The fellow holding the afternoon program yesterday (which was about who the ‘boss’ is in the home – guess who they concluded it is) alerted us to one of the greatest tragedies of our time – newlywed young Christian women who are coerced by their new husband into giving anal and oral secks using the rhetoric that he is the head of the marriage and should be obeyed. But the tragic part for him wasn’t the coercion part of it or the stupid, harmful rhetoric used to justify it, but the fact that the young maidens are being made to perform “unbiblical” acts. What’s happening here is indeed a tragedy, buy not nearly for the reason the clueless fool gave.
A woman in this situation is doubly the victim, and the perpetrator is not only the husband forcing her to do something she does not want, but the system that has so narrowed her sexual horizons in this manner. The type of upbringing that Adventists receive and the sex education (or abject lack thereof) they receive completely fails to convey the beauty and adventure of the act, instead filling anything that does not fit into their narrow view of what is acceptable (heterosexual intercourse in the missionary position, preferably for the purposes of procreation, the sick, sick bastards) being filled with shame. There’s a lot of blabber about sex between two married people being a beautiful thing without showing any real appreciation of that beauty, or of the fact that sex, in any paradigm in which you prefer to exclusively or non-exclusively define it, can be just plain fun.
To top it off, they close off some of the most amazing sexual experience. “Congress of the mouth” as it is known in the Kama sutra is a wonderful thing for both giver and recipient, and who the hell isn’t up for a little buttsecks every once in a while? And besides, despite what the old fogeys would most fervently like to believe, some of the best hea- no, I think I’ll hold that thought to myself (hint: it involves the very same mouths from which such marvellous melodies are produced during song service every Sabbath. I do not disapprove – quite the opposite. You’re all champions in my eyes, girls ;)
On top of this, I believe the young gent is also a victim in all of this (please bear with me; I’m not making an apologism for rape). Sex is at its best when it is a union between equals (or play-acting dominant and submissive roles). It is a congress of mutual, communal pleasure. It becomes an ugly thing when one party is doing something against their will, is under coercion or duress, is not enjoying themselves to the greatest capacity or is in physical pain (unwanted pain: that distinction is important ;). When such is the case, that one enters the relations with an obvious superiority complex, they prevent themselves from experiencing the full beauty and glory of the act. So the ultimate perpetrator, the one which deserves most of the blame, is the edifice, the structure within which all this brainwashing and the terrible lessons and psychologies it perpetuates. The victims are the precious young minds that have been mentally crucified upon the cross of the previous generation’s ignorance.
(That being said, the folks at this new church know how to put on one hell of a potluck. Numerous side dishes, meat (including god-damned AMANGQINA!!(cow shins & hooves, a local delicacy) and one hell of a dessert to top it off – that has to have been the best potluck of my life thus far!)
[P.S. God damn! It's been more than a year since I last posted here! Well, in that time I've gone through some downs, and more recently a few ups. I was in the doldrums for quite a while, since before I started this blog, in fact. It really intensified last year, and I frankly couldn't find the old creative spark that burned for so short a while. I may not fully be out yet, let's just wait and see. I'm going to be using this blog from now on as a bit of self-therapy. I've put aside the dreams of becoming some black atheist Moses who will bring the Children of Africa out of the darkness of religion. I'll be happy enough just to put my thoughts down in print and out to the world, and maybe discover who I am again. Oh, and also share some of the awesome metal I've got myself acquainted with ;P]
[P.P.S. Update on my personal life: I'm still in the closet. I'm also back home in Zimbabwe, since last year in fact, though I moved to another city this year. University keeps being pushed further back; hopefully I'll be going next year. In the meantime, I'm doing a computer engineering diploma course in the equivalent of an American community college.]
So my parents were playing last week's audio Sabbath School lesson last Friday. It could not be avoided - I had to stick around and listen as well. The title for the lesson was "The God of Grace and Judgment", and it had so many things wrong with it I simply could not pass it up. They did creation/evolution two weeks ago, but they said the same old doo-doo they always say about it. I've covered that before, and I don't want to sound like a broken record criticising the same crap over and over again.
Anyway, the lesson began with an illustration which went thus:
A soldier stood next to an old man about to be executed. He was guilty of being the “wrong” race and religion, nothing more. As the soldier raised his gun, his victim said, “Do you know that there is a God in heaven who sees all this, and who will one day judge you for your actions?”
The soldier then shot the old man dead.
