The best definitions of religion I've ever seen actually seem to make the belief in God of secondary importance.
Although, you're a strong atheist, Amy, I consider you a pious person, for the simple reason that you adhere to the best definitions of religion I know of.
James 1:27 describes what religion is supposed to be: "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."
So, have pity on the afflicted and keep yourself unworldly. Doesn't seem like such a tall order. God seems to be less of a person and more of an ideal.
Another definition I like appears in the Talmud, Shabbos 31A. A gentile approached the famous Rabbi Shammai, and requested that Shammai teach him the Torah while he stood on one foot. Believing (correctly) he was being mocked, Shammai took a stick and chased him away.
The gentile then approached another famous teacher, Rabbi Hillel, with the same seemingly impossible request. Hillel kindly said to the gentile, "This is our Holy Torah: That which is hateful to yourself, do not do to your neighbor."
"Does this mean that the gentiles and the Jews and all of us our brothers? That we must be kind to one another, like brothers?" asked the gentile, quite forgetting he came to mock the Rabbi.
"That's it," replied Hillel. "That's the entire Torah. The rest is commentary. Go and study it."
Patrick
at November 7, 2009 9:51 AM
Hillel is quoting/explaining a verse from the Torah (translated into Aramaic for the gentile's benefit):
Love your neighbor as yourself, I am G-d.
Often the second part of the verse is dropped off - but it is necessary to fulfill the first part. When you feel yourself to be a child of G-d, then you can love others "as yourself".
And notice the parallel - when we love our neighbor, then G-d's kingdom is revealed.
Amy - please get beyond your blind spot. There's a lot more to religion than tribalism and "pie in the sky when you die".
I'm not a Christian - but Christian morality is a lot better than the grasping gobbledygook that's replaced it.
Ben-David
at November 7, 2009 10:31 AM
you're a strong atheist, Amy,
I'm actually what's called a "weak atheist." I don't say, emphatically, "there's no god" -- how could I? I say that I see no evidence there's a god, therefore I don't believe in god.
By the same token, I'm also a-flying-carpetist, a-talkingdog-ist, etc. It's possible Lucy will one day wake up and blurt out, "Gimme a bologna sandwich," however, I wouldn't bet on it.
I like that Hillel bit a lot, Patrick, and learned it a long time ago.
Regarding this: "Amy - please get beyond your blind spot."
Requiring evidence before I believe in something isn't "blind," but quite the antithesis.
One doesn't need religion to live by the Hillel thing; in fact, in my upcoming book (which I hope you all will preorder!), I call for people to treat strangers like neighbors. Among other things.
Ben-David writes: Amy - please get beyond your blind spot. There's a lot more to religion than tribalism and "pie in the sky when you die".
What blind spot, Ben-David? To my way of thinking, Amy practices religion quite adequately. So, she doesn't see God the way Christians typically preach Him. Neither do I, quite frankly.
I think if Jesus were alive today, he'd have added one more Beatitude to the bunch he gave in the fifth chapter of Matthew. (The Beatitudes are the "Blessed are the..." verses that Jesus gave in the Sermon on the Mount.)
It would have gone like this: "Blessed are the atheists, for they aren't bound by ritual and dogma."
I personally think Amy has far less of a "blind spot" than doctrinaire believers. They are married to ritual and creed, quite forgetting the better worship of compassion, decency, charity, etc.
This is tragic because Jesus probably spent the greater part of his ministry railing against self-righteousness and making the outward show of faith, but ignoring the more important matters of character. (If you don't believe me, just get a concordance and look up the word "Pharisee." Preaching against self-righteousness seems to follow them around.)
For a taste, if you can get the gist of this passage despite the archaic language:
From Luke, chapter 11:
37And as he spake, a certain Pharisee besought him to dine with him: and he went in, and sat down to meat.
38And when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that he had not first washed before dinner.
39And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness.
40Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also?
41But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.
42But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
While I don't fully understand the practice of tithing various herbs, the message is clear: the Pharisees adhered to the ritual -- pardon the expression -- religiously, and ignored the far more important aspects of character.
One more verse, Ben-David: From Luke, chapter 6: 41And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
42Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.
I don't think we need to trouble ourselves over Amy's spiritual well-being. I'm not the arbiter of anyone's eternal fate, but I think Amy will be just fine. Moreso than a lot of people who call themselves strict adherents of their own various faiths.
Patrick
at November 7, 2009 2:49 PM
Thank you for the statement on your atheism, Amy. I was able to correct that on your Wikipedia entry, and you gave me the citation I needed. Just now preordered your book. Will be sending it to you with a SASE so you can sign it as soon as I get it.
