Beth and Traci: This Can't Be Right
Posted by Traci in category Beth and Traci go to Church on February 8, 2008
So here I sit, drinking a Sam Adams, doing a little editing, and listening to All Things Considered.
A story about Mike Huckabee’s propensity for waxing biblical in his campaign speeches comes on. NPR asks some of his fundie supporters about a couple of Hucakabee’s mentions. They have no idea what he’s talking about.
I do.
I recognize both references.
The Carmel Lutherans taught me about the widow’s mite; College Park Church — and the ever-so-delightful Kay Arthur — introduced me to Samuel 1. (Is that the right way to reference that? Also: Who the hell am I?)
Comment by: Beth
1 02/8/08 5:32 PM | Comment Link |You’re outta control.
Comment by: Traci
2 02/8/08 6:06 PM | Comment Link |You. Did this to me.
Comment by: Helen
3 02/8/08 6:42 PM | Comment Link |Traci, I think your response was supposed to be “Wow, the same Bible references came up on NPR that I just heard in meetings - this can’t just be coincidence - it must be…God speaking to me!”
But instead all you can think about is that you know more Bible than Huckabee’s fundie supporters.
How is God ever going to get through to you at this rate???
:-)
Comment by: Lisa
4 02/8/08 7:52 PM | Comment Link |knowledge is power.
Comment by: Claudia
5 02/8/08 8:42 PM | Comment Link |Helen, to say that you are the awesomest thing since sliced bread would merely overstate the awesomeness of sliced bread, because your awesomeness dwarfs its so. Seriously.
(And if I find out God wants people to vote for Huckabee, I AM going to become a Satanist prostitute, on principle.)
Comment by: Helen
6 02/9/08 5:41 AM | Comment Link |Thanks Claudia - although I’m not sure my family would agree. Maybe I can adopt you into it! Anyway the feeling is mutual: I’ve been enjoying your comments very much.
Seriously: any survey of what Christians consider ’signs from God’, as they go about their daily lives, would have ’same Bible reference’ high on the list.
Maybe it is a sign from God. Who knows.
As for Huckabee: this video clip was all I needed to hear. His response that his increased popularity has to be a miracle attributable only to God confirmed from his own mouth that there’s no rational basis for preferring him. And presumably he had no idea that’s what he just implied. Which (imo) reveals something about his mental acuity which contra-indicates his suitability to be President of the US.
I really really want someone smart (as in IQ, not dress sense) to be President this time.
Comment by: Helen
7 02/9/08 6:45 AM | Comment Link |I posted about the NPR Huckabee segment here - NPR has a write-up of it online.
Comment by: Lisa
8 02/9/08 6:46 AM | Comment Link |Is it too late for Beth and Traci to get in the running?
Comment by: Justin McKean
9 02/9/08 9:37 AM | Comment Link |But hang on… you’re supposed to know those references. It’s called cultural literacy and it exists independent of belief in god.
What’s remarkable is the large number of Xians who don’t actually know what they are supposed to believe.
Comment by: Traci
10 02/9/08 10:22 AM | Comment Link |Right on, Justin.
I’m glad to have an impetus for finally reading the bible. Previous attempts have not been successful, but I’ve always thought I had a responsibility to get through the thing because it IS such a big part of our culture. Also so I can argue more smarter with Christians.
Comment by: Beth Bates
11 02/9/08 1:40 PM | Comment Link |“More smarter.” Queerhead. When you say “argue,” what do you mean?
Comment by: karen
12 02/9/08 2:12 PM | Comment Link |(cue Nelson):
HA-ha! You’re a bible geek!
Comment by: Traci
13 02/9/08 2:33 PM | Comment Link |I mean argue.
Like when somebody tells me homosexuality is wrong because the bible says so, and they get all “Leviticus 18:22,” I can throw Leviticus 20:13 at them and ask whether they also accept that homosexuals should be put to death, just like people who curse their parents.
Actually, I need to dig in so I can come up with better examples than that.
Watch this space.