This is, in many ways, a prime example of a secular society. Not a secular government (a government that does not promote one religion over another), but a secular society, one in which there is no higher standard than the rules of the society itself. It’s a society with no sense of transcendence, no sense of a higher authority, no sense of God or of a moral standard greater than anything human. It’s a society where humans take the place of God, a society where the only judgment one faces is the judgment of one’s peers or of one’s own conscience (whatever’s left of it, anyway).
According to the Bible, however, the old man was right: there is a God in heaven, and He knows all things and He, indeed, will bring everything into judgment.
I don't know about you, but I was personally offended when I heard this. I do not see how a person shooting another person who said there is a god is in any way illustrative of a secular society. What if the shooter was serving his own - wait, that is the crux of my argument against this idiotic, piece of crap illustration, I'll get to it later. Let me pick on this first:
It’s a society with no sense of transcendence, no sense of a higher authority, no sense of God or of a moral standard greater than anything human. It’s a society where humans take the place of God, a society where the only judgment one faces is the judgment of one’s peers or of one’s own conscience (whatever’s left of it, anyway).
Well, I suppose anyone who's read this blog before should know where I stand on this - no, there is no transcendence, no higher authority and no god! There is no evidence for any such thing, and sincerely wishing for them will not make them true. That "humans take the place of god" line is a meaningless cheapshot, and the fact is that the only judgement we can ever face is that which society hands down upon us.
I understand why one would wish for more. Some may find
it impossible to face each day without the assurance that the injustices of
this world are ultimately going to be repaid in kind. Human beings can’t see
everything, and not every wrong done is going to be revealed and punished, and
it’s tempting to want to believe there is some entity that exists outside the
timeflow that notices everything and will mete out the punishment mortals were
unable to. But no matter how hard one may wish for it, no matter how hard one
may clap their hands, there facts of this reality will still remain. Instead of
throwing your hands up in the air and running to the insubstantial comfort of
imaginary entities, why not resolve to stand with your fellow human beings and
resolve to work together to root out the injustices and bring the collective
judgement of society down upon them. If you are not part of the solution, you
are part of the problem, standing in the way of the progression towards a more
just society.
The sort of “only God can judge” mentality fostered by the
mindset shown in the above excerpt (note: I am not saying that that is what is
directly espoused in the excerpt, only that it is a natural progression of it,
one which is followed all too many times) has some directly harmful
consequences too. Deep Thoughts catalogues numerous cases every week of sexual
abuse by so-called holy men: pastors, youth leaders and the like. Nearly
always, the most damning thing about these cases is the reaction of the
churches these criminal excuses for human beings led. Instead of co-operating
with authorities, condemning the offenders’ behaviour or even simply
apologising to the victims, they most often choose to maintain total silence,
sometimes even expressing their outright support for the offender and wilfully
hindering the authorities. And this isn’t just the already very well-known and
widely publicised Catholic clergy scandals and subsequent coverups I’m talking about: most of the cases
Mojoey covers are mainline protestant denominations(including Seventh-Day Adventists. Read the comments section of that link). But it’s
all good, hey? God is going to judge them, so what does it matter if they
escape Earthly retribution?
Now comes my real sticking point over this particular
illustration. The author gives the story of the old man being shot for being
“the wrong race and wrong religion” as an example of a secular society.
Question: in which secular society has this ever happened? Each and every time
in history people have been killed for being the “wrong race and wrong
religion” it has been at the hands of another group of religious people who
themselves believed they were doing the bidding of their god. More
particularly, the most prominent example of this which has happened during the
time since firearms were invented is most obviously the Holocaust perpetrated
by the Nazis. Even if it was not the example the writer wished to put forward,
the Holocaust no doubt sprang to the fore of most peoples’ minds due to the
widely spread misconception people seem to have that the Nazis’ philosophies
were atheistic. And yet, as most skeptics and anyone who has properly studied
the history of Nazi Germany will tell you, the Nazis and Hitler himself were,
if not directly religiously motivated, made use of religious propaganda and the churches to stir up hatred for the Jews, the Roma and other “undesirable” minorities.
The fact that the Sabbath School Study Guide’s writer,
Cliff Goldstein is himself Jewish only serves to exacerbate the scale of this
example’s error. It sounds to me very unlikely that Goldstein was unaware of
the facts of what happened during the Holocaust, or of the obvious link to it
people would draw regardless of whether or not he was directly referring to it.
