Atheism Is Work

There are many critics of Atheists but one charge one can’t level at atheists is that they are lazy. It is believing that easy – it requires no thought, preparation or investment of time or energy. Believing carries with it a huge payoff; it is comforting, reassuring, and removes the mental discord of stress, doubt and concern. Many believers wrongly think that Atheism comes to us easily; we simply dismiss acceptance of a deity. But this is not true; Atheism is difficult and demanding, quite often lonely and occasionally even disquieting.

On any Sabbath in our small Liberal town with several dozen churches, multiple Mormon ‘wards’, a synagogue and a mosque, hundreds of faithful convene to praise their versions of god. Conversely, only once a month does our local secular society attract a dozen or so non-believers. In The USA, ‘none-of-the-abovers’ are estimated to make up perhaps 20% of the US population. This fact contradicts those who charge that Atheism is, in itself, a religion. If that were true I would ask where is the Atheist Church located, who runs it and what is its tax exempt status? Or as I like to respond to this assertion: if stamp collecting is a hobby, is not collecting stamps a hobby as well?

Many believers hold myths about Atheists: that we are angry or disappointed at god, that we are closed minded about the possibility of his existence. To try to address these myths our little organization hosted two public forums we titled “Ask and Atheist”. Instead of being in lecture format, we would instead open the floor to comments and questions from believers to try to educate them about our position. We conducted two of these public forums, handing out survey forms which attendees turned in at the end of the sessions.

What we found were only a very small number of believers actually showed up. It was obvious who they were; the two or three who quoted from the ‘holy book’. They weren’t interested in why we were Atheists; they were there in vein attempt to save us from damnation. The majority of the audience, we found, were already other non-believers. We were preaching to the choir, it seemed. We had hoped that our little public forum might at least serve as publicity and perhaps draw new member to our group. That was a disappointment as well. Unlike believers, Atheists don’t need to regularly convene to reassure one another of their non-beliefs. It is simply a non-issue.

Like many before me, my path to Atheism has been difficult. It’s work! A recent Pew Research Center poll found that among the general population, Atheists and Mormons were more knowledgeable about other religions than religious people knew even about their own particular religion. Atheists may know more about Catholicism than most Catholics, for example, because they have taken the time and effort to find out. Atheism is driven by their need to find out the Truth. We ask the hard questions and demand answers.

Still Atheists understand people finding comfort in belief. In fact, comfort is the answer most often given as the reason people cling to religious belief. Belief affords the (illusion of) hope; hope that things out of your control are under god's, hope that you will live beyond death, hope that prayer will divert the natural course of events which appear threatening.

There is a comforting social component to being a believer, particularly if one attends church. Churches are communal, convivial; here one can associate with like-minded people with whom you share a common connection and bond – here they are part of your “tribe”.

But there is news recently that religious belief is on the decline. Clearly it was much easier to attribute to god(s) back in a time when man did not understand how clouds, weather and storms were formed; that bacteria caused disease; how the earth, planets and stars were formed and move throughout the universe.

Every day science adds to the body of man’s knowledge regarding the context of our existence – religion adds nothing new. Man is driven toward knowledge... and to achieve this, one must venture away from the desire for comfort.

Death with Dignity

I have absolutely no patience with telephone solicitors, and even worse “robo-calls” Who in their right mind would listen to an unsolicited cold call RECORDING!? So much for jobs creation, even Boiler Rooms are now outsourcing jobs to technology.

If you are on a No Call List, people or institutions you have done business with in the past are still allowed to phone you. So I listened to the spiel when the guy identifying himself being from the Oregon Death with Dignity organization called.

In 1994 Oregon passed a landmark law allowing people with terminal illness to end their lives; this is sometimes referred to as physician-assisted suicide. The law was brought into effect through citizen initiative and handily passed the popular vote. However, in 1997 the law’s opponents (primarily the religious) mounted strenuous opposition, eventually placing a new ballot initiative attempting to repeal the law. The attempt failed, the repeal was voted down. Oregon voters had now made it abundantly clear, TWICE, that people should have the right to determine their own quality of life and chose the terms and time of their death.

The opposition was vehement; claims were made that the law would lead to euthanasia – a wholly preposterous claim as a patient must be terminally ill with a life expectancy of six months or less. The patient must be mentally competent and able to understand the consequences of their decision. Two physicians must review the medical request of the patient prior to approval of the application.

