Jesus Jukes – An Atheists Response

The concept of a Jesus Juke will be familiar. It is how someone casually slips into the conversation that they are at that moment more au fait with Christ than you. Obnoxious enough done to another Christian, down right insult to an atheist.

7 Obnoxious Jesus Jukes goes into this from a Christian counter perspective. Thought I would answer them from my own heathen non turning the either cheek, you have the dirt of the earth if you like, perspective.

1) “Why do you make things so complicated? The answer is Jesus.”

Nothing like turning a situation anyone can find themselves in and saying consolation and acceptance is faith. Yet that never ends the question. Children being born with bone cancer does not strike me as the answer being Jesus.

Life is very complicated, and simplistic solutions can be much worse than recognising the complexity of a problem.

A sense of proportion to the problems in the world is invaluable to lend some perspective.

2) “You seem to be interested in what people want, but what about what God wants?”

Anyone who claims to know what God wants, and to give you a list from, is not only arrogant but possibly delusional. Treat with extreme caution and skepticism.

3) “You worry too much. God will take care of it.”

Parents who prayed rather than called for an ambulance for their children literally took this advice. If you can do something about it than do it. If you cannot than take the time to accept and move on. Use worry as an alarm call to act and think – not to procrastinate or ignore.

4) “You know, I used to talk the way you do back when I was a fundamentalist/liberal/etc.”

You really have no idea about me … Apostate and loving it. Never again.

5) “When I had your problem, I read [insert Bible verse] and everything made sense after that.”

Funnily enough that also helped me realise screwed up people like myself were writing the bible. Other books are available.

6) “I guess I just believe that Jesus meant what he said about hell/poor people/other topic.”

You haven’t read “Zealot” by Reza Aslan have you? Or the other books on historic and Christ version of Jesus. Go for it. Get the man, not the Son of God.

7) [A long, non-sequitur string of scripture references without commentary that generally involve some kind of prophetic “warning” of apocalyptic destruction that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.]

Gently head towards the exit, and do not look back … remain calm.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Video: Chris Rock – Need to Find God

In two minutes, a young Chris Rock talks about looking for God via Jehovah’s Witnesses, Christianity and Islam.

[Edit: It is Chris Rock so there is profanity]

Satirically spot on with Salman Rushdie fatwa which happened in the year of the clip, 1989.

Hat tip: Vix – @lillai23

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Pascal’s Wager

Myself and myatheistlife are discussing the use of Pascal’s Wager. For those unfamiliar with the term:

Pascal maintains that we are incapable of knowing whether God exists or not, yet we must “wager” one way or the other. Reason cannot settle which way we should incline, but a consideration of the relevant outcomes supposedly can. Here is the first key passage:

“God is, or He is not.” But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up… Which will you choose then? Let us see. Since you must choose, let us see which interests you least. You have two things to lose, the true and the good; and two things to stake, your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to shun, error and misery. Your reason is no more shocked in choosing one rather than the other, since you must of necessity choose… But your happiness? Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is… If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is.

Source Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy

In essence the bet is believe. If you are worshiping the true god salvation is yours. If no god, you get nothing. But if god exists and you refuse the wager, oh the horror …

I recognised in a blog the use of Pascal’s wager, which I questioned:

With regards point 4), which is Pascal’s Wager, do we think a God that cares enough to examine our life after death would not see our faith as genuine but a desire for self preservation beyond the grave? Unless like an avid twitterer checking his follower count he does not care if sincerely following their tweets as long as you follow.

The response was that taking the wager would lead to genuine sincere faith with the right study and application in the spiritual community. Having used Pascal’s words above paraphrased I remarked:

A fake it till you make it ploy; a deception this time to get you back into the after life garden of Eden. This hardly makes the gamble on salvation better if the means justify the ends.

Dear Lord I deceived myself till the delusion was real for for me …

The further objections to Pascal’s Wager can be found here.

With thanks to Patheos for the cartoon strip.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

Faith Campaign for Obama

President Obama’s Christian faith, and his belief that we are our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers, has shaped what he’s done as president — from supporting economic development abroad to making health care more affordable for all Americans, ensuring our elderly can retire securely, and helping all of our children get a good education and a shot at success.

Taken from Obama’s campaign website I was hoping to watch
the video The President on Faith where the above quote is mentioned. However it is off line at the time of writing. Just in case there is any doubt that Obama is motivated by faith on employment policy or health care there is:

the video: President Barack Obama is leading with faith values.

We could say this is a way to get religious people to vote. In the same way Dawkins is trying to get atheists (and indeed all of America) to vote for Obama. Pluralism means you try to appeal to voters in different ways, because what ticks boxes differs person to person, group to group.

For more see my previous blog here.

Think I have blogged this issue to death now. Obama is a devout Christian yet is also a secularist. But for more on Dawkins singling out Mormonism rather than Christianity as he did in The God Delusion you may want to check out this blog Richard Dawkins’ Blind Faith in Obama.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Obama just spiritual says Dawkins, but in 2008 …

Dawkins has slightly moved from what I reported earlier on here to saying that Obama is ‘vaguely “spiritual”‘

This however as I mentioned in the above cited blog is not borne out by the evidence. I think we can say that Obama is a Christian who is also a secularist. It does seem that Dawkins has difficulty saying that, so dismisses the thought that Obama is truly religious as a result.

A memory stirred to a blog in 2008 during the Democratic Primary. Sure enough, Obama’s campaign produced a pamphlet detailing his Christian credentials:

Even PZ Myers was unenthusiastic about campaigning for Obama because of his Christianity back then.

In 2008 Newsweek did a very in depth story on Obama’s spiritual journey Finding His Faith. So why is Dawkins saying what he is about Obama? Out of ignorance?

My fear is that secularism is being claimed as for atheists only – which I think plays into the religious fundamentalist’s and Christian Right’s hands. The meme that you cannot be religious and secularist has to be stopped. I am saddened that Dawkins cannot just leave it at what Obama stands for.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog