You might be one of those who are abandoning Christianity; one for whom religious beliefs are not just irrelevant, but baseless. You might be right, at least to some extent. Some traditional beliefs are not true, and the “God” of main line traditions simply does not exist. Most people don’t dare to confront their religious beliefs, and opt for the status quo, afraid of abandoning the “certainty” of their convictions. Most have become marginalized from the institutional Church, and try to find an environment in which they may fill a vacuum in their lives.

An illuminating book gives hope to you! The author accepted the challenge of finding the One who is recognized, even by Gnostics and atheists—the Existence. “Christianity Reformed From its Roots – A Life Centered in God” is perhaps a generation ahead of the current mentality, but you might find that there is something for you, too!

Bishop John Shelby Spong says of this book that it “rightly points out that those who seek to defend Christianity’s past are also killing Christianity’s future.” I am attaching two reviews of the book by eminent philosophers and thinkers that might give you an idea if this book is an insightful reading for you. You might look also at excerpts of the book at this link of Amazon.com.

Sincerely,

Jairo Mejia, M. Psych., Santa Clara University
Author - Retired Episcopal Priest
Carmel Valley, California

http://www.mbay.net/~jmejia/Grudzen.htm

Regarding the second point, I have no research to point to, only my observations. The reason I say irrational belief is the “default setting” is because the world is too complex an entity to understand given the meager tools of the mind available at birth and into adolescence. Inevitably, without some kind of guiding influence, children seem to grow up believing in things that are irrational. The “scientist inside” is a good point, however, and so I think there are at least some natural components of the mind working against what I call this “default setting”.

I look at history as a source for my hypothesis: whenever humanist books are destroyed (i.e. the cumulative store of human knowledge that counters irrational thinking), there is a long road to recovery before a rational inquiry of the world can once again overtake, for example, supernaturalist explanations of things.

* Some of the recent atheists’ writings (e.g. Hitchens) do come across as religion-bashing polemics and might do more harm than good, but a lot of it (and I’d include Dawkins in this group, despite the harsh sound of his book’s title “The God Delusion”) is simply making a strong logical case for one side in this argument. I don’t see this so much as atheists going on the offensive as I see them finally putting up their hands to fend off the bashing they’ve been (mostly) silently taking for hundreds of years. In those “Would you vote for a…?” polls atheists typically rank somewhere between terrorists and dead people in the USA. Look at Sen. Elizabeth Dole’s “Godless American” political ads in NC as an example of the “atheist=devil” attitude that’s so common in this country, and note that the response isn’t “there’s nothing wrong with atheists” but rather “Kay Hagan (her opponent) teaches Sunday school”. I believe Dawkins and his ilk are doing a great service by educating people about what atheism is and isn’t and yes, they should certainly take the moral high road and not belittle religious people, but neither should they retreat into silent acceptance.

* re your point “Irrational belief is the ‘default setting’ for human beings”, I’m really curious where this idea comes from. I can’t cite any research either way, but I’d be surprised if that were a true statement. On the surface I’d assume the opposite was true, that from the moment we’re born we’re testing the environment to see what’s true and what’s not (rational investigation, aka science). If we didn’t have a strong cultural religious indoctrination I don’t think we’d naturally make up most of the stuff they preach. I grew up going to church and still go occasionally with family, and since becoming an atheist I’ve noticed that almost the entirety of church services consists of repeating the mantra “we believe in God” over and over in different forms (creeds, prayers, hymns, etc), as though worshipers’ dedication to the cause was held by a tiny thread that had to be reinforced over and over.

I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of not mocking anyone for their beliefs, and maybe Religulous does this (the title certainly implies it), but it’s important to not be silent, either.

Eric

Mike

He was very clear, however, in his reaction to people who choose to (or are conditioned into) act as if the religious books are literal.

I see his challenging what I call the mind-only relationship to religion, as a positive wake up call for both religious and non-religious people who are interested in a true, personal relationship with God/Spirituality.

Also, he’s clear on the fact that he’s not an atheist. Again, I will watch the movie, and I highly suggest the interview.

Best regards,

Andre

* atheism isn’t an organization or a group. It’s a category of people who only refuse to believe in the [mainstream] concept of a deity. There’s nothing about “atheism” that prescribes a person’s personality. Yes, there are “secular humanists” and “moral atheists”, but these people are a subset of atheists.
* I hope you are as critical of the religious as you are of atheists.
* I wouldn’t say at all that “irrational belief” is the default belief for humans. We are susceptible to synthesize ideas and form frameworks of our worldview, and from there we *often* come up with conclusions that are later proven false or true or become more and more unlikely (animism, polytheism, monotheism…). I think that the humor atheists see in religion from the outside comes from the spectacular conclusions at which theists arrive.
* I agree with you that we should be more civil to each other and try to avoid elite attitudes (on both sides), although sometimes it takes a lot of work to make people open their minds.

Um, what is the theme?
I believe, the theme is much less controversial than what people make it out to be. He’s not making fun of religion, so keep that out of mind. Is he making fun of people who have a religion? Yes. What he is generating laughs from is not the doubt of a higher being, but the trust and vast amount of confusion in religions and those who do and don’t believe. You must agree that if you were a young child, and were “forced” to go to partake in your parents religious beliefs and/or rituals, you’re technically being brainwash and controlled to believe in it. Bill is merely saying, why is it true because you say it is, what’s wrong with not being sure, or being in the middle. So let’s all kick back and laugh about not bashing religion, but the goofy things that go on with people who got mixed and confused about religion along the way… (ex: believing you’re the second coming of jesus christ and wanting to tell EVERYONE / wanting to physically fight another because they disbelieve in your beliefs / telling church goers that birth control is wrong, so stop having sex or have lots of kids / people believing in something but being almost 100% clueless on who,what,when,where,why)