Landan Land The Personal Blog of Landan Crosslin

Interview with David on Science, Religion, and the Loss of Faith

Original Audio can be found here. I sound pretty bad in this, with lots of stuttering. Wouldn't recommend listening to it, but it's there if you want it.

Landan: Ok, I'm here with my good friend David and I've been doing a series on the relationship between science and religion. David is someone who used to belong to the Christian religion until he moved to atheism. So I think he can bring a unique perspective to this topic. So...David

David: Yes.

Landan: In high school you seemed really devoted to your faith. What prompted you to start down the road of religious skepticism.

David: That's a funny question. It was actually started at Ouachita Baptist. Umm...there was a guy, Bart Ehrman, who wrote "Misquoting Jesus". It was talking about biblical inaccuracies, translation problems, and the different kind of manuscripts that they found. And so I prayed before I started reading the book. I said, 'God I will never deny you as king and I just want to know the truth, so guide me through this process'. And at first it was, ok I'm a Christian Humanist. So I evolved from fundamentalist to Christian humanism, where I derived my morality from reason. And then it eventually devolved into pure humanism, which is purely atheistic in its nature

Landan: All right.

David: It all started at Ouachita Baptist when I started reading...I believe the first book I read was actually on Psychology, it was about depression. That gave the perspective that we're the summation of our brain chemistry and so I thought where in the world is
there room for a soul in that. If some chemical's just zipping along the way it should in a brain, at what point would the soul say 'No I want it to go to the left'. And then suddenly it just turns left and starts going in the left direction. After reading the psychology book that was the main question that popped up into my head. And from there it just tumbled.

Landan: So you went through a period where you were switching back and forth between these ideas. So I guess the transition was a difficult one for you?

David: Oh it was extremely difficult. It's hard to break a habit that you've had for twenty years. I'm still having trouble with it. I think it was probably helpful that I gave up the idea of hell first, when I became a christian humanist. Simply because then I was able to look at things squarely without having to be afraid of...'Oh no eternity depends on it' and stuff like that. Whether or not I'll be happy and eternally blissful or eternally damned. Once you abandon the idea of hell, it's a lot easier to look at things in...had I not abandoned the idea of hell, I think I would probably still be a Christian, if simply out of fear.

Landan: How did your family react to your conversion to atheism?

David: Actually, funny story. My brothers didn't care,they're both agnostic actually. When I told my dad, he took me into the living room. He gave me about a two hour lecture on Godless liberalism in America and how the health care system won't work out. I think that was his mechanism for coping with it. I don't know how I would handle my child telling me he was an atheist if I was a Baptist for 50 years. So, I can't really blame him for having to cope with it. Other than that, I mean every now and again I get a lecture, but it's smooth sailing for the most part.

Landan: How did your mom react to that?

David: My dad told my mom. I don't know her initial reaction, but she did cry a bit in front of me, which was difficult, but that's mostly done now.

Landan: Right. So you still attend church right?

David: Yes I do.

Landan: Uh, do you want to explain why you do that?

David: [laughs] Sure. Well actually at church, everybody knows I'm an atheist. So when I told this girl who was sitting next to me, she said 'What are you doing in Church if you're an atheist?' I thought that was a strange question. Seems like everybody would want me in church, but it doesn't really matter. It's here nor there.

I still go to church because, partly out of a twenty year habit, partly because I want to continue to expose myself to something I don't necessarily agree with to keep me on my toes. Because, if all I did was read books I agree with then I would become intellectually dull. It's slightly invigorating to go to Church.

Landan: Other than the example you gave, what's the reception been like? Have people avoided you? How have most people reacted to you would you say?

David: They've actually been surprisingly friendly. They didn't become hellbent on trying to reconvert me or anything like that. They just treat me like a normal human and I really like that. It helps me feel like I belong to a community. I don't really relate to them on the same level that they do obviously to each other, but it's nice because I feel like I'm still accepted there.

Landan: That's good. So, you've hosted some debates there?

David: I'm actually still advertising the debates, but through a series of random events and circumstances we haven't actually been able to host a debate yet, but it's in the works still.

Landan: Is there anything you miss from your period as a Christian? Do you feel like there's anything you've lost in your transition process?

David: The loneliest person in the world is an atheist in an empty room. Simply because there's no one to talk to. So I will say that every now and then when I was a Christian when I got lonely I could just sit down and pray or read the bible and I'd feel like I was connecting with someone. But now that I'm an atheist I don't necessarily feel that divine company. I don't particularly feel a need for it, but it was comforting when I was a Christian to know that I'm never alone. As an atheist it's a different story.

Landan: So would you say that...I know this is kind of a cliche' that a lot of Christians use is like a God shaped hole. Do you feel that at all?

David: I don't necessarily feel a God shaped hole. For a while it felt like I had a God shaped hole in my heart, simply because I was raised that way. If you talk to a person who was born and raised atheist, they would think that idea was totally foreign. I think I'm progressing toward that. So either my heart is getting harder or it's just not caring.

Landan: A lot of Christians argue that creationism is a viable argument against evolution and they have all these different foundations like the Discovery Institute. Obviously you've looked at these ideas. What was it about them that you found unconvincing?

David: It doesn't predict anything, it doesn't have an intellectual fervor about it. Let's say that we found a new kind of fossil tomorrow and it completely baffled us. We could say, 'Ok we can't explain this, it's impossible to explain this because it's so foreign to us that we have no idea where it came from. So we're going to chalk it up to creationism, put it on a shelf and forget about it.' Now what if they'd done that with the dinosaurs, where something so foreign was initially found and they said oh I guess God did it and put it on a shelf and never worried about it. Where would we be? I mean,creationism doesn't predict anything. It doesn't satisfy any sort of curiosity, except on a very surface level. It's not a very viable scientific theory, largely because it can't be dis proven.

