Graham, Crackers?

Occasionally I will read the newspaper column written by the Reverend
Billy Graham. I know what you are thinking, Yeeelch! Newspaper!, but I can't
help myself as it is a holdover from my youth when my dear grandmother used
to force me to sit absolutely still while she read his articles to me against
my will. A few times I actually agreed with him, but normally I was merely
indifferent.

However, as in the case of his column of Wednesday, August 11th 2010
the only conclusion I could reach is that Rev. Graham had lost his mind.
Someone had written in to say that the kindest, most thoughtful person they
knew said she was an atheist They went on to say that they had thought that
one would have to know God in order to behave like this but now no longer
thought that this was necessarily true.

I was fine up to this point, then he offered his answer and immediately
offended me like no other time before

“If your friend comes to Christ someday, she will be an even better
person than she is now.”

Alright, hold the presses. (literally) I have a slight problem with
this. To say that someone you do not know would automatically be a better
person just for accepting a religion, in my opinion is unreasonable and wholly
inaccurate. I've known way to many Christians to fall for that one. Now some
would say that those weren't REAL Christians. If this is the case then I
surmise that only about ten to twenty percent of Christians are REAL Christians.
His statement amounts to the opinion that the worst Christian is a better person
than the best Atheist. The fact is most of the worst people I've ever known
couldn't stop talking about their religion or God as if doing so excused the
most abhorrent of behaviors. To be fair I'm sure there are plenty of truly rotten
atheists as well. He then surprisingly ads

“Perhaps she simply has a sunny personality, as some people do.”

Wow. This one really caught me off guard. I don't think he is even trying on this one. This is an prime example of over simplification on a grand scale, and completely unworthy of the reverend's intellect. Maybe Stalin had a sunny personality as well, jovially sending his enemies off to the gulag, but it would not have made him a better person or even to seem like one.

And then the finale; “She's not this way because she's an atheist-”
Agreed. "In fact she's this way in spite of her atheism.” Disagreed. Completely.


And then; “because a true atheist has no real reason to believe in
right and wrong, or to behave sacrificially toward others.”

Hmmm. How about behaving that way simply because it is the right thing
to do. I would sooner question the character of someone who behaves this way
out of the fear of punishment only, than someone who has nothing to lose either
way. I have often wondered about this, is it really kindness if it is done
simply for self-preservation. Are you a better person if you do right and
sacrifice only because you are afraid of the alternative, rather than the
belief that it is the right thing to do? Can you sincerely love a God out of
the fear of the consequences without it breeding even a hint of resentment? Why
would an intelligent God want your worship or love under such duress in the
first place? Having questions about organized religion is nothing new, and it
has rarely made much sense to me. Why want to be worshiped at all? Why punish
when you could teach? If the goal is to become better people, wouldn't learning
be better than torment. (I feel the same way about prison, I do not see it as
rehabilitation or punishment, but simply prevention) Maybe separating yourself
from the rest of humanity through negative behavior is its own punishment.
Maybe I'm not smart enough to understand all this but I assume we all have a
conscience for a reason. More on this subject later.