I have a very dear friend of mine who is a devoutly religious Southern Baptist. She believes what to me are alot of goofy, unsupported things, such as a worldwide flood, an earth just over 6,000 years old, and that the human species, like all species was specially created by God, with man created in God's image and all other organisms put in place by God for God's divine purposes relating to his special creation, mankind. To me this is goofy, but in the real world I live in, I am perhaps the goofy one, asserting foolishly that based upon the best available evidence, the earth is around 4.5 billion years old, all animals and plants evolved through natural processes from a common ancestor, including humans. I base my thinking upon evidence that to me seems convincing. Evidence, catalogued by the best minds, in a systematic way, with an ability to falsify things that don't hold up to scrutiny. Everything I conclude is based upon evidence as I see it, recognizing that evidence is fallable as is my interpretation of the evidence. Because of that fallibility, I am willing to entertain other ideas if additional evidence can make me rethink what I had concluded previously.
The other day, this friend of mine approached me with some piece of evidence for what she described as "intelligent design." It was a pretty lame piece of evidence relating to the complexity of the eye, and I had a simple explanation for what she had read was a serious flaw in evolution. But I asked her, what level of evidence would I have to present to convince her that man evolved from common ancestors of other primates, mammals, etc. My dear friend told me, "that no amount of evidence could sway me from the truth that I know deep in my heart to be true."
I then said, "but you approached me with what you believed was evidence that evolution was false." "I could be convinced that evolution didn't happen." "Cambrian trilobyte fossils partially digested inside a icthyosaur would make me rethink some of what I currently think about the evolution of species. A homo erectus fossil amidst brachiosaur remains would do the same thing." I said in as nice a way as I could, that "why should I even consider any evidence you present to defend your case, when no degree of evidence would convince you to reconsider yours?"
Recently, two excellent books were published outlining some of the best arguments for evolution since Douglas Futuyma tackled the issue in the 1980's with his book "Science on Trial, the Case for Evolution." Jerry Coyne's "Why Evolution is True" and Richard Dawkin's (arguably my favorite author) "The Greatest Show on Earth" in slightly different manners tackle the issue with great eloquence, passion and insight. I'm currently drafting my book reviews of both of these excellent books. These books aren't written for my dear friend and her associates. Evidence doesn't matter to these individuals because it isn't the basis for which decisions are made in their personal paradigm for evaluating truth. But to those for whom evidence does matter, even in some aspect of your life, I recommend reading both of these books. Not only will you understand how convincing the evidence is for evolution, you come away with a new appreciation for just how awe-inspiring life is on this pale blue dot, in one of the far corners of our insignificant galaxy.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Mormonism and Glenn Beck
The phenomena of Glenn Beck’s popularity among Mormons is an interesting and fascinating thing to watch as someone who was raised Mormon. On MSNBC, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, and other liberal venues, people don’t know what to think of him. Is he a cheap demagogue, or does he really believe the zany things he says, and are the emotional tirades from the heart or there purely for effect? Understanding Glenn Beck is a lot easier when you understand Mormonism as a culture and as a paradigm for examining the world and coming to conclusions.
The first thing I would like to address is Glenn’s apparent seeing of demons everywhere and seeming to view the world in strict black/white or good/evil terms. In Mormon dogma, humanity serves as an on-going drama between the forces of good and evil. Man’s very existence is a test of whether he will follow good or evil and his future is unlimited if he follows good, to even to become divine. Another aspect of Mormonism that helps to explain Glenn Beck is the depiction of evil as cunning and deceptive. Much of this evolved out of the puritan beliefs the religion’s founder Joseph Smith culturally brought with him into his new religion. In the superstitious world of witches, evil spirits, and angels from former dispensations (a good book on this is Quinn's "Early Mormonism and the Magical World View"), much happens in the privacy of each individual’s own consciousness and subconscious. Secret combinations abound everywhere, where men who appear good, are in fact agents of evil, and only through the careful guidance of the spirit can one discern truth from error. The difference between imagination and revelation is blurred and depends upon the feelings one gets from the thoughts evoked or imagined.
Truth in such a framework has less to do with the preponderance of the evidence, but upon the feelings engendered by the idea, feelings in the Mormon view that can only come from the spirit. When Glenn Beck says apparently crazy things with emotion, he does what so many Mormons do; they say that which they want to believe, and subconsciously try to engender enough emotional feeling to vindicate the idea as having a spiritual foundation. This quality often makes Mormons gullible to persuasion, but often effective in selling ideas. They can convince themselves of the inherent worth of whatever product they’re peddling. Through self-deception, They can appear totally believable as a sincere believer in whatever widget they’ve conjured up as beneficial. The Mormon frame of mind allows a Mormon to actually believe their own con. This isn't a trait for which Mormons hold a patent, but it is one they use very effectively on themselves and others.
