Culture of the Lost

I've been thinking about athiests a lot lately. More specifically, I've been thinking about the nature of atheism, and what causes it. I think I've got an idea or two. I'm writing on-the-fly, so we'll see where this goes.

First of all, let's take a look at our culture. I've wondered more than once why missionaries can go to poverty-stricken countries and see tremendous conversions to Christ. How people in countries where Christianity is illegal (and punishable by imprisonment or death) will meet in standing-room-only rooms, under cover of darkness, just for an opportunity to hear the Scripture. It truly boggles the mind when, in the US, church members will stay home from church when it's raining. And raining plain ol' water, not bullets.

Not to go all Tyler Durden here, but I think consumerism may be part of the cause. In Western countries, we're advertised to CONSTANTLY. We're made to think that our lives are lacking if we don't have the latest gadget, the fastest car, the whitest teeth. What this causes is a society of consumers. And what do consumers do but, well, consume? Everything in our lives is focused on drawing in - on pulling things towards ourselves. We become black holes at the center of our own little universes and, when we are at the center of the universe, it becomes difficult to perceive anything else as being more meaningful than our own existences.

I think that this is where atheism springs from. If we are our own gods, what use have we for any others? Indeed, it becomes galling to even consider our focus wavering from ourselves. When our lives are full of our stuff and our own concerns, where is there room for God? So many of the atheists I know have such scorn for Christians. I know that I hated Christians before I became one. I think this contempt is a product of the perceived weakness of a group of people who would willingly submit to another entity, especially one that you can't see.

"We don't need God. You want me to believe in God? I'm going to need you to put him in this box for me. I'm going to need him to show himself to me, personally."

There is no room for faith in this thinking. Instead, it's a demand for a more self-focused approach. More consuming for the consumers. We want God to come to us. We want God to be a product that we can digest. What we don't want is something to be subservient to. We're far too proud and intelligent and self-gratifying for that.

And most of us Western Christians display these characteristics, too. This explains why the flashiest churches have the highest attendance - they have the best, shiniest product. It's also why, in any given Western church, maybe 20% of the population does all of the work. The rest of us don't want to stop focusing on ourselves - to stop consuming - long enough to truly build a relationship, either with God, or with our supposed brothers and sisters in Christ.

I think it's interesting that - as far as I know - every major society in the span of human existence has believed in and worshipped one or more deities. That being the case, is it completely unreasonable that - maybe, just maybe - there's something to that? That maybe you are NOT the center of the universe?

I'm not bringing all of this up to pick a fight. Truly. Atheists, I used to be where you are. I used to be you. Then, I was broken. I reached a point in my life where my own deity (myself) failed me. I turned to God in desperation and, while my life certainly hasn't been all puppy dogs and ice cream since then, I've been more filled up than I ever was as an atheist. My sincere prayer for you is that you are broken to the point where your own deity is insufficient. Not because I want bad things to happen to you, but because I want to share what I now have with you.

Hope to see you on the other side.

Statistical Analysis (or, Who Are You, Lone Visitor?)

And if that title didn't put you straight to sleep, I don't know what will (no offense to people who are into statistical analysis).

One of the great things about keeping this blog is the lovely toolset that Blogger gives me to track things like pageviews, audience, etc.  It doesn't drill down to an individual person or anything like that, but country of origin, linking page, and such are at my fingertips.  Ordinarily, I see a brief spike when I post a new blog and self-promote on Facebook.  People like my parents and a few close friends check in to see what I'm rambling about now and, within a day or so, the pageviews flatline again.  I'm mostly journaling for my own entertainment, so it's not a huge blow to my ego when I don't get pageviews for a while.  I'm not a huge source of news, or a celebrity, or hosting a depository of cute cat photos, so, admittedly, the draw is limited.

What spikes my curiousity is after I haven't posted anything new for a while and then get a single hit.  Especially when it's from a country where I don't know anyone.  Who is this single person, and what brought them to my tiny corner of internetdom?  Did they find what they were looking for?  I'd love to be able to engage this lonely visitor in a dialogue, just to complete that connection.  Was it a random blog link, or did they come, searching for beer, music, zombies, or religion (and what sicko [other than me] would combine those things)? 

People are notoriously loathe to forfeit their anonymity, but I'd really enjoy hearing from you if you find yourself here and don't already know me personally.  If you don't mind, drop me a quick comment, letting me know what brought you here.  I think it'd be a fun experiment.

