Let's Ask Adventists Some Challenging Questions, Please?

I dropped my little baby boy off this morning for his first day of school and after recovering from the feeling of my heart bursting at the fact that my little man is growing up fast, I decided to walk over to the Goodwill to look for something that might work as a Halloween costume for me or Brad for the wedding I'm helping plan for my friend Melissa. I got to the store a bit too early so I wandered over to the row of metal and plastic houses for all the free apartment guides and little nickels and lo and behold, I found a Seventh Day Adventist publication. The theme for this issue is: The Treachery of the CULTS.

Coincidentally, I bought my irony meter because it goes up to 11.

This is 64 pages worth of insight into this religion that I plan to read, but the part of the magazine that bothers me already is the very back. It's a 'Your Bible Questions' section but the questions being posed are ridiculously simplistic and accommodating. Nothing challenging whatsoever:

Q. What does it mean to blaspheme the Holy Lord?

Q. If we are under grace, why must we still keep the law?

Q. What would have happened if Eve had not been tempted?

Q. When God Said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness" who else was He talking about?

Q. Does a person have to observe the Sabbath on Saturday to be a true Christian and thus be given eternal life?

Q. Is fasting a church requirement, or is it for individual needs?

Q. What is the Abyss?

Come on guys, we can come up with better questions than that. I plan on mailing a few questions in myself and I encourage you all to do the same. Let me know what your questions are too, I'd like to see what others think is a worthy question for people who are literal worsipers of the bible.

Send questions to:

Your Bible Questions
c/o Signs of the Times
PO Box 5398
Nampa, ID 83653-5398

Monkey Girl FAQ - Evolution and ID Facts and Myths

To be sure, one of the more trying aspects of reading Monkey Girl was listening to the misguided and, at times, embarrassingly incorrect opinions people of the town of Dover had concerning evolution - especially people who were aggressively pushing the ID curriculum. Here is a FAQ from Edward Humes, the author of Monkey Girl, which was put together as a direct response to the kind of information and misinformation he ran across when researching for the book:

MONKEY GIRL: Evolution Facts and Myths

• Myth: Evolutionary theory holds that life on Earth, including humans, arose by luck or random chance.
• Fact: Evolution is mindless, but never random. Variations (in height, strength, intelligence, disease resistance, etc.) occur naturally among members of every species, from jalapeños to humans. Variations that help individuals survive (and reproduce) become concentrated in later generations, gradually transforming a species. Variations that pose a disadvantage are weeded out of the gene pool through the death of individuals or the extinction of whole species. This “natural selection” is evolution’s main engine.
• Myth: Evolutionary theory states that man evolved from monkeys.
• Fact: Evolutionary theory states that man and monkeys share a common ancestor that was neither man nor monkey, but possessed qualities passed on to each. Every species on Earth has an ancestor in common with every other species – some dating back millions of years, some hundreds of millions, others dating back billions of years. One implication of common ancestry is that there are far more extinct species than living ones; evidence in the fossil record and in living DNA suggests that more than 99 percent of creatures that have lived on Earth are now extinct.
• Myth: Belief in evolution requires atheism or leads to it.
• Fact: Most scientists accept the validity of evolutionary theory AND believe in God. Charles Darwin was trained to be a preacher and wrote that evolution and belief in God were completely compatible (with evolution contradicting only biblical literalism). It is true that Darwin grew to doubt the existence of God, but not because of evolution. He lost his faith when his young daughter, Annie, died.
• Myth: Evolutionary theory asserts that life arose from nonliving chemicals in Earth’s primordial environment — a process called abiogenesis, popularly referred to as “from goo to you.”
• Fact: Evolutionary theory has nothing to do with the beginning of life. It explains how life forms change over time, and does not attempt to explain how life began in the first place. Thus, evolutionary theory has nothing to do with creation but only change.
• Myth: There is more factual evidence to support the biblical account of creation than evolution.
• Fact: There is more scientific evidence, laboratory testing and direct observation to support evolutionary theory than virtually any other scientific theory, including gravitational theory* and the big bang theory. No credible evidence has yet falsified the theory of evolution, while new discoveries Darwin never dreamt of, such as the unraveling of the human genome, have supported his theory. On the other hand, there is no evidence outside of the Bible itself to support the Genesis creation and flood stories, and considerable evidence of inaccuracies and contradictions in Genesis’s description of the physical universe (such as a flat and motionless earth at the center of the universe). This is why many theologians, as well as the doctrines of mainstream churches and synagogues, avoid literal readings of Genesis in favor of metaphorical interpretations.
• Myth: Intelligent Design is a scientific theory that has detected scientific evidence of God. It is a legitimate scientific rival for the theory of evolution.
• Fact: Intelligent Design is a non-biblical form of creationism that avoids overtly religious references but posits an unnamed master “designer” by claming certain features in biology — particularly DNA and the complex molecular “machines” inside living cells — appear to have been designed, in the same way humans design software and complex devices. Because it posits a supernatural process — an intelligent designer fashioning life and the universe — it falls outside what is conventionally considered the realm of science, which is generally defined as the search for natural explanations for natural phenomena. This is why evolution is a scientific idea, while Intelligent Design is seen by many as a religious idea.
• Myth: the modern Intelligent Design movement was conceived by scientists to further human knowledge and understanding.
• Fact: The modern Intelligent Design movement was conceived by a lawyer in order to overthrow evolutionary theory and bring God “back” to public school classrooms.
• Myth: The teaching of evolution in public schools has undermined belief in God.
• Fact: Only one fifth of Americans believe humans evolved from earlier species.
• Fact: Sixty-four percent of Americans are creationists (meaning they believe humans were created directly by God, as in the biblical Genesis).
• Fact: About half of Americans believe God created the Earth and all life less than ten thousand years ago.
• Fact: A majority of Americans — including President Bush — believes evolution, intelligent design, and creationism should all be taught in public schools equally.
• Fact: The more educated a person is, the more likely that person will accept the validity of evolution and reject creationism (65 percent of Americans who attended graduate school believe evolutionary theory is scientific and well-supported by the evidence; 52 percent of those with bachelor’ degrees accept evolution; 20 percent of Americans with high school educations or less believe evolutionary theory is well supported by the facts).
• Fact: 98 percent of scientists in the nation and world accept scientific evidence that the earth is four billion years old and that primitive life first appeared on the planet three billion years ago.
• Fact: A majority of Americans who reject evolutionary theory as invalid have no clear or accurate understanding of what it is they are rejecting.
  

  *There is, of course, no doubt that gravity exists, but the understanding of how and why it effects space and time is surprisingly incomplete when it comes to laboratory evidence. For instance, the existence of gravitational waves is predicted by gravitational theory, but despite determined efforts by physicists for many years, such waves have never been directly detected. Evolution, on the other hand, has been observed directly in the laboratory and in nature innumerable times.

Monkey Girl - Evolution, Education, Religion, And The Battle For America's Soul

I just started reading Edward Humes' book Monkey Girl about the trial in Dover, Pennsylvania which centered around a young earth creationist led school board trying to teach ID in science class while also attempting to pressure science teachers into irresponsibly implying that evolution is less of an accepted scientific theory than it actual is. These teachers were told to focus on the gaps in the fossil record, the questionable aspects of the theory. Make sure the kids know that it is 'just a theory' rather than truthfully teaching that it is one of the three most proven theories in science to date (along side Newtonian mechanics and germ theory).

The book is difficult to read because it delves very personally into the creationist's motivations and ways of thinking, but it's also something that should be read. It's very easy to have a belief and to disregard those who don't share your beliefs as idiotic or willfully ignorant as a whole with little more motivation for their fears beyond an irrational fear of a vengeful sky daddy. While I feel like this is essentially true, I think that it's important to understand the true weight of that fear and to at least try to put yourself on the other side of the argument as much as possible.

I'm not talking about apologetics - I don't think these people deserve to re-define science, re-write history, or turn the world into some kind of one-religion theocracy simply because they're scared and we should feel sorry for them. I do, however, feel like I belong to the same race as they do and that they at least deserve my compassion. I want to understand creationists and IDers better because I truly don't understand them at all.

We see them as kooks, willfully ignorant simpletons, power hungry indoctrinators, etc. They see us as arrogant, tools of the devil, willfully defiant children of a shared creator, etc. While those labels fit the bill some of the time on either side, most religious people are not moronic sheep with cult mentalities and most atheists or people with similar humanist beliefs are not evil minded snobs. We're all people and we have different conclusions brought about by different experiences in our lives.

I recognize in myself an unshakable belief and understanding of science and evolution and I have said that it would most likely take god himself descending from the sky to make me re-consider my lack of belief in a god or gods. I know that there are some religious people that feel the exact same way about their beliefs - an unshakable belief. My beliefs are rooted in science and logic and because of that, I feel that my beliefs are far closer to the truth than religious beliefs which are rooted in faith and spirituality. What I often forget is that there are plenty of people who feel that faith and spirituality supersede logic and reason. In the minds of people who oppose my beliefs, they are just as correct as I am.

At the end of the day, I still feel that religion is pretty obviously a sham. The Bible was a work of fiction written by entirely mortal men without any divine intervention. God is an outdated human invention to explain things we previously didn't and in some cases still don't understand. Religion was at first a means to explain and then a means to control. However, I do feel that the only way people are going to ever really be able to move past this divide between belief and lack of belief is if we try to look at one another as part of the same whole. The ID side may not ever be able to do that since a lot of their beliefs push them to reject non-believers as an entirely evil and dangerous influence outright, but that doesn't mean I have to do the same in return.

This book is a hard read because it does a very good job of showing the human side of the creationist movement without apologizing for their actions or even offering excuses for their way of thinking. It simply shows them as they are - passionately dedicated people who truly believe in their view of reality at the expense of everything else. If I honestly held a real fear in my heart that my darling son might be damned to an eternal torturous hell for believing in evolution, I can't say that I wouldn't act similarly to the folks who tried (and failed) to force a curriculum which would diminish the scientific importance of evolution - regardless of what anyone else on Earth had to say.

Ray Comfort Pamphlet: Americans Blame Hot Dogs for Increase in Cancer

The other day my sweetie was cleaning out our car, a Subaru WRX, when a guy with a painted on smile came up and struck a conversation with him.

Painted On Smile: Nice car man. I saw a thing on YouTube where they showed you how these things are made. Cool machine.

Sweetie: Thanks! Yeah, I wanted to get an STI but this is an '03 and they didn't import STI's from Japan that year...

POS: Yeah, I like the color, that's a Subaru specific color isn't it?

S: Yeah, it's the slightly darker yellow.

POS: Cool. Hey man, I have this brochure I want to give you. Is that cool?

S: (pause) Uh...yeah. Ok, I guess.

POS: (hands Sweetie a pamphlet with the words "AMERICA AMERICA" printed on the front with a crudely disintegrated American flag on the front, bad photoshop job) Cool man, later.

(Sweetie watches man as he walked over to a Ford Bronco two vacuums down)

POS: (to Bronco owner) Nice car man. I saw a thing on YouTube where they showed you how these things are made. Cool machine...

And thus the YouTube proselytizer moved along, tricking proud car owners into seemingly friendly conversations about their vehicles and feigning human interest for no other reason than to litter the minds and/or ground with his ridiculous message.

The pamphlet is produced by this website - the Ray Comfort site! Yay! I feel like my sweetie was confronted by the circus clowns of the conversion circuit.

The pamphlet begins...

See if you can spot the odd one out: earthquakes, floods, droughts, cancer, AIDS, terrorism, war, hurricanes, God's blessing, tornadoes.

I'm sorry, but I can't spot the odd one out - all of those things can be considered or have the potential to be terrible, life threatening occurrences.

Of course "God's blessing" is the oddity.

Oh, because that's made up and the rest of the things on that list are actual eventualities, right?

The pamphlet goes on in the normal, moronic way they usually do - earthquakes happen because you masturbate, god's mad at you for wanting an X-box, And evidently, we're all blaming cancer on hot dogs:

Meanwhile, despite our national sins, a blind and mystified world points to everything from coffee to hot dogs as the reason for the increase in cancer.

Wait, what? I personally have never blamed a single beverage or ballpark delicacy for the raise in cancer. I may have attributed the rise in cancer diagnosis with technological advances in recognizing cancer in earlier stages or possibly a rise in cancer coinciding with the large baby boomer generation reaching a collective age at which cancer tends to develop, but I never blamed coffee. I'm a Seattleite - coffee isn't the cause baby, it's the cure.

Let's skip to the part where we're all a bunch of powerless shits:

Don't be fooled into thinking you can clean up your life. No "good" you do can wash away your sins - only God's mercy can do that.

That sounds a biiiiit...culty. Sorry, but that sounds like a manipulation tactic often used by cults to recruit wanton followers. Step one, convince the person they're a piece of shit. Step two, tell them they can be less of a shit if they follow your religion/god/vitamin regime/etc. Why should you care, you ask? You asshole atheist bastard, you? Well...

The Bible says, "God commended His love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." When Jesus died on the cross, He stepped into the courtroom and paid the fine for us. His suffering was necessary to satisfy the Law you and I violated.

So by simply being born - my creation being an unexpected byproduct of my parents sexual fulfillment with one another - I violated a law? Sorry, I violated a Law? No. I was simply born. Born into a world innocent and without any positive or negative marks on my score sheet. Not to get all sentimental mommy here, but I can't fathom how anyone who has ever had a child or has held a baby for that manner could look at that little person and see a horrible sinner who has violated anything beyond its own diaper.

The end of the pamphlet is what really reveals the extent of the absurdity this publication is promoting:

If you care about America, if you care about the children of America...if you care about your eternal salvation, tell God you are sorry for your sins...

In the words of Helen Lovejoy - Oh won't someone PLEASE think of the children?!?

I am thinking of the children, Ray - that's precisely why I am as outspoken as I am AGAINST this kind of self hating religious propaganda bullshit. In the recycle bin you go!

And a note to the YouTube proselytizer that slipped this worthless bit of American flag laden garbage into my sweetie's hands - he really thought you were a nice guy who wanted to talk cars with him. When he discovered you were lying to him just to throw him off and get him to take your culty pamphlet, it hurt his feelings. Way to add to the ever growing stereotype of the American asshole christian.

Reconciling Self Deception By Way Of Self Deception

I occasionally read christian blogs and news feeds just to see what those wacky sky worshipers are up to and to give myself some perspective. Most of what I read is generally polite and interesting and even if I don't agree with it, I at least learn a thing or two from what I've read. Today I ran across a book review on christianity today that I felt was interesting to a certain point. I feel like this is indicative of what I usually encounter on these sites - logic, logic, logic, god. And god is almost always the dead end.

The book which was being discussed was I Told Me So: The Role of Self-Deception in Christian Living by Gregg A. Ten Elshof. Pontification aside, the point of the book as explained by the reviewer seems sound and applicable to anyone, not just those of the christian faith:

The abilities that contribute to self-deception are not wrong in themselves. People go wrong when they use their deceiving abilities to convince themselves that they are better than they actually are: "If I'm not so bad, I don't have to change."

Makes sense and in all honesty this is a pretty basic point. Self deception (they cite setting your alarm ahead 15 minutes so that you don't wake up late as an example) is not always bad, it's only destructive when the self decption results in a negative impact on yourself or others which is additionally somehow rationalized by the person inflicting the damage as not their fault or concern. The book evidently reconciles this by stating the following:

How does one avoid self-deception's negative effects? Ten Elshof offers several helpful strategies: Recognize that everyone does it, put real plans into action that prevent the need to deceive oneself, welcome honest and diverse feedback, and ultimately, seek the Holy Spirit's guidance to reveal the truth.

This bothers me. As an atheist I see the whole 'holy spirit' figure as a kind of self deception, so in essence this author is suggesting that the negative effects of self deception can be avoided by participating in...more self deception.

I understand that religious people don't see their myth the same way I do and for them this seeking out of the holy spirit is something so real to them it can't possibly be categorized as self deception in the same way rationalizing cheating or lying is, but essentially the rationalizing of a lie is performed by having a conversation with yourself. I can't see the whole looking to the holy spirit for guidance thing as anything more than just another conversation with yourself, only in that instance you're not only mulling something over in your own head, you're additionally pretending that your own head is something far more grandiose (and therefore more worthy of consideration regardless of how crazy the end result of the conversation may be) than yourself. That kind of make believe seems far more dangerous to me than any reality based self deception out there.