Exploring Non-Religious Child Rearing

I have a seven month old son who is the light of my life. He is our first child, and now, just like many parents, it’s hard to even remember my life when he wasn’t a part of it. How things have changed; how life is exponentially better! It’s absolutely amazing what one’s child can add to life, and it’s also amazing the choices one needs to contemplate with this life transformation.

I must give credit to the blog that started my wheels turning for this entry. You can find it at Raising Children Without God

This post really got me thinking again about the issue of how I want to raise my son.

Those of you who are familiar with my blog know that I left Christianity a couple of years ago. The transition from Christianity to philosophical Deism was not an easy one, nor was it made lightly. All previous entries in this blog have been centered around my thoughts as they pertain to religion and humanist views, however, now with a child thrown into the picture, I must also evaluate how I want to raise him.

Firstly, he will not be raised in the Church. While I will not do anything to dissuade him from exploring this later, as he is old enough to make his own decisions, I will not force him to attend a service every Sunday simply for the moral benefit. I have had family members ask me “When are you going to baptize/dedicate _ in the Church?” My answer is that I won’t. I was raised going to church every Sunday morning. Every Sunday morning my mother had to fight to get us all up and out the door in time for Sunday School. Once we got to church, I spent my time drawing, people watching, or imagining strange things coming out of the person’s head in front of me. I couldn’t wait for it to be over. I participated in Sunday School, learned the Christian story, and really didn’t care overall. This was just what Sundays were about.

Now that I’m a parent and non-Christian, it makes no sense for me to raise my son in the Church. So, what does this mean when it comes to raising him outside the Church? This is new territory for me, but here are my thoughts on it:

1. I will teach him and encourage him to learn about the religions of the world. They play such a crucial role in understanding humanity and people of different cultures. I believe it’s extremely important to learn about the different concepts of God or creator, and how people behave according to their own concept.

2. I will do everything I can to teach him the value of human life. This is not just in regards to the act of murder, but also respect for others, respect for property, responsibility, and accountability. I will show him how important it is to help people, and be a defender of those who can’t defend themselves. To respect human life is to value what it means to be human.

3. I will teach him to think through ideas, not just blindly accept mine or anybody else’s opinions. There is a difference here between what I expect of his actions and what he thinks. I am his father, so I will have expectations of behavior. However, when it comes to the big ideas of life, I want him to think for himself. I will gladly tell him my thoughts, but I don’t want him to necessarily adopt them as his own. This is possibly the most important gift I could ever give to my son, with the exception of my love and devotion to him.

4. Never minimize the values of others. Talk to others of different values, beliefs, and situations. But never belittle them for what they believe. What a person believes is a large part of who that person is.

5. Notice your emotions, but follow your reason. Emotions tell us if we’re on or off track from our values. They are the markers of how we’re doing on the inside. They are not, however, an accurate map of how to live life.

This is what I have so far. I know that as he grows and matures, there will be many more life lessons that will come up. To raise one’s child outside of religion is not going to be easy, I can already see that. But I think it’s extremely important for him to come to his own decisions. Not only will they be his, but they will be much more heartfelt.

A Non-Christian’s Attempt at Helping Christians Learn How to Convert

I am becoming increasingly perplexed at the concept of conversion, and man’s role in the matter. I know Jesus gave the great commission to “go and make disciples,” and I get that. I also know that when the day of Pentecost came, it was through the “Holy Spirit,” not the preaching of Peter, that people were converted. I also know that Paul spent a good amount of time evangelizing to the Greeks in the book of Romans. I also know that only God can soften hearts (or harden them in the case of Exodus) that people may come to him…for we are all dead in sin.

Do you see where I’m going with this? What is the role of the person in conversion? I wrote an earlier article on the point of apologetics, where I determined that apologetics is really for the believer, not the unbeliever. Intellectual arguments are not going to convert me back to Christianity, just as intellectual arguments are not likely to deconvert someone out of Christianity, or any other religion.

