Another Atheist Goes to Church

Comment by: Esther

Happy 51st birthday to -
Tom in Sacramento :-)

Comment by: Ir

Happy Birthday Tom! :)

Jim asked: What would be the equivalent experience christians could participate in to see how it feels to be an outsider in an atheists world?

For a Bible-believing Christian,

1)going to something at a UU congregation is an interesting ‘real life’ outsider experience. Especially if they make fun of ‘fundamentalists’: it could happen - don’t Bible-believing Christians sometimes make fun of people who don’t share their beliefs? I’ve heard that on occasion. In general, I’ve found that making fun of ‘outsiders’ is a common bonding technique among humans - especially among the insecure and/or the insensitive ones.

2) Read a website or discussion forum for ex-Christians/freethinkers/atheists/nontheists/humanists. Be prepared to read things that are hard to read, if you do so. If you register and actually try to participate, be prepared for a possibly brutal interrogation and cross-examination of every word you write. But who knows, maybe some people will actually welcome you and be impressed that you cared enough to come find out about them first hand and listen to their point of view (if you are actually listening it will help a lot)

3) Attend a meeting for ex-Christians/freethinkers/atheists/nontheists/humanists if there is one in your area.

4) Listen to the Humanist News Network broadcast with Hemant’s interview in (it’s linked to from his blog)

I would recommend that every Christian/follower-of-Jesus does something so they can remember/discover what it feels like to be an outsider. I think it’s profoundly beneficial.

Comment by: Bob

NC,

Hemant gave me this link:

http://www.atheistalliance.org/directory/list.php

None in my area of IL, though. :-(

Comment by: Rick L in TX

Thanks to those who have joined me in wishing Tom well on his birthday. I have to apologize to Esther for being unclear though. My post of several days ago indicated that today would mark 51 years since his 8th year (which he identified in a prior post as the year in which he trusted Christ.) Tom is 59 today.

Comment by: TXatheist

NCxian,
Just use the yellow pages and look up churches. If you’re in NC then the larger cities definitely have UU churches. We joke there is even one in college station, TX. That’s where Texas A&M is at and it’s very conservative, imo.

Comment by: Tom in Sacramento

Thank you, one and all. Things like this are prima facia evidence that community has developed. Nice!

Jim, you asked, “What would be the equivalent experience Christians could participate in to see how it feels to be an outsider in an atheists world.” Welcome to my world. I work at a large, public, research university. The prevaling assumptions, day in and day out, are the naturalistic assumptions of secular humanism. Our campus has some highly vaunted “Principles of Community” which make it clear that it is not our ethic to dis others. But, of course, no one makes a peep when Christian values are ridiculed or trampled in the dirt.

For example, a few years ago, to celebrate Valentines Day, IIRC, a street theater group from San Francisco was invited to do their presentation in an outdoor public space on campus. It consisted of men and women dressed in Roman Catholic religious vestments — men in drag as nuns, women as priests and bishops — celebrating a mock eucharist passing out condoms in lieu of the host. The production was endorsed by several official campus organizations.

So, I am quite familiar with the concept of being a minority viewpoint in a sometimes hostile world.

Comment by: Siamang

Tom wrote

So, I am quite familiar with the concept of being a minority viewpoint in a sometimes hostile world.

Thanks for sharing that point of view. We can all learn from each other.

Comment by: Marty

Marty,
How do we get creation out of the public school science classes? That is the only problem I have with it, that some xians want their creation told to public school kids.

Comment by TXatheist — March 24, 2006 @ 7:55 am

Dear TXathiest - interesting question. I don’t know the answer - but your position has my empathy. My guess is that those who believe as you do would be more successful if they argued based upon the fact that it is mystery - than to take a position that the Bible - particularly taken literally is wrong. My guess is that there are lots of Christians who do not believe in a literal translation of Genesus - and therefore have no problem believing and maybe even supporting the scientific view of creation - while at the same time, they would not want to support an “Atheist” view that God does not exist - and one of the ways that “Atheists” attempt to prove that is by using science to prove that Genesus is wrong.

Comment by: Bill P. Godfrey

I go walking somewhere hilly and look at the scenery. (Wales is good.)