It was then claimed that Oregon would become a Mecca for terminally ill patients, flocking to the state in droves to take advantage of this law – It’s NEVER happened. Critics even charged that the law would be applied disproportionately to the poor, physically disabled, psychiatric patients, even racial minorities – Not even remotely true. Opposition rests solely with religious belief; who believe only god has the right to end a life. But such restrictions should not apply to the fifth of the population (and growing) who don’t believe in god.

Still George Bush’s Attorney General, John Ashcroft, an evangelical Christian who “speaks in tongues”, in 2002 petitioned the got the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to approve the suspension of medical licenses of doctors who prescribed life-ending drugs to dying patients. But in 2005 the US Supreme court ruled 6 to 3 that Oregon had the right to regulate the practice of medicine. Oregon’s Death with Dignity law “survived”.

Neighboring Washington State has since passed their own Death with Dignity law in 2008. A similar law is now being proposed by the people of the State of Massachusetts.

On its web site, the Oregon Death with Dignity maintains an information page on “Religion and Spirituality”, listing all the major religious institutions and their official position regarding suicide. Not surprisingly the vast majority are in opposition. Religion, you see, not only wants to dictate how you live your life but when and how you are allowed to end it. But then religion is seldom about choice.

I told the caller that I would contribute to help with the campaign to pass a similar law in Massachusetts.

http://www.deathwithdignity.org

It's a Miracle

Earlier this month 12-year-old Dale Ostrander was swimming in the cold Pacific Ocean; pulled from the shore by a dangerous undertow, he nearly lost his life by drowning. The boy, visiting the beach with his local church camp, was finally pulled from the frigid water after a second earlier unsuccessful rescue attempt, given aggressive life saving first aid, then rushed to the emergency room.

The three major national media networks reported the story but with a decidedly different publicity spin - focusing on the AP photos of Dale's distraught friends praying for him on the beach, the term “miracle” was repeated over and over by the news anchors. The overtly clear implication: the boy was alive through the result of "divine intervention" – it was a Miracle.

It was estimated that Dale Ostrander was under water for as long as 20 minutes. However there have been recorded incidents of people being revived after being submerged in freezing water for a much as an hour. The Pacific is cold, about 56º F in this area of the coast.

Dr. Mark Morocco, an emergency room doctor at the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles: “Your chances of surviving are better if you’re young… when people are plunged into cold water. The heart rate slows down and blood is diverted to the brain and other core organs. This so-called diving reflex is more pronounced in children, allowing them to better survive in frigid water.”

“Swift treatment helped." Morocco credited the rescuers for continuing resuscitation efforts even though Ostrander had no pulse and appeared dead.

Dale was received CPR from rescuers immediately upon being pulled from the water. Emergency Medical Technicians then on the scene continued to ventilate him until he arrived at the local hospital. There he was placed on a respirator until he was taken by Life Flight to Doernbecher Children’s Hospital, part of the Oregon Health Sciences University Medical Center.

The doctors at Doernbecher were unsure if Dale would continue to be able to breathe on his own. Having been on a breathing tube myself, I know there is only one definitive way to find out if a patient can breathe for them self – remove the breathing tube. Fortunately young Dale began breathing on his own.

Weeks later when Dale was released from the hospital the story was updated by the national media. Though Dale will continue to need physical therapy to full recover, the Media continued promoting the “miracle” story, repeating how Dale’s fellow church members knelt on the beach praying for him during his moment of peril.

I pose this question about claims of divine miracles: what most likely was the significant factor that saved young Dale Ostrander from death ...

This...

Or This?

Photo credits: AP News

Watch the "miraculous" ABC News Coverage of this story.

The Logical Facts of Emotion

I recall a story airing on Public Radio about a man who had suffered a serious brain injury. The individual made what appeared to be a full recovery – but with one lingering bit of permanent brain damage; he had lost the ability to apply emotional qualities to certain aspects of his personality.

His disability manifested in a very peculiar way; though his analytical functioning remained intact, he was severely inhibited in his ability to make decisions requiring choices from more than one set of options. For example, when shopping for groceries, he was incapable of determining whether he should buy “Catsup” or “Ketchup”. Though he was able to continue his employment, other problems arose during the course of his work. Upon finalizing a lengthy and complex contract he had written, he could not decide if he should sign the contract using a pen with blue ink versus black ink. Both options had perceived merits, yet he was unable to determine which color in pen to use.

Most of us believe that we are capable of making objective decisions based on fact and reason. But being purely logical is problematic. I was always intrigued by the highly logical character of Spock on the Star Trek sci-fi series. Ingeniously, Gene Roddenberry created Spock to be the progeny of an abjectly logical Vulcan father and an emotional human mother. Roddenberry knew that a purely logical character would be both predictable and uninteresting. But by imbuing the character with an inherently illogical “human” element, he created a built-in dramatic conflict between Spock’s logical leanings and often contradictory emotional responses - quite ingenious drama.

We are often unaware that we are making decisions; we actually make hundreds of decisions every day, a majority of them unconsciously. The choice of clothing, the route we drive to work, our lunch choices – they are all a combination of rational and emotional evaluations.

We believe we are capable, rational and perhaps analytical in our decision making when important choices, such as purchase of a car, for example. But we do not make decisions in a vacuum. Consciously or not, we place value judgments against our thought processes. We weight the projected consequences of our decisions, which we may accept or find we need to rationalize in our minds in order to feel good about the choice. Heck, this is why cars come in colors like Candy Apple Red, have sport wheels or a kick-ass leather interior.

Advertising is cleverly designed to tap into the emotional aspects of our decision process and it is extremely effective. Appealing images and convincing statements skew our analytical processes. This is why that even though brand name Tylenol and generic acetaminophen are exactly the same products, consumers consistently purchase the higher priced brand name over the generic.

Research has even shown that that employers often come to decisions about who they wish to hire within mere seconds of initially meeting the applicant. The results of these tests have shown the surprisingly high incidence that the applicants who an interviewer immediately likes, overwhelmingly results in that person being offered the job. The qualifications, skills and experience of the application become secondary concerns, justifications may be created in an attempt to rationalize a wholly emotionally made decision.

