Religion: Science's Anti-Christ

So many ask me: Why do you have a problem with what other people think?

Because I might want to get on a bus in Israel someday or, I fear, get on a bus in Chicago in 5 years.

Here's a simple question: Why do we need religion?

Keep in mind that there's a difference between religion and spirituality. Religion is a set of teachings about the truths of both human morality and human history. Spirituality is the word that describes ones relationship with the reality around them.

Unfortunately, many of today's dominant religions rely on these things: Habit, Ritual, Loyalty, Fear and Sense of Purpose. They do not, however, rely on credible science. In fact, most of the religions of today are incompatible with the history of the world as it is constructed from verifiable evidence. Radiometric dating places the earth around 4.5 – 4.7 Billion Years Old while the Judeo-Christian calendar puts it at around 5700 Years, for example.

Of course, modern history has taught us that religion has been a fetter on scientific discovery. Copernicus, Galileo, Darwin, and so on have all been, at one time or another, condemned for their various findings. Not many of us can dispute the significance of their scientific work today, but that begs the question: If their discoveries turned out to be true and the Holy Bible untrue, then does the Bible have any merit at all? Can we cherry-pick which parts of God's perfect word are correct and which are bullshit?

Religion is the opposite of science in so many ways except one: They both make claims about the way the world is. In contradiction, science is a method for learning – an ever changing perception. As new evidence comes to light (and new ways of acquiring it) the view of what is being studied becomes enriched. Religion is a fixed piece of knowledge – the basis of which is contained in (usually) ancient texts. Questioning it (such as in science) can be one of the most egregious offenses. The only thing that gives religion its strength is the social culture dedicated to it.

Oddly enough, however, religious people are more atheist about other faiths of which they do not belong than most atheists are about all faiths.

Also, arguments of the faithful are impossible to debate, because they require no evidence for those faiths to begin with. How does someone argue against a statement like: I just know Jesus was the Messiah. Scientifically minded people are weakened by juvenile arguments, because you'll rarely ever hear them resort to saying the contrary: I just know Jesus was not the Messiah. Scientifically minded people require more evidence than what is available to give such a statement.

Like a drug, religion fills you with a sense of (albeit shallow) fulfillment. The sense of self-righteousness and God-given purpose allows religious followers the privilege of feeling special, larger than life, or even super human. We all know the kind – people who claim to look into the souls of others or feeling "presences" of the dead and so on. They also speak with a sense of entitlement as believers as they claim to know what is impossible to know and that the rest of us aren't as fortunate.

Then they claim that to be the case with scientists – that their arrogance is offensive. I'd like to point out that there's a difference between certainty and arrogance. When someone's job is figuring out the mutations of different viral organisms so vaccines continue to be effective, it would be tough to convince them that their certainty of evolution is false.

So, again, why the need for religion? It's not morality – that's for sure. The moral standards in most of the western holy texts are utterly outdated. Not even the most extreme fundamentalist follows all of the teachings of the Bible.

The purpose of morality is to limit conflict between social creatures. Chimpanzees, for example, have an excellent sense of morality and cooperation among their groups – all without God. Wolves and Coyotes – carnivorous predators - work effectively in social groups. They also share what is hunted. Again: No God. No Jesus. No Muhammad. No nothing.

If we don't need religion to be moral and its teachings of history are incorrect then what is its purpose? On the other hand, the role of religion as an unnecessary social divider is obvious. There are so many divisions between humans – color, sex, nation, class – why cloud the human species with more ridiculous sub-categories?

Now send me your hate mail.