|
|
|
Contrarian Viewpoints on Hot Topics
Part
3: New Atheism & Blasphemy Part 3: New Atheism & Blasphemy Brian Worley What
is the point of the skeptical movement? Is it a progressive entity that seeks a
better life here on earth? Or is it a body that unites together to “blow off
steam?” Just
as stating a positive remark about another man’s looks doesn’t mean that a
man is gay; in like manner, an atheist that acknowledges something nice about a
Christian doesn’t mean that he cares for the faith. At least you will know
that they are human! It wouldn’t hurt those rejecting supernatural claims one
bit to tone down the negative rhetoric against theists and start to look for the
good that they do! Those that
cannot do this are unbalanced and those that cannot see this are blind! Some
erroneously think that anything less than secular contempt with the faithful is
a “slippery slope” towards compromise. This type of thinking confuses
ideology with communication skills. The manner in which we deliver our viewpoint
is as important as the message we are sending. The Four Horsemen of the New Atheism When
I see an iconoclast like Dawkins or Hitchens attacking religion, I see two men
(half of the “New Atheism’s Four Horsemen”) that have pushed the faithful
into the “fight or flight” mode. No doubt these men are intelligent, but
they are a clueless duo of celebrity isolationists that do not understand how to
talk with religious folks. Atheism was already bad enough, but to pitch a
scientist and an entertainer as spokesmen ready to rescue theists did little
more than to entrench the faithful deeper into their bunkers. Their
patronization and condescending tone towards Christians has trumped their
message and widened the gap rather than close it! Thanks for nothing guys! This
just goes to show that intelligent people can be geniuses at blundering! It
baffles me to comprehend how any “thinker” could follow them. New atheism wouldn’t be a movement if people refused to
follow. Are atheists that
hungry for affirmation by allowing these two men to continue as their leading
representatives? Evidentially so! New atheism should take a cue from successful
sales organizations; they “run off” belligerent salesmen because they are
bad for business! Better yet, just fire the atheist CEO! Does contempt for an
“elusive deity” justify new atheism’s belligerence towards the faithful?
Sheep
are not to be driven; they need to be led in a shepherd like manner! I laugh in
amazement while watching these two trying to reach the sheep in their Ivory
Tower style. Secularists should study the better Christian communicator’s
delivery mechanisms and learn from them rather than trying to “re-invent the
communication wheel.” No need to continue down the atheist path of a “bull
in a china shop’s” recklessness; are they looking for success or a fight? I
don’t see much difference between the old and the new atheism models.
A stubborn rigidity and inflexibility pervade their movement and yet they
somehow survive without adapting to their environment!
Christians take note, how will you know which group of unbelievers you
have dealt with when our worlds clashed? Answer:
The atheist would likely “rough you up some” while the secular humanist
would dismantle your belief system but leave you with your dignity. FACTS
ABOUT ATHEISM:
2) Atheism doesn’t address human concerns and is amoral. 3) Atheism is destructive in nature, doesn’t build anything of value. 4) Atheism gives Christianity the enemy they need to rally against. 5) Atheistic leaders would rather gag than say something nice about Christianity’s positive contributions to society. 6) Atheistic leaders are divisive in the secular community. Some think that humanists are wimps and distance themselves. 7) Atheism’s overreach of claiming knowledge that there isn’t a god channels endless philosophical arguments rather than more fruitful discussions concerning the veracity of a religion’s source (scriptures) 8) Honest inquiry is more attractive to seekers of what is true rather than atheist or religious dogma. 9) Atheism isn’t effective; people do not care how much that the atheist thinks he knows until they know how much he cares. Their arrogance and egotism makes them hard for a Christian to listen to! Drop the attitude! The atheistic identity is an attitude in itself! 10) Atheists don’t believe there is a god. Ok, you made your point and you killed the straw man. Quit telling me about the last “scrap” you got into with a Christian and tell me what YOU did to make the world a better place to live in? Killing the straw man doesn’t count!!! 11) Atheism is an argument looking for a fight. 12)
Atheism and theism contrast each other, but their methods often have a lot in
common with each other! I
see no evidence for the supernatural, nor am I looking for any (been there, done
that as an ex-minister.) Experience has taught me that dialogue with the
faithful ceases the moment they suspect or hear the dogmatic “no god” vibe
(i.e. atheism). Why express what one cannot prove? It is better to say that
there probably isn’t a god than to overreach with the “no god dogma.”
