Fan Mail, II: My Problem With Miracles, & Why Religious Folks Don't Get It

Fan Mail



Of late, I have been receiving a flurry of comments with my post on the Lighthouse Evangelism (LE) Church, which I have written because of its rather tall, preposterous tales about riding folks of their respective diseases; I have also written at length the dangers of believing in such miracles and being suckled into the delusion that you actually do not need professional, medical help to cure your bodily ailments.

Below are some of the comments I feel are worth mentioning, and I shall try to elucidate and perhaps clarify some of the points these Christians have felt imperative to highlight to me; Both of them address themselves as "Lighters", in reference to Lighthouse Evangelism, although it does remind me more of a device I frequently use to light up my cigar........

1. "People Do Get Healed!"

Magical Thinking can be a wholesome and fun affair: When we watch Criss Angels walking across a swimming pool on water, or David Blaine attempting to perform a levitation stunt, we watch with awe and amazement at their "magic", while at the same time acknowledging the fact that these are but complicated versions of sleight of hand and illusions meant to entertain the masses, and are not meant as propaganda tools to advance any form of religion.

Some religious organizations, however, exploit the idea of supernatural phenomenon and claim them to be true, and I contend that miracle healing belong to a class of subterfuge which exploits the gullibility of religious folks, and I made no bones in sounding this point across in my LE post.

Lighter responds to my post:

"Being a Lighter (member of Lighthouse) myself, I must say that your post contains a lot of words against Lighthouse. At every week's miracle service on Saturdays, many people are healed, and it can be proved if you go there once and witness it all. Each week's Lighters' Link also puts in print the number of cases there are of people being healed by God. There is a whole list on the Lighthouse website of the people who have been healed by the wonderful touch of God. Please don't dismiss this as a 100% failure thing; many people have been touched and moved the accept God into their hearts in the Miracle Service."

As a secular humanist, I would like to take this opportunity to elucidate my point: I'd be elated if, and I do mean a big "IF", miracles do work: Who doesn't want to be cured on a wing and a prayer? No more nasty medications, no more painful vaccination jabs, no more painful and nauseating chemotherapy; life will be one absolute bliss!

Why wouldn't the Church, with its healing prowess, engage in proper Science to study their amazing phenomenon, so that humanity can harness some good, or a whole lot of good, out of these miracle sessions hosted by this church???

But alas, Lighter does not hold much regard for Science:

2. "Science isn't Everything!"

"Why is everything related to Science? Why must everything be explained with Science? It's not like Science created this world. It's not like everything revolves around Science. What makes you think that Science is all 100% correct and believable? There are things which Science can't explain. Miracles are definitely one of them. Don't just try to debunk miracles like that."

Ah yes, the shortcomings of Science. Indeed, Science is not a perfect tool for humanity, in terms of discovering the world and a seemingly boundless, endless universe.

But Science is our best tool in validating existing phenomena, and it is particularly effective in sieving out fact from fiction. While it is true that Science makes mistakes, it is very much a self-correcting tool in the sense that scientists carry out consistent, continuous research to ensure that what is being studied is closest to the truth. Science is therefore an honorable pursuit for the truth, and while corrupted scientists do exist, corrupted or falsified data are sieved out and discredited by other scientists quite readily, minus the bloodshed religious sects tend to mete out against one another over trivial differences over mere doctrine.

If Christians like Lighter insist that miracles do exist at Lighthouse Evangelism, Science would be the Church's elixir of sorts; folks will start flooding into the Church seeking for a cure, hospitals will lose business and close down, and everyone will be happier, healthier and more inclined to harbor faith and religion in their bosoms. So what exactly is stopping them?

3. "This is an Anti-Christian Post!!!!"

Besides discrediting Science in general, Lighter alludes to my perceived anti-Christian stance:

"And by the way, you're not educating. You are merely publishing an anti-Christian post. "

I do not deny the fact that more often than not, I have a morbid disdain for religion; while it has been an absolutely brilliant political tool for mobilizing entire nations into going to war with other tribes not aligned with the host's religious beliefs, religion is increasingly becoming less relevant in an increasingly less sectarian and rational world. That being the case, religion is more akin to a cancer in societies, who would have been much better off without their religious yolk.

That said, I do not, and am not, against Christians. Belief is, after all, an individual right, and I have nothing against Christians in general. In fact, I am so tolerant towards Christians that I can actually empathize with Christians who knock on my door in a bid to convert my erstwhile soul. I have reservations, however, with regards to the level of tolerance some Christians can exhibit towards folks whose creeds do not align with theirs.