The next topic in relation to Glenn Beck is sensitive and I hesitate to bring it up. Glenn Beck is a convert and perhaps was not subject to some of the same indoctrination I was subjected to as a child. Mormons of my generation were raised with the belief that God curses the wicked and their offspring with skin pigmentation. People of African descent had been treated as the descendents of Cain and not worthy of holding the LDS priesthood until the late 1970’s. Native Americans also were a cursed race, with their skin darkened because they rejected Christ and ultimately destroyed the Christian civilization of their white and delightsome Nephite cousins. Former Prophet Spencer W. Kimball even indicated that one of the goals of the Indian Placement Program was to bring Native Americans to the true Christianity that Mormonism believes itself to be, which would in turn, turn their skin white.
Who knows what subconscious demons (so to speak) Glenn Beck brings to the table with regards to his religious convictions. It is possible that when he accuses Barack Obama, a man who is 50% Caucasian of being racist against his mother’s race, perhaps there is some projection going on. Battling racism is ultimately a personal thing that each of us must face. Accepting people who are different from us will always be a challenge, but when you add a history of racial religious dogma on top of it, I think all Mormons and ex-Mormons such as myself should constantly be on guard to whether we attribute inherent motives upon someone based upon their appearance and their level of skin pigmentation.
One more thing regarding Glenn Beck and Mormonism. Mormonism like most religions has a very tribal component to it. Glenn Beck’s dogma resonates with many of the social mores of Mormonism, and as such, I would expect him to be popular with his fellow Mormons and I suspect that is true. I have found even some of my relatives quite enamored with him. To them, he is one of US. Certainly more so than Harry Reid, who is a MINO (Mormon in name only) to many members of the church. Glenn Beck will continue to have a following, no matter how zany he appears. To people who believe in magic underwear, evil spirits, and secret combinations, there is nothing zany about Glenn Beck. Finally, there is someone telling it the way it is.
The first thing I would like to address is Glenn’s apparent seeing of demons everywhere and seeming to view the world in strict black/white or good/evil terms. In Mormon dogma, humanity serves as an on-going drama between the forces of good and evil. Man’s very existence is a test of whether he will follow good or evil and his future is unlimited if he follows good, to even to become divine. Another aspect of Mormonism that helps to explain Glenn Beck is the depiction of evil as cunning and deceptive. Much of this evolved out of the puritan beliefs the religion’s founder Joseph Smith culturally brought with him into his new religion. In the superstitious world of witches, evil spirits, and angels from former dispensations (a good book on this is Quinn's "Early Mormonism and the Magical World View"), much happens in the privacy of each individual’s own consciousness and subconscious. Secret combinations abound everywhere, where men who appear good, are in fact agents of evil, and only through the careful guidance of the spirit can one discern truth from error. The difference between imagination and revelation is blurred and depends upon the feelings one gets from the thoughts evoked or imagined.
Truth in such a framework has less to do with the preponderance of the evidence, but upon the feelings engendered by the idea, feelings in the Mormon view that can only come from the spirit. When Glenn Beck says apparently crazy things with emotion, he does what so many Mormons do; they say that which they want to believe, and subconsciously try to engender enough emotional feeling to vindicate the idea as having a spiritual foundation. This quality often makes Mormons gullible to persuasion, but often effective in selling ideas. They can convince themselves of the inherent worth of whatever product they’re peddling. Through self-deception, They can appear totally believable as a sincere believer in whatever widget they’ve conjured up as beneficial. The Mormon frame of mind allows a Mormon to actually believe their own con. This isn't a trait for which Mormons hold a patent, but it is one they use very effectively on themselves and others.
The next topic in relation to Glenn Beck is sensitive and I hesitate to bring it up. Glenn Beck is a convert and perhaps was not subject to some of the same indoctrination I was subjected to as a child. Mormons of my generation were raised with the belief that God curses the wicked and their offspring with skin pigmentation. People of African descent had been treated as the descendents of Cain and not worthy of holding the LDS priesthood until the late 1970’s. Native Americans also were a cursed race, with their skin darkened because they rejected Christ and ultimately destroyed the Christian civilization of their white and delightsome Nephite cousins. Former Prophet Spencer W. Kimball even indicated that one of the goals of the Indian Placement Program was to bring Native Americans to the true Christianity that Mormonism believes itself to be, which would in turn, turn their skin white.
Who knows what subconscious demons (so to speak) Glenn Beck brings to the table with regards to his religious convictions. It is possible that when he accuses Barack Obama, a man who is 50% Caucasian of being racist against his mother’s race, perhaps there is some projection going on. Battling racism is ultimately a personal thing that each of us must face. Accepting people who are different from us will always be a challenge, but when you add a history of racial religious dogma on top of it, I think all Mormons and ex-Mormons such as myself should constantly be on guard to whether we attribute inherent motives upon someone based upon their appearance and their level of skin pigmentation.
