Patrick’s Wager – Updated

If you can’t tell, over the course of 2009 to 2011, I gave up my christianity for atheism. However, for posterity and testimony to my time as a Christian, I will leave my old blog posts up.  I have no shame in admitting I was unaware of certain truths back then, but this gives me an opportunity to dismantle my previous arguments for myself.. myself.  One unpublished post from September 2009 (2 years ago) was entitled “Patrick’s Wager,” meant as a play on the classic case presented by Pascal.  It was two sentances and reads as follows:

“Throw everything you know about God aside, and ask yourself this.  If Jesus was a real historical human being, why would he and his closest disciples give up their lives for a lie?” – Patrick, circa 2009

One of the final strongholds of my faith was in the historicity of Jesus, and moreover the witness provided by the disciples.  So lets go over why i no longer believe that this is the case, starting with the martyrdom of the apostles.

“Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.”

—Matthew 10:2-4 (see also Mark 3:14-19)

Judas:

First off, it is interesting to note that there are two accounts for Judas’ death, that directly contradict each other.  I had a massive headache when trying to reconcile these two accounts, and you should for yourself: Matthew 27 records a suicide (and the 30 pieces of silver, while acts 1 records a body explosion.  The most common consensus is that Matthew operated from old testament scripture and invented details to fulfill prophecy, rather than provide a historical narrative of what occurred (so much for historicity).

Jesus Close Disciples: James (both), Peter, John, Matthew

James (john’s brother) is recorded to have been killed by herod, but he is not given an opportunity to recant.  Therefore even if this account is accurate, this does not at all prove jesus’ historicity at all; By just being killed, he may well have died for something he knew was a lie.

James (the other one) has several conflicting traditions.  According to the catholic church this is the same James as jesus’ brother.  If this is the case, then Josephus wrote of his death by stoning.  Of course tradition holds that he was clubbed to death in Egypt.

Peter’s inverted crucifixion, as alluded to by jesus, is not corroborated by anyone until 150-200 years later in the apocryphal “acts of peter“.  It is apocryphal because of its late date and numerous historical inaccuracies, and Eusebius puts it in with rejected (read:non-true) writings. It also contains a miracle-off, among other things.

John, Son of Zebedee’s death was reportedly natural, after being submersed in oil and miraculously surviving.  He supossedly died in 100 AD, living for ~80 years.  Of course the only evidence of this is speculation and church tradition that came about a century after-the-fact

Matthew: no one knows.  According to Catholic.org,  “Nothing definite is known about his later life”, and furthermore it is “uncertain whether he died a natural death or received the crown of martyrdom” and the Christian History Institute says, “We have nothing but legend about Matthew’s death.” For the record, Matthew did not write the book “the gospel of matthew.”  Thats another post though.

Lesser Known Disciples:

Andrew was crucified according to legend, and the legend originated from the second-century Acts of Andrew (also apocryphal)

Philip: Hung upside down according to the 4th century Acts of Philip.  The catholic encyclopedia regards this work as “purely legendary”

Bartholomew: Crucified in Armenia, Beheaded in India.  Nothing is truly known about this disciple besides his name being in the list of one of the most important legendary 12 people in all history.  Oops.

Thomas: Tradition states that he went to india to preach and was then killed by spearing.  There is no corroboration for this story, and the apocryphal gospel of thomas is the only place we have this recorded.

Jude: conflicting traditions.  Clubbing from the catholics, the apocryphal acts of thaddeus says he died of natural causes. There is also a legend that he died by crucifixion. Meanwhile these legends are corroborated by no other sources.

Simon, the Zealot: Conflicting traditions. Catholics believed he was martyred by crucifixion in persia, but the eastern orthodox tradition is that he died in naturally in Edessa.  There are several other possible locations of death given by other sources as well.

Matthias: Nothing until the 14th century, when the tradition of crucifixion in (modern) Georgia arose.


Very few of the martyrdoms are recorded in a remotely historical way.  There is simply no evidence besides legend that these chosen 12, again the most important humans of all time, were ever killed for their faith.  Furthermore even if they were killed, there is no justification for them believing a lie; there were no deathbed requests for renouncing their faith or suffer punishment except in a handful of cases (that are supposed as legend).

In summary, there is no reason to believe the disciples died for their faith at all.  Or (judging from the distinct lack of historical corroboration) that any traditions about their lives is true.  When I learned the truth, this final stronghold of my faith based in reality came crashing down. The resurrection stands on very shady ground indeed, and I will examine that in my next post.

This entry was posted in All Posts, Atheist Movement, Evolution, Philosophy, Spiritual Growth and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • Stephanie Hrisko

    Hello Patrick,
    This is indeed heartbreaking to see your posts. Is it in your “dogma” of atheism to try to convert others into not believing? What would be the point? If there is no God or higher power to subscribe to, then what point is there in trying to convince others not to believe? Why would you not just allow others to live in what you might call “blissful ignorance” with faith in SOMETHING in order to make it through their lives? Of course you know that I myself do not think of it as ignorance; however, from your point of view, I would imagine that you might think of it as such. From my point of view, Satan is rejoicing in his victory in your life and using you as a vehicle to try to keep others from the truth. This is terribly tragic. I’m sorry that this has happened in your life, and I pray that you rediscover the real truth. In the mean time, I beg you not to continue to give others reasons to doubt and people who are set in their atheist convictions more reasons to be so. God is faithful and unfailing in His love for us, and so, it is my hope that one day you will come back to him. How bittersweet it would be on that day, though, as you think of all the harm you’ve caused to people by being an “enemy of the cross” and leading them away from God’s kindom through your public expression of these views.

    Truth:
    Acts 20:30 “Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. 31 So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears.”

    • lpmitch

      Stephanie,

      There is no dogmatism involved. I am merely presenting my perspective, using historical facts and reference to build a case for why i believe what i believe. People have the option to disregard what i am writing, or ignore it entirely. I believe that science, reason, and a philisophically-based, educated modern morality are acceptable vessels for human progress. I see beautiful benefits in many religions, and i make no attempt to directly dissuade people, but i will not cease from the presentation of facts to raise awareness. Christians are called to understand and be accountable to what they believe:

      1 Peter 3:15 “But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,”

      I have presented nothing overtly malicious towards those who follow Christ, but there are certain reconciliations and rationalizations that i no longer believe are intellectually tenable.

      • Stephanie

        I guess that is the part I am confused about- the need to “raise awareness” of a non-religion. Regardless, it is still very sad that you have known the truth (which is the “reason for hope” that you spoke about) yet now have chosen to try to find everything you can to disprove it to yourself. In thinking about it, the example of marriage came to me. Just because my husband does things that I don’t understand or that upset me sometimes, it doesn’t mean that I just deny the fact that our marriage ever existed and walk away from it.
        Further, you certainly know that Christianity is based on faith, which is by definition from Hebrews 11:1 “…confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.” You know as well as I do that we are saved “by grace, through faith”….not by grace, through our scientific knowledge of God. If you have to have scientific proof that God exists, then you are completely missing the point. Hebrews 11: “6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.” Our faith (“assurance about what we do not see”) in Him is the key to receiving grace from Him.
        I don’t think that having faith implies the sacrifice of our intellect. In fact, our intellect is a gift from God. However, the Bible is very clear in stating that we are without excuse for denying God. Romans 1:19 “since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” Therefore, we are without excuse if we use our God-given intellect to dissuade ourselves from believing in Him.

        Surely there was a time when God revealed Himself to you, you felt His presence, recognized His power, experienced a miracle, and/or prayed to Him and had it answered. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have called yourself a Christian to begin with. I would encourage you to think back on those times and think about how real they were…that’s your evidence if you need it above and beyond creation.

        Regarding the posts below between Andrew and yourself:
        I think if you cared to try, that you would find many intelligent people, even in a scientific profession, who are Christians. You do not sacrifice one to gain the other as a Christian; but rather, you appreciate the fact that the complexities that take us years and years to figure out were all designed by a God more intelligent than ourselves. Additionally, you recognize that any skills or abilities that we might have were given by God. Personally, I am in medical school as a way to serve God-not in spite of Him, and I am thankful that He has blessed me in that endeavor. Furthermore, I think were I not a Christian already that it would be exceptionally difficult to deny that there was a God who was at work to create the intricacies of the human body. I find it far more plausible to believe in God than to not believe in Him even after my studies.