It's Not (Necessarily) Hate

Amidst a Facebook newsfeed largely comprised of red equal signs, I saw a phrase that I took some exception to: Str8 Against H8 (Straight Against Hate).  On the surface, there's nothing wrong here.  I am also straight and am not particularly pro-hate.  I understand that equal marriage rights are a huge deal right now.  Personally, I don't care if you marry your patio furniture.  It doesn't change my marriage in any way. 

No, the problem I have is this wholesale appropriation of the word "hate" by the LGBT community to label anyone who doesn't agree with them.  It's certainly an effective political tool, and one that I'm certain has rallied more than a few to their cause.  I mean, let's be honest - who wants to be viewed as someone who HATES an entire subsection of our society?  Anyone?  Probably not.  From a purely psychological standpoint, I bet there a good number of people who look at this propaganda-esque usage of the word and jumped on board, just to escape the label.  Very clever, LGBT community.

However, I'm going to go ahead and cry foul here.  I am not a stupid person, and I understand that this "hate" label is largely being leveled at Christians, right-wing-ers, evangelicals, fundamentalists, and whatever other groups are not on board with gay marriage, regardless of reasoning.  This lack of concern for the reason of one's opposition is my problem, and I'm going to say this loud and clear:

Religious conviction is not the same thing as hate.

It just isn't - regardless of willy-nilly application of labels.  As I've already stated, I'm not a stupid person.  I am sadly aware that some (perhaps many) people who oppose gay marriage do hate homosexuals.  It's unfortunate that, if these people who do hate - and do so in the name of God - are ignorant and are also, quite frankly, doing it wrong.  Scripture tells us to love each other many more times than it condemns homosexuality.  Actually, in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, amongst the people who are listed as not inheriting the kingdom of God are, yes, homosexuals.  Right alongside them are: the sexually immoral (which is a BROAD topic), idolators (anyone who places anything else above God), adulterers, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, and swindlers.  Certainly, most of us (myself included) fall into one or more of these categories - even the Christians.  The only hope any of us have is the salvation as noted in v. 11 - sanctification in Jesus Christ.

Now, where am I going with this?  Mostly, I just think it's unfair for everyone who disagrees with a particular issue to have this "hate" label applied to them.  For a group (the LGBT community) who is trying so hard to be accepted and normalized in society, this approach seems a bit counter-productive to me.  As I've said in other posts - if you're asking for tolerance and acceptance, try practicing a little.  Casting anyone who doesn't agree with you as an enemy does not foster acceptance.  Instead, it makes people defensive.  If you really want walls to come down in relationships, you have to bring yours down, too.

We'll all be better off when we can learn to disagree on principles without personal attacks on those who may be against us.  We're all human.  We all want to be loved and be free to live our lives in the way that we best see fit.  Let's all try to be a little cooler and not create hate where it doesn't exist.

Monkeys And Clay

I'm sure that most of us have certain things that we don't talk about in certain groups. For me, one of those things has been rearing its ugly head lately, and I've been finding myself biting my tongue an awful lot over the last few days. This is particularly troubling because the groups that I've been in have been groups that I should feel free to speak my mind with.  The major issue is that the topic in question is one of those hot-button topics that can really set individuals off.

In this case, I am speaking of the debate between evolution and creationism.

Let me lay out the scenarios: In the first, a fellow Christian and good friend of mine brought up people who believe in evolution in a tone that I would expect ordinarily reserved for, say, Michael Vick, immediately following that whole dog-fighting fiasco. The implication was that Christians should not believe in evolution.  This was Friday night.

The second happened Sunday morning, during our church service. The pastor was delivering a sermon on hearing the voice of God. Towards the end of the sermon, he made some statements that basically said that, if you believed in evolution, you were essentially unable to hear God, because you were too busy listening to the World (which is a bad thing).

It appears to me that this is one of those things that (like so many things nowadays) has become completely politicized and polarizing. Christians feel that believing in evolution negates God's hand in the creation of, well, everything. Evolutionists feel that believing in God means that you have checked your brain at the door and have become a sheep. Therefore, you must be one or the other, with no room for gray area.

It's not so simple for me. See, I believe both. I have spent many clock cycles puzzling out how these two things can fit together and have reached a point where I feel very confident that God, in creating the Universe, also put everything that falls under the term "Science" into place - including *gasp* evolution. Evolution, physics, chemistry, mathematics, etc. It all works, and I see His glory in all of it.

Sadly, I've been made to feel like a pariah by my "family", because I don't think that Science and Faith have to be mutually exclusive. I love God, but I refuse to be willfully ignorant of the things that I know to be true, just to fit into a mold.

I thought about outlining my personal belief system here, but I'm not sure it would do any good. It might actually do bad, if people are really that vehement about it. Depending on what feedback I get, I may write up another post about it. For now, I just wanted to vent a bit about how I've been feeling.

Update: I was able to talk to one of my other friends today, and he was able to talk me down from the proverbial ledge.  Most helpful: I'm not alone in my beliefs, as well as some wise words about how to proceed from here. I'm extra double grateful to have some really grounded Christians to bounce my ideas off of.

New Old Stuff

I just picked up Adele's debut album, 19.  By now, I'm sure that most of you have heard some/all of her ground-breaking, chart-topping, Grammy-winning album, 21.  You really can't avoid it.  I mean, if you haven't heard "Rolling in the Deep", you may need to pack your volleyball friend onto the raft and think about rejoining society.

Aside: if you haven't heard it, 19 is quite good.  It seems a bit more immature and more of an attempt to mimic the records she heard growing up, rather than developing her own, unique stamp.  There are shades of 21 in there, though.  "Make You Feel My Love" would fit nicely onto 21. 

Listening to her debut album, I'm struck by a few things.  One of them is that this young lady has such command and presence, even at such a young age, that, in my opinion, some of today's "divas" could stand to take some notes.  For one, Adele doesn't over-sing everything.  She crafts interesting vocal lines, sure, but the vocal acrobatics that are so prevalent today, and seem to be the benchmark for what makes a "good" singer, are completely absent.  This is a beautiful, "less is more" approach, and begins to undo some of the damage caused by all of the Whitney Houstons and Mariah Careys of the world.

"But...but..." you stammer. "Whitney could sing!".

You and I will have to disagree there.  Well, maybe not entirely.  She probably could sing.  To me, though, it just seemed like she was yelling on-key most of the time.  Tomatoes, to-mah-toes.  I really didn't come here to bash Whitney.

The second thing that struck me was the phenomenon that I've observed upon discovering a new artist, mid-career, and then delving into their back catalog(ue):

The first album you hear from an artist is, in your mind, their sound, regardless of how it may sound with regard to anything else they've done.

Let me clarify.  In the instance of Adele, 21 is what Adele's baseline sound is.  19 is a change from that.  IN MY HEAD.  For fans who started at the beginning, 21 is the departure.  If the first Pearl Jam album you heard was Vitalogy, Ten is going to sound strange to you.  Have you, readers, noticed this phenomenon as well?

I'd be curious to know what causes this.  Perhaps it's just simple familiarity.  Maybe there's enough nostalgia-weight with your first experience that you'll always hold a special place for that first taste of an artist.

Could you get around this by digesting a band's entire catalog(ue) in one go, thereby imprinting that nostalgia-weight to their entire works?

What artists have you experienced this with?

Oh, no. I don't buy it for a second.

I'm back!  I've had a lot going on, both at work and at home, and just haven't had time (or inspiration) to write anything.  I'll be honest: it's been a pretty stressful time for me, which culminated in something of a nervous breakdown this past weekend.  In fact, I started a post about that while it was still going on, but it read like a suicide note, so I deleted it.  No need to cause anyone any unintentional distress.

Thankfully, I have a wonderful, understanding wife, a fantastic best friend, and a great group of guys at the chapel that I was able to spend some time with, and I got through it.  I'm feeling pretty incredible right now, so that's a definite improvement.

However, that's not why I'm writing today.  As I stated before, I was going to share my new music with you.  I have a couple of new albums to talk about.

Fragrant World

by Yeasayer

Yeasayer are like that band that the cool, art-y kids were listening to in the 80s while you were trying to decide if Boy George would ever top "Karma Chameleon".  Sounding like a cross between Art Of Noise and Gary Numan, Yeasayer brings a deliciously retro sound to a modern audience. 

Their music is predominantly electronic, but the band eschews the trappings of most modern electronic music.  You will not find droning, repetetive beats here.  Instead, this is almost pure pop sensibility, but with so much experimentation and lush density that it feels more like prog than something you'd hear on the Top 40.  The music shifts and swirls, creating a new soundscape every few bars.  By relying on that pop sensibility, though, they keep the music accessible, never making it difficult to listen to.  In fact, the entire album is so utterly listenable that I find myself toe-tapping and head-bobbing right along with it.

Lyrically, the band hits familiar tropes like relationships, etc, but with an artistic flair that makes them more about mood than literal interpretation.  The only exception is the surprisingly mean-spirited "Folk Hero Schtick", which seems to be a diss track, specifically aimed at someone (I don't know who).  It's a step backward and takes away from the positive vibes that you'd expect from a band called Yeasayer (presumably, the opposite of a naysayer).

Overall, Yeasayer have crafted a fine album.  Perhaps it's not quite so memorable as their last effort, Odd Blood, but definitely worth a listen if you enjoy some 80s-sounding synth pop.

Tough Love

A couple of days ago, one of my friends posted a question on Facebook, and I thought it was interesting enough to take some time and give it a proper answer.  It's a big enough question that I thought it might be worth bringing up here:

Does anyone else out there think like me? Does anyone else think that you can be a Christian and a good person, without having to be a church goer that reads and refers to and lives by the Bible? I think I am a Christian as per my testimony at age 14, however, I have also met so many people in this country alone that are incredible people - Muslims, Buddhists, and even Catholic Strippers! Why is it that I can't be open to their ideas and accepting of them and respect their opinions? Does that make me a bad person or a bad Christian? I will not judge others for their choices in life, its just not for me to say, but instead for me to be nice and open and kind to them, right?


OK, since you asked...

There's really no way to address this without bringing up one of the ugly truths about religion.  Almost every religion believes that their way is the right way, and those who are not on board are going to Hell (or some reasonable facsimile).  People don't like this.  It's harsh.  It's black-and-white.  It doesn't leave a lot of room for "Gee, can't we all just get along?".  I know many non-believers who are really offended by this.  It's certainly not something we like to bring up as an icebreaker at parties.
  
However (and I'll speak from a Christian's point of view), this gets unfairly pinned on the believers.  "You're being judgmental!"  Well, no, actually.  I'm not.  I have no authority over where you spend the afterlife.  Now, as far as I know, that's the rules, but they're not my rules.  I didn't make them up.  God did.  It's all His, anyway, so...His rules.  Would I like it if everyone got a Get Out Of Eternity In Fire card, just for smiling at others and not kicking puppies?  Sure.  But that's not how it works.  The thing is, though.  There is a big stack of those cards available.  One for each person.  The trick is that you have to take it.  Faith in Christ is your free pass.  You just have to come that far.  The rest has been laid out for you.

Bit of a digression.  Back to the question.  "Can you be a Christian and a good person, without having to be a church goer that reads and refers to and lives by the Bible?"  A good person?  Sure, no problem.  A Christian?  Not so much.  Without the Bible, what does it even mean to be a Christian?  How do you know what Christianity is, or what it looks like?  I suspect that you like to call yourself a Christian, but don't want to have to deal with any of those difficult parts of it, so you adopt the label and then live your life how you see fit.  That way, when someone asks, you can say, "Yes, I am", but you're really not.  When you create the religion to suit what you think God should be like, you're really worshipping yourself.  If this is the case, and if you're really honest with yourself, you should probably stop calling yourself a Christian (unless your name is Chris or Christie - even then, it's unnecessarily misleading).  

Self-identifying as a Christian because you said you were when you were 14, and then not doing anything since is like me saying, "I'm an airline pilot".

"You're not an airline pilot.", you say, "You've never even studied aviation, much less flown a plane".

"True", I reply, "But, when I was a five years old, I got to go in the cockpit and the pilot gave me pilot's wings.  I'm totally an airline pilot".

Maybe I've got this all wrong.  I just don't understand how you're calling yourself a thing that you are not, just because you were at one time.  You are not an eighth-grader, are you?  Even though you were one when you were 14?  Why?  Because you don't attend classes in a middle school anymore.  Why don't you also call yourself an eighth-grader?  

For the other part - can you be a Christian and not a church goer?  Yes, but you're not going to be as effective and uplifted.  The Bible tells us:

Hebrews 10:25 
Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching. 

1 Corinthians 12:12 
The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. 

Now, can you be open to others' ideas and accepting of them and respect their opinions without judging them?  Again, yes.  Yes, you can.  There is only one Judge, and you are not Him.  But if you really are a Christian, that is, a follower of Christ, well:

John 14:6 
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me". 

Take a moment and let that sink in.  The Muslims and Buddhists and Atheists and Wiccans (etc.) are all going to be apart from God for eternity.  Straight from Christ's mouth.  Uncomfortable?  You bet.  If you care about these people, you should want them to be with you in Heaven.  At the very least, pray for them, fervently, daily.  Pray that they will accept Christ.  Because saying, "Hey, your way is as good as my way", is a death sentence. 

Again, that's only if you believe what you say you believe.  If you don't, and you think everyone's just cool the way they are, you should probably look into Universalism.

To my friend who asked the question: We've been friends for a long time.  You know we're still friends.  I'm just concerned for you and really would like you to think about why you believe what you believe.