I Wish Russell Simmons Were an Atheist
by Michael WilsonRussell Simmons confuses me. He’s one of the finest examples we have of an American kid from the most difficult circumstances imaginable hustling and struggling and pulling himself up by his own bootstraps to create a life for himself that is, in a word, extraordinary. Yet instead of inspiring other poor African American kids who are in the position he once was with his story of hard work and perseverance, Simmons spreads religious silliness and tells those kids to put their hope in government. And last week, he did both at the same time. I wish Simmons were an atheist.
As many of you who frequent this blog know (and often condemn me for), I believe there is no god. That’s quite different from saying “I don’t believe in God.” When I say I believe there is no god, I mean that in this vast universe (or maybe multiverse) I don’t choose to not believe in a god, but that there is no god to not believe in. There’s a distinction, and I’m very certain where I stand. It’s deeply personal to me, and I don’t really begrudge those who choose to believe that an invisible man lives in the sky. Sometimes people need to believe in something more, I suppose, even if it’s not real. And while I recognize I’m in the minority, and I’m happy to argue religion and god with you, I won’t push my thoughts on you unless you ask. But I wish that Russell Simmons could put aside the idea of God or Allah for a while. It would be more honest and it would certainly help a lot more people.
Simmons, who has said that Allah, working through the Nation of Islam has helped young criminals change their lives for the better, implied last week that God was going to punish America if we didn’t do what President Obama wants us to do. He said that we were under indictment, apparently by an invisible father figure who really likes socialism and doesn’t want anyone to achieve Simmons’ level of success. God, according to Simmons’ ideology, apparently wants us all to be equally miserable. (God actually wants us all dead, given that until we invented science and started figuring out how to extend our lives, we died in our twenties. But that’s another article.) Simmons actually believes that his god, who created all of existence and (as most believers tell me when we discuss the matter) created the whole of the good in the universe, will hurt us if we don’t do what one man in one tiny little whisper of time (cosmically speaking) tells us to do. As someone who thinks religion is mostly primitive superstition and performance theater, I can’t help but be afraid.
If Russell Simmons could put aside what he learned from his “second father” Louis Farrakhan and his nutty superstitions, including a 6 a.m. prayer and meditating in the “zen room” he showed off on “MTV Cribs,” he could really transform peoples’ lives. If he could stop believing that Allah or God or Jesus (Simmons doesn’t publicly define himself by any religion) handed him his beautiful life and recognize that it came from his own hard work, understanding of and ability to cross cultural barriers, tremendous foresight, and perfecting the hustle he developed as a street kid before transforming it into slick, successful and legitimate business practices, he might be able to inspire others to aspire to create the same for themselves. He might also recognize that Allah hasn’t ever helped a single young criminals turn his life around, but rather it was the desire within those young men to aspire to more, to clean up and work hard.
It is only the will of people to make the world better that ever actually makes the world better. It’s not Jesus who sends those checks to the kids Sally Struthers used to parade around on late night TV, it’s you. Moses hasn’t fed anyone in Bangladesh in a long, long time. The Buddha never helped anyone with AIDS, but Penn and Teller have. And it’s not Allah who gives clean water and sanitation to third-world nations, it’s Matt Damon. Batman and Superman aren’t going to save the world and God isn’t going to destroy it. We’ll have to do all of that. And for the most part, we try to do good things for people we love, and sometimes for people we don’t even know, as someone did for me this past week.
Simmons’ apocalyptic statement last week really scares me. It scares me because it discounts mankind as a whole, and places our collective destiny in the non-existent hands of an invisible man who lives in the sky. It scares me even more, however, because it uses and abuses the irrational fear many people have of punishment at the hands of whatever god to push a political agenda that directly contradicts Simmons own life experience and the foundation of a country that gave him the chance to achieve success most of us can’t even imagine. But try to imagine it for a moment: Imagine being able to buy anything in the world you want. Or give as much money as you want to any cause or charity or individual you want. Or to be able to take your children anywhere in the world you want at a moment’s notice. That’s Russell Simmons’ life.
Now imagine you have created all of that through your own hard work and intelligence and you tell people they must believe in an invisible man or face destruction. And then you use the power you have built from less-than-nothing to encourage people to follow a man whose policies would have kept you from achieving what you have worked so hard for and that would condemn those people who you could otherwise inspire to a life where hard work no longer means anything and excellence is a distant memory. Like I said, Russell Simmons confuses me.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
269 Comments
When you pour the pure water of faith into the rusty vessel called man, you can't blame the faith for pouring out of the vessel tainted. This sort of dispute is exactly why people should be allowed to come to faith on their own without trying to sell their way as the only way. God doesn't take sides in human politics; he wants every person to be free to follow him or not as they choose. If God wanted obedient servants, he'd have been content with the angels.
As to charity and good works, God wants us to give of ourselves, not to be forced to give by someone else.
"those who choose to believe that an invisible man lives in the sky". I've never met anyone who believes this. I'm religious and I don't believe this. Maybe it's just one of those phrases that atheist love to repeat, a mantra, if you will.
