Wednesday, May 1, 2013

Religion

Hello. May I have a moment of your time to talk to you about our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ?

Nah, I'm just fucking around. Truth is I'm about as atheist as someone can get: I was never anything else before becoming an atheist, despite constant bombardment by religious messages and symbolism. Maybe I'm just a stubborn ass, or maybe my way of thinking has some merit. Who knows? What I do know is that theists consistently fail to impress me. I'll try to outline why.

#1: Any theistic religion based on a holy book is false by default.
Unlike most atheists, I generally don't bother trying to deconstruct any particular religion. The entire construct of theistic religion is so easy to destroy at the macro level that unless a theist insists on going further, it just isn't necessary.

When you get right down to it, any document written or inspired by a supreme being would contain knowledge and wisdom so profound that no rational human being could deny the value of its contents. This text would not be subject to different interpretations, as any interpretation could only detract from the document's profundity. It would also be 100% consistent with all scientific observation, requiring no faith to believe its contents. There would therefore be no religion based on this document since its validity would be so painfully obvious that no cult following would be necessary to promote it.

We do not observe this phenomenon anywhere on planet Earth. If any document on Earth was indeed authored or inspired by a supreme being, then based on what we observe we can only conclude that this being intentionally lies to us on a regular basis. Since this creates a situation where we either have flawed evidence or no evidence, the only reasonable conclusion one can reach for the moment is that no supreme being is in communication with humanity.

#2: That which can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Contrary to what a lot of folks on Omegle like to tell me, faith is not the only requirement for getting someone to believe in your dogma. Theists and particularly Christians treat faith like something to just be randomly cast out like a fishing like into a lake. That is not how faith works, and it cheapens the word to such a degree that even atheists are reluctant to use it these days.

If I have faith in my friend's ability to accomplish a task, it's because I know from experience that he has accomplished similar tasks in the past. Conversely, I do not have faith in one of my former friends to do that same task if called upon to do so, because he almost went out of his way to demonstrate that he was totally incapable of anything but making a fool of himself by the time I quit talking to him. Faith has multiple definitions, and the first has nothing to do with religion:

faith
Noun
1. Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

I have no reason to throw my faith behind a religion like Christianity just because someone demands that I do so. Christianity has done nothing to earn my faith. I have no evidence that being any kind of theist would do anything for me that being an atheist does not, yet theists claim that I should have faith anyhow. That ain't how it works. You want my faith? Earn it.

But if someone insists on using the second definition, then I can simply dismiss it. No evidence? Piss off. It's a very simple concept.

#3: Chickenshit Arguments
A favorite tactic of theists online and particularly Omegle is to say something like, "Jesus loves you," and then bolt. They do this so they can get in the last word and feel like they've won the argument. I hate to break your bubble, folks, but all you accomplish by saying that is annoying me. It's basically admitting that you can't refute a single argument I make, and that you prioritize getting the last word over actually being right; pride before truth, as it were. Isn't that one of the seven deadly sins? Interesting that an atheist would actually be better at avoiding some of these sins than the theists preaching them. Maybe theists should re-examine their own beliefs before attacking mine, hmm?

I already mentioned faith in point #2, but I will expand on it by another point often brought up to me: that of "feeling God's presence." The personal relationship in a nutshell. This can be explained by what is called a simulacrum (look it up), and is not only evidence against the religion in question but in fact evidence of  mental sickness. No one will ever convince me via this route unless they gather some damn good evidence of the same being speaking to a large number of individuals, and even then I would question if this is really their god or something else.

Then of course, for the larger religions of Islam and Christianity, they like to make an appeal to numbers and to growth. First of all, the idea that Christianity is the world's largest religion is bullshit. Christianity is divided into so many sects that it can hardly be considered a single religion anymore. Not only that, Christianity is experiencing a net shrinkage in followers, even as the Mormons try to claim the title of "fastest growing religion." That leaves Islam as the largest religion, and it is being actively suppressed by outside influences for the moment. Despite experiencing a net growth due to the absorption of Christianity, like that religion Islam is also losing a steadily increasing number of followers who are becoming atheists, particularly in more secular countries in the west. If atheism were a religion, it would be the 3rd largest in the world; 2nd if you don't consider Christianity to be one religion. If the numbers argument held true, the Abrahamic world wouldn't be eating itself while hemorrhaging lost followers into the atheist community.

Finally, if all else fails they will threaten you will hellfire or some equivalent. This is the most pathetic out of any argument. Like all other aspects of their religions, the existence of an afterlife has no evidence, and can be dismissed as easily as it is claimed. Besides, if a supreme being really did want me to suffer for eternity for not worshiping them, I somehow doubt that I'd enjoy the alternative much more.

That's It
That is my entire argument against theistic religions. Note how I never brought up evolution, or the Big Bang, or anything else that typically comes up in these discussions. I don't need them. Religion is self-falsifying, and doesn't need science's help to collapse once one realizes this. If you are a theist and feel the need to argue such topics after reading this, you have missed the point of this blog post. It does not matter if you think scientific theories are wrong if your worldview is also wrong. The sooner theists realize this, the sooner we can all move on.

3 comments:

  1. Hey Mara,

    I am responding to this to let you know I'm lurking around and to also respond to your views on faith.

    No, I am not here to argue that you are wrong, with both of my parents being split half and half, I have a little insight on both worlds. I wrote this topic not so long ago...

    http://forums.warsworldnews.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=13290#p384081

    As you were so bold to mention, faith is a misinterpreted word. However, I'd also like to disagree with a little bit of your statement, as faith can't be measured in the same spectrum as trust, which seems to be implied a lot here.

    Faith isn't a medal, it is a state of being. In other words, there is no varying level of religious faith. It is either you have religious faith, or you don't. It isn't like trust where you can trust your friends in movie choice, but not to drive you to the movies.

    The problem lies within the words used to describe it. Since it is an opinionated report, I am just giving you the religious point of view of your argument. The religious word of faith has been skewed so it can't be argued against easily.

    It really doesn't have to do anything with the Big Bang or Darwin :).


    ReplyDelete
  2. I have a similar split on the parental front.

    I never implied faith to have the meaning you seem to think I assigned to it. Please re-read the post. Thank you. :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2Vx9qoLzFs

    and if you want some context

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBVb2WECSLw
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRNhNHXbUmk

    Faith is a lot harder to fight when you have to fight its full definition. So as promised...

    faith (fth)
    n.
    1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
    2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust.
    3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
    4. often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
    5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
    6. A set of principles or beliefs.

    Best of luck. (As promised a while ago...)

    ReplyDelete