I have had several cases of people quoting scripture to me as comments on my blog, trying to show me the error of my ways. They are good-hearted, wanting to help, but also knowing I am headed straight to hell. Well, here’s the deal. QUOTING SCRIPTURE TO NON-CHRISTIANS IS NOT GOING TO WORK! Sorry to yell at the reader, but I think this needs to be clearly understood. Christians, please do not quote scripture to me as a means of trying to get me “saved” again. It won’t work. Why? Because my eyes are darkened, my heart is hardened, and unless the Holy Spirit moves in me, I don’t have a chance of escaping hell. (Not to mention the fact that I don’t accept the bible as divinely inspired…you might as well quote Homer to me).

I am being a little tongue and cheek here. I’m really not trying to be rude, but I do think it’s important for Christians to realize that you are not going to save people through comments on a blog. If you truly want to save someone, you have to play a significant role in that person’s life. You have to make sure that you are living the life appropriately, and that it’s attractive enough for the convert-to-be to want to accept that life. You, Christians, are not going to save anyone. The best you can do is listen, explain your position (apologetics), and then get out of the way. If you truly believe with all your heart that God is the one responsible for saving and changing lives, please let him do it.

I have nothing against the bible. I do not hold it to be divinely inspired, but I do think it serves a purpose. I don’t mind people quoting scripture in a comment on my blog as long as it’s relevant to our discussion. But please refrain from meaningless banter about my needing to read the bible and quoting the “truth” to me. There are more effective and loving ways to reach people.

How Does Your Religion Affect Your Daily Life?

Interesting question, I think. For me, I would have to say that my religion hardly impacts my daily life at all. Actually, I consider myself without religion, although I hold to a Deist philosophy. So what does this mean? It’s interesting really, at least for me, because I feel free from the constraints of any particular belief system. I am able to discover what appeals to my own reason, and pursue that which my reason dictates.

Here is why I consider myself without religion: I have no daily, weekly, or other actions that result from my beliefs in spirituality. Many will talk of themselves as having faith, but not religion. However, I see religion as the outward actions that take place as a result of one’s faith.

I suppose I would consider myself as having some sort of “faith,” as I do believe in some sort of creator. While I don’t possess any personal experience with this creator, or have any “proof” of its existence, I do still believe that the universe reflects creation of some sort. However, the difference with me vs. people of regular mainstream religions is that my “faith” is really more philosophical than practical. This means that I almost consider myself agnostic in the sense that I don’t think we can ever really know the creative force. However, I’m not a true agnostic in that I do think there is some sort of creative force.

It’s really a mixed up system, but I understand it quite well and it makes sense to me and appeals to my reasoning. This is why I consider myself a Deist. It is the one established form of belief that most closely aligns with my beliefs.

It is really a very great philosophy for me because I remain open to intellectual integrity. In other words, if I come across something that really changes my mode of thinking and truly appeals to my sense of reason, then I can make the necessary adjustments. So far, I’ve never come across anything with that amount of force behind it, but one never knows. I can engage in religious conversations (which I love) without feeling the need to be right. I like to play devil’s advocate just to keep the conversation moving. I am not trying to convince someone else that I’m right and therefore he or she is wrong. For me, it’s not about who is right and who is wrong. For me, it’s the discussion that I love, the possibility of finding new ways to think about things. One thing I’ve learned in my few years on this earth is that I don’t know! I can’t know! Therefore, I’m not going to devote my life to something that makes no sense, and I’m certainly not out to win people to my way of thinking. I get nothing from that.

So how does your religion affect your life? Do you enjoy the intellectual stimulation from a great conversation, or do you try to change minds? Is it about right and wrong for you? Do you know that you are right and therefore I am wrong? If so, how do you know? Are you open to new ideas and perspectives, or do you stay with what you “know?” How do you act differently because of your religion than you might if you didn’t have that religion? These are all great questions and can be a lot of fun to answer, not to mention, give you more insight into yourself.

Apologetics- What’s the Point?