I am against chicanery, in whatever shape and form: Like Fengshui, extraordinary claims do require extraordinary evidence. If, for example, I claim fairies exist, then it is my onus to prove it to you that fairies exist, and it is the same situation with miracles. If these folks from Lighthouse Evangelism have no basis of proof to validate their claims, then their activities, along with their unctuous claims, are no better or worst than the medicine man who sells snake oil to the unwary consumer.

Besides, blind faith of this sort is dangerous: Folks who believe that God can heal them of their ailments and adamantly refuse to seek medical help are going to end up with more trouble than they can ever bargain for.

4. "Tithing isn't Compulsory!"

"Your point about old people being cheated of their money is actually quite invalid, because in LE, we never force people to tithe/ give offering. People come at their own will and do what they want to; they aren't forced to do anything. They don't have to ask for healing if they don't want to. "

Herein lies a fallacy: Contrary to his claim, cheats invariably do not coerce people into handing over property; rather, the use of a glib tongue or flimflam are standard psychological tools deployed to induce people to part with their earthly goods.

Churches use a variety of well-proven techniques to induce the cash into their pockets: A place in heaven would be standard fare, or some earthly rewards using the time honored tradition of "the more you give the more you get from God" are excellent sales techniques in ensuring that church coffers never run empty.

While I am not implying that the Church itself is cheating folks out of their hard-earned cash on purpose, the idea that people can be cured in a Church-sanctioned "miracle" session sounds too far-fetched for the rational mind, and it takes a huge dosage of faith, clouded thinking and desperation to believe in such deluded nonsense.

A Miracle? Prove It!

If folks such as Lighter wish to be treated seriously, they might need to persuade their head honcho to perhaps engage more earnestly with scientists, and perhaps have their "miracles" validated for all and sundry.

While I appreciate fan mail, I am very much perturbed by folks who hold such dangerous beliefs: If one doesn't think critically, all manner of hucksters are going to exploit this form of "open-mindedness", i.e belief without evidence and take them for a ride.

While I have no doubt that miracle services of the LE sort are fun and alleviating to the unwary, a staunch belief in miracles and God does one little or no good in the quest for convalesce: If you are sick, seek the advice of a doctor, not the priest or the shaman.




-"Heroin also makes people feel better, but I wouldn't recommend using heroin. " James Randi

Fan Mail

From time to time, I do receive comments/fan mail with regards to my specific posts; Christians, agnostics and other philosophical creeds drop me a note, telling me how well, or in some instances, how crappy my writings are.

The truth is, I appreciate fan mail. I really do, and it is heartening for me, not from a solipsistic point of view, that people are actually thinking about religion and not taking things at face value. The purpose of this blog is, after all, to give a different perspective of religion from a different point of view.

Good reviews aside, I take negative or sometimes ad hominem comments seriously; I am only human, and humans err, and I stand to be corrected if I have made an error on my part. Sometimes, Christians or religious folks send comments to address a whole spectrum of issues, and I regret to say that so far I have not been able to address a majority of them on my blog.

At this point, I would like to address one of the readers, who happens to call himself/herself a "Child of God" (Makes me wonder if this is Jesus I am actually addressing to!).

"Child of God" Replies

In addressing my previous post, "Of Talking Snakes and Talking Asses", "Child of God" takes aim at atheism's anti-religious stance:

"You "atheists" really aren't who you claim to be. You claim not to beleive in God, but all you do is talk about him. You know, there are plenty of gods out there and other religions other than christianity, so I don't understand why you would want to talk so much about something you supposedly don't beleive in. I don't beleive in getting drunk. So I don't do it. I don't go around talking about getting drunk all the time, that's just stupid. Just like the atheist religion. Lol...yea, that's right. You have found yourself in a religion here...something you speak against? Haha. Hypocrosy is a terrible thing."

To sum up his or her arguments:

1. One should not talk about God if one does not believe in God.
2. This blog only criticizes Christianity and pretty much nothing else is ever addressed.
3. Atheism is a religion.
4. Hypocrisy is a "terrible thing".

A Non-Sequitur Argument

Right off the bat, Child of God makes a fallacious, non-sequitur accusation: He or she insinuates that in order to talk about God, one must believe in God. If that were true, children's book authors must therefore believe in fairies to write about fairies for their juvenile clients!

Of course, Christianity is not the only religion I have addressed: Islam has also been touched on even if it has been regarded as a strictly taboo subject, and I have written about Scientology, Fengshui and a whole host of other religions and their respective charlatans. It is only with regards to Christianity and Judaism that I am capable of dissecting their holy books in such exquisite detail; I come from a Baptist background, so the bible is certainly not alien to me.

Why Religion?