However, there are pitfalls to rendering a decision based largely on emotions. The notable French scientist Louis Pasteur became concerned as scientific methodology surged in 19th century Europe. He saw many scientists engaging in experimentation who he felt were fixated on using the tools of science to confirm their already held hypothesis and thereby throwing out data which contradicted their expectations. He warned that discarding data could result in lost discoveries and incorrect conclusions: “Did you ever observe to whom the accidents happen? Chance favors only the prepared mind,” he cautioned.

~~~

Leaders in the so-called "birther" movement argued their case over President Barack Obama's U.S. citizenship before a federal appeals court Monday in Southern California, claiming the full birth certificate he released last week had been doctored. [Full story here]

The Default Option

"Belief is the natural state of things, it's the default option." - Michael Shermer, publisher, Skeptic Magazine

I grew up believing a lot of things – that my parents loved me; that Catholicism was mandatory and there was an all-powerful and loving “Super-Daddy” somewhere out in space that would protect me. But as I began more to observe the natural world, I encountered things I couldn’t explain. I believed in ghosts, telekinesis, UFOs and my mother’s reliance on Astrology. I believed that certain special people had unique and unexplained powers.

Aside from my parent's love, I don’t believe any of those other things today. But those changes didn’t happen overnight, it required decades of effort and study; work which I continue to do. It was only recently that I fully accepted my status as an Atheist, advancing from Agnostic. What I have discovered is that it is simple to believe; but Knowing requires effort.

As a child I was fascinated by Science. The country was all about advancing in science and technology; in school I learned about the natural world. Things began to make sense; it could be quantified and measured and therefore explained. We had entered the “Space Race”; new discoveries were advancing the body of science on an almost daily basis. And some of what I discovered was sometimes uncomfortably contrary to some of my previously held beliefs.

As a young man following college I began to wonder about consciousness on the fringes of science. I recall subscribing to a magazine called “The New Age Journal”; a periodical for spiritual seekers, I guess one could say. Although it contained some thoughtful articles regarding developing habits to deal with life stresses (such as meditation), it also offered horoscopes and suggested that crystals (pretty rocks) had remarkable healing properties. But by this point in my maturity I had also developed a latent personality trait – Doubt.

The “New Age Journal” subscription expired, replaced now with “Skeptical Inquirer” magazine published by the Center for Inquiry (formerly Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal). Each month there were articles about lake monsters, UFOs, ghosts and myriads of other paranormal phenomena. The underlying premise of the organization was to ask (and often answer) the question: is there another alternative, and most importantly, “rational” explanation?

SI led to other books which reinforced my trust (not faith) in science and allowed me to hold my own beliefs up to the light. Then in 1980 I watched Carl Sagan’s 13 episode series, “Cosmos” on public television. I was riveted. I was then working in the business world, but to indulge my yearning for science, I volunteered as an “Explainer” at the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI). I felt like a kid in a candy store.

Eventually, I became weary of the repetitive analysis of lake monsters and alien abductions. By now, I felt they all had been thoroughly discredited – my interest turned instead to trying to comprehend why so many WANTED to believe in these things. I discovered “Skeptic” magazine published by Michael Shermer of “The Skeptics Society”. Shermer had written books such as “Why People Believe Weird Things” and “How We Believe” and other titles on scientific skepticism. I needed to understand the thinking processes and influences going on within the human mind which caused people to justify holding onto strongly-held beliefs, even in the face of diametrically opposing factual information.

As luck would have it, I was fortunate to become friends with skeptic, inventor, poet and magician, Jerry Andrus. Jerry was the creator of some truly remarkable optical illusions. He was also well known among the world of professional magicians for his unique sleight of hand and magic. Though most magicians learn their trade from other magicians, Jerry did not want to be influenced by others; all of his illusions are ones he developed on his own. Jerry was one of the few men who could actually fool other magicians!

But Jerry had a purpose in his magic; he dedicated his life to teaching people that the conclusions we conclude from the patterns we arrange in our minds, even if they are WRONG, is a completely normal, natural and remarkable result from the evolution of our magnificent brains. Jerry recognized that for humans, “belief is the default option” – but or brains also have the capacity to question our perceptions in order to fully appreciate the wonders of this universe in we live.

Next: Why do we hold on to certain beliefs and why don’t we believe science?

Trailer from my documentary, “Andrus; the Man, the Mind & the Magic.”

The Temptation of the Skeptic

“…the devil took Him to a very high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world, and their glory. And he said to Him, "All these things will I give you if you fall down and worship me." - Matthew 4:8-9

Unlike as was my case, most other folks awaiting heart valve replacement surgery have gotten off pretty easy. Barbara Walters and Robin Williams, for example: a noticeable shortness of breath or perhaps or a bit of dizziness or fatigue. In otherwise good health, these people had the luxury of popping in and having their surgery and were out of the hospital in less than a week.

I had to do it the hard way. Unlike their experience, the conditions leading up to the emergency replacement of my heart valve were dire indeed. I had a massive infection, the full extent of which I didn’t fully appreciate until after the operation was over. At the time, I only knew I was in the hospital feeling like death warmed-over. Quite frankly, I was more than prepared to accept the “ultimate relief” that such an outcome might have brought..

While hospitalized, I had precious few visitors; mostly family and a few very close friends. One visitor was a woman who believed in “other unseen forces”. She chatted with me briefly before explaining about an amulet she was wearing – a Hebrew “Chai” symbol which she believed had helped six other of her friends, and herself, survive life-threatening situations. Though she was fully aware of my lack of belief in things paranormal, she hesitantly offered to have me wear the “magic amulet” prior to my going into surgery.

If one thinks about it, likely many of the personal convictions and values we may hold are, in reality, merely “academic”, particularly when viewed within the context of our normal, healthy, everyday existence. I chuckle when I recall back as a teenager in high school I felt strongly that our country should be fighting in Vietnam, keeping the Communist menace at bay. Not surprisingly I held those strong convictions until, whereupon my 18th birthday, I was required to register for the Selective Service (Draft). Harsh reality can sometimes force us to reexamine our beliefs.

So now my visitor had placed before me a dilemma, a challenge to one of my deepest of convictions – what should I do? I could just say “what the hell” and accept the “magic amulet”. I could easily rationalize my choice by simply claiming that it certainly couldn’t do any harm.

I thanked her but politely declined the offer reaffirming both to her, and to myself, that I would not accept, not even under life-threatening conditions, that there are supernatural powers which hold dominion over our lives. She left taking the amulet with her.

I accept that I survived because I just happen to be fortunate to live in a time and place where open-heart surgery is now a routine occurrence, when new technologies and pharmaceuticals are continually evolving, and because I tried to maintain my physical fitness in preparedness knowing I would need this surgery some day. Rather than rely on faith of magic, I placed my TRUST in the people who deal with these issues every day. It was, and is, the right choice for me.

