February 17, 2008
I want to speak out, and at the same time, come out of my closet. I know that I cannot remain in my closet for long, and I know that my belief and world view shape the way I perceive things and behave towards others.
We live in a messed up world, with two main competing ideas. One of which is the idea that we have special hereditary features passed on by our parents who, they themselves, have gotten those features from their parents. The list goes backwards to the age of our primitive common ancestor, as primitive as the Australopithecus. Even the Australopithecus is not primitive enough. All thanks to Charles Darwin, and the rest of the remaining scientists, palaeontologists, geologists, and many other professions. Another idea which we now commonly face is the concept of creationism - the hypothesis which states that the complexity of living organisms has to do with a force of a designer, whom most religious institutions describe as God the creator.
With slight reluctance, I attended the weekend service with my girlfriend today. As usual, and not surprising for me, the pastor preached about some moral principles, which I wouldn't even bring myself to take down the notes. These moral principles are indeed very useful, and everybody in the secular society would definitely agree them to be so. Of course, no one likes to be immoral or do evil without any involvement of the 'push' factor. Any sane and normal intelligent being would agree to today's sermon (more like seminar) that we should have our own moral values that eventually build up our self-respect and relationship with others, which are the only things that would be durable in my opinion.
One thing I agree with the pastor is that religion is an institution just like any organisation or company one is searching to work for. There are many companies one could work for in this world, and the company that one chooses to serve in would determine the destiny of that individual. This is no doubt true. So my question would be this: Take for instance, we have ethical and moral company A, B, and C. Since we are free to choose the company we want to work in or for, why should there be a civil law stating that employees of the company that does not practice company A's business strategy would be jailed and sentenced to death? And yet, why would the law state that company B's method towards office cleanliness should be the way, and that any other company, that use another different method should be fined and their employees sacked? Finally, why would the law asserts that companies, which do not sell the same product as company C, be forced to compensate their customers and their employees are to be sacked as well? (Let us suppose that these companies use strategies with integrity)
This, of course, is nonsensical. Because if every company starts telling one another that their business strategy is the right way of approach according to the (silly) law, and that others' strategies would lead to bankruptcies, then this is the hindrance for innovation and would ultimately, put an end to entrepreneurship. Such method slows progress and defies economic competition. The purpose is not to start a quarrel of whether who is right or who is wrong, since there are no clear absolutes with regard to morality (not immorality). The main purpose for these companies is to mind their own business. It is the same with religion (company) and their scriptural texts (civil law).
It makes sense to me that we should all be good to one another, and to show respect, love, and be kind. We all have the potential to do the best deeds in this life time. On the other hand, we also have the potential to do the nastiest deeds beyond imagination. Our motivations stem not solely from the scriptural values we digest, rather, our human brain directs our path. Our human brain tells us what to do next, and how to react to our environment. It is our brain that controls our every movement of our body parts, even to the point of how we use our tones in the way we speak. The human brain is the central nervous system that doesn't sleep, as long as one is still alive. This is the reason why there are still many people around, who do not have any religious views or other superstitions, who are also happy, moral, and respectable individuals. Again, humans do not need religion to do good or be moral. I understand that religion keeps people together, but it also divides society.
What makes humans believe that there is such entities like "us" and "them", or "ours" and "others"? It is the notion of identity within a tribe. The problem with humanity is that of the social. Since the existence of our most primitive ancestors, social needs for adaptability and survival in this cruel environment is the 'push' factor for the need of self or group identity. Hence, the formation of tribes and nationality. Today, we are aware that the notion of race and ethnicity still have unresolved issues in this postmodern era. But what keeps us separated with nasty prejudices and bigotry is not our biological features, nor is it being part of the minority. Rather, it is the way we tune our minds to perceive and interpret our surroundings, including other individuals. Therefore, I am concerned that with racism, comes another nastier hindrance to society's progress - religious intolerance and bigotry.
