An atheist sermon

November 17, 2012 • 9:52 am

Jerry DeWitt is a former Pentecostal minister turned heathen, a graduate of Dennett and LaScola’s “Clergy Project,” and now director of the organization “Recovering From Religion“.  You may remember the moving profile of him in the New York Times Magazine last August: “From Bible-belt pastor to atheist leader.” (Read it if you haven’t.)

This rousing two-minute atheist “sermon,” delivered at Reason at the Rock (the annual meeting of the Arkansas Society of Freethinkers), shows that DeWitt retains his preaching skills, and, despite his tribulations, has a great sense of humor.

h/t: Gregory

25 thoughts on “An atheist sermon

  1. Delicious!

    I haven’t been to church in 50 years but this rings true.

    That is how the sermons went.

    Is his a mistake? Only 2 min? Agin Religion?

    How can that be?

    1. It is a joke, it’s a satirical attempt at what an evangelical atheist sermon might sound like, provided people could stop laughing long enough, of course. 🙂

      1. Clearly I have been deprived in the diversity of my religious experience.

        It didn’t make sense that he would ask if he could get a Darwin Award.

        Everything before that was so funny, my eyes were leaking.

  2. Whoa American sermons are awesome, it’s like he’s singing. Our priests are rather boring, they just mumble and mutter, and thank monkey they don’t just recite the mass in Latin anymore.

    1. As you might expect, there’s a huge variety.

      That sing-song style is poplar with certain types of fundamentalists. If I’m not mistraken, it first gained popularity with the tent revival movement. Many Black Baptist preachers also have a similar style; it should come as no surprise that Dr. King delivered his speeches in the same style as Rev. King preached his sermons.

      But we also have our boring droners, too. Lots of ’em. It’s rare for me to do a gig at a church and not have to struggle to stay awake for the sermon. Most of the ones where I succeed, it’s because the preacher is seriously talking about some particularly insane bit of the Bible as if it actually happened, and I’m amazed at the spectacle.

      b&

      1. i>”Most of the ones where I succeed, it’s because the preacher is seriously talking about some particularly insane bit of the Bible as if it actually happened, and I’m amazed at the spectacle.”

        😀

  3. Now there’s a confused fellow.

    It has never been documented that prescriptive information could be derived from physics and chemistry but he has come to believe that it was.

    On the other hand the only source of prescriptive information we have ever experienced is from an intelligence (a mind)
    and he has stopped believing this.

    Alas, It takes all kinds…….

    1. Not confused at all. I gather from your comment that you think god lends us moral guidance. But in fact there are examples of “prescriptive information” (by which I assume you mean “moral rules”) found among all kinds of social animals on this little rock of a planet. They wouldn’t be social animals without rules of how to behave in the presence of other critters like them.

      Your assertion is simply false. And I’d request that you provide evidence that there is a god up there (which you term “a mind”) at all. In the absence of such evidence the case is clear. You don’t need such an entity to find “prescriptive information”. We humans create it perfectly well on our own.

      1. I think phosphoros99 is referring to David Abel’s creationist ID notion of Prescriptive Information:

        Is life physicochemically unique? No. Is life unique? Yes. Life manifests innumerable formalisms that cannot be generated or explained by physicodynamics alone. Life pursues thousands of biofunctional goals, not the least of which is staying alive. Neither physicodynamics, nor evolution, pursue goals. Life is largely directed by linear digital programming and by the Prescriptive Information (PI) instantiated particularly into physicodynamically indeterminate nucleotide sequencing. Epigenomic controls only compound the sophistication of these formalisms. Life employs representationalism through the use of symbol systems. Life manifests autonomy, homeostasis far from equilibrium in the harshest of environments, positive and negative feedback mechanisms, prevention and correction of its own errors, and organization of its components into Sustained Functional Systems (SFS). Chance and necessity—heat agitation and the cause-and-effect determinism of nature’s orderliness—cannot spawn formalisms such as mathematics, language, symbol systems, coding, decoding, logic, organization (not to be confused with mere self-ordering), integration of circuits, computational success, and the pursuit of functionality. All of these characteristics of life are formal, not physical

        PZ Myers had some fun with that twaddle here:- More bad science in the literature

    2. On the other hand the only source of prescriptive information we have ever experienced is from an intelligence…”

      I agree. Bob Dylan was the shit!

      😉

    1. In Louisiana – sorry, sometimes I’m too USA-focused for this website’s vast readership…

      We’ve had several superb speakers give talks at the student atheist/agnostic/freethinkers group at Louisiana State Univ, including DeWitt. Large turnouts, too. Gives me a little (LITTLE) hope for this lost state.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *