• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

If you ever wonder what’s the future of freethinking and who’s leading the charge; if you are curious to know what Freethinkers of today are doing to ensure that tomorrow’s secular world is on the right path; if you want to know what’s good to (free) think about these days; or, if you simply want to read a mind-bending interview, tune in to Religion Nerd for my series, Freethinking Tomorrow: In the Words of Today’s Freethinkers.

By Michel-Camille Bordeau

Parenting works in mysterious ways. It’s a complex affair for experienced, willing parents and an intimidating undertaking for those who, like myself, never prepared themselves for it, never imagined they would be fit for the task, or be given the opportunity.

Two years ago, I became a born again parent, a step-dad to an 8 year old with an incredible (free)thinking mind and a mean high kick.  Overnight, I grew a second heart—the first one being for his mother—and with twice the volume of blood stimulating my (free)thinking brain, I discovered a whole new family of anxieties that can be summed up with: ‘Seriously, don’t fark up (this kid’s life).’

Any life is precious, but that of a kid, who is half your responsibility, is a gem with so many sharp facets, that you’re always concerned you might get cut—and that regardless of the positive encouragements you receive from loved ones, your step-kid included. Still, as a (free)thinker, I had to find additional inspiration in written words.  That’s when a freethinking friend of mine with much parenting expertise recommended Dale McGowan’s Raising Freethinkers: A Practical Guide for Parenting Beyond Belief, what she called the ‘bible on parenting the (free)thinking way.’

Combining the words ‘bible’ and ‘parenting’ in one sale’s pitch to yours truly is a risky approach but it paid off. After all, I had to hope that there would be a book that deserved to be considered the bible of parenting, since the Bible itself, had little to offer in matters of non-authoritarian, non- patriarchal, post-Bronze Age parenting.  Indeed, I was looking for a book that would agree with my embryonic style of parenting, one that may include the occasional reprimand, but would not (re)enact the authoritarian-abusive parenting I grew up with.

And my hopes were rewarded. Raising Freethinkers: A Practical Guide for Parenting Beyond Belief gave me confidence that I was approaching parenting the right way, it gave me hope that I could succeed, and, my friend was absolutely right, it is the ‘Bible’ on parenting the (free)thinking way.  I had to interview Dale McGowan on behalf of my ReligionNerd friends.  I had to share his gospel.  And here it is:  

MCB: You are advocating for a child-centered, collaborative, and responsive approach to parenting–what psychologists call authoritative parenting.  Why do you think this is the best parenting model for a family of freethinkers?  Is it as rewarding for parents as it is for their children?

 DM: Authoritative (as opposed to authoritarian) parenting is centered on explanation. There are rules, and they are enforced, but they are also explained. A child is given the explicit right to question the fairness or reasonableness of a parental decision (but not to disregard it without consequence). There is also an open invitation to question authority, including the authority of the parent.

This approach helps the child develop active moral judgment rather than merely the ability to follow orders, which results in a much more powerful and effective moral sense. Best of all, it results in an independent thinker, not someone who simply parrots what authority figures (including the parent) have said.

It’s one of the most challenging parental styles, but also incredibly rewarding for the parent to watch the development of a deep, rich, complex and nuanced moral sense.

MCB: Raising Freethinkers is so user friendly that I’m tempted to claim that parenting finally comes with a manual! You conclude each chapter with an abundance of practical suggestions—reading recommendations, family activities, exercises, etc.—and it’s a gold mine for non-theist families trying to feel confident about their parenting approach.  Is it also a gold mine for theist families or do you think it is impossible to reconcile humanistic ethics and religious moral? 

DM:  Oh absolutely.  We too often put a bright line between religious and nonreligious, failing to realize that progressive religious people/parents share 90 percent of their values with us— far more than they share with the fundamentalists.  I’ve received many emails from progressive religious parents who have read Raising Freethinkers and found it entirely applicable to their parenting.

 MCB: You make it clear that ‘beyond beliefs’ does not mean ‘without a basic knowledge of belief systems.’  You even recommend that parents educate their freethinkers about religion.  What will future freethinkers gain from learning about religious practice?  And what might parents be most concerned about?

DM:  Ninety percent of those around us see the world to some degree in religious terms. If our children are to be anything but baffled by the human world around them, they must have some grasp of religion and religious ideas, period, end of sentence. They also need this exposure if they are genuinely to make their own worldview decisions.  Nothing about my own worldview means more to me than the fact that I came to it myself, fully informed but free to think and choose.  I wouldn’t deny my kids that same freedom.

Most parental concerns in this area are alleviated by a breadth of exposure to ideas and influences. There’s no greater threat to the development of a supple and capable intelligence than exclusive exposure to a single point of view—including our own.  It seems from my conversations with hundreds of parents over the years that children raised in secular homes, who are shielded from exposure to religious ideas and practices, are the most likely to end up glomming on to toxic religious expressions as the answer to a personal crisis in their teens or beyond.  The forbidden or unknown thing behind that church door suddenly becomes attractive and powerful.  Kids with knowledge of religion are far less susceptible to that emotional hijacking.  So the danger is in ignorance, not knowledge.

MCB: Parenting has gone through many positive changes in the past fifty years.  The biggest step forward has been to admit—at least in academic circles—that nothing positive comes out of authoritarian parenting.  Yet, it still prevails and, consequently, too many children continue to suffer mental and physical abuses.  What do you think will have to happen in the next fifty years, if we hope to see a cultural shift toward a more authoritative parenting model?