One more thing regarding Glenn Beck and Mormonism. Mormonism like most religions has a very tribal component to it. Glenn Beck’s dogma resonates with many of the social mores of Mormonism, and as such, I would expect him to be popular with his fellow Mormons and I suspect that is true. I have found even some of my relatives quite enamored with him. To them, he is one of US. Certainly more so than Harry Reid, who is a MINO (Mormon in name only) to many members of the church. Glenn Beck will continue to have a following, no matter how zany he appears. To people who believe in magic underwear, evil spirits, and secret combinations, there is nothing zany about Glenn Beck. Finally, there is someone telling it the way it is.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Why Darwinism is Threatening to Evangelicals
My fellow Americans who acknowledge the reality of Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection, sometimes console themselves when evangelicans and fundies of various stripes with arguments that 'it is just a theory" and seek to supplant science education with one form of myth-based teaching or another, that they are a small minority and that there are large numbers of main-stream religionists who are willing to accept Darwin's theory and seek to try reconcile their faith with observed reality.
However, the stark reality is that evolution and other aspects of science, and many of the basic tenets of Christianity are at odds. The existence of a God or higher power is not necessarily falsifiable in the way that specific myths are. The Noah story from Genesis is a falsifiable myth. No worldwide flood, the Bible is fallible. If species evolve by natural selection, the creation story in Genesis is likewise problematic. No Adam no fall, no fall no original sin and no need for redemption.
The reality is, that any religion that treats it's founding works as infafllible, is incompatible with science. Science arrives at truth through weight of evidence, not on the authority of the author. Any religious idea that is falsifiable places that religion in potential conflict with science. Darwin's theory is but one example. There are myths, both within, and outside of Christianity that can be challenged using science in addition to the Genesis creation story.
For example:
Noah's flood has already been mentioned. Any worldwide flood creates several problems. First, where did all the water come from? Where did it go after the flood? What evidence is there for a flood? How did different types of animals end up on different continents? Evolution and plate tectonics explain marsupials in Australia, Genesis does not. It also doesn't explain on-going human civilizations and distribution of the human species. It was problems with how to explain humans in the Americas that led to theories regarding their origins that include the Mormon myths regarding aborriginal Americans being descended from Israel.
The Tower of Babel- For some reason, linguists haven't suffered the same fate as biologists. However, the study of the evolution of languages is just as threatening to the Tower of Babel story as Darwinism is to the creation story. That mankind all spoke one language prior to the building of the Tower is contradictory to excellent examples of ancient language evolution in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas as well.
Moses and the Exodus- It is amazing how much we know about the history of Egypt. It's amazing how absent from that history is the Moses story. We know that Egyptian culture influenced Hebrew culture. Alot of the same polytheistic aspects of Egyptian culture permeated what the early Hebrews taught. The "Elohim" is actually a plural word, as is "Israel", representing Isis, the God of the moon, the sun God Ra, and"El" the God of the firmament. The problems with the Moses story are many, but historians and anthropologists should be able to detect such an important person, a problem for the existence of one Jesus of Nazareth as well.
Speaking of which, how about this Jesus fellow? Would the existence of fellows like him from different cultures and religious traditions suggest the borrowing of myths? What is the probability that a Jewish God-man should have the same stories associated with himself as Osiris, Mithra, Dionysus and others? And what about virgin birth? What would a man look like without a y chromosome? Did Jesus have his father's DNA? If so, wouldn't his father have to have a father in order for him to have a y chromosome?
These are but a taste of the problems a Biblical world view has relative to science. Even as evangelicals smugly promote their myths as "the truth", their truths do not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Science is at odds with the very paradigm through which they view reality. The conflict is inevitable so long as evangelicals look to past ancient writings as the basis of truth, rather than evidence.
Biology gets special attention from evangelicals, because evolution hits at the very heart of Christian theology, the need for a savior. No creation, and no original sin, and the mission of Jesus to redeem man from his fall is left in tatters. That is why biologists take heat for Darwin's theory when linguists who could just as easily annihilate the Tower of Babel myth.
Ultimately, we as a society have to choose which paradigm to follow. Do we base our lives on evidence, or authority. Do we accept the uncertainty that comes with assessing probabilities based upon the evidence, or put our faith in a false certainty.
However, the stark reality is that evolution and other aspects of science, and many of the basic tenets of Christianity are at odds. The existence of a God or higher power is not necessarily falsifiable in the way that specific myths are. The Noah story from Genesis is a falsifiable myth. No worldwide flood, the Bible is fallible. If species evolve by natural selection, the creation story in Genesis is likewise problematic. No Adam no fall, no fall no original sin and no need for redemption.
The reality is, that any religion that treats it's founding works as infafllible, is incompatible with science. Science arrives at truth through weight of evidence, not on the authority of the author. Any religious idea that is falsifiable places that religion in potential conflict with science. Darwin's theory is but one example. There are myths, both within, and outside of Christianity that can be challenged using science in addition to the Genesis creation story.