Maybe you're just being flippant. Who cares if you don't believe in God? Just say you are not religious or spiritual and leave it at that. The "dude in the sky" is truly a figment of the atheists' imagination. By the way, if Simmons were an atheist, he'd just be a run of the mill communist. God help us!
Good article, but:
"I don’t really begrudge those who choose to believe that an invisible man lives in the sky. Sometimes people need to believe in something more, I suppose, even if it’s not real."
Maybe people condemn you because of lines like that and not your atheistic belief, Mr. Wilson. I wouldn't dare condescend to anyone's beliefs like that even if I disagreed with it.
"I don’t really begrudge those who choose to believe that an invisible man lives in the sky…"
You know, I'm an atheist, too, and I say that you shouldn't do that. You could have — a lot easier — simply written something like, "I don't really begrudge believers," without the insult.
How come you couldn't resist that? It makes it kind of hard to take you at your word.
It’s deeply personal to me, and I don’t really begrudge those who choose to believe that an invisible man lives in the sky. Sometimes people need to believe in something more, I suppose, even if it’s not real.
Oh come on, you can be honest. You do begrudge us our views, otherwise you wouldn't feel the need to be so condescending.
Those common atheist snarks about "invisible men in the sky" or "imaginary friends" or the like always sounds a little strained and forced to me. As if they're not really convinced that they're right, and they're whistling past the graveyard with their fingers in their ears. "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU! INVISIBLE MAN! UNICORNS! LA LA LA LA!"
"Jesus or Allah or whichever figment of your imagination you worship must exist somewhere."
More arrogance and condescention. Why don't you just call all believers stupid and spare us the two paragraph charade?
I guess rational thought is just too much, too soon, for too many.
I still stand with my Christian brothers and sisters to try to save this country from Obama and his ilk. Of all the natural rights, the human right to property is one of the most precious. Dims act as if that right means nothing. They're the flippant ones.
"Oh yeah, take it from him and him and him; they've got plenty. Oh, yeah, I select you and you and you and you to receive the property I just stole from him and him and him. Will you vote for me, please, next time around? Oh, no, I'm not attempting to buy your vote. I'm an ethical, upstanding, noble, humanitarian Democrat who only wants to help my fellow humans."
I guess rational thought is just too much, too soon, for too many.
I still stand with my Conservative Christian brothers and sisters to try to save this country from Obama and his ilk. Of all the natural rights, the human right to property is one of the most precious. Dims act as if that right means nothing. They're the flippant ones.
"Oh yeah, take it from him and him and him; they've got plenty. Oh, yeah, I select you and you and you and you to receive the property I just stole from him and him and him. Will you vote for me, please, next time around? Oh, no, I'm not attempting to buy your vote. I'm an ethical, upstanding, noble, humanitarian Democrat who only wants to help my fellow humans."
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Big Hollywood, Fernando Colon. Fernando Colon said: I Wish Russell Simmons Were an Atheist http://bit.ly/QcqhF [...]
"I guess rational thought is just too much, too soon, for too many."
Are you kidding me? You're starting to sound like Bill Maher now.
[...] the rest here: I Wish Russell Simmons Were an Atheist This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
I certainly don't think believers are stupid. They are like all of us, in many senses: Afraid of this world and our eventual deaths, bound by past teachings that go back to childhood, of good intent to help their human brothers and sisters.
That said, your beliefs don't make any sense. It's no favor to you for me to pretend that they do.
Mr. Wilson – I agree with you: religion or even personal belief (as you define it for yourself) is indeed…PERSONAL, and I, as a Christian, will not presume to debate what you have formed for yourself through your own experience and education.
However, I'd like to throw in my two cents and its less a quibble with what youve said than it is making a distinction of my own: it is of my faith that those Good things that "I" do (and I WILL presume to speak in a broader sense and use "I" to mean the general Christian population) do NOT come from me, but the inspiration for it comes from Outside myself – that I have the ability to receive from a Spirit the impulse to "do the right thing."
Mr. Limbaugh also says "talent on loan from God" for a good reason and it harkens back to this "Spirit." No talent or gift that I have was created by myself – it was in spiritu – given from an Outside. If Id been able to create talents and gifts for myself, I would not be sitting here as a housewife and writer, but Id be in the thick of Egypt, digging up Imhotep's lost tomb…or I'd be the famous forensic anthropologist that Hollywood is making a TV series out of. These were things I aspired to be, but found I do not have the talent for that as much as I have the talent for other things. In my faith, I was given these talents for a reason, and it is up to me to apply the discernment and will to use them as they were meant to be used.
Having said all THAT, I agree totally – I wish Simmons was an atheist of the Obama religion he is promoting. There is something sick going on in the country now, an infection that is showing symptoms of a deeper problem.
Michael Wilson Hates Religion – Coming Soon To A Theater Near You
"I will tolerate you just long enough to get what we both want from each other, but after that I'm gone"
so the uneasy alliance remains in place
Why do Athiests/Democrats/other Denominations begruge me my stupid beliefs and yet I never begrudge them theirs. I think you are wrong but I'm not going to belittle you for it. I will try to explain it as best i can, but at the end of the day, we will propbably not convince each other of very much.