        I think it is quite obvious that there are many things in life that cannot be scientifically “proven”. In fact, even in scientific research, it is usually most correct to say that something is supported or not supported rather than proven if I remember correctly from my undergraduate days. The best example I think is that of love. Love cannot be proven or disproven, but I would think that each of you would agree that it exists. Now you may argue that it can be shown through the actions of a person, but I would argue the same thing about God. You may argue that you feel differently about a person when you love him/her; however, again, I would argue the same about God.
        I would venture to say that most people have an opinion about love; they may “love” the idea of love; they may have been hurt by love and now claim to hate it; they may be “in love”, etc. However, deep down, no matter what the opinion of love, I think everyone seeks it. This is similar to our opinions about and need for God. Some people recognize Him without reservations; some people cautiously seek; some people totally deny Him. But like love, our opinions of and attitudes about Him don’t change the fact that He exists and that we need Him. Indeed, scripture tells us that love comes from God.
        1 John 4:7 “Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.”
        I would think it quite wearisome to live in such a way that everything had to be proven through scientific reasoning, for the intangible things in life are the ones that truly satisfy the heart, and few, if any, of those can be scientifically proven.

        1 Corinthians 1: “18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
        ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
        the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.’

        20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.”

        So, while believing in Christ may seem like “foolishness” to you at the present time, I hope that one day it will become to you “the power of God and the wisdom of God” once again.

        Sincerely,
        Stephanie

        • lpmitch

          Stephanie, 2 peter 3:16 clearly states that one should always be prepared to give an account as to why you have the faith you do, and while faith is espoused as a virtue (to believe something without evidence), i find that there should be a modicum of evidence for me to even believe that that statement is true. As it stands, i don’t think that statement was made by a son of god at all, therefore i do not trust its validity. I do not seek to find “anything i can to destroy” my prior knowledge; i merely sought answers to real questions: Was jesus a real person? Why was hell never mentioned until the new testament? What gives god the right to create a catch 22 where he punishes everyone he wants for eternity for a finite crime? Why would god ordain genocide throughout the old testament? Why is there a medical profession at all if prayer is answered?

          I have found answers to these questions that make the world far more intelligible than otherwise, and i choose to share those answers here on my blog. As to the “God of the gaps” presented in Romans, an understanding of abiogenesis, evolution, the big bang, and astrology, i understand physics through what has been made, so that God is without excuse. Every account about historical or scientific ideas is completely contrived in the old testament, and without evidence. There is no evidence for a worldwide flood, or a 6 day creation, or a 6000 year old earth; It is far more likely that storytellers created the bible than a being of infinite knowledge. As you are in medical school, you see the evidence of evolution daily; extra muscles with no use, the appendix, the coccyx (remains from when we once had tails), and large numbers of vestigial items that have no purpose other than to show us our own origins. As you know “all sin entered the world through one man, and through it, death” is not valid if we are evolved in parallel. Did original sin happen to the first bacterium? I am not willing to become a liberal theologin, ignoring the parts of the bible i don’t like: I prefer the intellectual honesty that accompanies a true interpretation of the words in the bible. There was no adam and eve; there was no original sin; there was no need for Christ to die. I responded below that people can compartmentalize; i cannot succumb to this dishonesty, lying to myself about the true nature of ‘god’ without hating who i would be forced to become.

          You spoke of having a ‘feeling.’ Hallucinogenic drugs have much the same effect, and in multiple case studies people have replicated the feelings of religiosity and god-encounters in a lab setting. Furthermore, this proves nothing more than that we humans have an evolved spiritual component, and an anthropoligical approach to religion is far more likely to be true. Also, having a ‘feeling’ does no more to prove jesus than Allah, Vishnu, Zeus, Nirvana, or any other of the millions of gods that have been invented. All of them share unverified ‘faith’-hinged acceptance of oral traditions, and i am willing to reject all of them unless there is significant evidence for the claims of their religion.

