4 ms·

"The advice I would give atheists who are interested in this book..." is a good indication of where apologists think that the line is currently drawn. However,

"The advice I would give atheists who are interested in this book..." is a good indication of where apologists think that the line is currently drawn. However, the line typically is not "why should folks have faith in certain beliefs?" but "why should folks obey abusive churches?" The only reason that faith and beliefs are examined at all is because folks routinely excuse abuse with professions of faith.

dwater 6y ago
Indeed, my admittedly simplistic argument is: If your faith is the true one out of all others, why does it demand its adherents give it money and power? If it was the true faith wouldn't that be enough to drown out the rest? Doesn't that money and power corrupt the faith rather than enrich it?
- tines 6y ago
  Yes, great point. If you're not a Christian, then you're one more data point in my collection that shows that unbelievers understand Christianity better than most people who call themselves a Christian. Biblical Christianity looks very little like the modern religion we know by the same name today.
- jawns 6y ago
  Have you ever looked at the annual budget of a church? I'm a member of a typical Catholic parish in the U.S., and every year the pastor includes the budget in a letter he sends to every registered parishioner, for transparency. There are expenses to keep the lights on. A small number of staff receive modest salaries. There's a fund for capital expenses. And if the parish manages to do more than break even, guess where the rest goes? To help the poor and disadvantaged. Parishioners are encouraged to share their money and time to support the poor in other ways, as well. There are regular collections for those causes. I'm sure there is some level of corruption and embezzlement across the church globally, just as there is in just about any large institution, but I'd say that in terms of bringing in money, the vast majority of parishes and dioceses are just trying to get by, and to serve their communities when they can. The image of the Catholic Church being some vast, obscenely wealthy, powerful organization is good for the Da Vinci Code but doesn't really jibe with reality. The Vatican, whose annual budget is about five times smaller than that of Cleveland, rarely has revenue that exceeds its operating expenses.
  - tck42 6y ago
    Are these budgets available online, or at least at the ask to the public? Since they're not paying taxes, I think they should be. If not, then who exactly is it transparent to? The church across the street from my house is large and I'm sure heating and upkeep is no small chunk of change. A good portion of the cars parked in the reserved row (staff) are nicer than mine, so I'm guessing the salary isn't necessarily "modest".
  - myWindoonn 6y ago
    Have you ever looked at the annual expenditures of the entire Church [0]? Most of their income comes from interest on investments, and they manage their money well enough to cover their entire operating expenses and make a tidy profit which stays within the Church. The story that the Church donates most of its money "to help the poor and disadvantaged" is a reassurance which is meant to paper over the fact that the Church is not a very transparent organization. In terms of bringing in money, the vast majority of parishes and dioceses are on Church-owned land and have some sort of tax benefit or writeoff. This makes them far more stable than their surrounding community members, and somewhat ruins the image of the humble parish priest simply trying to spread the Good Word; his employer is certainly not humble in wealth. [0] http://www.ior.va/content/dam/ior/documenti/rapporto-annuale/IOR_AnnualReport_EN_2014.pdf http://www.ior.va/content/dam/ior/documenti/rapporto-annuale...
    - jawns 6y ago
      You are mistaken that the IOR represents the annual expenses/income of the church, or even a large part of it. The IOR is a bank that provides financial services to Catholic institutions, such as religious communities and Vatican offices. When money is held, it's put in very low-risk, liquid investment accounts, such as government bonds. The clients of IOR use it so they can carry out religious and charitable operations worldwide.
IgorPartola 6y ago
I disagree. I simply have a hard time believing there is a bearded man in the sky who cares a whole lot about what porn everyone watches, wants us to not wear multi color clothing, and insists that being gay is bad, but is also all knowing, all powerful, and in charge of the entire universe. To my tiny human brain it seems more likely that these are stories people made up that just haven’t been superseded by new ones, like stories about Zeus or Thor, rather than some divine knowledge that was passed down to us. Organized religion is, to me, organized control of the masses. But not feeding into that is not the primary reason. It’s that I have a hard time believing that the more we learn about the world the harder it becomes to find any evidence of god’s existence, which would be the exact opposite if he did exist.
tines 6y ago
> The only reason that faith and beliefs are examined at all is because folks routinely excuse abuse with professions of faith. That's a great point. I'm a Christian, and I think the reason why you have a lot of intellectual firepower directed against modern "Christianity" (which is an ideology that can't be found in the New Testament) is not simply because atheists think that Christians are wrong. You don't read polemics against Bob down at the insane asylum, arguing that he is not, in fact, a dog, despite his insistence. The difference to an atheist between a lunatic and a Christian is simply this: the lunatic doesn't _vote_ to force his insane views on the world, but a Christian does. Personally, I don't think voting, or any form of political participation, is consistent with Christ's teachings, specifically when he says "Don't resist evil" in Matthew 5:39. The entire point of the state is to resist evil (Max Weber even defines a "state" as the group that holds the monopoly on the legitimate use of violence in a geographic area), and voting is informing the government about how you want them to resist evil for you. And of course the very existence of the modern church depends on using the government to resist evil and get money, so you'll find all sorts of casuistry and rationalizations about how Jesus didn't really mean what he said, but none of them hold water. Point being, if Christians started following Christ, even a little bit, they'd find that they have a lot fewer "enemies".

dwater 6y ago

Indeed, my admittedly simplistic argument is: If your faith is the true one out of all others, why does it demand its adherents give it money and power? If it was the true faith wouldn't that be enough to drown out the rest? Doesn't that money and power corrupt the faith rather than enrich it?

tines 6y ago
Yes, great point. If you're not a Christian, then you're one more data point in my collection that shows that unbelievers understand Christianity better than most people who call themselves a Christian. Biblical Christianity looks very little like the modern religion we know by the same name today.
jawns 6y ago
Have you ever looked at the annual budget of a church? I'm a member of a typical Catholic parish in the U.S., and every year the pastor includes the budget in a letter he sends to every registered parishioner, for transparency. There are expenses to keep the lights on. A small number of staff receive modest salaries. There's a fund for capital expenses. And if the parish manages to do more than break even, guess where the rest goes? To help the poor and disadvantaged. Parishioners are encouraged to share their money and time to support the poor in other ways, as well. There are regular collections for those causes. I'm sure there is some level of corruption and embezzlement across the church globally, just as there is in just about any large institution, but I'd say that in terms of bringing in money, the vast majority of parishes and dioceses are just trying to get by, and to serve their communities when they can. The image of the Catholic Church being some vast, obscenely wealthy, powerful organization is good for the Da Vinci Code but doesn't really jibe with reality. The Vatican, whose annual budget is about five times smaller than that of Cleveland, rarely has revenue that exceeds its operating expenses.
- tck42 6y ago
  Are these budgets available online, or at least at the ask to the public? Since they're not paying taxes, I think they should be. If not, then who exactly is it transparent to? The church across the street from my house is large and I'm sure heating and upkeep is no small chunk of change. A good portion of the cars parked in the reserved row (staff) are nicer than mine, so I'm guessing the salary isn't necessarily "modest".
- myWindoonn 6y ago
  Have you ever looked at the annual expenditures of the entire Church [0]? Most of their income comes from interest on investments, and they manage their money well enough to cover their entire operating expenses and make a tidy profit which stays within the Church. The story that the Church donates most of its money "to help the poor and disadvantaged" is a reassurance which is meant to paper over the fact that the Church is not a very transparent organization. In terms of bringing in money, the vast majority of parishes and dioceses are on Church-owned land and have some sort of tax benefit or writeoff. This makes them far more stable than their surrounding community members, and somewhat ruins the image of the humble parish priest simply trying to spread the Good Word; his employer is certainly not humble in wealth. [0] http://www.ior.va/content/dam/ior/documenti/rapporto-annuale/IOR_AnnualReport_EN_2014.pdf http://www.ior.va/content/dam/ior/documenti/rapporto-annuale...
  - jawns 6y ago
    You are mistaken that the IOR represents the annual expenses/income of the church, or even a large part of it. The IOR is a bank that provides financial services to Catholic institutions, such as religious communities and Vatican offices. When money is held, it's put in very low-risk, liquid investment accounts, such as government bonds. The clients of IOR use it so they can carry out religious and charitable operations worldwide.

IgorPartola 6y ago

I disagree. I simply have a hard time believing there is a bearded man in the sky who cares a whole lot about what porn everyone watches, wants us to not wear multi color clothing, and insists that being gay is bad, but is also all knowing, all powerful, and in charge of the entire universe. To my tiny human brain it seems more likely that these are stories people made up that just haven’t been superseded by new ones, like stories about Zeus or Thor, rather than some divine knowledge that was passed down to us. Organized religion is, to me, organized control of the masses. But not feeding into that is not the primary reason. It’s that I have a hard time believing that the more we learn about the world the harder it becomes to find any evidence of god’s existence, which would be the exact opposite if he did exist.

tines 6y ago

> The only reason that faith and beliefs are examined at all is because folks routinely excuse abuse with professions of faith. That's a great point. I'm a Christian, and I think the reason why you have a lot of intellectual firepower directed against modern "Christianity" (which is an ideology that can't be found in the New Testament) is not simply because atheists think that Christians are wrong. You don't read polemics against Bob down at the insane asylum, arguing that he is not, in fact, a dog, despite his insistence. The difference to an atheist between a lunatic and a Christian is simply this: the lunatic doesn't _vote_ to force his insane views on the world, but a Christian does. Personally, I don't think voting, or any form of political participation, is consistent with Christ's teachings, specifically when he says "Don't resist evil" in Matthew 5:39. The entire point of the state is to resist evil (Max Weber even defines a "state" as the group that holds the monopoly on the legitimate use of violence in a geographic area), and voting is informing the government about how you want them to resist evil for you. And of course the very existence of the modern church depends on using the government to resist evil and get money, so you'll find all sorts of casuistry and rationalizations about how Jesus didn't really mean what he said, but none of them hold water. Point being, if Christians started following Christ, even a little bit, they'd find that they have a lot fewer "enemies".