I really enjoy hearing a different take on something it will often make me think.
Why the animosity?
Obama's conversion because of a church's organization rather than it's teachings (taking him at face value here) seems sad to me. It is no different than my Sister-in-law converting so she could be married in the cool Synagogue building. (the Rabbi didn't seem to care what their faith was as long as they went through the ceremony. And that to me is even more sad.) If as a professed believer you are going to convert, shouldn't it be for a deeper reason?
Of course the Athiest might say it really doesn't matter, but the political expediency/photo op motivation is repugnant to me.
esgaroth and mr. wilson,
i'm glad mr. simmons is not an atheist….i just imagine how much worse mr. simmons would be without it and how much better mr. wilson would be with it….just my two cents…..
I get your point, but mine was to say that I wish he were an atheist of Obama. If he chooses to worship Allah, I have no quarrel with that. Its the Marxism/cultism that he displays that I have a problem with. Obama is one of those cult personalities that the Bible warned us about and I wish Simmons had the atheism to disbelieve Obama.
You wrote: "I will tolerate you just long enough to get what we both want from each other, but after that I'm gone."
If you're ascribing that attitude to me, I can't imagine why. I don't belittle you for believing. I don't want to be rid of you. I don't view you as a useful idiot. I see the faithful as (generally) good, smart people who live with some pretty heavy falsehoods.
Politics and religion are in no way intertwined, at least in my mind. I am pleased and happy to know every political Conservative in my life, of any religious stripe whatever.
Believers say they accept their tenets on faith, and that science is either incomplete or wrong. Still, if one tiny bit of science even SEEMS to support their faith, they trumpet it as "evidence." To me, faith requires no evidence and evidence destroys faith. My favorite believers are those who would never use government to "help" religion, in general or in specific (to their particular brand of faith).
Great job!!!!!!!!!!! We've got to be much more aggressive with Atheism. God isn't in the sky or the dirt–he isn't. Religion is Leukemia and the world has a full blown case.
Oddly enough, many Christians say very similar things about Muslims or Wiccans, and vice versa. Heck, there are Protestants who say very similar things about Catholics with their "relics" and "intercessionary prayers". Everyone's atheist about a whole host of gods; atheists just disbelieve in one extra god.
Well, you certainly responded to the most important part of my comment. Well, I guess it was most important to you, because the rest of it was just tripe, you know, pointing out how much all political Conservatives have in common.
Bill Maher is a goon who happens to be right in one narrow part of his outlook. I certainly hope I never start believing in magic, the way he does. I place my reliance on science (hey, I busted a rhyme).
ok yeah agressive on my part
since morals are what much of religion is about it is difficult for many of us to set that aside when it comes to politics, because it deals with many issues that border on morality.
I might do the same if it wern't for a sympathetic streak for the non-mainstreamers (I apparently belong to a denominaion that is quite disliked by much of the country)
That is why i like a Libertarian flavor to my politics. It seems to hold a "how, where or what they may" type of attitude.
you can think I have a diseased brain all you want. You have that freedom. I won't insult your intellegence, and all I ask in return is that you not insult mine.
I wish you no harm but you say your beliefs are stupid. So, why can't I say they are stupid? Suppose I said kids should eat 3 pounds of mud everyday. Are you going to tell me –Oh, that's OK. You see, Atheists see religion as eating mud.
It's either that or an accidental walking around bag of chemicals whose highest form of existence is Bill Maher that exists on an accidental clump of dirt.
http://www.youtube.com/user/jaguarhorse
I'm an atheist too, man, but this isn't the way to talk about it. I used to get angry with religion too, now I'm past it. 90%+ of people will always be religious. It's human nature. Ask yourself if you want to be a minority in a highly religious area or if you'd rather live in Berkeley, CA, which is essentially like living under Islam. Progressivism is a religion and it's not tolerant of your dissent. Christians do tolerate dissent, and that's the best-case scenario you can hope for. Simmons is trying to put socialism in the spot where Christianity is in people. That's exactly what Marxists have been doing since day one. You can't fill that hole in people with nothing. You don't have that hole and never did, but most people do. They need an Answer, a moral structure that is as real as physics. To me and you it seems painfully silly. But ignore that the hole exists and expect people to leave it empty is folly. It's best to hope for them to fill it with something constructive, like Christianity, and just get out of the way of it.
Did the ability to gauge sarcasm leave you like a belief in God did?
while you work very hard to create the impression of an "enlightened athiest" you in fact are no such thing. When you refer to the concept of God as "an invisible man in the sky" you are simply dismissing the belief in God as something quite idiotic.
So, own up to it and stop lying about your true stance.
As for me, I am open to both sides of the God argument. What is the downside?
"I don’t really begrudge those who choose to believe that an invisible man lives in the sky. "
When you imagine other people's version of God as an invisible man that lives in the sky, it becomes pretty clear that you DO begrudge those who believe in something.
