Christianity often charges atheists with only worshiping themselves, and humanity at large. But the truth is that it is Christianity that only worships "man," and altogether rejects anything that could be considered an immaterial "God." This is not only true in the sense that it is religion that elevates human beings as the central and indeed only important creature in the story of existence, but also in the sense that history and power has always rested in the hands of men; and this is especially true regarding the power of religion.
Christians, in other words, only worship a glorified image of themselves, one that amounts to an infinitely perfected image of humans in the heavens, that they fall in love with like Narcissus, and are willing to die for in a fit of narcissism. And they do this with an "infallible" certainty that their "beliefs" constitute universal, immutable, undeniable, "truth," even as they defend their belief in such "truths" as simply an act of "faith."
Hence, even though all science and human knowledge is necessarily and always subjective, since all of it is nothing but a purely human endeavor, the Christian counts it a the greatest virtue of all to die for their claim that their "beliefs" constitute objective "infallible truth." And they claim that asserting such a "belief," and imposing it on others (with draconian tactics that rival those of ISIS or force of arms if need be), is nothing but an act of pure humility, practiced in "faith," by a "believer" who only ever does so, not out of altruism, but because they are trying to avoid the tortures of an eternal hell and amass an ever growing wealth which they can then spend in the Las Vegas an eternally pleasurable heaven, after they die.
And the universe is perhaps the greatest evidence for just how true, and how ridicules, such a perspective "truly" is.
The Christian need to ensure that the Bible was interpreted in ways that necessarily placed humanity at the center of all creation, for example, was perhaps most clearly illustrated by the adamant "belief" that the earth sat at the center of the universe.
That most scientists tended to agree with this perspective is different from the Catholic Church's need to enforce such a perspective as "divine truth" in any number of ways, including execution if need be. Science is as rife with biases as religion, but at least one can admit it is a subjective interpretation, where the other demands it's interpretations are not only objective but even infallible, and has readily burned people alive to prove it. Einstein could admit in 1931 that his belief that the universe was static was wrong, and that Edwin Hubble (who found in 1929 that the universe was expanding) was right.
The challenge between Einstein and Hubble was one between "belief" about the nature of the universe and the evidence. And while Einstein could admit he was wrong, given the evidence, the Church has never been willing to admit it was only human. In fact, when Martin Luther questioned whether the Church had the right to sell indulgences to pay for the building of the Vatican, and if the "treasure house of merit" from which those indulgences were being drawn were likewise inexhaustible, the Church responde by claiming itself "infallible."
Indeed, the Church would rather burn and torture those that disagreed with it's view of the universe, rather than humbly accept its cross and admit it was only human, and could therefore be wrong. And it refused to admit it was wrong, because the Church believed that any suggestion that the Earth was not the center of the universe, was to suggest that humanity was not the focal point of everything, the specific object of God's divine love, and perhaps not even the sole reason for the creation of the universe or anything else.
This need to "believe" that humanity is, in fact, the sole object of God's love and devotion, is perhaps the greatest con job the Christian religion has ever pulled off. If Satan himself wanted to addict humans into worshiping themselves while at the same time "believing" that they were NOT worshiping themselves, there is clearly no better ruse he could have come up with than through a religion that worships a "man-god" named Jesus, who calls all of humanity to adore, worship, and aspire, to be like the most perfect human being God had ever created, and only because he became that human being.
Even our "belief" that the planets moved in perfect circles, because we believed such a shape to be divinely perfect, is nothing but a human bias for circles. That the planets move in ellipses rather than circles, and that the earth travels around the sun, are all examples of a universe trying to tell us just how much our "ideas" and "beliefs" about "perfection" are purely human, and thus utterly useless in understanding practically everything, including ourselves.
Hence, we do not worship a "god" on Sundays, as people flood into their pews to pray to the statue of a man hanging on a cross (which any visiting alien from another planet would no doubt see as truly macabre), but to worship some "belief" in a perfection we dupe ourselves into believing we truly understand, and mostly because we believe our sole purpose here on earth is to aspire to reach that divine example, however incapable we are of ever being able to achieve it, lest we be roasted forever in a pizza oven by our loving, merciful "father" in heaven, for failing to spend our lives trying to do so.
The kind of a father that sentences his children to such a Sisyphean task, however, is even worse than having a mom like Norman Bates.
And the only way Christianity can ever hope to actually make itself relevant, since more and more people are seeing how clearly ridicules and hypocritical its claims so clearly are, is to stop talking to themselves like a maniac and calling it prayer, and start paying attention to what the whole wide world, and everyone in it, have been trying to tell them all along!
God, in other words, is standing right in front of you, in the vast diversity of humanity in all of its differences.
But Christians don't want to accept that God. They want only the God they "believe" in. That's why Christians do not love "God," they love only their "beliefs" about what they alone want "God" to be. Because without that, if they do not see their own ideas and "beliefs" as the center and the meaning of the universe, they feel incapable of finding any meaning at all. And as sad as that might be, it still has nothing to do with "truth," nor does it give Christians the right to intentionally conflate "truth" with their "beliefs," and demand that we worship the simplicity of latter rather than grapple with the complexity of the former.
Christians, in other words, only worship a glorified image of themselves, one that amounts to an infinitely perfected image of humans in the heavens, that they fall in love with like Narcissus, and are willing to die for in a fit of narcissism. And they do this with an "infallible" certainty that their "beliefs" constitute universal, immutable, undeniable, "truth," even as they defend their belief in such "truths" as simply an act of "faith."
Hence, even though all science and human knowledge is necessarily and always subjective, since all of it is nothing but a purely human endeavor, the Christian counts it a the greatest virtue of all to die for their claim that their "beliefs" constitute objective "infallible truth." And they claim that asserting such a "belief," and imposing it on others (with draconian tactics that rival those of ISIS or force of arms if need be), is nothing but an act of pure humility, practiced in "faith," by a "believer" who only ever does so, not out of altruism, but because they are trying to avoid the tortures of an eternal hell and amass an ever growing wealth which they can then spend in the Las Vegas an eternally pleasurable heaven, after they die.
And the universe is perhaps the greatest evidence for just how true, and how ridicules, such a perspective "truly" is.
The Christian need to ensure that the Bible was interpreted in ways that necessarily placed humanity at the center of all creation, for example, was perhaps most clearly illustrated by the adamant "belief" that the earth sat at the center of the universe.
That most scientists tended to agree with this perspective is different from the Catholic Church's need to enforce such a perspective as "divine truth" in any number of ways, including execution if need be. Science is as rife with biases as religion, but at least one can admit it is a subjective interpretation, where the other demands it's interpretations are not only objective but even infallible, and has readily burned people alive to prove it. Einstein could admit in 1931 that his belief that the universe was static was wrong, and that Edwin Hubble (who found in 1929 that the universe was expanding) was right.
The challenge between Einstein and Hubble was one between "belief" about the nature of the universe and the evidence. And while Einstein could admit he was wrong, given the evidence, the Church has never been willing to admit it was only human. In fact, when Martin Luther questioned whether the Church had the right to sell indulgences to pay for the building of the Vatican, and if the "treasure house of merit" from which those indulgences were being drawn were likewise inexhaustible, the Church responde by claiming itself "infallible."
Indeed, the Church would rather burn and torture those that disagreed with it's view of the universe, rather than humbly accept its cross and admit it was only human, and could therefore be wrong. And it refused to admit it was wrong, because the Church believed that any suggestion that the Earth was not the center of the universe, was to suggest that humanity was not the focal point of everything, the specific object of God's divine love, and perhaps not even the sole reason for the creation of the universe or anything else.
This need to "believe" that humanity is, in fact, the sole object of God's love and devotion, is perhaps the greatest con job the Christian religion has ever pulled off. If Satan himself wanted to addict humans into worshiping themselves while at the same time "believing" that they were NOT worshiping themselves, there is clearly no better ruse he could have come up with than through a religion that worships a "man-god" named Jesus, who calls all of humanity to adore, worship, and aspire, to be like the most perfect human being God had ever created, and only because he became that human being.
Even our "belief" that the planets moved in perfect circles, because we believed such a shape to be divinely perfect, is nothing but a human bias for circles. That the planets move in ellipses rather than circles, and that the earth travels around the sun, are all examples of a universe trying to tell us just how much our "ideas" and "beliefs" about "perfection" are purely human, and thus utterly useless in understanding practically everything, including ourselves.
Hence, we do not worship a "god" on Sundays, as people flood into their pews to pray to the statue of a man hanging on a cross (which any visiting alien from another planet would no doubt see as truly macabre), but to worship some "belief" in a perfection we dupe ourselves into believing we truly understand, and mostly because we believe our sole purpose here on earth is to aspire to reach that divine example, however incapable we are of ever being able to achieve it, lest we be roasted forever in a pizza oven by our loving, merciful "father" in heaven, for failing to spend our lives trying to do so.
The kind of a father that sentences his children to such a Sisyphean task, however, is even worse than having a mom like Norman Bates.
And the only way Christianity can ever hope to actually make itself relevant, since more and more people are seeing how clearly ridicules and hypocritical its claims so clearly are, is to stop talking to themselves like a maniac and calling it prayer, and start paying attention to what the whole wide world, and everyone in it, have been trying to tell them all along!
God, in other words, is standing right in front of you, in the vast diversity of humanity in all of its differences.
But Christians don't want to accept that God. They want only the God they "believe" in. That's why Christians do not love "God," they love only their "beliefs" about what they alone want "God" to be. Because without that, if they do not see their own ideas and "beliefs" as the center and the meaning of the universe, they feel incapable of finding any meaning at all. And as sad as that might be, it still has nothing to do with "truth," nor does it give Christians the right to intentionally conflate "truth" with their "beliefs," and demand that we worship the simplicity of latter rather than grapple with the complexity of the former.
Comments
Post a Comment