One basic form of religious intolerance is when some individual proclaims that his or her faith is the true faith and that believing in it would lead to a better life here and after. Christians do that often, Muslims do that too (although not evangelically so), and to the Jews, they believe that their Holy Book is right and crucified Jesus in the end. Why pick on these three faiths? It is because of these three faiths, that had cost the lives of millions or more people. So if someone come to me and tell me that I would be a good person if I strongly believe in Jesus Christ, my reaction would be, "Really..?" Didn't Jesus say that transformation of an individual takes place in his own mind? This has got nothing to do with having faith. This is about being rational minded and acting accordingly to what must be done to one's own self. Once again, the message is very clear: Religion doesn't change a person. It doesn't motivate a person. It doesn't provide any scientific evidence that is satisfactory. It is but a philosophy that, with a slight
tinch of God's supposed essence within its teaching, stained one of the best masterpieces.
So when anyone were to ask me if I'm an atheist, I don't think I would agree because I hate to use the term "atheist" to describe myself. The same goes for "agnostic" or "free thinker". These, like those terms "Christian", "Catholic", "Buddhist", "Muslim", "Hindu", or "Jew", are nothing but labels. It may be true that we do not label one another consciously, but sub-consciously and unknowingly, we have already labelled one another by uttering a simple sentence such as, "Would you like to convert so we can marry each other and live happily ever after?".
To me, I value knowledge. I seek for answers and other possibilities. Although I'm always questioning about the way things are or how things work, I do not fail to be opened to corrections whenever I'm proven wrong. That is the attitude that scientists like myself adopt. We may be sceptical, but it is a good thing. However, I do not agree that being overly sceptical would be any better, rather the key is moderation. The pastor preached that knowledge puffs up individuals, making them excited about explaining things that eventually (and usually) the church would disagree. They pointed out that these individuals start to question the existence of human beings and using logic to question this: who made the creator. Well, is it a joke to question everything in this universe? If it is even a slightest (laughable) sin to question the possibility of an ancient hypothesis of a creator being, who is supposedly the assumed God of the universe, just because that assumed phenomena is commonly subscribed to as the "majesty", then this is an example of an authoritarian authority that even democracy and freedom of speech reject. The congregation laughed loudly whenever the pastor sarcastically mocks evolution and sceptical scientists. Indeed, they should be thankful for the contributions these scientists have made to the society because of the application of their church-rejected theories into their priced research. Without these sceptics or scientific theories (such as evolutionary theories), these ungrateful church-misers wouldn't even have a chance to laugh or mock at them.
Am I to be blamed for losing friends or people I love just for my belief or disbelief alone? The danger of religious faith is that it separates people, divides society, and causes social disunity. In romantic relationships, it puts a pressurizing strain such that either party has to convert to undo his or her own principles or values to suit the other party's religious view. In close friendships, it eventually separates the commonality of identity within the group when the notion of faith is being brought up during a conversation. Between nations, differences of belief (or just disbelief) can cause mayhems and gradually take more lives than it can ever think it could save.
Do I deserve to lose my friends over the issue of faith? Perhaps.
Perhaps those religious people in church I used to know don't seem any friendlier to me any more. To them, perhaps I am their infidel, or Judas Iscariot, or a gentile, or whatever bad biblical names they wish to call me with. Did they bother replying my text messages? Nay. Cut the crap. Did they even bother to think I exist? I don't think so. To me, as an ex-Christian, I feel hurt, rejected, and utterly disappointed, not only with the church, or with the sermons it preaches every time, but also, many of those people whom I've made close contact with. God is out of the question, because if He's all powerful, all wise, and all knowing, he would have kick these people's asses.
(p.s. Sean, if you consider see me as your friend, I hope to be invited for a drink with you the next time you want to meet me... so I'd know that you've still not forgotten about me.)Tonight, I come clear of my disbelief. And I've already stated my reasons.