…I don’t really begrudge those who choose to believe that an invisible man lives in the sky."
Good, because that's exactly NO ONE. If you're going to criticize religion, it's best if you first accurately represented it.
See I have to disagree with you on that, the fact that Simmons is using religion as a shield to protect his warped views on politics just goes to prove he is not a truely religious man. Putting wrapping paper on dirt doesn't make the dirt look better anymore than wrapping religion around a political ideal.
If religion is leukemia, then atheists like you are herpes.
I have been an agnostic for most of my life and also a conservative/classical liberal. I lack the capacity to have faith in some idea that cannot be proved; however, I also know the limitations of my intelligence and I know I am not so wise as to be able to claim I have final knowledge about the most important question man has ever asked: does God exist. I believe in the necessity of freedom and liberty for man to seek his own happiness and also to truly do good works. Like John Stuart Mill, I believe no act done to help another can truly be called good unless it was done entirely from free will and without belief in some later reward. I also like to think that if God does exist the greatest gift [he] would have given mankind was that of free will, because it is only with free will that man has the freedom and liberty to do good acts.
If religion is leukemia, then atheists like you are a bad case of herpes.
The Evil Left has even hijacked faith — take Micheal Moore's claim to be a Christian! (I know Christians, and you sir ARE NO CHRISTIAN!) and the Black Liberation Left use the Black-Faith Card like it's equally dangerous The Race Card — it's all a hoax — it's all about an complete Godless Leftist Takeover.
THIS ATHEIST SOMETIMES HATES ATHEISM…!!
BREAKING NEWS — Example: A family member dies, and his grieving child comes to me for comfort.
I wish, oh how I wish, that I could tell that child that, one day, he will have a miraculous reunion with the loved one he just lost. Just that one application would make all the other crazy stuff about religion more or less acceptable.
I envy the true believers that aspect of religion, the part where you get to cheat death. Yet, I have chosen the only path that makes any sense whatever, to me, that of relying on mankinds best efforts rather than wish-thinking and fantasy.
The comments on this page are the issue with there being no conversation left to be had in this country anymore. Stop being personally offended by everything and look at the issue. We all can't fit in these boxes everyone tries to put us in. This is someone's view of religion, believe it or not it isn't a personal attack on you the person reading it unless you see yourself as a cookie cutter and in that case there is no hope for you.
This country is going to crap because everyone gets offended by everything. People know what instills fear in others when getting on a plane yet they still do it and when arrested sue the airline and make money. I was "personally offended". How to deal with your feelings should be taught in high school. It's not a right for your feelings to never be hurt just like it's not your right to walk through life not being offended.
LISTEN with something other than emotion and you may actually find yourself seeing a new perspective.
Ironic isn't it that Simmon's Islam is a violently intolerant unsecular religion that treats half of their adherents as mere chattel. How apt of him to frame any lack of support for Obama with God's wrath being visited upon us. Simmon reveals himself to be intolerant and unsecular to the core.
I'm not a practicing Christian but, I'll stand behind the gifts it bestowed on our western culture, not the least of which was Christ's permission to form secular societies with "render unto Caesar….." That's a permission that the Islamic world mired in intolerance, tribalism and violence desperately needs.
All right, now I can have a nice discourse with you.
A lot of atheists (you and pundit SE Cupp included) seem to envy those of faith, and it seems to be very genuine when they say it but they just can't go back because their reasoning won't let them and religion left the station a long time ago.
See, I'm dubious of the whole "miraculous reunion" because I don't picture Heaven or an afterlife like that. Hell, I'm not even sure there is an afterlife, but I don't the thought of one to be religious of have a belief in God.
Take care.
Yeah, he lost me on that one too. "Oh, poor little superstitious savages, you cannot be brought into the light of reason no matter what we do." Spare me.
LOL — I'm hardly a well-reasoned person. I'm a jumbled-up mess. But thanks for the vote of confidence. I'm certainly striving to get to that stage, the "oh-so-reasoned" part of life.
Excellent points, and very well made ones, indeed…!!
Thank you for the incisive comments.
Well said.
Personally, I go to church once a week for worship because I know I have a lot to be thankful for and I wish to express gratitude for it. I do this by attending service, and by performing volunteer work in the community, through the church. I am responsible for my actions, and my inactions. This is all part of my faith, just as much as the sacraments.
God did not intend for us to be slaves or blind followers. He gave us reason and intellect to use in our development. He only wants voluntary worship and love from Man.
"Progressivism is a religion and it's not tolerant of your dissent."
Amen.
Okay, what if I were to say atheists are "immoral heathens who are certain to rot in Hell as a result of what I believe their skewed views?" (Which I don't believe)
That kind of talk doesn't foster any understanding or discourse. It's bomb-throwing.
Here's how I view atheism: You came a different hypothesis than I did. Certain evidence and reason swayed you towards your views, and I respect that.
"Simmons is trying to put socialism in the spot where Christianity is in people. That's exactly what Marxists have been doing since day one. You can't fill that hole in people with nothing."