Whichever way one cuts it, this example is, consciously or unconsciously,
slanderously dishonest.
The second issue I have a problem with comes in the study
section for Thursday. In this section, we see this being said:
Looking around at the world, we shouldn’t have a problem
understanding the idea of judgment and condemnation. One doesn’t have to be a
believing Christian to realize that something is radically wrong with humanity.
Who can’t see what a royal mess, even disaster, we’ve made of things? Maybe we
cry so hard at birth because, instinctively, we know what’s coming. “I cried
when I was born and every day shows why,” a poet wrote. Who can’t relate? Who hasn’t
himself or herself been the victim of just how greedy, selfish, and mean people
can be? Or who hasn’t at some point been the greedy, selfish, and mean one?
You know, all sorts of people, from friends to strangers,
Christians, Muslims, so-called “agnostics” and less strident atheists ask me
all the time why I’m so vocal in opposing religion. Simply put, it’s attitudes
as expressed in this excerpt, and various overtones laid throughout the lesson.
The vibe you get from reading it is one of defeatism, of ultimate unfaith in
one’s fellow human beings, the feeling that society is in a downward spiral
from which it can never pull up. Well, first of all, this view of humanity is
factually wrong. Humanity is now as it has ever been: capable of both good and
evil. The decay envisioned by many religious conservatives is in equal parts
imagined and the consequence of greater connectivity and communication. News
travels fast nowadays, and shocking news is by far the most popular and
therefore we tend to hear more about it. We think murder, rape, violence and
sundry other crimes are increasing in frequency because the frequency of which
we hear about them is increasing. And yet, per head, there are fewer people dying
violently today than in previous eras.
The media’s sensationalism is causing
the rise in alarmism,...yet I welcome it. I welcome that we get to hear about
the crimes which were so studiously hidden and never spoken about in ages past.
I welcome it, because it brings them to the light, gives us reason to be
outraged by them. I welcome it because it enables us to see our enemy, so that
we can work to defeat it and to change our circumstances.
And yet, that excerpt tells us that we cannot change
them. It forces on us a spirit of defeatism and complacency, for if only God
can change us, what reason do we have to even try? Why should we work for
global peace and unity if some magic man in the sky is going to wiggle his
fingers and do it for us? That is my greatest gripe with religion, that it
breeds malignant mistrust in those it infects, and that it turns them into the
biggest stumbling block to ever changing the situation we find ourselves in.
I’m not saying that once religion dies the path will be clear, no. Other
sources of herd-mentality intolerance and alarmism will remain, as well as humanity's own capacity for both good and evil, which we probably will never be able to fully banish. But the
mountain in our path will have been worn down and we will be able to glimpse
the brighter future that lies ahead of us.
The natives were fasting yesterday, then went on to have an all-night prayer to sprinkle some Jesus Magic on an upcoming crusade they're holding over the next two weeks (not that kind of crusade. They don't do those anymore - it's just a two week long preach fest, though one has to question the taste of calling them after such a violent era). Needless to say, I participated in neither - I had three full, healthy meals and went on to double-break the Sabbath by splitting a takeout with a buddy, then went home, watched the new Pirates movie (which was terrible) and had a good night's sleep.
The whole affair - the fasting and sleep deprivation, as well as the greater blanket issue of asceticism, smacks of masochism. Dictionary.com defines masochism thusly:
I do believe strongly religious people gain some gratification from their pain, just as much as the more fanatical auto-flagellants do, the difference being that religiously motivated masochists have developed a rationale behind their actions. Those who fast tell me that it gets them closer to god, that they can feel a stronger connection being forged and that their prayers are being heard. Of course, I'd argue that it's more likely the lack of food affecting their brain, but that's just me. Among Adventists (at least locally, anyway) such self-denialist streaks run even deeper than the occasional fast. Especially around older folks, you get the feeling that simply having any sort of fun is wrong. Last Sunday, I was at a friend's birthday party, and the amount of supplication that went on just dazzled me. Before anything had begun, there were pleas for god to forgive everyone in advance for any sins they may commit and a blessing for everyone to enjoy themselves, "but not too much" in case they sinned, then after it all, another prayer for god to forgive everyone's sins, both those they committed "knowingly" and "unknowingly". Frankly, this brings images of an abusive relationship, where one partner is so afraid of angering the abusive partner that they are constantly begging for forgiveness and limiting their activities in order to avoid arousing their ire.
