A Christian friend, who no doubt saw the recent Christopher Hitchens debate where Mr. Hitchens was asked a very similar question, asked me if there is a single argument for Christianity that has given me pause.
No, and for that matter, not a single argument for any theistic or metaphysical religion has given me even the slightest pause. Even when I answer a question with, “I don’t know,” I have always been able to follow that with a, “but you’re dead-wrong. Let’s go do some research together.” I cannot be convinced with all the thousands of years of unscientific and, often, downright false evidence piled up over the many thousands of years of religion that any intervening god exists.
Are there arguments for Deism that can convince me? Not yet, but some have come close to doing the job before disappearing in a puff of logic. Deism still requires certainty that a sentient being created all things, or, at the very least, set them in motion, and the only thing I’m absolutely certain of is if Chimbley steps on my keyboard one more time, I’m locking him in the bathroom.
Can I be convinced of agnosticism? Absolutely! In fact, I already have. I am an agnostic Atheist. I don’t know that there aren’t gods, but I can definitely shade the probability toward the no side.
But what of religious feelings? So many people, when asked about proof for God, talk about the feelings of forgiveness and beauty they find in Christianity.
I was listening through my new Tom Waits CD, Orphans: Brawlers, Bawlers & Bastards, when the stomping junkyard beat halted and gentle piano music picked up. Tom began singing the Johnny Cash song “Down There By The Train” while gargling his usual marbles. The lyrics were very moving and I felt a religious pull I haven’t felt in years. The song and the message actually brought tears to my eyes.
There’s a golden moon that shines up through the mist
And I know that your name will be on that list
There’s no eye for an eye, there’s no tooth for a tooth
I saw Judas Iscariot carrying John Wilkes Booth
Down there by the train
Down there by the train
Down there by the train
Down there by the train
Down there where the train goes slowSo if you live in darkness, if you live in shame
All of the passengers will be treated the same
And old Humpty Jackson and Gyp the Blood will sing
And Charlie Whitman is holding on to Dillinger’s wings
They’re down there by the train
Down there by the train
Down there by the train
Down there by the train
Down there where the train goes slowSo if you’ve lost all your hope; you lost all your faith
I know you will be cared for, I know you will be safe
And all the shameful, and all of the whores
And even the soldier who pierced the heart of the Lord
Is down there by the train
Down there by the train
Down there by the train
Down there by the train
Down there where the train goes slow
The lyrics, and the ragged and earthy way in which they were presented, actually moved me to see myself as a wretched, hopeless sinner in need of redemption and given redemption as a free gift. The message that even the Charles Whitmans and John Wilkes Booths of this world could be completely forgiven touched (not convinced) me deeply. I can see why so many churches play slow, repetitive songs with humble lyrics before they call people forward to be saved. In the heat of the moment, I would have walked forward if this were played in church.
It’s there that I made the step of logic that so many moderate and liberal theists fail to make: I pushed aside that feeling and actually analysed what caused it.
I asked myself, am I really accountable for the sins that my forefathers committed? Do I want to be forgiven by the Creator of the universe for those sins and any others that I committed myself? After thinking about it for a minute, I answered myself: No.
Even if there is a divine engineer to meet me in an old trainyard after I die, I will not let him forgive me for crimes against my fellow man. When I insult or strike a person, when I break a person’s property, when I betray a person’s trust, it’s their option to forgive me or not and it’s my obligation only to ask them for forgiveness, not a deity. No deity has the obligation or even the right to forgive me for what I’ve done to another human being.
Also, Charles Whitman, John Wilkes Booth, John Dillinger, and gang leader Humpty Jackson were bad people. They were murderers and I am not a murderer. The families of their victims, as unlikely as it might be, could have forgiven them. However, no matter how much forgiveness is piled upon those murderers, I am not morally equal to them. There are people who have done much less harm in their lives than I have in mine, and I would not want to tarnish their good deeds by saying that I can erase my past and be just as good as them.
As beautiful as the song is, and as touching as it may be on the first listen, it is essentially a plea for the erasure of personal responsibility and a call for mindless following, coerced by guilt.
Still, I will listen to the song and be moved by the simple melody, beautiful lyrics and earthy presentation. Feelings aren’t evidence for anything other than the innate human sense of guilt.


You don’t ask forgiveness from God for things you do to your fellow man; you ask God for forgiveness for sins your have committed against him. If I sucker punch a guy in the street, I need to ask his forgiveness for the punch and God for grieving him by breaking his law.
Comment by Trey Jackson — 22 November 2008 @ 1:20 pm
I seemed to have missed “Thou shalt not suckerpunch.”
And your theology isn’t the only theology, Trey. Some of us grew up learning that your victims’ forgiveness wasn’t enough, you also needed God’s forgiveness for the same sin: Not a generic ‘breaking the law’ sin, but the actual sin itself. Because God is in everyone, raping someone is like raping God… or something like that.
However, in a rational society, a dispute that’s already solved–say, I punched out three of your teeth, bought a billboard calling your mother a pirate whore and took your girlfriend’s virginity, but, against all odds, you put down your katana and forgave me an dropped all charges (legal and vigilante) as I pleaded for your mercy in a pool of my own sweat, tears, urine and faeces–needs no further absolution. Solved disputes are solved disputes. For unsolved disputes, we have the legal system, and that’s good enough.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 22 November 2008 @ 1:33 pm
I agree with you Reed on most of these points. I won’t comment on the God’s forgiveness part, since I don’t believe in one in the first place and I definitely don’t want to put words in the mouth of Christian followers. However, I will say that yes, the four men you mentioned are murderers and I personally understand that what they did was “wrong” as far as society goes. But does that make them bad people? Of course not. People’s opinions and beliefs vary from the common to the extreme, you must take in all of them to fully get the broadest spectrum for human belief in a cause. I also don’t believe in writing someone off with a title, good or bad. I don’t think saying that someone is a bad person or a good person is just… because, back on my point, a good thing for one person is a bad thing for another. Not trying to cause argument or say your wrong, I’m just pointing out that although we do “write off” people as titles or states of being (even I do), I still don’t think it’s right and justifiable to do so.
Comment by Cereal — 22 November 2008 @ 5:26 pm
Well, we can agree to disagree, but I still think anyone who knowingly and willingly commits a murder is a bad person. Someone who knowingly and willingly commits several people is a really bad person. I’ll let you disagree with me, but I’m going to go ahead and call you a terrorist sympathiser.
Cereal pals around with murderers.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 22 November 2008 @ 7:13 pm
Reed,
You are certainly correct in saying that my theology is not the only theology of Christians, but the same could be said of what you heard in your Baptist church as well. My understanding is based on my experience and my study of the Bible, which I am able to do better everyday.
As far as the issue of forgiveness goes, the Bible teaches that the only people that you need ask for forgiveness from are those whom you have sinned against. We don’t seem to have any problem when it comes to the people, but then you go on to say that you feel no need to apologize to a Creator either. It is not as if you have sinned against people, and God always demand you apologize to him, not because you wronged him but just because he likes apologies. It is that you have sinned against a person, but also a holy God. When you steal from someone, you are stealing their goods and defacing God’s Image (mankind), exhalting your desires over God, and pissing on what Christ has done to allow you to be right with God. It is because of all of those things that I would say that yes, forgiveness from God is necessary.
Cereal, on your points, I agree with you to some extent but side with Reed more. A person may be a “good” driver, but that doesn’t trump the fact that he killed a lot of people. A woman may be a “good” worker, but if she kills her children, that weighs a little heavier. It is certainly good that you want to have a fuller view of a person, but there are still some acts which must and will be weighed more than others I would place rape, intentional homicide, genocide, and some others in that category. It doesn’t mean I couldn’t admit something good about them, but overall I would call them a bad person.
Comment by Trey Jackson — 22 November 2008 @ 11:35 pm
Oh yeah, and you never invited me to do research with you.
And thanks for imagining me with a katana.
Comment by Trey Jackson — 22 November 2008 @ 11:54 pm
Trey, arguing about biblical interpretations and details is like debating over whether Humpty Dumpty was an egg or a person. Sure, in relation to the literature, interpretation means a lot… in reality, however, it’s a fairy tale either way you look at it.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 23 November 2008 @ 3:57 am
Hey, let’s not get snippy. I’m just trying to have an intelligent conversation about the top selling book of all time. If you don’t feel you can dialogue about it, just let me know.
Comment by Trey Jackson — 23 November 2008 @ 2:03 pm
[...] Reed Braden presents Crisis of Faith(less), posted at Homosecular Gaytheist (and friends!). Read his post to discover what led him to say [...]
Pingback by Carnival of the Godless #106: Holiday Feast Edition « An Apostate’s Chapel — 6 December 2008 @ 10:58 pm
“Trey, arguing about biblical interpretations and details is like debating over whether Humpty Dumpty was an egg or a person.”
LOL! Very late to the party from Carnival of the Godless – but I just may have to steal that line. Can you forgive me?
Comment by ildi — 16 December 2008 @ 3:44 pm