~~~

I am only recently able to spend a bit more time in front of the computer. I've missed visiting my followers and leaving comments. I anticipate that will change in the near future. Thanks to all of you for your supportive comments. ~ RTS

Atheism as "Faith"

One of the argumentative maneuverings religious believers attempt to ploy on Atheists is the argument that Atheism is, in itself, a belief system – that Atheists have “faith” that there are no gods. It is a clearly specious position; first, one cannot hold a belief in a negative, a “Not”, position; and secondly, the definition of “faith” is acceptance without proof. Atheists say there is no proof... were convincing proof of god(s) to exist, there would be no Atheists! Considering Atheism a form of faith is like considering baldness a type of hair style.

Interestingly, this week one of our Secular Society members will debate a professional theologian and debater on this subject at the local university Socratic Club forum.

The OSU Socratic Club will sponsor a debate on the topic, "Do Atheists Have Faith?" on Monday, November 15, at 7 p.m., in Gilfillan Auditorium on the OSU campus.

It is a common assertion in conversations between secularists and religious believers that religion is a matter of “faith,” which is devoid of any cognitive content and therefore, in the eyes of many secularists, of little or no truth value. Michael Gurney will argue that faith is commonly found among secularists and religious believers alike because everyone, including atheists, has a faith of some kind. Martin Erwig of OSU will argue that those who hold a secularist view reject faith claims altogether and base their views on science, rationalism, and human autonomy.

The theologian has his work cut out for him for this debate. For one thing, with an estimated 15% to 20% of the US population claiming no religious affiliation or belief in any deities, one might ask where are all the Atheist “churches”? Religions have built testaments to their belief over history in the form of huge edifices of architecture, works of art and music – nothing even remotely approaching this magnitude of devotional display exists for Atheists. That is… until now!

Thanks to Steve Martin; I give you the first in history Atheist Hymn:

The Chase is Afoot

Back when I was in high school, a very interesting social network somehow formed. Nobody was really sure who the members of this group were as they were pretty much self-declared. Nor were there any apparent leaders; in fact, no one had any clear idea of who founded the organization. Nonetheless, it was not long before the high school administration became concerned that a local chapter of the HSJ, "The Horny Sons of Jerusalem”, had been established within the student body.

As far as anyone could tell, the sole purpose of this organization was to orchestrate the annual “HSJ Nude Relays”. Held each year during a warm spring evening after school at an undisclosed location, the school would become abuzz over the anticipated event. Someone even circulated the club’s alleged logo; an erect “flying” penis, sporting a set of Roman god, Mercury style wings. Fanciful versions of the HSJ logo could be glimpsed penciled on the back of notebooks or book covers. Cute.

Of course, due to the evocative nature of the HSJ’s principal activity, to avoid the authorities, the precise whereabouts of the “relays” was announced strictly by word-of-mouth, usually the day of the alleged event. Not surprisingly, as the word spread like a chain reaction through the school, it wasn’t long before the school administrators would seize upon this intelligence… which they then passed on to the local police department.

As fate would have it, though, gossip mills the following morning told of how the local police had been thwarted in a fruitless attempt to locate and bust the HSJ Nude Relay participants and “supporters”. (Yes, pun intended) Apparently skittish that the cops might have been tipped, the Relay had been postponed at the last second… another time and location to be announced.

Before long word would again spread of another HSJ Nude Relay, the school would once again pass the info on to the cops…only to find themselves yet again on another Wild Goose Chase.

This cycle repeated for weeks before the school administration and police began to suspect that there may not actually be any Horny Sons of Jerusalem or clandestine Nude Relays.

What is most remarkable about this story is that large groups of people actually BELIEVED this organization was reality. School officials wanted to believe there was an organization that was promoting students to naked through the streets of town. Their belief lent credibility to the cops who were no less in a position to doubt the school administrators. So fueled by hormone charged adolescent imagination, the HSJ took flight even though it didn’t really exist.