Comment by: Eliza
14 02/9/08 4:15 PM | Comment Link |Leviticus 11:9-12 is a good one.
Lobster, anyone?
Comment by: Lisa
15 02/9/08 4:19 PM | Comment Link |I finally had a chance to see the video of your interview and I have one thing to say to BOTH Beth and Traci.
OMG your hair is FABULOUS!!!!
Comment by: Lisa
16 02/9/08 4:35 PM | Comment Link |You know, the 1st time I realized one can use the bible to their advantage, whatever the argument, was when I saw an interview with a homosexual couple (probably over 15 yrs ago) defending their choice of living in a loving partnership and using scripture. I don’t remember what bible verses they used, just remember that they claimed that the verses typically used against homosexuality were about lust, and were not speaking to their particular situation. I started wondering how the church in general was going to deal with that.
Comment by: Jon
17 02/10/08 5:02 PM | Comment Link |unfortunately, scripture has been leveraged over the millennium to “argue” (justify, support, etc.) a variety of clearly “unscriptural” positions and actions.
scripture, like knowledge without context and reason, can be a dangerous thing.
when in doubt, love your neighbor – the “law “will take care of itself.
Comment by: Beth Bates
18 02/11/08 8:36 AM | Comment Link |Hi, Jon. Welcome to the blog. I think you make a good point with the when in doubt rule. I wonder what atheists and other bible-doubters think of that verse.
Comment by: Traci
19 02/11/08 8:48 AM | Comment Link |Is there a catch? Why would anyone not think respecting others is a good idea? Maybe I don’t get what you’re asking, Beth.
Comment by: Beth Bates
20 02/11/08 8:49 AM | Comment Link |The catch is that it’s a Bible verse. I mean. Which ones are valid and which ones to throw out?
Comment by: Beth Bates
21 02/11/08 8:50 AM | Comment Link |(I’m asking myself this same question.)
Comment by: Traci
22 02/11/08 8:54 AM | Comment Link |And therein lies the rub with stuff like calling homosexuality wrong “because the bible says so,” in my view. The bible says a lot of crap that nobody pays attention to.
I’m obviously not going to give credence to anything just because it’s in the bible, but the flipside of that isn’t that I’m going to do the opposite of whatever’s in there.
I have a moral code like anybody else. Sometimes it overlaps with the bible. Naturally.
Comment by: Beth Bates
23 02/11/08 8:59 AM | Comment Link |What is the source of the moral code?
Comment by: Beth Bates
24 02/11/08 8:59 AM | Comment Link |Or. In other words, “HOW are you so good?” and “When are you going to post about the lady who said you can only be so good?!”
Comment by: Traci
25 02/11/08 9:06 AM | Comment Link |Reason.
Although how people form a moral code is subject to debate. I read a Steven Pinker article recently that showed most people instinctively feel that this or that is right and then work backwards to justify it. Not surprising, really.
Comment by: Beth Bates
26 02/11/08 9:09 AM | Comment Link |Would your little one know right from wrong if you didn’t teach him? I’m really asking. Not arguing.
Comment by: Traci
27 02/11/08 9:17 AM | Comment Link |Eventually, yes. When he had the capacity for thinking it over. Right now he’s all id, and there’s no way a being can be moral in that state, given that moral action requires empathy.
Even Christian kids have to learn right and wrong. What’s the diff?
Unless God magically transfers a moral code to the kids of Christians when they’re born. Or does it come with baptism? Pow — you’re moral!
Comment by: Helen
28 02/11/08 9:19 AM | Comment Link |Beth wrote:
Beth, over the last few years I decided it’s dangerous to assume something is right or good just because a book (or a person who believes the book is without error) says so.
I use all the resources available to make my own best judgment and go from there. All the resources means, evidence from the world around me and the opinions of people I have some reason to trust.
I might still be wrong but at least my own mind and judgment have come into the process and so I am comfortable owning my decisions.
I used to be willing to give the Bible the benefit of the doubt and say “if it says it’s wrong it is”.
Now I consider such things as “what good does it do and what harm does it do?” I’m much more pragmatic than when I was a Bible-believer.
