I just watched the 30 Days episode "Christian/Atheist," and it seemed clear to me why the two have so many problems. In America, we should adopt and revere a "tolerance model" when it comes to faith. Instead of fighting to maintain "In God We Trust," rather we should think more about "In humans we trust." You might think I am saying that because I am a humanist or atheist ... wrong. I am a Christian, and I feel most Christians in the media represent me and the faith I ascribe to.
When people say "Christian" on TV, the connotation often follows of slapping people on foreheads and proclaiming "You're healed." Even more likely is the judgemental person with a rifle on a Jeep and wearing a Ku Klux Klan hood riding in the back. Even these aren't the only types of negative Christian stereotypes out there. There are twisted cults like that of Jim Jones in the 1970s. There are also the David Koresh images that run through the television of the American mind. It was hard for the woman on the show I watched to get beyond these pigeon-holes where atheists usually dismiss Christians. She did listen though, and luckily this non-denominational church was not as bad as some. I still thought the people were too much on the illogical side. I for one believe that Christianity is a logical stance despite the hundreds of people who have argued with me about that fact. The fact is that some of them have become Christians in varied ways.
Faith is a freedom we need to revere again. At the time of the American revolution, we fought to worship God apart from the King's "slant" on things. Perhaps we all need to remember that. The atheists should not attack the Christians for believing the way they do, and the Christians should respect the atheists for believing that when they die, they simply cease to be. I have thought for many years that stance takes more faith than Christianity. The point of this article is to show we need to stop judging one who says she/he is a Christian and/or an atheist. When we declare the USA to be a "Christian" nation, we are forgetting there are a plethora of sects in Christianity. One sect might be a healthy, well-balanced church where people are built up and live productive lives as a result. Another may be one where you are dis-fellowshipped when you show interest in dating someone outside the church walls. "Christian" is not a monolith and I might venture to say neither is atheist.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Clavos
Interesting article; I applaud your advocacy of tolerance between faithists/believers and atheists, however I must take issue with your inclusion of atheism among the "faiths".
Atheism is the absence of faith, arrived at (usually), by the observer's conclusion that there is no scientific evidence of the existence of a deity.
One of the irritants of my youth, in response to my questions of "Where is the proof?" was the inevitable response from the priest/minister/preacher, who, when backed into a corner, inevitably intoned, "You must take that on faith."
2 - Drakim
I don't really understand how it takes faith to think that "when you die you'll be dead".
Is that really such an unreasonable position that it requires more faith that "when you die you live in paradise"?
3 - Dr Dreadful
Clavos is quite right, of course. It's the pervasiveness of religion in human societies which leads believers to the erroneous conclusion that atheists also have faith.
The vast majority of societies and civilizations taken it as a given that some sort of higher power controlled the universe. Not only that: it's obvious to a believer that there is a God. So it can easily seem to be a leap of faith to say that there isn't one.
But, to put the distinction another way: It's an act of faith to say, "If I jump off this cliff, a giant eagle will swoop down just before I hit the ground and carry me to safety on its back."
It takes no faith to say, "I don't see nor have I ever seen any giant eagles flying around, so if I jump off this cliff the likelihood is that I will hit the ground at great speed and die."
4 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus
I have to agree with Clavos as well. Atheism isn't a religion nor does it have anything to do with "Faith".
Honestly, I'm tired of being lumped into a group because I don't believe in imaginary creatures that have no evidence to support their existence! I don't see a label for the people that don't believe in the existence of life from other planets.
Seriously, it doesn't make any sense for me to be labeled by a society that thinks their lives are controlled by fate and that fate is determined by a creature that created us...HA!
5 - Mark Saleski
woah, i just agreed with clavos and brian. (***shudder***)
6 - Dr Dreadful
What am I, chopped liver?
7 - zingzing
that can be arranged...
8 - Jon Sobel
I think you guys are overreacting. It's true, of course, that atheism is not a "faith" the way a religion is a faith, but being sure there is no "god" does require some degree of faith - in the sense of having a feeling of certainty without absolute proof. There isn't much we can really KNOW when it comes to the nature of reality. In that sense it's only the "agnostic" who can be truly said to have no "faith." And I say that as an atheist with as little patience as anybody for superstition and magical thinking.
9 - DrHomeSkooled
How does it take faith to accept no afterlife? the universe is 13 Billion years old, not once have I felt a sense of loss or pain over the fact that I dont remember the past 13 Billion years... who is to say the next 13 billion will be any different?
10 - doug m
If Christianity has a logical stance, let's hear it.
From the books I have read, it sounds like your view of the American Revolution is rather limited.
11 - roger nowosielski
". . . being sure there is no 'god' does require some degree of faith - in the sense of having a feeling of certainty without absolute proof."
Beg to disagree, Jon. Being certain of something, first off, does not require "absolute proof." (There is an implicit understanding that we may be wrong). Likewise, it does not require faith.
It's precisely in situations in which we cannot be certain that the notion of faith comes in.
Just a short comment on the grammar of language.
12 - Dr Dreadful
being sure there is no "god" does require some degree of faith - in the sense of having a feeling of certainty without absolute proof.
No, John, you're shifting the burden of proof here.
Since the only evidence we have of the existence of God is anecdotal, the default assumption should be that he does not exist. Atheism in its purest form is merely that assumption.