Marxists like to fill empty holes with people. They're called "mass graves".
” When I say I believe there is no god, I mean that in this vast universe (or maybe multiverse) I don’t choose to not believe in a god, but that there is no god to not believe in."
It is not uncommon for an Athiest to make some claim against religious belief by labeling it "blind faith". However, what the OP has written above is far and away the greatest statement of "Blind Faith" that can be made. To make a claim of what may or may not exist in "this vast universe" is the height of hubris. He discounts the Christian's belief in an all-knowing GOD but then tries to pass an attempt at omniscience as a "personal belief".
cont.
I cannot speak for any other Christian, but for me. There was a man who lived, who died and who rose again to life. Who appeared to individuals, to the Twelve and to hundreds more. A man who walked with them and talked with them. Who they could touch. Who they could sit and eat with. These people in turn left home and country to tell others what they saw and through that action changed the world in the name of Jesus Christ.
You can argue that you don't believe but learn a little humility and realize that you do not know what the universe holds, much less anything of the ONE who made it.
I think white lies are OK. Or are you just brutally honest in every instance of your life?
You should read some Polkinghorne and some D'Souza. Try it out.
And some people who are religious do believe just that! I'm not offended by someone saying that just like I'm not offended at this authors VIEWPOINT of atheism. I know what I believe and to be personally offended by how another perceives what I believe due to my own experience is ridiculous and would make me wonder if my beliefs are that strong. I know what I believe. Your opinion of how I came to that hypothesis means nothing, but I'll listen.
Glad you liked it.
I wouldn't dare argue how anyone came to their religious decisions.
When your wife has to wear a sheet you will know.
you are right, I usually preach that myself. So I recognize myself, somewhat, in what you wrote. On the other hand belaboring the issue to the point of insult is another thing.
People should not be quick to take offense, nor should we be quick to state things we know to be offensive.
Like the commedian hiding behind "well it is just my job" we should use the "you are oversensitive" response sparingly
"It is still bad taste to be an avowed atheist. But now it is equally bad taste to be an avowed Christian." — G.K. Chesterton
I don't have enough faith to be an Athiest. God exist everywhere, at all times. The fact that the concept evades you means you don't understand that which you don't believe. God loves us enough to make our own decisions because a forced relationship is no relationship. How loving to you think God would be if he kept everyone locked up "safe" and didn't allow them to live their life? You assume life is the greatest thing so death is a bad thing ("doomed us to die"). The life after death is far superior to what we have now.
Please prove your statements/ideas, Thanks
so all religious practitioners are Fundamentalist Theocrats who opress women?
Yeah people to point to the sky after they hit a homerun or score a touchdown or score a goal. I don't know where anyone would get the idea of a "dude in the sky".
I will meet you on our common ground. Russell Simmons would benefit young men and women across the country by talking about hard work, perseverance, dedication, focus, etc…..believe in self, and strength of character, treating others as you wish to be treated, avoiding drugs and other self destructive habits….Could not agree with you more on these lines…….
Mmm I think is funny to hear your statements about people of faith. Sad to see you such things that make you seem so uninformed. Religion and faith in God are two totally different things maybe you'll come to understand it and if you can please try and not belittle people of faith atheist seemto have a problem with that and keep their hatred for people of faith
Craig
An atheist is by nature an individualist. I don't believe any form of collectivism or group thought. I think it is dangerous. The fact that so many of you get offended by any perceived slight of your group think is reminiscent of liberal incredulity, not rational individual free-think.
-I am thinking of preemptively attacking all the obvious replies to this, but I think my efforts would be futile.
If my concept of God was as simple as a man in the sky, I wouldn't believe either.
But it's not. It's much bigger than that.
One question…..what about the resurrection of Jesus? Hundreds of witnesses – Biblical and non-biblical, miracle after miracle. Response?
If the replies are so obvious would that not indicate the weakness of your statements or at least places where you might reinforce them?
"I don't believe any form of collectivism or group thought."
So why have you previously referred to yourself as an "Objectivist"? Do you hold to the philsophy espoused by Ayn Rand and if so how is that not a form of group thought?
"The fact that so many of you get offended by any perceived slight of your group think is reminiscent of liberal incredulity, not rational individual free-think."
And yet judging by your comments history, whenever an athiest is put to task for attacking or belittling religious belief you come to their defense. How is that any different than a Christian coming to the defense of religious belief?
Yeah, Isaac Newton, Galileo, John Locke, Thomas Acquinas – all these wacky Christians just don't understand rational thought. How old are you HumanPersonJr – fifteen?
Why do you have to be much more aggressive? I don't believe there is an Easter Bunny, either, but I don't feel the need to aggressively push my opinion.
(And, before you throw out that old canard about "how religion has killed more people than…" learn your history).
I find bits and pieces of many philosophies that inform my belief structure; Ayn Rand's Objectivism, which celebrates the individual, is one of them.
Good question.
I am simply defending the idea of individualism and the right to pursue individual freedom without persecution based on a collectivist belief. A philosophy that promotes individuality will always receive my defense. By it's own nature, religion or dogma seem to be collectivist. Writing books about the virtues of individuality or discussing those views don't seem to me, to be collectivist. Creating a religion to control the masses for the greater good, well that's another thing.
I try to be as consistent in my beliefs as I can. I think the means are important.
I certainly enjoy the challenges. Especially if the point out hypocrisy on my part.
I can only assume that you are willfully ignorant to all the religious based charities and organizations that go around the world helping people. How many atheist foundations are there to help fight AIDs in Africa? Compared to how many religious based ones?
It's so amusing when smug atheists say, with absolute authority, that there can be no God or gods, not realizing that shows you for what you are, close minded, small, and petty. But hey, I'm just a religious nut who isn't doing enough, apparently, because I'm not smart enough to not believe in God and help my fellow man. Whatever that means.
If only we could get rid of all that "god" nonsense and have a society based upon living for your fellow man! It worked great for the Russians and Chinese circa 1950's, right?
My, my, you show a different face from the one I debated in that other article, HumanPersonJr.
"What's wrong with assuming they live in the sky?" Well, I will speak for Christianity, since I am a Christian and all.
Nowhere in the Christian faith does it say that God lives "in the sky". It does say He dwells in heaven, but it also says that He existed before all time(i.e. before the creation of the universe). So, He does not "exist" in this universe like a tree or a planet exists. So, to say that God is merely "a man in the sky" is not only wrong in regards to Christian doctrine, it's incredibly condescending, meant to imply those that believe in God are childish or stupid.
Also, you should know better speaking of the heart. When Christians speak of the heart, we don't mean the physical organ, we mean your inmost being. You're center, as it were, from whence you life comes forth. We call it the heart, because that is the physical organ that represents it best. Without a heart, no one can live. That is what we mean when Jesus lives in our hearts. Not that He's hanging out in one chamber or any nonsense like that.
God does Love us. How did he doom us to die in our twenties? Wait, I thought there was no God? How could something that does not exist doom us to die? You're all over the place here. Which is it? Is there no God(which makes you a fool for arguing with insane, delusional person like me) or is a God and He is cruel and wicked? Make up your mind.
Also, the church put its thumb on scientific advancement? Please, that argument is laughable. In which society did science, as we know it today, really take off? Christian medieval Europe. Why not the Chinese? Or Indians? Or Africans? They had been around a long time before western civilization. The reason why science, as we know it today, came about is because Christianity allowed for the world view that there is a God who created and ordered the universe to act in a certain way and that we could figure out what those ways were. Without that, there's no reason to think this world or all of the universe should act in an ordered and structured way.
You show your true colors in this post. Your anger, hatred, and disdain. Fortunately, you don't have to live that way and you know what you need to do. Until next time, God bless.
Hmm, I made several statements so the vagueness of your request makes this difficult. However, perhaps if I used the word virtuous instead of good, it might be easier. If a person donates to charity, a good act, but only to get the tax break or to be able to publicly proclaim their generosity, then that person is not acting out of true concern for others but rather for some later reward. If a person volunteers for some worthy cause, a good act, because they can tax deduct their time or because of public notice then again they are acting for their own ultimate good and the volunteering is simply the means to obtain that end. If a person does good acts in the hope of receiving "reward" from their God, then once again the good acts are simply the means with which they obtain some ultimately beneficial end. The acts are not done solely for the good of the recipient but more for the good of the doer. True virtue and altruism is doing good acts simply because those acts are the right thing to do not because there is a promise of some near or distant reward.
What people want and desire by nature sometimes does exist. C. S. Lewis's "argument from desire" reasons thusly:
The intrinsic needs of human beings (e.g., hunger, thirst, sexual desire) are fulfilled by extrinsic realities (food, drink, sexual intercourse). Since the vast majority of human beings have an intrinsic need to experience transcendence, there is likely an extrinsic transcendent reality (God) to fulfill this need.
Rather than committing the wishful thinking fallacy, Lewis's argument may be viewed as a type of inference to the best explanation about human nature.
Ardent non-believers will not accept any evidence presented to them. Even eye witnesses to the miracles Jesus performed, including raising people from the dead, did not convince them He was the Messiah. It is very difficult for one who trusts reason to believe it can lead one to believing in the supernatural.
Without God, there is no rational basis for human liberty. Atheistic proponents of the intrinsic rights of man unwittingly ride on the wave caused by the splashdown of the incarnation into human history. Nihilism (the only logical conclusion of atheism) does not produce freedom.
To criticize Theism based upon the words and actions of this Simmons person strikes me as akin to criticizing Medicine based upon the conduct of Josef Mengele. Any idea can be either misunderstood, or understood well, and then manipulated to achieve the opposite of its true intent. I am confident that whatever agenda this guy has (Simmons, that is) he could find many means to promote it; if he is using Religion, it is only because that is what seems most expedient.
"That's a permission that the Islamic world mired in intolerance, tribalism and violence desperately needs."
