Alex’s Heresies – embracing a physical reality

I received the following letter:

hi,
i was reading your blog, and i highly disagree with your god vs. santa first of all santa is faux and god is a very wonderful and real thing. You may belive what you wnat o to byt a wise man once said he who belives will live eternally in a pkace of gold and wonders with me. Heavens roads are made of gold and youll never thirst again for i am all you need.I dont think your quote to ponder is corect either. It hurts me when people don understaind christ, do me a favor and research god then see what you think. Because whether you like it or not god loves you more than you could imagine.
Fel than emptiness in you, its the hole that can never be filled without jesus.
Thanks,
Aynonomous

The more I think about the language of religious believers and those of non-believers, the more I realise that we perceive vastly different realities or world-views and, essentially, do not share the same language. I discussed these issues during my recent ‘Problem of Evil’ course at CAE in Melbourne. We listened to debates between intelligent, caring people who presented views of the world that were diametrically opposed. Religious people talked of a superior reality with God that framed Earthly suffering as a challenge of understanding God’s will. Naturalists (and atheists) spoke of the superfluous nature of God in explaining the extensive, indiscriminate nature of pain and suffering in our physical world.

The writer, quite naturally, tells me to research his God with the implication that I shall know his God. But my God is the philosophers’ God – an intellectual concept that can be analysed and criticised. I do not get the religious experience that is of primary interest to the writer. I even suspect my very reasonable intellectual understanding of the Christian scriptures and early Christian history would mean little to him. Ultimately I don’t see what he does. Of course it is easy, perhaps all too easy,  for me and fellow atheists to retort how can we as it doesn’t exist!

Alex McCullie

The most recent mailout of the National Secular Society (UK) warns of Christian fundamentalism creeping into British schools via the Alpha religious course. To quote the article:

Fundamentalist Alpha Course infiltrating more schools

The fundamentalist Christian Alpha Course is being operated in state schools up and down the country, drawing in children to its particular brand of literalist religious dogma – and all with the schools’ approval and support.

The NSS is receiving increasing numbers of complaints from parents who are alarmed by the number of evangelical groups that are being allowed into schools to spread intolerant religious teaching, but the Alpha course is by far the most organised and widespread.

The Times Educational Supplement last week reported the growing influence of Alpha in schools. It cited Archbishop Blanch CofE High School in Liverpool, where “Youth Alpha” courses have been running for 3 years and has had 300 pupils participating. It runs for eight weeks at lunchtime and is promoted throughout the school on notice boards and in assemblies.

The course was set up with the headteacher’s backing by Reverend Kate Wharton, the Bishop of Liverpool’s appointee on the school’s board of governors. She claims that the Alpha Course is a “balanced introduction” to Christianity.

What she does not mention is its homophobia and the final sinister “holy spirit” session that encourages participants to speak in tongues and behave hysterically.

Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: “This is real fundamentalist stuff all wrapped up in reassuring words and delivered by a bloke in a jumper with a permanent smile who looks remarkably like Tony Blair. This is not a ‘balanced introduction’ to anything; it is a carefully planned attempt to push people in a very specific direction. It is deeply manipulative and has no place in schools paid for by the taxpayer.”

Quoted in the TES, Jonathan Bartley of the Ekklesia Christian “think tank” said the courses deal with doctrine rather than Christianity as a way of life. “It’s about sin, hell and resurrection and what people must do to get to heaven. I would be very worried about the adult content being used in schools unless it has been heavily modified.” He said that Governing bodies of “faith schools” (who are mostly representatives of the local diocese) are “overstepping the mark” in pushing these courses in schools.

Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the NSS, told the TES: “We have pupils, a captive audience, funnelled into hardline proselytising on school premises. These schools should be seeking permission from parents, but I’ll bet they aren’t.”

Alex McCullie

Here is a link to Susan Blackmore’s essay in the Guardian. She also refers to an interesting research paper by Gregory Paul,  freelance researcher, on the dependence on religious belief and dysfunctional psychosociological conditions.

Alex McCullie

This is an opportunity to add a beautifully produced bible to your library. Logos are giving away premium bibles (and not the cheaply produced giveaways we normally see) until the end of this month. Whether you are a believer or a critic, the Christian Bible is an essential part of any thinkers library as one of the most important books in Western civilisation. I have more than one bible and I would recommend one for your library too.

Alex McCullie

Commonly atheists like to think that religious people have belief in a god whereas atheists hold no belief. This then is the basis for arguing that the obligation is on theists to prove the existence of god and not atheists to prove the non-existence of god.

However I think “non-belief” also requires belief. Here I take belief to be a justified claim to knowledge. So, to have a belief means you see enough support for a claim that something is true. Let’s look at some non-theist examples of disbelief.

Most people support the urgency and seriousness of human-accelerated climate change. They believe justified in claiming that this is a serious threat that we face. The climate change supporters, mostly non-specialists, would feel convinced by the wide-ranging support from scientists, political and religious leaders. Typically they would see this reinforced by selective observations of extreme weather reports.

However many others are not convinced by the evidence or the strength of public opinion that we face a crisis. Some of those are also specialists in the field, though in the minority. Typically they are called “climate change skeptics”. No one would seriously suggest that these people have no beliefs about the seriousness of climate change even if their stated position is “not convinced”.

Many people believe homeopathy is an effective strategy as alternate or complementary medicine. Their belief is supported by homoepathic practicians, personal experience and stories of others. Other vehemently deny homeopathic claims citing lack of scientific support. They equally hold strong opposite beliefs. Still others are unconvinced either way. However they still hold beliefs that the “jury is out”, believeing the evidence does not clearly support either position.

Whether or not you support the truthfulness of a claim you have a belief about the supporting evidence. I could imagine the only people who have tryly “no belief” would be those of are totally unaware of the subject. A person may have no belief about “dark energy” if he or her had never heard of the concept.

This description however does not conceivably apply to a concept of god within our western society. Whether you believe, disbelieve, or unsure, you have a belief, a reasonable claim to knowledge – one that you should be able to articulate. Claiming that a non-belief in a god as having no beliefs with the implicate claim that the onus is on atheists to prove is a fatuous claim. Atheists, agnostics, and naturalists need to be able to articulate their positions convincingly and persuasively.

Alex McCullie