DM:  Authoritarianism at all levels—individual, familial, national, societal—is a response to fear.  When we are afraid, we retreat into that limbic brain.  We respond with violence, intolerance, and a whole range of other pathologies.  It’s never our finest moment.  The best thing we can do to move parents toward a more positive parenting model is to diminish fear about outcomes. It helps if parents recognize that (for example) corporal punishment produces ten different negative outcomes and that reason-based parenting tends to produce reasonable, ethical kids. The same applies above the parenting level.  We need to show that nonviolence, diplomacy, negotiation, reason, and other alternatives to aggressive problem-solving have a long history of effectiveness.

MCB: Based on the response from fans and/or critics, what changes, if any, would you consider making to Raising Freethinkers?  Also, tell us about your current projects, initiatives, etc?

DM:  Honestly, there’s not much that I would change.  We applied several lessons learned from Parenting Beyond Belief that helped Raising Freethinkers land right in the sweet spot for so many parents.  I’ve been thrilled with the reception.

My current projects include running Foundation Beyond Belief, a humanist charitable foundation with 800 members.  We feature ten charities per quarter and have raised over $145,000 since January 2010, including $20,700 for Japan tsunami relief.

I’m also working on several books, including a college-level anthology of freethought historical documents, a children’s book about natural selection, a personal exploration of religious practice from an atheist’s perspective, and a collection of Judeo-Christian myths told at last as the exciting stories they can be once you drop the sacred kid-gloves. Who knows what will see the light of day!

DALE MCGOWAN left a 15-year career as a college professor in 2006 to pursue writing full-time. He edited and co-authored Parenting Beyond Belief and Raising Freethinkers, the first comprehensive resources for nonreligious parents. Dale writes the very inspired and very helpful secular parenting blog The Meming of Life. He teaches nonreligious parenting seminars across the United States, and serves as executive director of Foundation Beyond Belief, a humanist charitable and educational foundation based in Atlanta—we are neighbors. In September 2008 he was named Harvard Humanist of the Year by the Humanist Chaplaincy at Harvard University. Last, but not least, he is such an approachable person, that we are on a first name basis. Dale, continue the hard work!

 *****************************

Michel-Camille Bordeau is the founder and author of The School of Seshata  (www.scriptotheism.net), a blog about Liberal Spirituality, a concept of spirituality based on compassion and reason, core principles of Humanistic Ethics. Michel is also a regular contributor to www.ReligionNerd.com.  He’s recently started “Freethinking Tomorrow: In the Words of Today’s Freethinkers,” an interview series about the past, present, and future [OF] secular scholarship.

Michel earned an M.A. in French Studies from The Ohio State University (1998) and is A.B.D., also in French Studies, from the University of Michigan (2001). Mid-life crisis oblige, he is returning to college in August 2011, to pursue an M.S.W. with a specialization in Mental Health & Drugs of Abuse. Before relocating to Atlanta, Michel was an Academic Advisor at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor campus, for nearly ten years. He has advised many students (and parents) on academic and life matters. He taught English, Public Speaking, Humanities, and French at various colleges and universities. In 2002, Michel published Poire Sucrée, Salée, Epicée, a short novel about a dance teacher forced to face the demons of her past. He is currently seeking representation for Seeing Purple, a dystopian novel set in Anaïs Abelard’s hometown, the New Orleans of tomorrow, also home to the power-hungry mega church known as the Calvinistry. Michel considers himself an amateur ‘atheologist,’ and writes and speaks primarily about religious determinism, atheist spirituality, and freethinking therapy.  

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Michel-Camille Bordeau

I’m an Atheist who sees god.  Do laugh, but don’t click away, yet.  Seeing or perceiving god is really easy, even for a non-believer.  Even in my godfree world, God is a collage of artistic-aesthetic re-presentations, a sensory response to the magnificent beauty of a stunningly decorated church, a life-like statue, a painting, a ritual song or dance, a poem, etc.  To me, God exists as an awe inspiring anthropological artifact which can never be fully dead as long as I retain the ability to see, hear, smell, think, or touch.  Rare breed of Atheist, I believe that god is as alive as a tapestry, a reliquary, or a stele exhibited in the Louvre.  But as much as I love museums, and that particularly French museum, I don’t live in one.  My real dwelling is Humanity, you, us, my next of kin.

Because I’m an Atheist who is also a religion nerd, sometimes I wonder how gods survive the fierce competition of today’s abundance of sensory stimulations.  Let’s face it, gods are no longer the lone subjects or objects of our sensory attention. They used to be the tallest (building), the loudest (choir music), the innermost (thought-prayer), the most palatable (can you say flesh-wafer and blood thirst?), the finest (philosophy of life), the greatest (proto-science), and the wildest (crusader warriors).  They no longer are!  Nowadays, there’s too much competition, and that’s why, in order to be heard in the general cacophony, some religious leaders don’t hesitate to make exaggerated claims on behalf of their god.

Harold Camping’s Rapture prediction was one of these exaggerated claims.  It was a rather simple eschatological claim, dangerously simple some might say.  Indeed, it was no different than another advert trying to catch your attention at the end of online article:

May 21^st, 2011 @ 6pm (your time) Game over! See you in Heaven, by God’s side! Click here for more information and begin the journey!

How is this not a scam?

Before I sat down to write this article I wondered if it would be too cynical to write about another Failed Rapture.  It’s a painful subject for most Christian friends who are willing to put faith into the certainty of their eschatological future, but rarely when it comes so soon or when it’s so clearly predetermined; and never when it’s as finite as death itself.  In truth, a countdown always defeats the metaphorical intent-purpose of an eschatological scheme.  And my Christian friends know that.

