7/27/2019 12568594

1/8

Chapter Eight

The Danger of Religion

My heart tells me there is a god. Yours may tell you something different. I am okay with that.

Fundamentalists are not. This defines the greatest complaint I have with fundamentalism as a

whole. They are dissatisfied with and unable to accept the fact that someone might disagree with

their belief system. They are determinedrequired, reallyto go beyond a friendly

disagreement. They must convert the unbeliever.

To be fair, one must realize that a cornerstone of religion is conversion. A religion without

converts will quickly fade and die. To truly accept a religion, with all its nebulous facets and airy

promises, one must wholly embrace it. One must become a near fanatic. Anyone who feels

strongly enough to convert will likely feel strongly enough to share it with others and be

disappointed when they dont exhibit the same level of enthusiasm.

Imagine a co-worker arriving at the office with pictures of the new baby in the family. The co-

worker is ecstatic and flaunts the photos relentlessly. To avoid hurt feelings, it is expected that

everyone show at least a measure of interest, even though nobody really cares. There are times

when people simply must share personal experiences. Religion, with its innately personal and

often inspiring tendencies, qualifies as such.

So we can excuse the zealous convert, can we not? They may be annoying at the office, but no

more so than the guy who screams at the copy machine or the woman who wears too much

perfume.

Of course, it goes deeper than that. Believers are often genuinely concerned for the spiritual

well-being of the person they are attempting to convert. They are convinced that if they do not

succeed in winning them to Christ, the sinner will die and spend eternity in hell. Believers are

often required to visit the highways and byways in search of converts. In my church, for

example, you were considered to have blood on your handsbe partially responsible for the

sinners damnationif you didnt do all you could to turn them onto the straight and narrow.

Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. (Mark 16:15)

My argument is not with the fact that someone accepts a faith, feels good about it, and wants to

share. My argument is with the believer who demands my conversion or else. The office worker

may force me to look at the baby pictures and Ill survive, but when they say that I must either

agree that its the cutest baby ever or go to hell, well, thats crossing the line.

The sheer arrogance of this approach is simply mind-boggling. I feel somewhat like Christopher

Hitchens, author ofGod is not Great, when he says that he will need to hear a lot more

7/27/2019 12568594

2/8

apologizing from Christians about the trouble their religion has caused before he will allow them

to lecture him on morality.

My real sadness is for these same believers, however, because their god apparently isnt big

enough to handle his own problems. He needs people to run around and make nuisances of

themselves in order to accomplish his will. Their god isnt big enough to handle criticism orhonest questions and needs his people to quiet the opposition and quell discontent. The void in

their religion saddens me. I can feel comfortable with my questions and uncertainty, because I

know God is not petty enough to resent it and is wise enough to expect it. God is not

unreasonable and doubtless recognizes a large part of the faith concept to be just that. I am

going to give you evidence of nothing and expect you to believe everything, God reportedly

says. Does this sound like an omnipotent, reasonable being?

Although I hold strong opinions regarding religion as a whole, it is necessary to be careful not to

commit the same transgressions religion commits. While religion attacks those who do not share

the same beliefs as do they, it is equally easy to attack those who do not disbelieve the samethings. Neither approach is acceptable and both are equally destructive and petulant.

I should make it clear that I do not suggest believers are evil. American churches are full of well-

meaning people who perform good works and have dedicated their lives to the advancement of

others. They are to be commended for their dedication and sacrifice. My problem lies with

religion itself, with the ideal and the organization. The problem with religion is that the truly

selfless workers are a minority and largely overshadowed by the self-righteous, judgmental

culture that exists at the core of nearly all Christian churches.

My disgust with religion, however, must coexist with my grudging admiration for theeffectiveness of its methods. Karl Marx wrote that religion is the opium of the people.

Although Marx wasnt entirely disparaging religion with these words, the phrase rings true.

Religion and drugs are disturbingly similar.

Consider a crack dealer who will often give samples of his product away for free, knowing he

has likely created a lifelong customer. He has set himself up as the sole provider for this person,

eventually becoming the centerpiece of their life. The Church is much the same. They preach a

message of guilt and fear. Once they have people hooked on the message, they reveal themselves

as the provider of salvation. Follow us and receive peace. Adopt our creed and be eternally

secure. People crave assurance and knowledge of the future. Some of the craziest religiousleaders have received vast attention simply by claiming to know the future. 99.9% of the world

knows intellectually that theyre nuts, butwhat if?

The Church doesnt pretend to tell the futureat least not the immediate futurebecause that is

an unsustainable claim. They do promise the next best thing, however, and that is to see that it all

comes out right in the end, as long as one is faithful. Theres the catch.

7/27/2019 12568594

3/8

The more conspiratorially-minded could make a case that the construction of religion was

intentional in purpose. It really would be a brilliant schemetrading people assurance of

salvation for their allegiance, i.e. time, money, dignity, and talent. The point could be made that

the prevailing fallacies about God are so detailed and insidiously brilliant that they cannot be

accidental. Is it a far stretch to say that religion was intentionally created by men in order to

better control other men? In any case, it succeeds wonderfully in this manner.

The Church, in particular fundamentalist groups, guides its flock in all things: behavior,

entertainment, speech, wardrobe, sex, and finance. It dictates that a member cannot do certain

things, enjoy certain things, say certain things, and wear certain things. Sex is for marriage and

between a man and a woman. Oh, and dont forget to tithe at least 10% and give liberally in

special offerings.

Additionally, Christianity has been very clever in building their base support around ideas that

cannot be either proven or disproved. An opponent of the faith cannot unequivocally say there

will not be a Second Coming of Christ, for example, because it is a future event with no set date.The folly of excess certitude can be seen in the unceremonious death of various cults that

routinely arise, claiming to have pinpointed the day of Christs return. The hour comes and goes.

Because the cults foundation was built on a single impending event, it quickly crumbles once it

is seen to be a farce.

Christianity avoided that mistake. Like most religions, it is founded on the idea of faith: You

must simply believe. This is why arguing with a believer is often so pointless. If they feel the

discussion turning against them, they can simply fall back on the intangible faith issue. This is a

weak-minded defense, the easy way out, and much akin to the default childs argument of,

Yeah, so, I dont care.

By the same token, a believer cannot prove their faith to a non-believer, but must convince them

to accept the same level of blind faith. How do they do this? If examined honestly and critically,

it sounds pretty fantastic. Lets examine Christianity in a nutshell:

The first two people on earth were originally perfect, but committed a sin, thereby bringing evil

into the world. This evil stalked humanity for many years and the only way to atone for it was by

periodically killing animals. Then God had a son and sent him to earth and had him killed

instead, putting an end to the need for animal sacrifices. Now all we have to do is believe this

happened and were good.

As fairytale-like as it sounds, the story has gained legions of followers, as have other major

religions. Sub-religionsbranches of existing belief systemsmany of which make far crazier

claims, also gain followers. Why do people accept this?

Fundamentalists have no real evidence to back up their claims, but seem to base most of their

arguments on the idea, What if were right and you are wrong? The idea that this is, in any

7/27/2019 12568594

4/8

way, a viable source of proof is beyond ridiculous. I could employ the same strategy by stopping

random strangers on the street, demanding their money, and threatening to call down fire from

heaven if they refuse.

Thats ridiculous! theyd say.

Playing the part of the fundamentalist, I would raise a knowing eyebrow and reply, But what if

Im right? Meaning, of course, that by giving me their money they will have assured their

own survival.

While this particular get-rich-quick scheme would have no chance of success, religion has

employed a similar strategy brilliantly, even down to the give me your money part. Millions of

people have fallen for the line and decided to play it safe by joining one religious cause or

another.

Religion exploits the innate uncertainty of man. It promises everything in return for, well,

everything. In this way, one gives up everything they currently have in order to gain something

else at an undetermined later date. Not the greatest of investments, but an impressively clever

ploy. Since the rewards are post-death, one cannot prove or disprove the claims. People die and

are said to have gone to their reward, presumably regaining everything they gave up, with

interest.

Something inside mankind wants the stories to be true. People will believe anything if they can

be made to desire it. It happens every day in countless ways. A wife so badly wants to believe

her husband is faithful that she believes it, ignoring the nightly smears of lipstick on his office

attire. An overweight, dieting person convinces himself that one doughnut wont hurt him, so he

eats two. Its human nature. But what makes people desire to believe? Fundamentalists say this

desire is proof itself that what they say is true. The world is hungry for what we want, I often

heard them say.

What is the appeal of religion? What are the odds that the religion you hold, and the particular

sect in which you find yourself, is the correct one? I recounted earlier that Bob and I used to

marvel at this, although at that time we were convinced that we had somehow been chosen by

God to be blessed in this fashion. It never occurred to us to either question such a coincidence or

buy a lottery ticket, possibly because both actions would have been considered sin.

I do believe there is a spiritual void inside humanity. One into which God fits nicely. However,one must first carve and sand all the religion off him in order to make him fit. We have been

trained to think that God and religion are inseparable, that you cannot have one without the other

and simply must choose which religion best suits you and then follow God within the dictates of

that faith.

7/27/2019 12568594

5/8

A Christian comedian, Mark Lowry, does an amusing bit during his appearances where he calls

out the names of different faiths: Baptists, Catholics, Lutherans, etc. Each group cheers as he

calls out their title. At the end, he pauses and then says, Just think. Somebodys wrong!

He makes an excellent point, one that can be taken a step further by saying all of them are

wrong. The odds of any single group getting God right are just too small to consider. The ideathat man could create a set of beliefs encapsulating God is arrogant in the extreme. Man has

developed to individually seek after God and discover him in their own way, whether it be

through prayer, meditation, or nature.

Religion, however, has taken God hostage and provided an oasis for people unwilling to take

responsibility for their own spiritual journeys. It provides an easy way out: Dont think about it.

Just believe what we believe and do what we say and youll be fine.

This would obviously be appealing to people, particularly since manyperhaps mostof us

have been raised to believe in eternal punishment if we mess up here on earth. Yet this is exactlythe point. It is simply too easy.

