Tag Archives: atheist

Why I am an Atheist: Christianity’s Dubious History

Posted on by

Like most children brought up in the Christian religion, I was taught that the Bible, at least certain portions of the Bible, was historically accurate in every detail. The first chapter of Genesis might be open to poetic interpretation, but everything from Adam and Eve on was to be taken at historical face-value. The battles, miracles, and exiles of the Old Testament, totally historical. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were historical biographical sketches of Jesus from four different points of view. My upbringing was not one that demanded literal belief of every word, but we came pretty close to that ideal pretty much of the time. To me as a teenager, even if I saw no other confirmation that Christian belief was true, I was certain that the Bible was a solid foundation that would bolster my belief even though the stormiest trials of faith.

Then I learned a bit about the history of the Christian church, including that of the Bible. After about two decades of Sunday School instruction, what I learned was deeply unsetting.The most disturbing thing I found out was that there were many different sects of Christianity from the beginning, and the differences between them made the most volatile disagreement between modern denominations look piddly. In fact, for a couple of centuries after Jesus was said to have lived and died, they could not even agree on who he was. Let me say that again…for about the first two centuries, different sects of Christianity could not agree on who Jesus was exactly or what his true nature was. Seriously. (Most of these differences are now called heresies, and I found the way they were determined to be heresies and how the “heretics” were dealt with to be just as troubling as their disagreements.)

Some believed that Jesus was born in the normal way, was adopted with God’s spirit at baptism, and then was abandoned by God’s spirit before he died (since God cannot die, of course). Some thought he was a special prophet of God, but totally separate from God in being. Others thought he was totally a spiritual being and not really human at all! Didn’t Jesus clearly reveal what his nature was when he was on earth? How could there be such discord on this very important point among the early Christians so very soon after they had met him in the flesh (don’t forget some didn’t even think he HAD flesh)? And if there was so much confusion back then, how are we supposed know what to believe today?

Actually, a unified Christian view of the nature of Jesus was not nailed down (no pun intended) until about 325 CE, with the Nicene Council. By this time, some of the Christians had gained some clout with the Roman government. It was declared church dogma that Jesus was “one substance” with “God the Father” and was therefore 100% God and 100% man at the same time. All who taught otherwise were persecuted or killed as heretics, and their books were burned. In other words, the winning view did not win because it had evidence on its side, but because it had the power to censor and destroy opposing ideas on its side. With the full approval of God’s Holy Spirit of course, if you take the council leaders at their word. How someone would go about confirming this with the Holy Spirit is not exactly clear. Also suspect to me was the idea that it was of utmost importance that everyone believe exactly the same way…where was the idea of religious tolerance in those days?

Consider the time frames here as well. Assuming Jesus lived from about year 0 to 30 CE (give or take a few years) and the orthodox view of Jesus was officially decided in 325 CE, that means the church didn’t come up with a unified belief about the nature of Jesus until 300 years later! Is this not like a group of people who claim authority in historical matters getting together to decide on some nuance about the American Revolution, and then declaring that if anyone henceforth questions their pronouncement, that person shall be declared a heretic and their research burned?

There is a lot more to the the dubious nature of Christian history, but this early disagreement over the nature of Jesus is the one I found the most worrying when I learned about it. If Jesus so clearly revealed himself to his disciples, who then immediately passed his teachings on to the rest of the world, how could there be such confusion and disagreement over who he even was or whether or not he even had a physical body? And what about Paul, from whom the modern church gets the bulk of its theology? He never even met Jesus, but claims (and we have the collaboration of his servants to back him up) to have had a vision. Consider this is in light of the his severe disagreements with the leaders of the church in Jerusalem, who had supposedly had personal ties with Jesus himself. There are also known forgeries and serious inconsistencies in the biblical manuscripts themselves, and the inconvenient fact that we have no idea who wrote any of the Gospels (they were written anonymously, decades after the events they claim to describe). It goes on and on.

Small caveat: I am not a historian myself, and no kind of authority on historical matters. I have only taken a couple of classes in Christian history and read a few books. If my blog post has piqued your curiosity and made you want to read more, then my goal has been accomplished. If you would like to read it from people who have actually done the research, I recommend the sources below.

Anything by Bart Ehrman, especially Misquoting Jesus regarding forgery in the New Testament, Lost Christianities regarding early Christian sects that are little known today, and Jesus, Interrupted. Click on his name for more information on the author and his books.

Not the Impossible Faith by Richard Carrier. An earlier version of this work can also be found for free online at The Secular Web. See Was Christianity Too Improbable to Be False?

For a pretty quick read of the arguments that Jesus never existed as a historical character at all, see Nailed: Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed at All by David Fitzgerald.

To clarify the point on Christian persecution of so-called heretics, is this passage from the Wikipedia article on Christian Heresy. According to this, the Christians who deemed themselves “orthodox” were not able to really persecute the heretics immediately after the Nicene Council, but they did so when they gained the power.

The first known usage of the term ‘heresy’ in a civil legal context was in 380 AD by the “Edict of Thessalonica” of Theodosius I. Prior to the issuance of this edict, the Church had no state sponsored support for any particular legal mechanism to counter what it perceived as ‘heresy’. By this edict, in some senses, the line between the Catholic Church’s spiritual authority and the Roman State’s jurisdiction was blurred. One of the outcomes of this blurring of Church and State was a sharing of State powers of legal enforcement between Church and State authorities. At its most extreme reach, this new legal backing of the Church gave its leaders the power to, in effect, pronounce the death sentence upon those whom they might perceive to be ‘heretics’.

Within 5 years of the official ‘criminalization’ of heresy by the emperor, the first Christian heretic, Priscillian was executed in 385 by Roman officials. For some years after the Protestant Reformation, Protestant denominations were also known to execute those whom they considered as heretics. The last known heretic executed by sentence of the Roman Catholic Church was Cayetano Ripoll in 1826. The number of people executed as heretics under the authority of the various ‘church authorities’ is not known, however it most certainly numbers into the several thousands.

Skepticon Wrap-Up

Posted on by

This was my first year coming to a Skepticon and it was a blast! I meet some cool people, and learned a lot of great stuff. From what I had heard prior, I knew Skepticon was an skeptics convention, though I didn’t know how much it would be about atheism (which I thought was great). Then again, most of the talks had nothing directly to do with atheism–which is great if you have been doing this long enough that the basic atheist arguments and discussions are old hat.

David Silverman set the tone for the entire weekend on Saturday morning with his speech “Skepticism, Atheism, and our Common Movement.” He pointed out, and I agree, that while “atheist” is not synonymous with “skeptic,” the two categories of people have an incredible overlap of people and that skeptics play a large and vital role in the secular movement. He also encouraged the crowd at Skepticon not to be afraid to use the word “atheist” in public whenever the question of religious affiliation comes up. When friends and family know that someone they love and know personally is an atheist, it’s less likely that they will hold negative stereotypes in their minds about atheists. This has worked for other movements, and it can work for us.

Most of the talks were not directly related to atheism, but had to do with science, rationality, and clear thinking in general. There were two talks addressing cognitive biases (Eliezer Yudkowsky) and how our own thinking can go wrong (Spencer Greenberg), a couple of basic and interesting talks on molecular genetics and addressed popular misunderstandings of genes (P.Z.Myers and Jen McCreight), a speech on undercover paranormal investigations (Joe Nickell), the need for critical thinking in math education (Hemant Mehta), and the crazy history and beliefs of Mormonism (David Fitzgerald). There was also a talk on the “Straw Vulcan”–ways in which logic and rationality and misrepresented in popular media  (Julia Galef), and I may write more on that later as I have thought about this a lot before and find the topic fascinating.

One of the more unusual speeches was from Darrel Ray on “Sex and Secularism” presenting the results of a study that queried how leaving religion had affected their sex lives. I think I had even participated in that survey some time ago, but I had forgotten about it. A major theme that Darrel Ray has proposed is that religion roots itself in people’s lives by generating a great deal of guilt about normal and healthy sexual (and other) behaviors, and then also promotes itself as the cure to ease that guilty feeling. That is a bit of a simplification of his thesis, and one day I need to read his book “The God Virus” and examine his idea more throughly.

Without a doubt, the most fun presentation was put on by the “Atheist Evangelist” Sam Singleton, which was in part a parody of a charismatic style  church service, and in part a (semi) serious sermon to secular people about giving thanks to the people who deserve our gratitude. At least, I took it somewhat seriously, because I think it was a great message. Thank you Brother Sam!

The final presentation was the most powerful and incredibly personal of them all. The title of JT Eberhard’s presentation was “Why the Skeptic Community Must Concern Itself with Mental Illness.” In which he came out as someone who has struggled silently for years with anorexia. The whole experience was so heart rending and emotional I find a difficult time describing it. There is such a stigma attached both with admitting that there is something wrong with your mind, and also with seeking help and taking medication to treat it because of a fear that that means  you are weak. He delivered a heartfelt plea to the skeptical community to address the incorrect and non-scientific views on mental illness just the same way as the community exposes the frauds of homeopathy. And for those who have mental illness to come out and help remove the stigma in the same way that we are calling atheists to come out and remove the stigma of nonbelief. Mental illness is not an issue I have had to deal with personally, and he presented a view of this problem that I have never been able to see before. The reception from the crowd was also amazing. We all love you JT!

My New Christian Friends

Posted on by

Today I rode about 35 miles on my bike with the Louisville Bike Club, the farthest I have ever rode in a single trip. I almost missed going on the trip altogether because when I arrived at the meeting place to start the ride, I realized that in my hurry to get there on time I had forgotten to grab my helmet and my bike gloves (though the gloves were not a deal-breaker the way the missing helmet was.) I considered giving up and driving back home, but decided instead to hang out and wait for the others and see if anyone had a helmet that I could borrow. As it turned out, someone did. The first people to show up at the ride (and the only ones I saw at the time, since we were not aware that the time had been pushed back an hour to avoid running into the mini-marathon also scheduled for that day) were a very nice married couple who did indeed have a helmet and pair of gloves I could borrow at their house about 4 miles bike ride away. So I rode back to their house with them, feeling a bit naked with only my Buff on my head and no helmet, and got the helmet that I would be wearing for the next few hours. Fortunately, it was a perfect fit and worked well for the rest of the day.

I spent the ride mostly with this couple, since our ride was out of sync with the others in the group due to the change in start time (though this was really no problem at all since the route is the same every Saturday.) There was one little thing about the couple that took me aback just a bit right before we rode to their house to get the helmet. The guy informed me that it was their usual custom to say a prayer before starting the bike ride and asked if this was alright with me. This took me totally off guard, I have to say… at that point I was just so happy that they were helping me out and lending me a helmet for the ride that I was not even going to consider rocking the boat by voicing any kind of objection about prayer. And really, it didn’t matter that much to me at all, so I said that if they wanted to say a prayer that was fine with me.

We didn’t discuss religion at all other than that, though it did come out in discussion that they are members of Southeast Christian Church (for those who are not familiar with Louisville, this is the most famous massive Evangelical megachurch in the city.) I wondered for a while if they were going to try to discuss religion for me, or ask me where I went to church, or if I went to church but they never did. And I wondered what they would think if I told them that my husband and I organize the Louisville Atheists and Freethinkers Meetup, or that I have volunteered as an escort outside the local abortion clinic. I really liked these people and enjoyed riding around town with them, even with the knowledge that we were probably on complete opposite sides on some issues I hold very dear to my heart. Though today it did not matter, and I was perfectly prepared to be straight with them on what my views are if they were to come up in conversation.

After the ride I went to lunch with them, and it did start to get slightly annoyed (though I didn’t show it) when they informed me that they say grace over meals and would this be alright with me? Meh. I’m still fine if they want to say a prayer, but the conspicuous Christianity tactic does get on my nerves a bit. And I wonder if this behavior has anything to do with the Darwin Fish that they probably saw on my car. At any rate, I will still be happy to ride around town with them on future rides.

The Atheist Booth at the Kentucky State Fair

Posted on by

KySS KY State Fair Booth 2011For the second year in a row, there is a atheist-themed booth at the Kentucky State Fair. Last year, there was a billboard sponsored by the Coalition of Reason posted right outside the fairgrounds though the entire month of August that declared “Don’t believe in God? You are not alone.” The billboard is what prompted the idea for us to have a matching state fair booth at the fair, along with a banner to match the billboard (now being displayed in our current booth at the front of the display table.

Last year we got some media attention, mainly around the billboard but also with the fair booth as a followup story. But don’t think we are saddened by the lack of media attention this year–when people are no longer shocked at the “atheist booth” and get used to the fact that we are here, that is a sign of progress.

My first shift at the booth was on Friday evening, from 6-10. The way the shifts are scheduled, there are 2-3 people there for each shift. Just as last year, we have had no trouble at all finding members who are willing to step up and volunteer, and the shift schedule was filled out just about a week in advance of the fair’s opening date. Having multiple volunteers there makes it a lot more fun than if there were only one person, and it is invaluable for moral support and input in case any debates arise, and they always do. There is one main purpose to the booth, to reach out to our fellow secular citizens and let them know we are here. However we also make the most of the discussions with those who disagree with us. With Kentucky being a majority Christian state, we always have people coming by our booth who are not so pleased at our message. The responses have ranged from a puckered facial expression after they read our banner to declarations that “one day every knee will bow!” And of course, we do get asked from time to time if we are worried about hell, to which I would say “there is no hell.” We also have had long and frank and civil discussions about everything from where morals and values come from to the reliability (or lack thereof) of the Bible to whether or not America is a Christian nation. And the way I see it, regardless of the outcomes of these discussions it is a very positive thing for the religious to be in discussions with atheists in person, rather than only hearing what the preachers and the media have to say about us. We are putting a live, breathing, speaking human face on atheism in Kentucky.

And the discussions are great, but the best reward that we see daily are the surprised “thumbs-ups” and the grateful expressions of someone coming by and saying “I thought I was the only atheist in Kentucky.” This is the prize that makes all of the effort and debating worth it.

If you are interested in meeting with atheists and freethinkers in Louisville or in other areas of Kentucky, take a look at The Kentucky Secular Society and Louisville Atheists and Freethinkers.

Offensive?

Posted on by

The YMCA where I go to take exercise classes has Bible verses up on the walls throughout the building, and has a big nativity scene in the lobby at Christmas. As an atheist, does this offend me? It does not, in fact I feel very little emotion of any kind about it. The YMCA is a traditionally Christian organization and a private establishment. (FYI: I mention this mainly to head off dismissive comments from Christians that any display of Christianity in public view is offensive to atheists.) As long as I am not getting discriminated against or actively preached at while I am there, then it is all fine with me. I am the same way about people posting up Ten Commandments signs or crosses in their own yards, even though for personal safety and sanity reasons I would think twice about moving into such a neighborhood. At any rate displays that are on private property are mostly to the discretion of the property owners and maybe their neighborhood association.

There is a billboard that you might see on northbound I-65 between Elizabethtown and Louisville that proclaims in big and brash letters “HELL IS REAL,” perhaps as a warning to heathens going to Louisville to get drunk at 4th Street Live. I was in Bardstown, Kentucky yesterday and saw a church sign with the rhetorical question “You think it’s hot here?” attributed to God. If I were a theist I might be offended by those who presume to put words in the mouth of God. As it is, I am no longer offended but just simply horrified that there are people out there who actually still believe in such things as a place of eternal fire and torture for those who die not believing in Jesus as their “personal lord and savior.” (Sorry, dear reader, if you are not familiar with fundamentalist Christian beliefs, because I don’t intend to open up the whole can of worms of what that previous phrase actually means. That could take quite some time…)

There are some things that do offend me. Recently I was offended to the very core of my being by the audacity of that terrorist in Norway who wanted to turn his trial into an opportunity to declare to the world that what he did was right and justified. Big kudos to the judges in Norway to opted to deny him the opportunity.

Another thing that boils my blood is any kind of joke about rape, or even the hint of bringing up what a woman was wearing when she was raped as if this made any difference whatsoever. I’m even getting tensed up I write about it.

And, yes, I do get offended when people who make claims that atheists are “attacking America” or that secular philosophies cause the problems of society or other such nonsense. Not just because I know it is nonsense but because it perpetuates a very real prejudice towards people like myself who are atheists and not ashamed of it.

The thinks that most offend me are the things that violate my sense of justice and fairness, such as both of the items above. Things that seriously hurt people. Overloaded rhetoric and actions that has the potential to lead to real fear and violence.

I might feel offended at times from hearing statements where that I strongly disagree.  But I take the view that the mere fact that I am made to feel uncomfortable, or even angry, by some act or statement does not in and of itself mean that this statement ought to be censored or punished. I may be justified in standing up and yelling “I don’t like it!” but not justified in demanding “That should not be allowed!” There must also be some case in terms of legality, justice, and other higher principles that come into play other than “that makes me mad!” In the case of the American Atheists suit against the World Trade Center cross, I believe there is such a case in legal terms and in terms of equality and justice, and it is not merely the case that the cross offends my sensibilities. (See my previous post Opposing the WTC Cross.)

What about stuff like this? (from http://www.unofficialgervais.com/2011/07/27/rickys-rejected-rolling-stone-cover-photo/) Offensive? Why? What do you think his point is?

And here are what I think are the most important questions: If you are offended by this, do you think that it actually does real harm to people and that it should be blocked from all public view? Or do you see your offense as a personal matter of  ”I don’t like it” for your to deal with in your own private way?

Opposing the WTC Cross

Posted on by

I remember 9/11, and I remember it well. I was still in college, though on Tuesdays I had no classes. After I got out of bed, I went into the living room where Dad was watching the television, saw the smoking images of the World Trade Center, and thought at first that it was a movie. After watching for a few minutes I realized in horror that this was an actual news report.

I remember the shock and terror of that moment, and for the next few days I felt numb. I remember wondering if the world was coming to an end, or if the United States was going to be taken over by…well I had no idea who at the time. I realized with a shock that if the USA were to be taken over, our revered Constitution would become nothing more than an outdated, historical piece of paper. And then, after a few days as the shock wore off and I realized that neither the world nor the USA was about to end, I noticed a few other things.

There was a great surge in Christian religiosity in the months following the attacks. Not that this didn’t make sense—turning to the sense of certainty and comfort of religion is a normal response for people who suddenly feel frightened and helpless and uncertain of their future. I was right in the middle of it singing “God Bless America” with all the other people I knew…even though there was one factor of the 9/11 attacks that would forever mar my view of religion. It was the fact that the men who flew those planes into those buildings, killing tens of thousands of innocent people, were motivated at least in part by a strong religious faith. I was also deeply disturbed by the reports of attacks against peaceful Muslims, and others who looked like they might be Muslims (including one Coptic Christian man from Egypt), by Americans who were driven to a fury of prejudice and hatred by the actions of a few terrorists.

And I remember the hubbub about this particular piece of rubble from the buildings that just happened to be in the shape of a cross. Now, the state of New York wants to include this broken portion of building support, not as a remnant of the building to help us remember, but as a Christian cross. And not only in its original configuration but carefully air-lifted and placed upon a pedestal. How convenient is it for Christians that their symbol is in the same shape as a common building support?

At any rate, it was not only Christians but all Americans from many religions and backgrounds and ways of life that were affected, directly and indirectly, by the events of 9/11. To me, 9/11 is a reminder of how faith, even though it is a comfort to some people, can also be a force for incredible and tragic harm. I imagine that faith comforted the hijackers as they rushed toward the towers at around 500 miles per hour.

So, should we have a Christian cross, a sectarian religious symbol, as the attraction of the World Trade Center? Does this make the site more comforting, more inviting, more consoling to Christians and less comforting, less inviting, and less consoling to everyone else who may wish to go there to remember? I can’t see how it could be otherwise. This memorial should be something that is for all Americans, not something that divides us by religion or by anything else.

So, for this reason, I stand with American Atheists in opposing the WTC cross.

For more information see http://atheists.org/law/Ground_Zero and http://www.examiner.com/humanist-in-national/american-atheists-object-to-wtc-cross-ask-for-equal-treatment.

We get mail!

Posted on by

Ed and I got a letter in the mail today! Apparently someone is concerned about our immortal souls, though they apparently wish to express this concern anonymously. Here is the scan of the entire letter for your amusement.

I wonder who it could be from, and why he/she felt it necessary to hide his/her identities? (Though I figure this is at least a middle-aged person if they are making reference to “Let’s Make a Deal.”) I’d like to ask them what makes them think that it is in the nature of “creatures” to be “mastered.” Why don’t they recognize that we have lots of options in life, not just two? (Infantile black/white thinking here.) And why they think that quoting the Bible at an atheist is going to make any difference?

Oh, and here is the facepalm quote of the day: “We can be slaves to a loving God, or slaves to sin.”

Well, at least it isn’t a death threat. :-/


“Spiritual growth”?

Posted on by

My atheism became known while I will still living with my parents, a couple of years before I increased my independence by moving out. More than once during this period, Mom sent me notes though email or left on my bed to scold, guilt, console, or apparently say anything that she thought might cause me to accept Jesus once again and renounce my disbelief. (It appears to me that this was her motive, at least.) Once, when she realized I was not going to church anywhere anymore (though I had been going various places on my own from time to time, seeking what I could consider a believable faith) she stated in a letter that as long as I lived at home I was required to go to church somewhere (anywhere!). This was part of a larger requirement that I seek what she referred to as “spiritual growth.” I went to the closet church I could find that looked decent, though I saw the things I found unbelievable in Christian faith as much there as anywhere else I went. I stopped going after a few weeks, and the topic was not brought pushed at home again. I don’t think much in the way of spiritual growth was achieved in this way.

