Often, atheists and agnostics grossly underestimate the power of Jesus. I am sure that some of you are already thinking or saying out loud, Bruce, are you nuts? Have you renounced atheism and become a follower of Jesus again? We don’t underestimate the power of Jesus because he doesn’t exist. End of story!
But, he does exist and I think many atheists and agnostics forget this. In our desire to rid the world of the damaging effects of religion we often forget that Jesus is alive and well.
Now, the Jesus who is alive and well is not an actual, physical living human being and neither is he an actual, physical God or Son of God. The Jesus who was born in Bethlehem two thousand years ago is dead. The Jesus who, for thirty-three years, walked the roads of Palestine is dead. The Jesus spoken of in the Bible is dead. We know that dead people do not come back from the grave. We know that once a person is dead they stay dead. Jesus is dead and there is no chance that he is coming back from the dead.
But, Jesus is alive and well in the myths and beliefs of millions of Christians. In the mythical Jesus people find comfort, meaning, and hope. In the mythical Jesus people find what they think is lacking in their lives, and quite frankly atheists and agnostics don’t have anything to offer when it comes to what Jesus can offer a person.
But, Bruce, believing in Jesus is irrational. Believing in Jesus is as rational as believing in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy. Totally correct, but this doesn’t matter.
When suffering and loss come our way, our rationality does not do us much good. When our lives are in a heap of ashes, knowing the proofs for God not existing does nothing to comfort us. When we are struggling to keep from drowning, the books written by Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris, provide no help. All our rational, well-thought-out arguments do little for us when we are at those moments in life where the most precious thing to us is our next breath.
In these times we look for comfort and hope. We look to those who love us and who are willing to do anything for us. In these times our intellectual prowess does not matter. What we desperately want and need is a hand to hold on to, someone who will tell is it is going to be all-right.
But, Bruce, shit happens and we are all going to die in the end. Atheists and agnostics don’t need sentimentality. Surely, we can face what comes our way with a rugged resolve, knowing we are right. Perhaps.
But is knowing we are right the most important thing? Is drawing our last breath knowing we were right about religion, God, Jesus, and the Bible really the grand objective?
Forget for a moment what you know about the Bible. Forget what you know about its teachings. If you were once a Christian, forget your experience in the church. Think for a moment about the essence of the Christian religion. What is the one thing that matters more than anything else? What is the one thing that allows millions of people to live in a state of cognitive dissonance? What is the one thing that allows Christians to shut off all the criticisms of Christianity and allows them to continue believing?
One word…Jesus.
The mythical Jesus, the Jesus of legend, the Jesus that is preached in countless Christian churches all over the world, this Jesus is the one thing that matters above all else.
Why is this? What is it about Jesus that millions of people will abandon rational thinking for? There is no proof for what the Bible teaches on most anything. Few of the events in the Bible have any historical proof. Why does Jesus have such power over people?
Jesus offers salvation. Jesus offers friendship, love and compassion. Countless drug addicts and alcoholics have abandoned their addictions because of Jesus. Gang members have forsaken their violent ways and thieves have turned to gainful means of employment all because of Jesus. Only the most hardheaded and blind among atheists and agnostics would deny the fact that, for millions of people, Jesus makes a qualitative difference in their life.
In Jesus, millions of people find meaning, purpose, and direction. In Jesus, they find the strength to suffer and to die. This Jesus promised to never leave them or forsake them and no matter how hard we try to show that Jesus is AWOL in the lives of Christians, they still believe he is that friend that sticks closer than a brother.
I am sure there is some psychological or neurological explanation for why this is so, but such explanations have little value. People believe what they believe and that is all that matters.
My wife’s parents are in their seventies. They are now on the short side of life and it is unlikely that both of them will still be living ten or fifteen years from now. When they die I will mourn their death. I love them dearly. I will grieve over the loss of two people I have known most of my adult life. Good people. Loving people. Caring people. And yes, devout, fundamentalist Christians.
They believe that Jesus is with them through thick and thin. Jesus has been their constant guide for over fifty years. According to them, Jesus has worked countless miracles for them. To them, Jesus is as much a part of their lives as the air they breathe.
