Fandango’s Provocative Question (FPQ) #29

It shouldn’t matter, but it does.

Fandango’s Provocative Question (FPQ) provided me a prompt for my blog. Thanks, man.

This is how Fandango asked the question:

Thomas Jefferson said, “It does me no injury for my neighbor to tell me there are 20 gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
The FPQ asks, “Do you agree with Thomas Jefferson that it doesn’t matter or hurt you if people believe in many gods, in one god, or no gods? Why or why not?”

My response takes Jefferson’s comment at face value, since I don’t know the exact context, much less TJ’s thoughts. But I must split a hair. Mister Jefferson spoke of his neighbor telling him gods exist or do not and that causes no harm to Jefferson, or to me. I agree. The people who want to tell me god(s) exist(s) or not cause me no physical pain or financial loss. But that is not how Fandango posed the question.

He asked if it mattered or hurt me if people believe in god or not, and why. The biggest difference in the two is that Jefferson’s comment was personal, Fandango’s question is culturally broader and public: ‘people’ instead of my neighbor; ‘belief’ instead of god. Jefferson did not address belief (although he did in other comments), but the FPQ does.

I read one post in response in which the writer said she resented people doing that (evangelicals or “dedicated atheists”). While she never said if she agreed with Jefferson, that comment implies she does not.

I showed the FPQ to my wife and her reply to it was, “It’s none of my business.” I shook her hand and said, “Welcome to the neighborhood. Have you found a church home yet? Feel free to join us at….”

Yes. What people believe does hurt me! It picks my pocket and breaks my leg. The problem is that virtually all belief in god(s) is mired in some form of religion, even for those believers who claim no religion or eschew organized religion.

Religion is given a privileged status in the USA and much of the world. Some people make fortunes with religion and cry persecution if we ask them to pay taxes. The business of religion is given use of public property and protection (police and fire) without paying for it. I pay more taxes because of that.

I’m not even sure where to begin with physical harm. Maybe I should turn on the news to see what religious group has blown up another today. All Abrahamic scripture says that I should be killed because I do not believe in any god(s). Death threats are not rare over religion, nor is homicide.

What people believe matters to me, and it should to you. “Religion poisons everything.” Freedom of and from religion may be good things, but the greater emphasis should be on the from.

Bill

Why Do You Believe?

A lady who phoned the internet show, The Atheist Experience, said, “I cannot imagine how anyone could be an atheist.” Despite a long and patient discussion with the show’s co-hosts, she never really changed her view, outlook, or conclusion of what it means for someone to identify as atheist. She saw atheism as the rejection of an existing god, of her own personal spirituality, and the exact opposite of what she believed. She saw it as the flip side of the same belief coin that she applied to herself. When the hosts would try to explain her error, she would interrupt with defensive or attacking arguments. It’s entertainment.

Watching the show is a good lesson about human nature and communication. It is educational. However, for many believers, the puzzling question is indeed how anyone could not believe.

When callers identify as believers, they are usually invited to explain why they believe in a god, have some specific metaphysical world view, or follow a certain religious tradition or dogma. This is usually when there are silent pauses on the part of the caller. That’s understandable.

In day-to-day life, believers are seldom challenged to explain or show how they arrived at some theistic view, so they are ill-prepared to logically present salient facts regarding their belief (often a certainty to them) and how or when they came to such a conclusion as there must be a god. The internet is replete with arguments defending belief or faith. Those I have read are fallacious illogical tripe that eventually falls to pieces before melting into a just because it’s true and I have faith defensive stand. Or worse, because the bible says so.

I like to hear people explain why they believe in a god, a higher power, an invisible force or energy, or whatever it is that causes them to conclude that the high and mighty one exists. It reinforces my own conclusions. However, I do find most honest explanations refreshing for two reasons. One is that, while I’m comfortable with what I think, honesty and sincerity feel good. The other reason is that I get to listen to someone talk through what they believe. So, here are some of my favorite reasons why people do believe in god.

I don’t know why. I just do.
Ninety-five percent of all people believe, so I must be right.
God personally spoke to me or showed himself.
Things exist (universe, people, magic). The only possible explanation is a god.
I define god however I like, and that is what I believe in.
I prayed for something and it came to be, thus proving to me that there is a god (what else?)
It is beneficial within our society for me to say I believe and to act that way because it brings social privilege, economic gain, and personal protection.
It is what I was taught as a child. I have always been a believer.
Everyone will hate me if I do not say that I believe in god. I would be rejected and ostracized, as I have done to others. (That could also be a closeted atheist.)
I don’t want to spend eternity in Hell and I’m afraid of dying and other things.
It is just obvious that god exists. What else could it be?
I’m hedging my bets. If there is a god, I win. If not, I’ve lost nothing.

I think most people who believe in supreme beings and spirits make their claim for cultural reasons. Those reasons are based upon social and educational factors (indoctrination), not on intuition or logical analytical thinking. Therefore, many fundamentalist religious groups want to teach intelligent design as science and religion in public schools. Apparently, they agree with me about the indoctrination part. May I suggest additional required courses in argumentation and basic logic?

Bill

How I see it: Bibles

The Source

I once balked on an atheist’s blog because the writer implied something about all atheists. He said we all view the bible as fiction. While I did not agree with that description, my real squabble was with saying anything about all atheists beyond some sort of negative conclusion regarding gods. Atheists debate, argue, and many of us commit logical fallacies, especially the owner of the blog I questioned. I recall no response by him, but one comment by another atheist did make me wonder.

Her comment questioned me directly as to what we (presumably we atheists) should call the bible (or how we should see it). I did not respond. I cannot answer such a question quickly because I would be presuming to speak for how others should, or do, see something and identify it. However, I can state how I personally regard the collection known as the bible. I can also explain why I see it as I do. I can further say why I think it incorrect to refer to the bible as a book of fiction. While I don’t care how others refer to the collection, especially if their motive is antagonistic or trolling for reactions, I feel my opinion should carry as much weight as the original blogger; and I was asked.

My Background

While I grew up religious (Roman Catholic), my world was not dominated by bibles or thumpers. I went to a religious school through 8^th grade, but I only recall studying a lot of Catechism for eight years and Bible History in 7^th and 8^th grades (textbook and academic course title).

We had religious paraphernalia in our home, but I recall no bible. So, I was not indoctrinated into a bible-based form of Christianity during my formative years, although Catholic liturgical practice (Mass) included several bible readings according to a liturgical calendar which is followed closely today by several main-line protestant denominations. This probably left me with a more flexible view of scripture compared to those raised in bible-based and sola-scriptura faiths (protestants). It was many years before it dawned on me that everything in the Catholic Mass is based in some fashion on the contents of the bible.

I have attended a variety of protestant churches (I married a protestant) over the years during which I gained a greater appreciation for, and knowledge of, the bible. I have studied the bible and read all of it, including the additional books of the Catholic bible, and others for comparative analysis. I’ve read most books more than once or twice. I have read and researched various versions (side by side) and miscellaneous translations. I have taken and taught courses about the bible. For years I taught what is called Bible Study in many forms and attended same. I became something of a lay expert on the bible. I also became very aware of people reading and studying the bible and the various views and ways to interpret it.

Understanding the Bible

Hermeneutics is the study of the various ways to interpret the bible and other literary texts. How one interprets the books of the bible is important, especially for people who apply metaphysical value to them. While there may be others, there are four main types of bible interpretations: literal, moral, allegorical, and anagogical.

I have never considered myself a literalist in biblical interpretation (or in much of anything), but I confess to using all four variants in interpreting scripture. When atheists (and some believers) challenge biblical content, they are often told that they are misunderstanding the text. This is often the case when a literalist is challenged and needs to jump into an allegorical or anagogical defense because literal interpretation is often what the atheist is doing, and what the biblical defender has been doing. Such arguments become a silly game, especially when one or more participants are basically biblically ignorant.

Is the Bible True or the Word of God?

The bible was written by humans. To believe or say otherwise is nonsense. To get around this fact, the claim of being inspired by god works well. But then the problem becomes how we are to determine which religious documents were inspired by god (or an angel). That water gets mighty muddy, but someone made such decisions regarding the biblical cannon, and the result is scattered scripture within all three Abrahamic religions, and fractured Christianity being lost within itself.

Can such variety be both true and the word of god? Not in my opinion. But it is a fact there are many bibles. None of them are original documents, and they do not all agree. All of them have been tampered with in one way or another over two millennia. All must be read in languages other than the original (Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek [not Latin], all now dead languages) which confounds already questionable authenticity.

The number of books in the bible and what they say are not agreed upon. If there is a god, one would think that He would have been a better steward of the only valid communication he has ever made with his creation.

I attended an event at a church this weekend. I saw no visible signs (a cross or something) to determine its denomination, so I looked it up. They claim to be Christian in some new age, inclusive way. They also state that their biblical interpretation is metaphysical. Ok, but what they are claiming is to be philosophically interpreting the bible which is a highfaluting way to say whatever. That makes truth relative (or subjective) and literalists would have a fit.

The so-called word of god seems subject to human opinion so much so as to negate any god’s involvement with the bible.

Then What is the Bible?

Try this familiar children’s tune.

Jesus loves me! This I know,
For the Bible tells me so;
Little ones to Him belong,
They are weak but He is strong.
Yes, Jesus loves me! … The Bible tells me so.

The original poem for this was in a novel and used to comfort a dying child. But this is not biblical, and it is not being used for any reason other than to provide solace and perhaps courage in the face of death (in a book of fiction). But notice that justification and truth are supported by reference to the bible. The bible says so, therefore it must be true.

Other descriptions of the bible include fiction, wisdom, poetry, history, and religion. Indeed, the bible contains all of this (although much of the historical value is questionable). I prefer the last. It is a book of religion. Classifying the bible as fiction is confusing even though it is without doubt fictional in many ways (parables are not true).

I do not believe any god exists, but even if one or more did, I seriously doubt they would claim any authorship of what we today call the bible. If you want to refer to the bible as fiction, that is up to you. Much of it is. If you want to claim all atheists see the bible as fiction, you’re wrong. I do not.

Shalom,

I beleive a lot of things, the existance of any god is not one of them

I read this post (link below) and have been struggling to figure out how to repost. This is the best I can do. It is relevant because she makes a good point.

A friend once asked me this, “I know what you do not belive, but what do you believe?” What a great question to ask anyone! But she should have added, “and why do you believe that?” I responded with my answer (and a blog post), but I think Sophia provides a good answer.

It is not very important that I do not believe in god. What I do believe is what defines me and should be what identifies me.

Even the word atheist is not the best one for it, but it’s all we have (for now).

I am posting this because I think it is worth your time to read it.

Click on the link below to find it.

Bill

I am an Atheist, not a “non-believer”

A to Z Blog Challenge: Three Logic Fallacies (A)

Ad hominem fallacy – is attacking the person rather than the argument or point itself. The personal is irrelevant to the argument the person is making.

A guy posted to me on Facebook, Your an idiot.

I replied, It’s you’re. You’ve been schooled by an idiot.

Since this happens so often, religion and politics are poor topics (blogs excepted).

Ad hoc hypothesis – is an argument to explain away facts that seem to refute theory or research outcomes. It is created because woo-woo is often just that. This fallacy is common in paranormal research and in the work of pseudoscientists.

A lot of ESP research with poor results is defended as being tainted by the thoughts of non-participants. When the light flashes, we are experimenting, so everyone must stop thinking and feeling or our findings will be bogus. Sho’nuff.

Argument to ignorance [argumentum ad ignorantiam] – is a logic fallacy claiming something is or isn’t because the opposite has not been proven. Two sides are:

1) god exists because you cannot prove she does not,

2) god does not exist because you cannot prove that he does.

It basically uses what we do not know. Medicine uses this. We lack enough research to know if that is healthy, thus it is not healthy.