My Christian friends are a non-representative bunch and that’s why I try to be reasonable when I go for their hearts—I’m just warming up!  They’re all highly educated, most of them are trained in literature, religion, psychology, cultural studies, and a lot more.  They would never mistake a metaphor for death (the ‘rapture’ and other items on the list of eschatological trials) for its reality-realization.  They know that putting so much stock in a prediction is putting oneself at the mercy of a scam(mer).  And they know that religious scammers are no better than their cousins in the penny-stock industry.

But financial and religious scams don’t seem to hit the same buttons. They don’t trigger the same emotional awareness. We don’t view them with the same set of eyes.

A financial prediction promising great returns (dollars) on small investments (pennies) is easily ignored. We’ve all been warned, we’ve all been scammed really, and we know that in financial matters, a penny doesn’t grow into a dollar no more than a rotten fruit grows into a healthy tree overnight.

America may be a squandering culture; Americans may be overburden with debts, but they can tell when they’ve been duped economically.  They know a penny scam when they see one, and they can smell it and feel it, long before they will touch or be touched by it.  No one is immune and immutable to financial schemes, and that’s why we are always prepared to bring the fight to penny scammers or we’ll come after Banksters and other tax-free cheaters.

So the cynic wonders: How could Harold Camping rip so many hearts and wallets with his Rapture scheme?  He’s just another scammer, albeit a spiritual one.  Why are we so apathetic when dealing with spiritual scams?

Humanity’s heritage (call it History if you want) is a reminder that marketing creed has been religion’s number one priority since the dawn of proto-history.  And religious organizations have been successful at it—they’ve literally written the book on idea-product marketing.  If you ever asked yourself how our book-religions managed to survive centuries of well-recorded illiteracy, you know exactly what I mean. What marketing geniuses our Bronze-Axial Age forefathers were!

If you think about it, a book is a curious thing when you can’t read.  How does one believe in a book one can’t read?  How do you comprehend words you can’t decipher?  Theist friends might say by the Grace of God.  I might add by the Mouth of the Guru.  The translator of symbols, the scriptor of meaning, or what Erik Erikson called the ‘provider’ of divine knowledge always gladly assists.

Imagine what it would do to your curiosity, imagine how excited you would be, and trusting you’d likely become, if someone told you that he could turn the meaninglessness of the book into meaning that matters most to you: the meaning of (your) Life.

Can you imagine the excitement of a four-year-old when his dad comes to his bedroom for a bit of reading? You got it, then.

Now, if the father kept his promise to his son, the child would have good reasons (the primordial one being the love for his father) to be overwhelmed with joy.  He would be one happy bedtime kid!  But, what if the father didn’t keep his promise? What of the child’s emotional reaction?

In essence, Guru-Patriarch Harold Camping turned his followers into no more than innocent children when he proposed to deciphered the hidden meaning of the Bible and promised that the Rapture would occur on May 21, 2011. He put them at his mercy and wasn’t merciful when,in the end, he broke his promise of the promise land.

As Erik Erikson puts it in Childhood and Society (page 404):

All religions have in common the periodical childlike surrender to a Provider or providers who dispense earthly fortune [not in monetary sense, that’s for sure!] as well as spiritual health; some demonstration of man’s [childlike] smallness by way of reduced posture and humble gesture; the admission in prayer and song of misdeeds, of misthoughts, and of evil intentions; fervent appeal for inner unification by divine guidance; and finally, the insight that individual trust must become a common faith, individual mistrust a commonly formulated evil, while the individual’s restoration must become part of the ritual practice of many, and must become a sign of trustworthiness in the community.

We can’t expect restoration of trustworthiness with the likes of Harold Camping.  He’s already made that very clear.  After the fiasco of May 21^st, he took time to regroup, and when he was ready to face the public, he came out to announce that he wasn’t wrong, he couldn’t be wrong, and he would never be wrong.

The Patriarch, provider of eschatological hope, had spoken.

But these were not the expected words. He did not seek forgiveness or offer an apology to his wounded children and/or the rest of the world. Being wrong was the right thing for him—and he was certain that God would forgive him. In fact, he was convinced that it was in God’s plan…for him…through him… and for the rest of the world… whether we liked it or not.  Even if some of us, his dearest fans, suffered great emotional injury.

But being wrong is one thing and doing wrong is another. If Harold Camping had been wrong and hadn’t pocketed tax-free dollars, we might feel sorry for that senile delinquent. Unfortunately, the patriarch-provider deceived the children-followers, he did wrong to them.

And that’s wrong!

At 6:01pm on May 21^st, 2001, after a lifetime of waiting, the gates of eternity (he’d promise to open) were shut in the face of his most trusted followers. In that moment, to them, life became death. The anxiety of life and the great fear of death were indivisible again. It was punishment by Death! The greatest spiritually injury of all! 

As Matthew Alper remind us in The “God” Part of the Brain: A Scientific Interpretation of Human Spirituality and God, we can’t forget that “Living with certain knowledge of imminent death leaves us in a perpetual anxiety.” (117)  It is cruel to tease with what Alper calls our species’ ‘anxiety function.’  It is humanly criminal to promise healing from the anxiety of death-survival and deliver the absolute opposite.  Stuck between delusion of life and the illusion of life after death, caught between fear and anxiety, helpless, homeless, hopeless, Harold Camping’s followers are no longer provided for.  They surrendered their spiritual lives to him, all $80 million of their material worth, and, though the Rapture failed miserably, he has no intention to return the favor.

The Patriarch has abandoned his Children: he’s closed the book on them—the Bible, not the checkbook. He’s left them in ghost town, trapped between life and death. He failed them spiritually, scammed them economically, and he will not fix them emotionally.

Harold Camping is the great Guru of Spiritual Scam.  An example never to follow!

