Bishop Robert Barron recently reviewed
the movie, The Case for Christ, which is almost as much pure
emotional propaganda as Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ and the1935
German propaganda film Triumph of the Will. The movie is based on the
supposedly "true" story of Lee Strobel, a journalist who set out to
save his marriage by debunking Christianity, only to succumb to a serpentine
story of salvation and redemption that Christianity "intelligently designed" to seduce human mind, with the promise that it would live for all eternity as a perfect ideal.
Christians never suspect that Strobel
simply wrote a book that he no doubt knew Christians would be both eager to "believe" and
only too willing to buy, of course, selling enough copies to
score even a movie deal in the process. No, Christians never doubt that someone
who is making money off of their willingness to "believe" anything that supports their brand of God and religion, could be
simply deceiving them for their own financial gain - from Jerry Falwell to Joel Osteen to Oral Roberts - even as those same
Christians only ever doubt anyone who tries to save them their hard earned
money, by pointing out just what kind of charlatans these purveyors of "salvation" really are.
The real "miracle"
performed by these works of pure emotional manipulation, then, is how easily religion
uses them to transform peoples emotions into indefatigable "reason,"
convincing Christians that a "belief" is the same thing as an
"infallible truth," the same way Christians claim their "lord
& savior" turned water into wine, and Catholics claim their priests
turn wine into the actual blood of Christ at every mass, which those same Catholics subsequently drink like as if it were simply Kool Aid.
The major cornerstone upon which Lee
Strobel begins to build the facade that convinces him that all of this
emotional propaganda must indeed be "true" is posed in a simple
question asked by Bishop Barron, one Barron uses to lull people into an almost
hypnotic trance with its simplicity, and emotional subterfuge. The question, as Barron puts it, is this:
"Would pious Christians go to
their death for a story they made up, just a nice story? Because lets face it,
most early Christians went to their death defending this claim. I mean, would
someone do that for a pious legend that they made up?"
The answer, as counter-intuitive as it may seem, which many Christians fail to
realize, is actually, "Yes! yes, they would!" In fact, people the world over have been doing just that throughout history.
WOULD
PEOPLE DIE FOR A LIE?
The simplicity of this question has
been relied upon for centuries by spiritual charlatans like Strobel and Barron,
to lead Christians to the natural and altogether inescapable conclusion - by of
course getting would-be "believers" to use themselves as the standard
by which they should only ever measure the rationality of such a question -
that no one in their right mind would ever willingly die for a story, unless
they were absolutely sure that that story was undeniably "true."
The only problem with this
reasoning, however, is that history demonstrates the very opposite to be the truth. And one reason this is true, is because the people who tend to die for their beliefs are almost never in the same comfortable life situation as middle class or affluent Americans, who often enjoy the twin invisible benefits of being both the majority race and the majority religion. In this respect, the question requires the audience to make a comparison between apples and oranges; between themselves, as members of a peaceful successful majority, and early Christians, who belonged to a despised minority which was persecuted by the majority of Roman citizens for being atheists towards the gods of Rome, much in the same way Christians persecuted those they claimed to be witches across Europe in the middle ages, and poor, frustrated, and disenfranchised minorities feel in America today, in places like Detroit, Ferguson, and Baltimore.
But first, let's start with an
experiment: If it could be demonstrated that people had similarly accepted
martyrdom for their "beliefs" in the "truth" of stories
about other savior "man-gods" who had similarly risen from the dead -
for example, stories concerning figures like Osiris, Tammuz, Adonis, Attis, or
Dionysus - would this serve as sufficient evidence to convince the Christian
that they should therefore reject Christianity, and instead simply accept any of these
other deity's as the "true" God over Christ?
Probably not.
In fact, Wikipedia lists as many as 20 potential other
"gods" who rose from the dead, that the Christian could similarly
"convert" to accepting as their "lord and savior," if the the only thing the Christian needed to validate the "truth" of such myths is evidence that people willingly died for them, because they believed in their heart of hearts that they were absolutely true.
