A friend from college and I have been discussing whether the separation of church and state is what the founders intended and whether it is a good or bad thing for society.  After a few years of studying the issue, here are my conclusions.  I’ll keep it as brief as I can.

I despise intellectual dishonesty more than almost anything else. The simplest definition of intellectual dishonesty is when someone knowingly excludes information or data that would hurt his or her own point of view even though they are aware of its existence.  For example, some cell phone companies have stated there is no “conclusive” proof that older model phones cause brain cancer. That one word is key because there are studies that show heavy phone use correlation with increased tumor development. By using the qualifier “conclusive” (meaning beyond question), the companies can basically lie, while being legally protected because it is true according to the letter of the law.  There are millions of Americans buried in cemeteries because the tobacco companies used this same line of reasoning back in the 1950s and 1960s and they weren’t trained by the school system to pick up on this.  That is because the school system was created to churn out good factory workers and not leaders or thinkers.

Lately, in my reading, I’ve come across some religious authors who are stating that the United States was “always a Christian nation” and it was the intention of the founding fathers that we be ruled with a ethical system descending from the “desert religions” including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.  The evidence from the the founding fathers’ own writing disputes this, however, as well as their actions when they took the reigns of power after establishing the constitution. (more…)

  • Share/Bookmark
 

Back in college, when I was the student body treasurer and chairman of the finance board, a Christian group known as Campus Crusade for Christ threatened to sue the university because they wanted to be officially recognized.  The problem was they required that their elected leaders leaders sign a personal “Statement of Beliefs” pledge that included a provision affirming that homosexuality was a sin and the leader did not engage in immoral sexual conduct.

This went against the university’s non-discrimination policy and caused a lot of problems for us.  As a result, the administration did not want the Christian group recognized unless that provision was removed from their by laws.  This led to a lot of meetings with people from both sides and a request that until the matter was resolved, I stopped issuing checks to this group, yada yada yada.

At the exact same time, across the country in California, a law school was going through the same thing.  We resolved our issue in-house.  The folks on the west coast didn’t and they sued.  Their case went to the Supreme Court and was decided this morning, which I blogged about earlier.  I just finished reading the entire opinion in Christian Legal Society Chapter of University of California Hastings College of Law v. Martinez.  Here are my conclusions.

My Own Personal Background with a Similar Case

First, you all know that when I went through this, my official position was that any group should be able to discriminate as long as the opportunity to form an organization was open to everyone.  That way, if one group was a “I hate pastries” group, other students could form a, “I love pastries” group and free speech reigned.  The free market of ideas would sort out which group was more popular.  It was a libertarian-leaning position and I thought about it carefully, even calling home to talk to my parents about it for several hours as I worked out my opinion on the matter. (more…)

  • Share/Bookmark
Tagged with:
 

I find human inconsistency fascinating.  The ability for the civilized mind to endure cognitive dissonance is breathtaking.  For example, it is perfectly Biblical and accepted by God to own slaves and enslave the nations around you.  Leviticus 25:44 says, “As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you.”

Lest some of the more ignorant among us claim this was a law specific to the Jewish people, it is reiterated after Christ rose in the New Testament.  1 Peter 2:18 says, “Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.”

Thus, the horrific bigots of the late 19th century that believed slavery was perfectly acceptable had solid Biblical footing and yet, as Americans, we reject it because our culture rejects it.  I believe completely that the Bible is wrong on the issue of slavery.  I believe the concept of owning another human being as chattel is inherently evil, whether it applies to slaves or spouses.

When was the last time, though, that you saw people who believed in the literal interpretation of the Word of God standing outside and publicly advocating for the return of slavery?  This illustrates my point that much of what we call religion is nothing but a regional brand of homogenized patriotism wrapped in a flag.

We, as a society, made a choice and decided the Bible was wrong on slavery.  It isn’t popular to say this, and a lot of evangelicals would deny it because by refusing to acknowledge this inherent moral contradiction, they can continue to condemn equal rights for women (there are a lot of denominations that believe a woman’s place is in the kitchen), equal rights for gays, equal rights for animals (which we now know are sentient, in many cases), etc.

  • Share/Bookmark
 

This Is Funny … Jesus, Gays, and Prostitutes

C.S. Lewis talked about how we excuse almost anything for the sake of humor. I’m sorry, but this is funny. It caught me so off-guard I almost swallowed my coffee wrong.

Jesus Gays and Prostitutes

And this one … because it’s true (it is completely Biblical for a husband to stone his wife if she isn’t a virgin on the wedding night):

Bible Marriage Quote

  • Share/Bookmark
Tagged with:
 

Does Religion Have a Responsibility to Look to Science?

Here’s an interesting question: Does religion have just as much responsibility to examine scientific evidence as it does religious tradition and scriptural text?

Religion and Science Christianity and Science

Responsible religion cannot ignore scientific discoveries. Do you think the Christian church thought they were wrong when they were punishing Galileo? Of course not. But it doesn't change the fact they were.

