Lead? Or Follow?

Over on Whatsoever Is Lovely, fellow blogger and fellow former Christian, Alice, authored a post in which she talks about being "Christlike". I think the gist of the topic can be encapsulated in the form of a good question that she raised, and that question was this:

"Can one be Christlike without even believing?" ~ Alice 

In order to answer that question, we'd have to first assume a few things, one of which, that being "Christlike" is actually a good thing.

So, okay, I'm willing to do that for sake of discussion. Let's say that following Christ and imitating his behavior is definitely a good thing. Done.

But wait, there's still a snag. How do we know what "good" even is? In other words, how do we know if another's actions are even worthy of imitation? If it's the case that we have an innate, preexisting sense of what "good" is - let's say, that which seeks to promote well-being and avoid unnecessary harm is "good" - then we don't even need to imitate anyone; we can just choose to do and be "good".

On the other hand - and as best as I can tell, the only alternative - if we rely solely on and/or put our trust/faith in the individual we intend to imitate/follow, then we've necessarily surrendered any innate sense of right or wrong; we've surrendered our innate sense of reason, etc., and at the end of the day, we're essentially just playing an adult version of follow the leader.

At this point, notice how the individual we intend to imitate/follow can feasibly do or say anything he (or she) darned-well chooses, and yes, this is even if it's things that we'd likely all agree would be monumentally idiotic if any of us did or said those things.

Now, if we actually look at some of the things that "Christ" said and did, it definitely shows the harm in opting for option 2, above. For example, it's frequently pointed out how noble and inspiring it is to love one's own enemies, per the Luke passage in the Bible. We should strive to love our enemies. We should strive to do good to those who hate us. If someone pops you in the face? Turn the other cheek, according to "Christ".

Okay, really? What if our enemy's mission in life is to see to it that we and our families be killed? What if I'm standing in line and someone cuts in front of me, and when I call them out, he or she slaps my face? Do I offer them my other cheek?

 As sane, reasonable people, we (should) know that ethics are situational, not absolute. We (should) also know that imitating someone who cannot or will not follow his or her own advice is a bad idea. And, well, the god of the Bible clearly cannot follow his own advice, nor can his son. In fact, if we're talking about "enemies", consider that biblegod's worst enemy seems to be the only individual who stays consistently within his character. But here is what I would like to know: Which Christian, if any, believes that God loves Satan? And if the idea of God loving Satan sounds preposterous, why then are we being asked to love our enemies? Does Jesus want me to "love" Satan, who's presumably my worst enemy???

In any case, to answer Alice's question, yes.....we can most certainly be "Christlike" without believing. But why would anyone need to be "Christlike", is the better question, especially when we can just choose to be good?

My Own Wisdom (and yours)

In my years as a bible-toting, church going Christian, I was taught things like how human reasoning is weak and unreliable, and that I can't even begin to solve life's most difficult problems..e.g...human suffering, human nature, etc., because, according to the bible, my own wisdom is "foolishness"(compared to God's wisdom).

In short, your and my wisdom is "worldly", and therefore, it is pretty much useless, according to the Christian philosophy. God's wisdom, on the other hand, is reliable, and therefore, our faith should be in God, not man.

So, just let that sink in a minute. Yes, let that sink in, and then think about when and where we use our own "wisdom", aka, our own reasoning and intellect, and then think about how and why we trust our own reasoning and intellect.

Done? Okay, now think about the frequency with which this "trust" happens throughout our daily lives.

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I trust my own wisdom and reasoning because they actually work most of the time. Does my own wisdom let me down occasionally? Yes! Of course! But just because a function or process isn't perfect; just because a function or process isn't successful 100% of the time, that is no reason to scrap that function or process. Good grief, if we scrapped something just because it fail us occasionally, then no one would drive an automobile, because, oh, those things break down.