I could point out to them all the times that Jesus wasn’t there for them. Where was Jesus when they miscarried? Where was Jesus when their daughter was killed in a motorcycle accident? Their life is filled with examples where Jesus was nowhere to be found. He seems to always be around when they need a hundred dollars but nowhere to be found when faced with job loss and sickness. Yet, they still steadfastly believe.
Is it my place to expose their fraudulent Jesus? Is it my place to point out all the places that their friends Jesus was no friend at all? Perhaps I should buy them Bart Ehrman’s books for Christmas so they can know the truth about the Bible and Jesus?
Why would I want to do this? Would their life be better without Jesus?
I can’t think of any way their life would be better without Jesus. Their whole existence and being is invested in Jesus and they are trusting him to be there when they are dying and to carry them home to their reward in Heaven.
None of this is true BUT it doesn’t matter.
All that matters is what Jesus means to them and what value he adds to their lives. If this Jesus gives their lives meaning, purpose, and direction, I have no right to disabuse them of their beliefs. If this Jesus gives them peace and comfort…who am I to take that away from them?
Sometimes, we as atheists and agnostics, in our zeal to rid the world of the evil of Christian fundamentalism, forget that most Christians are not theocrats trying to take over America. They have sincerely-held beliefs and, for them, Jesus adds value to their lives. Yes, we must battle Christian fundamentalists who want to turn American into a Christian theocracy. Yes, we must battle attempts to teach creationism as science in the public schools. Yes, we must battle attempts to codify Christian morals and ethics as the law of the land. We must battle any and all attempts to lessen the individual liberty we have to believe or not believe. But, beyond these things, it is not our place to rid the world of beliefs we think are silly or anti-intellectual.
We must remember, for those of us who are bloggers, that the Christians that come to our blogs to debate, evangelize, and attack are not typical Christians. Zealots deserve all that we give them and I have little tolerance for such people. But…I must never forget that most Christians are not like the zealots. Most Christians are like my wife’s parents…who love Jesus and who want to live a good life.
All human beings want a life that has meaning and purpose. We want to be loved and we want to know our life mattered. In the end, we all die and we will soon be forgotten by all but those who loved us. Let’s be careful, in our zeal to rid the world of all the evils associated with religion, that we don’t lose those we love, that we don’t trade being right for those who will be there for us when we draw our last breath.
To some degree this is why I keep silent about my deconversion. I really don’t want to challenge those who are comfortable in their faith and many of them would feel compelled to reconvert me (good luck with that!) As long as someone is comfortable with their image of Jesus walking beside them without them bothering me, I’m OK with that.
What does worry me, though, is that many of these people feel that Jesus tells them how to vote. He also wants them to oppose science and reason. He wants back into the school and courthouse. I’m NOT OK with that.
my summary view:
people that use religion to improve themselves are some of the nicest people i know. people that use religion to try to improve everyone else are at best obnoxious and too frequently dangerous.
Bruce,
You could almost rewrite this post completely, but substituting the word “Jesus” with Mohammad, or Buddha, or Ganesha, or . . .
Those atheists and agnostics who speak out against religion are quite aware of the “power” that the nonexistent Jesus has had throughout history.
The power to enslave; the power to hate or conquer those outside of your race or tribe; the power to condemn unbelievers to eternal torture; the power to make second-class citizens of women; the power to impede the progress of science.
Your premise is silly. Atheists and agnostics don’t oppose Christianity because it is incorrect. They oppose Christianity because it is devastatingly harmful to society.
“With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion. ” Steven Weinberg
“The power to enslave; the power to hate or conquer those outside of your race or tribe; the power to condemn unbelievers to eternal torture; the power to make second-class citizens of women; the power to impede the progress of science.”
Yes, when it’s turned outwards. Bruce is talking about private faith, and I have to agree that there’s no need to track down individual Christians for the express purpose of disabusing them of their fantasies.
By standing against theocracy in the public sphere, we show that ALL people deserve common decency and respect, even people who believe things we think are silly or bizarre. We say, in essence, “we’ll leave you alone if you leave us alone.” We’re never going to convince the zealots that what they believe is nonsense, so why try? What we need to do is convince thoughtful people of any faith, or no-faith, that enforcing one particular religion’s view of the world on everyone is wrong and harmful. It is certainly legitimate, also, when this religion or that does attempt to legislate its morality for everyone, to point out in what ways the particular moral point is harmful to society in general (e.g. anti-abortion laws, especially when coupled with abstinence-only sex education and limited health care). But I think it’s mean-hearted and uncompassionate to deliberately go after individual believers just to deconvert them.