I’ve been doing some reading lately on Christian apologetics. In the course of my latest readings, I have come to an interesting revelation: so far, I have not found one convincing argument for my belief in the Bible or the Christian God. I suppose the reason that this discovery stood out to me so much is that I am reading the same materials that were a buttress to my faith only 3+ years ago. William Lane Craig, Josh McDowell, Ron Rhodes, Lee Strobel, and many other websites as well have all had fair consultation by me.

Here’s the deal: I remember a former pastor of mine making the comment in a sermon that “you can’t prove or disprove the bible.” I still think that is a great statement fully ringing of truth. Why is it that the same arguments that formerly strengthened my faith only now seem to discourage it all the more. Is it that I have become an apostate and therefore my eyes are now blinded to the truth? Possibly, however, Paul performed apologetics to the Greek Pagans in Romans and changed many of their minds. Is the reason that apologetics are not working for me because God has “hardened my heart” and I have no ability to return to the fold? Possibly. Although, I have to admit, if that were the case, I want nothing to do with that god anyway.

Here is what I think is really going on. Christians, you need to read and consider this, because I think this could be helpful to you.

1. Apologetics solely should not be used to lead people into a relationship with Christ. A Christian can have all of the reasoning in the world why his or her belief is correct…but guess what, the non-believer can have all of the reasoning in the world why his or her non-belief is correct. To engage in debate is fun, however, in the long run, completely ineffective. Even if there is a definite winner, the loser is not likely to change his or her position. Read some of the transcripts of debates between Atheists and Christians that can be found online. In some of them, you can see a definite winner, but never did I hear of an Atheist becoming a Christian or a Christian becoming an atheist as a result of the debate.

2. Apologetics is primarily useful in strengthening the faith of the faithful. Peter exhorts the readers to “have a reason for the hope that lies in you.” I believe this scripture has been twisted over the years. I don’t believe that having the reason is for the hearer as much as it is for the sayer. If you as a Christian have a reason for the hope that lies in you, then that strengthens your faith in the wake of questions and doubts. This reason helps convince you that there is reasoning behind your faith, not just blind acceptance. But once again, this reasoning is not likely to bring anybody to faith in Christ.

3. No matter how many answers you have for why the claims of Christianity are true, there will always be non-believers that can counter those answers with answers of their own. This is not necessarily a battle over who is more intelligent, instead, its a battle of perspectives. At this point, I don’t think there is anybody on this earth that can convince me to return to Christianity. No man (or woman) can do that, nor should they have to. The only one that could do that would be God. Apologetics are great to show the world that there is logic and reasoning behind your faith, but this logic and faith really does nothing when it comes to the “heart” relationship espoused by Christianity.

I do believe that apologetics has its place in the public discourse. I love listening to and participating in good debate. It must be understood though, your religion, whatever that may be, is your perspective. Do you look at life through Jesus colored glasses? Or Jewish colored glasses? Or do you look at life through the glasses of a skeptic? In order for true conversion or “soul-winning” to happen, there has to be a change on a much deeper level. A level so deep that apologetics couldn’t begin to get there.

How do You Relate to Your Leaders?

While I have long held an interest in politics, I have been resolved to not broach that subject within the confines of this blog. My reasoning for this:

1. There are far too many blogs of this nature out there (for better or worse)
2. I don’t know exactly where I stand anymore

While I still hold a deep and abiding view that politics is a very important subject for all citizens to be both knowledgeable of and closely monitored, I can’t help this apathy I’ve obtained in the last few years. I admit that I am ashamed of this apathy, as I always felt that those who were apathetic to politics were just making excuses. However, I truly have become apathetic. I can really only think of one reason: The Practicing of Politics Requires Full Concealment.

Have you noticed the changes in the parties, candidates, and even the media as the political season gears up for another 1 1/2 year long Presidential race? Really, what becomes important? I am tired of watching the Sunday morning political shows where the politicians will be asked about their stance on the Iraq war, and end up reminiscing over their Grandmother’s all-American apple pie that they ate fresh out of the oven when they were kids. The politicians will answer questions with no answer at all, and I really am tired of it.

