Hiding Behind Reason
I explored Mr. Jager's website and several atheist links. A recurring theme is that atheism = respect for reason while Christianity (and other religions) = superstition. Respecting the appeal of reason while understanding that approaching religion requires an openness to spirituality - I attempted to engage in a dialog with Mr. Jager in hopes of toning down some of his rhetoric or giving him a chance to defend it. These efforts are partially documented in links to his site and my previous responses - but have included many emails.
This page summarizes my observations. I took issue with only two points on Mr. Jager's website - and note a third assertion:
Mr. Jager quotes an atheist who describe religion as mental illness and lists 7 similarities between religion and mental illness.
Mr. Jager applies a concept (mind virus) to all religion.
Mr. Jager claims that he takes the approach he does so that he can apply logic and reason to his beliefs as opposed to superstition.
Now I don't want to jump to conclusions or misstate anything. Mr. Jager may be too busy to defend his statements. He may be intellectually incapable of defending his positions. He may feel that exaggerating his position helps further his views. But I submit the following observations and suggest you read both sites to see if I am unfairly or incorrectly reporting our discussions:
I responded that there are many Christians
who do not ascribe to the behaviors or beliefs that Mr. Jager or his sources
complain about. His response was to quote Hitler - and when called
upon the fact that Hitler is a poor example of the kind of Christian that I
am referring to, the response was to detail that Hitler was not
excommunicated and that Mr. Jager accepts anyone who says he is a Christian
as one and cannot be expected to differentiate between the many Christian
denominations.
I attempted to explain that Mr. Jager's exposure to people claiming to be religious might have been limited - that my experience with spiritual people (Christian or not) was that spiritual people (almost by definition) are not violent and do not exhibit hatred. The response was to invoke the religious fervor of the Taliban, etc. - saying these people claim to be spiritual.
I submit that Mr. Jager is as incapable of applying the same standards to his logic as any of the people he criticizes. Mr. Jager rightly points out that many religious people unquestioningly accept a collection of beliefs and yet cannot understand those whose belief system differs. However, he is equally incapable of modifying (or even defending) his beliefs (or at least his statements) in the face of reason. Arguing that the failures of some that claim to be religious or spiritual implies that religion and spirituality are flawed is as illogical as any form of prejudice. One should be as embarrassed to use Hitler as an example of a Christian as one would be to use an atheist mass-murderer as an example of atheists or a white corporate thief to prove that all whites are money-grubbing thieves or O. J. Simpson as an example of how blacks deal with their relationships. Perhaps the logic is even worse - because Hitler is demonstrably not Christian (regardless of which of the 23,000 denominations Mr. Jager is so concerned about) - while in the other examples the people are at least by definition atheist, white or black.
(Note: one obvious exception: if someone claims that anyone who claims Christianity is superior - Hitler is a fair counter-example. (assuming Mr. Jager accurately reports Hitler's claim of Christianity) But that was not the context in which Hitler was both invoked and then defended as an example.)
Mr. Jager has no response to my assertions that :
many Christians do not fit his descriptions of religious people
implying superiority for ANY non-religious morality over ANY religious-based morality is ludicrous
spiritual people (people at peace with their relationship with God - respectfully and humbly trying to discern God's will) are non-violent by nature.
etc. You are free to interpret whether this is because he is too busy, because he is incapable or because it is impossible - but I think it is fair to assume that his devotion to logic and reason are either beyond his abilities, beyond his interest or less important than his beliefs and prejudices.
From looking at several atheistic sites, atheists may or may not have a lot to offer in terms of thought, examples of the abuse of religion and challenges for the thinking Christian - but the tendency to imply or assert that this is out of love for logic and reason is not borne out. Literalists/Fundamentalists and atheists have more in common with each other when it comes to indulging in generalizations, arrogance and mean-spiritedness than either side would like to believe, much less admit.
email me at doug@hardts.net