Got to find paradise on earth while I’m still alive to enjoy it.

Comment by: Tom in Sacramento

TX, you make a comment that has always baffled me. I should preface this by saying that I assume, undoubtedly naievely, that people are motivated by pure motives and a desire to maximize learning. That is undoubtedly the problem. But my question is, why would anyone want to get creation out of school science classrooms?

I had a conversation once with the person who was in charge of all the undergraduate science labs at Stanford University. This was a number of years ago before the debate had heated to a boiling point. And he said to me, speaking as a scientist, that the really interesting thing was that, he thought, properly understood, science is silent at the points where creation speaks most clearly, and that the Bible, properly understood, supports everything he know from the realms of science. (And this guy knew biology, chemistry, physics, geology…everything. Amazing guy.) I have since become persuaded that his analysis is correct.

So you’ve got a situation in which, in the context of a science class, some kind of faith proposition will be at least alluded to on the subject of first origins (prior to the Big Bang), the origin of life, and the origin of man. If you’re going to be at least alluding to one set of faith propositions, why not, for the sake of a comprehensive education, make them explicit and present the whole set of alternative views? What is to be feared? I have never gotten this?

Comment by: Siamang

Tom wrote:

And he said to me, speaking as a scientist, that the really interesting thing was that, he thought, properly understood, science is silent at the points where creation speaks most clearly, and that the Bible, properly understood, supports everything he know from the realms of science. (And this guy knew biology, chemistry, physics, geology…everything. Amazing guy.)

Tom, you must understand that, well, that’s a subjective argument. He wasn’t speaking “as a scientist” since science doesn’t work like that. Science isn’t “one really smart guy who knows a lot of stuff says this is true…” Science is experiments, data collection, hypotheses and showing results that you publish and your peers try to duplicate. Anything else that scientist does, be it reading the bible, cooking dinner or making love, he doesn’t do as an official voice of science.

Okay, great, a scientist says he sees no conflict between the bible and science. He’s got a belief and a way he interprets that faith. I’m happy for him. But it’s not science, and it’s not what is taught as science.

So you’ve got a situation in which, in the context of a science class, some kind of faith proposition will be at least alluded to on the subject of first origins (prior to the Big Bang), the origin of life, and the origin of man.

I am not sure what kind of faith proposition you’re talking about. The only talk of faith in my high school biology courses was the little talk at the beginning that was designed so that the fundies in the class didn’t have their parents complaining to the PTA.

In my college courses, there was zero discussion of faith. It was simply a class on evolutionary physical anthropology. My religious studies courses were the ones which talked about faith.

Comment by: TXatheist

Tom,
I’ll say this. I can understand how to make the genesis story reconcile with science though I would not do it and it’s not a science to do it that way. One is science, one is religion and keeping them separate is best for all, imo.

Comment by: TXatheist

That will be $5 for the service:) j/k

Comment by: Tom in Sacramento

Eliza,
Several other people and I wrote letters to the editor of the campus paper in protest. But nothing official was evere done. Because of my position I was able to have an off-the-record discussion with a campus manager.. They were truely astonished that someone would find it offensive, but promised to try to avoid such things in the future. And, in truth, while there have been other more minor incidents, there has never since been anything of that magnitude.

Comment by: TXatheist

Tom,
I gotta ask. If that is offensive to you can you try to understand how it is offensive to have the TX state capitol have the 10 C monument to me? I am even willing to leave it there but have an atheist monument next to it. The one I’d prefer is the FFRF holiday sign they actually do put in the Wisconsin capitol.

Comment by: TXatheist

Tom,
Thanks for clarifying but if you don’t think it’s literal that’s great. Ken Hamm is building a creation museum near Cincinnati that takes a 100% literal interpretation of the bible account as the abiogenesis of our world. According to gallup 45% of the USA believes he’s right and the bible is literal with regard to creation. I won’t go any farther but I don’t want my kid taught that in science class. My point is you don’t want it taken literally but many xians do. What about the 100’s of other creation stories? Do we teach the hindu creation story in science? The native american? Why just the biblical story presented?

