Faith and health

The grammatically challenged website On Faith, poses this question, ably answered by one of my favorite thinkers, Dan Dennett:

Do you believe that faith can effect [sic] your health or is that a lot of new age nonsense?:

Dennett:

Of course faith can affect your health, as various studies have shown. So can faith in new age nonsense. So can faith in the Yankees or the Red Sox. People cling to life to learn the outcome of the World Series, after all. This has been measured statistically. More seriously, I do not know of any studies that compare the health and longevity of those who attend church regularly to those who devote regular hours of work to some secular charity (Oxfam, you name it) or to volunteering for a political party, for instance. It might turn out that religious allegiance is a better health promoter than any other form of voluntary contribution, but so far as I know, this has not been determined.

The larger problem with this week’s ON FAITH question is that it is being asked at all. This question should not be seen as a matter of personal conviction or opinion at all. People’s hunches, anecdotal recollections, or personal convictions are of no more weight here than they would be about the causes of global warming. You have asked an empirical question, and there are established methods for answering such questions. Encouraging any other approach is actually undermining proper respect for scientific methods and facts, right alongside the nefarious tactics of the tobacco companies, the global warming skeptics, and the “teach the controversy” Intelligent Design crowd who have so successful persuaded so many people to treat factual material as if it were mere opinion.

But you can put a respectable spin on it: by asking the question you are gathering data on people’s convictions, data that can later be compared to the facts, whatever they turn out to be. It will be interesting to see, for instance, how many respondents declare with confidence that they know the answer to your question quite independently of any careful research. And it will be interesting to learn if they are right.

Hitchens on Christianity

I know he has many detractors but I can't help admiring Christopher Hitchens, whose intelligence and language skill is always persuasive. Granted, I haven't heard his defense of the Iraq war, but everything else I've seen is convincing - which is probably why I have avoided his views on the Iraq war!

Here's a YouTube "illustrated" talk on his critique of Christianity, which I totally agree with.

Biology trumps spirituality

Here's another in an occasional series of "deconversion" stories. Though there are many more over at debunkingchristianity.com I only feature those that stir a responsive chord in me. This one is from a former Seventh-day Adventist and hits at the point that even learned Bible scholars can see the light eventually. As a Christian Scientist I had taken "the inspired Word of the Bible as our sufficient guide to eternal Life," and studied the Bible diligently, applying the unconventional interpretation that religion imposes on the texts. Gradually, over several years, several of the supporting concept of Christianity began to crumble. I could no longer believe in the doctrines of the virgin birth, the resurrection, or even the very existence of the person who is claimed to be the founder of Christianity. Eventually this led to my complete disbelief in the existence of any "supreme being" or individual "Creator" of the universe. Like "Evan" in the following account, the evidence of evolution became the universal acid that dissolved every supporting column of spiritual belief.

My departure from Christian Science, and all forms of "spirituality," came as a result of long and deep thought, observation and testing. After thirty years of immersion in a specific form of it, Christian Science, I believe my decision should not be taken lightly by those who continue to cling to spiritual beliefs. I am someone who has gone before you and worked it out. I encourage you to take on the adventure for yourself. I'm not saying it will lead you to bliss -- in fact, it will probably be difficult making the transformation - but you can rest in the conviction that your views are more truth-based than any religious or spiritual doctrine.

Here's an excerpt from Evan's story:

I was a believer in biblical inerrancy and a young-earth creationist just like all those around me. I was the best in my age group at Bible trivia (we called them Bible sword drills) to the point that our Sabbath School teachers would keep me from playing because it wasn't fair to the other kids.

In high school some of my friends were growing disillusioned with our church and I listened to their arguments but didn't find them compelling until I got to college. I wanted to go to medical school eventually, but I initially declared a major in Religion while taking all the science prerequisites needed for my premed aspirations. The second quarter of my freshman year, I took a class in Jesus and the Gospels. This was the first exposure I had had to higher literary criticism of the Bible and my exposure to the textual theories about the Gospels astonished me, and made me realize the all-too-human nature of the text. This also led me to investigate other German theories regarding the Bible including Graf/Wellhausen, which confirmed my concerns.

My study of religion abolished my faith in biblical inerrancy and I changed my major to biology.

I began to see strong evidence for evolution, even though all my professors were young earth creationists.

Full text at: http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2008/02/my-deconversion.html

Thank goodness for Dan Dennett

** This man has been pivotal in rethinking my life. It started with Breaking the Spell, and continues with his other books. (see my librarything catalog). This is the story of his recent hospitalization, which I find quite inspiring.

Thank goodness by Daniel C. Dennett