It is then up to "faithists" - to use Chris Rose's favourite term - to convince us that the default assumption is wrong.
13 - roger nowosielski
We have no evidence of the existence of God, Dreadful, anecdotal or otherwise. Likewise, we don't have evidence of nonexistence. It's up to us which description is more at home: thus, we're opt either for being materialists/naturalists or not.
14 - Dr Dreadful
Anecdotal evidence is still evidence, Rog, albeit the most unreliable kind.
Evidence of nonexistence, however, is a nonsense. While it's not entirely true that you can't prove a negative - I can, for example, quite easily prove that you're not sitting next to me at this moment - the burden of proof generally requires it to be shown that something is so, not that it is not so. That is why the accused in a criminal trial is innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
15 - Damien S. Riley
Hi there. Thanks for so many comments, I hardly ever get this many on blogcritics. This concept of Christian/Atheist is a hot topic. I know this because throughout my 41 years I have had numerous heated discussions about it. For that reason, I am choosing to avoid the macro concept in favor of discussing my article which is about tolerance on both sides.
First of all, Clavos commented that Atheists are devoid of faith. Why do atheists want people to keep acknowledging that? Everyone comes to a world-view through faith. I'll just respectfully avoid that topic. At the same time Clavos, I will give you that the atheist sort of avoids stepping forward in faith in a way so it can be construed as true that atheists have no faith. I appreciate that you complimented my article and see tolerance as a good thing. I used to be an atheist way back in 1986 and found it too far more faith to live that way. But that was my experience.
Second: I want to address doug m's challenge about Christianity having a logical stance. I will tell you I got all the way to an MA from a Cal State school and I tool anywhere from 8-10 logic classes. On any logical topic from the death penalty to abortion, there is always a leap of faith after all the facts are given. Some Christians become that way out of emotions and ignore logic but others weigh the Bible and history and logic and then make a leap of faith based on logic. That's all i have time to say, mostly because I doubt you really want to hear what I view as a logical faith. Thanks for your comment though, I want you to know I appreciate it.
To everyone else who reads my article: This is a really cool episode of 30 days. It shows respect and tolerance on both sides. I know you atheists would have fun at my church and I know I would enjoy getting into the practices and rutuals of atheism. In fact, I will go as far as to say that some of the biggest jerks I have know in my life were in the church. Don't judge God by Christians. If I did, I would be an atheist.
16 - Damien S. Riley
Oops, made a few typos in my last comment. My apologies. Just wanted to say also to doug m that you are correct: the American revolution was motivated by many things, being free to worship differently from the King was only one. My view of the historical event is not limited I am aware there were other motives. I sear it seems as if people attack Christian immediately once they find out they are such. You comment reminds me of that.
17 - Damien S. Riley
Eh, more typos. I'm gonna go make dinner now (hangs head in shame). This stuff is heavy folks, that's why I thought the show was so valuable and innovative. I think Morgan Spurlock is an atheist and yet I love his movies and shows. Thanks again for the discussion.
18 - Christopher Rose
"Atheists should respect what religion has done throughout history"
Huh?
Would that be the completely false explanations of things? The religious wars? The arbitrary and manipulative rules?
This article demonstrates only that no matter how many classes in logic somebody takes, religion will completely mess up their ability to think straight.
People who don't suffer from the god delusion are incredibly tolerant of people who do. We don't lock you up, torture you or abuse your human rights, whereas faithists have done and continue to do exactly these things as a matter of course.
I don't judge god, because that would be as irrational as judging Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy.
I do judge faithists as naive and/or dishonest, as exampled in the comment above mine which refers to the "practices and rituals of atheism", which is simply meaningless.
People who believe in an afterlife are guilty of, at best, wishful thinking, at worst a cruel manipulation of everybody's understandable concern about the prospect of their brief existence coming to an irrevocable end.
People who don't believe in such a charming fantasy have a greater respect for all life, because they see how incredibly brief and fragile it truly is.
As I've said before, the absolute worst thing about all these wacky religions is that they get in the way of the evolution of a more genuine reverance based upon the fact that all life is literally interconnected.
The best thing, even if it is based upon obviously false ideas, is the way religion provides a way to mark important life events such as births, marriages and deaths, something that a more secular spirituality has not really yet developed.
19 - Damien S. Riley
My spirituality includes a profound reverence for mortal life. I agree many Christians miss that. I also know I may be wrong about my faith so I respect other points of view (wishing I would have used that instead of "faiths")
20 - roger nowosielski
#14, I see what you mean by "anecdotal" - testimony. Yes.
21 - roger nowosielski
Just for you, Dreadful.
Too bad I can't transmit Wisdom's delightful article.
22 - roger nowosielski
Bear in mind, however, the same Anthony Flew, a devotee of Hume and a rabid anti-cleric, has in his latter years turned - believe it or not - a theist!
23 - roger nowosielski
With the following caveat.
24 - El Bicho
"Clavos commented that Atheists are devoid of faith. Why do atheists want people to keep acknowledging that?"
Because most believers get that aspect wrong
"I know I would enjoy getting into the practices and rutuals of atheism."
What? There are none. Are you sure you were you an atheist in '86?
25 - roger nowosielski
Satanism?
Just kidding.