| "Shopping for God" by James Twitchell |
  Book Review by ESVA
Originally Posted @ Lady Book Notes
James Twitchell, a professor of English and advertising, spent more than two years researching and writing his account of the USA’s recent rise in religiosity. He notes that consumerism is deeply ingrained in American culture and that American religion has not escaped its effects. In fact, as Twitchell demonstrates, American religion played a role in shaping American consumerism. Thus, the phrase “shopping for God” is literal as well as metaphorical. Twitchell visited dozens of churches and interviewed scores of pastors and churchgoers to discover what churches are selling and what religious consumers are buying. The result is an engaging book that offers substantial insights into both American religion and consumerism.
Twitchell opens by citing the intersections and interactions between American religion and popular culture. It was once the norm that celebrities said little about their religious beliefs. Nowadays, celebrities flaunt their faith. Few, if any, Americans are not aware of Mel Gibson’s Catholicism, or Tom Cruise’s Scientology, or Richard Gere’s Buddhism, or George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton’s Methodism. And religion pervades movies and television. Most Americans have viewed, repeatedly, such “sword and sandal” epics as The Ten Commandments and Ben Hur. Throughout the 1990s, Touched By an Angel was one of the most popular shows on television. And TV news shows, such as Dateline, frequently do special features on religion. You can’t even escape from religion in your car, unless you keep the radio off, because most programming on the AM band is religious. And guess what subject ranks second only to pornography in Internet popularity? Religion is even ubiquitous in print media. In 2004, Americans spent $3.7 billion on Christian books and related merchandise (sometimes called “holy hardware” or “Jesus junk”). Is it any wonder that the subtitle of Twitchell’s book is: how Christianity went from in your heart to in your face? Religion is everywhere in America these days. Keep Reading...
|
|
| "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins |
 Book Review by ESVA
Originally Published @ Lady Book Notes
Yet Another Review of The God Delusion
In the year since its initial release, millions of people have read The God Delusion. Some have echoed Michael Shermer in hailing it “not just as an important work of science, but as a great work of literature.” Others have sided with H. Allen Orr in deeming it a “badly flawed” book in which Dawkins “makes a far from convincing case” for his opposition to religion. My view lies somewhere between these two extremes. The God Delusion is not Dawkins’ best book. In fact, it may be his worst (even so, Dawkins at his worst is immeasurably superior to most of us at our best). While his scientific discussions are, as always, insightful and illuminating, his philosophical and theological shortcomings are clear. Nevertheless, The God Delusion is a book that should be taken seriously by religious believers and non-believers alike.
Dawkins describes himself as a religious non-believer, a position that he also ascribes to Einstein, Sagan and Hawking – lofty company, indeed. Since theists are often quick to claim that Einstein was a theist too, Dawkins cites several passages from Einstein’s letters and other documents to refute their claim. Dawkins contends that Einstein was a deist, or perhaps a pantheist, but certainly not a theist. This is important because, as far as Dawkins is concerned, there is no room in the cosmos for a deity of the sort postulated by most theologians, particularly those of the three major Abrahamic religions. He states at the outset that he does accept the idea that religious ideas should be politely excused from critical scrutiny, nor does he accept Stephen Jay Gould’s notion that science and religion are two realms of “non-overlapping magisterial” of human inquiry. Dawkins uses The God Delusion to make his case for both of these claims. Keep Reading...
|
|
| Spirituality Without Superstition |
  Originally published at Skepchick.
There are many sources of spirituality; religion may be the most common, but it is by no means the only. Anything that generates a sense of awe may be a source of spirituality. Science does this in spades.
-- Michael Shermer, The Soul of Science
I am an atheist, a person with a naturalistic world view, free of supernatural, metaphysical, and paranormal forces. Can I understand what it means to be spiritual? Can I write about spirituality? Can I claim to be a spiritual person? I was recently challenged to think about these questions when I attended a reading of at the in Las Vegas.
For many people, the word spiritual is closely tied to the concept of religion and the belief in a personified God, a father figure looking out for his children as he reigns in heaven. For others, the word spiritual brings up images of the New Age movement, séances, auras, Tarot cards, and crystal energy. Still others think of Zen Buddhism, meditation, yoga, the Tao Te Ching, and other Eastern traditions. Yes, people following these paths do consider themselves to be spiritual. But that does not mean that those of us who are skeptics and brights cannot dip into the well of spirituality to quench our own thirst for mystery and meaning. Keep Reading...
|
|
| From Fundy to Orthodox to Apostate |
  By leopardus
My upbringing was entirely Protestant. My family were good Protestant “churchians” (people who go to church regularly 'cause that's what good folk do). The faith, such as it was, was just cultural really. I did know some real Christians (all Protestant) and I admired them but I wasn't one of them any more than the rest of my family.
Somewhere around 14 or 15 years of age I realized that the religion I’d been brought up with was largely dead, worthless, and meaningless, so I stopped going to church. That lasted about four or five years. During that time my parents somehow started taking the faith more seriously. When I was 19 they asked me if I'd like to come along to church with them. They had a good reason. The preacher, they told me, was a very good speaker who made sense and was logical. Now a sensible, logical, interesting, skilled speaker in a church was a whole new concept to me. I just had to see it to believe it. So I went.
Sure enough the man lived up to his reputation. In fact I was so interested that I went back a few times. Then my parents told me there was a youth group full of interesting, intelligent, lively guys and gals my age. So I went there too. And they lived up to their billing.
With time and study and being around Christians a lot, I began to learn about the faith and to grow in it and like it. It wasn't all smooth sailing. I went to bars more than a few times. During my first college semester away from home I stopped going to church or studying the Bible entirely. Then I got into another group of dynamic, growing, dedicated young people. This new group helped me learn to study the Bible systematically and to develop a full theology that affected all of my life. In essence I learned then that the faith had to be practiced every day not just Sunday. Keep Reading...
|
|
| Ethiopia and the Ark of the Covenant |
  The Ark of the Covenant, like many artifacts sought after because of Biblical speculation, is shrouded in mystery. According to the Book of Exodus, God commanded Moses to have the Hebrews build the ark as a communication device between God and Moses (Ex. 25:9-10). Contemporary references such as in Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) have focused on such powers as the source of fanatical treasure searching. There are many theories about the fate of the Ark of the Covenant, of which the majority revolve around its transportation to Egypt and beyond or a secret location in Israel in which the Ark was hidden away prior to the Babylonian conquest. One such theory that is particularly intriguing is the Ethiopian legend. The Ark is only a small part of Ethiopia’s long and peculiar legend and history associated with both Judaism and Christianity.
The Ark of the Covenant is said to contain the “testimony” of God’s covenant with the Hebrews (Dt.31:26), a golden jar with manna and the rod of Aaron (Ex. 16:32-34, Heb. 9:4). However, 1 Kings 8:9 states that the only contents of the Ark were the two tablets of stone. The Ark, even from its Biblical record, is concealed in smoke and mirrors as High Priests themselves, notably the first one, Aaron, were only allowed to see the Ark on specific days. The Ark was covered when carried among the Hebrews and hidden in the Holy of Holies. This Biblical account of the Ark of the Covenant follows its many journeys from the wanderings of Egypt to the “Promised Land” of Palestine. The Ark of the Covenant was the subject of many narratives throughout the Tanakh, including its capture by Israel’s nemesis, the Philistines. It was not until the 6th century BCE that the Ark disappeared from the Biblical records when the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem. Consequently, the Ark then became an artifact of legend comparable to the Holy Grail. Keep Reading...
|
|
| "Parenting Beyond Belief" ed. by Dale McGowan |
 Book Review by ESVA
Originally Published @ Lady Book Notes
This book, written from an explicitly atheistic perspective, is unlike many other books about parenting that are available throughout the USA. The editor states that “There are scores of books on religious parenting. Now there’s one for the rest of us” (p. x). In spite of its clearly non-religious posture, this book is not intended to denigrate religion and its practitioners. In fact, McGowan observes at the outset that “religion has much to offer parents: an established community, a predefined set of values. . .comforting answers to big questions, and consoling explanations to ease experiences of hardship and loss” (p. x). Nevertheless, McGowan and many others believe that there are compelling benefits to raising children outside of religious traditions. This book is intended to assist such parents.
The book is divided into nine chapters, each of which is comprised of an introduction by the editor and writings from various authors, many of whom identify themselves as freethinkers. These authors include philosophers, scientists, two Unitarian Universalist ministers, a former Pentecostal minister, a comedian and several others. The chapters address such issues as religious literacy, parenting in a mixed secular/religious marriage, good and bad reasons for belief, celebrating religion-free holidays, developing moral values, coping with death and consolation, developing critical thinking skills and habits, and building secular communities. McGowan and several other authors agree that this final task, building communities, is the one at which freethinkers, in stark contrast to religious adherents, have been least successful. Keep Reading...
|
|
| "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe |
|
 Book Review by Ebon Musings
Original Published @ Ebon Musings
Biochemist Michael Behe's 1996 book Darwin's Black Box is, to a significant extent, the fulcrum and rallying point of the modern "intelligent design" movement. Partially this is because his book is one of the few ID works that contain any genuinely original material, and therefore others tend to rely on him (the work of other prominent supporters of ID, such as William Dembski, is entirely dependent on Behe's argument, and Behe's claims regarding the bacterial flagellum have become iconic to ID), but also because Behe is one of the very few advocates of intelligent design who possesses any relevant scientific credentials whatsoever. Although the movement is awash with lawyers, mathematicians, philosophers and theologians, ID supporters who actually have academic degrees in evolutionary biology or some related field are conspicuously lacking. By contrast, the National Center for Science Education was able, in a very short time and with no advance notice, to put together a list of hundreds of practicing, qualified scientists who unequivocally support evolution - all of whom are named Steve. Of course, scientific disputes are ultimately decided by the evidence, not by appeals to authority, but it is nevertheless telling that advocates of ID have attracted so little support from precisely that group that is best positioned to judge the quality of their arguments. Although Behe is at best a drop in the bucket against this trend, he has been lionized by the creationist community. It is therefore worthwhile to show that even his work, despite his legitimate degree, contributes nothing to the cause of overturning evolution. As I said, scientific disputes are ultimately decided by the evidence, and the evidence shows that Behe's argument does not hold up. Keep Reading...
|
|
 By marie
"Oh God, you are my God, and I will ever serve you..."
I grew up singing all the lame-ass church songs that you know are lame at the time, but you are too afraid of eternal condemnation to even whisper a critical comment about them. I grew up with church leaders who seem like they are bitchy and judgmental and the only place they can criticize others without it being a sin is to pick on kids in youth group. I have been to summer camps, winter camps, mission trips, water-ski trips, watermelon seed spitting contests, paint-balling, pizza parties, pool bashes, and bible jeopardy extravaganzas galore. When I was in 4th grade, I made sure to memorize as many bible verses as possible so I could get the prize of a giant strawberry lip-smacker or fun-size Butterfinger. I wore dresses to church which I hated, I tried to fake sick to get out of church at least once a month. I have done all that a young evangelical can do between the ages of 1 and 21...everything that is, except think for myself.
I was pretty brainwashed until I was 18. My best friend and I secretly hated church and would goof off all we could and make fun of everyone because we thought we were cooler...but essentially I was under the spell. I was terrified of sin and anyone who sinned. I was freaked out by homosexuals or homeless people, I thought that divorced women were bad, that non-Christians who rode their bikes on Sunday instead of church, deserved an eternal pit of fire. I wasn't a bad person, I was just overexposed to the church and God. Keep Reading...
|
|
| From Gospel Preacher to Good Atheist |
By Joe E. Holman
Originally Published at Minister Turns Atheist
My Early Years
Growing up, I was a typical American kid. I had a brother and a sister, a loving mom and dad, and we were taught to believe in Christianity, America's status quo faith. Mom and dad were not religious fanatics, but they were mild fundamentalists who believed that Christianity was the only way and that no one could have the highest morality without belief in the Christian God. I swallowed this philosophy hook, line, and sinker from day one, though I didn't become a baptized believer until my eighteenth birthday.
