And By “Seriously”, I Mean, “Don’t Laugh In Their Faces”
The Secular Outpost reviews a fascinating new book, The Secular Bible: Why Nonbelievers Must Take Religion Seriously, by Jacques Berlinerblau.
Berlinerblau premis is that Secularists don’t take religion seriously:
Today’s secularists too often have very little accurate knowledge about religion, and even less desire to learn. This is problematic insofar as their sense of self is constructed in opposition to religion. Above all, the secularist is not a Jew, is not a Christian, not a Muslim, and so on. But is it intellectually responsible to define one’s identity against something that one does not understand? And what happens when these secularists weigh in on contentious political issues, blind to the religious back-story or concerns that inevitably inform these debates?
It’s a bit of a generalization but he has a point: Sometimes, for some of us, we define ourselves by what we aren’t. I disagree that we need to take religion as serious as the true Believers would like. That gives the fundies too much leeway. If we start granting their beliefs prima facie value, they have enough wiggle room to build their usual wicker traps, “But you agreed that the Bible has some validity, and God wrote the Bible, therefore you admit there’s a God!”
But that’s not really what Berlinerblau is suggesting, which makes this book sound all the more intriguing:
Jacques Berlinerblau suggests that atheists and agnostics must take stock of that which they so adamantly oppose. Defiantly maintaining a shallow understanding of religion, he argues, is not a politically prudent strategy in this day and age. But this book is no less critical of many believers, who–Berlinerblau contends–need to emancipate themselves from ways of thinking about their faith that are dangerously simplistic, irrational and outdated.
To this, I wholeheartedly agree. You must know your enemy and why they believe the crazy ass shit they do. You also need the scholarly tools to pick those irrational beliefs apart, leaving the rational though dodgy bits intact so that, eventually the believers begin to doubt their long held superstitions and reject them on their own terms. That’s how you help people see the light without being thought of as an asshole. But to suggest that Secular thought is in some sort of crisis, as Berlinerblau does, is a bit of a stretch. Tanner Edis, from the Secular Outpost made a similar point:
So I’m not sure about secular thinking about religion being in a state of crisis. I don’t want to deny that Berlinerblau has a valid point, and that it would be good if there was more explicitly secular reading of the Bible going on. This would have immense practical value, and it might even help break the isolationism within religious studies. Nevertheless, there’s a lot more secular thinking about religion going on that Berlinerblau does not recognize. And in this wider context, I suspect that a certain lack of interest in the Bible is more understandable.
still, it sounds like a fascinating book and will be added to my Amazon wishlist, forthwith.
September 6th, 2006 at 12:11 am
I come from the other direction: I was fine with Christianity until I started studying the Bible. At that point I noticed that there was a lot of “picking and choosing” going on depending on the the “flavor” of Christianity you supported, and the Bible had more “authors” than an encyclopedia.
The other problem is that I have an excellent memory and reading the Bible from start to finish highlights the duplications and variants.
Then you start “processing” what you have read and you quickly decide that G-d does not like people and seems to enjoy massacres. The Book of Job is not a flattering chapter in a deity’s CV. The ending is a load of BS - “Job is made whole”. Good for him; he won his law suit; but what about all of the people, including family members, who were killed early on in the Book?
Knowing too much just pisses you off at the people who think this is a good idea and a pattern for a “moral life”, following a mass murderer.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:05 pm
Agreed, though I’m also disinclined to give leeway to people who, from the start, dismiss whatever I have to say simply because i don’t believe in their failry tales. I’m a n immoral, godless heathan and nothing I say is worth hearing. That’s the beginning of their argument.