All this is simply another way religion poisons peoples' minds, limiting their view of the world and their enjoyment of life.
**
If this piece seemed a little disjointed, forgive me. I actually watched considerably more than the Pirates movie last night.
In our local Adventist churches, there is always a story told for the children before the main sermon every Sabbath. Usually, these take the form of morality tales that reinforce simple values like kindness and honesty, or retell Bible stories in the form of modern allegories. Occasionally, though, you'll get the miracle stories. Many are innocent enough - "answered prayers" wierd coincidences that are attributed to God and such, but sometimes there'll be truly fantastical ones, which tend for some reason to always be the ones set in rural Africa. The one we ahd last week was one of the former type. It was about a couple of kids who were lost in the bush when they came across a lion. One of them remembers that their mother had told them that they should sing if ever they're cornered by a lion, so they start singing one of the well known hymns and the lion leaves them be. A short while later, some villagers who'd been looking for them arrive at the scene. They remark that they'd been led there when they heard a multitude of voices singing, the implication being that angels had joined the kids and scared the lion away.
"Well, it's just a story," some might say. What's wrong with that? Well, I have no problem with stories. I do have a problem, however, when they're being peddled to children in order to reinforce superstition. We can almost be certain that no such event has ever happened, but a child has no way of knowing that. To a child, everything you tell them is true. Every word is laden with vivid fact and they find it hard to tell what is true, what is allegory and what is pure imagination. Fairy tales also deliver to kids the same type of feeling, one of wonder at things which are not 100% true. Unlike fairytales, however, stories told in a religious setting are reinforced and never revealed outright to be simply imagination conveying a message. In the same breath, children are also told similarly fantastic stories from the Bible, which they are told are 100% infallible truth. Such stories wind up being a tool for crushing minds to better take in religious indoctrination - the child grows up with a stunted ability to tell the difference between fact and fiction, ripe for inculcating with all sorts of superstition, stories of miracles and the like.
Tomorrow, I will talk about the admissibility of stories as evidence, with particular attention paid to miracle stories.
As I was entering church this past Saturday (late as usual), someone was reading Matthew 24:24. I was immediately struck by a new interpretation of it I haven't heard before, and I'm wondering if any serious theologian/pastor has shat it out before. Matthew 24:24 reads:
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
And this got me thinking: the false prophets aren't literally prophets. The signs and wonders are things we're already taking for granted every day: the healing of diseases, increased longevity, technology. I mean, we all know the cause of disease is demonic - the only force outside of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ that can cast out demons is the master of those demonic powers themselves. Only the devil can extend the life of a human being beyond the three score years and ten our Heavenly Father hath allotted us, and the only thing outside of prayer that can allow instantaneous communication? Surely you agree with me - it has to be demonic. Those pictures you see on the television? Demons. You are inviting demonic forces into your house the moment you turn on that infernal device.
The coup de grace of the demonic deception is yet to come (for what prophet of doom worth his salt doesn't make up his own predictions?), in the form of a cure for cancer, HIV and all other of ailments God has poured out as a curse upon the sinners, satanic agents and homos (especially the homos) of this world, brought forth by the ritual demonic sacrifice of unborn children known as embryonic stem cell research and, worst of all (cue dramatic organ music), evolution.
The point of all of this will be to divert the sight of the world from the Lord and get them trusting in their own devices and their new god science. Undoubtedly, science is the greatest force driving skepticism and atheism today and has been driven from its very foundation by a diabolical agenda. You have been warned: do not partake of the forbidden fruits of science, lest you be deceived and pulled into its web as well.
And that also means my favourite reason for rejecting claims of gods, holy books and the supernatural - that science has done just fine without them and gone a long way towards disproving them - is all part of the satanic ploy...
---
P.S. - My official Back to Blogging post is coming later today or possibly tomorrow.
Heard someone try to give a defense of Original Sin last Sabbath. It went something like:
Imagine you catch a thief in the act of breaking into a car. The thief runs away and you remain guarding the car. When the police arrive, would they not be justified in holding you under suspicion? It would be up to you to prove your innocence.
That won't work for one reason in particular: God is meant to be omnipotent, no? The two characters being equated here, the police and the supposedly all-knowing, all seeing, ever just deity, do not possess the same qualities. Given this, we are still left with the image of a vengeful, malicious, short-sighted god.
Original sin is, without a doubt, one of the most repulsive doctrines of Xianity. I have heard it argued by very ordinary, average Christians, that a child born to sinful parents who died at birth or young age would be judged according to its parents' sins and burn, with justification given by the numerous passages in the Old Testament that state that the sins of the fathers are visited upon down to the third and fourth generations. To top it off, I remember once a little debate I had with a lady friend over the morality of God wiping out the entire population of Sodom and Gomorrah. I said that even ascribing to the bigoted view you have ascribed to God that homosexuality is the worst sin imaginable and that the women of Sodom were equally as evil as the men, you simply cannot justify punishing the children as well. Know what she said? The children were evil as well.
And this was a normal, fun loving, otherwise caring and empathetic young woman! She couldn't see beyond the narrow-minded view she had been fed her entire life and see the utter objectionability of what she had just said. This is the same kind of reasoning that causes much emotional suffering and, I believe, permanent scarring to young children who are told that they are essentially evil, and that justifies the abuse and murder of children in Nigeria because they are "witches". This is one of the reasons I am so vehemently against religion and indoctrination.
Last Friday evening I was blindsided, tricked, coerced, fucking ninja'd into presenting on the next day's Sabbath School. It was Family Life Day and my parents are the directors of the church's family life department, so our family was taking the day. As I said, there was no warning, just an announcement around five-thirty that evening. You would not believe how little I cared for that shit. I just sat there doing nothing, almost swearing that this is where it would go down, this is where the gauntlet would be thrown, the buck would stop, the hammer would fall and I would finally come out and tell them just what I believed, whether they liked it or not. But I ended up reasonig "hell, what will it hurt me to pick up some random book and recite some rote piece of bullcrap at the congregation." The rote piece of bullcrap was from Ellen G. White's The Adventist Home.
I picked "Children in the Home" as my topic, reading from Section XI. It basically codifies the Adventist child rearing philosophy. There is a lot in there I can agree with, including the importance of children helping around the home and things like that, but there is a lot I cannot. There is a very strong emphasis on gender roles, for example, but it is an old book, written when such views were universal. Unfortunately, though, a lot of Adventists (most especially here in Africa) still follow its words as law. The importance of "raising children in the Lord" is also heavily emphasised.
So I ended up doing it, and making it quite convincing, too, adding a few interjections of my own. I have discovered that it's quite easy to lie to a bunch of people whose opinion you don't give a flying donkey's ass about. The crunch came when we were expected to fast on that day, but I had breakfast anyway and managed to sneak in a couple of Bar Ones I stretched to satisfy me the whole afternoon.
***
P.S. Please check out the entries for the Astronomican Winter Contest! My fiction entry is somewhere in there. I'm not at liberty to reveal which one's mine yet. Try guess which it is!
I know, I'm posting this a little late, but I had to make some finishing touches on my entry to the fiction competition I'm participating in before the deadline, then when I got round to writing this I had to keep pausing to play some death metal in order to bleed off some of the rage caused by watching the videos I talk about here. This last blessed Sabbath's lesson was one I simply could not pass up the opportunity to comment on. The title was "Self Esteem", and the lesson touched briefly on the issue of origins. Frankly, I wasn't much surprised by the treatment the issue was given, but thought it worthy of mention.
The lesson itself presents the usual strawman of evolution we see from religious sources, using such charming terms as "pure chance", "cosmic accident" and "we just happened to come into existence". Note that it does not even attempt to adress any questions of evidence: all the counterarguments are emoti0nal, mostly focussed on how we eviutionists live purposeless lives and that believing the magic man blew on a pile of mud to make us gives us soooo much more self esteem. The series of lessons is centered on emotions anyway, so I won't hold that against them. It's the validity of the arguments that I have a problem with. (I'll address that later)
The exegeses of the lesson given on the Church's two main media conduits was, however, nothing short of delirious. There are two main programs that go over the lesson every week, one on each of the two major Adventist satellite channels, 3ABN and the Hope Channel, called Amazing Facts Central Study Hour and Hope Sabbath School respectively. I'll start with Central Study Hour.
Origins is addressed only on one day - sunday - one seventh of the total lesson. When Doug Bachelor attacked it, it ended up becoming a rant that took up almost half the lesson time (From the 16:38 mark to38.30). And damn me to the void if there's anyone more adept at building a strawman than Pastor Doug. He began by giving a beautiful, flowery picture of what life as a creation of God is like, so much so that I almost found myself wishing I was one of them (no, I lie. But it sure must have worked on the faithful). Then he proceeded to build up his combustible, very well ventilated man of straw, douse it in petrol and set it alight.
I'm really not swayed by the extreme contrast presented by Pastor Doug. In fact, I can give an even better one supporting and evolutionary perspectie. Here goes:
"Compare that with the other paradigm that says that some invisible magic man made us from dirt and that our first ancestors damned both themselves and all their descendants to a life of misery and death by eating a fruit given to them by a talking snake. It says that we are all sinners from birth and our lives have no purpose but to atone and suffer for that sin, and when you die, depending on if you accepted this far fetched (and I'm being nice here), unverifiable story you will either spend eternity glorifying and praising the magic man who put you in that situation, or if you didn't you will be cast into a lake of burning sulphur to die a horribly painful and final death (the Adventist doctrine on hell)."
There's more to be said about emotional arguments against naturalism and evolution, and I shall adress it later. Pastor Doug then went on to state that belief in evolution correlates with suicide, stating that the high suicide rates observed in adolescents is due to questions regarding origins. I don't think that's entirely correct. It's true, higher suicide rates are observed among those without religious affiliation, but I doubt very much that it's because of evolution. I'm more for the theory that higher suicide and depression rates are the result of a lack of a social support group as is present in religious congregations (pretty much the only thing we secularists need to learn from them). A whole hunch of arguments not really worth rehashing followed, including his own personal story, the argument from design, conflating Nazism and eugenics with evolution, invoking a scientific conspiracy (*facepalm*) and a modified argument from morality (if we are animals, we should act like animals).
There are a couple of other points I do find worth mentioning, though. One is Pastor Doug's assertion that a lot of smart people can be wrong about something. They once were, a few centuries ago, when they worked exclusively from a divine assumption. When they realised that the facts did not support their assumptions they changed their tactics, finding facts to draw assumptions from, instead of trying to find facts to fit with their conclusions. For example, the Old Earth theory was formulated by religious geologists who originally had the intention of finding evidence for a recent, global flood. When they did not fnd that evidence they changed their conclusions to ones that were supported by the facts. (reference)
The second point I found highly ironic. I don't remember the point he was making (and I'm too lazy to hunt for it in the video), but he said something about how prisoners who are so used to a life of crime often relapse after they have been released. I found this to be quite synonymous wiith what happens all too often with religion. A person has taken their first tentative steps towards freedom from religion, but because they are so used to religious life, be it because of vigorous indoctrination and brainwashing, sudden loss of the social framework or simple fondness of tradition they end up falling back into the pit they were trying to crawl out of.
But Derek Morris (who is such a great singer) and his audience didn't dilly around, virtually stating right out that they would ignore evidence for evolution in favor of what the bible says. Morris gave an anectote about a buddy of his who said something to the tune of, "I have some unanswered questions but I choose to believe what the bible says." That wasn't all, though. He went on to say that if God gave us all the answers we wouldn't understand them, and that Jesus will tell us all about it when he comes. This perpetuation of ignorance is why religion still survives. First of all, I will say that evolution does not rely on faith but on evidence, like any other science. There will always be uncertainties, but they are not simply left as is but actively researched into and ironed out. That's how science in general works, and if you are going to reject evolution, you might as well reject the rest of it as well. Second, I want to ask, if we must simply accept things on faith without giving mind to evidence, what's to stop me from going to any of the other religions that exist? What's to stop me from simply adopting a pantheistic religiosity that gives equal credence to all religions? According to all indicators, Christianity is simply another religion thought up and written by men and with the same shortcomings as all other religions. Therefore, I say there must be some more objective way of determining these things, and empiricism is that way.
Then came the actual Sabbath School on Saturday morning. In contrast to the "pros" the section was given just the time it deserves, but the reactions were no less extreme, if a little less informed. I heard such genius gems as: "God spoke. Monkeys don't speak. Therefore we did not come from monkeys", "have you ever seen a monkey loving another like itself?" (this question could be answered "yes", though I can't find any links supporting it), "my bible is my professor", "who has been redeemed by a monkey/ a scholar?", "If evolution is continuous, why have we stopped evolving?" and so on ad infinitum. Then came the very crux of the whole anti-evolution movement. The teacher simply didn't hold back, stating out-and-out that "Darwin was a servant of the Devil!".