Speaking of cars, my own wisdom tells me that wearing a seat belt and following the rules of the road is the safe way to go. If the religious alternative is to have faith in God, why then do you suppose that believers wear seat belts if God is sovereign and in total control? Your fate, as a believer, is presumably in God's hands, right? Right, God has "a plan". Yes, you are to trust God's wisdom and the fact that he is "Sovereign", knows best, and that you are part of his perfect "plan"

So, two-part question: 1) why don't Christians use "prayer" exclusively when it comes to arriving safely at their next destination when traveling? And furthermore, 2) if unadulterated, everlasting eternal bliss is just a head-on crash away, then, well, what's the problem with not strapping in? Why adjust your review mirrors? Why check your tire pressure before a long trip?

• why lock your house when you leave?
• why go get doctor's checkups? 
• why go get teeth cleanings?
• why purchase home protection?
• why look both ways before crossing the road?
• why not give your SSN to the "IRS guy" on the phone?
• why throw the Watch Tower literature in the trash?(if you're not a Jehovah's Witness)
• why have a surge protector in case of a lightening strike?

• how do you know that planet earth doesn't sit on the back of an overgrown turtle?
• how do you know that Tom Cruise is deluded when it comes to Scientology?
• how do you know that Muhammad didn't really hop on a winged pony and fly off into the clouds?
• how do you know that Jack'n the Beanstalk isn't based on a true story?
• how do you know that large-footed community gorillas aren't traipsing around the North East?
• how do you know that Cleo doesn't really know the future? 

If you are a Christian, I contend that the answer to the above "why" set of questions is that you do not sincerely believe that God knows what's best for you. No, you don't sincerely believe that God is your "copilot", or at least, your actions do not coincide with that belief. Sure, just as I liked and agreed with "God's Plan" where it benefited me, the truth is, I questioned and second-guessed that "plan" when it did not benefit me, just like you do. Eternal bliss? A part of you does not really believe it. If I'm wrong, then why the seat belt?

From my POV, it seems your "faith" is nothing more than "hope", and please note, I absolutely, positively am not saying that having "hope" is a bad thing; I'm saying, have all the hope you'd like, but don't tell me that in matters of "hope" that said hope is in support of facts or knowledge(unless that you can demonstrate it). And perhaps most of all, please don't disparage me when I use my own wisdom to determine that your religion is likely untrue, when you sit there and use your own wisdom to determine the other guy's religion is not true.

I further contend that, if you are a Christian, the way that you arrive at the answers to the above "how" set of questions is that you use, yes, your own wisdom. Yes, that's right, you know that Tom Cruise is a nut-job; you know that Muslims are deluded, and you know these things, not because of any "faith" in a supreme being our reliance upon that being's wisdom, but because of your own god-blessed(no pun) wisdom.

Whether you are a Christian theist, a Muslim theist, or whatever theist, you use your "faith" selectively. For every facet of life except where you claim to need "faith", interestingly, your own wisdom works fine and dandy. I don't write this to disparage believers or insinuate that they are stupid; I only write it because, if you are going to go around disparaging those who use their "own wisdom", then you're going to have to not mind looking a bit foolish, and further, I guess you should become accustomed to being called out.


"Faith is for believing what you know ain't so" ~ Mark Twain

The Perfect Plan

When it comes to Christianity, you will frequently hear followers talk about their triune biblegod having "a plan". When this happens, it is more often than not the believer's way of rationalizing an outcome that was not desired. It's taking a situation, which, on its face, is undesirable, and then trying to make it "good", or at least, make it acceptable(in their minds).

And then there are other times when the "God has a plan" conviction is used as a means to buffer anxiety, say, where there may be uncertainty regarding an anticipated future event. After all, Christians are not comfortable with uncertainty, which is why you will frequently see them filling in the gaps in knowledge by proclaiming "God did it!", for instance, on the topic of the origins of life or the universe. Likewise, "God is control!" and "God is my copilot!" are frequently uttered in times where the future is concerned, when in actuality this is just another way of saying whatever is going to happen is going to happen.

But today I would like to know how the Christian who speaks of "God's Plan" squares-up this "plan" with things like "prayer", "free will", and god's (supposed) "sovereignty".

So, Christians? Why do you commence to "praying" if you truly in your heart of hearts believe that.....

• God is Perfect, Sovereign and nothing happens without his direction
• God knows the future with absolute certainty
• God knows what's best for you, despite what you want

Well? Please do chime in for my benefit and for the benefit of other non-believers. Yes, because, see, if you are so interested and/or concerned with the fact that I and millions more left your religion, just think of what a good ministry tool you could be in bringing us back.

