Hacker News Reader

Comment by api | Hacker News Reader

I’ve always seen American evangelism as a political movement first and a religious one second.

This impression has strengthened quite a bit in recent years as it’s become clear that political movements and politicians that are diametrically opposed to the teachings of Jesus are perfectly okay if they align on other more immediate secular political issues.

There’s always been a claim that the US is an outlier compared to other developed nations in terms of religiosity. I don’t really believe this anymore. I think we have a lot of politics with heavy religious veneer, but if you look only at sincere belief in the tenets of a faith I don’t think the US is much more religious than the UK for example.

View on HN

It’s a legit religion. People go every Sunday for prayer, worship, etc.

Political movements tend to be ecumenical - across religious boundaries. The Civil Rights movement was a political movement, as was the labor movement, etc.

> I think the religiosity of the US is an illusion.

I grew up in the Bible Belt around Baptists and Evangelicals and even a few Pentecostals. I assure you it isn't an illusion.

While there may be some outliers and grifters, particularly where religion intersects with politics (I doubt Trump believes in God half as much as Evangelicals believe in him) the vast majority of these people absolutely do believe what they say, and that they're right with God.

This is the depressing reality.

When I lived in the bible belt, I had a hilarious idea for a "student film" project on the life and times of Jesus. Stuff like using little-kids' floaties on his ankles to walk on water, accidentally raising an undead zombie, etc. My good friend told me he couldn't morally participate in the project.

We were 18 and he should have been able to laugh at a funny project but he saw it as insulting an important deity. What a sad and limited life organized religion constructed around him.

I also remember when my father started dating and he complained to me that he always made it clear that he was an atheist but then a few dates in the women would start talking about their faith and getting all Christy. I was incredulous and explained that it had always been that way since we moved there. He just wasn't divorced yet, so he didn't notice.

These people's lives are all about their faith. It's a fucking brain rot. It's a sickness and it greatly contributes to the misery of others.

Hi!

I can’t speak for your friend, but as a former atheist who brcame a Christian (albeit a very mediocre one) I feel like I can see both sides of this so perhaps I can offer a perspective that might help you understand each other better.

When I was an atheist, I assumed that anyone who didn’t care for the kinds of jokes you mentioned was worried that God would zap them with a lightning bolt.

Now I see it a little differently: if you see something as being of great importance, then it simply feels off / wrong / weird / missing the point to treat it as if it’s of little or no importance. In a word, it feels cringe. If such a project holds no allure for you, then you’re not missing much by sitting it out.

Not to harsh on your sense of humor, but I hope it might help to understand your friend better.

If an atheist has a weak explanation of religiosity, perhaps that atheist gets infected with religion.

It shouldn't come as great revelation, to an atheist, that to those infected with a mind virus it "feels cringe" when anything attacks the virus. That's its whole mechanism of action, its fangs. Besides, there's things like faith healing, and gospel churches, and the phrase "religious ecstacy", and all these other signs of the religious getting off on religion, so it should be obvious that they're defending something that feels precious, and are not merely terrorized.

However, if the atheist instead made a shallow assumption that religiosity is simple fear of a smiting bogeyman god, then it would come as a revelation that the religious are in fact having euphoric feelings, and this might be mistaken by the now ex-atheist for divine revelation of the way and the truth and the light, as the fangs sink in.

Using the "mind virus" language of the Right isn't helpful. We know it's a disease. They claim treating people with respect is a disease. Don't reinforce that.

You wanted to make a mockery of that which he held sacred and you're surprised he didn't want to participate?

Did you also suggest wearing blackface, telling women to get back in the kitchen, and burning the Quran?

What the fuck are you talking about? My mother didn't laugh at a joke because Jesus was in it. That's the kind of adherence that leads to hurting people because they disagree with you. Religion is stupid, it hurts people.

Edit: letter

I can understand your POV. My parents were atheists. Then, in college, it was just assumed everyone was one. So, I just accepted that as truth. I went on to read all the philosophy and religions. I always avoided Jesus though because honestly his name was a "bad word" in my crowd. Then, a few years ago I picked up the Gospel (nothing else) and decided to read it for informational purposes. And, it stuck with me. Then, I kept reading more and more, and realized that it was all cohesive and coherent. And, for years I tried to find flaws, but it was just too good and life changing and real.

I too like some philosophers. One or two of them were writing back in the iron age. But I don't worship them.

exactly - the worship part is essential, having obedience to good

Ideas should speak for themselves and compete fairly on their own merits, and there should be no faith.

What I mean is that for some people, the Gospel toggle some previously unknown bits in the brain that activates and transforms them. And, worship just becomes what they do. It's the freedom of it - they become unshackled. I really don't know how to describe it in a way that my previous atheist self would understand.

How about "shackled" instead of "unshackled"? That might make the thing you're describing seem less extraordinary.

You seem to have an almost religious devotion to your worldview. Which makes sense: it works for you and you feel compelled to convince others. You also limit yourself to thoughts and practices that align with these views. Imagine for a moment that this is also true of other people for other beliefs.

What are you trying to argue? This is nonsensical.

> It's the freedom of it - they become unshackled.

Slave. That's what you describe.

I'm not attacking you when I say this: drugs can get you there, too.

If you read about early christianity (which I did for 18months), you will see that the "gospel" is a mess.

If you couldn't find flaws, you are clearly biased. Even religious institutions have found flaws. The contradictions are so well published that you have to ignore them to not know about them,

I don't think you have any true knowledge of the history of your faith (said the atheist).

> ...he should have been able to laugh at a funny project but he saw it as > insulting an important deity.

He may have been an outlier. I know that I've heard god-jokes from the pulpits of evangelical (using that in the sense it was used 30 years ago). The one I remember best is about the difference between a dog and a cat (based on evidence of how their master treats them, the dog thinks its owner is god, the cat thinks he is god--that's a synopsis, it was much funnier in the full version).

No. My mother also told me I shouldn't joke about Jesus when I relayed a pretty harmless joke to her. It's a thing in the midwest.

I recognize the pet-God joke. I shared a meme pic with my partner that had that. Regarding cats and dogs, it's completely accurate. Our cats are in charge more than we are (or so they think).

> I grew up in the Bible Belt around Baptists and Evangelicals and even a few Pentecostals. I assure you it isn't an illusion.

The religiosity might be an illusion, but in many cases the religion is drifting away from Christianity. It has certainly very different from traditional Christianity in the rest of the world. Many fundamentalists themselves will say that the major churches are not really Christians, which implies they are not the same religion as the major churches. Other American groups have broken with Christian theology in major ways, such as rejecting the trinity of the incarnation. Some have their own scriptures. Many have beliefs that are not taken from either Christian scriptures or tradition.

> I doubt Trump believes in God half as much as Evangelicals believe in him

Again, if he does, his beliefs are significantly different from traditional Christianity. He seems to know very little about what Christians believe - he once tweeted "Happy Good Friday"!

Then again the Bible has a lot to say about the rich, none of it good.

If you took Jesus' teachings and stripped the name off, would most of these people agree with them? Things like welcoming the foreigner and treating them as one of your own, not judging others, etc.?

I don't think using the name and trappings of a religion as a cultural label and dog whistle is the same as sincere belief.

They sincerely believe what they consider to be the teachings of Jesus. They aren't just using the name and trappings of a religion as a cultural label.

You can call them hypocrites, and maybe that's fair (most Christians are) but they are sincere.

Scripture is pretty clear the name of Christ matters. The genealogies refer to a specific individual, not a message. The Epistles even single out Christ’s name as worthy of praise.

The messages of the gospel aren’t obvious, or obviously good. Without an actual man-god preaching them, I don’t see why we should love our enemies as we love ourselves.

What about the Spanish Inquisition?

Nobody expects it

What about it?

It was an agency of the Spanish monarchy that aimed to strengthen the state, motivated by a history of being occupied by an empire, and fearing the the descendents of the former conquerors would be disloyal to the new state.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com