About Bob Seidensticker

I'm an atheist, and I like to discuss Christian apologetics.

Halloween Extra: An Atheist Horror Story

Here’s a repost of a short story of mine, an atheist horror story to get you in the mood for Halloween.

 

“Good morning, Dr. Jones.” Oliver Jones’ secretary smiled at him from behind her desk. “Welcome back.”

“Thank you,” he said. He had no memory of ever seeing the woman before. He paused to read the label on his unfamiliar office door: “Oliver Jones PhD, Chancellor.”

This was his first day back at work after his accident. He had been out for just a few days, but it felt more like nine years. His neurologist diagnosed the problem as retrograde amnesia. The nine years of memory loss could be permanent, his memory might return gradually, or it might return quite suddenly. “I’ve had patients who’ve said, ‘Oh, yeah …’ and then they can almost watch their world rebuild itself as the memories return.”

Nine years earlier, he had been a successful and ambitious college administrator and very much an atheist. Today, he was the head of Tabernacle University, perhaps America’s most aggressively Christian university.

Only his neurologist shared the secret. Jones’s public story was that he had some limited amnesia, he’d soon be fine, and that he needed to take things slowly. He hoped that his secretary’s prepping visitors with this vague prognosis would explain away any erratic behavior.

He looked around his big office. He saw many books on Christianity and atheism that he remembered reading. There were other familiar touches—artwork that he recognized and a few nerdy desk toys. But then there were the photos—photos of him shaking hands with televangelists, prominent religious leaders, and a presidential candidate. Who was this guy?

He looked himself up online, horrified as the details filled in the outline of what he had already learned about himself at the hospital. He had become Tabernacle’s chancellor four years earlier after some sort of religious epiphany. As a prominent and outspoken atheist, he had apparently been quite a catch for conservative Christianity.

On this first day back at work, he blundered through the day with impromptu staff meetings to update him on the latest issues. As with his first look at his secretary, each of his colleagues was a stranger.

In his house that evening—he was apparently still a single divorced man—he considered his situation. Should he come clean and quit? Find a new job?

He weighed his options as an interesting route took shape—remain as chancellor, but be a reformer. With this bully pulpit, he could steer this inept leviathan onto a healthier course. The board might fire him, of course, but as an atheist who woke up at the helm of a prominent Christian institution, this was too good an opportunity to pass up.

He thought of the students. The image came to mind of a jungle explorer who slips into quicksand. He struggles but sinks deeper. Exhausted, he calls for help, but no one comes. His students were like that, living and breathing reason but gradually slipping under. He could throw them a rope.

The university charter made clear that the Christian student had nothing to fear from an honest search for the truth. With this as his armor, Jones began his reforms. He sidelined projects that had been on his desk and created a lecture series with nationally known atheists. The students needed to see the real debate, not some neutered version. No longer could his professors set up flimsy atheist arguments but would need to respond to the best.

Reactions came quickly. Alumni protested, and parents demanded that the school be turned back into a safe haven for their children. The board warned that neither group could be alienated. Jones responded by pointing to the school’s confident charter. Wasn’t it still in force? He said he wanted nothing more than to honor the founders’ vision.

Perhaps the board figured that a man who’d had a recent brush with death was entitled to a little slack. With a bit of breathing room, he courted the press and soon became the darling of the mainstream religious media. He next dropped the faith requirement for professors and students and created a new professorship for Atheist Studies. He charged the science department with teaching only the scientific consensus—no more Creationism or 6000-year-old earth. He launched a project to earn an honorable accreditation for the university rather than one given only to Bible colleges. Students would discover the truth, not be force-fed a dogma. Each strategically timed innovation brought a new round of interviews that raised his profile progressively higher.

Tabernacle had been a stodgy refuge from reality but was evolving in the public mind into an innovator in Christian thought and higher education. Despite continuing resistance from all sides, his influential public profile helped convince the board to give him room to explore his new vision.

At the end of the semester, Jones took stock of his work. Four months earlier, he had felt like Alice, newly through the looking glass. Now he could point to solid progress in smoothing off the sharp edges, at least for this Christian institution. For all the enemies he had made, he seemed to have even more allies. Who could say what additional innovations he might make in the years to come?

It finally felt right to make this office his own, to replace photos of that other guy with recent magazine cover stories and pictures with new friends.