Comment by: Tom in Sacramento

TX, #32, first, we Christians have folks in our camp that are an embarassment to us just as you atheists have folks in your camp who are (or ought to be) an embarrasment to you. My granddaughter goes to a private Christian high school. She’s a freshman. She won’t be going there next year. But when her geography teacher had them study a text that talked about literal creation and a young earth, I raised cain with the administration and the teacher and got a more scientifically balanced perspective taught. so you’re preachin’ to the choir.

As for other creation stories, by all means present the other alternatives. Especially if, as here, you have classes that are fairly ethnically and culturally diverse. I would definitely present all the alternatives that are represented in the demographics of the classroom. I want education. Throwing creation out of the classroom does a disservice to the community and the students because it produces students who are less than thoroughly educated.

Comment by: Siamang

Dude, I SO hope Hamm builds that museum. I want to go SO bad I might pee myself. Please say he’ll actually build it, and not just another playground with cement dinosaurs and rope-ladder jungle-gyms like Hovind made.

Comment by: TXatheist

Siamang,
My brother just left Cincinnati so I won’t be there to see it most likely as there is no reason to go to Cincy. In Texas we have something on a much smaller scale in Glen Rose, Tx. They also have a science exhibit in Glen rose to balance the creationism. I know El Cajon outside San Diego has something too for the creationists.

Comment by: Siamang

Tom said:

I’m talking about what he was saying about science’s ability to address three specific points which just happen to be the three specific points at which the Bible says that God intervened directly in the process He’d started.

Sorry, which THREE points? You only named one, the Big Bang.

I’m not going to say that science will never be able to study the cause of the Big Bang. You’ve asserted that. I’d like you to prove that assertion. Specifically the NEVER part of it.

You’ll find that physicists have been working specifically on that very thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekpyrotic

The problem with saying “science will never understand X” is that you’re putting your own personal limited knowledge and experience against the greatest scientific minds of the present and the future. I’d never take that bet myself.

You’ve further asserted this:

origin of all, origin of life, and origin of man. Is it mere coincidence that science cannot answer any of those questions. (No, they really can’t…definitively.)

I’m not sure how you define “definitively”. But the third one of your list has been proven again and again for the last 150 years.

I’d like to share a quote from Stephen Jay Gould.

Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world’s data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein’s theory of gravitation replaced Newton’s, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin’s proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered.

Moreover, “fact” does not mean “absolute certainty.” The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science, “fact” can only mean “confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent.” I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.

Comment by: Siamang

TXatheist said

I hope you will forgive me and I intend to play nice:)

Oh thank goodness. Whew. I was afraid this little corner was getting way too hot for my liking.

Comment by: Marty

Here is the question that is the topic of this thread “Question- What would be the equivalent experience christians could participate in to see how it feels to be an outsider in an atheists world.”

It seems to me that most of the responses have been totally unresponsive to this question - which for me is a shame - because I think it is a good question that added much to the dialogue and learning. If each of us went to visit groups whose beliefs are very different than our own, learned from those visits and respectfully shared our perceptions of the good and bad of each - we collectively might be making a great move forward.

The new discussion site is really great and works really well for those who would like more flexibility in their inputs, for those who want to debate - while at the same time leaving space for those of us who are interested in dialogue and put off by debate - to have a place to dialogue.

Comment by: Esther

“What would be the equivalent experience christians could participate in to see how it feels to be an outsider in an atheists world.”

Some of you suggested UU church. May I understand deeper for the reason? From what I searched on the web about UU, it is far from “Atheist”.
Having said that, I have to admit that just by visiting the UU sites and imagining myself participating their services or activities did already made me feel uncomfortable. It is the feeling of insecure, fear…it’s very strange. (I didn’t anticipated this!)

Thank you folks for this dialogue. All of these experience is really an eye-opening for me.

Hemant and Eliza, I sincerely appreciate the courage of you to walk into communities in which you are a complete outsider.

Anyways, I’ll attend a UU church in the near future despite the butterfly in my stomach.
Hopefully, I’ll share my experience with you all.