That's why I agree with Anne Coulter: convert them to Christianity, tell them to "come to Jesus" – Christian believe the blood-price has already been paid.
Excellent remarks!
You say
"When I say I believe there is no god, I mean that in this vast universe (or maybe multiverse) I don’t choose to not believe in a god, but that there is no god to not believe in. There’s a distinction, and I’m very certain where I stand."
Fair enough, but respectfully, let me ask you this:
How is it possible for you to posit a logical negative?
It seems to me that the only rational way you could do that is to have all knowledge of the entire universe at the same time to assert conclusively that there is no god. If you don't have that knowledge, isn't it possible that god exists, just not in a place you know about? If you *do* possess that knowledge, aren't *you* god?
I guess what I'm getting at is that from a logic/reasoning perspective the best you can do is say "I don't think there's a god" or "I don't see evidence of god"
Of course, as one on the other side of this issue, I see God pretty much everywhere I look, but then, that's me.
If someone said they really believe in the Easter Bunny would you challenge that, you think? If someone told you kids should eat 3 pounds of mud. Would you just let it pass? Atheists feel religion does the same amount of damage as eating mud. I like Idaho french fries BTW.
I think we need to stop giving religion a free pass. There is no evidence of god — and don't say the bible. See my Utube video on angels at newstogod. Take care
I have to say this about Russel Simmons. He's a very accomplished man, and there is much that could be said about an example that he could be setting for young people. I saw him speak at a leadership conference a couple of years ago and he expressed some good concepts about providing financial services for poor people.
Unfortunately he was essentially incoherent – he could not string two sentences together in a sensible way. I don't know if he was having mental problems or was under the influence of mind-alterers, but the example he set that day was not a good one, and it made me sad.
Me too!
Geesh, I wish I could be that sure of anything! So, we agree to disagree – but not aggressively, I hope.
Atheists accuse Christians of proselytizing – isn't that what you're doing?
Just as liberals say there are no absolutes – absolutely.
Glad you enjoy the fries – unfortunately I'm an IdahoGal stuck in California!
Hey Russell Simmons! My God can beat up your God! This may sound infantile. Well it is.
And infusing religion into politics is a perfect way to start wars. I'd say check your high school history book but it probably blames America for every war since Moses walked…oh never mind. And the New Cold War is internally now American.
thank you for that – yup, I'm a believer, but not of some old dude up in the sky with a long grey/white beard in a white robe with really cool air-jesus sandals handing down life lessons. anyways, your line if a much better fit.
Mr Wilson, you have posted intellectual gobbledy-gook. You have confused quirks of English grammar for Grand Truths about the universe. "I believe there is no god, not I don't believe in God." yes yes we all know the difference between the open mindedness of agnostics and the supposed inversed closed mindedness of atheists, but you really suck at demonstrating the difference. You come off as somebody who could only pull off the cliff-notes versions of Wittgenstein, Quine, and Austin, if at all. Pathetic….
I don't know that you can say Atheists are individualists by nature, not uniformly, anyway — what do you make of the phenomenon of Atheists starting "freethinking" summer camps for children and social groups with structures closely resembling those of modern Christian churches?
To the contrary, I think your average "new atheist" is perfectly cognizant that it's a lot easier to get a movement going if you create a social structure and immerse the next generation in your beliefs while deconstructing opposing beliefs before they encounter them for themselves. Else why make the summer camps, why send your children to classes deconstructing other peoples beliefs, why put up the signs on buses?
For that matter, what do you make of the rigid socialist structures that were started in Russia and China of which Atheism was a mandatory part? The idol of the state, of the collective, is jealous and capricious. The statist, whether religious or atheist, ultimately wants and needs to place this idol on the highest throne in the heart of the masses. For the religious socialist, this means attempting to ignore how the state replaces God as a source of strength while cherry picking the parts of genuine religious teaching that SEEM to support his agenda. For the atheist socialist this means simply denying God exists and that humanity requires a REAL savior, in the form of the state.
I submit that, all things being equal, the atheist socialist will come by his socialism more naturally and easily (and more honestly) than his religious counterpart — the religious socialist must strain to harmonize his political idol with his god, while the atheist is under no such burden.
For what it's worth, what you say here is in line Christ's teachings, especially the part about doing things for public notice or other earthly rewards.
Also, as a Christian, I would say:
We do virtuous acts not in hope of receiving a future reward from God; but, in gratitude for what he has already done for us.
I am in the bible belt there's a church on every corner and people pray for bowel movements here. somebody's got to say something. What nonsense.
Many times when I listen to my "fellow atheists" I'm reminded of an old story I once heard. Once there was a man with a snake for a pet. His mother was worried that he spent too much time with his snake, and not enough time with other people. So she enrolled him in a herpetology club, so that he could gather with other people who liked reptiles. One day she asked him how it was going, and was he making any friends. He replied, no, mother. Why not, she asked? He replied, well, basically we all sit around at the meetings looking around and thinking, I know why I like snakes, but why does HE like snakes?