          You are correct that our feelings about god do not make him exist any more than he doesn’t already. I can hope and have faith all day that i can fly; i will never be able to. The same is true of god. I can try my hardest to try and believe something that has no evidence for the rest of my life, but i seriously doubt it will happen. Even if i did soemday believe, it would not change his character: He created a system whereby everyone throughout all eternity would be punished except for those lucky enough to be ignorant of all the evidence pointing against him, brought up in the correct part of the world, and who accept contradicting stories written 50 years after the man purportedly walked around. and this acceptance gets you out of eternal suffering independent of any good or evil you’ve ever done in your life. Furthermore the faith to believe is given by god, so as to humble us into realizing God is a psychopath who picks and chooses who will not burn forever in a system of his own creation.

          When you argue for an evidence based approach to God, i’m doing the same thing: i do prove love by its evidence. There is no evidence for god, and that’s what i’m endeavoring to show on this blog.

          As to calling me a fool, I’m sorry i offended you so much by saying these things that you would resort to attacks on my character. I hope you know that i am no fool, and i take things like my eternal life very seriously. I am not about to admit that i am a fool, but i will respond.

          You are ignorant. You ignore the reality that God obliterated humanity through the flood, drowning MILLIONS, commited mass murder of CHILDREN against the egyptians (by his own doing by hardening pharoah’s heart). He ordered the israelites to commit genocide against the Amalakites and Caananites (think Hitler. God. Is. Hitler.). He created a system of law whereby disobedient children are brutally murdered by hurling stones at their heads. The same punishment applies to women found to be non-virgins on their wedding night. God’s punishment for rape is marriage to the rapist. The philistines were not safe, those that were kind to the Israelites were not safe. God sent bears to maul to death 42 young people, for calling someone bald. Time and again God shows himself to be an insane psychopath, pleased only with the blood of innocent men, women, children and animals. He delights in the blood of his enemies.

          Then he ok’s human sacrifice of the only ‘innocent’ human to ever walk the earth, to pay the price for a sadistic system he himself created. You are ignorant, because you ignore the fact that ‘god’ is evil, and pleasures himself in the perished wails of billions of souls that had no choice in the matter. You ignore the evidence to the contrary, that the stories contradict themselves. that God is not omnipotent, because he does nothing to stem the tide of evil. Free will is a cop-out, for god to ignore the peas of billions of children who die every year, to be sent to eternal punishment for being created BY HIM. You do not admit that there is no rational argument that is not based in fantasy, or simply wanting to believe something until it is true. You yourself said this does nothing to change the truth of his existence, and you are correct. No matter how hard you believe in something that isn’t there, it will never exist.

          Think twice before calling someone a fool for learning and understanding the truth.

          I believe my accurate description of your person is better than your bible verses that point to me as a fool. I am merely willing to admit the truth of god’s nature, while you are not. And you still think you are justified in calling me a fool?

        • Stephanie

          Patrick,
          I have looked in my response, and I have no where seen where I have called you a fool. I certainly apologize if you got that impression. While I do honestly believe you are speaking untruths about God that make me cringe when I read, I do not think you to be a fool at all. If you are referring to the verses posted, I would urge you to re-read it to see that it is not meant to call you a fool. It says the message of the cross is like foolishness to those who do not believe- which I would argue simply means that it doesn’t make sense to the people who do not believe. The verse goes on to talk about God making wisdom of the world foolish and that the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom- to which I think it is speaking to the fact that God is infinitely more wise than we are. Therefore, if you think I was calling you a fool with these verses, then it would be in no more of a way than calling everyone a fool because none of us can compare to God. I assure you, however, that I wasn’t calling you a fool. Examining my last statement, I said that believing in Christ may seem like foolishness to you- this seems to be your very point in all of your posts; I do not see how this would be offensive to you, even though I wish it wasn’t true. I hope that clears up any misinterpretation of my post.

