An Atheist in the Woods
An atheist was walking through the woods.
'What majestic trees!
'What powerful rivers!
'What beautiful animals!
He said to himself.As he was walking alongside the river,he heard a rustling in the bushes behind him. He turned to look. He saw a 7-foot grizzly bear charge towards him. He ran as fast as he could up the path. He looked over his shoulder & saw that the bear was closing in on him..He looked over his shoulder again, & the bear was even closer. He tripped & fell on the ground. He rolled over to pick himself up but saw that the bear was right on top of him, reaching for him with his left paw & raising his right paw to strike him.At that instant the Atheist cried out, 'Oh my God!'Time Stopped. The bear froze. The forest was silent. As a bright light shone upon the man, a voice came out of the sky. 'You deny my existence for all these years, teach others I don't exist and even credit creation to cosmic accident. Do you expect me to help you out of this predicament? Am I to count you as a believer?'The atheist looked directly into the light, 'It would be hypocritical of me to suddenly ask you to treat me as a Christian now, but perhaps you could make the BEAR a Christian'?'Very well,' said the voice.The light went out. The sounds of the forest resumed.
11 comments:
This is a surprisingly bigoted and insensitive post. It is difficult to fathom how a blogger dedicated to hope, perseverance, and Christianity could be so religiously intolerant. This "joke" has many versions including "Muslim", "Christian", and ones with racial slurs.
"suprisingly bigoted and insensitive" Are you serious? What is so offensive to a non-believer? A bear speaking? Or the fact that he's saying a prayer? This post had no Muslim, and racial slurs within it. You want to spread your leftist non-believer hullaballoo, take it elsewhere. I happen to enjoy the posts from this blogger. By the way, where do you think "Hope" and "perseverance" come from? Some bio-electri-chemical reaction within the body? Lastly.. Last time I check there is no "Church" for Atheists. In fact, I think the mere suggestions that Atheists are religious, would upset most Atheists, certainly the ones that I know. - a caring (and believer) supporter
Well well well. Its been awhile since the blog has had any controversy. I hope the author of the first anonymous comment is still on the topic. If you knew our family, you'd know that the intentions of the contributors post, and the values we live within are family are far from the innuendo suggested in your comment. I personally have not see this type of "joke" in any form. Be it Muslim, Christian, or Creek Indian for that matter. But I would be interested in a follow up comment about how you feel this post is insensitive and bigoted. When Israel last bombed Palestine, did you comment on that? When huge numbers of people lambasted the Catholic church for the actions of a few, how did you comment then? When a suicide bomb went off in Islamabad the other day, what was your reaction? Most, if not all religions preach tolerance. However they also preach belief and support in their particular doctrine. Catholics preach love and tolerance and acceptance. But that goes only so far, otherwise you stop being Catholic and you in fact break from Catholic doctrine. To me, this "joke" speak to that tone. It acknowledges God. It acknowledges he listens to all, even those that choose to turn away and spite him. And it show that you should be careful what you wish for, since its not always what you think. Peace to you nonetheless my Brother (or Sister)
I am surprised that the first assumption is that I do not believe in God. I do, in fact, believe in God. I am also fascinated by what makes you think I am a leftist.
I believe that "Perseverance" and "Hope" are human nature. We want to become better people, so we persevere. We also "hope" for something better, a better life for ourselves or for someone else.
You are correct that there is no "Church" for atheists, though I never suggested that atheists had a church. However, I would argue that the words "religious intolerance" could be applied to those without religion.
To respond to "Ted", I am sure that the original poster did not mean to offend. However, I am also sure that the Australian singers, performing a Jackson Five hit in "blackface", thought their performance would be funny as well.
The post is "insensitive and bigoted" because an individual is killed solely because of his lack of religion. It is implied in the joke that he would have been saved had he been a believer.
I am saddened when Israel bombs Palestine, or when Palestine fires rockets into Israel. I am saddened by the the disgusting acts of some Catholics, then further saddened when the Catholic Church and pontiff choose to ignore it. I am not sure how jokes about a non-believer dying fit into Catholic doctrine, perhaps you could enlighten me?
If all religions preach some form of tolerance. Maybe it is time for parishioners (of all faiths) to practice what their religion preaches.
-First Anonymous Poster
"If all religions preach some form of tolerance. Maybe it is time for parishioners (of all faiths) to practice what their religion preaches."
That would be nice. And perhaps like you that is something I "Hope" for. However, knowing what I know (which might not be alot) and what I observe, there are some tenants (or morals or ethics, etc) that do not seem to transcend all the major religions in the world.
"However, I would argue that the words "religious intolerance" could be applied to those without religion." I would be interested in hearing a perspective on that argument. Not sure I see how religious intolerance could apply, ever to atheists. Maybe there is a case about general intolerance. But even then. It depends on what that tolerance is related to. If there existed (hypothetically) that had a core principal that abortion is good, is acceptable, and should be encouraged. Should a "Catholic" tolerate that? (we should love them and pray for them, but by tolerance of those views you are going against catholic doctrine) Should we "tolerate" the outspoken atheists try to change the "In God we Trust", or should we tolerate how only Darwinism as is allowed to be taught despite huge tracts of mounting scientific reason to support a view that Darwins Evolution theory can not cover everything. My point is that at some point, tolerance has to be belayed as it would result in direct conflict with ones own moral or religious tenants.
