Slavery and the Good Book - Christianity's Dirty Little Secret

We nonbelievers frequently have to fight proposed legislation that would promote Christianity in favor of other religions. Examples are Pennsylvania’s State House resolution that declares 2012 the “Year of the Bible,” the efforts to prevent legalization of gay marriage, and politicians like Rick Perry and Rick Santorum vowing to bring the Bible back into American government. Some ask us why we care what’s in the Bible if we don’t believe in it. As long as there are those who feel strongly that America’s laws are (or should be) based on Biblical principles, we need to understand this book in its entirety, and certainly those who believe that the Bible is God‘s word should want to understand it. If the Bible is the inspired word of the Creator of the universe then I think it’s fair to look to it for our morality - our definition of what’s right and what is wrong.

So what does the Bible have to say about slavery?

A quick check of a concordance will reveal that the word “slave” appears 89 times, “slaves” appears 71 times, “servant” 528 times, and “servants” 266 times in the New International Version. While some of these references might refer to paid workers, and some to people who voluntarily entered into slavery to repay debts, there are many references to buying and selling human beings, some of whom were born into slavery and some who were aquired through wars with other nations. There is no question that these are people who are to be treated as property (Leviticus 25:44-46), and there are many verses that detail how that is to be done, what kinds of beatings are appropriate, when it’s allowed to have sex with your slaves, and things like that. Owning other people was an accepted part of ancient Hebrew culture. The fact that Hebrews might have treated their slaves better than some other peoples did hardly seems to make the practice more palatable.

Then maybe the question becomes, why didn’t God (or the authors of the Bible in whatever way you may understand that) see fit to mention anywhere that this practice was wrong? They seemed to have a lot of opinions about a lot of things. There are detailed instructions on how to prepare a burnt offering, on which foods are to be eaten and which avoided, what kinds of clothing to wear, how we should shave and wear our hair. Today’s believers seem pretty comfortable not spending too much time trying to understand or follow the old laws. They seem kind of silly today, don’t they? Yet, with all the detail of what seems to us to be the most mundane things, God never saw fit to even suggest that owning another person was wrong?

But that’s the Old Testament. You won’t get very far in a discussion with a Christian today before they say that Jesus changed everything. With his birth, death, and resurrection, we are not saved by following the old laws but by His grace.

Surely Jesus wouldn’t have condoned slavery, right? If we look to the Gospels to see what Jesus says about slavery we don’t find much. When He did refer to slaves or servants He seemed to be doing so in order to compare the servant-master relationship to the relationship between all men and God. He seems to have been not so much bothered by the slavery of his day as He was trying to make a bigger point about all people, slaves and rich men alike, finding freedom in God. Some have said that His purpose was not so much to reform the world’s customs as it was to reform the souls of men.

That may be true, but what does that mean for us today when we claim that the Bible is our source for our knowledge of right and wrong?

We know that it’s wrong to enslave another person. I don’t care what religion you follow, if you are not a sociopath, you understand deep inside yourself that it is morally wrong to force another person to work for you. Why, and how do we know this? I believe that it’s because we, as homo sapiens, are able to empathize. We have enough intelligence to be able to look at another person and imagine ourselves in his situation. If we imagine being taken from our homes, separated from our families, and denied the freedom to decide for ourselves how we will spend our efforts, it’s not hard to see that we would be unhappy about it.

I think the reason that nonbelievers point to the Bible’s silence on the question of slavery as important is precisely because it is an easy example of our morality being superior to that of the Bible. Does that shock you? I’ll say it again. When it comes to slavery, our current ideas (at least in America - I’m not denying that slavery still occurs in some places and I’m not saying I’m okay with that) are much more just than anything we could glean on the subject from our Bibles. If you claim that the Bible is the ultimate guide for moral instruction, then you would have no moral problem with owning another person. If the morality of the Bible supersedes the trends of any culture, then we have to conclude that slavery is not a big deal. Fortunately today’s laws have evolved to the point where that isn’t an option for you anyway, but you won’t find the objection to slavery in the Bible.

While the abolitionists of the 19th century were certainly motivated at least in part by religious conviction, it must be noted that those who advocated for the continuation of slavery also used the Bible to promote their position. Both sides in the Civil War claimed to be fighting with God’s blessing. The very thing that I’m suggesting in this blog - that the Bible has nothing to say against slavery - was what Southerners used to justify their position. Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States, said, “(Slavery) was established by decree of Almighty God…it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation….”

The fact that abolitionists were motivated by their faith, the fact that the Old Testament instructed its followers to treat their slaves better than their neighbors might have, and the fact that slavery and servanthood in its various forms were common in that time, serve only to sidestep the central issue, which is that not only does this book, which is supposed to be our guide for ultimate morality, not condemn the practice, but actually outlines how to treat slaves like property and which kinds of beatings are acceptable. If this is God’s word, then we must conclude that, in His infinite and unchanging wisdom, God was okay with his chosen people owning other human beings.

So what does all this mean? To atheists such as myself, it is an indication that the Bible was written by men who were a product of their time and culture. This doesn’t mean that there is nothing worthwhile in it, but it suggests that the Bible was not under the direction of anything omniscient, omnipotent, virtuous, good, loving, or praiseworthy.

We will make better laws if we take the responsibility as humans to imagine ourselves in other’s places and treat each other accordingly. This is known as the Ethic of Reciprocity, and Jesus wasn’t the first to suggest it. It does line up nicely with what He said about loving one another, and that if we do that the rest will take care of itself. But for those who continue to claim that the Bible is our best gauge for moral behavior, its treatment of slavery should cause discomfort.

The Parade of Gods

What do Perseus, Buddha, Huitzilopochtli, Attis, Genghis Khan, Horus, Mercury, Romulus, and Jesus have in common?

I would propose that more atheists will know or be able to guess at the answer than Christians will. Why is that? This is the kind of information that exposes Christianity as just another of many religions. It's one of many kinds of facts that might give some Christians pause, as well it should. It's the kind of thing your minister probably hopes you don't know. It's not proof that Jesus didn't exist; it's just another bit of trivia that puts Christianity in perspective.

So what do they have in common? They were all born of virgins. Some of their virgin mothers were inseminated by gods, some by bright lights, some by a shower of gold, some by placing some object to their bosom - you get the picture. None of them got pregnant in what we might consider the traditional way.

I think it's just something you should know.

The Value of Faith

Why is it that when there is a piece of knowledge that we have plenty of evidence for, we never talk about having faith in it?

Well, that's because the definition of faith is belief in something without evidence. It's self-contained in the definition of the word, that if you have the evidence then you don't need faith. Fair enough.

So when we talk about having faith in something, then by definition we are talking about something that there is no evidence for. It's like we're creating this third class of existence. There are things we agree exist because we have evidence, there are things we agree probably don't exist because we don't have any evidence, and then there is this mystical third class of things that we have "faith" exist, even though there is no evidence.

Isn't that kind of just a word game, though? Could it be that we are playing with the spaces in between real and imaginary? By claiming to have "faith" in things that we have no evidence for, could it be that we are trying to create pseudo-credibility in an area that we claim is real despite a lack of evidence? Is this intellectually honest? What would prevent every creature from the imaginations of science fiction writers from membership in this special class of existence, this list of things we have no evidence for but accept on faith? (Here I'm thinking of unicorns and green Martians and leprechauns and things like that.)

Whenever we have knowledge with good evidence, you won't hear the word 'faith'. It's simply not necessary, and it's not helpful. It would only muddy the waters of knowledge. In some ways, faith is the very opposite of knowledge.

Maybe instead of praising ourselves for faith, we should put our energies toward knowledge, and being open to accept new knowledge as it becomes available. Maybe the word 'faith' should serve as a red flag that whatever someone is proposing you believe in doesn't have evidence to back it up, otherwise we would just call it knowledge.

Overcoming a lifetime of indoctrination is uncomfortable. If you reject the things you were taught to believe it has an alarming effect on others who still believe. I suppose the very act of rejection sends the message that you think they are wrong, even if you never say anything to that effect. Intertwined with what most of us have been taught to believe about God is the idea that doubt itself is dangerous, so that even the bravest among us might experience a slight physiological discomfort when we begin to contemplate that there might not be a God at all.

The next time someone tells you that you've got to have faith, understand that faith is only needed when evidence is lacking. Be responsible for making your own decisions about what you believe. Recognize that there will be others who will stand to gain, whether financially or otherwise, if you accept what they tell you without question. Realize that intellectual honesty can be uncomfortable at times, and lonely, but know that there is reward in the simple act of searching for truth, and accepting the world as it really is.

The Fucked-Up World of Morality

There's something I like a lot about the New Testament. Surprised? Don't be. There's actually a lot I like there, and I think my favorite part of the whole Jesus Thing is the unlikeliness of it all. His birth to a poor family, in a stable. (Note: I have no idea if there was a man named Jesus who actually lived and did anything that the NT says he did. It doesn't make any difference to me whether it's true because I don't believe in gods, so don't interpret my treating the historical Jesus as a true story as anything other than my response to what is written about him.) He wasn't a king or a priest. In fact, he didn't care much for the leadership of the Jewish community at the time. He ate with tax collectors, not pharisees. I love that.

Jesus challenged the idea of what was considered Holy at the time. He turned morality on its ear. He did the exact opposite of what a lot of religious leaders wanted or expected him to do. That's kind of awesome.

So here we are in 2012. We've got Presidential candidates flouting their faith and "traditional values." Somehow we've done it again. 'Morality' today means not drinking and not using the word 'fuck' in a blog title. It means marriage between a man and a woman. It means not using birth control.

What does any of that have to do with how we treat each other? The prevailing economic attitude of those who would define themselves as the harbingers of values and morality can be summed up with, "I've got mine. Fuck you." That's too harsh? Is it really? Why don't we hear these moral leaders worrying about how to help the poor?

We've allowed these folks to subltly redefine morality in terms that suit them. They would prefer that morality be more about sex than the really hard stuff like helping their neighbor.

I like to think about what Jesus would be like if he was born into today's world. Would he hang out with the televangelists in their limos? Would he fight gay marriage? Would he be excited about a Gingrich presidency?

It's funny that I don't believe in God, but I seem to take what Jesus stood for so much more seriously than so many of those who say they do.

It's fucked up.

Why Religion Will Fail, and Soon

I was in second grade when I first remember hearing something about the USSR. That was 1972 - well after the bomb drills of the 1950's but still before The Day After, the 1983 movie about the nuclear holocast that we grew up believing was absolutely inevitable. My generation had a kind of built-in pessimism, I think, a belief that there really wasn't much point.

But in the second grade they told me about how the Soviet government controlled all media - the newspapers, the tv, books and magazines. There was no internet then, and the government simply told the people what It wanted them to know. To attempt to publish anything outside their approval was to actually risk your life.

But something sparked in my seven-year-old mind. Somehow I knew, you can't keep people in the dark forever. Somehow, someday, they would realize that their information was being carefully controlled, and that knowledge would make them hungry to know more. It's just human nature. And what is true has a way of not just going away quietly, no matter how hard some people might work to make that happen.

That knowledge was a source of hope for me. I knew that it wouldn't be wars or weapons that would eventually free that nation, but the gradual erosion of propaganda and the human desire to know the truth about the world.

And I was right. As it turned out, it was only seventeen years later that the Berlin Wall came down, in the same decade that the internet began to deliver information to every corner of the world. It would have been like trying to hold back a waterfall with a handful of mud to try to keep people in the dark after that.

So what does that have to do with religion?

Once a person has a good working knowledge of history, and other cultures, and science, it's an easy step to see that man has always invoked the gods to explain the things he didn't understand or was afraid of. Every culture has its creation story to explain how the world and we came to be. In the days of subsitence farming, a drought must have been a scary thing, and it's easy to see how anybody claiming to know of a way to appeal to the gods to send rain would be the most popular guy in town - so popular that people would build temples and make sacrifices and give him a portion of their assets.

There were probably always skeptics too, but in those days when ruined crops might mean death you can see why it would have been much more comforting to think that you might have a way to affect that outcome. Even a skeptic might be tempted to throw a sacrifice on the fire, just in case.

If you look at today's culture I don't think you can underestimate the influence of the internet. This is the first time, ever, that any person in any country who can read can learn where thunder comes from, what our most brilliant scientists think about the origins of the universe, or how all life forms evolved from single-celled organisms. There is no longer a need to invoke gods to explain how the world works, or even how religion itself works.

Too much of what we can observe just doesn't fit with what religion has taught us. We're taught that homosexuality is a sin, but we see that there have always been gay people - whether we accept them or torture them doesn't seem to affect their numbers. We begin to see the humanity in religion. The authors of our faith were simple humans, vulnerable to the same prejudices that we are today.

What we get from this new perspective is that whatever religion we were raised with isn't really any different from any other group's religion, and when we understand the reasons why we reject belief in their gods we understand why others reject belief in ours.

All of this is good news. When we realize that it's our humanity that binds us to each other rather than our superstitions, we will be more motivated to look for solutions to the world's problems - solutions that don't depend so heavily on "us vs them."

Expect big changes and expect them soon. The cat is out of the bag. You can't keep people in the dark forever, and the light of truth is breaking all over the world. Expect the religious to make a lot of noise in the hopes that you will become confused. Expect them to appeal to emotions like fear to keep people faithful. They won't go quietly, but one day you'll wake up and realize that the world has kind of gone on without them.

You don't really need to do anything. Just wait for it.

Life Without God

One of the cool things about the internet is the abililty to do geneaological research. This was maybe the first time in my life where I was really thankful for my unusual family name (Ulery). I can't imagine trying to find your roots with a name like Smith. I was able to follow most of my lines back into the 1600's, including my Ulery's, who came from Bavaria, Germany to the New World in the 1700's.

I joined a facebook group for Ulery's and it was there I met a young evangelist who, although we share a last name, is not related to me from what we can tell at this point. When I got a friend request from him I checked out his page. He was definitely what I would call "over the top" for Jesus, but he was also a really, really nice guy, someone I enjoyed knowing, and someone who truly lived according to his beliefs. I don't share his faith, obviously, but I can respect his dedication to it, and my life would be dull if I only surrounded myself with people who think like me, so we friended and got to know each other a little.

Today I want to offer an atheist's response to a comment he made once, not to me personally but in a status, that, "Without Him [Jesus] my life is void and empty, and has no meaning, purpose, or fulfillment."

I know he meant what he wrote because he wouldn't have said it otherwise, and I'm sure that, according to what he has been taught and the way those around him believe, he can't comprehend how anyone could have meaning without belief. I'm sure he wasn't trying to be offensive or even challenging. He was simply stating that his faith is so powerful that it defines who he is in his every waking moment, and that it is such a large and important factor in his life that he thinks he would be lost without it. The idea of being without something that has been so prevalent in his life is probably kind of scary.

So what is it like to live without faith in God? Is life without God just one pointless day after another? Is it just a drunken orgy of pleasures of the flesh? Are atheists lonely, sad, despairing, angry, and selfish?

Not at all.

