Why Christians Should Be Pro-Abortion (a Blog short)

The people of Samaria must bear their guilt,

because they have rebelled against their God.
They will fall by the sword;

their little ones will be dashed to the ground,

their pregnant women ripped open.”

Hosea 13:16

Dear Christian,

Have you ever considered that being pro-life, or against abortion, is an irrational position to take from your perspective? If the precious human soul with intrinsic value is worth just as much as any other human being with a beautiful intrinsic soul than we can safely say that all lives matter to Christians. I think most of you would agree. Most of the Christians I know would say that these precious little souls with intrinsic worth even if aborted would go straight to their creator/Father God when they are murdered at Planned Parenthood. Also, most of the Christians I know believe in a hell (whether it be an actual lake of fire or separation from god in some tormented way) and that all human souls have that chance to hear the gospel and if rejecting it they will face judgment in the afterlife. All except babies that haven't reached this "age of accountability" yet. So, there is a loophole. Die or be murdered before you reach this age (usually around 4 or 5 years old or something, I've heard) and you escape God's judgment. Thus of course showing original sin doesn't actually begin in our species until about age 4 or 5.

But more importantly, Christians, by doing the simple math it's much more probable a human being would go to hell if he/she survives past that "age of accountability" than if they were simply aborted by their mother before they were born. The success rate for an aborted fetus going to heaven is at 100%. If minimizing suffering is hinged on morality and getting to heaven to be with our Savior is the end goal Christians must stop being pro-life and join us liberals who are for a women's right to choose. Anything else would be logically inconsistent.

*Original idea from my friend, Steve.

Pluto: A Scientist Explains / A Christian Apologist Explains (A Blog Short)

 

NASA's New Horizons space probe has finally reached its destination - Pluto! We are now seeing stunning images from the dwarf planet's surface. I was reading a new report from NASA.gov today and one portion of the report gave me chills. Science is always changing with new evidence and reworking it's theories and completely scrapping some. In this report it talks about how due to the active geologic surface and lack of craters on Pluto (showing a very young surface compared to most icy moons in our solar system) scientists are forced to rethink ideas of geology on icy worlds. There must be a form of energy to be making this happen on Pluto, but all the standard ideas of how this happens are not sufficient in explaining how Pluto's geology is active enough to create mountain ranges. 

Many religious people do not understand science and how it works. They take science's best attribute: it changes with new evidence! - and speak out against it as if this is a bad thing. They of course are assuming all things work as religion does - dogmatic over evidence based. I pictured how differently a Christian apologist would tackle this situation on Pluto. Christian apologists know the answer of course is in the Bible or through a Christian worldview - we just must retro-fit reality and history to this answer. We can bend things to fit what we need because we know the answer FIRST then we attach reality to this answer. Not in science. Science is bottom up and evolves with new evidence to form the overarching theories. This is why science when compared to religion is far superior. I know I know. They are two different things and some scientists are Christians but I am talking about religion and science as a whole not specifically those practicing each.

Side note - I have heard often from some New Christians that something "to consider" (never quite using the phrase "evidence for") is that the overwhelming majority of humans throughout all of human history have believed in a god. These New Christians are aware of argumentum ad populum fallacy so they try not to say this proves theism outright, but of course it's something "to consider" for the atheist. I often respond with breaking this down... If we are to flirt with logical fallacies here- could we not then delve deeper into the human population and gain statistics (especially since the rise of modern science and philosophy when we mostly stopped using magic as science)? What percentage of those in academia are atheists compared to theists? Why is it most scientists and most philosophers are atheists? Could we then not make the argument (if it's sorta-kinda OK to flirt with the logical fallacy) that at the cream of the crop of human population (those with the highest IQs) the majority are nonbelievers. Does this say anything? The majority of the people in America think all climate scientists are evil liberal hoaxsters working for communist take over or at the least think they or their favorite news pundit knows more than all of climate science as a whole. The majority of people in this country believe in supernatural beings like angels and that praying works since God reaches down into the natural world to affect things by asking him too (sometimes). The average population of this country at least and many others are embarrassingly stupid, naive, and uneducated.

I'm being facetious, of course in this blog. I don't envision William Lane Craig trying to give a Biblical/God-centered answer for Pluto's geology any time soon, but why not have a fun go at it? A Christian apologist would look at these unanswered questions about the geology on Pluto and say, "see! Evidence of a higher power! God of the Gaps indeed! They could say science can't explain these mountains or where this energy is coming from to affect this dwarf planet's geography! - therefore - God himself MUST have molded them into existence only to have Neil deGrasse Tyson demote his newly formed planet! Further evidence that Neil deGrasse Tyson is working for Satan! Keep in mind too that God apparently invented black holes. Um, why?? If we take the religious teleological view that everything in this cosmos has a purpose, a plan, a design - please explain to me the destructive power of a black hole ripping apart his own creation. Jesus, this way of thinking is so primitive!

In all seriousness, shed all beliefs that are based on zero evidence... keep your eye on the ball and live skeptical of claims made - even those made by scientists and atheists. Research and fact check. Remember, we all fall subject to confirmation bias and presuppositions in arguments. The most accurate way we can live is to live scientifically and to do good philosophy - question things and seek out evidence that could debunk your truth claim and see how it holds up. If a position is unfalsifiable (god), or ill-defined (god) and you are accepting this "theory" of reality maybe rethink your reasons for doing so in the face of the lack of evidence. It's akin to having a zero in the denominator. It's undefined. You're view of the universe, if you are a theist, is "undefined". It's a burden of proof issue, theists are positing something - God and the claim that he exists and so on... As atheists we are taking the humble position of looking at each of these claims and finding no valid reason to accept them - thus adding up to our position as a non-theist or an atheist. So stay focused, get back to school maybe, get in the books, do the hard science and read good philosophers and embrace reason and skepticism to believe as many true things as possible before you die and try to leave the world a better place than how you found it. These are things we should all strive for!

