The faith trap

Thank you for the quote from Eric Hoffer:
"We can be absolutely certain only about things we do not understand. A doctrine that is understood is shorn of its strength."

This speaks exactly to the problem with Daawkins, and those who are so sure of themselves that religion is empty. Religion - not the literalist/fundamentalist sort, but true religion - allows for mystery, for things not to be understood fully. Placing God within the equation of life means that we cannot fully come to understand the fullness of life, but only catch glimpses of it here and there. Faith, understanding that there is much beyond knowing, grasps such things as hope and love, even when there seems to be no rational reason for them. A good pastor struggles with these deeper things of life, and helps his/her congregation to do so as well. If he/she has lost faith - then that is part of the struggle to be shared. To be called a liar or an actor is insulting, demeaning, and a lie. I am a man with two PhDs, who works seventy to eighty hours a week, and makes less than most garbage men, and have done so for thirty years. I could do many things - but this is what I have been called to do, and am grateful for the chance to do it.

Dear Richard,

If, as you say, this rabbi "did not get it", then I think that you found an unusual rabbi. The punch line to an old parable about honesty is "honesty plus tact is everything". Find another rabbi.

MW

Atheists should create parallel institutions to satisfy the human hunger for community, ritual, acknowledgement of life milestones and seasons, routine, an agreed-upon set of moral values, and to hear words of wisdom and comfort from a wise and respected community elder.

That way there would be something for disaffected clergy to do besides wait for a check from Dawkins.

Richard Dawkins wrote:

Only religion is capable of making a mere change of mind a livelihood-threatening catastrophe, whose very contemplation demands grave courage.

Well, there is politics...

"refrain from calling ostentatious attention to my unbelief"

Now that's hypocrisy!

D J Wray
Packaged Evolution: The Intelligent Universe
http://www.atotalawareness.com/documents/packagedevolution.pps

I know of at least one man who quit a very good job at JPL in the early 1970s, after careful analysis of lunar samples brought back by various Apollo missions were proved to be about 3 - 4 billion years old. He couldn't handle the conflict between the scientific evidence and his "young earth" beliefs. He chose his beliefs. He is still peddling The Watchtower from door to door.

"Perhaps we should simply view the clergy as performers."

I viewed them thus as a child from as early as I can recall. Only later did I add fraud to that view.

It is my view that every cleric & priest with any semblance of intellect knows that they are dishing out pablum and lies, Day in and day out. I would like to narrate a personal anecdote, my apologies as this will probably be a bit long. My mother had passed away this past summer in India and I had gone there to perform the final rites. My dad knowing my secular proclivities, said he would perform them and bid farewell to his wife of nearly sixty years. Given his age I assured him that I would acquit my duties as the son. On the 13th day, amongst Hindus have a big ritual. This is done in two parts first one at the funeral grounds the second at the home. During the first part the priest insisted that I have some 39+ showers, symbolically three for each plus a few more, lest my mother's soul be caught in some limbo. I agreed to it without any objections.

Coming to the second part of the ceremony, we had contracted with the priest for a fixed price they would take care of all the proceedings in terms of fetching all the requisite material for the rituals. My family being Sudras the priests do not countenance break bread as part of the ritual in our houses. It is customary to give the priests enough vegetables, and grains for a meal for up to 16 priests and their families. However, on that day they not only not bring enough groceries, but the few they brought was so scant that it would not even make a few complete plates. My dad was getting too agitated, so my nephews had to go and purchase more groceries and the ritual was stopped until adequate groceries were brought. In this interregnum the priest was complained to me that, he could not understand my dad's insistence of the plates, especially in this 21 century. That just was the last straw for me. had it been that we had not contracted out the whole thing these very same 16 priests would have insisted that the plates be properly made, lest my mother should be caught in a limbo. I just unloaded on the pond scum by telling him that bets thing he can do for his health sake would be to shut his trap tight. This priest obviously aware of the fact that all this ritual was bah-humbug but would insist on following it only it maximize his disposable income. So all these clerics including the likes of Mr Moehler, who is one of the Faith panelist, are out there to maximize their own wealtha nd the religion is their racket. But would rail at the clergy that have genuinely seen the light. The hypocrisy in my book is when these clergy who know that whole thing is a sham but would use the scripture to manipulate the congregants for their own purposes.

Singingtiger croaks:
Only religion is capable of making a mere change of mind a livelihood-threatening catastrophe.
I am sure politics has the same potential."

Do you NOT REALIZE that religion is just a sub-species of politics???

Only religion is capable of making a mere change of mind a livelihood-threatening catastrophe.

I am sure politics has the same potential.

Richard,

You made your point. Rabbis dislike hypocrisy.

However, they are not alone. Among those who share their distaste are atheists, yours truly among them.

After the manner of "To the Virgins, to Make Much of Time" by Robert Herrick. 1591–1674 (Gather ye rosebuds while ye may)

With slight corrections ~

Gather, ye atheists, while ye may,
Do your heckling and high-fiving,
Ye may be laughing at us to-day,
But, to-morrow ye'll be crying.

The glorious Light of Heaven, the Son,
Tis soon that He'll be coming,
And days as ye know it will be done,
Into His arms ye should be running.

The age is best which will be last,
And that is fast approaching,
Put your unbelief in the past,
Upon His grace, ye've been encroaching.

