The billboard was financed by a couple of atheist and free-thought groups who wanted to reach out to like-minded people.
None of that is a problem...at least not for me. Every group or organization needs to do outreach in order to reach the people they serve, and to obtain funds to sustain themselves. The Catholic Church put up billboards to encourage men to join the priesthood, Latter Day Saints have TV commercials, and I don't know if it's even possible to count how many hours of programming on both TV and radio goes to evangelical Christians.
So everybody has their right to speak about their faith, everybody has a right to try and teach their faith to those who might be interested, and even this blog (while not advertised or shared with many) is a reflection of my beliefs.
Philly.com, which has serious problems with religion, particularly Catholics, not only gave the story about this billboard front page space, but they included a Comment section and a poll to find out how many people believe in God.
The poll was not restricted, which means you could vote as many times as you liked. The non-God believers were well out in front, although there's no way to know if that's an indication of an increase in atheistic thinking, or if it's an indication that some people had way too much time on their hands. Given Philly.com's aforementioned anti-religion tendencies, it would not surprise me to find the counter had been unevenly set so a non-God pollster's vote would count while the God pollster's vote would be blocked. But that's just me being paranoid*, so I'm sticking with people voting numerous times to boost the numbers.
*Note: The very next day Philly.com featured a story about a sex shop in West Chester that faced objections from the local Catholic church and school that are apparently nearby. This article also invited comments and a poll as whether the church should protest the location of the shop. If anybody happens to see an article about the war in Iraq, or Darfur, or any other national news on the front page, let me know. Better yet, if Philly.com ever invites commentary from the public on the war in Iraq, Darfur, or any other national news on the front page, I'd like to see that too. But I digress....
I read over the comments even though most of them depressed me because of the complete lack of critical thinking being applied to what is usually a complex topic. This is not a blog about proving whether or not God exists, or whether or not people should believe in God. This blog is about how people arrive at their conclusions. It's about thought processes that have no basis in logic.
On the pro-God side, there were Scripture quotes, warnings of dire circumstances to the immortal soul, and I think my favorite was the person who warned non-believers "don't you dare call out to God on your deathbed..."
As Catholic as I am, these kinds of retorts wear me out. Oh, good LORD! Number 1, when an atheist demands proof of God's existence, there's no reason to run to the one book the atheist will reject out of hand. I wouldn't even bother bringing it up, and really, it's not necessary.
Number 2, what possible effect could the threat of hell fire and damnation have on a person who rejects the concept of a god - never mind a judgmental god?
And then to top that off with a "Don't you dare call out to God on your deathbed..."?!? Okay, way to miss the point of forgiveness and the infinite mercy of the god this person presumably claims to believe in. Why not just come right out and say it..."We don't want your kind in heaven anyway!"
The roll call of saints is filled with the names of people who sinned ,fell down, made mistakes, hurt someone's feelings, had doubts, asked questions, and demanded better answers, which is, IMO, what brought them to the level of faith found in the hearts of those we call saints.
Had the person been around that said, "Don't you dare call out to God....", I wonder how far any of them would have gotten in their search for God.
It's flawed thinking and that's what I find offensive about it. There are very good answers to many of the questions set forth in these discussions, and it annoys me to no end to watch people completely bypass the answer that has substance and reach immediately for the rhetoric. It's when I see commentary such as this running rampant on public discussion boards that I find value in having a centralized authority in the Church. There are people out there who think they are an authority on faith when they themselves are so lost they end up confusing everyone around them. The Tower of Babel must have been an oasis of contemplative thought compared to the mindless chatter of these comments.
And speaking of flawed thinking, the atheists aren't off the hook either.
My biggest complaint with those who choose to refute the existence of God generally (in my experience) start off by listing their issues with religion.
A religion is a man-made collection of practices and rituals used to express belief. It's a tool. Like any tool, when it falls into the hands of irresponsible people, it can be used to cause harm. This does not make it a bad tool. Even a hammer can bash someone's skull in, but no one disputes that when you want to drive a nail you might want to pick up the hammer.
When it comes to God, it's all about the religion - bad priests, thieving ministers, bullying nuns, self-serving reverends who think the "love donation" is for them. If the person representing the religion fails, then all faith is lost. Where else does this happen? Doctors malpractice and people die, but I don't see any push to abandon medicine. Lawyers malpractice and innocent people go to jail, or guilty people go free, or people go bankrupt from losing frivolous lawsuits, and I don't see any push to abandon the legal system.
For some reason the distinction between someone who sucks at their job and the value of their profession is clear when it comes to anything other than religion. Religious men and women of any denomination are as human and as subject to wrongdoing as the most secular of human beings. I claim to have faith. I don't claim to have perfection.
The next popular reason for rejecting God often reads like this: "When I was (6, 7, 8, 9) years old, I figured out the Bible was just a bunch of stories and decided there was no need for God or religion."
I'm not knocking people who were, I'm sure, bright children, but developing a complete understanding of issues as complex as God, creation, morality, spirituality, etc., is pretty much beyond the reach of the elementary school child.
- Age 9 - Nine is a good sleeper, but some do have nightmares. Nightmares tend to be related to the general anxiety of this age and have frightening themes such as being fires, storms, snakes, being chased, or someone being killed. Nine is developing a conscience. In contrast to age eight, nine year olds do not show a great interest in God and religion, and many do not want to go to church and Sunday School. They do have a basic ethical feeling and faith, however, and will pray to God when they are in need.
So for a surprising number of commenters, their lifelong decision on the existence of God was based entirely on their perception of the world when they were 9 years old, and that perception was completely in keeping with their age and development. I wonder what other 9 year old traits have been preserved.
When it comes to God (and politics), there are no easy answers. There are no quick courses to be taken, or snap judgments that can be made with any confidence. No matter what the belief, ask the hard questions, demand better answers and be open to change.
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment