Willingness to Accept New Ideas Contradicts Religion

I am often looked at a bit cross-eyed. Atheist and agnostic friends can't figure me out-- I'm sort of like religious, but not totally what they expect of a religious person. Religious friends- Christian or other religion- think I must be irreligious because I subscribe to humanistic relativity (as far as they can see). That is, I question things.

When I am willing to investigate "Old Earth Creationism" I must not be Christian enough. When I am willing to read and study evolution, I am certainly not Christian enough. When I choose a secular science text over a right-wing Christian science text, I am not Christian enough. When I wonder why the civil matter of state-recognized marriage is an issue, I am not Christian enough. If I vote believing there is more to politics than abortion or gay marriage-or *gasp* the abortion and gay marriage argument doesn't belong in politics, I am not Christian enough. Jesus didn't hang with the religious folks, y'all. He spent his time pissing them off, frankly. He got down with the prostitutes, the tax collectors (stealers).... and with children. The religious people hated him. And he hated religious people~

I hear about being open-minded. It's worth hearing out the "open-minded" argument, and mulling over. Put it up against the Gospel, which is: there is one God and He made the world and allowed free thought and will, then provided an "out" by sending part of himself- his Son- to be the sacrifice to cover the choice to try to live without God. All you have to do is admit that yeah, life sucks without God and eternity will suck even more without God, and I'd really like not to Free Will choose to live without. I'd like to quit screwing around with thinking I can be God, and I'd really like to let Him have at it, because I am sure He can do a better job than I can. Academics talk a lot about EVIDENCE to back up what you believe. I feel that there is sufficient evidence for biblical canon- it is an older, more traceable document than The Illiad, or Socrates or Plato and I don't hear the scholars dismissing those. Anyhow. Here is a video I found this week on being open-minded.


lostinrain said...

Good post!
Well, except for one thing. Socrates and Plato were philosophers. And while some view the Bible as philosophy, others view it as fact. The reason scholars are not "dismissing" their writings is because they are not even in the same realm. Philosophy is not fact people generally don't claim that it is. Most science minded people I know are totally cool with the idea of God. The philosophy of God. Many are even Christians. It is when those right-wing religious politicos talk about "facts" that scientists question and then dismiss. The sad thing is that some dismiss all of it based on the obnoxiousness of a few.

Luke said...

I like a quote my dad shared with me once a long time ago:

"The purpose of an open mind is to close it again on something solid."

I'm more than willing to consider and entertain new ideas that contradict my current views. However, I am finding it harder and harder to get reliable evidence and reasoning that would make changing my views wise. And that's problematic and something that Dawkins doesn't address in his video.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...