Yeas later when I was out of state in college my mother sent me a clipping from the local town newspaper. The article described that police had been tipped to be on the lookout for naked runners in the streets, apparently part of an organization of local high school students called the “Sons of Jerusalem”. (The newspaper editor obviously dropped the word “horny”). The torch, as it were, of a noble tradition had been on passed to the next generation.

How do we know what we know.

How do we know what we know? Or more importantly, how do we know what we believe is true?

I know, for example, that the sun is 93 million miles away and it’s light, in for form of photons traveling at 186,000 miles per second, take about 8 ½ minutes to shine down upon me. Yet I personally do not have the tools nor the means to measure the distance of the sun to me. Neither do I have the skill to independently confirm the velocity of photons which themselves are infinitely much too small for me to see.

Now add to my body of knowledge the theory of biological evolution, plate tectonics, atmospheric pressure effect driving the weather and neurobiology in controlling brain-mind function. Few of these facts have I had the opportunity to personally test and evaluate. With one exception: The Law of Gravity – THAT, I have personally validated as a sport skydiver.

These are all principles that have been made known through the only real means we have of understanding our natural world – Science. But still, occasionally people bring into question; how do we know that the things scientists are telling us are true? After all, there are people in science who would have us accept that aliens from other planets are abducting our sleeping citizens and subjecting them to horrid experiments, that strange ape-like creatures live in our forests, and that we can communicate between each other with only our minds. We witness people who apparently communicate to the deceased or are informed that inoculations against common diseases cause autism. How do we sort out which knowledge about our world to accept or reject?

One method is to ask if the explanation makes sense – is it plausible? Initially the conclusions regarding biological evolution were based strongly in the morphology of living things. Over time better technology further confirmed the lineage of species through examination of their DNA. Many non-scientists have noted, when looking at a globe, that the continental shapes appear to “fit” like puzzle pieces. Later undersea mapping clearly showed that at one time they actually did.

When presented with this sort of data, it is reasonable to accept this information as the most likely fact. Our casual observations match the suppositions; they pass the reasonableness test.

Then there is the acceptance of consensus – confirmation of reported facts which are checked and rechecked independently Experiments are conducted and refuting arguments tested. Most importantly, no fact is sacred nor above being questioned or tested. This allows our knowledge to adjust and improve in the light of newer and better information.

Some religious positions accuse science of being just another form of “belief”. But scientists don’t “believe” in evolution, gravity, continental drift, neurophysiology and all the rest – the scientist TRUSTS these things are true and correct because they have been independently demonstrated time and time again.

Trust is differentiated from belief in that trust is “earned” – trust is built upon experience over time. We know that an object dropped from a height will fall downward just as we are confident in the fidelity of our spouse because of our history together over time. Experience, repetition, validity, dependability are forces involved in the building of trust. These experiences applied to the natural world cause us to illuminate the darkness and lead us to understand how it works. Science is not a body of knowledge; science is a way of thinking.

Conversely, belief requires only blind faith. Belief does not need substantiation, verification or a basis in any form of reality. Belief comes from the desire to accept that which we wish it to be. Belief needs nothing than itself. As Carl Sagan said: “You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe.”

It requires more work, more effort to know something than to believe something. There are many barriers and pitfalls on the road to knowledge. Our perceptions can deceive us, our internal biases can lead us astray, we can make mistakes and we can sometimes intentionally fudge. It is a fact that we are imperfect beings, which is all the more reason to question, experiment, prove and verify.

I fear this country is potentially wavering on the brink of a new Dark Ages. In an era of now unparalleled scientific and technological advance greater than man has ever known in all history, the most powerful nation on earth is yielding to dangerous mindsets of superstition and belief. Our standing as a beacon of innovation and discovery in the world is slipping; America is now among lowest of the civilized nations in acceptance of biological evolution and in teaching our populace science and math. It is not possible to retain our standing on the globe and insist on remaining ignorant.

The belief that ours is still the greatest nation on earth may be one of the most widely held myths we hold today.

The Fictional Bible

Photo credit: Left - The recto of Rylands Library Papyrus P52 from the Gospel of John. Date: 2nd Century CE.

When I was moderating our local “Ask an Atheist” forum recently, one or two of the religious attendees in the audience attempted to underscore their opinions through quotations from the Bible. Many people believe that quotations from their "holy book" represent the definitive authority for their belief. I don’t - I dismiss all these references as the opinions of man, not god.