          -Stephanie

    • Stephanie

      Dear Patrick,

      I think of you often and continue to pray for you. I hope things are going well for you. I have been checking back to see if you have received my response to your last comment. I must admit that at first I was taken aback by your response. As I was re-reading parts of our conversation, I can see why you may have been on the defensive though. I’m afraid that my first post may have come across as less gentle than I had hoped, and I’m sorry for that too. I hope you can appreciate after being on this side of the argument for so long before now that my words truly came out of concern for you and people reading your blog who might be hesitantly seeking God. It was not meant to come across as an interrogation or condemnation but more of a Titus 1:13 reaction to someone I hope to continue to consider a brother.

      Blessings,
      Stephanie

      • http://geekatheist.wordpress.com geekatheist

        A reply to Stephanie:

        “Therefore, if you think I was calling you a fool with these verses, then it would be in no more of a way than calling everyone a fool because none of us can compare to God.”

        I think you’re trying to read too much into that verse. You know that’s called cherry-picking, right?

        When you see the Bible for what it is, you’ll realize there is a lot (a WHOLE lot) of bigotry written into the Bible. The verses calling unbelievers “fools” don’t say just that. Read the whole context, and you’ll see unbelievers are not only called fools, but also evil. Nowhere in the Bible do we see an example of an unbeliever being good or having good intentions. All are called evil, all are painted full of themselves, and plotting againt the “righteous”.

        Well, OF COURSE they’re painted that way! The Bible is religious propaganda, written BY religious people! I don’t know who started this “Scripture is inspired by God” business, but he was a genius. By claiming that those who criticized the prophets criticized God, they automatically gained holiness, and their words became unquestionable.

        It’s one of the oldest tricks. Take a look at nearly all the religions in the world, and you’ll see the same pattern. Divine authority is the perfect excuse to gain political power.

        And we all fell for it.

  • Pingback: Jesus: Lord, Liar, Lunatic, Literal? « dotings of an amalgamous persona

  • Andrew

    Does it scare you that the op wants to practice medicine despite her utter disregard for the concept of scientific and rational thinking?

    • lpmitch

      I have no problem with that. People have compartmentalized reality for years, and it does not hinder them from doing there jobs.

  • Andrew

    I guess it bothers me knowing that people who believe in talking snakes, cursed fruit, and a floating zoo are publishing scientific literature and making scientific and medical decisions that may be life and death. I agree with you though, it doesn’t hinder most from doing their jobs…just makes me uncomfortable knowing that my doctor doesn’t have enough scientific knowledge to see the flaws in a 6 day creation belief.

  • http://geekatheist.wordpress.com geekatheist

    “Peter’s inverted crucifixion, as alluded to by jesus, is not corroborated by anyone until 150-200 years later in the apocryphal “acts of peter“. It is non-apocryphal because of its late date and numerous historical inaccuracies, and Esubius puts it in with rejected (read:non-true) writings. It also contains a miracle-off, among other things.”

    It should read “It is apocryphal because”. Also, it’s “Eusebius”.

    • http://geekatheist.wordpress.com geekatheist

      By the way, my comment got submitted twice (once anonymously), you can delete the anonymous one.

      • lpmitch

        Geekatheist,

        Thank you so much for the correction. I really should do a better job editing my posts. Checked out your blog, and i approve. woot for geeky atheists.

        -PMitch

  • http://gravatar.com/newlysouthern Amanda

    Patrick,
    I’ve been reading your blog (and your Facebook posts) with great interest. You are certainly well-educated and have read extensively on the topic of Christ. You will be able to out-quote me, out-logic me and provide some sort of scientifically backed viewpoint to counter mine, no matter what I say. Regardless, I shall proceed.

    You claim to have found joy in your newfound atheism and feel it’s something to be shared. However, I can’t help but sense a pervasive bitterness throughout your posts. You seem angry. Perhaps it’s because you feel you’ve been duped for a decade, and now the truth excites you. I don’t know you very well, but I also can’t help but wonder if the problem lies within your execution of Christianity rather than with Christianity itself. Perhaps when you were a Christian, you tried to volunteer more than any other Christian, or get into more religious debates with atheists than any other Christian, or control your sexual desires better than any other Christian. Perhaps you thought you were too moral and God-fearing to experience pain or misfortune. Maybe you thought that being a Christian meant possessing a pure mind that could never be penetrated with unwanted thoughts or desires. Maybe, in your quest to be the perfect Christian, you realized you weren’t perfect enough, which gave you feelings of deep inadequacy, which in turn led you to discount Christianity as a fairy tale concocted by humans to ease our fears of death and the unknown.