Before that I was more likely to ‘give the Bible the benefit of the doubt’.
Comment by: Helen
29 02/11/08 9:26 AM | Comment Link |…I’m just saying, that’s my experience and approach. Not saying everyone who doesn’t do things like I do is wrong.
Comment by: Helen
30 02/11/08 9:33 AM | Comment Link |FYI I found a link to an article explaining why Christians don’t believe all those Old Testament rules apply to them.
It might be helpful to anyone wondering why Christians don’t advocate stoning people who pick up sticks on the Sabbath, etc.
Comment by: Beth Bates
31 02/11/08 9:37 AM | Comment Link |Id. So you believe in Freud? I didn’t meet him so I don’t believe he existed. (Har.)
Comment by: Beth Bates
32 02/11/08 9:39 AM | Comment Link |Freud and C.S. Lewis rap a la Traci and Beth
Comment by: Lisa
33 02/11/08 9:50 AM | Comment Link |This is something I’ve been wondering for quite a while. What makes a person “good” when there’s no one watching. If you could get by with something minor. Let’s say, something was left in your cart that the cashier didn’t notice. Do you think to yourself, “oh well, their problem” or do you call attention to it or take it back in because it’s the “right thing to do”. I know some Christians who have justified bad behavior, but I often wonder what makes an atheist choose something good when they might be able to get by with something. I’ve asked my husband, what would keep him faithful to me even when it gets difficult to stay with me, if he feels no responsibility to a god. His response is, “it’s just the right thing to do”. I think he likes me most times, and try not to push him to the point of being disgusted with me, but I’m sure he’s had his moments. My husband is one of those “good, ethical, moral” people who doesn’t correlate his behavior with a connection to a god. He’s not so verbal though, so I’m glad to have access to a group who may be able to articulate this. In my case, “GOD” is such a familiar concept, that even if I completely turn my back, the idea of him and the things I’ve been taught are still always in the back of my mind. I wonder more about people who have not had any religious experience growing up. Then I think of my oldest and closest friend who has never had any religious upbringing, and she’s just GOOD and so STRONG, but I can’t help but wonder if she had God as a source of strength, if her horrible experiences would be any easier for her. Or is “God” just a different coping skill?
Do any atheists let the idea of Karma enter their thought processes?
After watching the news this weekend, I realized we don’t need God watching to make us do the right thing. My god, they’re taking pics of our houses to put on the Internet. Have you seen “streetview” on google maps? I hope they don’t drive by and snap the pic while picking my nose (not that I do that). Neighbors can now anonymously write reviews online about bad neighbors. YIKES we better all be good.
Comment by: Helen
34 02/11/08 10:05 AM | Comment Link |Lisa wrote:
Lisa, I’m just curious: have you noticed that Christians cope better with horrible experiences than your friend?
Comment by: Helen
35 02/11/08 10:08 AM | Comment Link |Lisa wrote:
It would be nice if husbands who believe in God always stayed with their wives but, evidently they don’t…so the ‘responsibility to God’ thing isn’t failsafe for wives.
Comment by: Helen
36 02/11/08 10:09 AM | Comment Link |Beth, I’m sure CS Lewis and Freud would not be half as enjoyable as what you and Traci are writing. I don’t exactly picture either of them as a bundle of laughs… :)
Comment by: Traci
37 02/11/08 10:28 AM | Comment Link |I question the legitimacy of good behavior that comes from thinking somebody’s watching.
But I also don’t think it takes any particular strength or mental wrangling to be good without God. If I cheated on my husband, he’d be devastated, and that’s a terrible outcome for both of us and for our kid. I don’t need the threat of a divine handslap to tell me that’s wrong.
Comment by: Beth Bates
38 02/11/08 11:03 AM | Comment Link |I find good behavior is self-rewarding. I don’t think about being watched. If I did I wouldn’t have done half the bad things I’ve ever done.
Comment by: Helen
39 02/11/08 11:31 AM | Comment Link |Beth wrote:
I do too - and that ties in with what Traci said also: not cheating on her husband is self-rewarding because it preserves relationships she cares very much about.
When I had more belief in God I used to hope what the Bible said about how people were to behave was more because God cared about people doing what worked out best for all of them, than because he liked telling people what to do because he was God and he could.
Comment by: Lisa
40 02/11/08 1:50 PM | Comment Link |Helen, regarding your question about Christians coping better, I’m not necessarily saying I believe that.
I think my “God-less” friend copes remarkably well. She’s my inspiration. I just know Christians who claim that GOD is the ONLY thing that “got them through”. So I can’t help but wonder about the differences. Maybe we’re back to different personality types, and my friend is just a hell of a dame.
RE: Christian husbands still cheat. Yeah, I know. Maybe that’s more about maturity.
I wonder more about the minor things in life, that don’t seem as though they matter, on the surface.
I have a personal belief about sin that is working for me so far. The conventional thoughts about right or wrong and feeling guilty didn’t correlate with other things I learned about God. Christians have debated my thought processes, but so far it makes the most sense to me, that “SIN” is ultimate unhealth. I try to make choices that encourage optimal health– physical, mental, emotional,spiritual (whatever that is). I don’t believe that wrong choices necessarily send me to hell, but just prevent me from being a whole person. I know people that feel guilty because they continually make unhealthy choices. I think guilt is unproductive and unloving. I guess everyone has to decide when they want to move toward wholeness. My life, like most, is probably 3 steps forward and 2 steps back, but I guess I’m ok with that.
Comment by: Helen
41 02/11/08 2:28 PM | Comment Link |Lisa wrote:
Thanks Lisa. That’s pretty much how it is for me too.
Comment by: Jon
42 02/11/08 3:48 PM | Comment Link |a couple of thoughts…
i think we’re all “hard-wired” to seek out a connection with our Creator. call it whatever you like, soul, instinct or just plain curiosity. whatever it is, it is in evidence all around us - even by the very existence of this blog (why else would we even engage in this discussion?). when we connect with the Divine, we are changed (but certainly not perfect). and like every other relationship we have, this relationship (especially, this one) compels us to modify our behavior (i.e. reference “when in doubt…â€).
this certainly does not preclude someone who hasn’t made that connection from acting in a moral fashion. it’s just why i believe christians should (and hopefully do) act/cope the way they do. as for those who feel or believe that they haven’t connected, i presume they have their own (numbered and various) reasons for why they chose to behave decently. but i don’t really need to understand why. i’m simply grateful that they do (behave decently).
Comment by: benjamin ady
43 02/11/08 5:22 PM | Comment Link |just for the record, I don’t believe in Freud either. =)
Beth, Traci,
Ongoingly following your writing and the generated conversation continues to be a pleasure. Thank you.
Comment by: Claudia
44 02/12/08 8:36 AM | Comment Link |I think I speak for at least one or two other folks when I point out that I’m not following the discussion here because I’m curious about the creator. I’m curious about others’ belief in what seems to be a very specific type of creator.
You’re welcome. Although, if you happen to find out that the exclusive reason I’m behaving in a socially acceptable manner is that I’m convinced the Flying Spaghetti Monster is watching my every move and will punish me for any infraction, well, keep a close eye on me. Because that means I’m a sociopath.
And while we’re on it: I do believe in Freud. I just don’t subscribe to his theories. Oh, and I don’t believe he had superpowers.
And last but not least: B&T, ditto what Benjamin said. Looking forward to the next one…
Comment by: Claudia
45 02/12/08 9:01 AM | Comment Link |ETA (kind of):
Lisa/Helen: That’s a pretty interesting idea. Have you ever read any Madeleine L’Engle?
Comment by: Helen
46 02/12/08 9:41 AM | Comment Link |Claudia, yes, I’ve read a lot of Madeleine L’Engle - I like magic/fantasy/adventure (because I’m an escapist at heart, maybe). I’d have to read some again to see how I feel about her writing these days. Some fiction writing by Christians feels ‘too Christian’ to me these days and pushes my buttons.
In 2002 I read His Dark Materials (the trilogy which begins with The Golden Compass) and that had an impact on me beyond anything else I’ve read in the genre in recent years.
Have you read Tom’s Midnight Garden by the way? I totally loved that book when I was growing up.
Comment by: Beth Bates
47 02/12/08 9:42 AM | Comment Link |Claudia - you mean the next one after the next one after this one? My Weave post killed the discussion. The “poetry” was an experiment.
Comment by: Traci
48 02/12/08 9:57 AM | Comment Link |In other words, “[Poetry] is dead”? But let’s leave Nietzsche out of this.
Comment by: Beth Bates
49 02/12/08 10:00 AM | Comment Link |Arr arr arr arr arr!
Comment by: Lisa
50 02/12/08 11:24 AM | Comment Link |Claudia, I googled her, but am not familiar with her. I’m assuming some of her concepts are similar? Can you tell me more about her?
Comment by: Jon
51 02/12/08 12:16 PM | Comment Link |I think I speak for at least one or two other folks when I point out that I’m not following the discussion here because I’m curious about the creator. I’m curious about others’ belief in what seems to be a very specific type of creator.
forgive me claudia (and the others), i’m new to the blog and thought my comments to be somewhat relevant. i thought the conversation had to do with what motivates people to behave “morally”. if my comments aren’t timely or topical, (again) my apologies. (and if i’m not mistaken, technically speaking, belief in the “flying spaghetti monster†would be delusional, not sociopathic, yes?)
so what is this discussion really about – the existence of God or why christians, jews and muslims believe God is the creator? or is it simply about the nature of God?
Comment by: Beth Bates
52 02/12/08 12:33 PM | Comment Link |Helen? A little clarification for our newcomer here?
Jon, I think this particular discussion. . . Hm. I don’t know. I think it’s whatever you want it to be.
Comment by: Helen
53 02/12/08 12:42 PM | Comment Link |Beth wrote:
Ummmm…well, Beth and Traci are writing about their experiences attending Christian women’s meetings together and as they do that, people have raised various issues in the comments.
I think people have different reasons why they’re posting in these comments conversations. Jon, you’re welcome to join in.
Comment by: Beth Bates
54 02/12/08 12:45 PM | Comment Link |Thanks, Helen. :) I knew I could count on you.
Comment by: Claudia
55 02/12/08 12:59 PM | Comment Link |A thousand apologies, Jon! Didn’t intend to speak to the purpose of the discussion, but instead for the reason some of us are following it. Its existence seems poor evidence that we’re all hard-wired to seek out a connection with our Creator, was my point.
Lisa, L’Engle’s stuff generally makes a connection between “evil” and “disease”–I think you’d find it pretty interesting. Most of it’s YA fantasy stuff, like Helen said, but much in keeping with the belief system you described.
Comment by: Helen
56 02/12/08 1:13 PM | Comment Link |Beth, you’re welcome - actually I make half of it up as I go along (shhhh, don’t tell :))
Comment by: Lisa
57 02/12/08 3:47 PM | Comment Link |Claudia, do you have a fave L’Engle
you could recommend?
Comment by: Claudia
58 02/12/08 6:15 PM | Comment Link |I’d recommend Wrinkle in Time, Lisa–plus it really focuses on that whole health/sin thing. (And, Traci, it’s almost as anti-Communist as the Fountainhead!).
Helen, I’d be really interested to know if you still found it too–what’s the word–”obviously” Christian? Adore those Pullman books, too! Will have to look into Tom’s Midnight Garden–sounds very promising!
Comment by: Laurie
59 02/12/08 8:22 PM | Comment Link |Some thoughts…
I have never believed that my children would believe in Jesus by some sort of womb to umbilical cord osmosis. Rather, I have believed that, in order for my children to consider what I believe, they will need to see a living example to fight…. So, I have tried to make my Christian journey transparent to my children. The good, the bad, the very ugly… including calls that intruded on our eating, our traveling, and our leisure time.