"Child of God" uses a very weird analogy to define the atheist stance: A person who doesn't get sloshed out on alcohol should not be harping about the ill-effects of alcohol abuse. This may be the case, but if you have a close relation or friend who is an alcoholic addict, or if you are an ex-abuser of alcohol yourself, wouldn't you want to help others who have trotted down the same path as you had?

The reason why atheists talk about religion most of the time (well, not all the time; I do talk about human rights issues, for example. I am sure atheists are not all inept and dull and dreary to repeat the same drivel on religion!) has more or less got to do with the intrusive, abrasive nature of religion and their legions of believers. Ideally, beliefs, be it religious or philosophical stances and dogmas, are personal stances that constitutes part and parcel of what secularists deem as human rights. In layman's terms, you have your right to belief, and no one should be able to stop you from your right to belief.

That right of belief, however, does not entail the following:

1. The right to force or shove down your beliefs down the throats of others through intimidation, threats, or violence of any sort.

2. The right to infringe upon secular government or education to endorse your unscientific, baseless beliefs.

3. The right to get tax-free relief to uphold your religious belief.

For example, you may believe in the existence of elves. No one can stop you. Sure, some folks might snigger about your odd little belief behind your backs, and some people might even make snide remarks in front of you, but no one should be telling you, or even enforcing any rule of law, to stop you from believing in anything, regardless of ridicule.

That said, you cannot demand that your odd little belief be turned into standard curriculum in government schools, nor should you be forcing secular government institutions to endorse your quaint beliefs.

The reason why atheists feel aggrieved is this: Religious folks want to have the cake and eat it whole: They want us to respect their beliefs, but they have no qualms when it comes to criticizing other creeds, such as gays, lesbians and atheists. They want to enact laws to limit the rights of other groups, such as gay marriages and in some countries, the right to sex between two consensual, adult same-sex partners. They have lobby groups which attempt to discredit Science and other forms of secular education, while at the same time trying their darnest best to smuggle quasi-religious topics, such as Creationism and Intelligent Design, under the veneer of "alternative Science" or other equivalents into secular education programs.

And on the worst possible end of the spectrum, religious folks are quite inclined to commit violence on the hopes of getting prime tickets for a seat in paradise: Muslim males, driven by the horny desire to screw 72 virgins in heaven, are often too willing to subject themselves to indoctrination and subsequent martyrdom, and in the process killing scores of innocent people in their quest for a piece of the divine. This is religious mayhem and genocide at its worst.

Is Atheism a Religion?

If only it was true: Atheism lacks the decisive, cohesive trait to form any sort of institution like what the Christians and other theists do not find lacking. As a result, herding atheists is kind of like herding cats, and it gets worst when one of the basic, well-acknowledged fundamentals with regards to secular free thinking encourages independent thought.

To call atheism a religion is kind of an oxy-moron in any case; there is no elaborate religious ceremony (such as the Eucharist), no deity, no enigmatic figure (some religious folks may concur that Richard Dawkins is some sort of a mythical high priest of atheism; I find this to be more of a tribute to the great work of the scientist than anything symbolic) and no united philosophy or common ground other than a distinctive absence of belief in any form of deities or the supernatural.

Is Atheism Hypocritical?

It depends on how you see it. If you believe that our beliefs are religious in nature, you'd probably call us hypocrites of the worst possible nature for denying the religious aspects of atheism.

That said, atheists do have their own beliefs, but it doesn't stem from atheism: I am an atheist based on one single premise that I do not believe in God. I am also a secular humanist, a communist sympathizer (No, I am not a communist. Frankly, I think communism is not practical), and most importantly, I advocate Science because it works (for good and for bad). These are my core set of beliefs, and I do not expect every atheist to share all my beliefs and with it, my opinions. We atheists are too individualistic to behave like androids, or sheep in a farmer's pen.

Most atheists are not overtly offended by personal belief, as long as it stays personal and does not infringe upon the rights of others. Most of us don't have a tendency to judge other folks, no matter how absurd their beliefs may be, but all it takes is a flying circus of religious hucksters, murderous barbaric hordes of criminals eviscerating themselves in the name of God, to get us into an angry frenzy of words and denounciations. And even then, we don't generally bear arms, nor do we go on a spate of riots to prove our points.

Atheism in a Nutshell

While it is very easy to lambast "Child of God" for his somewhat lob-sided comments, I do appreciate this opportunity to highlight the misconceptions of atheism, and also the level of mistrust against atheists in general.

To sum it all up, atheists are folks who simply do not believe in your God, or anyone else's God. All we ask for is to keep your religion to yourselves, and in the process of doing so, try doing away with the flying grenades, time bombs and the occasional torture.

Beast FCD

One Less God = No Gods?

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

Stephen Roberts