For example:
Noah's flood has already been mentioned. Any worldwide flood creates several problems. First, where did all the water come from? Where did it go after the flood? What evidence is there for a flood? How did different types of animals end up on different continents? Evolution and plate tectonics explain marsupials in Australia, Genesis does not. It also doesn't explain on-going human civilizations and distribution of the human species. It was problems with how to explain humans in the Americas that led to theories regarding their origins that include the Mormon myths regarding aborriginal Americans being descended from Israel.
The Tower of Babel- For some reason, linguists haven't suffered the same fate as biologists. However, the study of the evolution of languages is just as threatening to the Tower of Babel story as Darwinism is to the creation story. That mankind all spoke one language prior to the building of the Tower is contradictory to excellent examples of ancient language evolution in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas as well.
Moses and the Exodus- It is amazing how much we know about the history of Egypt. It's amazing how absent from that history is the Moses story. We know that Egyptian culture influenced Hebrew culture. Alot of the same polytheistic aspects of Egyptian culture permeated what the early Hebrews taught. The "Elohim" is actually a plural word, as is "Israel", representing Isis, the God of the moon, the sun God Ra, and"El" the God of the firmament. The problems with the Moses story are many, but historians and anthropologists should be able to detect such an important person, a problem for the existence of one Jesus of Nazareth as well.
Speaking of which, how about this Jesus fellow? Would the existence of fellows like him from different cultures and religious traditions suggest the borrowing of myths? What is the probability that a Jewish God-man should have the same stories associated with himself as Osiris, Mithra, Dionysus and others? And what about virgin birth? What would a man look like without a y chromosome? Did Jesus have his father's DNA? If so, wouldn't his father have to have a father in order for him to have a y chromosome?
These are but a taste of the problems a Biblical world view has relative to science. Even as evangelicals smugly promote their myths as "the truth", their truths do not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Science is at odds with the very paradigm through which they view reality. The conflict is inevitable so long as evangelicals look to past ancient writings as the basis of truth, rather than evidence.
Biology gets special attention from evangelicals, because evolution hits at the very heart of Christian theology, the need for a savior. No creation, and no original sin, and the mission of Jesus to redeem man from his fall is left in tatters. That is why biologists take heat for Darwin's theory when linguists who could just as easily annihilate the Tower of Babel myth.
Ultimately, we as a society have to choose which paradigm to follow. Do we base our lives on evidence, or authority. Do we accept the uncertainty that comes with assessing probabilities based upon the evidence, or put our faith in a false certainty.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Happy Birthday to My Little One
Yesterday, my little girl turned 2. It is hard to believe how the time has flown. It is amazing how fast these little ones go from a helpless little newborn, to a highly mobile and inquisitive toddler. My little one was not expected, as I recently turned 47 and was pretty sure I was done changing diapers when my youngest came along. But I have to admit how wonderful it has been to see all the stages again, this time enjoying them even more, because I really do know this is our last baby.
And how wonderful is it to have a curly-haired toddler excited to see me at the end of a bad day? It has been amazing therapy to sing "itsy bitsy spider" and "twinkle twinkle little star" with her and to kiss her chubby little cheeks. How incredible it is to have her curly little head on my shoulder and to feel her embrace.
Do I sound smitten? Yep, I am. Just as I still am with my two older daughters. During the last couple of years, I have been under an enormous amount of stress. I cannot imagine getting through it all without this little baby turned toddler.
So happy birthday, my little curly-haired beauty. And may you have many more.
And how wonderful is it to have a curly-haired toddler excited to see me at the end of a bad day? It has been amazing therapy to sing "itsy bitsy spider" and "twinkle twinkle little star" with her and to kiss her chubby little cheeks. How incredible it is to have her curly little head on my shoulder and to feel her embrace.
Do I sound smitten? Yep, I am. Just as I still am with my two older daughters. During the last couple of years, I have been under an enormous amount of stress. I cannot imagine getting through it all without this little baby turned toddler.
So happy birthday, my little curly-haired beauty. And may you have many more.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
So Long to a Friend
A good friend of mine is moving to Oklahoma. One of the challenges we atheists face every day is a lack of fellowship among atheists. It is hard to rally around a lack of belief in a certain dogma. Atheists can disagree on almost everything, and still find the probability that there is a supernatural entity rounded to a zero. So it was a breath of fresh air when I met this friend of mine, who has hung out with me for the past year. My friend isn't typical and is hard to categorize in any way. He just thinks the way he does and is comfortable in his own skin.
My friend drinks more than he should, but who am I to judge. I've been known to get a little foggy-eyed myself on occasion. He certainly rubs some people the wrong way, but hey, who doesn't. I do know, he treats bartenders, waiters, and his friends well, usually above his means. His efforts to get me hooked on single malt scotch didn't work, given it collided with my own desire to abstain from alcohol for health reasons this year. So far I've lost fifteen pounds and saved a bundle of dinero. I think he has missed hanging out and downing scotch, but I've got little ones to take care of and I've got to mind my health.
But even so, I wish my friend well. I hope the books I've loaned him and the websites I've referred him to make a difference in his life. But more than anything, I hope he knows, he's got a friend in Utah. So long good buddy. And may the farce be with you.