What's more, Christians the world over then decide to simply ignore the fact that Socrates died, not in defense of his beliefs in the gods of Greece, but for questioning those gods and the religions of his day, which he concluded were built on pure sophistry. They also ignore the fact that, by claiming to be Christian, the Christian becomes a believer in a religion based on a man who was killed by religious believers for questioning their religious beliefs. Yet these examples, even though Socrates championed reason over religious faith and even Jesus himself died for his stance in being so clearly anti-institutional-religion, never serve to convince the Christian to convert to the philosophy of the one or the free thinking of the other.
What's more, Christians the world over then decide to simply ignore the fact that Socrates died, not in defense of his beliefs in the gods of Greece, but for questioning those gods and the religions of his day, which he concluded were built on pure sophistry. They also ignore the fact that, by claiming to be Christian, the Christian becomes a believer in a religion based on a man who was killed by religious believers for questioning their religious beliefs. Yet these examples, even though Socrates championed reason over religious faith and even Jesus himself died for his stance in being so clearly anti-institutional-religion, never serve to convince the Christian to convert to the philosophy of the one or the free thinking of the other.
The fact that plenty of people have died for their "sacred" beliefs and stories - be they for the ancient paganisms or modern patriotisms of various economic and political orders - certainly does not lead throngs of Christians to
accept those stories as true. Indeed, if the Christian truly believed that people only ever engage in such total self sacrifice for the "truth," then the murder of everyone from Socrates to Hypatia, the latter of which became the first female martyr for science and unfettered reason when she was stoned to death by Christians in the Roman city of Alexandria, in 415 A.D., than why have those same Christians not converted to the religion of reason and self reliance?
What's more, if Christians really believed that a willingness to die for a belief was somehow proof of the veracity of the belief itself, then perhaps all Christians should have moved to Guyana or joined Heaven's Gate. Indeed, the Buddhists who engage in self immolation never serve to convince the Christian of the authenticity of Buddhism over Christianity, even as those same Christians seem to think that the martyrdom of early Christians for Christianity should serve, at least in part, as evidence of the "truth" of their claims about the divinity of Christ, and more specifically, about the authenticity of their Christian brand of God.
What's more, if Christians really believed that a willingness to die for a belief was somehow proof of the veracity of the belief itself, then perhaps all Christians should have moved to Guyana or joined Heaven's Gate. Indeed, the Buddhists who engage in self immolation never serve to convince the Christian of the authenticity of Buddhism over Christianity, even as those same Christians seem to think that the martyrdom of early Christians for Christianity should serve, at least in part, as evidence of the "truth" of their claims about the divinity of Christ, and more specifically, about the authenticity of their Christian brand of God.
Such "martyrdom" tales
have always served as pure emotional propaganda, whether such stories are used
to support a religion or to romanticize wars and the "heroes" who
willingly die fighting them. People embrace "martyrdom"
for all kinds of bogus and even totally ridicules beliefs, however, especially when it
comes to one god, religion, cause or country, or another. But none of those self-sacrificing acts ever
really do much to convince the Christian to convert from their Christianity to
any other religion or nationalism.
But ultimately, the point in
bringing up all of these other stories, especially about the other resurrected
"man-gods," is to show how "the Jesus story arose in a culture suffused
with the idea of dying and rising saviors.”[i] And even though I have no evidence that anyone willingly embraced martyrdom
for these other "gods," 9/11 is an example of the fact that there is
plenty of evidence that shows how often people are willing to do all kinds of
crazy things to prove their "beliefs" are undeniably "true, including killing and dying for
them.
Indeed, the very reasoning that Barron uses to support his claim that Christianity must be true because so many people were willing to die to prove that it was, is the same reasoning that contributed to the dramatic rise in the number of Americans who subsequently converted to Islam after the terrorist attacks on 9/11. According to Barron's reasoning, then, that attack should be considered as evidence - and in fact by a number of people it was considered evidence - that Barron's Christianity was false and Islam is therefore the one true faith. The evidence Barron offers for the veracity of his religion, in other words, is the same evidence offered by every other belief system in the world, throughout history.
