How come people care what Glenn Beck thinks?

I understand that he has a TV show.

But listen, YOU could have a TV show if you had a $300 netbook and a wifi connection.

Our postwar media environment is collapsing faster than our economy, which is saying something. But when will we reach the point that these noisemaking goofballs aren't taken seriously?

If you turn off your TV, Glenn Beck goes away. It's not just that he ceases to influence your opinion, he also ceases to influence the opinions of people you've never met, and you don't have to worry about him any more. I'm not kidding! You should try this!

Actually, it bothers me that so many people cannot tell the difference between fact and fiction - and are arrogant enough to insist that they cannot be fooled.

Is it unfair to hold religious belief to the same standards as scientific, rational thought?

Not a matter of fair/unfair. It's a matter of coherence. Science investigates nature. Religious beliefs have to do with meaning, purpose, and metaphysical concerns.

I don't see why, since religion is making an empirical claim about the world,

Religion is making an empirical claim about the world only insofar as the Bible or texts of other religious traditions posit historical events that can be investigated by historical science.

Whereas atheists have ideas about meaning, purpose, ethics etc. but are unaware of where these come from.

I like Glenn Beck frequently, and we are God's chosen country. Every country on the planet is. That doesn't negate man's free will or the laws of nature.

The point that is being missed is that G0d does not "interfere" with the universe except in extraordinary circumstances. For example, He does not cause it to rain on an individual field when the rest of the fields in an area are suffering from drought. There is an analogy about people being subject to miracles. Someone walking down the middle of a major highway would require a much bigger amount of righteousness to "deserve" the miracle of not being hit by a car than someone who stays on the sidewalk.

It is not that G0d does not have the power to intervene, but that part of the purpose of having created Human beings is that we have free will and must choose to act properly of our own free will. Obvious miracles constantly would harm this purpose. It is actually a lower standard of behavior that required constant miracles. That is like a child who requires constant supervision and intervention by the parents in order to behave. Once the child grows up, he is expected to have learned how to behave on his own.

There is a quip that gives a good idea of the needed attitude.

Why did G0d create atheism?

So that someone should not turn away a poor person saying "G0d will help:, but will have the attitude "It is up to me to help".

I think it's a little hypocritical to poke fun at a person's "faith". Everybody has faith. Every person on the planet. Atheists have just as much faith as "believers". For example:

Have you, an atheist, ever PERSONALLY proven that water molecules are made of of 2 atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen? Or do you simply believe that to be true (as I do) because you've been told it's true?

How many scientific theories have you proven for yourself? I mean, YOU did the work for them to prove beyond a doubt that "science" is true.

Don't get me wrong... I am a firm believer in scientific discovery. But don't kid yourself, either: science requires faith and is not above reproach (think of the recent scandal involving manipulated global warming data).

Everybody has faith. Some of us put more faith into the conclusions of "rational" men. Others put more faith into the conclusions of "spiritual" men. Informal surveys I've participated in seem to indicate that the population is split almost 50/50 between people who are more "logically" minded and those who are more "feelings" (ie: spiritually) minded. One doesn't trump the other in importance. Both sides desperately need each other. The thinkers and feelers work hand in hand to make us a beautiful species. It's quite ignorant for "thinkers" to value themselves/their opinions higher than "feelers".

FWIW: I am much more inclined to logic, and not "feelings"... but I honestly wish I could switch the dial a bit in the other direction.

Guys, it's a sin to worry on behalf of the Little People.

Listen, as far as Beck's concerned, YOU'RE the Little People.

First bright morning. I guess June Gloom is over.

> Atheists have just as much faith as "believers".

Two thangs here.

1. How come the particular stupidity has become so popular on this blog in recent years? We've had about five people stand up like snot-nosed eight-year-olds and say "Oh yeah? Well, YOU do it TOO!... SCIENCE people have faith just as much as anybody!"

No. This is not true. It's a really silly thing to say, and you don't need a degree philosophy to know why not.

2. What's with the bogus quotation marks around "believers"? Is he quoting someone? Is he implying the that believers aren't really believers? Is he trying to be ironic? What exactly is the subtle effect he hoped to achieve?

"How come the particular stupidity has become so popular on this blog in recent years?"

It's just a word game. The word "faith" has different meanings in different contexts. For example faith that the sun will come up tomorrow is a different thing than faith in an invisible, omnipotent entity that creates whole universes with a word and is intensely interested in my sex life.

The first is a result of experience combined with a belief that the universe is not perverse and the rules don't change arbitrarily. This is the faith that C.S Lewis (IIRC) referred to as the virtue by which a man holds to reasoned ideas even during moments of irrationality. The second is an example of a trusting or revealed belief in a transcendent reality and/or in a supreme being and what role She/He/It has in the order of things.