Simply put, I think one loses credibility when you proclaim something nobody has
proven as fact. Looking
for Atheism’s Contributions to Our World I
regret to say that atheism has done the world little good! After looking upon
their greater body of work, I am hard pressed to see their contributions! I
would classify them as divisive, isolationists, and by in large an obstacle to
progress for secularists. No, I probably won’t get any official secular groups
to endorse this view because they wouldn’t want to offend any past, present or
future donors. I think that it is pathetic to watch secular groups pander to the
atheist segment of their constituency! Grant the atheists their own island and
give them a boat to enable them to come back to the secular mainland when they
are in the proper frame of mind to do so. But don’t blur the lines between us
(secularists & atheists!) While
I as a secular humanist would agree with a portion of atheist conclusions, to me
if this were baseball…they would be a bunch of single hitters that can’t get
past first base! They are keen at
identifying the religious community’s problems; which is similar to a hellfire
& brimstone preacher’s ranting about sin in the world! Identifying wrong
isn’t that significant of an accomplishment if one is unwilling to “roll-up
their sleeves” and effectively resolve them! Both of these make noise, but
negative messages rarely inspire people to greater heights! I’d take the
contributions of one humanist over the clamoring of a hundred atheists any
day! Atheist
arrogance is simply nauseating! Just
look at their “press clippings.” They need to keep “tooting their own
horns” in self-promotion to keep attracting those that can’t see the bigger
picture of humanity in life for themselves. Atheism is similar to a
non-religious fundamentalism that exalts godless heroes. Atheism attracts the
same extremist types of people that would follow a man like Wiley Drake if they
only had religion. All one needs is to foment at the mouth a little and spew
some divisive rhetoric due to a misunderstanding of theism, and poof…you have
a following! This works on both sides of the theism coin (theist and atheist). The
contradiction of the term Atheism The
misunderstanding of theism that I refer to is that atheism’s identity has
granted the acceptability of the unproven term of theism in their very own
namesake! They accept what they oppose so that they can then turn and
fight against it! If theism
isn’t legitimate, atheism isn’t legitimate either! When one
cannot prove something (the existence or non-existence of God) while still
claiming the namesake in their identifying titles; you have ignored reason and
taken a “leap of faith” to attain the position! The Christian does this and
acknowledges faith; the atheist is oblivious to this simple truth and lives on
with the denial thinking others are stupid. What
we see is what we get: Arriving at our positions One
could ask how should atheists, humanists, etc. react to religion; but isn’t
our respective positions indicative of what we focus upon within Christianity?
For example: atheists try to kill religion because they see no good within it.
Humanism has secular and religious branches that take differing approaches to
the question. I
see a “mixed bag” when I look upon religion. The clergy certainly play a
large role in our perceptions of religion. Lately, it seems that if we keep
providing Christianity with “enough rope” the clergy will eventually hang
themselves and usher in the atheist’s utopian dream via their scandals! Some
will hate me for stating that three years of living in pagan Latvia has proven
to me that the absence of Christianity isn’t necessarily a good thing! The
aftermath of roughly 50 years with the intentional breakdown of the family
structure and religion has led me to believe that people would miss religion
once it were gone. Good religion plays an important role in society; I’d
rather not see it destroyed but would rather see the edge taken off of toxic
religion (bye-bye fundamentalism!) Do
you know what I like about Christians? They are a group of flawed individuals
(like myself) that largely want to make the best out of their lives and our
world! Stating this doesn’t make one an advocate for the advancement of faith.
On the contrary, see my The
Queen of All Sciences for further discussion on the topic matter. Blasphemy
laws shouldn’t be necessary If
one thinks that the new atheists are merely annoying rather than harmless; look
at the current push for blasphemy laws. It’s hard to miss the synchronicity
between new atheism and blasphemy legislation! This brings to mind one of Newton’s
laws of motion, “Every
action has an equal and opposite reaction.” Democracy
ceases to exist the day blasphemy laws are enacted! Religion, atheism or reason
shouldn’t be force fed upon anyone, it is contrary to the spirit of democracy!
What the faithful term as “blasphemy” in reality is just “in your face
reason!” It can be presented tactfully or in an inflammatory manner and
interpreted in various ways. The real issue is between people of faith that
cannot deal with rejection of their views and maladjusted individuals who feel
the need to exploit it by sarcastically rubbing salt into the wounds of the
faithful. But just because we have the freedom of speech to express the
absurdity of religious practice doesn’t mean that it is wise to exploit it! Those
that insist upon forcing their viewpoint cause preventable problems. Ideally
what should happen is that both sides should actually practice what they
"preach." Secularists that proclaim reason should peaceably present
it, step back and watch it work! Saints who proclaim faith should proclaim it,
step back and let the chips fall where they may! The problem lies within
inpatient people that lack full confidence in their view that feel the need to
force the situation (usually the opposite desired effect happens). Too
bad that we couldn’t make the wayward grown –up children go to their rooms
without supper for being uncouth, but politicians and legislators shouldn’t
interfere into this matter. I have a lot of ideas about the issue and how to
minimize the problem, but this is for another time. Concluding
Statements So
here I stand as a contrarian! I hate to have to keep opposing the party line but
atheists do not understand how to get to the Christian decision maker! I'd
suspect that most atheists never once held Christian beliefs, for if they had
they would know how it feels to be treated indignantly and would refrain from
treating others disrespectfully. There are some atheist that are well adjusted,
these types aren’t threatened with this exercise of free thought!
I strongly think secular humanism has a superior approach and I hope to
have diverted attention away from the faithful thinking that atheism is the
mouthpiece of the skeptical movement! I for one am thrilled to see things like the “theism questioning” billboards and bus messages! Pushing the envelope and challenging the Christian worldview are good productive moves! The goal is to make the faithful think (yes they are plenty capable of this); not to get them to react! Brian Worley Ex-Minister.org July 25, 2009 All rights reserved |
Website/Contact Information
|