Indeed, the very reasoning that Barron uses to support his claim that Christianity must be true because so many people were willing to die to prove that it was, is the same reasoning that contributed to the dramatic rise in the number of Americans who subsequently converted to Islam after the terrorist attacks on 9/11. According to Barron's reasoning, then, that attack should be considered as evidence - and in fact by a number of people it was considered evidence - that Barron's Christianity was false and Islam is therefore the one true faith. The evidence Barron offers for the veracity of his religion, in other words, is the same evidence offered by every other belief system in the world, throughout history.
What Barron fails to mention, however, is how often people who feel they have reached a state of utter hopelessness, will gladly sacrifice their body for a chance at eternal paradise, especially when those same people are indoctrinated to believe that their body is simply a "temporary
container for the soul," and not only expect to receive eternal paradise as their just reward for refusing to admit that their religion could ever have duped them about anything, but also when believing such a thing is the surest way they know of to avoid the eternal fires of hell
that every soul is threatened with in Philippians 2:12, and those same people also fully expect the world is
about to end anyway.
EARLY
PERSECUTIONS OF CHRISTIANS
Like Islamic terrorists today, early
Christians similarly felt they were living under a state of hopelessness on the one hand, and during the end times on the other. In fact, much of the "hope" such Christians felt at that time came almost exclusively from the belief that "the kingdom of God was at hand," which they thought meant the world was about to see its final curtain call.
Although the "first persecution of Christians organized by the Roman government took place under the emperor Nero in 64 AD after the Great Fire of Rome," and "lasted until the passage in 313 AD of the Edict of Milan" by Constantine, which made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire, persecution of Christians by Roman mobs existed long before this. Christians were not only ostracized by their fellow Jews, but were widely accused by Roman citizens of being both atheists, for rejecting the gods of Rome in preference of a single deity called Jesus, and of being anti-patriotic for doing so, much like Socrates. The troubles of Rome, then, much like immigrants, socialists, liberals and atheists today and "communists" during the McCarthy era, were all blamed on Christians.
Although the "first persecution of Christians organized by the Roman government took place under the emperor Nero in 64 AD after the Great Fire of Rome," and "lasted until the passage in 313 AD of the Edict of Milan" by Constantine, which made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire, persecution of Christians by Roman mobs existed long before this. Christians were not only ostracized by their fellow Jews, but were widely accused by Roman citizens of being both atheists, for rejecting the gods of Rome in preference of a single deity called Jesus, and of being anti-patriotic for doing so, much like Socrates. The troubles of Rome, then, much like immigrants, socialists, liberals and atheists today and "communists" during the McCarthy era, were all blamed on Christians.
In addition to this environment of growing
persecution, early Christians not only believed their body was simply a
temporary container for their soul, but likewise wished to escape a corrupt
world for an eternal paradise in heaven, while avoiding eternal hellfire
through the temporary suffering of death for their sacred "beliefs." In this sense, the greatest "virtue" of religion was to attach more value to one's "beliefs," which were all thought to be as "eternal" as the thing "believed" in, than they should attach to defend their own "body," which was fallen and only destined for the grave anyway. Ashes to ashes, as they say, and dust to dust, but our beliefs will surely save us all, forever.
FACING
DEATH FOR BOGUS BELIEFS
In truth, people have always engaged in all sorts of behaviors that risked death to prove they were right, brave, or just extremely talented. We see versions of this bravado in extreme magician David Blaine, for example, or even Harry Houdini.
Take Franz Reichelt, as another example. Reichelt was a tailor, who "dreamed of inventing a fashion accessory that would
allow a person to float safely to the ground after falling from a great
height." To prove his invention would work, he jumped from a great height,
embracing his martyrdom for his conviction that he was right, when coming face to face with the pavement below, where he
discovered he was wrong.
What's more, studies show that men are
far more likely than women to willingly engage in such all-or-nothing behavior.
Researchers suspect that men may do this, in part, to enhance their social
status by demonstrating their bravery in the face of a mortal threat. Bull
fighters, cage fighters, cliff divers, sky divers, and many such extreme sports
enthusiasts, are thought to engage in these sports for this reason, as well as
the adrenaline rush that comes from facing death. In fact, that adrenaline rush
is what addicts soldiers to combat just as much as it addicts modern audiences to the
ubiquitous amount of death and violence that proliferates video games, movies,
television, sports, and even literature today. Indeed, even Ernest Hemingway loved being a war correspondent as much as a good fight.
Add to this the fact that people
are even more likely to want to die for their beliefs when they believe that by
doing so, they will not only win the respect and admiration of their peers (like gang members in, say, MS- 13), but are also guaranteed to avoid an ever present threat of eternal
hellfire in return for doing so (like suicide bombers in ISIS or Al Qeada). And since the Bible says in Philippians 2:12
that we must all "work out our salvation in fear and trembling,"the perennial threat of loosing ones soul to eternal damnation can be a truly terrifying source of stress for the true "believer" to
have to live with.
Plus, that person can also expect to receive eternal bliss in exchange for their loyalty and willingness to accept their own momentary suffering and death. And when that death is done in the service of a larger cause, it gives the would-be martyr perhaps the greatest sense of "meaning" to their life possible, as it convinces them that through their sacrifice, they become like Christ, and thus an integral part of "God's divine plan." Even Christ's comment of "let thy will be done," is a kind of calling for how we should be willing to accept our own death in the service of a larger cause, or what the Christian calls "God's plan." Ergo, our quest for meaning can lead us to make a suicide pact with whatever "beliefs" promise us the greatest meaning of all, in exchange for our very life, and even the lives of our children.
Plus, that person can also expect to receive eternal bliss in exchange for their loyalty and willingness to accept their own momentary suffering and death. And when that death is done in the service of a larger cause, it gives the would-be martyr perhaps the greatest sense of "meaning" to their life possible, as it convinces them that through their sacrifice, they become like Christ, and thus an integral part of "God's divine plan." Even Christ's comment of "let thy will be done," is a kind of calling for how we should be willing to accept our own death in the service of a larger cause, or what the Christian calls "God's plan." Ergo, our quest for meaning can lead us to make a suicide pact with whatever "beliefs" promise us the greatest meaning of all, in exchange for our very life, and even the lives of our children.
What's more, there are any number of
examples where people have either died, or even inflicted death upon others,
all in the service of their "sacred beliefs." People do this because they become convinced that their "beliefs" must be
true, and thus require such sacrifice to defend. As crazy as this sounds, this was pretty much the underlying rational for everything from the Manson family murders by "family members," to the Holocaust kicked off at the Wannsee Conference in Germany in 1941 by a round-table of high ranking and highly educated Christians. And many of the examples that follow were similarly
rationalized by people relying on the same kind of
eschatological perspective that inspired early Christian martyrs.
Consider the example of the Jews at Masada who
killed themselves rather than submit to Roman legions in 73 A.D. In 1303 A.D.,
when the Muslim Sultan of Delhi,
Ala-ud-din Khilji, besieged Chittor Fort, the queen of Chittor, Rani
Padmini, "led all the royal ladies (around 700 women) and their children into a
bonfire in order to protect themselves from the Delhi's lustful army." True, these are not exactly suicides for "beliefs," but early Christians faced similar threats from mob violence against them in Rome, which only became worse under the state sanctioned violence by the Emperor Nero.
We see perhaps the greatest of mass
suicides associated with the schismatic "Old Believers" at the end of
the seventeenth century in Russia. "The Old Believers were persecuted, and
their early leader Avvakum, was burned alive at the order of Tsar Feodor in
1682. "During a six year period from 1688 to 1694, 20,000 Old Believers
voluntarily followed their leader into the flames, preferring martyrdom to
accepting the religion of (what they considered to be the) Antichrist."[ii][i]
Even in the modern era we see only a
proliferation of such willingness to die for one's beliefs, beliefs that most
Christians consider to be unfounded at best, and bald face lies at worst. And
most of the people in these cults were not only well educated, but professed to
be devoutly Christian as well.
On November 18, 1978, 918 Americans
died in Jonestown, Guyana, at the direction of the People's Temple leader Jim
Jones. More than 75 Branch Davidians, anticipating a coming end of the world,
died in a fire during a siege of their Waco, Texas, compound by federal agents
in 1993.[iii][ii] From 1994 to 1997, the Order of the Solar Temple's members
began a series of mass suicides, which led to roughly 74 deaths.
"On March 27, 1997, 39
followers of Heaven's Gate died in a mass suicide in Rancho Santa Fe,
California, which borders San Diego to the north. These people believed,
according to the teachings of their group, that through their suicides they
were "exiting their human vessels" so that their souls could go on a
journey aboard a spaceship they believed to be following the comet Hale–Bopp.[25]
Some male members of the group underwent voluntary castration in preparation
for the genderless life they believed awaited them after the suicide."[iv][iii]
"In October 1998, 60 members of
a millennialist cult, calling itself Concerned Christians, disappeared from
Denver, Colorado, where their leader Monte Kim Miller had predicted
(inaccurately) the destruction of Denver in an earthquake: they were thought to
be traveling to the Holy Land in an attempt to commit suicide before the start
of the new Millennium. Mr. Miller claimed to be both God and the final prophet
on earth before Armageddon. He (also)
claimed that like Jesus he will rise from the dead after three days.." [v][iv]
And like Miller, it should be noted,
many who heard Jesus thought he was also a madman, as John 10:20 points out (KJV), saying, "and
many of them said, He has a demon and is mad; why do you listen to Him?"
Finally, in 2007, in Mymensingh,
Bangladesh, a family of 9, all members of a novel "Adam's cult"
committed mass suicide by hurling themselves onto train tracks, apparently because
they wanted to live a life like Adam and Eve.
CONCLUSION
So actually, yes, yes people would
die for a "belief" that may very well be untrue, just because they
"believe" that it is. Yet none of these people, who all willingly died as "martyrs for their faith," convinces the ardent Christian of the "truth" of their beliefs, even as Barron expects that all those who have done the same thing for Christianity somehow demonstrate the "truth" of his own Catholicism.
Yet when you think about it - that's pretty much what
every war ever fought throughout history has largely been about: people making up stories that
they succeed in selling to others as "true," from the Creel Commission to the Vietnam War to the wars in the Middle East, just to get those people to
go off and sacrifice themselves in one war after another; fighting for what they
are convinced is not only true, but is what their God wants them to die
fighting for! That's why "there's no atheists in foxholes." God is the giver of life, after all, but he still expects people
to feed themselves into the furnace of war, just to prove they really love
"truth," even if that "truth" is a complete fabrication,written by a journalist, who sells books by pretending that the "evidence" was indisputable.
It's not what's in your heart that matters, in other words, it's just about proving your loyalty to your "beliefs." And in a culture of consumerism, as Joel Osteen knows only too well, it's even more about selling a "belief" to anyone who will buy it.
[i] . http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2014/04/jesus-just-one-more-dying-and-rising-savior-easter
[ii][i] Millennialism, Persecution, and Violence:
Historical Cases, page 205
[iii][ii] Whether this was really a "mass
suicide" or something very different is heavily debated today, it should
be noted.
[iv][iii]
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-heavens-gate-tragedy-remains-the-countrys-worst-2007mar26-story.html
[v][iv] Approaching the Apocalypse: A Short
History of Christian Millenarianism by John M Court. page 192
Comments
Post a Comment