I agree with everything you said here:
By standing against theocracy in the public sphere, we show that ALL people deserve common decency and respect, even people who believe things we think are silly or bizarre. We say, in essence, “we’ll leave you alone if you leave us alone.” We’re never going to convince the zealots that what they believe is nonsense, so why try? What we need to do is convince thoughtful people of any faith, or no-faith, that enforcing one particular religion’s view of the world on everyone is wrong and harmful. It is certainly legitimate, also, when this religion or that does attempt to legislate its morality for everyone, to point out in what ways the particular moral point is harmful to society in general (e.g. anti-abortion laws, especially when coupled with abstinence-only sex education and limited health care). But I think it’s mean-hearted and uncompassionate to deliberately go after individual believers just to deconvert them.
Well said.
And the power to do good and live good, meaningful, productive lives.
Demonizing all people of faith gets us nowhere and it is foolish and naive to think otherwise. We are many lifetimes away from religion ceasing to be a major force in our world. Perhaps we will evolve out of our need for religion or spirituality. But, whose to say “that” will be a better world. Maybe, but I have my doubts.
I understand your point that many Christians are not zealots. I wouldn’t say “most” – the power wielded by fundamentalists in each election cycle speaks to their great numbers.
But I have to agree with Sam Harris (Letter to a Christian Nation), that even moderate Christians empower fundamentalists by empowering the preeminence of religious thinking. As many atheists have pointed out over the years, it is nearly impossible for an atheist to be elected to public office in this day and age, there is so much religious prejudice in opposition.
I wouldn’t worry about atheists offending the religious in this country; there is far more offensiveness and bias in the opposite direction.
The general rule in Evangelical churches is that 10%-20% of the membership does most of the work, gives most of the money, and are the true blue believers.
This small number of people make a lot of noise and we must be careful not to make them out to be more than they are. Fight them? Yes. But their power is dwindling and that is why they are so shrill. As more and more people become indifferent to religion their power is lessened. we have a long way to go but I am hopeful.
I think you may have nailed it here Bruce. It is indifference, more than anything else, that could take the wind out of the zealots’ sails. Of course we still have to fight them on a political scale etc. But when it comes to one on one encounters, if we stop caring to debate I can imagine the ‘believers’ would lose some of their validation. Of course I could be wrong, but it’s an interesting idea.
Certainly I am bored of the whole things and seldom discuss it with Christian friends anymore. What’s the point? I’ll never change their mind. And if anything, debating with them only makes their resolve stronger. Just talking about Jesus gets their excitement up. And what do we get from it, except frustration.
Bruce
Who are you addressing in this post? Is it the Sam Harris’s and Christopher Hitchens’s? Atheists who make billboards about atheism or religion?
Harris, Hitchens, and other writers shook me out of a complacent acceptance of my religious upbringing. An upbringing that made me overlook prejudicial and (literally) ignorant attitudes that I had inherited from my religion towards politics, science, and people in general.
Individual atheists and agnostics that I know personally walked me through this process clearly and rationally.
I am very glad atheists and agnostics took the trouble to track me down for the express purpose of disabusing me of my fantasies!
Consider me disabused and free!
If a person seeks to investigate their faith then by all means engage them. However, being an atheist version of a Baptist fundamentalist will get us nowhere. Bashing Christians every time they pop their head above ground accomplishes what exactly? Yeah, it feels good and maybe it is payback for how they treated us…but what good does it do?
Most atheists I know don’t like being evangelized or preached at. Yet, some atheists do not treat the religious the same way. They think the religious are ignorant, believers in a myth…surely when presented with the “evidence”, ah yes the “evidence”, they will leave off of Jesus and become a born again atheist or agnostic. (and many of the hard core atheists abuse agnostics as much as they do the religious)
Sadly, way too many atheists have a simplistic view of religion and they think that sound evidence and argumentation will disabuse most any religious person. They totally ignore the fact that Christianity being true is not a requirement for people to find meaning and value in Christianity.
