Bolt or Blake for Olympic gold?: Speed not important in deciding who to back

'Tis the season! The one that comes by once a four years, where some chosen few whose training behaviour has been good, will see officials come bearing them gifts of gold, silver and bronze. It's that global festival called the Olympic Games. And unlike the more common ones like Christmas, Easter, Thanksgiving and  Independence it is free of faith controversy. Not to say that we don't see images of religion on show, there were enough hymns during the Opening Ceremony to make me feel I was in St. Paul's Cathedral, but at least we secularists are not being accused of starting a 'war' on this particular historical celebration.  Thankfully there are no religious fanatics saying that we have lost the true meaning of the Olympics and need to get back to paying homage to the gods that live on top of Mount Olympus. It's a relief to be able to watch the games online or on television without having believers telling me that I have no right to be enjoying the spectacle when I have not accepted Zeus as my personal Lord and saviour.

Celebration of science, nature and human evolution

Yes, the Olympics is at least one party that the atheist can feel completely a part of. It's a chance to sit back and marvel at the super natural rather than the supernatural. Olympic sports are indeed a true demonstration of the beauty of science. The laws of gravity, angular momentum, centripetal and centrifugal forces are on show in every dive off the platform, somersault in gymnastics or hurl of the discus. Water currents are critical in the whitewater rowing, wind resistance when sprinting or doing a sport like archery. We see biology in how our physiology has evolved over time to make our bodies able to perform tasks that were once necessary to our basic survival. Being able to run fast to escape a predator,  fight to overcome a rival from another tribe, lift heavy objects to construct a place to live or throw a spear to kill an animal for food. To a large extent the games remind us what it is to be a basic human, trying to adapt and survive in our natural habitat.

Some of my friends in faith will no doubt tell me that the Olympics is also about 'spirit.' Digging deep to produce what you could never achieve with body and mind alone. Maybe, but I like to think of this 'spirit' as unlocking the potential which the body always had but the mind up until that moment didn't think was possible. It's not that there's a special non natural entity that makes the body do what the body really can't do.

If God, as many people think, is one who intervenes in nature, it is a miracle that the Olympics actually works at all. All the athletes in training or preparing for an event rely on the consistency of natural laws. They assume that if they toss a ball in the air it will take the trajectory that is predicted by Newton's Laws.They expect that there will be no trans dimensional being looking on that will throw things off a bit to favour the one that believes in him a little more strongly.  During the Olympics, athletes from every nation appear to have complete faith that God will not interfere with anything during their events. It seems that they are quite sure that whatever God they believe in will simply standby and let nature prevail.

Fans of the various events, regardless of their views on faith also appear to have no worries of spiritual interference. I have talked to a few of my Christian friends about their predictions of what will happen in London. Likely winners and losers and who will carry away the lion share of medals. Strangely enough, the belief system of the athletes never factors in. No one ever says that it depends on who prays more on the day, who has the right interpretation of theology or who has been washed in the blood.  But if God exists and cares how we worship and serve him and will punish and reward accordingly, these factors should at least matter a bit in the final analysis.

No, curiously this God factor never makes it to the discussion table. It's all about who is better prepared, who is in the best physical condition, who is stronger mentally or who is a better tactician. Of course the spirituality factor always comes in afterwards. God in his wisdom works retroactively, arriving after the fact is his trademark. So you will often hear the statement, " I prayed to God and that's definitely why I won" but almost never the statement, " I prayed to God and that's why I definitely will win."

Some Christians will hear athletes thanking God and tell me that it's foolishness.They will say flat out that God isn't interested in sports. He may like to watch but he doesn't care who wins. God has no favourite team. They will tell me that sports is actually too trivial for God to worry about anyway. Games are just something that we humans build up to be important, but they don't ultimately matter. God has bigger fish to fry, so to speak. I suppose they have a point. Perhaps he has  more critical things to do like ensuring that every human being gets at least one meal everyday, that there is no abuse of people based on gender or race, that epidemics don't ravage poor communities, or that earthquakes don't destroy cities. OK, forget that argument. On second thought, maybe Christians should stick to the idea of  a God of the games. At least the sporting God ensures that somebody comes out a winner.