Be not fools, but redeem the time,
Away from the pit of hell, He'll carry,
Into a place beautiful and devine,
Where ye may forever tarry.

March 21, 2010 ~ Composed and written by Nick Duliakas. If used, please give proper acknowledgment. May not be used for profit without permission. (nikosd99@hotmail.com)

don't worry NIKOSD99, this "heaven" of yours sounds like a truly awful place, brown-nosing a fearful childish deity as you worship. Oh, and it would be full of people like you.

I doubt any atheists are really interested in winning a ticket to your heaven. Only losers would want to kiss the butt of this god character of yours for eternity. A "f***king celestial north korea" as Hitchens so eloquently said.

Keep your stinking heaven to yourself.

After the manner of "To the Virgins, to Make Much of Time" by Robert Herrick. 1591–1674 (Gather ye rosebuds while ye may)

Gather ye atheists while ye may,
Do your heckling and high-fiving,
You may be laughing at us today,
But, to-morrow you'll be crying.

The glorious Light of Heaven, the Son,
Tis soon that He'll be coming,
And days as ye know it will be done,
Into His arms ye should be running.

The age is best which will be last,
And that is fast approaching,
Put your unbelief in the past,
Upon His grace, you've been encroaching.

Be not fools, but redeem the time,
Away from the pit of hell, He'll carry,
Into a place beautiful and devine,
Where you may forever tarry.

March 21, 2010 ~ Composed and written by Nick Duliakas. If used, please give proper acknowledgment. May not be used for profit without permission.

As he is wont to do Dawkins absurdly overstates his case. What other career can be utterly ruined by a change in opinion, he asks? I can think of plenty. Someone who has worked their entire life as a teacher would be ruined by coming to the conclusion that students are not capable of learning. A Republican political operative could not start espousing socialism without imperiling his or her career and personal relationships. An artist who loses faith in the meaning of their art is likely to be unable to create anything worthwhile. Perhaps most ironically of all, if Dawkins himself were to have a vision and get religion tomorrow, his secondary career as a self-appointed atheist spokesman would go up in smoke, and depending on what he newly believed, so might his primary gig as a world-renowned scientific authority. All human social constructs are a great deal more arbitrary and contingent on unwarranted assumptions than he seems able to admit, which is one of the reasons he's such a subpar philosopher and social analyst despite being a first-class evolutionary biologist.

As he is wont to do Dawkins absurdly overstates his case. What other career can be utterly ruined by a change in opinion, he asks? I can think of plenty. Someone who has worked their entire life as a teacher would be ruined by coming to the conclusion that students are not capable of learning. A Republican political operative could not start espousing socialism without imperiling his or her career and personal relationships. An artist who loses faith in the meaning of their art is likely to be unable to create anything worthwhile. Perhaps most ironically of all, if Dawkins himself were to have a vision and get religion tomorrow, his secondary career as a self-appointed atheist spokesman would go up in smoke, and depending on what he newly believed, so might his primary gig as a world-renowned scientific authority. All human social constructs are a great deal more arbitrary and contingent on unwarranted assumptions than he seems able to admit, which is one of the reasons he's such a subpar philosopher and social analyst despite being a first-class evolutionary biologist.

Perhaps we should simply view the clergy as performers. Then the words from the pulpit need no more qualification than any other theatrical event. The congregation is simply participating in a show just as reality-based as a Trekkie convention. We might be surprised at how many of the congregation of every church, mosque, and synagogue have gone the same way as the non-believing clergy but can't bring themselves to declare that the emperor has no clothes.

It is not surprising that there are still a large number of atheists who are living in the closet. There is after all a great deal of social pressure aimed to discourage open disbelief. That pressure is much greater for those who make a living from their god-belief.

Religion is a business. There are people in the world who have trained all their lives to preach the Bible. Not all of those people are forced into a life of celibacy either. Many have families to support. So when one of these people who was raised from near birth to believe and spends their life learning the details of the Bible finally realizes that it is all a sham, they have some real problems to think about and deal with.

You can read the rest of my response to this topic:
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-8928-Philadelphia-Atheism-Examiner~y2010m3d17-On-Faith-Disbelief-in-the-pulpit

I will be responding to every issue posted in the 'On Faith' section. If you would like to be notified when my new response is up, please subscribe.

In a similar situation, I have said "Let us all say Grace silently, after the fashion of Quakers", and after about half a minute, saying "Thank you" or "Amen", and everyone is satisfied.

Or where a form of words is demanded (and not specified, as seems to be the case at Oxford), I would say something like "Let us bring our minds together to give thanks to all the forces and people who have produced and prepared this food, and combined to bring us together here to share and enjoy it, and each other's company," or words to that effect. By speaking in such general terms, you can include any deities that others may believe in, while not doing violence to your own beliefs.

You are a breath of fresh air Professor in these stale columns, and you make nothing but good sense. Thank you so much.

A great quote from Eric Hoffer:

We can be absolutely certain only about things we do not understand. A doctrine that is understood is shorn of its strength.

Perhaps with the thinking believer, a little too much theology can be a dangerous thing - dangerous to his belief.

Religious beliefs, christianity in this case, are a Big Lie. In order to be effective it must be swallowed whole in its entirety.

Seriously, how many preachers of this big lie who have made any real study of it still believe?

I don't think we should ask how many disbelieve, let's ask how many still believe.