Welcome the World’s 7 Billionth Citizen

An old-fashioned car odometer rolls over to zeroHere’s a scary thought for Halloween: today marks the rollover to a world population of 7,000,000,000 people.  Some say: No problem; God will provide.
Not me.  This freaks me out.
I recently came across the television show 19 Kids and Counting (yeah, I know—where have I been?).  It’s the story of Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar and their 19 children.  No, they don’t adopt needy children, they make them the old-fashioned way.
Their web site is full of Christian talk, links to Creationist sites, and ads for Christian products.  Here they talk about birth control.

We prayed and studied the Bible and found a host of references that told us God considered children a gift, a blessing, and a reward. Yet we had considered having another child an inconvenience [by the wife taking birth control pills] during that busy time in our lives, and we had taken steps to prevent it from happening.
We weren’t sure if Michelle could have any more children after the miscarriage, but we were sure we were going to stop using the pill. In fact we agreed we would stop using any form of birth control and let God decide how many children we would have.

This is the thinking of the Quiverfull movement, whose name comes from Psalm 127: “Like arrows in the hand of a warrior, so are the children of one’s youth.  How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them.”  From Quiverfull.com:

We exalt Jesus Christ as Lord, and acknowledge His headship in all areas of our lives, including fertility.  We exist to serve those believers who trust the Lord for family size….

What kind of childish logic is this?  Maybe during the Bronze Age, people could say, “We’ll let God decide how many children we’ll have,” but today, we know very well where children come from and how to avoid them.
If you drink poison, you’re not letting God decide whether you live or not; you’re deciding.  If you wave a gun in a bank, you’re not letting God decide whether you get arrested or not; you’re deciding.  And if you have frequent unprotected sex, you’re not letting God decide how many children you have; you’re deciding to have as many as biologically possible.
Quiverfull aficionados reject all forms of birth control.  But if vaccines and antibiotics aren’t messing with God’s plan, why would contraception—not killing an embryo but simply preventing it from happening—be a problem?
Back to the Duggar family, someone might respond that they’re paying their way.  They’re not asking for handouts, so what’s the problem?
The problem is that the planet has a finite carrying capacity.  There’s only so much oil, fresh water regenerates only so fast, and so on.  To make it worse, Americans live a rich life compared to most other people.  For example, the resources that support these 19 kids, assuming they consume at the rate of average Americans, could support 600 average Kenyans.
“God will provide” might satisfy a child, but adults should know better.
In a discouraging article that concludes that religious believers will simply outbreed their competitors, author Tom Rees says:

In Israel and Palestine, both orthodox Jews and religious Muslims have astonishingly high birth rates, at least in part as a consequence of waging war “by other means.”  Throughout the Islamic world, those who have the most extreme beliefs are also the most likely to endorse the desirability of large families.

That other guy thinks he’ll win by having more children?  We’ll have even more than that—we’ll fight fire with fire!
We find similar thinking in the U.S.  Again, from Quiverfull.com:

Quiverfull mothers think of their children as no mere movement but as an army they’re building for God.

But is that the way to play the game—we just descend to the other guy’s level?
Is there no role for reason here?  You don’t fight fire with fire, you fight it with water!
Related links:

  • No Longer Quivering is a site that provides education and support to those getting out of the Quiverfull movement.
  • Bryan Walsh, “The World at 7 Billion: Why the Real Victim of Overpopulation Will Be the Environment,” Time, 10/26/11.
  • Elizabeth Kolbert, “Billions and Billions,” The New Yorker, 10/24/11.
  • Tom Rees, “Shall the fundamentalists inherit the earth?” Epiphenom blog, 5/4/10.
  • “Overpopulation,” Wikipedia.

No Apologies or even Admission of Failure from Camping

What happens when you make a bold public prediction—say, for the end of the world—and it doesn’t come true?  Don’t analyze it or even acknowledge it; just pretend it didn’t happen and get on with life.  Maybe no one will notice.
That’s what Harold Camping is hoping about his May 21 prediction of the Rapture and October 21 prediction of the end of the world.
For a stock broker or farmer or scientist—professions where evidence is important—repeatedly and reliably missing predictions would demand a change in profession.  But within Christianity, this kind of inept song and dance seems to work.  Indeed, Camping gets hubris points for claiming that the non-Rapture on May 21 only seemed to be a non-event and that God actually did judge the world.