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/07/meet_the_victim.html#comment-1676614">comment from Patrick
Thank you for the statement on your atheism, Amy. I was able to correct that on your Wikipedia entry, and you gave me the citation I needed. Just now preordered your book. Will be sending it to you with a SASE so you can sign it as soon as I get it.
Thanks so much - and thanks for monitoring/changing my Wikipedia page. I'd rather not look, lest I find somebody's given me an adam's apple yet again!
Not to worry. Your article entered semi-protected status after all the vandalism occurred, which meant no one but an established Wikipedian was allowed to edit it, and the vandals got all discouraged and left. And I have it on my watch list. Every time someone does anything at all to the article, I'm notified at once.
Adam's apple? No, Amy, that's Ann Coulter, not you.
Patrick
at November 7, 2009 11:44 PM
Amy:
One doesn't need religion to live by the Hillel thing;
- - - - - - - - -
History both ancient and modern proves that this is not so. Man-made moral codes are subject to subversion when it is politically expedient.
If we're really just smart monkeys here by accident, it's clear that some are more talented than others. Unsweetened by Jewish notions of transcendent individual worth, the "I'm all right Jack" libertarian meritocracy promoted on this site can lead to a cruel world none of us would want to live in - or consider just.
Even Enlightenment thinkers had to fall back on a Deistic construct, not having found any earthly hook for their "natural rights of man". And in our post-modern, post-colonial age it's clear that the rights they thought were "universal" and "obvious" are not at all universal, not at all obvious outside the Judeo-Christian world.
Like them, good people like Amy are coasting on inherited Judeo-Christian ethics. But without religious belief to animate and reinforce those beliefs, the pit gapes.
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/07/meet_the_victim.html#comment-1676650">comment from Ben-David
Man-made moral codes are subject to subversion when it is politically expedient.
We have reciprocal altruism and cheater detection and all sorts of EVOLUTIONARILY-made codes. Morality is hard-wired. You don't need to fear your Imaginary Friend In The Sky to be good. In fact, that kind of "goodness" isn't goodness at all, but highly primitive self-interest practiced by gullible, irrational people. There's no evidence there's a god, and your need to cheer for the team is quaint but childish.
"Allah Akbar!": Someone I know, who is also the biggest apologist for Palestinian terrorism I currently know, just told me that FOX news retracted the report of any witnesses quoting the terrorist Major as saying this.
I do not know if this is true or not, considering the source.
Amy:
We have reciprocal altruism and cheater detection and all sorts of EVOLUTIONARILY-made codes. Morality is hard-wired.
- - - - - - - - - -
uh huh.
Which is why this blog so frequently documents the expressions of universal morality in Arab culture - including the collusion of its women in their own abuse.
And why murderers have high status in the primitive societies that have been studied - from Amazon tribes to south-sea aborigines.
And why caste systems, honor killings, and enslavement and dhimmification of the weak and the Other are part of so many primitive cultures.
It's that hard wired morality!
Sorry, mammeleh - it would be nice if what was obvious to us was obvious and inevitable to all, ticking over without the effort or disciplined commitment of individuals or communities.
In other words: it would be nice if we could enjoy the fruits of Judeo-Christian morality without having to hold up our end.
But it is not obvious.
Not hard-wired.
(The Torah itself puts human free will front-and-center. It IS possible to choose debasement and evil - and get ahead, at least in the short term...)
Nor is its continued rise inevitable - even in traditionally Judeo-Christian societies (take a look at Europe).
The credo of "love your neighbor as yourself" is not obvious, not universal.
It flows directly from "I am G-d" - a very specific "Guy in the Sky" called Monotheism, which changes completely the nature of my relationship to my neighbor.
Drop the "I am G-d" and we are neither brothers nor neighbors - but strangers, adrift.
Similarly, there are no "inalienable rights" without the "endowed by their Creator" part...
Two halves of the same truth: sever them and you are costing on borrowed moral time (again, see Europe).
Ben-David
at November 8, 2009 9:14 AM
"Man-made moral codes are subject to subversion when it is politically expedient."
Not just politically.
If moral codes were handed down by religion, then we'd have no pedophile priests, and no divorced Christians.
"Moral codes", extended by prudes worldwide in the rule of the busybody, have led to the bizarre suppression of anything resembling full partnership in relationships.
Radwaste
at November 8, 2009 9:21 AM
Ben-David: uh huh. Which is why this blog so frequently documents the expressions of universal morality in Arab culture - including the collusion of its women in their own abuse.
And why caste systems, honor killings, and enslavement and dhimmification of the weak and the Other are part of so many primitive cultures.
It's that hard wired morality!
Brilliant, Ben-David. You just made her case.
Religion is behind the atrocities you cite. In other words, immorality is learned, even taught by the religion you're preaching. Where do Arabian countries get the idea that women are second class citizens? From the Qu'ran. And not to mention, Christians aren't exactly all about gender-equality, either. Where does the caste system come from? Hinduism. Who's at the top of the caste system? The Brahmins, priests. Who calls for the honor killings? Allah.
And every major religion in the world advocates slavery, including Judaism and Christianity.
You've just made Amy's case for her. Morality is hard-wired and it takes religion to overrule it.
And by the way, I consider proselytizing to be among the most offensive forms of communication there are. Kindly respect the rights of people to believe as they wish. If not, then please take it elsewhere.
Patrick's cocktail-party trick:
Morality is hard-wired and it takes religion to overrule it.
- - - - - - - - -
If morality is so hard-wired - burned in by evolution's survival imperative - how do religions succeed in subverting the deeply ingrained "natural morality"?
They don't. Most pagan religions/social constructs codify the selfish impulses that are natural and common - that spring naturally from the temporal world, which offers no clue of any fundamental brotherhood or equality among humans.
The moral code Amy and other Western agnostics are depending on is unique, not obvious, not natural. And it requires willing, disciplined effort - if not faith - to maintain.
Ben-David
at November 9, 2009 2:19 AM
Ben-David: If morality is so hard-wired - burned in by evolution's survival imperative - how do religions succeed in subverting the deeply ingrained "natural morality"?
The Goebbels approach. Repeat a lie often enough, and people will start to believe it.
Sigh...really is depressing that people are willing to do this to one another. Our time on this planet is short. Why do things like this?
Patrick at November 7, 2009 9:18 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/07/meet_the_victim.html#comment-1676559">comment from Patrick"Why do things like this?"
I believe the thinking is "Our Imaginary Supreme Being says your Imaginary Supreme Being sucks and you should die for believing in him!"
Amy Alkon at November 7, 2009 9:24 AM
Story of one of the victims, local to the area here in central TX.
sterling at November 7, 2009 9:50 AM
The best definitions of religion I've ever seen actually seem to make the belief in God of secondary importance.
Although, you're a strong atheist, Amy, I consider you a pious person, for the simple reason that you adhere to the best definitions of religion I know of.
James 1:27 describes what religion is supposed to be: "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."
So, have pity on the afflicted and keep yourself unworldly. Doesn't seem like such a tall order. God seems to be less of a person and more of an ideal.
Another definition I like appears in the Talmud, Shabbos 31A. A gentile approached the famous Rabbi Shammai, and requested that Shammai teach him the Torah while he stood on one foot. Believing (correctly) he was being mocked, Shammai took a stick and chased him away.
The gentile then approached another famous teacher, Rabbi Hillel, with the same seemingly impossible request. Hillel kindly said to the gentile, "This is our Holy Torah: That which is hateful to yourself, do not do to your neighbor."
"Does this mean that the gentiles and the Jews and all of us our brothers? That we must be kind to one another, like brothers?" asked the gentile, quite forgetting he came to mock the Rabbi.
"That's it," replied Hillel. "That's the entire Torah. The rest is commentary. Go and study it."
Patrick at November 7, 2009 9:51 AM
Hillel is quoting/explaining a verse from the Torah (translated into Aramaic for the gentile's benefit):
Love your neighbor as yourself, I am G-d.
Often the second part of the verse is dropped off - but it is necessary to fulfill the first part. When you feel yourself to be a child of G-d, then you can love others "as yourself".
And notice the parallel - when we love our neighbor, then G-d's kingdom is revealed.
Amy - please get beyond your blind spot. There's a lot more to religion than tribalism and "pie in the sky when you die".
I'm not a Christian - but Christian morality is a lot better than the grasping gobbledygook that's replaced it.
Ben-David at November 7, 2009 10:31 AM
you're a strong atheist, Amy,
I'm actually what's called a "weak atheist." I don't say, emphatically, "there's no god" -- how could I? I say that I see no evidence there's a god, therefore I don't believe in god.
By the same token, I'm also a-flying-carpetist, a-talkingdog-ist, etc. It's possible Lucy will one day wake up and blurt out, "Gimme a bologna sandwich," however, I wouldn't bet on it.
Amy Alkon at November 7, 2009 10:32 AM
I like that Hillel bit a lot, Patrick, and learned it a long time ago.