I was converted for the same reason that many others were -- I was at a time in my life when I needed emotional and psychological support. I had fought my own battles with depression growing up, but when Christianity came along, that was the end of my singing the blues! Finding something to believe in is a big part of the psychological make up of the individual. I had also just fallen out of a relationship with a girl and this made me begin to "look upward" for help like I'd never done before. I was a party-goer, by and large, but I knew that someday, I would have to give up my selfish life and become a part of what I was taught God told me to do -- to be baptized and live as a Christian. I remember how it felt to start looking for answers in the bible and pray like I never had before. I was a changed man at my conversion one cold February morning in 1994. What I felt Christ did for me was all too apparent in my mind. I decided to live for him since he gave so much for me, and I was so thankful that I had escaped the eternal flames of Hell that awaited me for my former lifestyle's conduct! From then on, my life would change in ways I never imagined. Keep Reading...
|
|
| "The Case for Christianity" by C.S. Lewis |
 Book Review by HeIsSailing
The Case for Christianity is a series of transcribed radio talks given by CS Lewis during WWII, and edited together with additional notes into book form. It is one of three books that ultimately made up his famous apologetic work Mere Christianity.
Reading the book reminded me of some mathematics seminars I used to attend. The speaker would spend great effort in setting up the initial steps of some elaborate proof, only to spend the last 3 minutes of his talk rushing through the rest to get to his conclusion. It is the classic cartoon of a math professor writing “Poof, a miracle occurs here” in the middle of his equation list. Lewis attempts to build the case for Jesus Christ on first principles. The argumentation style is that of a long chain of assumptions and arguments, with one continuously built on the other. The problem with this type of argument is that when any argument or assumption in the chain is shown wrong, or even questioned or doubted, everything else that follows is discredited. If the foundational argument fails, the whole structure collapses and we might as well not read the rest of the book.
Lewis begins his arguments, indeed the first half of the book, with the argument of our moral conscience. He claims that since we have a moral baseline, which seems to be a standard across humanity, that it must have been implanted into us upon creation. Since our moral conscience cannot conceive of the abstract notions of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ unless they exist, they must then exist outside of our selves. Has our moral base been implanted into us, or are we born with it? It is the classic sociological problem of ‘nature versus nurture’, which I am not well versed in. But even if we are born with a moral conscience, is it truly universal? Is right and correct in one culture equally abhorrent in another? Does this moral base exist in the same sense as a universal multiplication table, as Lewis claims? Is this truly evidence of a transcendent creator who implanted that base into every human? I really don't know the answer to this, but they are important questions to consider when reading Lewis’s line of reasoning. The subject of morality without God bores me a little, so any reader who wants to comment on this, please feel free to do so. Lewis spends over half the book establishing this argument, so he needs to move quickly to get from here to the divinity of Jesus Christ. Keep Reading...
|
|
 By athinkingman
Originally published @ A Thinking Man
The summer period marks an important anniversary for me. I used to be an evangelical Christian, and in the summer of 1966, I got 'saved'. I literally came out - I got up out of my seat in front of family and friends at a Billy Graham rally at the age of 13, and decided to follow Jesus. That faith and commitment lasted for a long time, at least until 2000. I was a lay preacher, a pastoral counsellor, a church leader, and a Christian author. I was in hook, line, and sinker. However, over the past 7 years I have slowly abandoned that faith. I wrote in the entry in elsewhere, of my feelings about that and promised to return to the reasons for doing so at some stage. Today seems to be a good day to recount them.
Of course, I know that if my Christian friends were reading this they would say that I am trying too hard. That the fact that I am having to write about it just proves how insecure I am in my new atheism. I would argue that since so many of them ask me about what has happened to me I have had to think things through, for their benefit, and to make sense of the massive change for myself. It didn't happen overnight, and it didn't happen in any neat, logical order, but it has happened, and what is written below is a poor attempt at an explanation after the event. Keep Reading...
|
|
|
| Login |
Not a member yet? Click here to register.
Forgotten your password? Request a new one here.
|
|
| Users Online |
 Guests Online: 2
No Members Online
Registered Members: 119
Newest Member: weemaryanne
|
|
|