He studied the old photos as he took them down. He was surprised as they brought to mind dreams he’d had recently—dreams of an unfamiliar past that now came more into focus—and he went through the photos again. Oh yeah, he thought, as memories trickled back to become ill-fitting jigsaw puzzle pieces. The man in the top photo, that was the outgoing chancellor. He’d been informed of that, but now he knew through his own memory. And the photo with the famous preacher—he remembered when the photo was taken.

He even remembered the event that led to his being there, that low point when he got on his knees and embraced Jesus. He was getting his life back, though instead of walking into a welcoming and familiar new world, he felt that old life creeping up around him like a jungle vine, pulling him under, yanking him back to his Christian past.

He could call for help, but who would come?

.

(This is an update of a post that originally appeared 1/1/14.)

Image via Ashley Whitlatch, CC license

 

Top 20 Most Damning Bible Contradictions (4 of 4)

We’ll conclude our look at Bible contradictions. Here are the final five (part 1 is here).

16. There are two incompatible Ten Commandments

You know the story: Moses got the Ten Commandments from God on Mt. Sinai in Exodus 20. The list of commandments had the familiar rules—no blaspheming, no murder, no lying, no stealing, and so on. Moses returns, only to find that the Israelites, impatient and anxious during his long absence, had made and were worshipping a golden calf, a familiar object of worship from Egypt.

Moses smashed the tablets in his rage, 3000 Israelites were killed in the opening round of punishment, and Moses eventually went back up for a duplicate set (Exodus 34), which was put in the Ark of the Covenant.

Except that it wasn’t a duplicate set. It’s a list that very few Christians are familiar with. For example, number 5 is “The first offspring from every womb belongs to me.” Number 7: Celebrate the Feast of Weeks. Number 10: “You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk.” This set is referred to as the “Ten Commandments” in Exodus, not the other set.

We can debate which set fundamentalists should try to illegally place on government property, but despite God’s assurance, these are two very different sets of rules. (More here and here.)

17. There are two creation stories in Genesis

There are also two creation stories at the beginning of Genesis. First is the six-day creation story that enumerates the things God created day by day, after which God rested. Next is an older creation story, the one about the Garden of Eden.

Apologists try to harmonize these two, saying that the Garden of Eden story is just an in-depth look at the last day of creation, but details in the two stories disagree. The 6-day story says that humans can eat from every tree, while the Eden story says that one is forbidden. The 6-day story has plants and animals before humans, while the Eden story has the opposite. And so on (more).

18. There are even two Flood stories

You see the trend: the Old Testament often has two different, incompatible stories. Each was too precious for ancient editors to discard, so both were jammed together somehow. The two Ten Commandments stories are separated by over a dozen chapters, the two creation stories are back to back, and they’re interleaved in the Flood story.

In Flood story 1, the older story, Noah takes seven pairs of all clean animals plus one pair of all the others. Once on board with his family, it rained for forty days and forty nights, and everything outside the ark was killed. Noah sent out a dove to scout for dry land. On the second try, it returned with an olive leaf. Back on dry land, Noah sacrificed one of every clean animal to Yahweh, and Yahweh promised to never again destroy life on earth (with a flood, anyway).

In story #2, God is named, not Yahweh, but Elohim, and specifics about the design of the ark are given. With just one pair of each animal plus provisions, Noah (now 600 years old) and family go into the ark. This time, the water comes, not from rain, but from “the fountains of the great deep” and “the windows of the heavens.” Water had covered the earth for 150 days when Elohim made the water recede. This time it was a raven that helped scout for dry land, and they were back on dry land after a year in the ark. God told them to “be fruitful and multiply.”

A leading explanation of the Old Testament’s many story pairs is the Documentary Hypothesis. It answers a lot of questions and proposes four original documents that were merged to make the Pentateuch, the Bible’s first five books. Read more on the two Flood stories and the Documentary Hypothesis here.

19. Resurrection contradictions

Forty percent of the gospels focus on the last week of Jesus’s life, from the triumphant entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday to the crucifixion, resurrection, and final teachings, and they differ on many points.

A popular Christian response is to say that just because only Matthew wrote about the dead coming out of their graves and walking around Jerusalem doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. (Yeah—the other gospel writers must not have thought that Jesus causing the dead to reanimate and walk around Jerusalem, seen by many, wasn’t worth writing about.)

