On atheism, believing and intelligence...

There are the so-called secular cities, like Seattle where Driscoll preaches or more evidently, Manhattan where Tim Keller preaches. And then there are the cities like Dallas, as described by Matt Chandler, where people think they know Christianity when they really don't. They're the dechurched or the hyper-religious. And then you have Quebec.

Quebec, I think, is a little different. It's not secular and it's not dechurched Christians. It's some sort of angry hybrid of the two. People here don't just think church is old-fashioned and behind the times. People here actually hate it and everything it represents. Whether it's because of all of the sexual abuse at the hands of priests and preachers that makes headlines, or it's because each successive generation was taught less about the gospel and more about religion all while getting more and more educated (and hardened) - either way, it doesn't bode well for Christianity in Quebec.

Some dude, self-described as "a married atheist libertarian with a strong distaste for liberals" (from this article), from London School of Economics and Political Science published a study in which he determined that in accordance with evolutionary expectations, "people with high IQs are deemed more likely to be liberal, monogamous non-believers than those who are less intelligent."

He seems to be arguing that being liberal, monogamous and a non-believer is more evolutionarily forward because:
a) Being liberal implies you help provide resources to those in need, to no benefit of your own;
b) monogamous people have evolved further than the hunter-gatherer-polyamorous genre;
and
c) those hunter-gatherers were also more likely to try to find meaning or spirituality in their surroundings in an effort to understand or explain the goings on in nature.

Of course, those points are me paraphrasing so again, here's the link to the article I read.

Ok.

So they think some conservative, religious.. uh.. polygamists? will be offended by these findings.

First, just because a study says believers are dumber doesn't mean we all suddenly caught a case of the dumb just because "science" says so. ("Science" being in quotes because I haven't read the original article and if it's just one dude's opinion, that's not exactly science.)

I don't remember ever taking an official IQ test in my youth, but every time I do one for fun, I score somewhere between 135 and 145 (although I always feel they inflate the numbers to make people feel good about themselves). Frankly, I think those numbers (even when accurate) are absolutely meaningless, but that's my personal opinion. You know why I feel that way? Because who writes those tests? Is that person, like, a 200 scorer? Are they the ultimate genius in the universe? How can somebody with, say, an average IQ write a test that will stump somebody smarter than them? Unless God writes the test Himself, I'm not sure that it means anything except that the taker of the test thinks in a similar way to the writer(s) of the test.

Just to cement my point, if I know you well enough and you write me a multiple choice exam on any subject, even a subject I know nothing about, I could probably ace that test. Not because I know what the hell the answers are, but because I know you and how your mind works and what tactics you would likely use to throw me off. Honestly, it's how I passed some of my physics classes. And if you really wanted to make it easy on me, all you have to do is read me the questions. I will fairly confidently pick out the right answer just by the subtle changes in your voice. It has nothing to do with intelligence, rather a disproportionate level of manipulative skill that comes from being messed with enough over the course of my short lifetime to always judge situations and read people in order to protect myself. It's not about knowing the answers but knowing what they are looking for, and that is driven by the fundamental motivations of their person, which is exactly what the least trusting of us is consistently aware of.

But I digress.

George Stroumboulopoulos, aka "Canada's boyfriend", the host of The Hour on CBC was the one who highlighted this study and poked my debatey bits about it. Right away, I knew the answer. But first, at the end of his show, he ran the usual mock headline, and today's was: "God on smart atheists: I made them that way". (Which, by the way, had an extra dimension of funny to it seeing as Strombo's show, I would have thought, is really left, liberal and far from religious supporting, although his mom is very religious and he did have Billy Graham's daughter on tonight...)