Sites:

From Mountains to Moons: Multiple Discoveries from NASA's New Horizon's Pluto Mission:

http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/from-mountains-to-moons-multiple-discoveries-from-nasa-s-new-horizons-pluto-mission

The Rise of the New Victimhood

 

There has been a top news channel in the U.S. that in the past decade or so has created an alternative reality for many of its viewers. This constant straw-man mentality at Fox News headquarters began in the George W. Bush era. Fox News was first in line among the cable news channels to promote Bush's war in Iraq. The liberal talking points dissenting against this war made it onto Fox News but strictly for the purpose to prop up their bias. These weak-wristed liberals were always circled by the entire cast of strong patriotic pundits then pummeled like a boxing bag in front of their cheering angry viewers. How could any traitor in America possibly say there are no WMD in Iraq or that there was no connection between Hussein and Bin Laden?!

The equation back then was simple... Fox News = supporting the troops. Fox News = supporting our Commander and Chief. Fox News = patriotism. Fox News was the place to go for 100% propaganda for U.S. exceptionalism with no exception. There was not a critical bone in their body when it came to war decisions or of the President that just so happened to be a Republican at that time. Fair, Balanced programming at all times.

With the advent of the Kenyan, Marxist, Muslim, otherwise known as President Obama, Fox News viewers began to become reclusive and more clickish... as they huddle in family outings to Golden Coral to bitch about President Anti-Christ in many smalls towns across the Midwestern United States. Their loyalty is strong to Fox News and has moved beyond brand loyalty and reached a somewhat cult-like following. They greet their day with "Fox & Friends" and sip their warm milk before bed watching "Red Eye" for some late night hate-giggles. Their position was proudly exclaimed to not be an intellectual position, it was a "gut" position. Raw emotion fueled by nationalism. They missed their "gut-reactive President" when it came to bombing other countries. They missed his cowboyesc, anti-educated ways!

Meanwhile in the real world President Obama's foreign policy was about as hawkish as President Bush's foreign policy. He wasn't starting any major war with any countries that never attacked us but he was still bombing countries without approval. The technology advanced, so now the President could use robots to bomb other countries. This of course angered many on the left, some that even voted for him, but living right next door, the Fox News viewer was injesting the narrative on their favorite television channel right off the cliff of anything resembling reality.

The narrative that has always been true and strident with Fox News is that they and their viewers are under attack from the overarching, overpowering, radical left agenda - led by the current President of this country. Fox News and their viewers are always the victims. This can be seen on any of their programs on any given day. Turn it on right now and look at the banner at the bottom of the screen and chances are that Fox News or their viewers are being victimized by the left.

It's a total scam. It's a bait and switch with such obviously fake bait. Fox News has convinced it's worshippers that mere labels are powerful enough in discussion. No evidence or facts are needed in arguments. Simply calling someone a liberal, socialist, leftist will win the debate automatically for you. We see this everyday with many of our friends and family on social media. Also, the louder you yell your point the more true your point becomes (*see earlier O'Reilly Factor).

Fox News never addresses actual "wars on..." that really need to be debated and addressed in this country; they create "wars on..." out of thin air - "the war on Christmas", "the War on Christians", "the War on the Rich". There are actual "wars on..." like "the war on drugs", "the war on terrorism", etc that could be debated but are largely ignored as most things are of any substance on these bastions of hyper-sensationalism.

The biggest victims painted on Fox News is Christians (some of their most devout viewers). These Christians are being persecuted by liberals and by atheists. We have seen this in many cases such as the Hobby Lobby case and clashes between church and state in regards to displaying the ten commandments or other religious monuments on public grounds. Also, if you want a group to really loathe Fox News will provide that for you - the ACLU!

However, the newest victim card being played on Fox News is homosexuals stepping on the rights of the religious (let's be honest though - only Christians, they're not talking about Muslim rights). This is furthest from reality we've seen the Fox News victim strategy bend. It is becoming a sound rule that if you take what Fox News identifies as the victim and bully in a situation then flip it - you'll most likely find in reality that the bully is actually the victim and the victim the bully. This has a pretty strong success rate. Try it!

Fox News would have you believe that it isn't that homosexuals are being denied service due to their sexual orientation from a business like a bakery (not unlike black people during segregation in the 60') but that it's the homosexuals and those in support of their cause that are trampling on the rights of the religious business owner to refuse service due to their religious belief.

See, flip it - there's the truth! You merely need to watch Fox News in reverse to get the truth!

Fox News would have you believe that it isn't that homosexuals are being denied their equal and constitutional right to marry as heterosexuals can (not unlike interracial marriage a few decades back), but that it's the homosexuals and those that support their cause that are trampling on the rights of the religious to make it unconstitutional for two people of the same sex to get married.

The other arguments against gay marriage from Fox News are what I like to call "ARGUMENTS FROM THE FUTURE!" where we see the pundits and conservative guests who apparently dabble in prophecy and fortune telling argue an issue that is not happening at present time - the ultimate alternative reality straw man argument! They suggest (with zero evidence) that soon the government will force all churches to marry homosexuals just as they marry heterosexuals.