Hitchens, Harris, and Dawkins preach to the choir. Their books have not turned massive numbers of Christians (especially Evangelicals) away from their faith. Generally, these writers are viewed in the Christian community as arrogant, bombastic, and often simplistic in their view of Christianity. I would never recommend their books to someone having doubts about their faith. Their books do have great value but not at the onset of a loss of faith or a questioning of one’s faith.
I am a firm believer in incrementalism and I am of the opinion that we must learn to co-exist with the religious. That said, when Christians, especially Evangelicals, drag their faith into the public square or try to evangelize others, THEN I am all for taking firm, bold steps to counteract them.
Personally, I think the atheist community does a lot of things that hurt our cause. i.e. The recent spate of billboard campaigns aimed directly at offending the religious. I think we need to fight battles that matter and we need to quit doing things that make us feel good but do little to advance our cause.
Quite frankly, I am increasingly tired off of the antics and arguing and debates that are going on among the godless. Sometimes I think, I left Christianity for THIS? I am far more concerned with advancing humanistic morals and ethics than I am winning another soul to atheism.
This is where I am. I realize you may be at another place in life.
Bruce
Yes. I am definitely in a different place. You assert that the books of Hitchens, Harris, and Dawkins “do have great value but not at the onset of a loss of faith or a questioning of one’s faith.”
My own personal experience belies this! It was precisely at the onset of my loss of faith and questioning of my faith that these book were of greatest value to me!
You say that “when Christians, especially Evangelicals, drag their faith into the public square or try to evangelize others, THEN I am all for taking firm, bold steps to counteract them.”
What do you mean “When”?! Christians drag their faith into the public square and try to evangelize others every day!
Surely you know a personal illustration, an anecdote, proves nothing. We can never make a judgment on our own experience alone. You found their books helpful, I did not. (though I do find them helpful now)
You grossly overestimate the number of Christians who are pushing Christianity in the public square or who are out evangelizing. 80-90 percent of Christians never share their faith with a non- Christian one time. Don’t mistake the noise for Christianity as a whole. I hope Christians do the same and not mistake the pronouncements of Richard Dawkins or Bill Maher as typical of atheists.
Bruce
Surely you know a bald-faced assertion, with no evidence to back it up, proves nothing.
When you make statements like “80-90 percent of Christians never share their faith with a non- Christian one time”, where are you getting that “data”?
Are you (as Rush Limbaugh is wont to do) pulling statistics out of your behind?
Your last statements lends nothing to the discussion.
The studies I saw while a pastor stated that 80% of church members never share their faith one time.
As a pastor, conference speaker, and someone who knew many pastors with whom I talked shop with, most agreed the 80% stat was low.
In most of the churches I pastored 10-20% of the church members witnessed. People who witnessed as you think all Christians do? Probably 1%. The 10-20% also give the bulk of the money and do the bulk of the work.
Most church members are good people who are quite passive about their faith.
Even in this Barna study, a study which defines witnessing so broad to render it meaningless, 40-60% of Christians do not share their faith with someone else.
http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/186-survey-shows-how-christians-share-their-faith
Keep in mind that the two most common form of witnessing in the study are praying for someone and lifestyle evangelism. (witnessing without words) While these two things are good they are hardly witnessing. True witnessing is the verbalizing of the Christian gospel. It is, by nature, confrontational.
The fact is, most Christians and pastors don’t like to witness so they don’t. I did it because I knew that is what God commanded me to do but I never liked doing it.
???
OK . . . so you’ve cited a study that contradicts your “statistics” . . . can you cite the study that corroborates them?
This is tiresome. Though your website is full of anecdote, my story gets the response “Surely you know a personal illustration, an anecdote, proves nothing.”
When I point out that assertions without evidence are as valueless as anecdote, you say “Your last statements lends nothing to the discussion.”
Fine. To the extent that you thoughtlessly dismiss counterargument, your website lends nothing to the discussion.
The study does not contradict my statistics. I explained why this is so. (their broad use of the word witness)
My professional observations are hardly anecdotal. I have had intimate discussions with many, many Christians, pastors, Evangelists, and other church leaders. My statistics are grounded in these discussions and actually pastoring thousands of people over 25 years. If you don’t want to accept this, fine.