Between the extremes there are categories that are less easily separated and it is in those gaps that someone can find the gods.

I'm not a fan of Beck, but I do happen to believe in God. I don't have physical proof to offer. Belief is something that isn't tangible. Oh, and I don't think that those who don't believe in Him are bad or immoral. I happen to believe He reveals Himself to all in His own time, according to each person.

The problem I find with Beck and others like him is not that they are praying to God, but what they are asking of God. My family happens to be very religious, but also very focused on reason and intellect. I was told from a young age that prayer isn't a KMart. You don't go in asking for X,Y, and Z. Rather, you ask God to help you help yourself. You ask for guidance to make the right choices. You ask him to open your heart and eyes to opportunities to do good that you may overlook in the process of living your every day life.

I pray over the oil spill, but I certainly don't ask for Him to reach down His hand and clean it up. I ask him to touch all of our hearts, to reach out financially or with our time to those who have lost their living. I ask him to send feelings of comfort to those who lost family members in the explosion. And I ask that He help us find ways to work together to find solutions.

Prayer, in my opinion, isn't supposed to be an instant fix-it. It's an opportunity for us to look within to find the wisdom and strength to do the right thing. Some people get this with meditation or just by sitting. However you get there, though, I do think it is finding the spark of divinity withhin.

So, Sabba I take it you are neither christan, jewish, zorastian, or muslim then and jut a mono theistic deist?

Because acording to the 'sacred' tets of the only four monothiestic religions in humanites history claim that god does interven on a personal level all the time.

Also as you infer(by claiming to belive god doesnt interfere) to not blong to any monothiestic faith, why are you monothiestic at all, why are you not a polythiestic deist?

I *do* believe in spooks, I *do* believe in spooks ...

> It's just a word game. The word "faith" has
> different meanings in different contexts.

Probably true. People do that with "love", too. You can take the most crack-addicted, irresponsible woman in town, and when you point out how she's fucking things up and her children are naked and hungry in the rain, she'll still say "But I love my kids!"

In the case of both love and science, people seem to understand that it's the source of progress, a big part of what the human project is about. No matter how little room they give to these forces in their daily lives, no matter how obvious it is that their real allegiances lie elsewhere, they'll never concede that they're not on the team.

Whereas atheists have ideas about meaning, purpose, ethics etc. but are unaware of where these come from.

Posted by: Engineer

So engineer, where do you live? Because ethically and morally according to the faiths you are defending, I can kill you, and your enitre fammilly in order to kidnap and perpetually rape your daughter(s). But only if their virgins, if upone raping them I discover they are not virgins I can take them to a park and have people throw fist sized rocks at them until they die.

Ethics? meaning? Dont make me laugh.

couple things:

nice thoughts re God in the above comments

there is more, to existence, than mere science can comprehend

I like this concept: we are like fingers of God in action. This means, of course, we need BE in action here in the world.

opinions/discussions such as H. McDonald and A. Alkon are engaged in are most welcome and appreciated. I am Christian, yet question the faith pretty often. If Christianity cannot stand up to inquiry, I want no part of it.

I want no part of it.

If Christianity cannot stand up to inquiry, I want no part of it.

Posted by: gcotharn

Jesus sad the world would end within the life time of those listening to one of his speeches(cant remember which one).

Asuming there was an infant in the crowd, and assuming that infant lived to be 1000yrs old, why didint the world end nearly 1000yrs ago?

On a more serious note, why didnt the world end about 1900 yrs ago?

As your faith cant stand up to that question I assume you'll convert now?

"Because acording to the 'sacred' tets of the only four monothiestic religions in humanites history"
No. There were sun worshipers in Egypt, Pyroon in Ancient Russia to name two. The had the All Father concept then lesser deities, similar to angels in the four modern monotheistic faiths.

The killing of humans isn't approved by any faith. The definition of human however is quite fluid. To some it is all humans, to others it's only our humans.

We have no proof that Jesus said anything. What we have is a collection of writing that were assembled by men who's sole purpose was power. They are likely to have edited those writings to suite their aims. Don't mix up faith and religion, they are not the same.

Look you amoral atheists, who can't comprehend that science is just another religion, it is so simple, I can't believe it requires explaining. Perhaps this easy example will help:

If a tornado hits a brothel, it is an act of God.

If a tornado flattens a church, it is an act of nature.

UW Girl: "Prayer, in my opinion, isn't supposed to be an instant fix-it. It's an opportunity for us to look within to find the wisdom and strength to do the right thing"

If the answer is inside of you then why ask for external (god) assistance? Not being sarcastic here, just think about it for a bit. If you have the strength, wisdom, etc to do the right thing in any given situation then why ask something/one/entity for help? If you are not going to get explicit instructions, as your post indicates you believe (per my reading), then why not just skip the asking part and look within for the answers that are apparently there? Try it the next time you want to pray. Can't really hurt to try, right?

gcotharn: "there is more, to existence, than mere science can comprehend"

Name one thing. Bear in mind that we are talking here not about what science has provided explanations for but what we will see explained in the future. So....just one thing. Please.

Hey Skipper: "If a tornado hits a brothel, it is an act of God.

If a tornado flattens a church, it is an act of nature"

If god hits a brothel it is a natural act of god? Resulting in no babies of course as there is typically a lack of virgins in brothels. So I am given to understand.

@Gareth

Maybe "mere science" would be better written as "human science", i.e. what human beings can comprehend.

Can human beings comprehend infinity? eternity? Creation? And the implications of each?

I am reminded of people who have died and come back to life. They frequently say: Suddenly, I understood everything, and yet I cannot explain what I understood. There are not words. I've an acquaintance who had such an experience. He said: I will say this: if you are not right with God, GET RIGHT.

But, these are mere anecdotes. My serious reply to you is: infinity, eternity, Creation.

Our lovely and charming hostess, Amy, says: "Science does not require faith. Science requires evidence, and scientists look to see where evidence is lacking -- it's the foundation of science, seeking the evidence-based truth."

Ok, Amy. Let's see. Scientists cannot explain how the entire universe came into being in a tiny fraction of a second -- out of NOTHING. They also cannot explain how life formed from non-life. They also cannot explain the existence of reality as we know it without the theoretical existence of multiple, invisible dimensions beyond the 3 + 1 with which we are familiar. In fact, scientists cannot even really explain how gravity works (which they know causes EVERY object in the ENTIRE universe to have an instantaneous effect on EVERY other object in the universe, no matter how distant).

So then, following your disciplined approach to belief, I take it you do not believe in the universe, nor even in life, correct? Nor, since there is no available "evidence" of the other unseen dimensions, can you believe in reality itself, I suppose. Can you even believe that gravity will continue to keep you on the groud? After all, there is currently no scientific "evidence" to support how these things came to be or how they work -- except through the prior intervention of an unknown (and unknowable?) "Creator."

Atheists who rely on "science" to explain existence rapidly find themselves backed into a corner by ignorance -- and by the acknowledged limits of scientific inquiry. Indeed, all the "evidence" points to the existence of a Creator which is out of space and time, and which is beyond the capacity of science to explain.

Most often, atheists are muddled in their thinking as a result of confusing religion (a man-made and therefore imperfect artifact) with God. When they attack some aspect of religious practice, they think they are attacking the concept of "God." It is only this which enables their condescending sniggering. Atheism, not a belief in God, depends on ignorance and narrow thinking. Is this why atheists constantly have to tell themselves they are SO smart?

We are all by definition agnostic, because none of us is in a position to "know" for certain. It takes faith, one way or the other, to be either a believer in God, or an atheist. Why anyone would choose atheism is beyond me ...

Jeebus, I was taught a tthe age of 12 to never argue religion with folks, as it is very personal and very important to some people. I am not religious per se, but I was raised Christian and I find nothing wrong with the teachings of Christ. Whether or not he interacts with people, quite honestly I have never felt it, but I would never begrudge those that do if it has a positive impact on peoples lives. I just hate it when an atheist wants to make fun of a person's faith, I find it demeans the atheist. As far as Geln Beck, he, rush limbaugh, and sean hannity have done so much damage to the conservative movement in this country it is just incredible. I am a pretty staunch Reagan type republican. Unfortunately these nut jobs have guided the republican party to the likes of dubya and his cronies and forced true fiscal conservatives out of the party, thus republicans today equal democrats of the 60's. Unless we can get a decent third party soon, we are all hosed regardles of your religious beliefs.

Gareth -

The answers may be inside of me, but I don't always know where to find them.

I understand that some people may be able to arrive at the destination on their own. Most of the time, I am able to do that. But there have been occasions in my life where I may have known what needed to be done, I just didn't know how to go about doing it. On those occasions, I have prayed to God, and it's my belief that He has pointed me in the right direction. You may call that my conscience. And that's OK. I choose to believe that there is a power beyond my own emotions and intellect that can and does offer help when asked.