Now, what?  Humanity must and will come to the emotional rescue.  And as friends, family, and even (Atheist) foes, like myself, help these dead-again be live again, whether we are godfree-gurufree or not (nobody is perfect), we must always remember that the emotional price of these eschatological scams is very steep. And, since as Americans, we seem to have a keener eye for anything that resembles financial schemes, we should never forget the heavy economical price of Harold Camping’s Rapture campaign.

He’s pocketed 80 million tax-free dollars in various revenue schemes since 2005. It’s his money to keep. Followers will never see it back and we, tax-p(r)ayers, will never see it back either. Yep, we should never forget that we, the tax-paying people, are all contributors to the lifestyle of these penny-prophets.  And we, the tax-paying people, should never be victimized by spiritual scammers like Harold Camping any more than by banksters or tax-free cheaters.

****************************

Michel-Camille Bordeau is the founder and author of The School of Seshata  (www.scriptotheism.net), a blog about Liberal Spirituality, a concept of spirituality based on compassion and reason, core principles of Humanistic Ethics. Michel is also a regular contributor to www.ReligionNerd.com.  He’s recently started “Freethinking Tomorrow: In the Words of Today’s Freethinkers,” an interview series about the past, present, and future [OF] secular scholarship.

Michel earned an M.A. in French Studies from The Ohio State University (1998) and is A.B.D., also in French Studies, from the University of Michigan (2001). Mid-life crisis oblige, he is returning to college in August 2011, to pursue an M.S.W. with a specialization in Mental Health & Drugs of Abuse. Before relocating to Atlanta, Michel was an Academic Advisor at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor campus, for nearly ten years. He has advised many students (and parents) on academic and life matters. He taught English, Public Speaking, Humanities, and French at various colleges and universities. In 2002, Michel published Poire Sucrée, Salée, Epicée, a short novel about a dance teacher forced to face the demons of her past. He is currently seeking representation for Seeing Purple, a dystopian novel set in Anaïs Abelard’s hometown, the New Orleans of tomorrow, also home to the power-hungry mega church known as the Calvinistry. Michel considers himself an amateur ‘atheologist,’ and writes and speaks primarily about religious determinism, atheist spirituality, and freethinking therapy.  

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Michel-Camille Bordeau

If you ever wonder what’s the future of freethinking and who’s leading the charge; if you are curious to know what Freethinkers of today are doing to ensure that tomorrow’s secular world is on the right path; if you want to know what’s good to (free) think about these days; or, if you simply want to read a mind-bending interview, tune in to Religion Nerd for my series, Freethinking Tomorrow: In the Words of Today’s Freethinkers.

If, like yours truly, you’ve been closely following the new wave of freethinkers, if you’ve helped Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bart Ehrman, Daniel Dennett, Christopher Hitchens and many others become bestselling authors, you might remember Matthew Alper, author of The ‘God’ Part of the Brain: A Scientific Interpretation of Human Spirituality and God. You might even recall the original cover of the 1996 self-published edition of his seminal work. 

Indeed, there were 50,000 of us who became fans long before The “God” Part of the Brain was bought by Sourcebooks and repackaged in 2008.  And, to think of it, long before the aforementioned became household names.

Although The “God” Part of the Brain continues to pad Sourcebooks’ pocketbook; although it has been adopted by about 50 college professors; and, although, fifteen years after the initial release, Matthew Alper still receives hundreds of e-mails from students and professors worldwide, I still think it should get more attention. It should get Religion Nerd’s reader’s attention. Here’s why.

First, Matthew Alper is one of the first thinkers, if not the first thinker, to successfully demonstrate that human spirituality and our longing for a transcendental being might have a bio-psychological root.  Second, he is responsible for the now fast growing field of bio-theology (aka, neuro-theology).  And, last but not least, The ‘God’ Part of the Brain is a remarkably easy read, considering the complexity of the concepts Alper introduces.  In short, below is my interview with Matthew Alper, a true pioneer.

MCB: Why is ‘God’ in quotation marks in your title? Is God always in quotation marks for Matthew Alper?

MA: I put God in quotation marks in my book’s title for the simple reason that I don’t believe in one [God]and wanted that to come through lest people think I was writing a book which suggested that the actual spirit of God somehow resides in our heads as many probably do believe.  According to Wikipedia, the use of quotation marks to denote sarcasm is referred to as irony punctuation so this was my intention.

MCB: Why did you relegate the mind-bending concepts of religious and spiritual impulses to a footnote?

MA: My book is so packed with mind-bending concepts that sometimes I ran out of room and had to cram some concepts, as they occurred to me, into footnotes to avoid shifting all of the page/chapter settings, which, frankly, would have been a pain in the ass.

MCB: And what do you say to people who argue that the spiritual/religious dichotomy is a contemporary and fallacious invention?

MA: Every culture from the dawn of our species–no matter how isolated–has believed in some form of a spiritual reality.  I therefore hypothesize that this would suggest that humans, as a species, are genetically predisposed–that is “hard-wired”–to believe in some form of a transcendental reality.  This is further supported by an accumulation of genetic, anthropological, biological, and ethno-botanical evidence.  Thus, one of the main premises of my book is that humans are genetically engineered with a dualistic perception of reality which compels the majority of our species to believe in some form of a spiritual reality.  It is neither a social or historical construct but rather a biological one.  The function of this cognitive adaptation is to enable our species to survive our unique and otherwise debilitating awareness of death.  Of course, each individual belief system, that is religion, is constructed by individual cultures, but the initial predisposition to have faith in a spiritual realm comes from the mechanics of our neurophysiology–what I informally refer to as our “God” part of the brain.

MCB: Which concepts in The “God” Part of the Brain show your greatest strength as a thinker?

MA: Without reiterating the entirety of those concepts I think are most original to my work and which highlight my strengths as a thinker, I will simply list seven of them as something of a teaser.

1. That humans are genetically predisposed to a dualistic interpretation of reality. 
2. My theory that it was the advent of self-conscious awareness, which, though it made us the most powerful species on earth, also made us the first animal to be aware of our own mortality. It was this debilitating anxiety of inevitable death that I suggest prompted the evolution of a cognitive adaptation that helped allay our fear of death by compelling us to believe in an alternate, transcendental realm through which our “souls” or “spirits” would persevere for all eternity.
3. My theory regarding the nature of our view of infinity as nothing more than a cognitive construct.
4. How in our original state–as Paleolithic nomads–the religious function was essential but then became maladaptive as we became a global animal.
5. The biologizing of our concepts of good and evil via my theories regarding the evolution of moral reasoning.
6. A biological explanation of atheism and the introduction of the new field of “Bio-Theology” and “Bio-History.”
7. A neurophysiological interpretation of near-death experiences, speaking in tongues, transcendent states and religious conversion.

MCB: The God Part is as relevant today as it was when it was first published. What do you have to say to your new readers that you didn’t have a chance to say in 1996? 

MA: I’d say to them, “Why didn’t you listen to me in 1996 when I first discussed these ideas? What the hell were you doing then that was so important? And now you want me to repeat myself?”

MCB: In the 2008 edition of The “God” Part of the Brain you first introduce the concept of bio-history and illustrate your point by discussing what has motivated people to immigrate to the US.  How can bio-history help readers better conceptualize (their) cultural heritage?  Can it help them understand why religion plays such an important role in American life?

MA: Regarding the premise of bio-history, without reiterating the entire chapter, suffice to say that, what I wanted to introduce as a concept was that just as particular physical traits can be passed along with the migration of a particular gene pool via the phenomenon known as genetic drift (as was true, for instance, of those physical traits associated with the Native Americans whose Asian ancestors crossed the Bering Strait), the same holds true for cognitive traits which can also be transferred by the migrations of certain gene pools. 

MCB: You have a fascinating chapter entitled ‘Why are there Atheists?’ I’m sure Religion Nerd readers would like to know why you think there are people like us? 

MA: In that chapter, I offer the first proactive take on an atheistic philosophy i.e., as most atheistic ideologies are based in the mere denial of God’s existence, I would like to stress that no philosophy can be justifiably upheld without possessing some underlying logic through which to substantiate its basic principles. Without such a logic, what is referred to as a philosophy is really nothing more than just another groundless belief system, founded in emotion rather than reason. As I see it, this is the essential problem faced by today’s atheist movement. Rather than possessing an inherent wisdom of its own, the atheist movement relies on the logical shortcomings of those faiths it seeks to contest. And though it’s true that no religion has ever been able to defend its precepts with reason, no legitimate philosophy can stand on gainsay alone. The contradicting of one belief system does not validate the tenets of another. Establishing that something is not white, for instance, does not necessitate its being black.  Analogously, finding fault in the convictions of every world religion does not constitute proof that there is no God.  Consequently, if we are ever to advance a viable atheism, it must possess its own rationale, its own logical foundation, something I believe this new science of Bio-theology finally provides.

When I re-read The ‘God’ Part of the Brain to prepare this interview, I was most impressed by the maturity and freshness of Matthew’s incredible effort—I like to think we are on a first name basis.  Reading The ‘God’ Part of the Brain today, reading it along the works of Harris, Dawkins, and Bennett, reminded me that I/we have a lot more to learn from it.

For more information on Matthew Alper and his book, The ‘God’ Part of the Brain, visit his website at http://www.godpart.com/

**************************

About Michel-Camille Bordeau

Michel-Camille Bordeau is the founder and author of The School of Seshata (www.scriptotheism.net), a blog about secular spirituality and the home of the Scriptopedia Project. Michel earned an M.A. in French Studies from The Ohio State University (1998).  Mid-life crisis oblige, he is returning to college in August 2011, to pursue an M.S.W. with a specialization in Mental Health & Drugs of Abuse.

Before relocating to Atlanta, Michel was an Academic Advisor at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor campus, for nearly ten years. He has advised many students (and parents) on academic and life matters. He taught English, Public Speaking, Humanities, and French at various colleges and universities. In 2002, Michel published Poire Sucrée, Salée, Epicée, a short novel about a dance teacher forced to face the demons of her past. He is currently seeking representation for Seeing Purple, a dystopian novel set in Anaïs Abelard’s hometown, the New Orleans of tomorrow, also home to the power-hungry mega church known as the Calvinistry. Michel considers himself an amateur ‘atheologist’ and he often writes under the nom de plume Anais Abelard.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Michel-Camille Bordeau

In his most recent article, famed spiritual author Deepak Chopra expresses his concern that “By making belief in God their enemy… atheists deprive themselves of what spirituality is really about: a process of inner growth.”

Chopra’s short article is a blog-jab in Christopher Hitchens’ direction, a response to a recent letter he wrote for the annual convention of atheists, and, by ‘atheists’, Mr. Chopra implies those who think-believe in the manner of the outspoken Christopher Hitchens.

Though, like any self-respecting minority, Atheists have plenty of reasons and sufficient rights to question majority opinions like those expressed by Mr. Chopra, assuming that every Atheist sees Humanity with Hitchens’ eyes is somewhat reductive, although very flattering, considering the man’s achievements.

As an Atheist, I wish I were as eloquently acerbic as Hitchens and I wish I had his worldwide exposure. I wish I had something mind-bending enough to say to deserve quality real estate in the greatest newspapers, magazines, and journals around the globe.