Your last statement “Are you (as Rush Limbaugh is wont to do) pulling statistics out of your behind?” doesn’t lend anything to the discussion. I am not Rush Limbaugh, you are dismissive of my professional and extensive experience in the Christian church, and you asserted I was pulling stats out of my ass. (which I never do, as anyone who regularly reads this blog knows)
Yes, my blog has a lot of personal stories. After all, this blog is pretty much about my life and my journey from Evangelicalism to atheism.
If you find my writing, my approach, my response tiresome to you, by all means stop reading. I can’t please everyone and I realize you differ with me on the issues we have discussed. I don’t believe I have made my responses to you personal. All I am doing is trying to answer your questions and objections. Don’t like my answers? Sorry about that…
Thanks for commenting.
Bruce
Just to be clear, let me share a quotation from the Barna study that you reference:
“One of the key findings of the research was that a slight majority of born again adults – 55% – claimed to have shared their faith in Christ with a non-Christian during the prior 12 months. That figure has remained relatively constant during the past decade.”
Now, what was it that you said? “80-90 percent of Christians never share their faith with a non- Christian one time”?
As I said, it is how they are defining witnessing. They define it so broadly to render the it meaningless.
Most of the “witnessers” did things like praying for someone, inviting them to church, or practicing “lifestyle evangelism” (living the christian life but not actually verbalizing their faith to anyone)
When you factor in these things, it is clear that very few Christians actually verbalize their faith to someone who is not a Christian. Even pastors do very little actual witnessing one on one. Often they use their preaching on Sunday as “proof” of their witnessing.
Another thing to consider is this…Christians(especially Evangelicals) are expected to attend church, tithe, read their Bible, pray, and witness. When asked about these things they lie and over-report what they actually do. (as is the case with sex surveys)
I accept what the surveys say but I add to them my professional experience as a pastor. I told my wife about your objections and we had a discussion about one church I pastored for 12 years. The church grew to 200 people and at the time I was hyper-evangelistic. We counted up the people who actively shared their faith and did most of the work in the church. We came up with about 22 people.(and we both wondered how many of them would have shared their faith if I had not harped on it frequently from the pulpit) The vast majority of church members were quite passive in their faith. They were good, decent, honest people who loved Jesus but they never shared their faith. They loved my preaching, the community our church fostered, and they agreed with the doctrines I taught.
I hope this helps explain things. I don’t know what else I can say on this matter.
You seem to have a basic misuderstanding of what statistics are and how they should be used. Statistics are not created with years of intimate conversations with like-minded individuals. Real statistics are based on objective data gathered from the largest cross-section of the target population, using verifiable and transparent methods.
When you publish percentages with no caveat such “my guess is” or “my personal estimate based on experience is”, you are leading your readers to assume you have objective evidence that does not, in fact, exist. Bogus statistics are worse than adding “nothing” to a conversation. They add bias and deceit.
I am well aware of what statistics are and how they should be used. I am also aware of how they are easily distorted. There are many variables that can affect the outcome of a statistical study. (i.e. how the question is phrased)
It is not my best guess. It is data gained from 25 years in the pastorate. There is no bias or deceit here. You don’t like my conclusions because they conflict with your personal observation and contact with Christians. You wrongly assume the noise you hear from the squeaky wheel talking heads in Evangelicalism are representative of Christianity as a whole. They are not.
There is nothing more I can say on this matter. Disagree? Fine. You don’t like my atheism? Fine. Trying to paint me as unethical (bias and deceit) is not fine. I have not said one thing to you that is personally disparaging. I answered your questions and tried to answer your objections. You don’t like my answers? Fine. Not much I can do about that.
Bruce
I apologize if you felt disparaged. It was not my intention to characterize you as unethical.
However, I would urge you to consider that (intended or not) the use of unsupported statistics is a pointedly dubious way of making an argument. Bogus statistics are the most common form of internet deceit.
I do believe that bias and deceit are not your intent.
Thanks.
