Many a Christian, engaged in a desperate attempt to save my soul, has claimed that when they surrendered to god to have had a supernatural experience. With the entrance of the spirit of god these people assert a cleansing of their soul. I respond, as is my nature, that it is all in their head.
Many an observer has had their perceptions tainted by their proximity to the object observed. When we step back a bit and observe behavior from the perspective of a disinterested party, reality becomes clearer. From the advantage offered by a more distant window, the disinterested party can apply reason and common sense, and perhaps discern a better, a clearer, view of the truth.
Christians claim a change. Do we in fact see evidence of this alteration? Is there evidence that this change is anything more than another façade erected to obscure the individual claimants true nature?
Christians continue to:
- commit criminal acts
- express hatred, jealousy, violence, bigotry
Christians claim a high moral ground. They claim that all morality originates from their god. They claim that even though they be in this world , they are not of it. Nevertheless, from the vantage point of the impartial viewer, they exhibit no signs of being different, being more moral, of having undergone a miraculous change.
From the overlooking, indifferent, observer observing the mass of what is called civilization, quite the opposite seems to be true. These Christians seem to exhibit much the same behavior as the preponderance of the population. Not only that, but they commit acts of immorality more frequently. When measured not by biblical, but modern human morality, Christians not only commit immoral acts more frequently, but also, while doing so, claim special privilege for doing so. The word of their god, the Bible, gives them special license, they claim, to express bigotry. They do not label it bigotry, society does. Society can go to hell, and will, by their standards. Violence committed in god’s name occurs, and has occurred, and is excused by these “loving” Christians, as righteous behavior. They make the old saying that “the winners write the history” starkly apparent.
Humans engage in both moral and immoral acts. Christians and nonbelievers both do good, and bad, service to humanity. Motivations for these acts are of importance. The behavior of a Christian is encouraged by fear. They fear their god. They are promised that if they obey the dictates of their god they will receive the generous reward of immortality. This reward works to assuage their natural fear of death. Conversely, they are repeatedly admonished, that if they do not acquiesce to the will of their god, they will suffer an indescribable and hideous, everlasting death. It appears, to the dispassionate and disinterested observer, they do good in the act of seeking a reward, or in seeking to avoid punishment. It would seem neither a generous, nor a selfless act. Naturally, it is true that nonbelievers are not as likely to do good. Altruism has never been a natural trait. It is arguable that altruism does not exist. Yet, many nonbelievers have given great sums of money for the benefit of humans with which they have no acquaintance. Neither seeking immortality, unless you count in the memories of those they help, nor seeking to be absolved from some indescribable punishment, acts of kindness, generosity, frequently are engaged in by those who are not aligned with any faith whatsoever. Such selfless giving, in the eyes of the disinterested party, the non-aligned party, seem of a much higher order than any of those committed by those claiming faith in the divine.
Observations from the precipice, the vantage point of the neutral observer, derive no evidence of divine guidance of the faithful from above. The behavior of the flocks of numerous religions compares to the general population in most respects, unfavorably in many other respects. If one were to claim the population of prisons as a measure of the morality of portions of the masses, the devout do not fare well. Yes, presently the percentage of the masses that claim divine guidance are a majority in the United States. Nevertheless, the portion of the prison population which the faithful comprise, is much greater still. This disparity cannot in whole be attributed to the proselytizing of the inmates, though religion is well known to feed relentlessly upon the down and out.
In conclusion it can be asserted that:
All humans are capable of committing good or evil acts
Christians exhibit no evidence of divine guidance nor of change
If there are altruistic acts, nonbelievers come closer to accomplishing such acts than believers
Religions, though they may have served to make groups more cohesive in the past, are detrimental, divisive, and undesirable now
What other conclusions can you derive?