Or wait.....can you be that ministry tool??? Is that even possible in a Christian worldview?

 Let's explore the answer together...

So, I occasionally encounter a Calvinist guest on another blog I frequent. I'll call this Calvinist guest "S.Z."

S.Z. subscribes to the philosophy of John Calvin, and under Calvinist doctrine it is stated in no uncertain terms that God predestines people into salvation. This is a cornerstone of Calvinism. It is further a cornerstone of Calvinist doctrine, aka, "T.U.L.I.P.", that Jesus died *only* for those predestined to be saved, and that God "regenerates" the person to where he or she wants to choose God(aka, "Irresistible Grace"), and it is then and only then that the person is able to "choose" God.

Whaaaaaa?!?!?!?

Okay, the astute among us see the problem(s) immediately. Seriously, this is even worse than the idea that we can actually choose God or not, and by extension, "choose" to go to "Heaven" or "Hell", which also has its share of problems.

One atheist YouTube video-maker who goes by "NonStampCollector" made a video in which he compares Christianity's "free choice" concept with that of the IRS allowing you the "free choice" of paying your taxes, or not. It's actually a good analogy, because while one is "free" in the dictionary sense of the word, one is certainly not "free" in the intellectual or emotional sense of the word. Our intellect and emotions are part of what make us human.

But interestingly, if we apply that same IRS analogy to the Christian doctrine that is "Calvinism", we'd have to seriously reconfigure it to make it truly analogous.

Let's see, to be analogous with the Calvinist worldview, the IRS would send out letters to everyone telling them that they are too frickin' stupid, wretched, and depraved to do their own taxes. Maybe it's because one couple seriously botched up their taxes, so now two people ruined it for everybody else, and subsequently, now no one can be trusted(this should sound vaguely familiar at this point, but if not, think "Original Sin", mainly, the idiocy of it).

A month later the IRS would send out a followup letter stating that they've elected to provide free tax services to those who qualify.

Lo and behold, a month after that another letter is sent out saying that no one qualifies and that all ineligible people will be penalized. However, as a kind gesture, and so that no one would lose faith in the good ol' IRS, the IRS decided to use an election process to choose a small percentage of people to be exempt from the newly instated tax laws and penalties.

A month later everybody receives a roster of names, and anyone on that list will not be penalized.

Now, if you consider yourself to be a rational, intelligent individual, then the above analogy should sound utterly bat-sh*t insane to you. And yet, while no analogy is perfect, it illustrates the lunacy of the Christian doctrine known as "Calvinism", specifically, that of "predeterminism". Just as it would be useless in the above analogy to phone up a person not elected to be exempt from tax penalties and to harass them and/or second-guess their tax preparation abilities, it would likewise be useless to tell someone not elected by God that they have failed or fallen short in some way.

So, again: If "God" has "a Plan", and if part of that "plan" is to elect some people to save, while not electing others, then guess what.... the non-elect are every bit a part of  "God's Plan" as the elect. Thus, asking for "Divine" intervention(AKA, "praying") on the behalf of the non-elect is counter-productive, at best. And yet, time and time again you will see the Christian bloggers (claim to be) throwing their hands up in the air in lack of their ministry doing any good.

"All we can do is pray", they say, and yet, we nonbelievers are evidently PART of "God's Perfect Plan"(assuming such a being exists for sake of discussion). But S.Z. and her Calvinist constituents blatantly ignore this. Every. time. Yup, S.Z. argues for "predeterminism", and she even confesses that it is up to her own supposedly "Sovereign" god to "open the eyes" of her non-believing counterparts.

So, maybe someone can explain how a "God" who already knows who will go to their grave a non-believer is "free" to open such a person's eyes. If "God" could "open my eyes", then I'm sorry, but that "God" couldn't have known with certainty that I wouldn't choose him.

This is applying basic logic in a world where we entertain the views of the illogical. If I said that I live next to a "married bachelor" and you correct me, but then next week I say the same thing, it is at that point that I become a damned liar. Well, it is no different for people like S.Z. when they repeat their errors.