Radio!

2011-07-02T23:20:00.003-05:00

It's been a while. I feel the need to ramble, you feel the need to read me.

Firstly, I've been working on an album. Again. For real this time. Also, I've been working with 2 friends on developing a radio show. Canada lacks a Conservative radio show. Dennis Prager has been such an inspiration to me, I just feel the need to do this show and babble about things that matter to the 3 of us. Plus, there will be a lot of wisdom between the 3 of us, so you'd be doing yourself a disservice to not listen in. If we get our crap together, that is.

So I've been debating on youtube comments today. Yes, I know. I have no life. But the ignorance about the world and its issues never cease to amaze me. This idea, for instance, that religion has caused more wars and death than atheism or secularism. It's just not true.

Hitler - 60 million dead - NOT religiously motivated

Mao Zedong - 40 million dead - NOT religiously motivated

Joseph Stalin - 20 million dead - NOT religiously motivated

Pol Pot - 2,267,000 dead - NOT religiously motivated

Genghis Khan - 40 million dead - NOT religiously motivated

Vladimir Lenin - 8 million dead - NOT religiously motivated

This far from complete list nets over 170 MILLION dead because of secularism, NOT religion.

Christianity: Crusades - 3 million dead. Spanish Inquisition? Can't find figures (they exist somewhere I'm sure). The closest I could find was 'in the thousands, not millions'.

Now I would be a fool to say that this therefore makes religion perfect, or innocent. There have been atrocities committed in the name of religion. Nobody can deny that. But take Christianity: The Crusades, although they started out to defend the Jews from the merciless slaughter the Muslims were perpetrating on them, ended up with self-professing Christians killing Jews 'in the name of Christ'. But wait -- Jesus only gave two commandments to Christians: 'love God with all your being, and love your neighbour as yourself' (paraphrased). So does the behaviour of those self-professing Christians put a scar on Christianity? I challenge any of you to find a verse in the Torah or the New Testament that commands the killing of the Jews (and most specifically by Christians). Besides, why would a Christian, who understands that the Jews are God's CHOSEN people, want to kill one? It is an absurdity.

Instead of looking ONLY at the actions (though they do speak volumes), we also need to look at the creed of a religion:
Christianity: Love God with all your being, love your neighbour as yourself. Anything outside that is not true Christianity.
Judaism: The 10 Commandments (which are summed up in Christianity's creed).
Islamism: Murder all infidels (anyone who disagrees with anything they specifically believe)
Islam: not Islamism.
Secularism/Atheism: There is no God, therefore you are your own boss, there are no ultimate consequences for your actions.

Of all those systems of belief, which one(s) do you think have the capacity to cause evil in the world?

I'm not trying to pick on secularism. What I am trying to accomplish with this post is to extinguish the lie that religion is inherently evil, and that more evil is done in the name of religion than in the name of secularism.

As Dennis Prager consistently states, there are good people on all sides. There are also bad people on all sides. (paraphrase).

So why do our schools and media teach that religion is evil? Because they hate religion. This idea that there is a law-giver that renders morality an absolute instead of subjective makes a non-believer uncomfortable.

If this offends you, please ask yourself why. I personally challenge my belief system, question my faith, and examine in search of better explanations. We have lost this in society, and it is apparent from the insolent and wicked children who do not respect adults, to the immoral who waste a business owner's time knowing full well they will buy whatever he recommends online for cheaper. And when we call what is good evil, and what is evil good, there is little to no hope for humanity.

The problem is that there are people suffering in the world who do not receive our help if we cannot recognize basic moral principles.

This concludes my rant for today. Please, re-examine your beliefs. Challenge yourself. It can only lead to good things.

-Brodie

Theism vs Atheism

2010-10-08T01:33:00.003-05:00

Understanding Theism, Agnosticism, Atheism

From my perspective, there ultimately is belief and non-belief. However, there are varying degrees of faith.

On the left, Theism, or the belief that God exists.

On the right, atheism, or the active belief that God does not exist.