Yet, wishing to be a recognized participant in today’s (Media) vanity fair—pun intended—doesn’t mean I would argue, with Hitchens, that god-believers are all under the spell of “mind-forged manacles of servility and superstition.” It’s his ideological battle, not mine: this Atheist’s position, not that one.

My minority-battle is elsewhere, and I don’t want my tree (of knowledge) to be taken for the proverbial forest (of contradictions and confusions).

I’m not Hitchens, Hitchens is not me.I’m much better looking. He’s a lot smarter.

As non-believers, we are two of a kind, and that’s why, with due deference, I’ve decided to give Mr. Chopra a one of a kind, freethinking opinion about his article from last week.

It’s my Atheist take. It’s my thought-response to Mr. Chopra’s “Christopher Hitchens and the Atheists’ Mistake.”

It’s my twig of knowledge and no one should seek the forest behind.  Buddha aint’ there!

Let’s get right into the subject, let’s see if Mr. Chopra’s kind worries are justified,and let’s find out if Atheists do deprive themselves of spiritual growth.

Mr. Chopra writes:

By making belief in God their enemy, atheists deprive themselves of what spirituality is really about: a process of inner growth. There are wisdom traditions around the world that do not use the word God (e.g., Buddhism, Vedanta) or advocate religious worship in the conventional sense. Countless people have seen through the faults of organized religion and turned instead to their own spiritual journey.

Why does Mr. Chopra affirm (and therefore treat as absolute) that non-belief means non-potentiality for spiritual growth?

God-less is not spiritual-less, is it? Spirituality or ‘inner growth’, as Mr. Chopra defines it, is not the exclusive dominion of those who call themselves religious, those who pray to a sky-god or relate to an inner god or a plain ol’ transcendental deity. I am an atheist, have been all my life, and have no reason to change precisely because my humble successes in life have been the result of inner growth. And I’ve been quite intentional about it.  I had no choice but to seek inner growth. It was a matter of survival.  Here’s why.

Twenty-years ago I was a jobless, high school drop-out, living with his soon to be divorcing parents in the small chaos of a sleeping community outside of Paris. I’m writing this article in a language I barely knew back then. I didn’t know who Hitchens or Chopra were. I don’t think I’d cared to know who they were or what their contribution to the greater good of Humanity might have been. I was more concerned about static ‘moi’ and I was searching for ways to expand personal horizons, to grow within and without.

Back then, I would not have been able to read the article I am writing and you are reading. English was a foreign language. The thinking-studying of religions was a foreign concern. I would not have cared a second about the discourse this article is trying to penetrate-perpetuate. I didn’t know what ‘discourse’ meant. I didn’t give a hoot about this sort of thinking.

Twenty years later, I’ve come a long way, thanks to a deliberate effort to improve my chances in life. I’m as God-less as I ever was, though. I’m a good example, but not an isolated one, of what I call Liberal Spirituality, a desire to maximize potential in the service of humanistic growth—here, you must think of ‘Liberal’ as in Liberal Arts, not the semantico-political mumbo-jumbo.

Back to Mr. Chopra’s statement: why does he exclude Atheists from that group of ‘countless people’ who, while acknowledging organized religion’s many shortcomings, have found their own spiritual journey? Feel free to read again, I’ll wait for you.

God-less is not purposeless, is it? I don’t believe in the existence of a god, but I have a number of purposes in life. My wife thinks I have too many purposes, in fact, but it’s okay because I love her first.

One of these purposes is to educate people about religious misconceptions. For that purpose, I’m even returning to school to earn a fourth college degree: more inner growth is under way. I will train in Social Work to become a psychotherapist and hope that eventually I will be in a position to help people who have been victims of religious abuse and are ready to find a way out of that toxic relationship.

Also, I want to live a long life, in which I shall continue to love my wife, child, our families, our friends, and, if given a chance, a good chunk of Humanity! Humble purpose, but purpose nonetheless!

I will dare to generalize and state that most Atheists are not purposeless. Majority opinion should not hastily judge minority thought-behaviors, even when Atheists seek spiritual purpose beyond-before God-the norm! Let’s remember that for many Atheists, Life is the default spiritual journey. I’d go even further and say that…

Life (with or without god) is the default inner growth journey. It’s how Humanity, our next of kin, engenders the next generation, how we guarantee that there will be a world to come. It’s a matter of existential survival.

As Mr. Chopra puts it himself: “Spirituality is existential, too. It asks who we are, why we are here, and what are the highest values by which a person should live.” Though, if you read his article, and I recommend you do, you will find out that Mr. Chopra’s quest for inner growth (spirituality) is existential (worthy, pragmatic goal) only if ontological questions are within the context of some metalogical journey.

To put it simply, Mr. Chopra offers his advice to Atheists and suggest that a spiritual journey of ‘Find God and/to Find Self’ is a worthy goal that should not be denigrated. It’s not a bad advice, though not a novel one. And most importantly, it’s not the only noble and spiritual-worthy one either.

As an Atheist, inner growth comes first. By Mr. Chopra’s definition spirituality is the first stage of my life journey, the first step I take every morning, long before I look up to the sky and pounder about some metalogical question.

I ask questions about what are the highest values by which I should live in society, who I am, why I am, first. I’m ontological first because it’s a matter of existential survival.

My purpose in life is to best contribute to Humanity’s welfare. I am truly dedicated to the survival of my species: Humanity, my next of kin. I am devoted to friends, family, and fellow human beings in matters Health, Education, Love & Lucidity.

The order of my personal priorities might be different than those advocated by Mr. Chopra, but, by his own definition, they are no less spiritually effective. ‘Find Self and/to Find Humanity’ is a worthy existential/inner growth goal. (Personal) Reason(ing) inthe service of compassion (for Humanity) is spiritually liberating. Humanity does keep me alive. It’s my default spiritual bond with you. It’s our spiritual bond.