That was my first impression of this article. The author's idea that Russell Simmons would be better off as an atheist, presumably ridiculing people who believe in an "invisible man in the sky" as opposed to whatever he's saying now, doesn't sound like an improvement to me. Also, I think the author of the original post misses something when he states that the only reason for success is people's own hard work. I worked hard for years, up to and including the time I lost my job several months ago when I was laid off. There are 3.5 million other Americans who were hard working and now are struggling along without jobs or the prospect of one. We're "unlucky," not lazy or delusional. The belief that God or Allah is helping people succeed seems to me to reflect the idea of humility — that in spite of all of our best efforts, it might just not be enough. Humility, I've found, is something sorely lacking in a lot of my fellow snake-lovers, also known as atheists.
I myself was raised as a Catholic, and have experienced both periods of devout belief and lack of same. For the past several decades, I've been an atheist. However, I'll never forget the event that set me free of the feeling that I had to prosletyze about it. Years ago, my mother was visiting from out of town during Christmastime. She asked me to take her to midnight mass, which I more or less begrudgingly agreed to. At the time, I was of the it's-all-a-delusion mindset about religion common to many atheists, and the idea of going to church made me wary. However, my experience at the midnight mass was one of being charmed by the fact that here I was in a pleasant community of people who were very happy to share their own happiness with strangers. The music was nice, the atmosphere one of love and acceptance, and at one point in the service people smiled at one another and happily shook hands, wishing peace to the total strangers in their midst. And what could be evil or delusional about any of that?
Since then I've learned not to ridicule people for having something that makes them content and able to live at peace with one another. On the other hand, I've also learned (via 9/11) to be skeptical of believers who use their beliefs, whether positive or negative, to control and destroy others. Remember: the 9/11 terrorists were very religious. But the people who've used 9/11 as an excuse to demonize America were, in many instances, progressive atheists. One can use their belief or lack of same simply to sow dissension and hatred. To paraphrase one commenter, sometimes what is poured into a vessel can be very different when it's poured out.
Excellent points. And it is those type of beliefs that make me thankful that I live in a nation founded upon Judeo-Christian values and not anywhere else.
What is constructive about Christianity? I'd argue it's very destructive. People wasting hours and days and lives praying and proselytizing instead of learning about things that can actually change the world like science and charitable giving and basic human decency. Christianity in history has been one of the most repressive, destructive forces in the world has ever seen (second only to Islam, I'd say).
And yes I'm a republican. I wish people could separate conservatism from religiosity. They do have and should have nothing to do with each other.
The major religions are monotheistic (Christianity, Islam and Judaism being the largest). Monotheism means you believe in one god and reject all others as mythology.
As an atheist, I take it one further and say that they are all mythology.
We are not really so different, you and I.
I love the "invisible man" comment. Because it's always about treating us like we're too retarded to handle real life ourselves and that we "need" to believe in someone else, because it's gotta be about us.
The point, is that it's not about us at all. It's about the fact that we were made by God to serve Him and worship Him and live as He wants us to. The reason that so many of us don't is that He also gave us choice. Choice is the reason that you all can choose to believe what you want to, and live as you want to, otherwise we'd all just be robots. God doesn't force us to do one thing or another. We live, we grow, we change, and we die.
I love that athiesm's main target is always God, though. You never hear them ripping into Buddhism, or Hinduism, or any of the new-age "I worship sticks and stones because Gaia the earth-mother told me to".
If there was no God, then were do we get moral absolutes from? Why do we know the difference between right and wrong? Good and evil? We have to get that from somewhere right? A supreme good for us to measure things by? Otherwise we'd be in the wilderness living like animals and eating our young and we would have all died off long ago.
And if you disagree with me, you're probably a racist.
Christianity was the cradle of modern science, and many priests were scientists who made fundamental breakthroughs. Show me the other religion anywhere like that.
And I think you're missing my point that people who need what religion offers are going to get it somewhere. Christianity is best-case.
Moral absolutes? Does a child need to know about God and have faith to know the feeling they have when abused is hurt? Does a woman who is raped need to have faith to understand what she is feeling, that what is happening is wrong and not right? Does a person held at gunpoint during a bank robbery need to believe in a supreme good to know it's wrong that her life just flashed before her eyes for simply going to the bank? Does a drunk individual need to be one of faith to to know it's wrong that they are getting behind the wheel?
People deserve a little more credit in the power of themselves. No faith or understanding of how people think the world was created has anything to do with I feel when wronged.
You seem to be saying the logical path of the Atheist is to become a socialist. What I make of the socialist atheist is that they are not intellectually consistent. It's much truer to say that the natural progression for the Atheist is to become a nihilist, but to do so would be to deny pragmatism. I think we should try to be as pragmatic as possible without violating our core beliefs.
My core is built on individual freedom and anything that stands in its way I oppose……except when it may be more pragmatic to say build a fence on the border.
I don't want to be an absolutist, but I also don't want to be like these liberals who hide behind the vagueries of nuance to explain their every hypocritical position.
I hope that makes some sense.
he was in a comma.
You must be logged in to post a comment.