I will say that.. in the beginning of their journey, when they were in the “concrete operational phase†- see Jung - a disciple of Freud - they were much more self-centered. It really was about what was in it for them.
In the “formal operational stage,†at about puberty, they started to think about others. The idea that morality would be about how others would feel was a novel concept. Previously.. morality was about what would be rewarded or punished. It has been a great challenge to form other humans who are at such a young stage.
comment relocated by Helen
Comment by: jon
60 02/13/08 11:15 AM | Comment Link |no worries, claudia. and you’re correct that by itself, the existence of this blog certainly isn’t conclusive evidence of (what i believe) to be our “instinctive” desire to discover and connect with our Creator.
perhaps a more compelling argument would be the seemingly universally expression within most (all?) cultures/societies of the existence of a deity or gods.
do we have any anthropologists out there?
Comment by: Helen
61 02/13/08 1:17 PM | Comment Link |Jon, for what it’s worth - I don’t have a desire to discover and connect with a creator.
So it’s not a universal expression as far as I’m concerned.
I’m guessing that Claudia and Traci don’t have that desire either.
Comment by: Beth Bates
62 02/13/08 1:59 PM | Comment Link |Helen, what was it, then, if not a desire to connect with Something Bigger, that led you to pursue God earlier in your life? I wonder? And before Claudia and Traci decided there wasn’t a God, I think they may have searched. Or at least Traci did. Why?
Comment by: Helen
63 02/13/08 2:28 PM | Comment Link |Good question, Beth. I don’t think I had an ‘instinctive desire to connect with my Creator’. Someone told me that such a Person existed and loved me and had a plan for my life - and that appealed to me so I decided to place my faith in such a Person.
But now, with all I’ve been through emotionally I can’t be sure that what I thought I believed in was attributable to more than this: if you believe good things, that affects your emotions. (If someone told you some horrible news it would affect your emotions if you believed it whether it was true or not. And it wouldn’t affect them if you didn’t believe it whether it was true or not.
Maybe there was more to it than that; maybe not. But if so, why do I no longer have that desire - why would something ‘instinctive’ just disappear like that?
If Traci did search my guess is that she searched because it makes sense to investigate something lots of people believe in - it MIGHT be true. I doubt she would attribute her searching to an ‘instinctive desire to know her Creator’.
Comment by: Traci
64 02/13/08 2:44 PM | Comment Link |Hey, Beth. I actually was going to post something very similar to what Helen just said. And then the phone rang. And then other stuff happened.
Anywho, when I was looking for God, I was young. A teenager. At that point it hadn’t occurred to me that I could stop. The nuns told me God was real, and the nuns are in charge.
I kept at it because everyone around me seemed to believe, so I thought I should, too.
And then I read Ayn Rand.
I started realizing that it was okay not to believe. I’ve grown up, had crappy times and great times and never been remotely tempted toward a higher power.
Comment by: Traci
65 02/13/08 2:47 PM | Comment Link |For the record, I’m not so much tempted toward Ayn Rand anymore, either.
Comment by: Beth Bates
66 02/13/08 2:58 PM | Comment Link |Fascinating.
Why not tempted toward Ayn?
Comment by: Jon
67 02/13/08 4:50 PM | Comment Link |toma’to, tomato’…it’s all semantics.
whether it’s instinct, desire, curiosity, or “appeal”, it all seems to have caused the same effect – an investigation, yes?
now, where that activity has lead everyone (God, Freud / Jung, Ayn Rand - whom i know nothing about) is another matter.
Comment by: Helen
68 02/13/08 5:04 PM | Comment Link |Jon, I thought you were appealing to the instinct as proof God existed, but maybe I misunderstood where you were going with it. Did you bring it up for a different reason?
Comment by: jon
69 02/13/08 8:18 PM | Comment Link |actually, it was just my long winded wind-up in getting to why christians should act a certain way. but now that you mention it…
why have humans (universally, with zeal and vigor) pursued (throughout the ages) the concept of something ‘larger’ than themselves if it weren’t (at least) because we contemplate the possibility?