Evolution predicted DNA 70 years before it was found, no 90 years before it was found, and it predicted a genetic code. So, when 1952 rolled around and Watson and Crick discovered DNA or at least the shape and function of DNA, that strongly supported evolution. I can't think of any evidence that would support creationism except for a lack of knowledge.

Landan: A lot of Christians would retort that non-theists believe in evolution by default because it supports the idea they want to believe. What would you say to someone who argued that?

David: If God wanted to sit down with me tomorrow and wanted to have coffee with me, I'd be more than happy to do that. I could get to know the guy, we might become friends. Until that happens I see no reason to believe in a creator, God, or higher power. The idea that we're going to evolution by default is...I'm sure some people do it, but that's really faulty scientific reasoning.

I believe in evolution because it's the best thing out there right now. If they came up with a better theory then I would believe that. That's why I brought up the God example. If God sat down with coffee and said 'Hey come over here and drink with me', yeah I'd do it. Then I'd have a completely different look on things because there's evidence to support other things. I believe in evolution because there's evidence to support it. It explains a lot more than creationists give credit to it.

Let's pretend that you found an arc of pebbles over a stream in some forest. A creationist would walk up and say, oh it's the divine watchmaker. That arch couldn't have gotten there because if it was missing any stone it would just crumble. An evolutionist might walk up there and be initially perplexed, but then he'd say 'well wait, if I start out with a mound of pebbles and then a stream starts flowing through it, it's going to eat away at the pebbles beneath the arc until finally you do end up with a stable arc.'

If you talk about things like the evolution of the eye, which has been explained. The idea that creationists have a trump card on us simply because it agrees with what we already believe, that's really a moot point. Most evolutionists believe in evolution because it works, not because they already agree with it.

Landan: What about scientists like Francis Collins, who's head of the human genome project? He's an evangelist and he believes in evolution. What are your thoughts on this type of thinking that's been fairly prevelant now? That evolution and Christianity can coexist.

David: The big problem I have with that is, at what point would we acquire a soul? If you go back to the origin of life and say that life was something that God started. Except, that if you look further back, that can be explained with evolution. It's on a chemical level rather than a living level, an organic level. It's really just thermodynamics. I sent you that video.

Landan: Yes. (This is the video he's talking about)

David: The origins of life can be explained with thermodynamics and diffusion. It seems superfluous to believe in a creator when everything appears to be explained. When would we acquire a soul? When we started walking upright? That seems arbitrary. When would God say, 'Ok I'll give a soul to this guy, but not to his parents?'. Or maybe there are degrees of souls, of consciousness, where you develop.

It goes back to the original problem I have with the soul. At what point does it influence the physical without becoming physical? Then it can just be explained away by normal means. For something to metaphysically exist and then influence the physical. The metaphysical would have to manifest itself physically, at which point it's just abiding by all the other rules that govern the physical realm. Maybe there's a metaphysical realm, but I don't see that it has anything to do with this life.

Landan: Besides scientific issues, what moral and theological problems do you have with Christianity?

David: The feeling I get from Christianity is that people are afraid that if you stop believing in it that it won't be true anymore. That's why they have the idea of hell in there. I mean, how many people would be Christians if Christianity professed that there were no hell? What would be the driving factor to become a Christian? When you look at the other religions where they don't need a hell, there's Islam.

Landan: Well Islam has hell I think.

David: Yeah, Islam and Judaism have hell. Sheol. But if you look at the non judeo-christian religions, a lot of them actually lack a hell. I find those more appealing simply because it doesn't give me the feeling that I have to believe in it in order for the truth to be perpetuated by my belief. I'd rather believe in a religion where it doesn't need me to be true. That's just the feeling I get from Christianity. As far as morally goes, I've no idea what they've got against gay people. Is it bad to have too much love for someone? I just don't understand that.

Landan: Ok on that same note, a lot of the popular atheists like Richard Dawkins think that religion is a menace to society and that we need to eradicate it. What do you think about that?

David: That's kind of a double standard, because a lot of religions think atheism is a menace to society. There was a poll performed on Americans; 41% said they wouldn't let their child marry an atheist because they don't share the same view for America. To try and yank that sword away from the religious folk and use it on them, that doesn't seem right to me. If people want to pray in their closet and just leave me alone about it, I'm perfectly fine with that. As long as they aren't blowing up my building over it.

Landan: So you're also pretty knowledgable in the realm of physics. Have you learned anything in that field that bolstered your lack of belief in the supernatural?

David: Conservation of momentum. I mean past that, which is a pretty big foundation of physics, I can't think of much. Electron placement. If anything I could see room for metaphysical influence in that, because the best we can do is have a probability of where an electron might be. Even that's more of a god of the gaps idea. If I believe in a god of the gaps, then I'd rather just not believe in one at all.

Landan: Can you expand on conservation of momentum.

David: Oh, yes. Some chemical process is going on in your brain and it makes you want to do something naughty. Then a little angel on your shoulder says, 'no don't do that, you'll regret it'. So then you make the conscious choice not to do it. Who's to say that wasn't already predetermined? I'm not die hard deterministic about things. It's not to the point where I feel like everything's futile, but the idea that something metaphysical can influence the physical, would deny the laws of physics. The law of conservation of momentum says that unless something happens, everything will be the way it is. For that metaphysical force to influence the physical, that would kind of destroy physics at its core.

Landan: Well, thank you for your time. I really enjoyed this.