The idea of a God that keeps entirely out of sports, I think would be an unfair God anyway. Why should people who dedicate their lives to be the best they can be in a discipline be singled out to be ignored? That would be almost as bad as the amputees that get snubbed everyday. It's strange also because athletes are some of the most religious people around, many with strong faith convictions. If God does not care about sports that means he has never answered a single one of their prayers to help them improve their performance . Who among people among faith would ever argue that God has never helped an athlete become a winner in the sport he or she has dedicated their entire life to? But that is the only logical conclusion we could come to if God is only a spectator when it comes to sports.

Well, I won't dwell on that anymore. The track and field starts today and I want my Caribbean friends to all focus on the competition. The showdown between Bolt and Blake, and Campbell and Frasier Price of Jamaica, Kirani James of Grenada, Bailey of Antigua,  Kim Collins the evergreen from St. Kitts Nevis,  the Trinidad male sprint relay and the depth of the Bahamas squad. Even dare I say it, Barbadian Ryan Brathwaite trying to make a comeback in the hurdles. The Caribbean has a lot to look forward to in these games and in spite of my criticisms of the region at times when it comes to the role of faith, there is no doubt that when it comes to sprinting our islands are not just on track but  proudly leading the way. I will certainly be screaming my lungs out for the region over the next week. Maybe this will be truly our time, I mean even our cricket results have been looking up recently.

Blake versus Bolt: The clash of the games

So, let the games begin! The swimming, gymnastics, rowing, diving and volleyball are all well and good, but we are now about to get out of the starting blocks for the REAL Olympics.  From a Jamaica, Caribbean and world perspective, much  has been made of the rivalry between Usain Bolt and Yohan Blake. This dual is certainly a mouth watering prospect. It's remarkable that just three years ago, it was inconceivable that Usain Bolt could have a rival. Back in 2009, the only dual on the track in the men's sprints was between Bolt at the clock and the clock was usually second best.

The first sign of Bolt's vulnerability was at the World Championships last year where he was dramatically eliminated from the final by a false start. That opened the door for Yohan Blake to take the gold and he has really not looked back since. He came frighteningly close to Bolt's world record in the 200 metres just weeks later. The indication that Yohan Blake "The Beast" meant business came in the Jamaica trials leading up to these games when he beat Bolt in both the 100 metres  and  200 metres.

Now the battle is really on. No longer is it a case of sitting back and wondering how many records Bolt will break in the meet. Things have changed in the last few years and many who would have backed Bolt without question just a year ago are now not as confident or have changed their minds. And why have people changed their minds so quickly? We can sum it all up in one word. EVIDENCE. Yes in watching these two over the last year there is evidence that Blake is on the up and Bolt may be on the way down and so predictions for who will win the gold have changed.

When I look back at what has happened in men's sprinting this year, I am reminded of that charge that we atheists have to face almost daily. Until now, whenever they have asked us the question, " Do you believe in a God?" The answer has been 'no'. It is 'no' today, it was 'no' ten years ago, it was 'no' 100 years ago. They see this consistency in answer and come to the conclusion that we are just 'no.' people. The answer has always been 'no' to the God question and will always be 'no' to the God question. There is no evidence we could possibly accept for the existence of a God. But that's simply not true, at least not for all atheists and I daresay not the majority.

In terms of where we are, we are about as convinced about God not existing as we were about Usain Bolt as a 100m champion a year ago.  For the years between 2008 and 2011, if you had asked anybody into track and field who would win a 100m with Bolt in the field, everyone (or close to it anyway) would have said Bolt, and they would have said it without thinking. It would have been said so naturally that it would have come across as a presupposition. As if Bolt was the only answer that could be given to the question. A person asking this question outside of the track and field fraternity could be excused for thinking we were all brainwashed 'Boltisciples', just following the herd, that none of us could think for ourselves. They could be excused for thinking that regardless of the evidence we were presented we would always go for Usain Bolt as our winner. They might have argued that we were just choosing Bolt as a winner because we liked him and wanted him to win. That was true for some, but definitely not all. I know quite a few who were not a fan of him and his antics but it was just impossible to deny that he was the fastest man in the world. The facts were just too clear. It's the same with God, many of us actually would like him to come and at least carry the baton for us a bit. However, we haven't even seen him hanging around the stadium with his track suit on.

Boltisciple apologetics

So, one year later we see that not all track fans are 'Boltisciples'. Not everyone believes in him as a track and field God. Some people at least have changed their position based on the evidence. I have no doubt that many atheists would change their position in God if the evidence came. To say that we won't change our minds even with evidence is to make the Bolt assumption, which was clearly fallacious. To test your theory, you just have to bring us a Yohan Blake, but unfortunately none has come.

Another thing important to note from this Bolt versus Blake story is that in making predictions on things its better to wait to get as much information as you can. If you make decisions early about something you deny yourself the opportunity to benefit from knowledge you may acquire later. Even now, it is a bit premature to say who will win the 100 m final. We will no doubt get more evidence after seeing the heats and semi finals. Indeed in two days time we may be predicting neither Bolt nor Blake. That's the nature of sport.

It's unfortunate that when it comes to the God question so many Christians want a decision right away. I don't know if it's because we have so many sprinters in the Caribbean, but it seems all the evangelicals want a fast decision when it comes to Christ.

" Come to Jesus now before it's too late!" is their eternal cry.

 But I think making a decision like that today is definitely jumping the gun. If you commit to Jesus now and evidence comes that he is not the one later, THEN it will be too late for you as a Christian. I don't know about you, but I prefer to wait before I decide. I don't see the need for the rush. If God provides the evidence one minute before judgement, I will make it before the bell, I  promise.
I don't think this jumping on to the bandwagon thing has only affected Christians, I think that some of the track fans have revealed themselves as true 'Boltisciples' as well. Let me make it clear, I am not saying that those who still believe Bolt will win have an irrational allegiance. There is definitely in spite of the Blake surge, still many reasons to support Bolt as champion. He's done it before and he is a bona fide star, that counts for a lot. However, I have heard from some people a fair degree of Bolt apologetics. Claims that Bolt deliberately let Blake win in the Jamaica championship out of generosity. That he wanted to give  Blake part of the spotlight or even wanted to lure him in to false sense of security. Without any evidence to support any of these conspiracy theories they are convinced they are right about Bolt and are angry that anyone could even consider the possibility of Bolt losing in London in spite of seeing what happened in Jamaica. I would have thought Bolt would have relished the opportunity to stamp his authority and send a strong message before London and put on a show for his adoring home fans. But this is a theory quickly dismissed by 'Boltisciples.'

 Some were saying after the 100m loss, that Bolt would be back for revenge in the 200m at the trials. We know what happened to that prediction, but these fanatics just moved the goalpost, determined to deny any anti Bolt evidence. That's what happens when you commit to an idea too early, whether it be Bolt as the Olympic champion or Jesus as the eternal saviour. That's way I say it's better to wait.

So, who do I have to win the big showdown right now? Well I'd have to say Yohan Blake at the moment. I am of course in no way discounting the 'Lightning Bolt', but Blake may just be a little more hungry and he seems to be on an upward trajectory. I am sure that the world at large would prefer a Bolt win, it's just hard to match him for charisma. It will of course be a great race either way, not forgetting Powell, Gay and Gatling who also could be in there. Of course many of you will probably be reading this after the result is known. If Bolt has won, I am sure that the 'Boltisciples' will be all over the place saying that they never ever had a shadow of a doubt about it. But I would be skeptical of all their  big talk after the fact, because deep down inside 'Boltisciples' just like born again Christians, always have a fear deep down of the "Mark of the Beast."

Mixing up the steps: Why theists continue to trip themselves up

'Dancing with the Stars' www.eonline.com

It rained on the parade, but from all reports the Reason Rally in Washington DC last Saturday was a roaring success. It must have been a unique experience to be among so much rationality in one place. I have managed to catch a few clips of the presentations on youtube and it has been amazing to hear speaker after speaker stating emphatically that "the world is 14 billion years old not 6000." It was refreshing to hear such statements greeted with rousing applause from the secular masses. At the same time it was amusing to hear the statement of a simple scientific fact stirring such emotion. It's like hearing screams of delight when a physicist says that the acceleration due to gravity here on earth is 9.8 metres per second squared.

Immediately, it occurred to me what is the big difference between the many Christian mass worship events I have seen and a rally like the one last week. A religious speaker would never start off a sermon with a scientific fact. A leader in faith would start by appealing to the human desire for meaning, purpose and moral guidance and then include in some way these considerations in determining what the facts are. There is quite a contrast there.

 The secular thinker approaches life by taking two distinctly separate steps.

Step One: Investigate the world to try to determine what the facts of the reality you live in are.

Step Two:  Seek to find meaning within the reality you discovered in step one.

