Something which is true should able to withstand scrutiny. Evidence, both pro and con, would be weighed and and a definitive conclusion presented, or perhaps the finding that there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion. Likewise, when something is deemed good, we should be able to validate that claim by comparison to other "good" things, or by observing the benefits and risks associated with it.
Many Christians make the claim that God and his offspring, are both real and good. However, when it comes to defending that notion very few are willing to stick with you long enough to defend the claim. When confronted with a challenge to these beliefs they fall silent or spew a list of things they believe about God or their 100% certainty and then fall silent without any attempt to actually address the issues presented.
It would seem to me that if God was real and good, they should be able to easily demonstrate those facts, but they never do. They make some sad attempts at telling us how incomprehensible God is to us intellectually ill-equipped humans all the while regaling us with their comprehension of what God thinks and does and wants. They never actually present any tangible evidence for their claims or rebuttal for the arguments against the existence of God or his immorality.
I am beginning to believe that it is actually the idea of God/Jesus that these individuals are clinging to rather than the "real" God/Jesus. If God/Jesus were real, they should be able to easily shut us down when we question them; however, they stubbornly refuse to even entertain the debate. Perhaps, they are afraid that the belief they hold cannot stand up to the test and they feel it would be devastating to lose that belief. The idea of an eternal life and a constantly vigilant father is comforting to them and they will lock themselves behind that steel door of 100% certainty and 0% inquiry to ensure that their emotional cocoon is not broken. They are in love with the idea of Jesus and ideas can be challenged and overturned with knowledge, so they must be protected against any such attack by the most effective means possible- remaining ignorant and unwilling to respond to any challenge by simply ignoring it and going silent. If they actually believed in a substantial being of morality, justice and love, they would take the challenge head on and demolish us with truth, irrefutable truth and silence us as we too stood in awe. Their failure to do so speaks volumes about their claims and that 100% certainty they proudly proclaim.
Showing posts with label Certainty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Certainty. Show all posts
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Saturday, August 28, 2010
The Twelve Step Program for Today's Fungelicals
(1) Proclaim existence for that for which there is no evidence.
(2) Dismiss that for which there is evidence.
(3) Reject all scientific results except those that support your agenda, even if they use the same source.
(4) Refuse to directly respond to uncomfortable questions.
(5) Always inject God when you can't answer a question.
(6) Support logic, reason, and critical thinking, except when they are applied to your beliefs, then praise ignorance and blind faith.
(7) Always try to muddy the water during a discussion; it will tire your opponent and give you a meaningless victory.
(8) Label any challenge to your beliefs as intolerance and persecution while simultaneously being intolerant and persecuting others that believe differently.
(9) Frequently use condescending or misleading statements like "Hate the sin, love the sinner", "It's not religion, it's a personal relationship", or "Jesus believes in you even if you don't believe in Him".
(10) Remain willfully ignorant while projecting arrogant certainty.
(11) When caught in an uncomfortable question, mention God's Mysterious Ways or point out humanity's limited capabilities and frailties when it comes to understanding the universe.
(12) Never admit you could be wrong, especially to yourself.
(2) Dismiss that for which there is evidence.
(3) Reject all scientific results except those that support your agenda, even if they use the same source.
(4) Refuse to directly respond to uncomfortable questions.
(5) Always inject God when you can't answer a question.
(6) Support logic, reason, and critical thinking, except when they are applied to your beliefs, then praise ignorance and blind faith.
(7) Always try to muddy the water during a discussion; it will tire your opponent and give you a meaningless victory.
(8) Label any challenge to your beliefs as intolerance and persecution while simultaneously being intolerant and persecuting others that believe differently.
(9) Frequently use condescending or misleading statements like "Hate the sin, love the sinner", "It's not religion, it's a personal relationship", or "Jesus believes in you even if you don't believe in Him".
(10) Remain willfully ignorant while projecting arrogant certainty.
(11) When caught in an uncomfortable question, mention God's Mysterious Ways or point out humanity's limited capabilities and frailties when it comes to understanding the universe.
(12) Never admit you could be wrong, especially to yourself.
Labels:
Certainty,
Character,
Critical Thinking,
Faith,
Intolerance,
Lies,
Reason,
Speech
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Abolute Certainty
I recently had a discussion with an Evangelical Christian that I know about the possibility of being wrong in her belief. I asked, "My question is, despite your certainty, are you willing to admit that in the end, the possibility exists that you are wrong?". Her response, "Nope!!! Because I know Jesus is real so therefore I can't be wrong!!!".
To me this is the problem with some of the Fungelical Right. They will not even allow for the possibility that they could be mistaken - no possibility whatsoever. Couple that arrogant certainty about their perception with the negative aspects of their religion, throw in a little politics, and you have a recipe for disaster. They have the potential to become no different than those Christians that burned witches in the past or the Taliban today.
These Christians have a worldview. Fine. We all do. But when something arises that conflicts with my worldview, I examine it, question it, and gather more information to either confirm or reject it. If I get enough evidence, I abandon that part of my worldview. It matters to me if I am actually right or wrong; it is not enough to just think that I am right, I want proof. They do the opposite, apparently. If something disagrees with their preset worldview, they automatically reject it instead of examining both to see which is correct. They have absolute certainty that they are infallible. Hey, everyone's the Pope!
The only way they can be absolutely certain is to have absolute knowledge. Anything less than absolute knowledge would allow for some piece of information to exist that disproves their position. If no god exists, then as far as I know, no being has absolute knowledge, so therefore, anyone would be mistaken (delusional) to claim it. If a god does exist, then god would (by most definitions) have absolute knowledge, so that means that they each think that they must be god since they have this absolute knowledge and certainty. Sorry to disappoint them, but gods they aren't.
These types of people are not open-minded by any stretch of the imagination. If you are not open, then you are closed. A closed mind is a dead mind. Seriously, anyone who has absolute certainty that they cannot be wrong, that it is impossible for them to be wrong, has a serious god complex.
To me this is the problem with some of the Fungelical Right. They will not even allow for the possibility that they could be mistaken - no possibility whatsoever. Couple that arrogant certainty about their perception with the negative aspects of their religion, throw in a little politics, and you have a recipe for disaster. They have the potential to become no different than those Christians that burned witches in the past or the Taliban today.
These Christians have a worldview. Fine. We all do. But when something arises that conflicts with my worldview, I examine it, question it, and gather more information to either confirm or reject it. If I get enough evidence, I abandon that part of my worldview. It matters to me if I am actually right or wrong; it is not enough to just think that I am right, I want proof. They do the opposite, apparently. If something disagrees with their preset worldview, they automatically reject it instead of examining both to see which is correct. They have absolute certainty that they are infallible. Hey, everyone's the Pope!
The only way they can be absolutely certain is to have absolute knowledge. Anything less than absolute knowledge would allow for some piece of information to exist that disproves their position. If no god exists, then as far as I know, no being has absolute knowledge, so therefore, anyone would be mistaken (delusional) to claim it. If a god does exist, then god would (by most definitions) have absolute knowledge, so that means that they each think that they must be god since they have this absolute knowledge and certainty. Sorry to disappoint them, but gods they aren't.
These types of people are not open-minded by any stretch of the imagination. If you are not open, then you are closed. A closed mind is a dead mind. Seriously, anyone who has absolute certainty that they cannot be wrong, that it is impossible for them to be wrong, has a serious god complex.
Mental slavery is mental death, and every man who has given up his intellectual freedom is the living coffin of his dead soul. - Robert G. Ingersoll
Labels:
Arrogance,
Certainty,
Critical Thinking,
Reason,
Religion
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