Regarding this: "Amy - please get beyond your blind spot."
Requiring evidence before I believe in something isn't "blind," but quite the antithesis.
One doesn't need religion to live by the Hillel thing; in fact, in my upcoming book (which I hope you all will preorder!), I call for people to treat strangers like neighbors. Among other things.
Amy Alkon at November 7, 2009 10:35 AM
Ben-David writes: Amy - please get beyond your blind spot. There's a lot more to religion than tribalism and "pie in the sky when you die".
What blind spot, Ben-David? To my way of thinking, Amy practices religion quite adequately. So, she doesn't see God the way Christians typically preach Him. Neither do I, quite frankly.
I think if Jesus were alive today, he'd have added one more Beatitude to the bunch he gave in the fifth chapter of Matthew. (The Beatitudes are the "Blessed are the..." verses that Jesus gave in the Sermon on the Mount.)
It would have gone like this: "Blessed are the atheists, for they aren't bound by ritual and dogma."
I personally think Amy has far less of a "blind spot" than doctrinaire believers. They are married to ritual and creed, quite forgetting the better worship of compassion, decency, charity, etc.
This is tragic because Jesus probably spent the greater part of his ministry railing against self-righteousness and making the outward show of faith, but ignoring the more important matters of character. (If you don't believe me, just get a concordance and look up the word "Pharisee." Preaching against self-righteousness seems to follow them around.)
For a taste, if you can get the gist of this passage despite the archaic language:
From Luke, chapter 11:
37And as he spake, a certain Pharisee besought him to dine with him: and he went in, and sat down to meat.
38And when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that he had not first washed before dinner.
39And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness.
40Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also?
41But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.
42But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
While I don't fully understand the practice of tithing various herbs, the message is clear: the Pharisees adhered to the ritual -- pardon the expression -- religiously, and ignored the far more important aspects of character.
One more verse, Ben-David: From Luke, chapter 6: 41And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
42Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.
I don't think we need to trouble ourselves over Amy's spiritual well-being. I'm not the arbiter of anyone's eternal fate, but I think Amy will be just fine. Moreso than a lot of people who call themselves strict adherents of their own various faiths.
Patrick at November 7, 2009 2:49 PM
Thank you for the statement on your atheism, Amy. I was able to correct that on your Wikipedia entry, and you gave me the citation I needed. Just now preordered your book. Will be sending it to you with a SASE so you can sign it as soon as I get it.
Patrick at November 7, 2009 3:35 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/07/meet_the_victim.html#comment-1676614">comment from PatrickThank you for the statement on your atheism, Amy. I was able to correct that on your Wikipedia entry, and you gave me the citation I needed. Just now preordered your book. Will be sending it to you with a SASE so you can sign it as soon as I get it.
Thanks so much - and thanks for monitoring/changing my Wikipedia page. I'd rather not look, lest I find somebody's given me an adam's apple yet again!
Amy Alkon at November 7, 2009 10:46 PM
Not to worry. Your article entered semi-protected status after all the vandalism occurred, which meant no one but an established Wikipedian was allowed to edit it, and the vandals got all discouraged and left. And I have it on my watch list. Every time someone does anything at all to the article, I'm notified at once.
Adam's apple? No, Amy, that's Ann Coulter, not you.
Patrick at November 7, 2009 11:44 PM
Amy:
One doesn't need religion to live by the Hillel thing;
- - - - - - - - -
History both ancient and modern proves that this is not so. Man-made moral codes are subject to subversion when it is politically expedient.
If we're really just smart monkeys here by accident, it's clear that some are more talented than others. Unsweetened by Jewish notions of transcendent individual worth, the "I'm all right Jack" libertarian meritocracy promoted on this site can lead to a cruel world none of us would want to live in - or consider just.
Even Enlightenment thinkers had to fall back on a Deistic construct, not having found any earthly hook for their "natural rights of man". And in our post-modern, post-colonial age it's clear that the rights they thought were "universal" and "obvious" are not at all universal, not at all obvious outside the Judeo-Christian world.
Like them, good people like Amy are coasting on inherited Judeo-Christian ethics. But without religious belief to animate and reinforce those beliefs, the pit gapes.
Ben-David at November 8, 2009 1:02 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/07/meet_the_victim.html#comment-1676650">comment from Ben-DavidMan-made moral codes are subject to subversion when it is politically expedient.
We have reciprocal altruism and cheater detection and all sorts of EVOLUTIONARILY-made codes. Morality is hard-wired. You don't need to fear your Imaginary Friend In The Sky to be good. In fact, that kind of "goodness" isn't goodness at all, but highly primitive self-interest practiced by gullible, irrational people. There's no evidence there's a god, and your need to cheer for the team is quaint but childish.