Caring and appreciating my next of kin is what I’ve been doing for forty years and will continue to do for the next forty plus. That’s the reason why:

In matters of Health, I will trust a licensed Nurse, Therapist, Social Worker, and Doctor, first. Also, I will trust a warm broth and a comfortable bed. A Loved One sitting next to me.

In matters of Education, I will trust a University educated Teacher, a Counselor, and a Professor, first. I will trust my curiosity and that of my kin.

In matters of Love, I will trust a caring Family Member, a loving Friend and Neighbor. I will trust those who understand that Love is for us all, first.  I will trust heart-felt Love.

In matters of Lucidity, I will trust those who contribute daily to my good Health, Education, and are deserving of reciprocated Love, first. I am the agent of my life. Me with You. We are my Life, now! My Humanity!

In matters of Health, Education, Love, and Lucidity, I simply trust Humanity, my next of kin, our mother. I trust Humanity, that’s why I’m an inspired freethinker-atheist. And I’m not alone.

Contrary to majority belief, the large minority of Atheists out there (over a billion strong) have a worthy belief-spiritual system, the default existential-survival mode, I might add, and one Mr. Chopra and his followers might agree to:

Life (with or without god) is the default inner growth journey. It’s how Humanity, our next of kin, engenders the next generation, how we guarantee that there will be a world to come. It’s a matter of existential survival.

Read more at : http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/05/16/deepak_chopra_atheists_mistake.DTL#ixzz1McEuykhm

 *****************************

About Michel-Camille Bordeau

Michel-Camille Bordeau is the founder and author of The School of Seshata (www.scriptotheism.net), a blog about secular spirituality and the home of the Scriptopedia Project. Michel earned an M.A. in French Studies from The Ohio State University (1998).  Mid-life crisis oblige, he is returning to college in August 2011, to pursue an M.S.W. with a specialization in Mental Health & Drugs of Abuse.

Before relocating to Atlanta, Michel was an Academic Advisor at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor campus, for nearly ten years. He has advised many students (and parents) on academic and life matters. He taught English, Public Speaking, Humanities, and French at various colleges and universities. In 2002, Michel published Poire Sucrée, Salée, Epicée, a short novel about a dance teacher forced to face the demons of her past. He is currently seeking representation for Seeing Purple, a dystopian novel set in Anaïs Abelard’s hometown, the New Orleans of tomorrow, also home to the power-hungry mega church known as the Calvinistry. Michel considers himself an amateur ‘atheologist’ and he often writes under the nom de plume Anais Abelard.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Michel-Camille Bordeau

CJ Werleman

If you ever wonder what’s the future of freethinking and who’s leading the charge; if you are curious to know what Freethinkers of today are doing to ensure that tomorrow’s secular world is on the right path; if you want to know what’s good to (free) think about these days; or, if you simply want to read a mind-bending interview, tune in to Religion Nerd for my series, Freethinking Tomorrow: In the Words of Today’s Freethinkers.

The format is simple: I read a book, contact the author with a lengthy email, invite him/her to answer half a dozen questions, and then I wait eagerly to see if blind confidence gets rewarded.  And it does.

The first Freethinker I decided to interview for this series was the Australian born author of God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of The Bible and  Jesus Lied-He was Only Human: Debunking The New Testament, C.J. Werleman. When I initiated contact, after a brief introduction, I made sure to explain to some length how much I understood, enjoyed, and had a willingness to share with fellow Religion Nerd readers his rationalist take on the Bible.

My hopes were very soon answered. CJ sent responses to my questions in less than twenty-four hours—I like to think we are on a first name basis. I am a fan, if you haven’t notice.  And after this, I hope you will be one too.

MC:  Do you think rationalists, freethinkers, and secular scholars have to resort to in-your-throat titles in order to be heard?  How did this marketing strategy work for you? What other titles did you consider? Anything Twitter worthy? [CJ Werleman--@rationalists-- is very active on Twitter]

CJ: Interesting question.  I guess a captivating title is essential for any book these days, no matter the genre. Especially when you consider the vast number of new titles released every year, which is a result of improved self-publishing ease and accessibility.  Now days, anyone can write a novel, for example, and then self-publish on Kindle within two minutes of completing their manuscript.  Thus, with a litany of available titles on the market, an attention grabber is a must.  Unless you’re a Dan Brown, of course. Coming up with the title for God Hates You. Hate Him Back was as difficult as writing the book itself.  I wanted something that conveyed the objective of the book, that being to demonstrate the God of the Bible is arguably the most wicked character of all fiction, using the sixty-six chapters of the Holy Book to validate that claim.  For a long time, every title that either I came up with or my publisher suggested, didn’t meet the litmus test I had set.  Then, with less than four weeks to release I was watching Lethal Weapon 2, of all movies.  And there is a scene where Danny Glover’s character says, “I think God hates me!” In reply Mel Gibson says, “Do what I do, hate him back.” That was the light bulb moment, while eating nachos and enjoying a beer watching a crappy movie.

MC:  God Hates You. Hate Him Backis refreshingly humorous considering the seriousness of your project—plowing through the Bible for a non-apologetic, textual analysis. Was there a particular point in your research where you wanted to toss humor out the window and empty your lungs? Can you recall particularly frustrating passages?

CJ:  Ha. Well, yes, the Bible can be a tediously boring endeavor.  For example, reading Leviticus is like watching golf on valium.  It reads as an ancient cookbook, providing every minuscule detail for preparing bread offerings.  I’m sleepy just thinking about it. But overall I love the Bible. It remains the most significant book in all of Western civilization, but no one reads it. Christians don’t even read it. In my book I cite one study that shows 93% of American households own at least one copy of the Bible but 75% of Americans can’t name the four gospels. So I wanted to write a summary of the Bible in a manner that makes it enjoyable and entertaining, and not just for theologians, but for the man in the street. Like me.