Comment by: TXatheist

Esther,
They are going to charge $100 as it’s a top secret club. Next, be sure and wear formal dress with your hair pulled up, not hanging down or you won’t be let in. Bring a bible and have it memorized cover to cover. Other than that just wear casual clothes, tell them an atheist said for you to check out UU just to see what it’s about and you’ll go from there. Oh and forget the 1st set of recommendations:) UU is so laid back, imo, that even the people who tell me they are members of the xian uu club don’t bother me one bit. I’ve enjoyed knowing them and never once had to talk about that jesus guy:)

Comment by: Esther

Thanks very much for the encouragement!

Yet, I know that I’m not afraid of meeting new people. I know that they’ll be friendly and welcoming. All these I know for sure.

What’s already bothering me is that I’m afraid that I’ll have a big battle inside my head or my heart when I get exposed to UU!!

This is my brought up and training (or brainwashing) that’s deep grown inside me. I guess one of the in-grown thing is the huge

“guilty”

feeling my family or church have given me…

This sounds horrible even when I’m writing it. It’s wrong. I’ve got to undo it!

I know you will not pray for me :-)
Thank you for your support in your spirit!

Comment by: Tom in Sacramento

Siamang, #40, The three points were the three origins: everything, life, and man.

Everything: I know there are people working to understand. But I have heard high-end theoretical physicists and cosmologists speak on the subject. (I got to hear Stephen Hawking speak a couple years ago.) And the understanding that I get is that while we can theorize all we want, there is no way to go back through the Big Bang to see what was there. If there was something there, it was destroyed in the process and it could have had the same physical laws or different ones. so that looks like a closed door to me. If it changes…well, I’ll look seriously at the data when it happens. But it wouldn’t be science for me to jump the gun based on theoretical cogitations….even by smart guys.

Life: Again, we’ve got theories. But we don’t have science demonstrating inert chemicals coming to life. Once life is there, there are models of evolution that seem to me to be reasonable and acceptable. But, once again, it wouldn’t be science for me to jump the gun based on theoretical cogitations….even by smart guys.

Man: I am not necessarily arguing for a unique creation of man from “100 pounds of clay” as Gene McDaniels so tunefully put it 50 years ago. I would not be uncomfortable with an evolutionary scenario in which there was evolution into a proto-man. But I am persuaded that there is an evanescent but qualifiable difference between man and animals. And that is something that will never be found in a fossil record.

I have imagined, for example, that after eons of evolution there emerged a creature who was, perhaps, Neaderthal, say. And God said, “Now that’s what I’m talkin’ about!” (That’s my translation of the KJV’s “God saw that it was good.” ;-) ) And the Bible says that God breathed into him and the man became a living being.

I do not think that it is talking there about physical life. I think it is talking about spiritual life. A physical, living creature took on an additional spiritual dimension that gave him an awareness of the spiritual dimension of life.

That is obviously something that you and I will disagree on. But, if I am right (and I think there is abundant evidence to support it), then whatever that spiritual dimension is, it doesn’t petrify and leave a fossil.

Point is, it is the nature of these issues of origin that takes them out of the realm of science. Everyone has their own opinion, their own belief, their own faith about the origins. But they are, in the final analysis, an article of faith that we each bring with us to the evidence.

Comment by: Marty

Marty,
How could I hurt my own cause? Did you see the U of M report on least trusted people? I ain’t trying to get us kicked out of the US but we ain’t winning any battles. I mean look at Newdow. Polite, smart, articulate and hate mail and death threats. Please see that our cause needs to do something and I will be polite but persistant. I am not not not saying it’s the same thing but did blacks just roll over? Did gays just stay silent? Minorities have to have a strategy. Mine, persistance until you pass out of exhaustion:)

Comment by TXatheist

Txatheist - I read the U of M report - and it troubles me. A part of what troubles me is that at that time - I might have been one of those saying I didn’t trust Atheists. I find myself extremely troubled that Ir feels she is not safe to come out and fully reveal herself in her own community - and therefore is even reluctant to further reveal herself to us.

I am not particularly feeling drawn to becoming an Atheist - but I am feeling very drawn to doing what I can to be a small part of working to change the Atheist image here in my town. I have become quite open with people when they ask me what I am doing - and I have shocked a lot of people - but by sharing how I had been prejudice and what I have learned - and hopefully their impression of me is (was :-) positive - my sense is that in my own small way I am helping change that image. I have even shared with my poor, 93 year old, born again Christian - there is only one way, and the gays are all big sinners - Mother.

But if the only image of Atheists that I knew was the TXatheist of this morning - I wouldn’t be becoming a crusader for understanding and respect of Atheists. In fact - I would be confirming my old prejudices.

My sense is that there are others on this board that are even more engrained into Christianity and its dogma - that are also feeling a sense of change brought about by some tremendous Atheists - including yourself.

I agree that minorities have to have a strategy - and I am an old strategic planner. But what I think you are saying is that your strategy to date has not worked. It would please me if I could be a part of helping create a strategy that will work - and I think it could eminate from what we are all learning from one another on this board.

Comment by: TXatheist

Marty,
It is my opinion that Sam Harris has the right idea in his book the end of faith, someone says god created the universe, tell them that’s a fairy tale and if you put that answer on a science test you’d fail because it’s a bad answer. Truth hurts but nice guys finish last.

Comment by: Ir

Esther, do you feel you will be betraying your family and friends if you go to a UU church and you like it better than your own church?

Comment by: TXatheist

Ir,
I’ve got to admit you holding out only makes the mystery more compelling. Tell your story! pretty please. I can understand somewhat. At work maybe 4 people know i’m an atheist. They are discreet and that’s why I told them.

Comment by: Esther

Very good and practical advice, TXatheist.
Thanks

Comment by: Ir

TX, now I’m afraid I’ve created a big mystery around nothing, because I doubt my story is really that interesting :)

I expect I’ll break down soon anyway and say more about me.

Comment by: TXatheist

I’m still holding my breath with anticipation! How’s that for pressure:) I just have no qualms about being open on a blog or forum but I wouldn’t want to talk like this at work. I just think it’s irrelevant for work and gives people a reason to gossip.

Comment by: Siamang

I got a “mythology” portion in my 10th grade biology class, right before the evolution unit. One entire class meeting was spent discussing the various creation stories of various religions of the world. I seem to recall Mr. Guinn talking about “equally valid ways of looking at a question” but one that didn’t contradict religious beliefs or something about that. I just saw it as a breadcrumb they threw at the christians in the class. I was a liberal christian theist then but by no means a creationist.

This was in the Los Angeles Unified School District circa 1982.

I read now that they way they handle the evolution controversy in Arkansas is pretty simple. They just don’t teach evolution at all. Even geology teachers aren’t allowed to tell the kids in the class how old the rocks are.

http://www.arktimes.com/Articles/ArticleViewer.aspx?ArticleID=e7a0f0e1-ecfd-4fc8-bca4-b9997c912a91

Comment by: Jim Henderson

Since there is now a discussion forum where you can take discussions that weave off topic to. Please do so - so that those who want to discuss the primary issue don’t have to navigate the unrelated comments

Comment by: Eliza

Since it seems on topic here: Esther, are you thinking of attending a UU event or service quite soon, or is it more of a maybe for the future? Ir’s point about trying out a group that meets on a different day than their service is excellent - especially awkward if you might have to explain to your church community/friends why you weren’t there as usual one Sunday, before you have had a chance to explore a bit!

From my own recent experience, though I am coming from a very different situation, I recommend the “go ahead and visit this week” strategy - for me, at least, delaying something that might be uncomfortable only makes the mental barrier 5 times higher! Though it may be uncomfortable at first, you can get a sense of whether or not that path is one you think you want to explore more. It’s late, I’m rambling, good night and though I don’t pray I will be thinking of you and hoping all goes well!

Comment by: TXatheist

Jim,
You are right, I apologize. I will work on my tone and I appreciate the constructive criticism.
Sincerely,
Txatheist

p.s. Jim it’s on my blog titled Ir or whomever, there’s also a previous topic about some gentlemen who was fair, it’s called”why atheists should never say all christians are…” It will only take 1 minute to 1.5 minutes tops to read the posts. I hope you will.