I say 'active belief' because atheism is actually a non-traditional religion in that it does not speak of a divine 'God' per se, but replaces Divinity usually with one of two things: environment (or cosmos) or self. If there is no God, then I am ultimately in control. But some atheists worship the universe (evolutionists, hippies, environmentalists). This is in keeping with Romans 1:21- For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles...25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator.

In the middle, agnosticism: which, though a form of non-belief, is not an active disbelief (as in atheism), but rather a lack of belief. An intellectually honest agnostic would state that they do not actively believe in a God, but are either willing to be convinced by empirical proof, or simply have not thought about it (or haven't decided based on any thoughts they've had). They remind me of the church of Laodicea in Revelation 3:15I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. Of course this is referring to a church, not necessarily agnostics.

There are two components guiding the scale between theism and atheism. On both extremes exist those with no intellectually based belief, but instead rely entirely on heart. Also, there are those with stronger intellect supporting their belief than heart. But what does not exist is intellect without heart.

In other words, a believer will not come to faith purely on an intellectual basis. The heart is a core component of belief. Just the same, an atheist will not come to their faith by reason only. The heart is at the core of all belief. In Christianity specifically, Romans 10:10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. The word 'confess' has implications of intellect or knowledge.

An 'ideal' believer is one who is vigilant in pursuing intellect, because the very foundation of faith is evidence. The commonly-held belief that faith must be blind is NOT Biblical. Such belief comes from either a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of Scripture. To its extreme, 'blind faith' is not only stupid, but dangerous. (Stalinism, Naziism)

The classic atheists' example of 'the flying spaghetti monster' is a demonstration of blind faith. Though there is no evidence to support its existence, a person with completely blind faith could believe in it because blind faith involves no reasoning whatsoever.

Faith, good faith, is a belief in what we do not or cannot see, based on what we do see. A great example of this is 'The Blind Watchmaker' proposal:

Only a fool, after finding a pocket watch in the forest, would say to himself, 'look at what nature created by itself'. No, instead an intellectually honest person would recognize that by its complex specificity that there is a designer who created it, even though the observer does not necessarily see or know the creator. Such is an example of intellectual or reasoned faith. This person can recognize that by the evidence of the world surrounding him that, in order for something specifically complex to exist, there had to be an intelligent Creator. Such reasoning can apply to any evidence-based faith.

If I am to be intellectually honest, I find it difficult to make a case for intellectual atheism, because I personally believe it to be one of the greater forms of idiocy in the world. However, it is conceivable that a person could arrive at such a conclusion using reasoning driven by the heart.

Note that the heart (aka faith, emotion, gut) is necessary for both sides of belief. No amount of evidence (which are common facts shared by both sides ie: fossils) can prove either case. The mind in this aspect is useless without the heart.

But heart alone, though possible, is in the end useless. The heart without reason or logic are directionless, blowing where ever the wind may carry. In Christianity this can be seen when one relies on experience over Scripture (which is God breathed). The consequences of which are people howling and barking, twirling and screaming for no other reason than 'God made me do it', or 'I felt God's touch', etc.

In atheism the heart without mind produces foolish statements like 'there is no God because there is suffering'. The acknowledgement of suffering is supported through evidence. However, if there were a God, how could we know anything about His relation to suffering without direct communication with Him?

I've often said it is the ultimate definition of insanity to be angry at a God you do not believe in.

Interestingly, wisdom seems almost exclusive to Theists. Wisdom is the knowledge of what is true and right, combined with proper judgment. Or the proper application of knowledge.

Agnosticism: the gray area that isn't so gray.

I mentioned earlier that agnosticism is a form of unbelief. Because belief is an absolute, anything that is not belief is either unbelief or disbelief (the active form of unbelief).

The agnostic lacks both heart and mind. Pseudo-intellectual arguments are often thrown around, but the agnostic takes neither stance because they do not interpret the world around them, nor do they listen to their heart.

In my opinion, they are less foolish than atheists, but are fools nonetheless. And foolishness is the enemy of wisdom.

Flea Market Creep

Radio!

Theism vs Atheism