On the other hand I think I have achieved more in real “spiritual growth” as an atheist than I did in all my years as a Christian. I have experienced the type of growth that I think I never could have truly achieved within an evangelical Christian context.  I have learned to trust my reasoning abilities, to always strive to learn new things, and to change my beliefs to be ever more consistent with my new learnings. I’m much more likely to think out an issue, come to my conclusion, and trust in that conclusion even against popular opinion until someone rationally convinces me otherwise. The fear of doubt and reliance on authority was instilled in me by the Christian notion that salvation depends on unquestioning belief* and obedience to God. I knew even when I was still a believer that (the wrong kind of?) knowledge and self-confidence could be dangerous to belief and would undercut the authority of those that have set themselves up as speaker for God.

I’ve made it my goal to grow in confidence, willingness to stand out and speak my mind. Willingness to be different. And I have gone though enough cycles of being absolutely convinced of something only to have my mind changed by new information later that I’ve grown in tolerance of the disagreements I have with others over religion and other contentious topics. No matter how convinced you are that you are right, there is always a possibility that your view might change in the future**. Everyone molds their worldview on the experiences and information they have had in their lifetimes, and remembering this is inspiration for humility and compassion for others. I am still working on growing in that area.

*The tradition that I was raised in was somewhat lenient on what was allowed to be questioned, such as the nature of Hell, or whether or not God created everything in literally 6 days. However if you doubted that it was historically accurate that Jesus existed or rose from the dead, or that he was literally both God and man, or that the Holy Spirit was real, your soul was in danger. I was taught directly that you can be as good as person as you could possibly be, but if you don’t believe in Jesus you don’t go to Heaven (and there is only one other alternative.)

**If this gives anyone the idea that I might convert back to Christianity, be sure you know that the amount of evidence that it would take to convince me would be on par with what it would take to convince me that the sun revolves around the earth after all. Possible perhaps, but not very likely.

My Take on the Alabama Atheist Billboard

Posted on by

Here is the latest billboard from American Atheists, to advertise their first regional convention in the south, the Southeast Regional Atheist Meet. In the interest of full disclosure, I have been a member of American Atheists for several years and they are an organization I am proud to support.

I have somewhat mixed feeling about this particular billboard. On the one hand, I think it is a good thing for atheists to be able to stand up and proudly state that we do not believe in any of the religions. Especially in the largely religious south, where atheists are particularly nervous about “coming out” for fear of being judged as a bad person or worse.

On the other hand, I can see why religious people may be legitimately offended by it. Not that there is any right in this country not to be offended. Given the reaction of some religious people in Louisville to the LouisvilleCOR billboard, which stated “Don’t believe in God? You are not alone,” there are clearly those who are offended by any statement that atheists exist and that atheism as a good thing. As far as this billboard goes, I fear that it paints with a too broad of a brush. I think the claims of religions are all false on their face, but there a lot of people who reinterpret and reinvent their religions with a more humanistic and humane interpretation.  It would be a shame for us to isolate those who identify with some sort of religious tradition but still might be our allies on issues such as the separation of church and state. Maybe I would prefer if the wording on the billboard were different, and that the use of all-caps were nixed. But I also have to be honest in saying I have not yet come up with a good slogan that would fit in one line on a billboard.

On the whole though, I like the billboard and I think it has done well in its purpose of drawing new members into American Atheists and in creating a media buzz that reaches far beyond Huntsville, Alabama.

You can read more about the billboard here (I actually just found this page, and they do address the concerns I brought up about more liberal religions. It is worth a read.): http://www.atheists.org/atheism/Religion_is_a_scam

Ghosts of Christmas Past

Posted on by

I used to have a Christmas tree ornament that I would hold and ponder at this time of the year. I no longer have it, and I’m not sure if I threw it away, or just left it in some dusty corner of my childhood home. It looked very much like this.

(Image from http://www.booksofthebible.com/p3140.html)

That’s right. A thick, long iron nail (maybe pewter, in this case). The whole point is that back when I was a Christian I saw Christmas mainly as a foreshadowing of the death and resurrection of Jesus. The nail was to remind me of death and sin and blood in the midst of all the cheer and warmth and celebration of Christmas. I would hold it and ponder my sinfulness and complicity in the killing of Jesus (nevermind that the event, if it is not only mythology, happened thousands of years before I was born.) What sweet thoughts.

I used to think that these dreary thoughts were profound and edifying. Now I’m just horrified by the very idea that I ever thought that way. Christmas is a season of hope, though now for me it is about the hope that light and warmth will come again even though it is now so cold and dark. The lights on the houses remind that light is not gone from the world, even if our hemisphere tilted away from the sun’s rays for the time being. This need for hope in dark times is, I think, the root of all the winter holidays. The sun, and our longing for it, is the reason for the season.