The answer as to why atheists are statistically smarter is because it is exactly that that drives them away from God. If we look at the story of Adam and Eve in the garden, the most important part (to me anyway) is that Adam and Eve chose independence over God (and consequently, messed up the world because no matter how good we think we are, we're all broken and irreparable without God's mercy). So here's the cycle:
Man doesn't understand something as pertains to his soul and/or the universe -> there must be a God who created all this -> something bad happens, some sort of suffering occurs, something just doesn't make sense at all, we are faced with a choice in which leaving God seems favorable -> there is no God, God was just an illusion created as a buffer for our fears, God isn't important.

At this point, there can be two directions:
1) If God chooses this person to have faith (as Ephesians 2:8 says, "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God..."), and the person decides to either pray for his faith to be restored and begin the seeking process or God simply restores it somehow;
or
2) If this person is either not chosen to have faith or not chosen yet or has an alternate path to God's glory (I won't presume to know how God chooses or works), then they tend to set out to prove that there is no God, or no need for God, through scientific reasoning.

Of course, they never successfully prove that there is no God, rather prove the aspects of creation that we don't understand fully, and that understanding or awareness is what inevitably comes with intelligence, and especially with a healthy curiosity.

I don't doubt that if you are a person of faith, the more curious you are, the more intelligent you are and the more open you are, the more likely you will encounter periods in your life where you absolutely lack faith, where you wonder if there is a God or if you just believe to appease some sort of inner fear or temporary need. But the line between a smart atheist and a smart Christian is drawn at independence and pride.

When I first realized I fell for Jesus, I could have shut that down. I could have repressed it, thrown it into some far off dark corner of my brain and chalked it up to being accidentally manipulated or momentarily brainwashed. I could have taken my life back and not upset nearly everybody I knew. I would have been the life of the party had I decided to present facts debunking the Bible, God and Jesus to my atheist and agnostic posse who knew very little about Christianity but presumed to know it all anyway. It would have been easy to fall back into the old habits that have been burned into me my entire life.

But what if it's true? What if? What if the indescribable feeling of contentment when my soul feels connected to God is actually because it's connected to God? What if God chose me? What if?

And what if Jesus was real? And what about all the atheists who decide to research Him to prove He's a fake and end up screwed like me and have to shamefully switch teams?

What kind of intelligent scientist am I if I say something I have never researched is not true or deny the information that is readily available and say it's impossible to know whether it's true or not? It's kind of like the "scientists" who say there is no problem with corn syrup or trans fats. They just haven't done their homework. They haven't approached the subject with an unbiased, real determination to get at the truth, even if it's unfavorable to their profits, their social status or their own beliefs.

In theory, it is impossible to prove there is no God. No matter how far you go back in the Earth's history, and how much you explain, there will always be another question. How many questions do intelligent atheists have to ask before they're satisfied that there is no satisfaction in their answers?

Intelligence is an idol. It's something that gives us value. And I know that when I thought I was better than the believers, my intelligence gave me pride. I know that I felt I had more value because I was able to think for myself and think logically and strive for awareness rather than shielding myself under a shroud of religion.

But I'm still me. I'm still the girl who questions absolutely everything, and I still live in this place where Christians are morons who just don't know better (yet), and I still have faith. And life was easier without it- just like how the gay people I know say, "Do you really think we'd choose a life with more obstacles and challenges?" would I really choose Christianity? Was it my choice? If the God I believe in, the God of the Bible, is real, then I didn't choose it at all. And frankly, I believe I didn't choose it. I know the disdain I had for religion. I know the hate I felt. I know how deep-seeded my cringe mechanisms were and still are in the face of Christianity, or any other faith really.

When somebody with no missional experience and no concept of altering the message appropriately for the audience blurts out something about Jesus in a room full of bitter, intelligent atheists, I cringe. Visibly. It almost hurts. :D It's an innate reaction at this point. And I tend to be the witty one in the room, so you can imagine the product of my (former?) disdain mixing with my wit in the face of blatant Bible-thumping.

No, I didn't choose Christianity. I did try to choose to be gay for a while after the endless string of abusive men, but that wasn't mine to choose either. *shrugs*

My point being I'm a smart girl (I think) and as a result of my intelligence and curiosity, I worked hard at learning about Christianity and no matter how scientific the approach was, God is about the heart and that's where He got in.

A lot of people who don't believe say they've already read the Bible, several times even. Most had to read it in school or something. But it's not just a book, you know? You can't just read it. You have to pray on it, feel it, open yourself up to the idea that maybe the words are alive, that maybe it's an entire spiritual experience rather than just words on the page. Because without that openness, it is just a book, and you'll be able to read it over and over and over again and never see the point.

Keeping faith in a place where faith is frowned upon is difficult, and sometimes, I lose it. Sometimes, it occurs to me that I don't feel God, that whatever it was I might have felt before was just a craving to be loved or a deep loneliness or a denial of some sort or maybe indigestion (hehe). Sometimes, usually when I'm driving, I get this, "Crap, what if I have to tell all the atheists they were right and this was just a phase?" idea wave through my brain, and really, I'm not the type of person to shy away from that kind of admission. If it happens, I'm ready to come out with it. They're likely going to throw a party or something. Maybe dunk me in mud to get the baptism cooties off me. :D But then I remember what got me into this mess in the first place- I asked. With an open heart and an open mind, I asked God to get in. And He did. And so that's how I keep my faith here: I ask.

A lot of it is dealing with the Holy Spirit too, even if I have no idea what that's all about yet.

John 14:26 says this:
But the a Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

I'm still not clear on the whole Holy Spirit thing, but I know that there are times when things just sort of stand out and if I follow those things that stand out, I find God again. For example, the other day, I was reading Counterfeit Gods, and it occurred to me strongly that haven't read my Bible in ages. I signed up for the "Bible in a year" thing, but my reading is weak and slow (I never read jack when I was a kid), and now, *checks email inbox*, being the first of March, I am already at least 49 days behind. I say "at least" because I know I clicked some accidentally and marked them "read" when they so weren't. Has there even been forty-nine days in 2010? Seriously. :D Anyway, so I'm reading the book and this, from page 17, stands out:

Paul understood the true meaning of Isaac's story when he deliberately applied its language to Jesus: "He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all- how will he not also, along with him, freely give us all things? (Romans 8:32)

- Tim Keller's Counterfeit Gods

I kept reading to page 18, and ended up stopping to write the blog post a couple down from this one on having cake and eating it too and after writing that, which was at all hours of the night, I picked up my giant ESV study Bible and meandered over to Romans 8. That quote from page 17 doesn't stand out. It doesn't really hit hard or tug at the heartstrings or provoke some sort of emotional reaction, does it? It's just... *shrug* I mean, yes, it's great that God would give us all things freely and that He gave us His Son, sure. But that specific bit of text isn't all that impressive, and yet, it stood out that night. It's one of those things you can ignore as a fleeting thought of no consequence, or you can follow it and see where it goes. And it's also one of those things where when you ask God to get back in and He tries to, you really want to be listening.

And so I did. Just in case.

The good thing about being a newbie who reads excessively slowly is that most of the Scriptures are new to me. It wasn't as though I read the Romans 8 reference and was all, "Oh, yes. Romans 8. Classic." No, I turned to Romans 8 without a clue as to what it was. Honestly, even though I've read Matthew and John a bunch of times, if you whipped out a chapter number, it's likely it'd all be new to me anyway.

So this is what I found in Romans 8 on a night I was questioning my faith and asked:

35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?
[...]
37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Of course, being that I'm a smart girl, my second reaction is that it's just a fierce coincidence, a lucky draw. My first reaction, the one I quickly brush away just instinctively, is that God answered. And the difference between being an atheist/agnostic and a person of faith is after my second reaction, I go back to the first and let it make me smile.

And then I do that kiss two fingers, touch my heart, hold 'em up to the sky thing and laugh at myself. :D