So for the atheist, facts come first. It's a simple two step rhythm. Fact then meaning, that's the way we groove it. This is important to remember because things are not as clear when it comes to theists.They consistently mix up these two steps. Trying to find meaning without having a clue about facts then attempting to get facts to fit the motif set up by the meaning.

If you are ever on the dance floor trying to put down some moves with a theist, you'll see what I mean. You try to set up the basis for the dance by telling them that they need to start with the right fact first. But, they will shake their head at you. They will tell you that you're too boring, too mechanical, dancing is an art not a science, it's just about feeling it. So, when you start with a fact like, the earth is 14 billion years old, or that we have reached our present state as a species through gradual evolution, they will stare at you blankly. So what? What does that mean?  Why is that important? How does that make me a better person? How does that give life value? 

This is a huge misstep on their part but they don't recognise it. They are surprised when we stare back at them just as quizzically. Meaning? Value? Purpose? We are talking about scientific facts, the first obligatory step in learning about the world around us. To try to find purpose within these brute facts is to pull us entirely in a different direction and that is where they start to stumble in their arguments even more. It may surprise you, but if we as atheists don't keep the balance in our arguments when something like this happens, we can end up flat on our faces alongside them.

Yes, before you can say 'Baila!' they are doing the slide into an argument from meaning, making you feel embarrassed for trying to fact things up. They talk about how believing in evolution and big bang, means that everything is just an accident and there is no reason to value anything in life. You are just a biological machine, molecules in motion, a chemical reaction just fizzing away into oblivion. There is just no point to anything if  you just follow science. In fact they tell you it is a mystery to them why you even bother doing anything. Why bother even learning to dance? In fact, why not just go and kill yourself?

It's at this point in the dance  that there is that awkward pause in the routine. You realise that things are already going awry with the simple 'two-step' that you had set out to do, but the music is playing and other people around are watching you. So, you have no choice but to think on your feet. You can do one of two things. You can pull your partner firmly by the hand and lead them back in to 'step one.' Tell them to stop tap dancing around the issue and stick to 'fact'.in step one whether they like it or not. This can be a risky move though. If you are dancing with a stubborn partner and they don't trust your ability to lead, this could spell trouble. They will just resist and make you look like the one who doesn't know the moves. They will insist that you need to follow them and that your resistance just confirms that you really have no idea of  'meaning.' Atheists in such situations can become frustrated and accuse their theist partner of not giving a 'fact.' Major tension can ensue and in a worse case scenario,  the tug of war can send you both crashing down to the floor in a millisecond. Once that happens, it will be very difficult to get back on your feet and neither of you will have any credibility in the eyes of the guests for the rest of the night, no matter  how much each of you tries to throw the blame on the other partner.

Another option is to go with the flow, smile and pretend that the stumbling and sliding is all part of the choreography. If your partner wants 'meaning' do 'meaning.' So instead of doing what you would prefer to be doing, which is giving the evidence to establish the 'fact' in step one you do a bit of a shuffle and spin around seamlessly into 'meaning.'

You take this opening to reveal that there is indeed meaning in the atheist position. A finite life means that every day is worth more. No ultimate judgement means we have to ensure we have as much fairness and equity as we can  in this world. The freedom from religion gives us the ability to live fulfilled lives which we can enjoy according to the things which we individually find fulfilling, rather than dancing to the beat of somebody else's drum.We can live our lives in a way that clearly benefits ourselves and others, rather than waiting for a cue from some unknowable capricious cosmic being who works in mysterious ways. How much meaning is there in a life where followers are required to bow down and worship a God every day in order to escape punishment? How much meaning is there in a  life after death where you sit around singing praises to God everyday and playing the occasional harp solo?

You smile smugly after you make these comments. There you have it. You're back in the groove, your atheistic meaning in life can match every theistic move they make. That's great, until your partner starts without warning to bring in this twist. The theist will look at you and say, " Oh, you don't want to believe in God, because you don't like the impositions he puts on you. He can't be real just because you can't understand him or don't find meaning in what he wants you to do. But who are you? You can't make God who you want him to be! God is real! Facts are facts! The truth is the truth whether you like it or not!" Wow, you suddenly realise what has happened here. Once again, it's trouble in the dance hall. Your partner has somehow stumbled from meaning back into facts again. This is what you were begging for earlier but now the timing is off, you're both way behind the beat.