Overall, this lesson was handled in a manner typical of that always used by Adventists: make emotional arguments backed by the bible or prophesy and ignore all evidence. Of course, they do have their creation "science" disinfo programs, like the Celebration of Creation series on the Hope channel, and I've caught a number of documentaries on 3ABN spouting the "Australopithecus was fully ape" claim and they also sometimes play Robert Gentry's long debunked videos. In reality, they are really vanity affairs simply affirming what the Big Guns say - it is the main church body itself that has the last word. When you see pastors telling biology professors how to do their job, you know they've strayed from fact and truth.
As I have stated before, emotional arguments hold no water in the light of evidence. The gist of this whole lesson was "creationism makes me feel good, therefore I will believe in it". Well, geocentricism may have felt good in the 16th century, but that still did not make it correct. Evolution is a matter of science and says nothing about self worth, self esteem and stuff like that. You may take what you like from it, but don't say it forced it on you. I don't think these fellows realise that as much as they deny the fact that we each make our own purpose in life, they are themselves making their own purpose by accepting their religion. One would think that if Christianity was the one true religion and Christian creationism the one true doctrine, then members of other religions would be suffering the same "insecurities" and "low self esteem" we atheistic evilutionists do. But they don't (and we don't), therefore it is easy to deduce that all religons have the same merits. Once again, it boils down to a social support structure.
As my earlier monologue demonstrated, it's all a matter of perspective. But I will still say that if there is any self esteem destroying belief system, it is Christianity. One of its core tenets is that we are all dirty, worthless sinners because of the actions of a distant ancestor we've never met and all deserve to suffer and die. And boy am I glad I stopped believing in that a long time ago.
***
This post from Pharyngula very aptly describes my experience regarding Adventists and Evolution. All baseless assertions and no science.
I learnt something fascinating at Sabbath School yesterday: Satan cannot read our minds! Ain't that just wonderful! Now, I was prepared to ignore this particular bit of childish fantasizing, but I really could not pass on the whopper that followed. Want to know how to thwart him? Don't say your thoughts out loud. Yeah, that's right. If you do, he can then us his knowledge against you and place corresponding temptations in your path.
And here I am thinking, are these real, fully grown adults saying these things? I mean, this is the kind of thing you'd expect to hear from kids, sort of like "don't say 'boogeyman' three times while you're in bed or else he'll appear underneath it"! I've found myself noticing these things a lot of late and I tend to get this "like, seriously?" smile on my face when I do. People then tend to think it's because I have something to say but when they ask me I politely decline and say "no, it's nothing." I'm beginning to feel that this, coupled with the fact that I barely say more than ten words from the time I enter the church gates to the time I leave has got them thinking I am a very odd person indeed.
Well, this is what religion really is, a system of childish beliefs held by people who've somehow failed to grow up(in a bad way - not growing up is good in certain circumstances), throw off the shackles of reckless fantasy and embrace the cold, hard truth of reality and make something good out of it.
On a sadder note, oner of the church elders is currently in a critical condition in hospital. He's an ex-alcoholic and his godless past is finally catching up with him. Now, just a few weeks ago everyone had been praising God for his miraculous recovery and saying how marvelous He'd been in answering their prayers (the elder had been in hospital for quite a while before that).
Now, I am not going to use this as an opportunity to gloat - I am not some heartless, evil demon. But I do wish to deliver a lesson through this. Put simply: sometimes people get better. Sometimes they don't. It's the way of life - no hocus-pocus magic men in the sky necessary.
I am definitely hoping the old man gets beter. He's a genial, soft-spoken fellow and I have developed quite a soft spot for him. I haven't a shadow of a doubt that hands of flesh and blood are doing their best to keep him with us, and I hope they succeed. All we can do in addition to this is to let him know that we are behind him and hoping for his recovery. In fact, this is where I think prayer makes a difference, in lending the person and their family support in their trying hour - no magic involved. And let's also not belittle the advances in science that actually give him a shot at survival he would not have had mere decades ago.
P.S. - About a week ago I reported that 2011 is the Seventh-Day Adventist Year of Revival and Reformation. Well, as it turns out, the theme isn't just for this year, but the next five years (couldn't find any links - I heard it at church yesterday).
EDIT(7/2/11 - 22:35) - I've just learnt that the elder I spoke about has passed away. They'll probably never read this, but his family has my deepest sympathies.
m