Or that just because John says “Mary Magdalene went to the tomb,” that doesn’t mean that many other women weren’t also with her as Luke says (“Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them”).

Or that just because only Matthew has Jesus riding on two donkeys, that doesn’t mean the other gospels’ reference to just one disagrees. (Yeah, it pretty much does.)

Or that Paul’s reference to 500 eyewitnesses to the risen Jesus might’ve been compelling to him, but it wasn’t worth writing about in any gospel (more).

From who Peter denied Jesus, to Jesus’s last words, to who the women saw at the tomb, to whether Mary Magdalene recognized Jesus or not, to how many days Jesus stayed after his resurrection, the various accounts differ. (More here.)

20. Jesus forgets the plot

At some point the three persons of the Trinity—Yahweh, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit—agreed that Jesus should live as a human on earth. Jesus was born as a divine being (except in Mark, where he becomes divine with his baptism) and lives out a life that ends with crucifixion. Just before that, he prayed with his disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane. To the few disciples with him, he said, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death” (Matthew 26:38). Then he prays, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup [he’s referring to the upcoming crucifixion] be taken from me.” He prays this three times. The story is the same in Mark, and in Luke, an angel strengthens Jesus.

Why did Jesus go off-script? He was part of the Trinity that decided this, so how could he be second-guessing the plan now?

We can look for a human comparison. It wouldn’t be surprising for an ordinary human to have second thoughts before a suicide mission, but in this story we’re talking about a god. Even if agony were a thing that he could perceive, why would an omniscient being question a plan that he knows is perfect?

The puzzle vanishes if we reinterpret the Jesus story as legend.

But wait! There’s more!

Religion is just superstition
which has been around long enough
to have become respectable.
— J. B. R. Yant

.

Image via Drew Saurus, CC license
.

8 Lessons from New Age Thinking for Christians and Atheists

new age thinking and Christianity

I recently summarized the story of Karla McLaren, a New Age practitioner who gradually embraced science and turned her back on poorly evidenced New Age claims.

Most Christians critique New Age thinking as harshly as any atheist and find McLaren’s analysis compelling. I encourage Christians to hang on to that skepticism as we consider the parallels between New Age and Christian thinking. Let’s first look at four lessons for Christians and then four lessons for atheists.

1. Maybe it’s all wrong.

McLaren was skeptical . . . to an extent. Her ability to reject silly beliefs within her own community convinced her that she was sufficiently skeptical and able to winnow the valid beliefs from the false ones, but this token skepticism deceived her. She rejected some New Age beliefs, which was good, but she was slow to consider that it might pretty much all be nonsense. When science conflicted with her beliefs, she stayed within comfortable New Age boundaries.

Christians also reject silly supernatural beliefs (the claims of the other guy’s religion). But just because you’ve rejected some supernatural beliefs doesn’t mean that you’re entitled to hold on to the ones you still fancy. We must always be on guard against confirmation bias, wishful thinking, and all the other human mental maladies that protect our beliefs from critique.

2. Accept that we just don’t know everything.

McLaren turned popular New Age thinking on its head when she realized that it’s not the New Age practitioners who embrace mystery. Instead, skeptics accept that science has plenty of unanswered questions that may or may not be resolved in their own time, and it’s actually the New Agers who must have an answer to everything. She said, “Critical thinkers and skeptics don’t create answers just to manage their anxiety.”

Similarly, many Christians have little patience for ambiguity. Though they rarely put it this bluntly, their arguments are sometimes, at root, nothing more than, “Science has unanswered questions; therefore, God.”

These Christians insist that they know what caused the Big Bang and how life came from nonlife—God did it. They have no scientific evidence for it, but that doesn’t matter. God still did it. The problem is that “God did it” is too powerful. It answers any question and can never be proven wrong. By being unfalsifiable, this claim is useless.

3. Personal experience? Maybe not that reliable.

McLaren “knew” that her metaphysics was true because she experienced it herself, but we have many ways by which we deceive ourselves. She realized that personal experience wasn’t so reliable after all.

Christians may also want to reevaluate how they know what’s true. Personal experience may be less reliable than what science tells us.

4. Fear of not knowing leads to unjustified confidence.

McLaren says that the “incapacity to tolerate mystery is a direct result of [New Age] culture’s disavowal of the intellect.” If reason doesn’t give an answer, New Age thinkers appeal to some vague spiritual reality as a way to understand reality.