MC:  By the end of the Old Testament, your precise count reveals that Satan is not in God’s league when it comes to genocidal mania—40 innocent victims versus 31 million is a shocking discrepancy. What social, cultural, if not economical mechanisms must be set forth for people to realize that (1) the Bible is a toxic, if not dangerous read, and that (2) their interests are better served outside the influence of Religion?

CJ:  Absolutely the Bible is a dangerous book if you do what God commands you to do.  For example, if my daughter says, “God damn it!” I’m to take her to the edge of the town and bash her brains out with large rocks.  If I wish to sell my daughter into sexual slavery, not only does the Bible not say there’s anything wrong with that, it gives commercial terms and conditions for doing such a thing.  When we look at places like tribal Pakistan, for example, there they routinely execute people for blasphemy, a victimless crime.  Now, are they barbaric, evil people?  No they’re not.  In fact, according to biblical law, of which the Koran is based, they’re more pious and pleasing to God than those who ignore that command. When people become cognizant of these kinds of issues, people realize this ancient book has no relevancy in today’s times.

MC:  You make a point of demonstrating that authors of the Bible were ‘family-challenged.’ What’s your reaction to contemporary theists who are still convinced that the Bible is a moral barometer in matters of marriage, family, parenting?  What would you like (to tell us) to tell them?

CJ:  Well, similar to my answer in the previous question, the Bible only provides moral guidance if you wish to live in a world of tribal barbarism.  If you don’t think slavery, misogyny, racism, xenophobia, and homophobia are good values, then the Bible is not a great reference for morality.

MC: Which argument in God Hates You. Hate Him Back shows your greatest strength as a thinker?  Is this the strength most recognized by your readers or critics?

CJ:  I’d hate to second guess or presume my reader’s thoughts, but based on the feedback I do receive, and at the risk of being a presumptuous turd, it would seem people admire the way I do go question the taboo and sacred in a no-holds barred manner.

MC:  Tell us about your new book, Jesus Lied-He was Only Human: Debunking The New Testament. You don’t beat around the (burning) bush with that one either; do you consider it a continuation of God Hates You, or an entirely new project? What should your readers be excited about?

CJ:  Jesus Lied He Was Only Human is somewhat of a sequel to my first book.  With God Hates You. Hate Him Back I examine all sixty-six chapters of the Bible, but as the Old Testament comprises more of the Bible than the New, it’s the former that gets most of the attention, and therefore a closer examination of the Jesus myth had to be its own, stand-alone book, as there was just too much to cover. Using the New Testament, and some Gnostic gospels, I break down Jesus’ life into the respective milestones of birth, baptism, childhood, ministry, arrest, trial, execution, and resurrection.  I then show readers how wildly the gospels contradict one another with their respective accounts. Bearing in mind we have no biographies of Jesus outside of the Bible. When one sees the gospels examined side-by-side, or horizontally, one sees how absurd the Jesus biography is hacked together.

MC: What’s next for CJ Werleman? 

CJ:  My next book tackles Islam, which is due for release in the Fall 2011.  I provide a biography of Muhammad, from childhood to his prophethood, while explaining the entire Koran alongside the things Muhammad did and experienced.  The ultimate objective is to provide readers with a contextual understanding of the Koran. For example, when Muhammad said, “Jews behave like apes”, people will accuse the Koran of being anti-Semitic, and it seems that way when you take that passage in isolation. But this verse is contained within an entire chapter that refers to one specific Jewish clan in the city of Medina, a clan that went behind his back to offer assistance to the people who were trying to kill him, the Quraysh.  Hence, this verse is Muhammad expressing his disappointment with that particular tribe he thought was friendly to his mission and is not directed to the entire Jewish people.

In this first installment of ‘Freethinking Tomorrow: In the Words of Today’s Freethinkers,’ I thought it fitting to start with CJ Werleman, a man who dared to plow thru the 770000 words of the Bible never lost his sense of humor, au contraire! Good (free) thinking always begins with a thorough analysis of primary texts, which is rarely something to smile about. So, it only makes sense to conclude that with God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of The Bible and Jesus Lied-He was Only Human: Debunking The New Testament, C.J. Werleman has been responsible for an incredible tour de force.  And we (free) thank for that!

Please, follow CJ Werleman on Twitter (@rationalists) and keep an eye on this busy man on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/CJ-Werleman/207324500344

***************************************************

About Michel-Camille Bordeau

Michel-Camille Bordeau is the founder and author of The School of Seshata (www.scriptotheism.net), a blog about secular spirituality and the home of the Scriptopedia Project. Michel earned an M.A. in French Studies from The Ohio State University (1998).  Mid-life crisis oblige, he is returning to college in August 2011, to pursue an M.S.W. with a specialization in Mental Health & Drugs of Abuse.

Before relocating to Atlanta, Michel was an Academic Advisor at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor campus, for nearly ten years. He has advised many students (and parents) on academic and life matters. He taught English, Public Speaking, Humanities, and French at various colleges and universities. In 2002, Michel published Poire Sucrée, Salée, Epicée, a short novel about a dance teacher forced to face the demons of her past. He is currently seeking representation for Seeing Purple, a dystopian novel set in Anaïs Abelard’s hometown, the New Orleans of tomorrow, also home to the power-hungry mega church known as the Calvinistry. Michel considers himself an amateur ‘atheologist’ and he often writes under the nom de plume Anais Abelard.