Remember that feeling, if you're someone who has ever had a history as a person of faith, when you gave money to feed the hungry or bought computers for a school in an impoverished country or when you helped a lost child find his parent? Do you know that feeling you get when you turn the other cheek, or love your neighbor as yourself, or give someone the coat off your back? Those parts of Christianity that teach us to love and help one another are actually common to lots of different faiths, and they are something that you *can* and *should* continue to do as an atheist. Why? Because you are human, and you have the power to make other humans' journeys easier. Because it's the right thing to do.

Somewhere along the line we (all of us) allowed religion to claim certain things for itself, things like the Golden Rule, or the "ethic of reciprocity." No, Jesus was not the first to suggest it. This ethic is found in most cultures throughout history. Religion claims that "morals" or "values" belong to the church, and those have become code words for certain kinds of bigotry, but if we look at values as being a way of being responsible for our social behavior and of treating others well, then we can see that this is not something that is exclusive to religion. In fact, we can cite thousands of examples in which churches or people of faith have behaved in ways that are just the opposite of the values which they claim are theirs. From the Catholic Church protecting its priests at the expense of children to faith healers bilking their followers for millions, there is no shortage of immoral behavior to be found under our steeples.

The fact is that every single one of us is responsible for how we treat others. It doesn't matter what you do with your Sunday mornings. With the exception of sociopaths, human beings hopefully try to treat others well, not because we were told to do this but because we have the mental capacity to imagine ourselves in another's place and behave accordingly.

When I say that I find my own meaning I don't mean that I just charge through, taking whatever I can get for myself with no thought to the consequences. I have chosen a life of contemplation. The truth, to me, is the most important thing, and I can't think of any way I'd rather live than in relentless pursuit of it. I value free thought and speech, learning, love, service, equality, my family, and my fellow humans. I have it within my power to affect change in my corner of the world, and I don't take that responsibility lightly. I fight for the things I think are important. I teach my kids to think about their place in the world and what kinds of contributions they might be able to make.

Whether we call ourselves believers or not, each of us creates our own meaningful life. We may think that we are following the directions set forth by God, but we have chosen to do that. We have chosen to believe that slavery is wrong. Why do we know this? Because we can imagine ourselves in the slave's position. We don't need anyone to tell us that it's wrong. In fact, the Bible never condemns it, but we still know it's wrong, just as we know it's right to love and help our neighbor. Even the most devout among us have chosen which parts of their Bible they follow and which parts they can ignore. (How many Christians reading this are wearing polyester?)

Maybe the only difference between the meaning in an atheists' life and in the life of the Christian is that the atheist admits that he chooses right of his own accord.

I think that in the coming decades we will see a huge increase in the number of people who claim not to believe in God. I believe that they're out there - in numbers hovering around twenty percent at present - and that as more of us speak out, so more will gain courage and realize that nonbelief is not something to be feared or ashamed of but rather something to be celebrated. We are free to take those parts of religion that we found meaningful, like helping others, and employ them in our lives. Giving up religion doesn't mean we give up on our values. We don't need to replace religion with the worship of any person or thing or culture. We share the human condition, and no shortage of need. As we realize that we have the power to pursue a life of service to others, no God required, we will have our meaning, our purpose, and our fulfillment.

Peace.

Bam - Problem Solved

Our poor friends the persecuted Christians are up in arms all over the country, battling to keep Nativity scenes on public property. Bless their hearts.

They've taken a very simple concept - that governments can't endorse any particular religion - and turned it on its ear. All they have to say is that part of their particular religion involves being free to share their message in public places, and that if they are prevented from doing that then they do not have the freedom of religion guaranteed in our Constitution.

It's kind of brilliant in its simplicity. Say that your religion requires you to pray in school, or see a statue of the Ten Commandments in your courthouse, or see a Nativity on the courthouse lawn, then the rest of us have to let you do it, right, or you are being denied the right to practice your religion?