Similar thinking underlies many Christians’ low opinion of science and skepticism, giving confidence that more satisfying truth can be found through the “spirit.”

But the lessons aren’t all for the Christians. Here are some for the skeptics.

5. Just because there are scammers doesn’t mean there aren’t honest practitioners.

McLaren argued that she honestly believed what she was selling and had no intention of scamming anyone. I can believe that.

Similarly, there are television evangelists and revivalists like Benny Hinn, Creflo Dollar, and Rod Parsley who may be unethical or know that their claims are bullshit, but we must remember that many preachers and evangelists honestly believe that they’re helping spread the truth.

6. They can’t hear you if your message is belligerent or culturally insensitive.

James Randi is a shrewd and incisive intellect who debunks pseudoscience. To me, he comes across as a gentle and wise elf motivated solely by a desire to help the public avoid being taken advantage of, but not everyone agrees. McLaren says that New Agers responded to his attacks on spoon bender Uri Geller in the 1970s by doubling down on their beliefs.

Reaching Christians also requires tact and patience. Remember the lesson of Daryl Davis.

7. Beware the Backfire Effect.

Yes, skeptics, you’re correct that New Age thinking is wrong, but there are right ways and wrong ways (mostly wrong ways) to convey this information.

Atheists, you’re right as well that Christianity is largely built on legend and wishful thinking. Nevertheless, the wrong approach won’t help and may simply reinforce a Christian conclusion.

(More on the backfire effect and how to minimize it here, here, here, and here.)

8. Consider what you’re asking them to do.

The skeptics are simply asking that we accept reality—a reasonable request, right? How hard is that?

Sometimes, quite hard. McLaren says about her own journey out of New Age:

In essence, I had to throw myself off a cliff. I had to leave behind my career, my income, my culture, my family, my friends, my health care practitioners, most of my business contacts, my past, and my future. I say this not to garner sympathy but to show what the leap truly entails….

Skeptical information can be threatening and unwanted.

This is similar to the path that atheists ask some Christians to take. The more central Christianity is to someone’s life, the more difficult to abandon it. It’s not surprising when they respond to challenges by mentally curling up like an armadillo. (I’ve written more on the difficult process of leaving religion here. For more on the Clergy Project, which supports hundreds of pastors who have concluded that Christian faith is unjustified, see the Rational Doubt blog.)

McLaren concludes:

I would ask you to respect our humanity, and approach us not as if you are reformers or redeemers. I would ask you to approach us as fellow humans who share your concern and interest in the welfare of others.

I’ll try. I’m sure this will be an ongoing process.

The yelling between our cultures just becomes louder
while the real communication
falls into the chasm that divides us.
— Karla McLaren

.

(This is an update of a post that originally appeared 12/29/14.)

Image via Mary, CC license

.

Top 20 Most Damning Bible Contradictions (3 of 4)

We’re in the middle of tossing Christianity’s dirty laundry onto the lawn for everyone to examine. Here are five more Bible contradictions that call into question foundational Christian claims (part 1 is here).

11. Do people deserve punishment for their ancestors’ sins?

The Bible demands intergenerational punishment so that children must be punished for their parents’ sins.

I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me (Exodus 20:5).

[God justified a calamity to the people:] It is because your ancestors forsook me (Jeremiah 16:11).

But the opposite claim is recorded in the Bible as well.

Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin (Deuteronomy 24:16).

Everyone will die for their own sin; whoever eats sour grapes—their own teeth will be set on edge (Jeremiah 31:30).

The one who sins is the one who will die (Ezekiel 18:4).

Where does this leave Original Sin? This is the idea that we’re born fallen and deserve hell because of Adam’s sin, which infects us all. What foundation remains for Original Sin if it is undercut by the Bible itself?

12. What day was Jesus crucified on?

The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) say that the Last Supper was the Passover meal and that Jesus was crucified after the Passover meal.

On the first day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Where do you want us to make preparations for you to eat the Passover?” (Matthew 26:17)

Three verses later, Jesus is at the Passover meal, the Last Supper. But in John, the order is reversed: it’s the crucifixion and then the Passover meal.

Now it was the day of Preparation [the day of preparing lambs for the Passover meal], and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jewish leaders did not want the bodies [of Jesus and the two thieves] left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down. (John 19:31)

A “historical account,” as the gospels are claimed by some to be, should get the order of important events correct, and the Passover meal and the crucifixion are both important events.

13. Who should the disciples convert?

At the end of the gospel story, Jesus has risen and is giving the disciples their final instructions.

Make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19).

This is the familiar Great Commission, and it’s a lot more generous than what has been called the lesser commission that appears earlier in the same gospel:

These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.” (Matthew 10:5–6)

This was not a universal message. We see it again in his encounter with the Canaanite woman:

[Jesus rejected her plea to heal her daughter, saying] “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”

The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.

He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” (Matthew 15:24–6)

You might say that a ministry with limited resources had to prioritize, but that doesn’t apply here. Don’t forget that Jesus was omnipotent.

Going back to the Old Testament, we don’t find an all-inclusive message there, either. The Israelites were God’s “Chosen People,” and God had harsh things to say about neighboring tribes.

No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of Jehovah, not even in the tenth generation (Deuteronomy 23:3).

God also forbids intermarriage with these foreign tribes (Deut. 7:3; Ezra 9:2, 10:10; Nehemiah 13).

Let’s revisit the fact that Matthew is contradictory when it says both “Make disciples of all nations” and “Do not go among the Gentiles [but only] to the lost sheep of Israel.” There are no early papyrus copies of Matthew 28 (the “Make disciples of all nations” chapter), and the earliest copies of this chapter are in the codices copied in the mid-300s. That’s almost three centuries of silence from original to our best copies, a lot of opportunity for the Great Commission to get “improved” by copyists. I’m not saying it was, of course; I’m simply offering one explanation for why the gospel in Matthew has Jesus change so fundamental a tenet as who he came to save.

14. Jesus should’ve returned already.

Jesus promised to return within the lifetimes of those listening to him. This Apocalyptic message (Apocalypticism claims that the end times are very close) is found in the three synoptic gospels. It takes a passage in Isaiah 13 that predicts calamity for Babylon—that the sun and moon will darken and the stars will fall—and repurposes it as a prediction of the end. It also predicts:

[All people on earth will] see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds. (Matthew 24:30–31)

The prediction ends saying that this will all happen soon.

This generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened (Matthew 24:34).

Let me emphasize those two points: “these things” will happen soon (within months or years, not centuries), and “these things” are obvious and world-destroyingly calamitous. The popular Christian response that this referred to the fall of the Temple won’t fly.

Earlier in the same gospel, we find other references to the imminent coming of the Son of Man:

When you are persecuted in one place [as you spread the gospel], flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes. (Matthew 10:23)

Some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom (Matthew 16:28).

It’s been a lot longer than one generation. Jesus made a mistake.

15. Jesus promises that prayers are answered

Jesus says a lot about prayer, and he makes big claims for it.

Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you (Matthew 7:1).

Whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours (Mark 11:24).

He who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do (John 14:12).

Apologists say that Jesus isn’t like a genie, but they need to reread their Bibles. Jesus really does say, “Ask, and ye shall receive”—it’s in John 16:24. He says it without caveats. That promise has been tested uncountably many times, often by desperate people, but if Jesus answers, it’s indistinguishable from chance. (More on prayer here and here.)

Concluded in part 4.

Religion is just superstition
which has been around long enough
to have become respectable.
— J. B. R. Yant

.

Image via Andrei Lazarev, CC license
.

Top 20 Most Damning Bible Contradictions (2 of 4)

What are your favorite Bible contradictions? These can be two sets of verses that are contradictory, or the clash can be the Bible vs. reality. And these aren’t just trivial contradictions where “It’s a typo—big deal” would be an answer. These seem to strike at foundational Christian claims.

Let’s continue (part 1 is here).

6. Faith saves (or do works save?)

Protestant Christianity often emphasizes that faith alone (sola fide) justifies God’s forgiveness. Many verses support this.

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast (Ephesians 2:8–9).

We maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law (Romans 3:28).

That seems clear enough until we find the opposite claim elsewhere in the Bible. The clearest example to me is the Parable of the Sheep and Goats in Matthew 25, but there’s more.

Will [God] not repay everyone according to what they have done? (Proverbs 24:12)

What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? (James 2:14).

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done (Matthew 16:27).

The dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works (Revelation 20:12).

For something so important as getting into heaven and avoiding hell, the New Testament is surprisingly unclear.

Addendum: Or maybe it’s repentance that saves . . . or maybe baptism?

What if it’s repentance?

Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord (Acts 3:19).

Repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem (Luke 24:47).

Or baptism? It was so essential a ritual that Jesus did it.

Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38).

We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life (Romans 6:4).

7. The different genealogies of Jesus

The Messiah had to be of the line of David (Jeremiah 33:15–17; Isaiah 9:7), so two gospels provide genealogies of Jesus to validate this requirement. The problem is that we only need to go back one generation, to Joseph’s father, to find a problem.

Jacob [was] the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah (Matthew 1:16).

Jesus . . . was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli (Luke 3:23).

There is just one unique male biological line that would terminate in Joseph, so at least one of these genealogies is wrong. And it’s hard to imagine that an ordinary Joe like Joseph would have a reliable record of his genealogy going back generations. Worse, Joseph wasn’t the biological father of Jesus, so his genealogy is irrelevant. If being in the line of David is a requirement, then having a god for a father makes you ineligible.

The most common rebuttal is to say that the Luke genealogy is for Mary, but the text makes clear that it’s for Joseph. Anyway, why would you provide the genealogy of the parent from whom descent from David wouldn’t count? We’re seeing the incompatible clash of two ideas: Jesus inherits David’s throne and Jesus was the son of God.

8. Does God prevent harm to good Christians?

In response to a church shooting, where good Christians were doubtless praying to God but still got shot, Christian apologist Greg Koukl pushed back against the idea that anyone should be surprised (I responded here). In fact, he assures us, Jesus promised persecution.

Do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal that has come on you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice inasmuch as you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed. (1 Peter 4:12–13)

Koukl said, “There is . . . no rationale, no line of thinking that if God does exist that only good things happen to people, particularly people who believe in God, especially Christians.”

In fact, the Good Book says precisely that:

No harm overtakes the righteous, but the wicked have their fill of trouble (Proverbs 12:21).

If you make the Most High your dwelling—even the LORD, who is my refuge—then no harm will befall you, no disaster will come near your tent. (Psalm 91:5–10)

When Christians desperately praying for their lives in a church are gunned down, atheists are right to point out that this makes one question God’s existence.

9. When is the End?

A 2013 poll found that 41 percent of U.S. adults think that we’re now living in the end times. But ask for the precise date, and the standard response is to point to this verse:

But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father (Mark 13:32; see also Matthew 24:36).

Harold Camping was hilariously wrong about his prediction of the Rapture® on May 21, 2011 (here, here), and fellow Christians pointed to that verse. But Brother Camping had a comeback with this passage:

You know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. But you, brothers and sisters, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief.  You are all children of the light and children of the day. (1 Thessalonians 5:1–5)

Some people won’t know, the children of darkness. But the enlightened ones will know. (Or not, if Jesus was correctly quoted.)

10. Jesus finds a new home for Mary. But why?

While on the cross, Jesus was concerned about his mother and made provisions for her to be taken care of after he was gone.

When Jesus saw his mother standing there beside the disciple he loved, he said to her, “Woman, he is your son.” And he said to this disciple, “She is your mother.” And from then on this disciple took her into his home. (John 19:26–7)

That’s a nice gesture, but why was it necessary? Mary had other sons. Tradition holds that James, the leader of the church and supposed author of the epistle of James, was the brother of Jesus. And then we have this:

Isn’t [Jesus] the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? (Matthew 13:55)

Mary had lots of sons who could support her.

Continue with part 3.

If horses had gods, they’d look like horses.
— Xenophanes

.

Image via Cristian Newman, CC license
.

Lessons from New Age Thinking

psychic fortune teller

Most of my posts are something of an attack on Christian thinking, but this is different. The atheists and Christians should be on the same side of the table on this one.

Karla McLaren had been a leader within the New Age community. She spent her life in that mindset and had written nine books on auras, chakras, energy, and so on. After she made the (surprisingly painful) trip from her world into that of a skeptic, she wrote an insightful article to help skeptics understand the hold that that kind of thinking can have on someone and the ways skeptics ruin any chance of constructive discussion (“Bridging the Chasm between Two Cultures”).

It’s like she’s been to another planet and is back to report.