Put another way: Throughout history, religion taken as a whole has lagged behind scientific discovery and development, only to redefine itself decades, or even centuries, later.  In the case of Christianity, the Bible, specific passages in it, as well as long religious tradition were used to justify:

  • Slavery (not only of whole races but the ability of fathers to sell their daughters, which still goes on in the world and is perfectly biblical)
  • The inferiority of women as evidenced by the prohibition of female preachers and female led households.  Up until the 1970’s, a woman really couldn’t even open a bank account without her husband’s permission in the United States.  That is a staggering thought.
  • The inferiority of different races.  (We’ll talk about this in a moment.)
  • The inability to earn interest on money loaned.  The entire American banking system and economy is directly in violation of biblical teaching.  Every time you put money into a savings account or certificate of deposit, you are earning interest from your share of the interest charged to borrowers, in some case outright usury at 30%+ on credit cards.
  • Child abuse.  There is absolutely nothing un-biblical about requiring 7 years olds to go to work to support the family (almost all of the children in the bible did), rebellious sons and daughters were stoned, and existed more for the benefit of the parents than having any real chance at self-actualization.
  • The torture, imprisonment, and murder of scientists.  We all saw what happened to Galileo for daring to discover that the Earth is not only the center of the universe, it is circling a star, which itself is part of a solar system that itself is circling a galaxy that is circling the center of the universe, which we are nowhere near.

Cognitive Dissonance in the Christian Church

Racism and Christianity

For the longest time, race was probably the most powerful example of cognitive dissonance in the church.  To this day, some misguided religious groups believe that African Americans are the cursed decedents of Cain.

From scientific evidence, however, we know that every human being on the planet started out as black. By extension, for those who believe in a 100% literal interpretation of the bible, Adam and Eve had to be black.  There is no way around the DNA evidence because it shows that humans came from somewhere in Africa, close to where the Jews, Muslims, and Christians believe God created mankind, and that being “white” developed as people migrated north into areas with less sunlight and those with paler skin had the ability to absorb certain nutrients, making them healthier and more successful in a reproductive sense. (more…)

  • Share/Bookmark

Dominion Theology and the United States

Christian Dominion Theology

Those who believe in Christian Dominion Theology for the United States are no different than Islamic clerics that demand Sharia law be followed in everything from banking to personal relationships. The ability for social institutions, such as education and business, to exist separate from religious institutions is one of the reasons the past 150 years have seen the greatest rise in education and the standard of living humanity has seen in its entire existence. A middle class person lives better today than the nobility did hundreds of years ago with access to hot, running water, electricity, furnaces, air conditioning, automobiles, and a rule of law that provides due process.

A few weeks ago, I was reading a political message board where some commentators espoused their sincere belief that all of humanity’s problems will be solved when they succeed in implementing dominion theology.  Intrigued, I began to research the concept.  What I found was frightening.  The only good news is that all mainline Christian religions have rejected dominion theology, although some, such as Focus on the Family, are accused of practicing a “soft” form if it.

In a nutshell, dominion theology is the Christian version of Islamic Sharia law where a group of delusional fanatics takes over the secular government and governs it exclusively by “the law of God”.  The problem is, most of these people have woefully inadequate knowledge of history and fail to realize that one of the reasons the United States has been successful is because we avoided centuries of bloodshed over questions such as whether or not the bread in communion becomes the literal body of Christ or merely represents the body of Christ.

For example, if we were to introduce prayer into public schools, the Christian denominations can’t even agree on what is appropriate or proper.  You’d have Catholics wanting to say a Hail Mary, born again Christians speaking tongues, and Orthodox Christians praying in Latin.  Instead of learning literature, mathematics, history, and philosophy, students would spend all day in fights over whether or not the end times were near.  That’s what families are for – to decide how (and in what) religion to raise their children, ensure that they get what they believe is a “good” foundational understanding of their theology, and then “train them up” in the way they should go.  That is not the purpose of school.  That’s like demanding people memorize the beatitudes at the DMV.  That institution has a specific function that works best if left alone.

In its purest form, dominion theology holds that Christians should own the television networks, elect the government, and write the laws so that Biblical laws are identical to political laws.  Thus, an unfaithful husband would be stoned, as would a gay teenager, rebellious children, and someone who had “heretical” beliefs and dared to question the wisdom of killing productive members of society.

Dominion theology, if it were to ever gain hold in the nation, would lead, unquestionably and inevitably, to some sort of genocide, just as it has in virtually every country where religion has been used as the basis of the court system.  We would have, rather quickly I should think, our own version of “Saint” Thomas Moore burned English peasants for daring to possess a Bible in English, so they could read scripture for themselves.

I am more and more convinced that horsehoe political theory is the most accurate model that has yet to be developed in understanding the role of individuals and institutions in a society.

  • Share/Bookmark
Tagged with:
 
Page 1 of 212

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!