On a much more personal level, when my Dad died very suddenly with no warning, I prayed to God to help get me through those days leading up to and after his funeral (my Mom lost her mind and was for all purposes, catatonic). Maybe it was strength I had within that got me through. All I know is that after I asked God for help, I had such a strong sense that my Dad was OK and that I could do what was required of me. If you want to say that was all me, I'm cool with that. But I happen to believe that I got some help from above.

See what I mean about not being able to tell the difference between fact and fiction?

This is one reason I promote DragonCon, Amy - the Skeptrack promotes reason.

Guys, there aren't really different levels of "faith". That's just an attempt to muddy the waters so people don't see that prayer never works. Here's the explanation:

When you know someone who has ordered pizza, then gotten pizza, and they give you the number, you have an expectation that if you call that number and the pizza guy answers, you'll get pizza. Likewise, when the engineers at LG tell you how an LCD monitor works, or the Intel guys tell you how their chips have switches just five atoms think, you can expect them to be right because they deliver. Not faith. Expectation.

But faith? "Any time now..." Assertions of faith are not only without evidence, they are made by people who have also not seen the asserted event.

You know that the number of people who vote for a President doesn't change how competent that President turns out to be, but you're willing to buy the popularity fallacy when it supports what you think already.

I am saddened at how many are inherently dishonest about the basics of cause and effect when they make statements about faith.

Glenn Beck is a manipulative genius. He is very good about manipulating his followers. So I don't know if he's actually religious or if he's just trying to use it to sell his stuff.

@lujlp

re "Jesus sad the world would end within the life time of those listening to one of his speeches"

You have pointed to the greatest instance I know of for Christians to be modest, and the greatest incident I know of to decide Christianity is false. I do not know of pithy apologia to give you. C.S. Lewis, whom I respect, said this was an instance of Jesus displaying human error:

"It is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible. Yet how teasing, also, that within fourteen words of it should come the statement "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." The one exhibition of error and the one confession of ignorance grow side by side."

Most often, atheists are muddled in their thinking as a result of confusing religion (a man-made and therefore imperfect artifact) with God.

This is a mistake commonly made by the faithful, and abetted by English.

First, distinguish between deism and theism, then think about what the word "atheist" really means.

Then go one step further: there might be something that exists outside the plane of material existence: call that god. About god humans know precisely nothing.

In contrast, theologies claim that there exists a specific, definable entity unique to each theology: call that God.

This is where your mistake lies: if it wasn't for theologies, there would be no Gods, and no atheists, because it is impossible derive a religion, or grotesque religious claims, from an entity about which we know nothing at all.

If only theists were willing to face up to their infinite ignorance on the subject about which they claim to know so much.

Do you believe in Zeus? Because how do you know your particular imaginary friend is the right one? Was it...because you were raised to believe in your particular god? What if you'd been dropped out of a plane and raised by a tribe somewhere? Do you think you'd believe in your god or in theirs?

This is a familiar argument. As before, I observe that the same thing applies to _all_ or our most cherished and fundamental assumptions.

If someone who is now a Geneva-based human rights activist had instead been dropped out of a plane and raised by a tribe somewhere, that person's notion of human rights would be quite a bit different.

Was watching a facinating show on discovery a while back, seems scientists have discoved a way to make non living semi organic componets from non organic material, there getting closer to finding how life's spark first started Jay R

vlad, ssun worshiper falls under nature worship, not monotheism. Also did a search for pyroon and found nothing - you got a particular link or book I could look at?

gcotharn - If Jesus made a human error that invalidates every trintarian based version of christianity right off the bat. It also invalidates every non trinitarian based version of christianity which claims Jesus was perfect.

Humans have evolved morality and behavior that's basically the same across cultures.

It seems to come down to whether you prefer to focus on the similarities or on the differences.

Probably all cultures have norms against murder. But cultures have very different notions about when exceptions are to be made eg. Ancient Romans killing slaves, contemporary Muslims killing immodest female relatives to preserve family honor, 20th century burning of widows in India etc.

Plus: observe that xenophobia, homophobia, and second-class status for women are the norm in most non-modern cultures. And observe as well that these tend to diminish as cultures modernize/westernize.

Also, when one has faith in a particular religion and its dogma there is no difference between religion and faith

I'd rather have my fellow citizens believe in a Judeo/Christian/Pantheistic type God than have them believing in a STATE or Government as their mighty and all powerful Oz.

I am all for freedom of religion, even if there are those out there that make asses of themselves...gives me all the more comfort (or maybe illusion) we live in a free society.

> I'd rather have my fellow citizens believe in a
> Judeo/Christian/Pantheistic type God than have
> them believing in a STATE or Government as
> their mighty and all powerful Oz.

That is a golden comment! These patterns aren't unrelated. The senseless adoration Obama received used to be given to other figures.