would suggest that if we are to use this "multiple eye witness testimony" as valid proof of an event taking place then we must take into account many other events in human history. The Christian apologist would likely be a skeptic in many of these other "multiple eye witness testimonies" such as UFO sightings or other religious experiences. In fact there have been several UFO sightings that have not only been witnessed by multiple people and reported to the local news, but have also been filmed by multiple people! So why would anyone be skeptical when we have film of this account? Why would people that accept multiple eye witness testimony as evidence of an event that happened thousands of years ago and was written down decades after the event not accept an event that multiple people experienced and even filmed?
This is inconsistent. And shows your confirmation bias, New Christians. Address this. Now let me address you:
What we do know is that eye witness is one of the WORST lines of evidence to rely on. Multiple court cases in this country alone have shown this to be the case. We are wired for bias. Listen to this for an example of what I'm talking about:
http://www.npr.org/2015/07/06/418585084/the-new-science-behind-our-unfair-criminal-justice-system
We are pattern seeking mammals and we are inclined to make major mistakes in connecting patterns and forming theories in our heads; creating false stories, attaching blame, biased for those reflecting our race, gender, and socioeconomic status. We are not reliable. It's a fact. And these biases and unreliable, unfair connections have real consequences convicting the wrong person in trials. We are horrible at identifying things from memory and our memory is faulty. And this is all in 2015, we are talking about thousands of years ago when we talk about Jesus' resurrection. Why on Earth should we be inclined to assume our memory was better then? Why on Earth would we assume that biases weren't at play in the eye witness testimonies of Jesus? Why do we mostly all understand that eye witness testimony (even from multiple sources on a single event) in 2015 is unreliable yet somehow think multiple eye witness testimony is somehow reliable in the past? Magic? We can say magic I guess... God's magic? Faith? That illogical gap there was all fuzzy wuzzy woo to connect it all together? We should just have faith in this? There is a certain level of faith here? Is this it? Honestly, New Christian?
Then you've lost me in an intellectual discussion... You're whole "proof of Jesus' resurrection" comes tumbling down in front of us. Multiple eye witness testimony proves fucking nothing! And you know it. Stop saying it does. You have a deep confirmation bias for your tribe to be the right one, for your religion to be the right one, for your god to be the right one. It's dishonest, it's clearly special pleading when you do not treat other claims the same as you do yours.
There is a something that seems crystal clear to me the more I look into it. Religion is like a colossal worldwide role playing game. It's followers are like those who obsess over the details of Lord of Rings or Game of Thrones. Only with a role playing game or these movies and shows, people know it's not real. In religion you embody cognitive dissonance at it's purest form. You start with a completely faulty premise, with no evidence to support it- the concept of God. A premise that has been hashed out and debated for thousands of years, but a concept that when specifics of a theistic god are examined have been debunked philosophically and scientifically years ago. The logical arguments are over.
The game is over but these people are still playing it as if it is real! Christian Universities flooded with budding New Christians eager to learn about the details of real-life-"Dungeons and Dragons/Religion", youth groups, church camps, mega-churches, apologetics seminars all hashing over the minute details of something that is all made up. Something that has no actual concrete foundation in science, logic, or anything in the real world at it's core. It's all smoke and mirrors reflecting emotion, community, fear, tribalism, superstition- each bouncing off each other in different combinations....
All built on .... Nothing.
I understand the pull. I used to be religious. I wrote a blog about what I think is happening regarding "human deep time" and the draw to the ancient woo... by default many things look magical and mystical from this vantage point so far from it's origin.. Religion began a long, long time ago, many different ones existed, those that survived human history still contain that "magical" and "mystical" pull that gets us because we realize it's old so it must be revered and it must be wise.
It's not, it's vestigial. It's not real. You are not talking to someone other than yourself when you pray. You are not pulling the laws of nature to adjust this or that because your imaginary father in heaven is at your call. This is absurd and it's well past time to put these things to rest. You are playing a game that is all it is, dear New Christian,... please let it go with the rest of us that realize we do not need these mental crutches anymore. If it means a purposeless universe.. at least we're not lying to ourselves and hashing out details of a fantasy to make consciousness easier for our species! Your lines of evidence are faulty and you are very deeply clouded in your own confirmation bias - steeped in culture and family history. It's weighing you down and you know it. You know the intellectual debate has been lost years ago and at best we are left with a sort of deistic god. A god that is indistinguishable from an atheistic worldview. Just let it go. We're not alone in the universe. We have each other ... There is a lot of us here on the other side waiting for you! I hope you come over soon. We'd love to have you.
Sources:
William Lane Craig: Did Jesus Raise from the Dead?:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NAOc6ctw1s
Timothy Paul Jones on "How We Got the New Testament":
https://vimeo.com/131499553
News report of UFO sightings by multiple eye witnesses:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeaBZyBTRiM
UFO Cases with Multiple Witnesses:
http://www.ufoevidence.org/Cases/CaseView.asp?section=multiplewitnesses
Unfair: The New Science of Criminal Injustice by Adam Benforando:
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/unfair-adam-benforado/1120377337?ean=9780770437763
No comments:
Post a Comment