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened (Winston Churchill)

Camping’s Family Radio web site now has deleted all references to its embarrassing and awkward predictions.
Maybe that was part of the plan.  Maybe they served their purpose in getting recruits, donations, and PR, and the ministry can move on to whatever’s next.  Maybe Camping’s been ahead of us all the time, knowing exactly how this would play out and that the rules of evidence don’t apply with Christianity.
[Update 11/1/11: In an October 30 article “Family Radio Founder Harold Camping Repents, Apologizes for False Teachings“, The Christian Post reports that Camping has retracted his claims about the end times.  “Camping confessed, after decades of falsely misleading his followers, that he was wrong and regrets his misdeeds.”
Camping’s Family Radio site has a recording of him backpedaling from his predictions.
Now, if he would only give back the money he received due to those nonsensical teachings …]
Photo credit: Wikimedia
Related posts:

The Bible Shows Why Prayer Doesn’t Work

Illuminated (illustrated) manuscript I think I’ve figured it out!  The Bible itself makes clear why prayer doesn’t work, and the clues are all from within the same gospel, Matthew.
I’ve heard stories of people in fast food restaurants who aren’t content to simply pray to themselves but stand and pray aloud for everyone’s benefit.  Jesus isn’t keen on these pretentious people.

When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.  But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.  (Matt. 6:5–6)

But later in the same book, Jesus says something different.

If two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.  For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.  (Matt. 18:19–20)

There’s the problem—prayer requires both a gathering and being by yourself.
No wonder it never works!
Photo credit: Wikipedia
Related posts:

Word of the Day: Hoare’s Dictum

C.A.R. Hoare and his wife stand outside Buckingham Palace after he was knighted by the queenSir Charles Hoare was a pioneer in computer science.  He observed:

There are two methods in software design.  One is to make the program so simple, there are obviously no errors.  The other is to make it so complicated, there are no obvious errors.

This applies to logical arguments as well: you can make the argument so simple that there are obviously no errors.  Or you can make it so complicated that there are no obvious errors.
A simple, straightforward argument for God’s existence might be, “Of course God exists.  He’s sitting right over there!”  Many arguments claim to be simple and straightforward—“the Bible is obviously correct” or “God obviously exists” for example—but are mere assertions rather than arguments backed with evidence.
Lots of apologetic arguments fall on the wrong side of this Hoare’s Dictum.  The Transcendental Argument, for example, is often a five-minute dissertation about what grounds logic and whether a mind must exist to hold it.
The Ontological Argument goes like this.  First we define “God” as the greatest possible being that we can imagine.  Two: consider existence only in someone’s mind versus existence in reality—the latter is obviously greater.  Three: since “God” must be the greatest possible being, he must exist in reality.  If he didn’t, he wouldn’t meet his definition as the greatest possible being.
When hit with an argument like this for the first time, you’re left scratching your head, unsure what to conclude.  These arguments are effective not because they’re correct (in fact, they fall apart under examination) but because they’re confusing.
The colloquial version of the argument is:

If you can’t dazzle ’em with brilliance, then baffle ’em with bullshit.

Photo credit: Microsoft
Related posts:

Related links:

  • “Hoare’s Dictum” has been defined in computer science as, “Premature optimization is the root of all evil,” so perhaps this use should be Hoare’s Second Dictum.

End of the World (Again)

Many years marked on a parchment, and then crossed offHey gang!  This has been great fun, but today is the last day for this blog.  Of course, that’s because this is the last day for everything.  God ends the world today.
I hope you took advantage of my “Only 21 More Shopping Days Till the End of the World” post and got those nagging last-minute items off your to-do list.  (If you need background on why today is the grand finale, check out that post.)
The parchment above is a relic showing some of many, many failed attempts at predicting the end of the world, going all the way back to the gospel story itself, in which Jesus says,

Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.

It’s been close to 2000 years since those “standing here” reportedly heard those words.  Oops!
So, there won’t be a tomorrow tomorrow … unless, of course, this is just the latest in a long list of pathetic, groundless predictions for the end of the world.
In which case, c’mon back for more polite but pointed critiques of Christianity!
Artwork credit: Kyle Hepworth
Related posts and links:

  • The Skeptics Annotated Bible has long list of gospel predictions of the imminent end.
  • “Lest we forget” is a video with clips of Camping’s claims.
  • Jessica Fostvedt, “Doomsday, Apocalypse, and Rapture, Oh my!” Scientific American, 10/7/11.
  • Stephanie Pappas, “Preacher still says Oct. 21 for end of world,” MSNBC, 10/14/11.
  • Benjamin Radford, “10 Failed Doomsday Predictions,” LiveScience, 11/04/09.