This has caused many churches, like my father's home church to vote on changing the constitution of their church to reflect their strong stance against gay marriage. This has turned Glen Beck even redder and more down the rabbit hole of conspiracy on his channel. He has created what he calls the Black Robe Regiment consisting of thousands of pastors and ministers that would be willing to die before marrying two gay people.

The reaction from the Supreme Court's decision on legalizing gay marriage is one of the funniest most pathetic things I've ever seen from conservatives happen before my eyes. On many of the podcasts I listen to, the hosts simply turn on the endless audio clips of these reactions from religious Republicans and laugh to tears. In some ways I feel sorry for them because they look like fools to the rest of the entire world for caring so much about something that doesn't actually affect their lives at all in any single way.

Lastly, if you are a Republican and/or Christian I want you to do something that many of you have not been trained to do.. it's something that is the exact opposite of what Master Fox News tells you day in and day out for decades - I want you to put yourself in someone else's shoes. I know, I know, this could be dangerous. You may very well find that the worst problem facing this country is not government assistance to poor people. However, in this thought experiment you may just find some clarity.

Focusing hard, put yourself into the shoes of an atheist living in America today. I want you to picture waking up and turning on the news and watching segment after segment of how Christians and the Christian worldview is far superior than not being a Christian. Oh, and it's also under attack by you and your ilk. I want you to imagine opening up facebook to see multiple friends and family members of yours quoting Bible verses and talking about who's praying for what and/or who. I want you to imagine a hit movie degrading your position as merely a self-loathing, misguided philosophical position and making millions of dollars painting all atheists this way. The straw men are all around you. You are one too as an atheist - everywhere you go.

If you are like me and work around books, you are surrounded by top selling titles that have something to do with boys going to heaven and coming back, Jesus this and Jesus that. There is no escaping "god bless you's" and "purpose-driven EVERYTHING!" We have a section in the bookstore I work in called "Christian Health/Wellness" .. what does that even mean? Should we carve out a section for "Christian Neurology" or "Christian Biology" too?

You can image there are times when you feel like pulling your hair out because you cannot escape it! Religion and God are everywhere!

Who is the actual victims in America? Obviously, I have perspective and realize that there are more oppressed people in this country, but keep in mind that being an atheist is the most distrusted stance one can have in this country and money follows the demographic. Fox News on almost a daily basis paints atheists in a negative light. Almost as bad as they paint Muslims. I am not sure which is more hated on Fox News. It's a toss up.

Christianity isn't under attack - a vast majority in this country are Christian and even larger number believe in a celestial father! It's everywhere! It's in all sporting events, on billboards, on social media, on television, on news programs, on monuments on public property, on our money and not to mention there is a church on about every block! If this is what it's like to be a victim can I be a victim for a while?! Can we atheists be a part of the Fox New's New Victimhood?! It looks like a pretty nice standing to have in this country!

Faith Vs. Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible (A Book Review, sort of)

Well, Fuck.

Just when I thought I was wrapping up my anti-theist (or as they often say "militant atheist") blogging days I had to go and read Jerry Coyne's new book. He's officially part of the "New Atheist" clan now, joining the "four horseman" (Dennett, Harris, (the late) Hitchens, and Dawkins). I read Coyne's other book "Why Evolution Is True" years ago and had always respected him as a renown geneticist and evolutionary biologist. This book was such a fun read and really fans the flames of this historically long debate between religion and science. All the years I've discussed and debated with theists friends via email and social media are reflected in the pages of this book. If I was a Christian curious about atheism and read this book I would become an atheist more than any other "pro-atheist" book out there. I went through an extremely long back and forth discussion with a New Christian friend of mine via email for about a year discussing many of these topics. Almost everything we brought up and argued about is addressed in here and Jerry knocks each point out of the park. 

In the end he summarizes the real dangers of religion besides the obvious issues in the Middle East. He mentions child abuse (denying children medical treatment due to religious affiliations), the suppression of research and vaccination due to religious affiliations, opposition to assisted dying (which I still don't understand - let's see, my religious relative is in pain and I want them to suffer here on Earth as long as possible and also withhold the speed at which they will be at peace with their creator. Makes sense. Not cruel at all.), global warming denialism and so on. 

I read Kenneth Miller's book called Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground between God and Evolution. Initially started this book as another book discussion with my New Christian friend who didn't think common descent was true and dismissed human evolution. My goal was to get this friend to see accepting evolution doesn't necessarily mean you need to become an atheist. This of course is true but Coyne addresses the folly of theistic evolution. It's simple really. Teleology is not science - period. What is theistic evolution? evolution with a purpose. This is a useless hypothesis to a scientist. There's no getting around this fact. It's just political. It's simply just good PR to not step on anyone's toes for fear of offending the sensitive religious community.

It's also a special pleading fallacy - for the theistic evolutionist- they take credit for the beauty of design and "irreducible complexity" (which has been debunked by the way) of organisms and the amazing wonders of the human eye - attribute it all to the glory of God. However, when it comes to evolutionary suffering and mass extinctions (99% of all species that have ever lived are now extinct) that is NOT attributed to the glory of God but to "the fall of man". The fall of one single species of animal. - us.

Of course explaining the past evolutionary suffering of most species (99%) going extinct due to "the fall" of man before Homo sapiens even existed is a tad problematic. Truly if you ask a New Christian why so much suffering and waste and extinction or really anything in the world that causes pain and seems to fly in the face of a moral, just, loving god they will 99.9% of the time attribute this to "the fall of man". You see, sin is like a virus infecting not just "Adam and Eve" (the first two humans that according to genetics didn't actually exist. This is also explained in great detail in this book) but all of their descendents and of course all other poor animals that had no say in the matter.

Or to quote Jerry Coyne on this point,

The flavor of special pleading is strong here, for surely God, were he really omnipotent, could have designed a world whose physical fabric lacked floods, drought, and evolutionary suffering. And, of course, if God gets the credit for the adaptive mutations that led to humans, why is he exculpated for the maladaptive ones, like mutations that cause cancers, genetic diseases, and deformed children? If mutation were a process designed by God, there's no reason why the vast majority of mutations should be harmful - though that's exactly what you'd expect if the process were purely a naturalistic one involving random errors.

Coyne tackles all aspects of religion - it's self-proclaimed superiority in all things "moral". Of course this is a mere walk in the park to debunk by simply quoting immoral passages in the Bible. Putting that aside, what I've heard from the New Christians is at worst atheists are simply "borrowing" from the religious ancient moral foundations (well some of them not others obviously or we'd be stoning people and bashing babies into rocks) to create their moral landscape (to borrow a phrase from Sam Harris). I disagree of course because our morals actually were derived over time by naturalistic means through our evolutionary past and evolve with differing cultures. Even if this claim by the New Christians were true - I would simply answer to that. OK. So what? Thanks. we'll take those and we all have the same moral values now.. asking them to then explain how/why the religious win the morality debate. I don't get it. Why again does religion take credit for morality again?

There was another passage in this book I found interesting...

The fine-tuning argument for God gets even weaker because it includes the proviso "life as we know it" - that is, carbon-based life. But creatures sentient enough to perceive and worship God need not be the kind we know and love: our imaginations are limited by the life with which we're familiar. There could, for instance, be life based on silicon instead of carbon, life that could live at higher or lower gravity, or life that could have come into being instantly, rather than having evolved. After all, the Abrahamic God is omnipotent and so could fine-tune for whatever universe he created, rather than fine-tune the universe for life.

Indeed, why should life be based on matter at all? To many people, God is a humanlike spirit, one with feelings and some sort of consciousness. Couldn't he create a race of similar immaterial but whorshipful beings: bodiless minds that lack his powers? After all, any being with the power to determine physical constants could create any conceivable form of life, and God already is said to create souls, which are in effect bodiless minds. Why not just have a conclave of souls instead of material beings on Earth? The problem is that we simply don't know what forms of humanoid life - and here I mean "sentient, rational beings made in God's image" - are possible. Nor can theists explain WHY souls MUST have bodies."

Something to chew on for the religious.

It makes me wonder why God put souls of humanoids through the grinder of the physical world in the first place, having physical bodies then having to send his son / himself to the physical realm to be an ape to die for this species of apes for rules he logically shouldn't even have to follow in the first place. Stop to soak that in.

The idea that an all powerful being has "rules" he must follow is nonsensical. An all-powerful, Uncaused Cause, Mind that created this universe is mandated to accept blood sacrifice rules should set off mild skepticism in most people's brains. The spell of religion is strong in many people but just stop to think about this... Who is enforcing these rules?! You know how when a New or Old Christian argues for irreducible complexity all you simply have to do is say if complexity is a requirement of design then by definition God must be designed by a more complex entity? "Who created God?" you have probably often asked a New Christian and they of course say - no one! God is where it ends.. Though it seems we're seeing some "data" piling up here against this response. It seems maybe God does have a God who's rules he must follow - like the rule of atonement.

If God set up the "blood rules" (who else did unless my God's God hypothesis has merit) that due to the "fall of mankind" (his most beloved species, created in his image - remember God is a man with a penis) a perfect "sinless" being (his son/himself) must be killed then resurrected to make amends it raises the question "to who?" To who is God making amends to? Who set up these rules that even God must follow? I think quantum mechanics is less complicated than theology. It certainly makes more sense and I don't understand anything about quantum mechanics.

Often from a few of my New Christian friends I've heard that science has no philosophical basis or that "you can't use science itself to show that science is the best way - or even the only way - to discover truths about the universe."

Jerry responds,

Let's start with the last view, one often raised by philosophers (the argument is called "justificationism")... It sounds quite sophisticated, and in fact it's technically correct: science cannot justify by "reason alone" that it's the surest route to truth. How can you prove from philosophy and logic alone that scientific investigation, rather than, say, revelation, is the best way to determine the sequence of a newly discovered gene? There's no a priori philosophical justification for using science to understand the universe. 

But we don't need one. My response to the "no justification" claim is that the superiority of science at finding objective truth comes not form philosophy but form "experience". Science gives predictions that work. Everything we know about biology, the cosmos, physics, and chemistry has come through science - not revelation, the arts, or any other "way of knowing". And the practical applications of science, channeled into engineering and medicine, are legion.

In the end, it may smack of circularity to use empirical results to justify the use of the empirical toolkit we call "science", but I'll pay attention to the circularity argument when someone comes up with a better way to understand nature. Science's results alone justify its usefulness, for it is, hands down, the single best way we've devised to understand the universe.

Many of you reading this have moved beyond such childish things as religion. Many of you, if religious at all are probably more deistic or Unitarian-like. If nothing else you may be someone who doesn't even think or care to think much about these ideas, often called "apatheists". However, I urge you to read Coyne's book, it should dispel any delusion that religion (and Coyne specifically defines this term right off the bat in the book) and science (again defined in book) are compatible. They are not. Never were or will be. 

Is any among you afflicted? Let him pray. Is any merry? Let him sing psalms. Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.  - James 5:13-15

In the last part of the book Jerry talks about faith as a substitute for medicine.

It's not just the parents who are at fault. Religious exemptions are written into law by the federal and state governments - that is, those who represent all Americans. In fact, thirty-eight of the fifty states have religious exemptions for child abuse and neglect in their civil codes, fifteen states have such exemptions for misdemeanors, seventeen for felony crimes against children, and five (Idaho, Iowa, Ohio, West Virginia, and Arkansas) have exemptions for manslaughter, murder, or capital murder. Altogether, forty-three of the fifty states confer some type of civil or criminal immunity on parents who injure their children by withholding medical care on religious grounds.

This got me thinking... find yourself a die-hard fundamentalist Christian American - You could find a Ray Comfort/Ken Hovind type of believer and ask them first where they stand on this new debacle of the religious rights of Christan (obviously not other religions) business owners to refuse service to homosexuals. You'll more than likely see they side with the Christian business owner to support their notion of religious freedom in this country. Now see how far they take this "religious freedom". Do they accept religious freedom or exemption on religious basis for vaccinations or withholding care by Christian parents from their sick or dying children? Does the state not have the right to step in seeing as to most of us this is child abuse?  
 
You may see there could be a few caveats to their thoughts on religious freedoms. 1. of course, "religious freedom" often only applies to Christians - not Satanists or especially Muslims (eww). and 2. It doesn't apply when letting a child die. Or does it? Maybe they do go as far a the Jehovah Witness or Christian Science devotees. You guild these religious people trapping them right into a corner created by their nonsensical religious moral dogmas. Hopefully they can see what's happening here - you are a moral person - DESPITE your belief in your chosen religious dogma.

I think this book is very important. Of course Richard Dawkins' atheist manifesto book "The God Delusion" was a huge de-converting tool for many of the young religious. I was already an atheist when I read that book but it certainly informed me on a few aspects to the "god argument" I hadn't been exposed to. Since then the book has had a hefty handful of counter-books by religious authors. Most criticisms of Dawkins and the "new atheists" as a whole, as Coyne points out at the beginning of this book, are that they simply beat up on the literalists and the extreme fundamentalists of each religion. Reza Aslan says the same thing about Islam as a Muslim apologists. Bill Maher and all the "new atheists" simply have a child-like, simplistic view of what religion is.

I couldn't disagree more. The world in which Reza Aslan paints is a world I would love to live in but sadly we're not quite there yet. The general whole of the religious are not like liberal theologians in each religion. Sorry. The fact is most people in this country think some really unfounded, debunked drivel often derived from their religion. Creationism (just google the percentage of American citizens that don't accept evolution), global warming denial, alternative medicine, astrology, new age woo and so on. There is a serious need for books like these from the "new atheists" because there is still such a large audience of brain-washed people still under the spell of religion - often since childhood. If any book could dissipate the spell of an entire lifetime of religious indoctrination I think this is one of them. 

"Anthropic Deep Time" or "Such Beautiful Buildings for a Celestial Dictator" (A Blog Short)

I live right down the road from a Catholic church. I often jog by it when I do laps around my block for exercise. The other day I stopped, pulled the headphones out of my ears and just stared at the artwork on the side of the building. Sweating, my heart pounding from running I felt a deep connection to that building. I had no idea why at the moment. I thought at the time it was due to my upbringing. I was brought up in a very religious home and there is often a sense of "home" or nostalgia I feel when I see a churches, attend church when I visit it my father, or hear an old hymn I remember from my childhood. I know, I know, the Christian would say that's God's way at pulling at my heart, but I am too much of a skeptic to accept such things now. The equation to something like that would look something like this: All things good in life = God/ All things bad = God works in mysterious ways or "the fall". My understanding of the world does not allow for such cognitive dissonance anymore with things like that, but what is it with these buildings that give me that connection, that emotion?

I have a hypothesis. That feeling, that emotion is "anthropic deep time". When we hear deep time it's relative to what we are talking about. When we think of deep time we think of the age of the cosmos or the Big Bang. We think of ancient rocks in Australia that formed 4.4 billion years ago as the Earth was forming. Think of the (dare I say?) "spiritual experience" you get when you go hiking in an old canyon (like Red Rock Canyon near me, for example). If you know some basics in geology you know that canyon and those rocks formed millions of years ago and once was an ancient ocean bed. Zero in on that feeling you get when you stare out at geologic deep history or hearing the poetic words of cosmologist Carl Sagan or Neil deGrasse Tyson about the true deep history of our own body and what we are all made of (atoms that formed in the hearts of other stars).

We humans have our own "deep time". Think of how entrancing it is to stare at old photographs of our great grandparents. There is a magic that goes with looking into anthropic deep time. We listen with absolute attention as our grandparents or senior citizens tell us stories of how the world was when they lived what we read about in our history books. We relish in stories of our past. There's an entire channel on cable TV called the "history channel" (though the "history" part of their name is debatable). Think on how we revere the Native Americans. If you read any accurate historical books on Native American history you will read the horrific, immoral acts implemented by these various tribes. Our new "liberal" way of viewing Native Americans is often skewed the other direction. (Did I just parody Ann Coulter without thinking about it?!) Of course before this all white children were told in school was that the Native Americans were savages. As usual the truth is a mixed bag with nuances from both extremes not just one or the other, but the Native Americans were far from perfect and we almost deify them when we look back on their very foreign culture compared to ours today.

Religion (as a very humanistic expression in art) can fall under the "deep time" wonder we can experience. Hear me out: It's been around since pre-history for our species, and there is spotty evidence that maybe our fellow hominid species might have had a rudimentary religion as well; there really is "magic" in religion. And that sentence sounds odd coming from an atheist, but its true. Not the way the fundamentalist mean "magic" but we need to start taking some of these terms back, in my opinion. It's "magical" only if religion isn't used as "the way the cosmos and this Earth works". Daniel Dennett wrote about religion as a natural phenomenon in his book "Breaking the Spell". I recommend it. Many authors have given a long history of religion, quick to point out the wonderful things religion has given the human race. I know this sounds weird coming from me and trust me - I am on the anti-theist side of most things religious, but that is mostly because now when we weigh everything out there is more harm that comes with religion than good. We need more of the religious to treat their religion as a cultural phenomenon and not "take it so seriously". This is the way we make progress and get somewhere as a species. We reflect and even celebrate the art in religion, but let go of the useless dogma that does nothing to help society flourish.

I don't need to tell you that the most beautiful of religious buildings are mosques. If you want your breath taken away google image search mosques. I have a close Muslim friend that designed a local mosque. He is an architect and a really talented one. A year or so ago he showed me the blueprints to the mosque he was designing and it stunned me. It was gorgeous. The level of craftsman that goes into the buildings of the Muslim religion is unparalleled in my opinion. Mormons are most definitely up and coming in the craftsmanship of their temples, and of course Christianity has had some truly gorgeous buildings. Synagogs? Eh. Just kidding! Google image search: "most beautiful synagogues in the world" and hold on tight! Obviously the Christian artwork during the Renaissance was some of the best paintings ever painted and the sculptures are breath-taking. Go to any art museum and you'll know the true beauty of religion.

The key for the future in my opinion is to get people to treat religion like art or a game (like Dungeons and Dragons) not as something that makes "real" claims about the natural world and cosmos. We have to also be honest about the "holy texts" - it isn't all bad, it isn't all perfect and good, it's a mix bag again and they are books written by men. That is what we know for sure. We need to stop hanging our hat about how things operate with some "cosmic plan" or "universal purpose" when we have no such evidence. We can't just ground our lives in things with no evidence. Instead we must take what we know and be honest about it and go from there. I love the way many people I know are religious - it's OK. I don't want to yell at them for being crazy or whatever, I just want more people to be "culturally" religious. This desperately needs to happen in the Muslim world overall. Look at the polls, we need this for our species to thrive. We need more people understanding religion as art and culture and letting go of these "way the world works" unfounded concepts. When religion "makes theories" about the natural world this is where it hits a wall. This part of religion must have the heart ripped out of it so we can truly appreciate the beauty of religion and that is simply - anthropic deep time.

"Such Beautiful Buildings for a Celestial Dictator" - from a text from my friend Forrest who at some point will join me as "Gog" on this blog!

Just look at this mosque!:
http://blog.oliver-meili.name/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/DSC_7818_stitch_2.jpg

and come on. the Old Christians make the best art:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/The_Sacrifice_of_Isaac_by_Caravaggio.jpg

Your Child's Religion of "Choice?"

Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.
Proverbs 22:6 (Bible)

O you who believe! Ward off yourselves and your families against a Fire (Hell) whose fuel is men and stones, over which are (appointed) angels stern (and) severe, who disobey not, (from executing) the commands they receive from Allah, but do that which they are commanded. 
Tahrim 66:6 (Qur'an)

There are a lot of bizarre, quirky memories I have from my earliest conscious experience growing up (almost literally) in church. I remember the dogma vividly right now, things told to us as matter of fact from no one with any actual academic expertise in theology. None of my Sunday school teachers I had when I was in the first decade of my life had degrees in Bible scholarship or theological discourse. Most were very kind, well-meaning stay-at-home moms without a college education. "Facts" about world history (via Bible stories) were dogmatic and made real before our eager eyes on felt board. If you aren't familiar with flannel board click on the link at the end of this blog entry. 

My mother and father brought me in a fundamentalist evangelical Christian home. We went to church every single Sunday without exception, two times - morning and evening service, as well as choir practice before the evening service since both my parents sang in the choir. Every Wednesday night we would attend Bible study (basically another evening church service). Early on I recall my parents going to visitation (which was essentially going door to door sort of like Mormon or Jehovah Witness-style). My brother and I, all the way through high school, attended a Christian private school that was in the same building as the church we attended 2 days out of the week. So this is what I mean when I say I nearly literally grew up in church.

If you read my blog entries from a few years back titled "Into the Lion's Den: Notes On a Recent Trip" I explain the emotional connection I feel with that very building. When I go home I will often attend a church service in that same building with my dad and it's always a trip down memory lane to walk into the gym or my old Sunday school classrooms. There is a strange mix of emotions like nostalgia with a deep realization at how far I've come in my life. The little child intently listening to stories of Jonah and the whale or singing in unison about Jesus' love for little children seems like a whole other consciousness that I can barely relate to anymore. It's a weird thing to step back into rooms like that.

I have a few Christian friends now. And a handful of these friends grew up in the same church/school or just church. I see some of my Christian friends having children and recycling the same pattern I had growing up. These little children begin religious (Christian specifically) indoctrination at a very young age. This is just like my past. I started in the church nursery and ended with walking out of Bible college in my 20's to eventually completely stepping outside the bubble and breaking the spell religion had on me all of my life. 

It concerns me when I see documentaries like "Jesus Camp" or hear of my Christian friends indoctrinating their children with a specific myth they believe in like it is a fact of life. Of course we know it's not and of course we know this is how you spread the religious meme and let religion continue to evolve from one generation to the next. It's the way the old ideas continue to thrive. We see it in Middle Eastern countries with Islam all the time. It's the same here in the U.S. and I feel this must be addressed and ended.

¹³ And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them.
¹⁴ But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
¹⁵ Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
¹⁶ And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.
Mark 10:13-16 

We were taught growing up that there is a specific "age of reason" or "age of accountability" in every young child wherein they will finally understand that 1. they are a sinner (and grasp the story of "original sin") and 2. that God's son died in actual history for their sins then rose from the dead and ascended up to heaven where he is now, and 3. accept Jesus into their hearts to save them from their sins. Some of this is not difficult. At a very young age you can get a child to admit guilt in wrong doing, so the "sin" thing is easy. The complicated part is getting a small child to understand the very weird story of the cosmic blood rules of blood sacrifice. Even as a small child I remember finding it sort of gross and odd that a whole group of people killed innocent animals for God. I still ask this question - why again does the Perfect Almighty God of the universe need animal blood? Is he a vampire? When small children are easily questioning your religious dogma and you need apologetics to defend your faith against babies- that's when you know your religion might be bullshit.

I was saved first at the age of 5. This is something I barely remember the specifics of now. However, I do remember it wasn't based on the alternative of NOT believing - which was burning forever. THIS is the best way to get a small child to accept Jesus into their heart. At the age of five hell wasn't as clear to me, but obviously a savior is needed if all other options get you endless torture when you die. Once the full picture of a never-ending Lake of Fire came into part of the narrative as I grew older I asked Jesus into my heart just in case once again. This was around the age of 8 or 9. 

Call it "fire insurance". 

You just can't be too safe when it comes to burning forever. Then into junior high, in one of the Wednesday night AWANA services, I watched some of those apocalyptic "end times" rapture movies from the 1970's called "Thief in the Night" and a new fear was born!-- The fear of being "left behind" in a world with an evil fascist new world order (called UNITE in the film), losing my Christian parents and everyone I knew. I thought maybe -- just maybe, I would have to live in a Walking Dead-type world. I would have to fend for myself, on the run from this tyrannical evil world government. I was terrified of having these creepy men wearing brown hoods (like some evil monks that worshiped Satan) coming after me to kidnap me. So, I was saved again for fear of being "left behind". Triple saved (so you know it's good).

I don't blame my family for raising me in a world in which they thought was the correct view of reality. What's the point? They too have evolved in some ways to adapt to new information and their worldview in many ways has loosened a bit since I was a young child. Change can be good and I think overall we've all changed for the better. I do think it is essential for us to have this discussion and to express how we feel about child indoctrination to our New Christian friends as they continue the pattern. Some atheist call it child abuse. That's a strong word I suppose, but I can agree with it in some ways. It is certainly taking a human at it's earliest cognitive years (where impression is so vital, raw, and malleable) and filling those gaps in knowledge with a very specific worldview of reality that is based in zero evidence and magic.

That's the issue. 

What's the alternative then? Well, you could start by being honest. By honesty I don't mean preaching to your children what you know in your heart is the right faith. I mean real global, worldly, historical, philosophical honesty! If you don't know better than maybe educate yourself about other worldviews before bringing a conscious being into the world. One should present religion as it is to their child - a set of beliefs by some people and a natural phenomenon throughout human history. Explain that religions have their own rule books they consider are "words of god" but contain some good information on ethical and moral living and some immoral ideas. Children are not stupid. They can decide from there what to do with all this information. Promote freethinking in the young. Explain to them that caging ideas and thoughts (which is what religion is at its worst) is the enemy. Think of this as promoting liberty for their young minds and raising up a child in truth and reality.

Felt board for Sunday school class:
http://www.amazon.com/Small-Deluxe-Flannel-Board-English/dp/B000TMB6MK

Salvation for Kids (YAY!)
http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-f005.html

Salvation Quantified.

Dear human,

Did you know that before you were saved by grace by the Son of God himself people once had to sacrifice other species of animals to atone for their sins? Did you know these animals had to be perfect, with no blemishes? It's not easy to find an animal like a lamb or goat that had no imperfections. You see we all have sinned, or so we've been told by our fathers and their fathers and their fathers before there were cars and smart phones and twitter.

The Great Mind "before" the cosmos, behind the curtain of all things known or unknown, the Omniscient, Omnipresent, The Beginning and the End... the Alpha and Omega who created every molecule, every quantum soup, every wave, every particle, every human laugh, every sunset, every swirling galaxy, every point of light in space, all life on Earth,  every human mind and eye, every something over nothing ...

... really needed goat's blood at one point.