Perhaps this is our fault (as a nation). Perhaps we hold expectations that are too high for any one person to even attempt to attain. Indeed, perhaps we make it impossible for people to actually answer questions with how they honestly feel. Is President Bush a conservative? Well, perhaps socially, but not fiscally. And, to be honest, it depends upon which group you were to ask. Perhaps the religious right would say he’s socially conservative, while other conservative think-tanks would say he’s not fiscally conservative. We have neo-cons, liberals, moderates, conservatives, Democrats, Republicans, religious, non-religious, blah blah blah. I truly long for the candidate who will just say what he or she thinks, without fear of which group they might forsake support.

This post is turning into more of a rant than I intended, but I haven’t posted in a couple of weeks, and it has been building. There is another area that truly disturbs me in politics: Religion.

I watched the Republican debate on Fox a week or two ago…Did you know that for each candidate, they would list on the screen as they were speaking what religious persuasion they hold? It was absolutely astounding to me. Everyone was a Christian, of some form or another, oh, and one Mormon. We have politicians wanting to make sure they are seen entering and leaving church, quoting the bible, and generally trying to appeal to the “family values” of the America of a bygone era. I am tired of feeling like I’m being pandered to in the vain hope of getting my vote.

I understand the reasoning behind this religious focus. If someone holds the same, or similar, religious views I do, then the chances are good that they will hold the same values as I. This makes complete sense, however, I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t a better way to relate to our leaders. I feel that all of this religious pandering that the candidates do throughout these campaigns really cheapens the religions and those who support them because of these views. Think about this, how does the phrase “religious right” make you feel? How about the group “Christian Coalition,” or the “Family Research Council,” or “Focus on the Family?” My point is not to speak out against these groups per se, but instead, bring to mind the emotion and anger that these groups can bring out among the masses. The same can be said for “Moveon.org” and the “ACLU.” While those last two aren’t religious, they do raise the same emotions from the other side.

Here’s what I would like to see. A man or woman, answering the questions asked, giving their opinions, giving their plans, and giving their goals for what they want accomplished in their Presidency. Stop telling me that you’re for “Family Values,” and then not tell me what that means. How many candidates have been for “family values” and had opposite views on abortion, homosexuality, and the role of religion in government? Many. What are family values? Whose family? How is that family made up? Wife, husband, 2.4 kids? Or…single mother raising her two children with a minimum wage job and living in tenaments?

I think we need more Americans as Politicians, not politicians that happen to be Americans.

From Faith to Reason

Going through any major life change can be difficult, scary, and confusing. I think that making a change in one’s religious views helps to magnify these feelings of insecurity. Anybody who has been reading this blog for a little while knows that I am a former Christian. Over the past couple of years I have removed myself from church and ultimately from Christianity itself. The reasons? Check out some of my other posts and you’ll begin to understand. I do want to point out one problem I have. This is a problem that seems to be well represented in the de-conversion world. The problem is “what if I’m wrong?”

Before I go any further, I want to let any Christians who may be reading this to know that this is not the appropriate time to comment on this post saying that “the reason you’re concerned about being wrong is because the Holy Spirit is convicting your spirit…” I’ve already thought about this. Please note, I’m not looking to “feel better”, I’m simply relaying thoughts I’ve had in the attempt to process them and maybe help others.

As a Christian for the majority of my life, and a truly serious Christian for the past 10 years or so, I cannot help ponder this possible situation of my being wrong to turn away from Christianity. I find that there is a disconnect in my head concerning this subject. Intellectually, I know that I cannot accept the Christian story anymore, and that to go to church or even pretend to be a christian would nobody any good. However, it is hard to let go of certain beliefs that one has had for a number of years. Such as:

1. Am I prepared for the fact that I may be consigning myself to hell just because I can’t intellectually follow Christianity anymore?

2. Am I prepared to meet God the Father face-to-face and explain why I stopped believing in his son?

3. There are and have been many people, much smarter than I, who have embraced Christianity. Could I be wrong about this whole thing?

There are many other questions that come into play when making this sort of life decision, but I wanted to list a few and also let you know what I’ve come up with.

First, because I still believe in a creator, I recognize our ability to reason as God-given. The simple fact that I can process these questions and try to come up with answers (creatively, on my own) is amazing. Second, as our reason is God-given, then the creator would never expect us to go against it for things that can’t be proven true or false. In other words, when it comes to the Creator, the only true revelation, other than personal, is general revelation. That revelation that comes through the handiwork of the creator–Nature. I believe nature is a map of the creator’s footsteps. I do not, however, believe in any holy or inspired book or collection of books from any religion. In truth, accepting a book as the authoritative word of god is accepting the author(s) as god.

There is an argument in favor of the infallibility of the bible that just because it was written by humans does not mean that the bible contains errors. While humans are fallible, they are capable of being infallible at times, and can do things perfectly from time-to-time. While I agree with this line of reasoning, it occurs to me that we have no way of knowing whether the writers who wrote the books of the bible were infallible in their memory, recall, and theology. They may have written exactly what they wanted, transmitted it exactly how they wanted, but that doesn’t mean that they were correct in their theology. To place my belief in Christianity is indeed to rest my eternity on the laurels of people who lived 2000-6000 years ago.

I can believe in God through the general revelation of nature and the universe, but I cannot place my creator into the box of any one religious system. In reason, I see religions as man’s attempt to grasp the eternal and shape it into some sort of map or guide to get through life. Instead, I believe that the eternal gave us reason to exercise at every opportunity, to expand our knowledge of the world, and make our own way through living as good and effective a life as possible.

As for the questions above:

1. Am I prepared to go to hell? No. However, I realize that if indeed there is a hell (of which I don’t believe), then I suppose I would be going. This cannot change though. If the Christian story is true, then I cannot believe in and worship a God that determines our eternal fate because of one decision we didn’t make on the brief blip of time we were here on this earth. If the fact that I’m using my god-given reason leads me to hell, well, I really can’t change that as I can not worship that creator.

2. Am I prepared to meet god face-to-face in explanation? No. I cannot even fathom this actually happening. I cannot believe that the creator of the universe will be so hurt, and feel so dejected that I did not say “I accept Jesus as my Lord and Saviour” that I will be promptly judged and escorted down to the fiery lake where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Instead, I think that using reason and recognizing the handiwork of the creator is all the recognition it is looking for.

3. Could I be wrong about this whole thing? Absolutely. There have been and will be many Christians, smarter than I, that are continue to hold to Christianity throughout life. I however, cannot. Do you understand that it’s not just a matter of “not wanting to believe”? When I say I cannot, I mean I cannot. If I were to get down on my knees right now and plead to god for forgiveness for my apostasy, it would not be genuine. I would simply be looking for a way to avoid hell (once again, which I think is bad theology). I can’t just turn from my wickedness and believe. Really, who among agnostics, deists, atheists,… wouldn’t like to believe in the afterlife… heaven for the good, and hell as retribution for those who wrong us during life. Everyone would like to believe in eternal life in heaven, however, it’s not that simple. If you are a believer in Christianity, and always have been, you probably won’t understand. Unfortunately, we can’t just flip a switch and decide to become whole-hearted believers. I believe, according to Christianity, that that is the Holy Spirit’s role anyway.

So, as you can see, I do not have the answers. However, I am becoming more and more comfortable in my apostasy. It takes getting used to. Undoubtedly, I will always have some of the left over theology of my past following me around and appearing every now and then, but to tell you the truth, I am becoming more and more thankful everyday for the freedom to use my reason to aim higher.

The Evil of Secular Humanism?

Secular Humanism as described by Encarta Dictionary:

nonreligious world view: a philosophy or world view that stresses human values without reference to religion or spirituality.

Seriously, what’s all the fuss about? It’s interesting to note that there is a fairly broad war going on between religions and humanism. Each side often accuses the other as evil, misguided, or at least the cause of the decline in our society (if there really is a decline).

I admit that I will often turn on a christian radio station, or sometimes even look to see what they’re talking about on TBN network just to hear what people are being “taught.” I have now seen one particular preacher on TBN going all out on the evils of secular humanists. They’re taking over the schools, they’re kicking God out of America. One day, after turning to a christian radio station, I heard a self-appointed “apostle” talking about the evils of secular humanists and how they’re all going to hell. The Humanists are “godless evil-doers” (I believe that was the exact phrasing). I realize that these two persons are just an example, and don’t necessarily represent the entire religious community, but they do represent a significant portion.

On the humanists side, there are many who will associate religion with war and general violence. “All wars are over religion,” “Christians bomb abortion clinics,” and “Christians are homophobic and protest funerals” are all arguments that one can hear made by humanists. Again, while parts of these statements do ring true, they don’t represent the majority. I have known many heartfelt Christians that believe homosexuality is a sin, but would never dream of protesting a funeral, or even making their beliefs known in polite conversation.

The point of these two previous paragraphs is to demonstrate that what is usually reported on television or radio is often the case of a few nut-cases. Then, each side blows the issues out of proportion and applies the labels to general groups. This is unfortunate.

I am a humanist. I suppose in some ways I could be considered a “secular” humanist because I don’t believe that religion has to play a part in public policy and public schools. While I do believe in a creator, I generally keep my beliefs to myself, save for this blog. I believe in every person’s right to believe what they will, however, those beliefs should not play a part in public services such as schools. I have no problem with students taking bibles to school and praying. However, the issue changes when the school takes the lead in bible reading and prayer. That becomes state-instituted religion. Indeed, it seems to me that “religious right” proclaim loudly, in response to criticisms or questions by humanists, that God gave humanity “free-will.” God did not want a bunch or robots dedicating their lives to him because then it’s not freely choosing. I understand and appreciate that. Let’s apply it to schools then…If the school is leading prayer and bible reading, doesn’t that necessarily indoctrinate students into Christian teaching, taking away their free will?

Christians will argue that Evolution is taught as fact in most schools instead of a theory. I understand this too. Theories should be taught as theories. This would include creationism as well. Whatever a 6000 year old book says, creationism is still a theory. We cannot teach evolution or creation as wholly true without risking intellectual dishonesty. However, they are both important to understand the different ideas of how we came to be.

Secular humanists are not out to destroy America. They are not all socialists (yes, there are some). The majority are not even out to destroy the idea of God in society. They may not believe in God, or they may, but they recognize that it’s personal and really has no place in public services and politics. The vitriolic attacks on both sides of the issue are really pointless and debilitating. Christians, you’re not losing America by not having prayer in schools. Teach the kids about God at home and in church. Humanists, stop being so defensive when someone wants to pray to God or keep “one nation under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. If you don’t believe it, fine, but it really comes down to semantics and each side feeling threatened by the other.

It is stupid.

Life After Religion

Is there life after religion? This is an interesting thought for many to ponder as religion, whatever one it may be, plays such a fundamental role in our lives. Consider, not only do religious beliefs affect our actions, they also affect our perception of the world. Being a Christian, I had so many preconceived notions of right and wrong, the way I should act, and how I should speak. I knew that homosexuality was a sin, I knew I shouldn’t get drunk, I knew what God expected of me, and I knew when I made a mistake. I knew that America was a Christian nation and therefore I knew we needed more christians in politics to positively affect the laws of this country toward a higher morality. I also knew that anyone not following Christ was living a lie and would be judged upon their death.

My, how things have changed.

I had doubts about what I believed creeping into my consciousness. Because I firmly believed that God gave me the abilities as a reasoning creature, I knew that questioning was okay. I also knew that I would come out a stronger christian than I was before. Well, it hasn’t turned out that way. Without getting into all my reasoning for leaving christianity, I will say that my life has changed. What is interesting is that while many of my views have changed, there are still many that have not.

I still believe that religion plays a major role in the world today, just turning on the news will tell you that. However, it doesn’t play a major role in my personal life. As a matter of fact, I really don’t give religion much thought at all, other than to view life through the lens it provides. If I want to understand what is happening in the world, then religious views must be examined. While I am no longer religious, it certainly does affect my life externally.