    I conclude from your new worldview that the comfort you once found in Christ now comes from tangible sources, like science and psychology. (I would hardly call the cosmos a tangible source, but I digress.) I suppose believing solely in these things is much safer than a belief in God. I can’t quite put my finger on why I feel this way, but somehow, I sense a deep fear rooted inside you, and I wonder if your conversion has less to do with the actual body of evidence surrounding God and more to do with an internal struggle you are displaying as atheism. I can only imagine that someone who is going to such great lengths to prove his viewpoint to the world must still be attempting to prove these things to himself. Moreover, I think this blog actually has very little to do with religion and is actually your way of dealing with some sort of trauma or crisis in your life that has left you questioning the things you once thought to be concrete. I could be totally wrong. Like I said, I hardly know you, let alone your experiences. But something tells me you did not wake up one morning and suddenly decide that the available evidence does not point to the existence of God. Something tells me you are dealing with an incredible hardship that has left you scared, frustrated and without answers, and this has eaten away at your faith and manifested itself as atheism. This all might sound completely crazy, but it’s just a hunch.

    • http://geekatheist.wordpress.com geekatheist

      Amanda: I see you’re making the typical mistake of blaming the victim and dismissing the arguments. See, the one going to great lengths to prove herself is you. You just said it, Patrick is more versed on the Bible and science than you are. And yet, you’re inventing this psychological babble to maybe make Patrick “realize his mistakes” so that he can “turn back to God”. This “something tells me” is nothing but pure speculation on your part.

      The problem with atheism is that it’s logical, it’s not pretty, and to defend it one would have to speak pests of the religion (which are true, but leave you a bad aftertaste). When you see an atheist defending his point of view and a Christian defending his point of view, OF COURSE the Christian will sound more at peace and his arguments will be emotionally appealing. But that’s the trap. The truth doesn’t need to be more pretty or comforting. Of course having a heavenly daddy who helps you sounds comforting, but the evidence points that it’s not real.

      The Christian presses and corners the atheist into presenting the ugliest information he can provide to prove his point – and then accuses the atheist of “going out of his way to prove his point because he’s trying to prove it to himself”.

      Deconversion does take a while in most cases, especially with devout christians. It’s people struggling with evidence and truth, the brain itself tries to defend its former viewpoints and finally is defeated by the new information presented.

      Why are you caring so much about Patrick’s blog? You’re begging him to stop giving information to people. But this information has not an inch of falseness in it. So, why is it dangerous for people? You feel threatened by it, that’s why. Because it threatens to destroy YOUR viewpoint on the world. But you can just turn away. Patrick’s not here on an evil mission. Remember when you found Christ how much you wanted to share Christianity with the world?

      It’s not Christ – it’s the feeling that you found the Truth. I felt it too, and I did try to share it with everyone around me. Well, I was wrong. The evidence of forgeries and adulterated manuscripts in the New Testament is too great to be dismissed (see “Misquoting Jesus” by Bart D. Ehrman, Biblical Scholar), and the fact that the King James Bible was taken from the poor quality greek translation “textus receptus” rather than from more ancient manuscripts leaves us wondering why so many people are so fanatic about the KJV being “the true bible”.

      Religion has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit – it’s about tribalism and fanaticism wanting to shut down dissenting points of view. Please take a moment to consider why you believe. There’s this booklet called “Why we believe in god(s)”, that explains why people are so eager to believe in religion and ignore contradicting evidence.

      Otherwise, you’re only making a fool of yourself in this blog.

  • http://gravatar.com/newlysouthern Amanda

    Geekatheist-

    You could not be more wrong.

    First, you’ve assumed that I’m “begging” Patrick to stop sharing his message, when in reality, I really don’t care what message Patrick shares. This blog is well-written and interesting, and I enjoy reading it. I spent a good part of my life as an atheist and there was a time not too long ago when I would have agreed wholly with what Patrick writes.