Amy Alkon at November 8, 2009 6:54 AM
"Allah Akbar!": Someone I know, who is also the biggest apologist for Palestinian terrorism I currently know, just told me that FOX news retracted the report of any witnesses quoting the terrorist Major as saying this.
I do not know if this is true or not, considering the source.
John Tagliaferro at November 8, 2009 8:00 AM
Amy:
We have reciprocal altruism and cheater detection and all sorts of EVOLUTIONARILY-made codes. Morality is hard-wired.
- - - - - - - - - -
uh huh.
Which is why this blog so frequently documents the expressions of universal morality in Arab culture - including the collusion of its women in their own abuse.
And why murderers have high status in the primitive societies that have been studied - from Amazon tribes to south-sea aborigines.
And why caste systems, honor killings, and enslavement and dhimmification of the weak and the Other are part of so many primitive cultures.
It's that hard wired morality!
Sorry, mammeleh - it would be nice if what was obvious to us was obvious and inevitable to all, ticking over without the effort or disciplined commitment of individuals or communities.
In other words: it would be nice if we could enjoy the fruits of Judeo-Christian morality without having to hold up our end.
But it is not obvious.
Not hard-wired.
(The Torah itself puts human free will front-and-center. It IS possible to choose debasement and evil - and get ahead, at least in the short term...)
Nor is its continued rise inevitable - even in traditionally Judeo-Christian societies (take a look at Europe).
The credo of "love your neighbor as yourself" is not obvious, not universal.
It flows directly from "I am G-d" - a very specific "Guy in the Sky" called Monotheism, which changes completely the nature of my relationship to my neighbor.
Drop the "I am G-d" and we are neither brothers nor neighbors - but strangers, adrift.
Similarly, there are no "inalienable rights" without the "endowed by their Creator" part...
Two halves of the same truth: sever them and you are costing on borrowed moral time (again, see Europe).
Ben-David at November 8, 2009 9:14 AM
"Man-made moral codes are subject to subversion when it is politically expedient."
Not just politically.
If moral codes were handed down by religion, then we'd have no pedophile priests, and no divorced Christians.
"Moral codes", extended by prudes worldwide in the rule of the busybody, have led to the bizarre suppression of anything resembling full partnership in relationships.
Radwaste at November 8, 2009 9:21 AM
Ben-David: uh huh.
Which is why this blog so frequently documents the expressions of universal morality in Arab culture - including the collusion of its women in their own abuse.
And why caste systems, honor killings, and enslavement and dhimmification of the weak and the Other are part of so many primitive cultures.
It's that hard wired morality!
Brilliant, Ben-David. You just made her case.
Religion is behind the atrocities you cite. In other words, immorality is learned, even taught by the religion you're preaching. Where do Arabian countries get the idea that women are second class citizens? From the Qu'ran. And not to mention, Christians aren't exactly all about gender-equality, either. Where does the caste system come from? Hinduism. Who's at the top of the caste system? The Brahmins, priests. Who calls for the honor killings? Allah.
And every major religion in the world advocates slavery, including Judaism and Christianity.
You've just made Amy's case for her. Morality is hard-wired and it takes religion to overrule it.
And by the way, I consider proselytizing to be among the most offensive forms of communication there are. Kindly respect the rights of people to believe as they wish. If not, then please take it elsewhere.
Patrick at November 8, 2009 3:37 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/07/meet_the_victim.html#comment-1676719">comment from PatrickIn short, thanks Patrick!
Amy Alkon at November 8, 2009 3:58 PM
Patrick's cocktail-party trick:
Morality is hard-wired and it takes religion to overrule it.
- - - - - - - - -
If morality is so hard-wired - burned in by evolution's survival imperative - how do religions succeed in subverting the deeply ingrained "natural morality"?
They don't. Most pagan religions/social constructs codify the selfish impulses that are natural and common - that spring naturally from the temporal world, which offers no clue of any fundamental brotherhood or equality among humans.
The moral code Amy and other Western agnostics are depending on is unique, not obvious, not natural. And it requires willing, disciplined effort - if not faith - to maintain.
Ben-David at November 9, 2009 2:19 AM
Ben-David: If morality is so hard-wired - burned in by evolution's survival imperative - how do religions succeed in subverting the deeply ingrained "natural morality"?
The Goebbels approach. Repeat a lie often enough, and people will start to believe it.
Patrick at November 9, 2009 9:52 AM
Leave a comment