A Praying Skeptic?

I don't think Allan Brawley really understands what it means to be a skeptic. In "A Prayer to Jesus From an Admiring Skeptic" he makes a couple rather large assumptions, tacitly accepts beliefs without any scrutiny, and blatantly disregards important details.

For the sake of clarity, skepticism is the view that there is no reason to accept something is true until there is a body of evidence that supports that belief.

Why pray? There is no evidence that prayer works. A skeptic would not simply assume that it does. He also takes for granted that there is the slightest reason to believe that Jesus Christ actually existed. He implies a question about Jesus' nature, whether divine or purely human, but it still assumes existence. He makes clear that he really does not "know the Gospels inside out" despite claiming otherwise. If he knew them so well why so much admiration? Did he somehow just skip over or not comprehend the various passages where Jesus behaves badly. There are a variety of Gospel passages where he disrespects his own mother as well as his followers. There are also passages in which he acts arrogant, selfish, hateful, and violent. If this is the best Christians can come up with for a savior I'm not impressed and I certainly don't see much to admire

Brawley further reveals himself as a bit of a fool in the second half of his piece. He states that, "The crux of the matter is I am seriously distressed by what is being done in your name." Really? If people falsely attributed behaviors to a group that would be disturbing. That is, in fact, not happening. Everything he talks about after this point does involve Christians. Whether someone approves of a particular interpretation/denomination of Christianity is beside the point. Why isn't opposing bad behavior regardless of the source the "crux of the matter"? There is more than enough reason to believe that no one denomination of Christianity is representative of the "true" faith. Christians can claim virtually anything they want about the nature of Christianity and find scriptural passages that support such claims.

His final paragraph is really over the top. Among other things he writes, "...desperate times call for desperate measures...Some sign or action on your part might help...Regardless, I leave it in your hands, with faith that you will do the right thing, based on everything I know about you." First off if he is really a skeptic and also desperate why doesn't he get off his ass and do something! Prayer does not work. However, organizing and mobilizing people to work towards solutions frequently does. Then I'd go back to this notion that he "knows" the Gospels so well. What did the Jesus figure in the Gospels do so well? Whether divine or not, the problems that existed during his supposed life time were not alleviated. The movement inspired by the Jesus figure that became Christianity has barely put a dent in the world's problems after nearly two millenia. Again, I'm not impressed.

At this point in time, a "skeptic" would not pray. A skeptic would seek to educate and act.

If this piece is meant to be humorous, it isn't. Contributing to confusion and misunderstanding or to the continuation of myths and stereotypes is not particularly funny. Neither is providing an excuse, even a lame one, to sit on your ass rather than work towards a better world is also despicable.