Now things are really confused, you have no idea when and where things will move after this. It's 'fact' and 'meaning' meshed into an incomprehensible concoction of hand waving, head bobbing and foot stomping in all directions. It's obvious to all and sundry now that neither of you knows what is going on and you are both tripping. So, what do you do now? You have realised that you are not likely to look very good if you follow the theist lead in this dance. If you go back to speaking about the scientific factual bass of your position, they will pull you back into talking about the lack of 'meaning'  in that step. You go into 'meaning' and they will tell you that you are really an atheist out of emotion, wanting to believe something even though it has meaning only for you. They will imply that you don't really care about objective facts, which of course can only be discovered when revealed by their God. You will get very dizzy from the constant spinning and it's not likely to end well. In many cases like this, I have known atheists to just walk away. Hold up their hands, say they have had enough, gracefully walk off the dance floor and let someone else cut in. This may appear to be the honourable thing to do, but it often backfires. Your partner as well as others on the floor, will heckle you, do the 'chicken dance' in front of your face. They will tell you that you have the fancy talk but you can't handle it when the heat is on. They will take your withdrawal as an admission that theists are simply better on the dance floor than you.

Take control of your partner

You can take a more aggressive route and stick to the dance routine as you know it should be done and do some advanced 'fact' steps that you know your partner will never be able to follow. You can deliberately then show others around how poor the theist's dancing skills are and how out of step with reality they are. In all likelihood the theist will be the one to  leave you this time, letting you do your own thing in front of your friends. You may think that this is a good way out and that it is better to have your partner being the 'chicken'  than you. If you think that way, you'll  be wrong. Onlookers on the dance floor don't treat atheists and theists equally. You are likely to find a cool glass of beer splashing down on your perspiring face within seconds. Abuse being hurled at you from all directions. Your friends will call you out for embarrassing your partner who clearly was not at your skill level. They will say  that you never really wanted to have a fair dance in the first place. It was all about you, just trying to show off with your arrogant self. Just because you went to some prestigious dance academy you wanted to make a young amateur look stupid. You are a coward, who would never be up to dancing with an equal.

I won't tell you a lie. It's not easy being an atheist dancer. But if you keep a smile on your face and generally respect others around you, some of your dance moves will be copied by the crowd around you. They may not catch on right away, but you might encourage them to practice on their own at home. Before you know it, they could be dancing like you too, doing the 'fact' step first. You have to reassure them that 'fact' first doesn't mean that facts are all that matters. It's just that you have to let the meaning fit around the facts rather than the other way around. Indeed,'meaning' in step two may be more important than the 'facts' in step one.  There is certainly more style and flair associated with step two. It's meaning that gives us much of our desire to do something. For many scientists it is the drive to find out what the facts are that actually gives life the meaning. But that is not the case for everybody and we need to recognise that. For some, the meaning that comes from believing in a God will not be matched if they go the atheist route. Nonetheless, there are times when meaning comes along to surprise us. I don't think I have met any atheist who has told me that their move to atheism came as a result of looking for meaning. Most were quite happy with the meanings that they already had in theism, but they just wanted to investigate more and find truth, atheism just happened to be the result. They found eventually much joy and meaning in being godless but that all came later, well after the fact. I don't think any of us would have been able to see that joy from the other side of the theistic fence.

It is true that we are "Good Without God" and we should keep letting people know that, but let's not lead the theists into confusing the steps. We don't believe in God because of what the facts tell us, the evidence that is glaringly absent, not because we can live better lives without him. If living a life without God was miserable and depressing, we would still be atheists because for us, facts come first.

Let's hear it for the facts!

So, let's keep cheering for the facts as we did last Saturday and encourage our theist friends to do likewise, because it takes two to tango. We want them to follow or lead not because they will feel better for it, but  because we all have a basic obligation to understand as much as we can about our world in order to make the best decisions. Both on our own behalf and on behalf of others in it. It's similar to how a driver must seek to understand all the traffic laws in a country if he nor she is to avoid putting other road users at risk. Learning how to interpret traffic signs and signals is not the most exciting activity in the world but lives could very well depend on us getting these basic facts right.

So, let's keep the rallies going and inviting the theists to come dance with us on our stage, but let us never allow them to sidestep the critical issues. We must constantly remind them that when they are dancing with us they must pay close attention to our footwork, which requires that they always, yes always, lead with the facts.