This is another reason religion is so dangerousit discourages thought and question.

Intellectualism is feared by the Church, a fear thinly masked by disdain. By disparaging

individual thought they hope to discourage its use. If one begins to think for oneself the

possibility exists the thinker may arrive at a conclusion at odds with the Church. This cannot be

allowed.

The beliefs of the Church compose a massive jigsaw of notions and dogma, each linked and

mutually dependent. The destruction of one leads to the failure of another. To question one pillar

of belief puts the entire structure at risk.

By energetically encouraging its people to examine the assertions of religion, the Church feels it

would, in essence, be devouring its young. Yet there is criticism to be faced when an attitude of

blind faith is imposed, so often there is a surface smile when a member appears to question.

I am reminded of the day I informed a concerned church member, who had approached me about

my spiritual condition, that I was searching for the Truth. This announcement was met with a

knowing silence and then they said, Well, just remember in your searching that there are some

things that cant be questioned. Then what was the point? If certain issues are off limits, why

bother approaching them at all?

There were safe topics to debate in my church: water baptism, whether Jesus could have

sinned during the temptation of Satan, and the exact chronology of the rapture. Other topics were

taboo: entire sanctification (holiness), the trinity, the ability to live without sin, the infallibility of

the Bible, and many more. Upon examination, it became obvious that the Church was willing to

7/27/2019 12568594

6/8

7/27/2019 12568594

7/8

A belief in religion is largely a cerebral endeavor. The power of positive thinking, while it

receives more credit than it deserves, does figure into ones ability to succeed at any given

undertaking. If you whole-heartedly believe in religion and trust it will help you quit something

you consider a vice, you have a much better chance of actually reaching the goal. If you want to

believe your sins are forgiven and you are now on the way to heaven as a result of a prayer, you

are going to feel happy.

Lets say you grew up believing that cotton candy was the greatest thing on earth and if you

could only find it, all would be right in your life. You lived for cotton candy, although you had

never eaten any. Everyone around you said they had tried it and it was indeed the answer to lifes

problems. The search for cotton candy consumed your life and you looked high and low, traveled

the world, and spent your lifes fortune searching for the elusive treat. Then you came to me and

I said I was the worlds only manufacturer of cotton candy and that if only you would buy and

eat some, you would be assured of a long life. Would you not feel happier after having purchased

and eaten the cotton candy? After years of searching, you had found your hearts desire and

attained longevity. In short, a belief can make you happy, even if that belief is untrue.

Conversely, a belief can make you unhappy, whether or not that same belief is accurate. I know

people who believe in the teachings of the Church, but have chosen to shun them. They know

they are going to hell, but cannot submit to religions authority. Their belief system is faulty, but

it still makes them miserable. This explains to a large extent the idea of conviction. Simply

walking away from a lifetime of teaching does not remove those ideas from your mind. They

follow you everywhere, affecting your mood and mental state. Often the inner pressure becomes

too much to bear and the prodigal ends up returning to the Church simply as a way to relieve the

pressure and achieve peace of mind.

While religion can provide a measure of peace, it has caused at least as much conflict and strife

than it has prevented. We read about the presentation of the Ten Commandments, after which the

nation of Israel continued to brutally attack and destroy its enemies. Rather than solve the

worlds problems, religion has given men an excuse to perform even more evil deeds: God told

me to. It was in the name of God and religion that the Inquisition rose to power, heretics were

burned, prisoners were tortured, slavery was put into practice and continued, science and its

supporters were attacked and discredited, and wars were waged. Does the perceived, possibly

misguided, peace of a number of people justify the rape and murder of millions of others?

As horrible as the aforementioned deeds are, they are made worse by the fact they are so oftencredited to God. If ever he trembles with wrath, it is not when the seeker questions the path of

religion, but when religion uses his name to destroy the seeker.

Going back to an earlier discussion, we now ask, Is religion intrinsically evil? Is it the belief

system that is faulty or is it merely the human tendency to abuse power that makes it so? I would

submit that it is both. As designed, religion is too easily manipulated and has, over the years,

7/27/2019 12568594

8/8

become hopelessly corrupt. Religion in and of itself can be a cure. In the hands of mankind, it

becomes a poison. Without mankind, religions cure is unnecessary and impossible. Therefore,

by religions mere existence, it will by necessity become a poison.

It would be ridiculous of me to say that an idea in and of itself is evil, for an idea without the

means to complete itself cannot have character. However, we have seen over the centuries thatorganized religion invites misuse and must therefore be viewed with grave suspicion or,

possibly, outmoded altogether in its current form. I do not mean to say that we humans have

outgrown religion and that we have progressed in an evolutionary sense past the need for such

trifles. I do suggest, however, that organized religion, while it may have begun as a noble

experiment and served some incidental, worth-while purpose, should now give way to what

Christianity has always claimed to be: a personal mode of faith.

Churches do not hold the keys to salvation or everlasting life. If there was ever a time when

traditional, organized religion as we know it today served a useful and worthwhile purpose, I

would submit that time has passed. We have no need of widespread control by spiritual dictatorswhen God is directly accessible and without malevolent tendencies.