But to many, the Bible is the inerrant and perfect word of god, to be taken as literally true. Other believers consider the Bible to be more of a manuscript from which interpretative references can be derived to support their vision of “truth”. Or more succinctly, to some Genesis means the world was created literally in six 24-hour days. To others Genesis refers to a more metaphorical creation period – a day being “millions of years” perhaps. The controversy that arises between these two interpretations, however, is that both can’t be right.

As I have studied more about the origins of the Bible it has become extremely clear to me that this is a book of mythology concocted entirely by man. I checked out a couple of books from my local library written by historical scholars regarding the origins of the original text of the Bible. I must admit, they were a little too advanced for my level of academic training.

However I bought an excellent book written for the lay person by a “textual critic”. Titled “Misquoting Jesus, The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why” by Bart D. Ehrman, this book clearly lays out how collected manuscripts evolved into the many versions of the Bible that exist today. More specifically through having been copied countless times (by hand) over the centuries, both accidental and intentional changes have radically altered this book that so many wrongly believe is the timeless and inerrant word of god.

If you ask most Christians today who they believe wrote the Bible, they might answer “god”; yet the most honest answer would be "I don't know". For a good portion of my life I had, as well, been under the mistaken assumption that the first books of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John had been written by those apostles. In actuality, biblical scholars really do not know who the true authors of these texts are.

Actually, the little fragment of Bible pictured above, and most all the known remnants of the early manuscripts, were written in Greek. Yet the principle language of people of ancient Jerusalem during that time was instead Aramaic. In either case, it is most likely that the apostles, allegedly recruited from common laborers, could neither read nor write. Public schools are a very recent modern concept.

One must appreciate that during this time in history, writing and reading was the Information Technology (IT) of its day. Often only the educated slaves or men of substantial wealth and power were literate; keeping tight control over the dissemination of information. The ability to write in Greek was a highly sought after skill of the day. Knowledge was power and those who wielded power were very cautious about into whose hands this technology was entrusted.

The earliest known writings concerning Jesus were the Letters of Paul, dating to approximately 37-40 AD. These epistles focus mainly on the crucifixion and resurrection stories but mention very little of the other familiar legends (virgin birth, magi, miracles, etc.) that later were incorporated into the first four books of the New Testament.

"Textual Critics” such as Bart Ehrman meticulously compare all the known surviving documents to determine if they can trace back, as closely as possible, to the oldest (and therefore supposedly most accurate) versions of the New Testament. They are Biblical CSI scientists. In comparing the accuracy of copies over time, subsequent documents reveal changes, some subtle, others significant, which sometimes completely changed the interpretation of the scripture.

Ehrman’s book is particularly interesting in view of his personal story of how he became a Biblical scholar. As a young man in college, Ehrman became a devout Evangelical Christian. He (as have other Biblical scholars) lost his belief when his study of the texts revealed how men promoting specific self interests have “corrected”, fudged or outright fabricated passages in the Bible that many today ignorantly hold to be the infallible word of god.

Some New Testament passages were added centuries later. For example, one of the more notable stories from the Bible, Jesus forgiving the woman caught in adultery (John 8:3-11) does not appear in any of the earlier versions until the 4th century. The motivations for someone to concoct tales about the life of Jesus remain can only be speculated.

Christians cite the testimony in the Bible as “evidence” of the divinity of Christ. However it must be noted that none of these testaments is written in the first-person. Mark doesn’t say, for example “… I went to the tomb and saw personally that the stone was rolled away”. The testament reports what someone says that someone told them what they claim to have witnessed. In today’s legal terms, such testimony would be considered hearsay which would be completely inadmissible in a court of law.

Conversely, Mormon Church founder Joseph Smith’s account supposedly is first-person testimony. Smith declares that the angel Maroni appeared in his bedroom, telling him directly where he could view and transcribe the golden plates (written directly by god) which form the content of the Book of Mormon. Is Smith’s testimony more reputable than that of the unknown authors of the Bible? Does that make the Book of Mormon more credible than the Bible? Followers of Mormonism might argue yes.

But if you don’t believe the Book of Mormon is the true word of god, there is even less basis for the divine origins of the Bible. To believe incredible tales which were not committed to writing until decades after their supposed happening about events that defy reason and logic, and most importantly, have been revised and altered over the past 20 centuries, requires a monumental leap of faith.