My friend drinks more than he should, but who am I to judge. I've been known to get a little foggy-eyed myself on occasion. He certainly rubs some people the wrong way, but hey, who doesn't. I do know, he treats bartenders, waiters, and his friends well, usually above his means. His efforts to get me hooked on single malt scotch didn't work, given it collided with my own desire to abstain from alcohol for health reasons this year. So far I've lost fifteen pounds and saved a bundle of dinero. I think he has missed hanging out and downing scotch, but I've got little ones to take care of and I've got to mind my health.
But even so, I wish my friend well. I hope the books I've loaned him and the websites I've referred him to make a difference in his life. But more than anything, I hope he knows, he's got a friend in Utah. So long good buddy. And may the farce be with you.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Charles Darwin- My Tribute
February 12, 2009 is the bi-centennial of the birth of Charles Darwin. It is hard to understate the importance of the life and career of Charles Darwin. The theory regarding evolution through natural selection created a stark and distinct break from the predominant paradigm of western thought for just short of two millennia. The idea that we humans are not specially created, but members of a broader family of cousins which includes all living things, is such as a dramatic philosophical shift, that the impacts are still being digested, often with convulsive vomiting along the way by those with “weak stomachs” or a delusional attachment to the old paradigm.
It is interesting to note that though Darwin used sound logic and good evidence to justify his theory, most of the evidence that further strengthened and validated that theory has been discovered long since his death. Advances in fields such as genetics, anthropology, geology, and several other ologies have sustained and supported Darwinism, even as insights from Darwin’s theory has fed back to science new avenues to discover the secrets of life on earth.
The power of Darwin’s theory is that it is so all-encompassing. Our relationship to the cosmos, and our standing as mankind in the natural world is defined by this theory. For those who still subscribe to ancient scriptural text to gain that standing, Darwinism has proved to be a villain which upsets the applecart, not by intent, but by the very winds of truth contained in that theory.
Little by little, scientific understanding has humbled humanity by the awe and power of the natural world. Mankind is no longer the center of the universe, just as the earth is no longer the center of our solar system. Our galaxy is but one of millions. The universe has grown as our understanding has, and our seemingly immortal power of consciousness has been left with two choices. We may either live in denial of the reality around us, and focus on our small existence and give it eternal meaning. Or we can embrace the vastness of the cosmos with wonder and awe. We can either choose to be part of something big, wonderful and amazing, or we can pretend to be the big fish in the little pond, and pretend our pond is the only pond in the marsh.
Darwin and his discoveries opened up the possibility of connecting human kind, not to the divine, but to something bigger and grander. We bi-pedal hominids, made of stardust, are connected to all living things. From the co-worker who pisses us off, to the bacteria that infects our wounds, we are all connected by our common ancestry. Such is the power of Darwin’s discovery, to reconnect us to the natural world, and disconnect us from a deity of our own creation.
Happy Birthday Chuck! Those of us who have found wonder and awe in the implications of your theory, give you our sincere thanks.
It is interesting to note that though Darwin used sound logic and good evidence to justify his theory, most of the evidence that further strengthened and validated that theory has been discovered long since his death. Advances in fields such as genetics, anthropology, geology, and several other ologies have sustained and supported Darwinism, even as insights from Darwin’s theory has fed back to science new avenues to discover the secrets of life on earth.
The power of Darwin’s theory is that it is so all-encompassing. Our relationship to the cosmos, and our standing as mankind in the natural world is defined by this theory. For those who still subscribe to ancient scriptural text to gain that standing, Darwinism has proved to be a villain which upsets the applecart, not by intent, but by the very winds of truth contained in that theory.
Little by little, scientific understanding has humbled humanity by the awe and power of the natural world. Mankind is no longer the center of the universe, just as the earth is no longer the center of our solar system. Our galaxy is but one of millions. The universe has grown as our understanding has, and our seemingly immortal power of consciousness has been left with two choices. We may either live in denial of the reality around us, and focus on our small existence and give it eternal meaning. Or we can embrace the vastness of the cosmos with wonder and awe. We can either choose to be part of something big, wonderful and amazing, or we can pretend to be the big fish in the little pond, and pretend our pond is the only pond in the marsh.
Darwin and his discoveries opened up the possibility of connecting human kind, not to the divine, but to something bigger and grander. We bi-pedal hominids, made of stardust, are connected to all living things. From the co-worker who pisses us off, to the bacteria that infects our wounds, we are all connected by our common ancestry. Such is the power of Darwin’s discovery, to reconnect us to the natural world, and disconnect us from a deity of our own creation.
Happy Birthday Chuck! Those of us who have found wonder and awe in the implications of your theory, give you our sincere thanks.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Christian Nonsense v. Mormon Nonsense
A dear friend of mine gave me a CD outlining just how outlandist Mormon claims were relative to Mormon beliefs. My friend did so as a fellow atheist. And that puzzles me somewhat.