    I believe it’s important to always keep yourself informed of opposing viewpoints, and that is why I take interest in this blog. I won’t attempt to counter Patrick’s arguments with Bible verses; that is moot. If you don’t believe the Bible is genuine, having verses spewed at you will do nothing. No, I’m not here to argue for or against religion, since I’m not nearly as well-versed with the evidence as Patrick is. Rather, I’ve simply made an observation about what I’ve read thus far, and my observation has more to do with Patrick himself and his motives for turning to atheism rather than whatever evidence there is, or, in your case, isn’t, for religion.

    When you take all these entries and boil them down, what you find is an issue of control. This blog is a written account of Patrick’s struggle for control over his own life. Before, when he was a Christian, he was trapped in a cycle of inadequacy that stemmed from his interpretation of original sin. He was never good enough, never pure enough. Now that he has eliminated God and is accountable to no one, he finds himself in control again, with science and reason to back him up. Many people, religious or not, go through periods where they feel helpless and out of control, where they struggle to define their purpose or who they really are. I know I’ve been there. I believe in Patrick, this manifested itself as atheism. Whether or not he was correct in doing that, well, that could be debated for an eternity. I’m not here to say that he is right or wrong in choosing atheism; I’m merely speculating as to why this change occurred. He was a Christian for 10 years; if he had believed Christian rhetoric once before, what suddenly changed? I don’t believe it was simply due to evidence, as that evidence can be manipulated to reflect whatever we want it to. Christians will seek out facts that validate their point of view, and atheists do the same regarding theirs. We see what we want to see.

    In any case, Patrick’s views do not threaten my own. Not at all. You assume that your logic is so foolproof that it must scare the daylights out of me. You assume I must want to cloak myself in ignorance as to avoid the truth you purportedly have. Quite the opposite; I rather enjoy the foray into Patrick’s psyche. I respect your quest for truth, it’s a noble effort. But Patrick’s viewpoints will never destroy mine, because I simply don’t require the same body of evidence he does. John 20:29 “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” Christians are absolved from hard truth, and atheists seek it. It’s a fundamental difference.

    • http://geekatheist.wordpress.com geekatheist

      Oh crap, I confused Stephanie’s post above with yours.

      My deepest apologies.

    • lpmitch

      I’ll explain this as simply as i possibly can:

      There were events that ‘rocked my faith,’ but there were also events that made me desire to dive deeper into the truth and evidence claims of Atheism.

      Christianity didn’t work for me because i was doing it wrong, or because i wanted liberty to do whatever i wanted; It doesn’t work because it is a lie. If I told you leeches would cure your influenza, and you kept adding leeches daily, you would never get better; you may get worse. The same is true of superstition. It didn’t work because it’s not true. Everything we know about psychology, reality, and just about any science we might encounter goes contrary to the core teachings of Christianity.

      Nothing suddenly changed; once the spark was ignited (from evolutionary psychology pointing to the fact that Christianity doesn’t have a good grasp on our psychological underpinnings), i kept searching, for 2 years. Now i find myself in the opposite camp, for no reason besides the fact that it is true.

      Emotional appeals don’t really work. I cried for a few hours today because Midtown’s family vacation happened, and I am no longer part of their tribe. As geekatheist said, religion is about tribalism. Belonging, having people. All achievable without fairy-tales. I am slightly bitter; no one likes to be lied to, and i could just as easily have avoided the loss of friendships and relationships without being presented with lies dressed up as truth. There is no need that i am cut off from many of my former friends by a belief in an imaginary friend. Religion is divisive, and is a cancer on our society; If you lost your arm to cancer, you might be a bit angry as well. I lost many years of my life engrossed in delusion. While I’m thankful for many of the experiences, I can now see clearly the destruction perpetuated by religion. Therefore I write.

      Thank you for your consideration and investment in examining my claims, and thank you for participating in discussion. Though we may disagree, I assure you that i am happier, and my psyche is stronger; having been firmly rooted in an accurate knowledge of psychology and how the mind actually works (to the best of the sum total of our knowlege), rather than superstition and myth.