I recognize the danger of using personal observations alone. That’s why I try to view studies like Barna’s (an Evangelical group BTW) along with and in light of what I have experienced. When I factor in the questions they are asking and how they define witnessing I think my observations and the numbers I extrapolate from them are accurate.
Of course, we should be glad that most Christians don’t witness. Imagine living in a country where most Christians actively evangelized. I suspect a lot of atheists would be in jail for assault.
Well, got to run to the store. Thanks for the interaction.
Bruce
One more thing to add. You characterized two Barna witnessing categories as “(witnessing without words)”. Not true. Read the study again. Christians were not praying silently for nonchrisitans (the assumption one would draw from your statement), they specifically “offer to pray with a non-Christian who was in need of encouragement or support.” And the much smaller percentage who practiced “lifestyle evangalism” were trying to “cause them [nonchristians] to raise questions about that lifestyle.”
I’ll grant that these methods may not be aggressive (depends on each situation), but your statement that they are nonverbal is false.
I am sorry if you assumed that. In church when people pray for someone they usually pray out loud. Regular readers here would understand this.
Well, you were the one who said “witnessing without words”. Praying out loud is not using words?
Two different things. Praying “with” or “for” someone usually is done out loud. Lifestyle Evangelism is a particular form a evangelism that uses non-verbal actions as witness. (i.e. the Amish) Of course the hope is that non-Christians will see how the person is ling and want they have.
Personally, I wish ALL Christians would practice lifestyle evangelism. (and atheists for that matters) The best way to show the validity of our beliefs is by how we live.
Over the past four years I have been eviscerated by Christians I don’t know, former parishioners, former Christian friends, and former colleagues in the ministry. If I judged Christianity based on their treatment of me I would NEVER want to be a Christian. Their hateful ,nasty, mean-spirited, arrogant, shit all over me treatment of me shows that their Christianity leaves a lot to be desired. (and these are the cream of the Christian crop)
Bruce
So to get past this objection to your use of “statistics”, my main objection is to the accommodation of the majority Christians ideologies in our society. Even if Christians never sought out individual atheists to proselytize, Christian majorities are determining the education of children, women’s access to healthcare, the abuse of the environment, and war ideologies on the basis of a text that is thousands of years old and is derived from a more barbaric age.
Studies do show (http://www.pewforum.org/Unaffiliated/nones-on-the-rise.aspx) that the ranks of the religiously unaffiliated is steadily rising. This gives me hope! If we can improve society by converting people from ancient prejudicial religious ideologies, then we should do so!
As an incidental note, you are arguing that a small percentage of Christians actively proselytize. My guess (and I confess, this is a guess – not a vetted statistic) is that an even smaller percentage of the nonreligious proselytize. Of course, having said that, I would like to raise that percentage.
On that we can agree. I think the rise in nones is encouraging. the only caveat is that most of the increase is from people who have become indifferent to religion. The increase in atheism and agnosticism is much more nominal, but still encouraging.
That said, atheists and agnostics need to do a better job at articulating a humanist worldview. We are good at showing the reasons religious belief is false but we are not very good at showing what we think would be a superior ethical and moral model.
Most atheists do not evangelize. Through this blog I have met a lot of atheists. Most want to live and let live. Every once in awhile a fundamentalist atheist will show up and excoriate me for not being a “true” atheist or for being too accommodating to the religious. Such people remind me of my Christian fundamentalist past.
Don’t think I am passive about Christianity in the public square. If you have read much of this blog you know that I am not. The U.S. is a secular state and I hold to a strict separation of church and state. I have written a good bit lately on why churches and pastors should not be tax exempt. I oppose teaching creationism in the public schools and I oppose allowing religious groups ANY access to public school children. I despise the religious-right and, in our local area, I am the public face of atheism. (I write frequent letters to the editor) http://brucegerencser.net/series/letters-to-the-editor/
If Christians quietly live out their faith, don’t evangelize, and don’t try to turn the U.S. into a Christian theocracy, I am quite indifferent to their beliefs. However, since this is NOT the case, when they push I push back.
Thanks for commenting.
Bruce
I’m glad that you push back. My guess is that we are mostly agreed.
Like yourself, I think your in laws are good people. I know many just like them.
Makes me think of the people Obama condescendingly described as “clinging to their bibles and guns”