I write about Mormonism often in my blog because I was raised Mormon, taught gospel doctrine, and gave numerous speaches in favor of the faith over many years. Like many well-read Mormons, I came to challenge the faith of my upbringing and ultimately discard it, but not without appreciations for the culture that I left and felt so much social sustenance.
As for Christianity? I harbor some of my fiercest critics upon those who rejected Mormonism and became Christians. The basis of Christianity is dependence and guilt. One is born in guilt by a predecessor, and are deamed unworthy of deified company except than one accepts a savior who is God manifested in the flesh.
Let us get real. First of all, why would someone be accountable for the sins of their ancestor? What kind of nonsense is this? It is nonsense to reasonable people, but for those who would wish to gain psychological control over others, this is a priceless ploy.
Oh, let's talk about Christ's suffering for our sins. Again, it seems like a ploy for religious leaders to sheer us of our human failings for religious domination and economic expoitation. Let's get real. Are we to be held accountable for "sin" by an other-worldly force? On what basis does this force gain authority over us? Is dying on a cross, a fate also suffered by numerous criminals who deserved such a fate the basis of our surrendering of personal spiritual sovereignty? Step back for a moment and ask yourself that question outside the bounds of accepted orthodoxy.
Mormonism is a branch of Christian thought, though it is not mainstream Christianity in that it rejects the Nicene Creed. But Nicene Christians have a weighty burden of proof to prove the validity of their faith. The four gospels were clearly written over a generation from the time of the purported events that they claim to have witnessed.
As for the Apostle Paul, when seen outside of the Book of Acts (an obvious forgery (from either Eusebius of Hyppolytus), his works seem to be gnostic in tenor, and never once reference the actual life of Jesus as articulated in the accepted gospel regarding Jesus's life.
Mainstream Christianity has as many holes in it, as the more recently created Mormon dogma. I discount both faiths as superstitions and mythologies, notwithstanding the sincere belief most of my ancestors held iun those belief.s
Is Mormonism stupid? Yeah, I'd say it is.
Is Christiantiy stupid? I agree with Thosas Jefferson on that pointed issue.
So what are we to believe? We believe in nothing. We look at the world and the best available evidence, and live our lives based upon the best available evidence. We don't believe, we make decisions. We make decisions based upon the evidence.
It may sound confusing to those who say "I believe with every fiber in my being (the following)" We have to,because the real world doesn't often coalesce with the mythical one. And yet we search for humor in it, or some common ground. But let me say unequivocably, that the challenge isn't between what is believed and not, but between those who base their beliefs upon the wisdom of accepted authority and those who would say NO.
t
I write about Mormonism often in my blog because I was raised Mormon, taught gospel doctrine, and gave numerous speaches in favor of the faith over many years. Like many well-read Mormons, I came to challenge the faith of my upbringing and ultimately discard it, but not without appreciations for the culture that I left and felt so much social sustenance.
As for Christianity? I harbor some of my fiercest critics upon those who rejected Mormonism and became Christians. The basis of Christianity is dependence and guilt. One is born in guilt by a predecessor, and are deamed unworthy of deified company except than one accepts a savior who is God manifested in the flesh.
Let us get real. First of all, why would someone be accountable for the sins of their ancestor? What kind of nonsense is this? It is nonsense to reasonable people, but for those who would wish to gain psychological control over others, this is a priceless ploy.
Oh, let's talk about Christ's suffering for our sins. Again, it seems like a ploy for religious leaders to sheer us of our human failings for religious domination and economic expoitation. Let's get real. Are we to be held accountable for "sin" by an other-worldly force? On what basis does this force gain authority over us? Is dying on a cross, a fate also suffered by numerous criminals who deserved such a fate the basis of our surrendering of personal spiritual sovereignty? Step back for a moment and ask yourself that question outside the bounds of accepted orthodoxy.
Mormonism is a branch of Christian thought, though it is not mainstream Christianity in that it rejects the Nicene Creed. But Nicene Christians have a weighty burden of proof to prove the validity of their faith. The four gospels were clearly written over a generation from the time of the purported events that they claim to have witnessed.
As for the Apostle Paul, when seen outside of the Book of Acts (an obvious forgery (from either Eusebius of Hyppolytus), his works seem to be gnostic in tenor, and never once reference the actual life of Jesus as articulated in the accepted gospel regarding Jesus's life.
Mainstream Christianity has as many holes in it, as the more recently created Mormon dogma. I discount both faiths as superstitions and mythologies, notwithstanding the sincere belief most of my ancestors held iun those belief.s
Is Mormonism stupid? Yeah, I'd say it is.
Is Christiantiy stupid? I agree with Thosas Jefferson on that pointed issue.
So what are we to believe? We believe in nothing. We look at the world and the best available evidence, and live our lives based upon the best available evidence. We don't believe, we make decisions. We make decisions based upon the evidence.