The life of a New Age believer

McLaren says that she encountered New Age thinking in 1971 when her mother took up yoga and experienced relief from arthritic symptoms that she hadn’t gotten from conventional medicine.

She says that personal experience taught her that much of New Age metaphysics was correct, but she also was skeptical of scams, fads, and cults such as “est, Scientology, breatharianism, [and] urine drinking.” She was able to use her skepticism to separate the accurate teachings from the false ones. If you’d demanded that she be skeptical of New Age thinking, she would’ve agreed and said that she already was.

She became a professional in the field, driven by a strong desire to help people. She believed every claim she made and never tried to scam anyone, and she says that the same was true of her colleagues.

The skeptical community? Not helpful.

But eventually she couldn’t dismiss the problems.

After a time, though, I began to question the things I saw that didn’t fit—the anomalies, the cures that didn’t work, the ideas that fell apart when you really looked at them, and so forth. I wrote passionately about the trouble I saw in my culture, and I even became a voice of reason. Sadly, though, every time I tried to research the things that disturbed or troubled me, I hit a wall.

She sought scientific critiques of New Age thinking but found two problems. First she was in too deep to accept the critique:

I couldn’t access any of that information because I simply couldn’t identify with it. Until now. . . .

The lion’s share of people from [New Age culture] can’t really hear much (if anything) from the skeptical culture. And that’s a real shame.

Problem two was that critiques of pseudoscience seemed unnecessarily harsh. For example, illusionist Uri Geller appeared several times on both the Merv Griffin show in 1973 and the Mike Douglas show in 1975. James “the Amazing” Randi responded to Geller’s popularity by publicly performing all of his tricks to prove that Geller’s claims of supernatural ability were lies.

You might think that that was that. How could Geller’s claims stand when they’d been shown to be mere stage magic?

But McLaren had seen the popular television shows that validated Geller’s abilities. She concluded at that time,

Some people just had it in for healers and people with paranormal gifts….

James Randi’s behavior and demeanor were so culturally insensitive that he actually created a gigantic backlash against skepticism, and a gigantic surge toward the New Age that still rages unabated.

(This response is another example of the Backfire Effect, about which I’ve written recently.)

In a 2014 New York Times magazine feature on Randi, Geller recounted his humiliating experience on Johnny Carson’s Tonight Show. Randi had advised Carson how to avoid Geller’s deceptions. As a result, Geller sat there for 22 minutes on television, unable to do anything. Afterwards, he was certain that his career had been very publicly destroyed, but he was then booked immediately for his first Merv Griffin appearance. The public failure actually made his career. (More on Uri Geller here.)

McLaren said about Randi:

I certainly understand and support James Randi’s anger, frustration, and even vitriol now (especially after having lived through the New Age for so many decades), but all I could see then was a very sarcastic man who seemed to attack Geller personally.

She says that within New Age culture, personal attacks come from someone ruled by their emotions, and serious skepticism comes from someone ruled by their intellect. Neither extreme is acceptable, and New Agers focus instead on “the (supposedly) true and meaningful realm of spirit.” Randi might have helped dabblers steer away from some New Age thinking, but by showing that he didn’t understand or care about their culture, Randi did nothing to dissuade serious believers.

Mystery in the New Age community

Within this community, it’s popular to imagine that skeptics have no tolerance for mystery while New Agers do, but she now says that this is backwards.

We love to say that we embrace mystery in the New Age culture, but that’s a cultural conceit and it’s utterly wrong. In actual fact, we have no tolerance whatsoever for mystery. Everything from the smallest individual action to the largest movements in the evolution of the planet has a specific metaphysical or mystical cause. In my opinion, this incapacity to tolerate mystery is a direct result of my culture’s disavowal of the intellect. One of the most frightening things about attaining the capacity to think skeptically and critically is that so many things don’t have clear answers. Critical thinkers and skeptics don’t create answers just to manage their anxiety.

Christians show that same insistence for answers and intolerance for mystery. When science doesn’t have an answer, they will happily point out that their religion does. That there is no good evidence for “God did it” is no concern.

Most Christians are as skeptical about poorly evidence claims as atheists are—when they choose to be.

We are a people, not a problem.
— Karla McLaren,
about the New Age community

.

(This is an update of a post that originally appeared 12/27/14.)

Image via Anthony Easton, CC license

.