My views on homosexuality have changed. I no longer believe that it is wrong. Interestingly though, I still DO believe that abortion is wrong. I have my reasonings for this, but this is not the purpose for this post.

While I am no longer a Christian, I still consider myself politically conservative. This, I find to be surprising, because for so long I had tied conservatism to Christianity.

My views on morality have changed in the sense that I no longer believe that morality comes from the commands of God through the bible. However, I still believe in right and wrong. This is an area where the religious and atheists may team up together to argue with me, although from different viewpoints. Is this morality a priori? To be honest, I’m not sure what I think about this. I still have some thinking to do. However, I do know that we seem to have an innate sense of right and wrong. As a deist, I could easily overcome this issue by claiming the creator applied this morality as part of the laws of nature, however, by reason, I can’t accept that yet. That would be a religious proclamation, one in which I truly don’t believe.

I no longer believe America is a Christian nation. I do believe that Christianity is the religious belief system to which the majority would ascribe themselves, however, we all know there is a difference between claiming a religious belief and living the belief. I now believe that America is not a religious nation. While the majority of citizens claim a belief in God, I think that for many of this majority, this belief has no impact on their daily lives.

I no longer believe that we need more Christians in politics to positively affect the legislation of morality on others. Now, I believe that Christians have just as much a right in politics as anyone else, however, when they begin legislating from those beliefs, we are in danger of theocracy. I do believe in the separation of church and state.

I now have a young son whom I will not bring up in the church. Instead, I will bring him up to pursue knowledge, to read as much as he can, to explore religious views, and if he so decides, he can accept religious views. It is not my job to indoctrinate him into any religious system. Instead, it is my job to help him explore what there is in the world with all the love and guidance I can. He will learn right and wrong, as we all do, through life experience. Through this life experience, he will learn responsibility for his own actions, and how those actions affect others. He will be raised to have integrity, strong reasoning, and a desire for knowledge.

Is there life after religion? Absolutely.

Does leaving the faith of your fathers change you? Absolutely. Interstingly though, I have discovered that while my religious beliefs have changed, I am still me. I still have many of the same goals and ideals I had before. My belief in integrity, goodwill, and character are still there. What has changed, is my now firm belief that humanity is basically good, not evil.

Proving the Bible?

This post stems from a “comment” conversation in which I’ve been involved for the past week or so. For reference, you can find the conversation at Are We Losing the Propaganda War in Our Schools. This has been a very thought provoking conversation for me as Chris has made some great points.

Unfortunately, as happens in many discussions of a religious nature, each side ends up trying to refute the other in order to show who is correct. When all is said and done, while I don’t believe the bible to be the inspired word of God, I do recognize the accuracy of its transmission down through the ages. I am not, nor have I ever been, out to discredit faith or attack those who hold to one or another. This blog is strictly about my own spiritual journey from Christianity to Deism, and thoughts and issues I’ve had along the way.

I firmly believe that I could never prove nor disprove the bible, as I firmly believe that no man or woman can. The bible is really of little concern to me overall. This reasoning is because although I recognize the historical accuracy of the bible, I disagree with the content that has been reliably transmitted. For me, it’s not about the contradictions and non-contradictions that can be seen and then readily rendered (in some opinions), instead, for me it is about a message that I just can’t reasonably accept. There are indeed issues that I have with the bible, as it is the central tenant of Christianity, but I’m not interested in trying to prove everyone else wrong. Instead, my interest is in expressing my own views, not just for others, but also for myself. I am able to better examine my own beliefs when I have to take the time to write.

So, to Chris at the Family Action Organization, I have truly enjoyed discussing with you. While I haven’t posted in a little bit, I will soon.

Those others of you that are reading this post, I encourage you to take a look at the discussion that we’ve been having, as I think it is a great example of how philosophical/religious conversation can and should take place, without ad hominum attacks!

Regards.