It may sound confusing to those who say "I believe with every fiber in my being (the following)" We have to,because the real world doesn't often coalesce with the mythical one. And yet we search for humor in it, or some common ground. But let me say unequivocably, that the challenge isn't between what is believed and not, but between those who base their beliefs upon the wisdom of accepted authority and those who would say NO.
t
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Chicken-hawk Nation- BYU's Legacy
Recently, I watched a Youtube video regarding the BYU/Utah football game where the song associated with that video, rather crass for my sake, shouted "where the fuck are you, where the fuck are you, etc." I thought it interesting that one of the few friendly confines Vice President Cheney could find to address Americans came at that campus. Even so, he drew protests, as I hoped he would.
But Cheney's visit also found him surrounded by a wave of support. Warfare against a nation that didn't attack us still is popular in this state, particularly in the county surrounding that "venerable" institution of higher learning.
Ok, let me make some confessions. I have supported for years KBYU radio, the only really substantial supporter of classical music in Utah. I also have frequented performances of the Utah Baroque Ensemble that is based out of BYU. I also hold dear Lehi Hintze's Gteology of Utah as Lehi was a BYU professor. There are things I like about BYU. But I have to admit, there are things about Utah County in general, and the environment of BYU I find abhorrent.
First of all, let's look at a little history. Gordon B. Hinckley, the much revered former prophet of the LDS Church got his start within the LDS hierarchy trying to keep Mormons from fighting against the same communism that another Mormon, Ezra Taft Benson, vehemently wrote and lobbied against. When Americans faced the communist overthrow of South Korea by a communist North Korea, it was Gordon B. Hinckley who was charged with keeping Mormon men immune from the draft in that war.
During the Vietnam war, Mormons were resolute in their support for the war, but also equally resolute in protecting their youth from the draft through religious deferment, i.e. missions. My uncle, a prime candidate for the infantry found safety behind this deferment as did many other Mormons.
But here we stand, with an unpopular war (outside of Utah) fought in Iraq and a still supported war in Afganistan against the supporters of those who attacked us on 9/11/2001. So where is the support from Mormon church leaders for these conflicts? During World War II, the missionary program was suspended and Mormons were encouraged to support the war against our sovereignty. What about now? Mormons, from Utah, Idaho, Arizona, and Nevada seem to be the last full-hearted warriors in support of the ill-founded war on terror initiated by Bush. That is why Cheney found you as the ones he could address. But has the church encouraged their member's support in that conflict? I welcome information that suggests they did.
BYU is representative of the "chicken hawk" tradition. There were few if any protests of an ill-founded war in southeast asia on that campus. Why? Because, they had an out. Mitt Romney could have served in Quangtri, but he served in France. And now he is the brave warrior against tyranny, safe behind his trust fund and favored status.
BYU is Chicken Hawk Nation ground zero. And when someone asks "where the fuck are You?" when it comes to defending our nation in the "war on terror", they can safely say, "I was peddling religion door to door in Bolivia and it was the greatest two years of my life."
And I say, "your resolute courage against tyranny speaks volumes". "Volumes of paper devoid of ink."
But Cheney's visit also found him surrounded by a wave of support. Warfare against a nation that didn't attack us still is popular in this state, particularly in the county surrounding that "venerable" institution of higher learning.
Ok, let me make some confessions. I have supported for years KBYU radio, the only really substantial supporter of classical music in Utah. I also have frequented performances of the Utah Baroque Ensemble that is based out of BYU. I also hold dear Lehi Hintze's Gteology of Utah as Lehi was a BYU professor. There are things I like about BYU. But I have to admit, there are things about Utah County in general, and the environment of BYU I find abhorrent.
First of all, let's look at a little history. Gordon B. Hinckley, the much revered former prophet of the LDS Church got his start within the LDS hierarchy trying to keep Mormons from fighting against the same communism that another Mormon, Ezra Taft Benson, vehemently wrote and lobbied against. When Americans faced the communist overthrow of South Korea by a communist North Korea, it was Gordon B. Hinckley who was charged with keeping Mormon men immune from the draft in that war.
During the Vietnam war, Mormons were resolute in their support for the war, but also equally resolute in protecting their youth from the draft through religious deferment, i.e. missions. My uncle, a prime candidate for the infantry found safety behind this deferment as did many other Mormons.
But here we stand, with an unpopular war (outside of Utah) fought in Iraq and a still supported war in Afganistan against the supporters of those who attacked us on 9/11/2001. So where is the support from Mormon church leaders for these conflicts? During World War II, the missionary program was suspended and Mormons were encouraged to support the war against our sovereignty. What about now? Mormons, from Utah, Idaho, Arizona, and Nevada seem to be the last full-hearted warriors in support of the ill-founded war on terror initiated by Bush. That is why Cheney found you as the ones he could address. But has the church encouraged their member's support in that conflict? I welcome information that suggests they did.
BYU is representative of the "chicken hawk" tradition. There were few if any protests of an ill-founded war in southeast asia on that campus. Why? Because, they had an out. Mitt Romney could have served in Quangtri, but he served in France. And now he is the brave warrior against tyranny, safe behind his trust fund and favored status.
