Saturday, December 19, 2009

Eradication or reform for religion? False dichotomy.

Over the next several days, I'll be attempting to catch up on the comment backlog.

First, the Religious Prohibition thread, since that's the one everyone seems to be in a tizzy about.

I stated up front that everything in that post was, for the time being, purely speculative. I was musing about the possibility of a losing battle in completely eliminating religion and wondering if encouraging healthier approaches might be more beneficial. Apparently, one commenter either didn't understand or chose to ignore the "speculation" disclaimer, because I got this comment:

The questions asked and tone set in this post is decidedly different than that of your post 'To the Lost Sheep: It's ok to run!'. 

A few excerpts from that post: "I have no intention of coming across otherwise [that is to come across as being derogatory towards religion]. "I have no intention of playing nice with religion." "to be blunt, I think it is poison and it needs to be eradicated if we're ever going to progress."

So, in the span of barely a month you have gone from 'live and let live' to 'we must eradicate religion because it is poison' to just needing a healthier approach to religion. I am confused. And it's quite feasable that all the lost sheep that you promised to help out are confused as well. So, are all the lost sheep now ok in their religion so long as they take a healthy approach to it? What is that healthy approach supposed to be? You came out of the gates early on in this blog sounding like this great liberator from religion to now saying "well, now I'm not so sure."

Are you even sure how you feel about religion?

I said this in my response on the thread, but I'll say it again here: I am not confused on my stance on religion for myself. I place myself at a 6 on "The Dawkins Scale." I can't think of any evidence that would convince me that an intelligent god exists, although I don't discount the possibility of some evidence outside the realm of my imagination turning up in the future. But, for the time being, "I cannot be certain, but I think God is very unlikely, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there." 

I do think an ideal world would be one without religion, and I will continue to advocate for an atheistic worldview, but I'm also a realist who sees the very real possibility that religion may never go away completely.

I'm highly dubious that the "lost sheep" that I'm aiming to reach were at all confused. These "lost sheep" are no strangers to doubt and speculation and reshaping their beliefs based on new information. For all of you who are so happy in your faith, not that I'm not glad to have you reading and being exposed to a new perspective, but I am a little confused as to why you're reading. My target audience is people who are unhappy in their religion and are searching for a better way. Most of them have already reached the conclusion on their own that something smells a bit fishy about their religion's truth claims. And it's not just those gosh-awful Mormons. I've heard from readers who are or were Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses and Catholics who have said they were thankful to have found my blog. And it's not because I'm writing anything earth-shattering or new. Most of the time, it's just because they're happy to see someone else articulating publicly the conclusions they reached on their own privately.

Another commenter said, "Your 'healthier' approaches would just make religion a superficial hobby." Perhaps so, but perhaps that's the proper place of religion. I'm probably gonna go to church tomorrow, for no reason other than that I think Christmas carols are pretty and I really like singing them. I adore yoga and meditation, not because I think I'm communing with the universe, but just because it feels good. Religion has stumbled on to some valuable things. A. J. Jacobs pointed out some examples, like taking one day a week completely off from your work or cultivating an attitude of gratitude. By all means, let's keep what works, but please, let's jettison the bullshit. Thou shalt pick and choose!

So, my exciting conclusion after thinking about it: It's not an either/or proposition. My approach will still be to discourage adherence to religious dogma altogether. I'll leave reform to the religious moderates. My ideal world would be populated with atheists and religious hobbyists, but in the meantime, I'll take lesbian bishops over creationists.


Share/Bookmark

If you enjoyed this post, I hope you'll check out my new blog.

4 comments:

  1. Since you are specifically referencing my comments in this post I guess I'll comment.

    Why do I read your blog? For a few reasons. One, you are my friend and I am interested in you having a relationship with your Creator. I remember having discussions with you in high school about God, only then you were still a mormon. I was elated to get reconnected with you after many years and found out that you had left the mormon church only to find out later that you had become an atheist. I believe that mormonism is a false path to Christ and you seemed to be expressing doubt back in high school so I participated in discussions with you. And now, you are an atheist, which I also believe to be wrong. Therefore, I participate in this blog for your sake. My second reason, I believe that your view on religion is wrong, and that you are an intelligent person who seeks after the truth, and so I seek to put in my two cents worth in in the hopes of showing either you or your readers that maybe the atheistic viewpoint is not so bullet proof after all. And thirdly, I find that my faith in Christ is actually strengthened by reading books and having discussions with people whose world view is different than mine.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Patrik, I truly am touched at your concern, and I mean that. I know that your concern is genuine, because I once had the same concern for your soul, back when I thought there were Two Churches Only, and anything but Mormonism was not the Church of the Lamb of God and thus was the Church of the Devil. You weren't Mormon and I was concerned about your eternal progression. Not that I thought you'd end up in hell, but you weren't on the Ultimately Awesome Path to the Celestial Kingdom. I do recall our conversations in high school, and for the record, I was not a doubter at that point, but any means. You would sometimes ask me questions that I didn't have answers for right away, but my reaction was never doubt. I "knew" it was all true, so just because I couldn't answer didn't mean that there wasn't an answer, just that I needed to study or ask my seminary teacher and find the answer. Learning how to refute an opposing viewpoint strengthened my faith, probably in much the same way you feel more firm in your faith after reading Dawkins or Hitchens and finding that you still disagree.

    I find it fascinating that you're so adept at pointing out the fallacies in Mormonism, but you can't see them in your own faith. How do you justify your specific god? I was not an atheist when we first reconnected, almost three years ago. I was attending a Presbyterian church at that time, still really wanting to believe in Christ, still really trying. In the end, I found that the foundation of mainstream Christianity was just as rickety as the foundation of Mormonism. I sincerely wanted to believe, but I just couldn't.

    I'm not out to save anyone's soul anymore. My goal is simply to help people be happier in this life, because all the evidence points to this life being the only one we get. If you're happy in your religion, I still think you're wrong, but so long as you keep your faith in the private sphere, I really don't have a problem with it. For those who want out, I hope I can help point the way.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Patrik, I truly am touched at your concern, and I mean that. I know that your concern is genuine, because I once had the same concern for your soul, back when I thought there were Two Churches Only, and anything but Mormonism was not the Church of the Lamb of God and thus was the Church of the Devil. You weren't Mormon and I was concerned about your eternal progression. Not that I thought you'd end up in hell, but you weren't on the Ultimately Awesome Path to the Celestial Kingdom. I do recall our conversations in high school, and for the record, I was not a doubter at that point, but any means. You would sometimes ask me questions that I didn't have answers for right away, but my reaction was never doubt. I "knew" it was all true, so just because I couldn't answer didn't mean that there wasn't an answer, just that I needed to study or ask my seminary teacher and find the answer. Learning how to refute an opposing viewpoint strengthened my faith, probably in much the same way you feel more firm in your faith after reading Dawkins or Hitchens and finding that you still disagree.

    I find it fascinating that you're so adept at pointing out the fallacies in Mormonism, but you can't see them in your own faith. How do you justify your specific god? I was not an atheist when we first reconnected, almost three years ago. I was attending a Presbyterian church at that time, still really wanting to believe in Christ, still really trying. In the end, I found that the foundation of mainstream Christianity was just as rickety as the foundation of Mormonism. I sincerely wanted to believe, but I just couldn't.

    I'm not out to save anyone's soul anymore. My goal is simply to help people be happier in this life, because all the evidence points to this life being the only one we get. If you're happy in your religion, I still think you're wrong, but so long as you keep your faith in the private sphere, I really don't have a problem with it. For those who want out, I hope I can help point the way.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Since you are specifically referencing my comments in this post I guess I'll comment.

    Why do I read your blog? For a few reasons. One, you are my friend and I am interested in you having a relationship with your Creator. I remember having discussions with you in high school about God, only then you were still a mormon. I was elated to get reconnected with you after many years and found out that you had left the mormon church only to find out later that you had become an atheist. I believe that mormonism is a false path to Christ and you seemed to be expressing doubt back in high school so I participated in discussions with you. And now, you are an atheist, which I also believe to be wrong. Therefore, I participate in this blog for your sake. My second reason, I believe that your view on religion is wrong, and that you are an intelligent person who seeks after the truth, and so I seek to put in my two cents worth in in the hopes of showing either you or your readers that maybe the atheistic viewpoint is not so bullet proof after all. And thirdly, I find that my faith in Christ is actually strengthened by reading books and having discussions with people whose world view is different than mine.

    ReplyDelete

Religion, skepticism, and carving out a spiritual life post-Mormonism