I know it seems barbaric and outdated. I know. I know... you may be reading that last part confused in an age of (let the understatement of the year begin...) taken-for-granted science with hyper-advances in communication and innovation, when technology is growing before your very eyes exponentially. Information is getting to sources as like never before. It has been said the internet is where religion goes to die. This is happening.

I'm not done.

Dear human,

Did you know that this Uncaused Cause. This Prime Mover. The Creator of all. Almighty God or I Am that I Am had a son that is also himself? Did you know, dear human that all that you know, everything you can ever imagine is known by this perfect God/Son? He created everything, giving us the story in his divinely inspired words penned by mere men, .. manly godly men, scribes of old that made some serious copying mistakes, but be encouraged because basically this perfect Deity (God and Son) got his points across (sort of).

Yahweh, Jehovah, the Lord sent his perfect Son. The good news is coming... Be of good cheer! He sent his Son/(himself) to die for you for everything you ever did that was wrong, for "original sin". Let me tell you about original sin. It began when the first representative hominid of our species ate a forbidden magic fruit from a tree that would give him the knowledge of morality that only God/and His Son possessed. This is in the first book of God's Word. Did you know that this first book, Genesis is Hebraic poetry so either way you know that whether metaphor or realty it's ultimately about magic. Because of this original sin God/(himself) sent his perfect Son/(himself) to appease himself(his Son) for the earliest known homo sapien representative eating that magic fruit (poetically).

this is the complexity of the gospel. Here's the simplicity of the gospel:

Jesus (the Son of God/the Father) was made by himself/(His Father) to become God in ape (homo sapien) flesh. The Lord came down to Earth and was sacrificed like all those animals mentioned before, without blemish, to satisfy himself/(His Father) for the cosmic rule of the blood of things. The Romans nailed poor Jesus to a cross (a torture device) and the weight of the world's sin was put on his poor body (the human part that could feel pain). Poor Jesus (the human part of him) was heavy with the sin of all humanity. Poor Jesus shed his righteous blood, the ultimate atonement, (better than all the goat's blood put together).

The good news is Jesus did all of this for you. He did all this for every human that will ever live. If only we believe in him and accept him into our hearts we will be forever spared from the flames of hell. Oh, right.. hell .. I should mention that. So the Unmoved Mover, the Prime Primer, the Ultimate Champion created a place of forever flame. Think the worst parts of the holocaust but with it lasting forever. This is your introduction to Hell. If you deny Christ you will be sent here when you die. You rejected the gospel. The skepticism, the doubt won and you fell for the fallen angel - Lucifer (the snake I failed to mention in that human origins story of magical fruits and "first humans" that tempted Eve) It's all poetry though.. It's probably over your head. Anyways, what I failed to mention is that that human part of you (that part of you that feels pain - those nerves) THAT survives into the afterlife with you in Hell. So you will burn forever, basically if you reject this story.

You may be a skeptic (sinner), you may be a Christian reading this (sinner saved by *see above). Either way you may be asking what happened after Jesus (Father/Son) died?! I mean a God/Son/Himself cannot just die and save all humanity according to the blood rules. You would be right to ask that. Here's the thing... you HAVE to rise from the dead if you are a perfect Unmoved Mover, Cosmic Creator-Mind, I Am to or else come on.. you're just another guy saying shit without backing it up. So in 3 days Jesus rose from the dead (conquering death btw) and yada yada yada ... talking to people .. then going up to heaven (where the element Au - Gold exists in street form) to sit on the right hand side of God/Himself. (in reality, hang on.. doing the math.. he hasn't left the Milky Way galaxy)

What happened though in those three days with humanity's salvation? Think about this. My friend recently wrote me regarding this very detail - Do you ever wonder about exactly when people became accountable to the gospel? . I think we should really look into the math here. Jesus died (the human part) on day 1 we can assume safely I suppose. Though a death on day 2 would be something to delve into theologically. Day 1 - Day 4 there is zero accountability (the old blood law with unblemished lambs, goats etc has ended and the new blood law has not yet begun since Jesus has not yet arisen). When Jesus finally rises on day 4 where is the accountability still? It's in limbo state because Jesus hasn't even begun talking to his disciples to get the ball rolling with the gospel. So... there surely was someone in the human race who was around and died in this time frame - what of their restless souls? Do the math.. they are the remainder. Christianity's error bar I suppose.

Keep in focus Hell. A very REAL supernatural place with a chemical combustion and gnashing of enamel. From day 2 of the Son of God/Himself death to the decades it took for the gospel to spread is a real black hole of "where the fuck did my soul go?!?!"

Dear human,

I know you know this is all ridiculous baggage from past uncultured culture.

Dear human,

I know you know that these things can weigh on your brain and your emotions and your very core. I know you were taught these things in this slice of your existence- the size of nothing in a cosmos of everything. Maybe you were never indoctrinated with these mythical stories presented as truth growing up, but you came into the "good news" of the gospel when things around you .... well, were utter shit. Or your heart was "tugged" in a youth camp or someone showed you unwarranted kindness that explained reasons for said kindness as their Savior, Jesus' goodness. I understand tapping into the empathy, the hope, the love, Awe, the sheer emotion and elation. It can still happen with human contact. THIS is the key. We are the very answers we've been waiting for. We are growing into ourselves and growing into our own minds. Evolution take time for apes with large brains. There is no Uncaused Prime Mover, Creator, Lord, Allah, Yahweh, I AM, Jehovah, Son/God/Ghost. There is only us (for what we know for now). You are conscious. You are human and you are not alone. Find us.. we are many.