BYU is Chicken Hawk Nation ground zero. And when someone asks "where the fuck are You?" when it comes to defending our nation in the "war on terror", they can safely say, "I was peddling religion door to door in Bolivia and it was the greatest two years of my life."
And I say, "your resolute courage against tyranny speaks volumes". "Volumes of paper devoid of ink."
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
My Christmas Gifts and What They Say
Damn I'm a nerd.
It is true: I read, read and read. And my gifts for Christmas reflect that. $60 in giftcards from Barnes and Noble, as well as several books. Music? Let's see, Haydn's symphonies 99-104 and "The Essential Maynard Ferguson". Pfffft! Why didn't I ask for some AC/DC? I like AC/DC. Shit, what was I thinking? Hey I just swore. Maybe there is hope for me. Naw, I suck.
Remember I do when my Christmas gifts centered around having fun. Scuba equipment, ski equipment, fishing tackle, new golf clubs, a new wet suit, etc. What has happened to me? Marriage and it's responsibilities, raising children, often working two jobs, etc., seem to have taken some of the youthful starch out of my frame and my outlook. I used to inspire fear in the paint when playing ball. Now I can't even get my doctor to clear me to suit up. Son of a Republican!! This bites.
Back when I graduated from college, I was on the leading edge of technology. I took MacWorld magazine and I was well on my way to being a a techno-star. WTF, I have yet learned how to text message. I don't have a Wii, no less a PS2 or Nintendo DS. I have become the techno fossil my father became at my age. I feel like I'm about to start referring to youngsters as "whippersnappers." Ugh!
Even at my watering hole, I'm known for bringing in a book to read while I down ice tea. I look at our incoming President, a guy about my age, and how much more hip and with it he his compared to this broken down old cyber-jedi. A backward facing baseball hat I saw on him. I wouldn't get caught dead. He probably listens to R & B! And I listen to a guy who wore a wig. (gasp)
As an old appraiser, I understand the phrases chronologicial age and effective age. I fear my effective age may be ten years past my chronological age. So what to do? Tattoo? No thanks. Go into mid-life crisis mode (leave wife and kids, dye hair, buy a sports car, hang out with Unitarians, you get the picture)- No- ain't happening.
So how do I recharge my jets? How do I get my life back during tough economic times? I'm not sure I can. I need to find one or two of my old passions and pick them up again. If I don't, I'll be metaphorically in a walker in no time. So I vow to get back some that youthful vigor in 2009, even if it kills me (no don't say that). You know what I mean.
So if you see a heavily tattooed, slightly paunchy, middle-aged dufus rushing to board meeting adjusting the stud in his nose, with a backward facing baseball cap, you'll know I've gone too far.
It is true: I read, read and read. And my gifts for Christmas reflect that. $60 in giftcards from Barnes and Noble, as well as several books. Music? Let's see, Haydn's symphonies 99-104 and "The Essential Maynard Ferguson". Pfffft! Why didn't I ask for some AC/DC? I like AC/DC. Shit, what was I thinking? Hey I just swore. Maybe there is hope for me. Naw, I suck.
Remember I do when my Christmas gifts centered around having fun. Scuba equipment, ski equipment, fishing tackle, new golf clubs, a new wet suit, etc. What has happened to me? Marriage and it's responsibilities, raising children, often working two jobs, etc., seem to have taken some of the youthful starch out of my frame and my outlook. I used to inspire fear in the paint when playing ball. Now I can't even get my doctor to clear me to suit up. Son of a Republican!! This bites.
Back when I graduated from college, I was on the leading edge of technology. I took MacWorld magazine and I was well on my way to being a a techno-star. WTF, I have yet learned how to text message. I don't have a Wii, no less a PS2 or Nintendo DS. I have become the techno fossil my father became at my age. I feel like I'm about to start referring to youngsters as "whippersnappers." Ugh!
Even at my watering hole, I'm known for bringing in a book to read while I down ice tea. I look at our incoming President, a guy about my age, and how much more hip and with it he his compared to this broken down old cyber-jedi. A backward facing baseball hat I saw on him. I wouldn't get caught dead. He probably listens to R & B! And I listen to a guy who wore a wig. (gasp)
As an old appraiser, I understand the phrases chronologicial age and effective age. I fear my effective age may be ten years past my chronological age. So what to do? Tattoo? No thanks. Go into mid-life crisis mode (leave wife and kids, dye hair, buy a sports car, hang out with Unitarians, you get the picture)- No- ain't happening.
So how do I recharge my jets? How do I get my life back during tough economic times? I'm not sure I can. I need to find one or two of my old passions and pick them up again. If I don't, I'll be metaphorically in a walker in no time. So I vow to get back some that youthful vigor in 2009, even if it kills me (no don't say that). You know what I mean.
So if you see a heavily tattooed, slightly paunchy, middle-aged dufus rushing to board meeting adjusting the stud in his nose, with a backward facing baseball cap, you'll know I've gone too far.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
