Atheism and Why I’m Talking About It – Part Two

IF YOU HAVEN'T READ PART ONE YOU SHOULD.
So, have you thought about it? Have you determined exactly where you reside on the theistic/gnostic axis? It can be complicated, I know – especially if you have been raised to believe. Or maybe you found it simple and just needed to be prodded into being honest (and this applies to those who find themselves to be true believers as well). I will say that after finding my own theistic address my day-to-day has become a much simpler place; almost as if I have finally washed a dirty pair of eye glasses. A fully transparent lens so to speak. Never in my past have I felt so naturally connected with this world and the people in it. Never in my past have I felt so at peace with my future. Never in my past have I so enjoyed my present. Okay, enough sap.

So how do I classify myself? I have diagnosed myself as an agnostic atheist with "Gnostic tendencies". Essentially, I don't believe in any gods or the supernatural but don't claim to have conclusive proof that they don't exist. My "Gnostic tendencies" stem from the fact that, although I can't claim that I am conclusively certain that no god(s) exists, if I had the luxury of being a career scientist (a la Richard Dawkins) I have little doubt I would declare that I have seen enough conclusive evidence to state that I know this non-existence to be true. I would undoubtedly fall into the Gnostic realm of atheism. For the sanity of all my friends and family (and those who actually choose to read my blog without really knowing me – all two of you) it's a good thing that I am not a scientist. An interesting point I will touch on later is the fact that most atheists thrive on the idea of being proven wrong, as this is the foundation of good science. This is also the root of my unwillingness to state that I am absolutely certain of the nonexistence of the supernatural. Can the same be said of believers? I know, I know – that's fate. I think fate is dangerous but again, more on that later.

Before I begin to explain why I believe (or not believe) what I do, let me share a recent change of heart. If you are reading this you likely know that I generally like to take an irreverent approach to challenging that which I don't believe, like, or respect. However, this topic is too important to me to address it with a "shock" slant. There are enough non-believers out there taking the atom bomb approach to atheist conversion (If you are interested in this approach please do watch The Root of All Evil – Dawkins is brilliant). Don't get me wrong, I hope this post persuades doubting, skeptical, liberal, believers to declare their innate disbelief. However, I also want to acknowledge that I do not wish to disrespect those who are willing to truly open their minds to the possibility of there not being a god only to find that their innate response is to believe. I respect your right to religion and appreciate your dedication to faith. I'll be frank: my targets are those "believers" who are lying to themselves; misinformed; apathetic; pretending; hypocritical; unsure; or scared. I have a particular ire for those who "cherry pick" the elements of their chosen religion that they like while declaring the more outlandish, improbable (i.e. impossible), and often offensive claims to be mere elements of the faith that are meant to be allegorical or ignored.

So, here's my personal rationale for being atheist, which I have a sneaking suspicion will be the rationale of a significant number of people who open their minds, look at the facts, allow their doubts to be investigated, and transform their instinctual beliefs to overt expression. My rationale is far from complex in any way because the scientific, historical, and logical evidence presented to me makes it uncomplicated. Simply put I just do not believe in myths in the literal sense. At the risk of sounding arrogant (which I will talk about later), my intelligence, level of education, and I suppose personality, just do not allow me to believe nonsensical (yet I admit romantic and enjoyable) stories of impossible feats and events. I cannot believe that there are any imaginary figures overseeing our lives and well being. The idea that this figure is also monitoring, policing, and taking note of the quality of my behavior for future postmortem consequences is farcical to me, especially when I review some of the downright offensive and immoral messages he allegedly "spoke" to the authors of his holy books. Let yourself think about that with honesty and then ask yourself if that is something you are willing to believe without evidence.

Okay, here are some myths I want you to think about:

1. Icarus: The Greek dude (son of Daedalus) who attempted to escape from Crete using wings his dad constructed out of wax and feathers. Poor bugger flew too close to the sun and his wings melted. Bye bye Icarus.

2. Poseiden: Created the horse (bet "god" has something to say about that) to impress a chick. His weapon, the trident, is capable of shaking the entire Earth.

3. Zeus: Throws lightening at people.

4. Apollo: Roman guy who holds the daily tasks of harnessing his chariot with four horses and literally driving the sun across the sky.

5. Izanagi: Japanese god who got undressed one day and each piece of clothing that hit the ground transformed into another god.

Most people who claim to belong to any of the Abrahamic religions (the "Big Three": Christianity; Islam; Judaism), and those who are pretending to belong to these religions will tell you that they don't believe these myths to be true. This means that YOU don't believe them. Why? Because they just couldn't happen.

Okay, so consider:

1. Noah: An old man (and I mean old, over 900 years) gathers two of every animal, flea, and gnat onto an arc he built of wood. It is a "love boat", as his purpose is to ensure his "passengers" all have sex.
   
2. Mary: Had a kid without having sex (it is that simple).
   
3. Jesus: Said kid. Walked on water. Came back from the dead. Turned water into wine (I so want to believe this one and, if I am wrong about all this, hope he will forgive me over a glass of water on his return visit).
   
4. Jonah: Got swallowed by a whale where he "hung out" safe and sound for three days and nights (similar to Marlin and Dory in Finding Nemo).
   
5. Moses: Raised his hands and parted a sea. Just like that.
   

Now tell me, what makes these any more believable? Do you really believe any of this? If so, why? There is no rational reason to believe that these things happened. There is no proof. Suggesting that the proof lies in the bible itself means that we have to hold as fact any historical fictional literature that someone claims to be true. Research the history of the Abrahamic religions and you will learn that they were all well "marketed" at a time when the masses needed something to believe in. In other words the "proof" of these fallacies lies in the sheer magnitude of people who have been indoctrinated into these faiths over thousands of years. "If so many people believe it,  it must be true."  It is self fulfilling but certainly not valid. In the words of Dan Gardner, "Truth is not attained by vote."

I'll be back with more reasons to free your mind and conscience, but I figured I'd use the simplest element of my own disbelief as the foundation for my persuasive journey with you: there is just no reason (neither testable evidence nor just plain common sense) to believe that this stuff happened. I wish there was a more eloquent way to put it but the impossibility of these myths occurring in a literal sense is too primitive to paint in an erudite manner. Is it coincidence that these "truths" only occurred during a time when science had not yet explained the many mysteries of the world (which we continue to strive for)? Why aren't people now splitting oceans, walking on water, being born to virgins, and living in the abdomens of animals? Because they can't. They couldn't then and they can't now. My request of you is this: When your intelligence and sense of logic whisper in your ear that these myths are just that, mythical, pay yourself the credit you deserve and stop believing them. At the very least, doubt them and dig deeper.

See you soon. I want to chat about my love of Jesus Christ. Honest.


 

Atheism And Why I'm Talking About It - Part One

I sit here not even knowing where to start. How about  "I'm atheist." Seems a logical genesis to this post (and yes the pun is intended). Yep, I'm an atheist but please don't mistake this declaration as a "coming out." Hell no (yes, another well intended pun). Coming out refers to a painful, risky, and brave announcement that you are not "normal." In spite of the fact that a societal majority (many friends and family included) live under the watchful eye of the "infinitely merciful father" it is neither painful, risky, nor brave to  declare my commitment to reason and free thought. Society currently sits historically at a point where "coming out" is real estate deservedly owned by our gay, lesbian, and otherwise sexually alternative cohabitants. What atheists do share with queers (calm down, "queer" is PC now) is the "abnormal" label. This is fine by me. Most "normal" people are only "normal" because they don't admit what makes them abnormal - but I digress. In my review of all things atheism (yep, "All or Nothing" has reared his ugly head once again) I too often come across declarations of oppression and rights violation by atheists who feel the theistic majority is preventing them from living a normal life. To these cry baby atheists (an actual sect within my cult) I say shut your pie-holes. The plight of the atheist in 2010 is quite comfortable. Exciting in fact. Which leads to the purpose of this post.

I hate evangelism. I really do. I live my life my way. If I am interested in your way you'll surely hear from me. Otherwise, get off my step, stop calling, and stick your pamphlet up your ass. Yet, there has never been a cause that I feel so compelled to proliferate than the message of atheism. I am aware of the level of hypocrisy that is about to occur - fuck it. Seeing that I am only human (humanist in fact) and there is no hell I feel quite comfortable being a hypocrite. Unlike the true believer (more on that later) I don't have to worry about an eternal afterlife in a sea of flames. All I have to worry about is some of you calling me hypocrite. I can call each of you as bad or worse so who cares? I also donated 600 beer and wine bottles to a local minor hockey bottle drive this morning  so I ain't all that bad. A tad alcoholic but certainly not immoral.

So, where was I. Oh yeah, why you all need to come to the bright side. How arrogant. But seriously, it's time for people to stop, put down their chosen sliver of technology, go to their room, close the door, and ask some questions. "Do I believe in god?" "Do I just say I do because everyone around me does?" "Do I believe the bible is a true story or do I think it is a fictional book of fables that tells us how to best lead a good life?" "Do I really believe that Mary had Jesus without having sex?" "Do I really think that Noah was over 900 years old and was able to gather two of every organism onto one boat to have sex?" I could go on but the purpose of this post is not to mock the bible - although I do find it fun and if you come to enjoy the same I can point you in the direction of some great websites that illustrate the countless contradictions and blatant hypocrisy.

Here's my point (sometimes it takes a while). It's time for everyone to determine where they stand on the theistic continuum. Are you a true believer - a gnostic theist? Or maybe an agnostic theist? Yes, you can believe in god but be agnostic. I bet most people didn't know this - I didn't. Let's  review the possibilities shall we?

Theism: What a person believes to be true.
Theism refers to what a person believes to be true in terms of the existence of a god or deity. A theist will state that she believes in god while an atheist will state that she does not believe there is a  god.

Gnosticism: What a person knows to be true.
Gnosticism refers to what a person knows to be true in terms of their belief. When speaking about the knowledge of an existence of a god, a gnostic claims to have a knowledge of what they believe to be true. This continuum has nothing to do with what either person actually believes but rather whether or not they claim that they know their belief to be true.

I am assuming that most of you are starting to see that this can be a bit complicated when we tinker with the possibilities:

The gnostic theist is the person who states that they believe in god and have proof that he/she/it exists.
The agnostic theist is the person who believes in god but accepts that there is no proof behind this belief.


The gnostic atheist is the person who does not believe in gods and claims to know that this non-existence is true.
The agnostic atheist is the person who does not believe in gods but does not claim to know for certain that they don't exist.

The key is to remember that the gnostic part applies to the specific belief of the person. For example, an agnostic atheist is not a person that doesn't believe in god because there is no proof of one. He is a non-believer who openly admits that there is no conclusive evidence that no god exists (although it may be the wealth of evidence - albeit inconclusive - against the existence of god that leads him to not believe) . Essentially, the agnostic will always claim that there is no conclusive proof of what he or she believes but they choose to believe anyway. The gnostic is more likely to be the evangelist: the person who has a belief and claims to have the evidence of it. The funny thing is, in my opinion, you can't prove either however the burden of proof should always be on the existence of something not the non-existence of something. But again, more on that later.

So, I will leave you with this morsel. Take some time to figure out where you stand. I am not going to lie, future posts on this topic will take a persuasive tone. However I must state two important points:

1. If you are reading this and choose to read "Part Two" I am not the moron who knocks on your door, calls you at 5pm, or leaves pamphlets in your mailbox.
2. Atheism is based on skepticism and we are always willing to explore the inexplicable and admit where our beliefs have weaknesses. I hope you can do the same, regardless of your gnostic and theistic slant.

Chat soon.

So, Soccer......what's up with that?

So every nation north, south, east, and west of North America is blowing a vuvuzela right now. The game that everyone but us “New Worlds” calls football completely consumes this planet. And unlike Canadians' quad-annual interest in its impoverished biathletes, “the beautiful game” is the obsession of the globe’s 193 other nations every minute of every day of all three years between the incredible spectacle of World Cup. I have made the odd fleeting attempt to get into the game in the past but each time other interests stole my attention. However, I can’t say that it was because I didn’t enjoy the time I did spend watching soccer. It was just the wrong sport at the wrong time. But this time things will be different. I am going to “engage” in the frenzy - and I’m going to take you along for the ride. Because here’s the deal: I’m a self-proclaimed sports nut and how can a sports nut not know anything about the world's most "beautiful" sport? I can sit down and confidently carry my weight during any conversation about North America’s traditional sports. Basketball? Forget it, I’ll kick your ass. Hockey? I never played it but I listen to sports talk radio in Ottawa and let me just say they use the word “sports” in “sports talk” liberally. It's a hockey station – plain and simple. This includes 30 minutes of Pierre McGuire every morning from 8:00 – 8:30. Ironically my morning commute is 30 minutes starting at 8am. You get the point. Baseball? Got it covered. MMA? I don’t watch it regularly but I follow, and enjoy, the "sports opera" of it all. Football? I think the CFL is a joke and spend Monday nights at the local pub enjoying the theatre of the National Football (they don't even use their foot) League. Golf? It's simple: Tiger's a skank. NASCAR? Okay, I don't quite get this one but I don't believe in god and have attended university so cut me some slack.

Quite simply I love the field of competition and I think it's about time I include the world's most popular sport in my lexicon.

So what is my strategy to, at the age of 37, add footy to my ever growing list of sporting interests? Well, true to my nickname, "All or Nothing", I have taken a head-first plunge into all things soccer, ahem, football. Here goes:
1. Come Autumn, I have decided to identify Saturday mornings as my "daddy time" (defined as 3-4 hours where daddy gets to do whatever the hell he wants free of daddy-like commitments) when English Premier League starts. Yep, I will be sporting my team's colours (read on) and walking down to the local pub on Saturday mornings to meet some new friends and imerse myself in British football culture. I plan on going alone so as to be forced to strike up conversations with the fanatics that I see lined up there every Saturday morning wearing those tattered old soccer scarfs. Which leads me to....
2. I have chosen a team and bought the garb. Yep, my nickname is well deserved. Prior to watching a single match, I have decided that the Arsenal Gunners will be my team. What is this based on? Well, if I am to be honest, I have used a technique employed by women every March during NCAA March Madness office pools: I have chosen the team with the coolest name and "outfits" (referred to as "kits" for those of us who know anything about football). Yep, the Arsenal Gunners. Tell me that isn't the coolest name you have ever heard. And check out their logo:

A fucking canon. Love it. Oh, and by the way, the most visited Arsenal blog is called "Arse Blog" - come on - you love them too.

So, I went and bought a "kit" at the local soccer store. It is actually at the end of my street - this was meant to be. Then, in a bit of a drunken ebay impulse, I bid on a "Gunners" (Brits refer to Arsenal fans as "Gooners" - again, how could I resist?) scarf (for $0.99) and a brand new Gooners warm up jacket. Again, this is fate - I won them both. So come August 14, when my (and they are my team) Gunners take on the Liverpool Reds, I will be lined up at the Georgetown Pub wearing my kit, scarf, and jacket eager to meet some fellow "Gooners" and begin my journey to becoming a real footy fanatic.

Check in regularly for my outsider's (becoming insider) take on everything footy. If I can tell a bird by its song (refer to my last fleeting obsession: birdwatching) I can certainly figure out this offside business.

Goooooooaaaaaaaaalllllllllllll