Responses welcomed
peace
Ted
p.s. frankly in 2009, I cant imagine anyone, anywhere what would think doing anything in blackface would be or could be funny. That is wicked poor taste. A man being eaten by a talking bear? My response. We all die sometime. Maybe the man in the joke.. maybe it was just his time. despite the bear....
"... there are some tenants (or morals or ethics, etc) that do not seem to transcend all the major religions in the world."
I believe that each of the major religions (Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, etc.), in pure form (read: not an extremist) all follow the same basic tenants.
I would argue that intolerance towards atheists be labeled "religious intolerance", not because atheism is a religion or even a religious belief, but the root cause of the intolerance is a religious issue (they don't share a mono or polytheistic religion).
I congratulate you on your final paragraph, committing not one, but three "red herring" logical fallacies - introducing abortion, "In God We Trust", and evolution.
I will conclude by saying that a recent Gallup poll showed that 40% of Catholics support abortion and 58% of Catholics support evolution as the best explanation for the origins of human life. Given that Catholics far outnumber the number of atheists (more than 2 to 1), your anger would be better targeted at your fellow Catholics.
Save the intelligent design debate for me.
- Kevin
Dont worry Kevin. I still have the last email on intelligent design we shared from, oh maybe a year + ago. While I doubt there little chance in me being able to soften you science leaning views, I have started pulled articles from top scientists (including Nobel winners) on the topic. But I'm withholding them for a time in the future :)
As for our anonymous poster...
"When I read that last post, I wondered if I was misreading parts as sarcasm or not" So I cant say for sure, so I'll assume it was. So from that perspective I'll comment...
Up until this post I felt intrigued and engaged in some lively discussion. But Gallup stats? Are you serious? My goodness, if those aren't the most meaningless things in the world. Even in High school statistics they teach you that stats can be used to suit anybodies need.
Its a wasted discussion to talk about the cafeteria Catholics in America. Yes they are out there. And there is a lot of them. Tits an issue within the Church. And sure there are people that claim to be Catholics and support abortion and Evolution. But what those people fail to understand is just saying you are Catholic doesn't make it so. In Catholicism you don't get the luxury to pick and choose what to believe on certain critical moral issue (such as right to life). Nobody said being a Catholic was easy. People (particularly Americans.. and speaking as someone with decades of extensive world travel) generally dont like things are that not easy. We all have free will. Its a wonderful gift. People can choose to belief what they want, and support what they want. But any true, practicing Catholic knows that supporting things such as Abortion is a moral sin. Again a practicing Catholic understands nothing good comes from being in a state of mortal sin.
To wrap up this episode..
three red herring logical fallicies? I got a laugh on that. Assuming that was sarcasm, that speaks volumes to you as an individual, and your full grasp on topics. The abortion fallacy. ha. The evolution fallacy a bigger Ha. Thanks for that laughs.. I'll spare the apologetics class and not bother with those tired rebuttals.
Peace
Ted,
Even if 5% of Catholics supported abortion, that is still more people than the total number of atheists in the US.
My "red herring" point is that you are trying to distract from the real discussion by throwing in a number of controversial topics.
I am not sure why you need to turn this into a discussion on Catholicism. The only way this would be relevant to our discussion is if you admit that Catholics hate atheists - in which case our discussion has been meaningless and I understand the reasoning for your intolerance.
Ok. Lets go back to "the real discussion". About a joke about an athestic in the Words, killed by a talking bear is some how bigoted and insensitive.
We'll leave Catholiiscm and its degeneration in the US to another post.
So lets talk.. offer me something.
You've provided nothing at all about how that specific joke is bigoted and insensitive. (granted everyone has a different level of sensitivity, and most agree that hypersensitivity is growing unbounded in the US). As someone who's attended, presented at, and is very active in many diversity based groups and activities, I feel that I'm no ordinary schmoe on the subject.
There are two sides to every coin. While I dont see or understand the perspective about how an atheistic would take offense at that joke. I could just as easily take issue with the joke as insensitive and bigoted in that an atheistic would have the audacity to turn their back on Jesus (as its a Christian Joke) only to cower at the last possible moment and expect some reprieve. As is if a lifetime of snubbing Christian faith is so easily overcome.
While valid perhaps to someone, neither perspective is terribly
deep or relevant.
(keep in mind we're leaving Catholicism out of this, since the resentment, judgment, and the connotations above would not be an example of good Catholicism)
On a new note.. I'm gonna plug a new "series" I hope to start on this blog. Its still percolating in my head.. but It'll be called something along the lines of "The Peace Manifesto"
Post a Comment