Bullshit. Or maybe it's not. Maybe I should say that if your religion does, indeed, require you to share it in public places, then yes, I am proposing that we deny you the right to exercise that particular belief. Is that shocking? I also deny you permission to fly planes into buildings full of innocent people. You can't just get carte blanche permission to do whatever the hell you want because it's your religion. We all have to live together.

So the atheists are usually the bad guys in these courthouse Nativity battles, but a town in Connecticut solved their problem very simply, in a way that both allows Christians to see the Nativity when downtown and keeps religion off public spaces:

Creche Clash Averted

They simply moved the Nativity to the lawn of The First United Methodist Church. Now they can accompany the Nativity with hymns, Bible readings, prayers, whatever they want.

See how easy that was?

The Imaginary War on Christmas

It's that time of year again, when our facebook pages are awash in outrage over people not being "allowed" to say Merry Christmas.

Yawn.

Can we get real for a minute? Why do you think you aren't allowed to say Merry Christmas? You are totally "allowed" to say Merry Christmas, or Happy Hanukkah, or Happy Kwanzaa, Ashura, Bodhi Day, St Lucia Day or Boxing Day.

So why have so many big retailers left Christmas behind in favor of Happy Holidays or Season's Greetings? Because they like the money that non-Christians spend every bit as much as the Christian money, and those greetings are all-inclusive. Being told Happy Holidays or Season's Greetings doesn't rob you of your Christianity. If Christmas is the holiday that you celebrate at this time of year then consider yourself greeted. If you own a business it is certainly your right to wish your customers a Merry Christmas.

I'm not offended by a Christian holiday greeting because that would be a stupid thing to get offended over. I am offended at the cries of persecution, however. If you want to be persecuted for your faith (and apparently this is something that has appeal) then I suggest spending December in Iran, where saying Merry Christmas could very well get you killed.

Having to endure seeing Happy Holidays on Walmart ads is not persecution.

Why I Think Prayer Is Harmful

How is an atheist supposed to react when told someone will pray for him? Of course it depends on the context. I usually get told that by a pissed off stranger, so it's a little hard to feel the love. But what about when a real-life friend says they are praying for me?

Everybody likes to be thought about. It's a kind gesture. And it can't hurt, even if I don't believe it works, right?

Here's my problem with prayer. It makes you feel like you're doing something. In my experience, only about 5% of the people who have prayed for me during my homelessness have taken any other action. And those actions were awesome. I got a gas card once, a grocery card, one friend drove from another state to bring me a phone, heavy coat, and lots of snacks and supplies. One awesome friend gave me a small job at his house to help me earn a little cash. To say that these kinds of things are humbling is an enormous understatement. There really aren't words to say how much I appreciate them. If it's any consolation to these people, I will someday be in a better position to help others and pass their kindnesses along, just like I've done in the past.

I'll be fine. I'm always fine. Nobody owes me anything. But it's not just me. I suspect that when we pray for folks, for most of us it ends there. We can sleep a little better knowing that we've done something. But have we really "done" anything?

Prayers don't hurt anything UNLESS we allow ourselves to feel that we have taken some kind of action to help another.

Two hands in action accomplish more than a thousand clasped in prayer. People swear by prayer. Everybody knows somebody who was healed or had some great thing happen after they were prayed for. But the hard truth is that there has never been any evidence that prayer changes anything at all.

Some people get better. Some get worse and die. It's confirmation bias that makes us remember the happy endings. People dying after they were prayed over doesn't make the news. Stuff happens, to Christians and non-Christians alike. We say, when the outcome isn't what we hoped for, that God had some bigger plan in mind, something that we aren't privvy to. That makes sense. But then why pray?

I'm not going to try to talk anyone out of prayer. And I'm going to continue to say a heartfelt thank you to anyone who tells me they are praying for me. I'll be fine. But if you know of somebody else who is sick, or in a bind, or having some kind of struggle, do pray - do - but please don't stop there. If everyone who prayed also accompanied those prayers with action, can you imagine the difference we could make in the world?

.