American Christianity? Part Two

In the last “American Christianity” post, I was solely interested in making the point that Christianity, at least here in America, has become “Americanized”. Here, however, I am more interested in the fact that Christianity and American seem to go hand-in-hand in many circles. I find this extremely interesting as I have previously posted on the cultural ties within religion. However, Christianity did not start here in America, nor was America founded on Christian principles. (I know, many will argue this last statement, however, Christianity does not, I’m afraid, have a copyright on Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness). Instead, American political philosophy was very much dependent upon Enlightenment ideals. So, how is it that to not be a christian, has become un-american? How is it that people have the belief that Christianity and the freedoms that the United States enjoys go together so well?

Christianity has taken up a huge role in politics today. This can be seen every election year when a candidate’s religious views are put to the test, as is their church attendance. We look at the religious views often times to get an idea of how patriotic a person is. Conservatives are Christians, liberals are not. In order to be a Christian, one has to practice conservative politics. It truly is astounding. Many people go as far as to vote for a candidate based on their religious beliefs and fervor. I can think of former Presidential candidates such as Alan Keyes and Gary Bauer, both of whom had not a chance at winning the Presidency, but were able to mobilize huge support in the Christian arena.

It’s interesting to me to look how Christianity has been Americanized now. While there are news stories about China soon becoming the nation with the largest amount of Christians, I daresay that no other nation comes close in in the efforts of evangelism, missions, and donations for worldwide broadcast of the Christian message as the churches of the United States. The only problem with this effort by the churches of the United States in worldwide evangelism, is that Christianity in other countries does not necessarily reflect the Christianity here in the United States. They may have the same central beliefs about Jesus, however, their approaches may be far different.

American Christianity seems to have a lot of emphasis on “doing”. Many churches go a long way to do good works for others (although often at a price of listening to the Gospel message and solicitation to join their faith). While I don’t believe that American Christians as a whole are doing more good works than non-Christians, as Churches they are very focused on evangelization and supporting missionaries and church planters all around the globe.

It seems however that Christianity in many other nations is more internally focused. More contemplative, introverted. I could be mistaken in this, as these are just my own observations. To me, it’s just remarkable how a religion centered around an Israelite, officially founded in Rome, has now been centered in the United States.

Somehow, it has become unpatriotic to question Christianity, just as it has become unpatriotic to question the war. Christians (as a whole, yes there are exceptions) tend to be supportive of the war in Iraq, whereas non-christians tend to be against the war. Christians, as a whole, tend to support the Israeli cause, whereas non-christians tend to support the Palestinian cause. Much of this comes from the belief of Israel as God’s chosen people. Christians, as a whole, tend to be for the Constitutional Amendment banning Gay marriage, whereas non-christians tend to be against it.

I’m not trying to slam Christianity or support it, I just find it interesting how your religious beliefs tend to determine your political support. In a country as diverse as the United States, I find it a dangerous thing to combine politics and religion.

It’s fine to support the Israeli or Palestinian cause, but what is your reasoning for doing so. Is it based on a text out of history (the bible) or actually following what’s happening now? It’s fine to be for or against the marriage amendment, but what is your reasoning? Is it because an historical text makes a few statements about it, or is it otherwise? It’s fine to support or not support the war in Iraq, but what is your reasoning? Is it because the President of the United States is somewhat conservative and a proclaimed Christian, or is it otherwise?

In conclusion, to base the policies of the United States on Christianity is just not reasonable. Nor is it reasonable for Christians to just get out of politics. C.S. Lewis once made the comment (I’m paraphrasing): The world doesn’t need more Christian authors; the world needs more authors who are Christians. I firmly believe that any religion has a much better chance at furthering it’s cause by participation in society as a citizen, not through participation in society as a Christian (or any other religion). This goes to C.S. Lewis’ point. Minds are changed through reasoning. If one has reasoning behind one’s beliefs, then there is a much greater chance at institutional change. One cannot change mind’s by using a personal religious perspective. It is dangerous to combine patriotism with religion, and the founding fathers recognized this point.

Have opinions, have central beliefs of right and wrong, but please don’t try to affect national policy because of your own personal religious views.