Never discuss religion or politics at the dinner table. Right? That is the old saying, I believe, or at least something like that. The purpose of this has to be because, everyone is an idiot and when arguing with idiots, you do not want to have food on the table, because this will just confuse them into throwing their food, and your wife will not want to clean up the mess. No? Ok. Fine. It is probably because religion and politics are two topics that rely little on fact and largely reside in the realm of opinion. And we all know "opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one, and everyone thinks theirs don't stink." Further to justify why you shouldn't argue religion or politics (potentially anywhere) is that it is not like arguing who the best NFL Quarterback is. My point being, if I think the best QB is Colt McCoy, I at least understand why you have left the conversation laughing at me. There is not a lot of evidence to back up my claim. However, if you walk away laughing a person who tells you that their religion believes that god is a mystical hippopotamus, with magical tusks of fury, you are likely to get slugged in the back of the head with a magical hippopotamus tusk.
People take religion and politics seriously. Extremely so.
I never argue politics. Mostly because I do not argue things that I choose of my free will to be ignorant to. I am a cynic. I tend to think that in our government, both Republicans and Democrats are trying to screw over the citizens they have sworn to serve. Like I said, I am a cynic. I accept that this is a clear generalization, there are probably many politicians with good hearts and good intentions. I simply choose to ignore them, because I am tired of finding out about the ones who do not have good hearts and do not have good intentions. This is my choice, and mostly, I run into no opposition when I bow out of political conversation, or when I sit quietly listening to other people argue, simply inputting when I think a fact here or there may be potentially misinterpreted or interesting.
Religion on the other hand, being ever more explosive, I can't seem to keep out of.
I do not know why, either. I simply cannot ignore a religious debate. Perhaps my education is at fault. I attended a Jesuit Catholic high school, and forever have been burdened with having an inquisitive mind when it comes to religion. However, often, I am on the side of not believing.
Good to know I am at least consistent. I am a cynic.
I used to take issue with many things regarding religion.. but let us just shake this whole thing down and get to the crux of most religious arguments between people who believe and those who tend to believe a little less. THE BIBLE.
Is it true? Is it the word of God? Is it likely that Jesus was born of a virgin Mary, etc, etc, etc.
Three words. I. Don't. Know.
Of course, that is where belief kicks in. Obviously, it takes a leap of faith, that as a human being you must be willing to take in order to believe.
Honestly, it's a leap of faith I once took, but no longer can.
Because.
I am a cynic.
Let us assume that God sent his word in the form of the Old Testament, which was written many (many, many, many) years ago by the early Jews. Why don't Christians follow these rules? Sure, pork is delicious (Bacon in particular).. but if it is unclean and God has ordained that we do not touch it, why do Christians choose to not follow that rule, but Jews do? Does this mean we can, as Christians, pick and choose what rules to follow? However, Jews cannot.
The Christian church has been a shining example that "power corrupts, but absolute power, corrupts absolutely." The early history of the Christian church is fraught with examples of leaders abusing power. Who is to say that they guarded the Word of God with reverence, when they often were clearly corrupted and interested in only themselves? As a cynic, I have a hard time with this. I find it extremely hard to believe that the Bible has remained the true word of God over centuries and millennia of cultural distress and upheaval.
The Bible is a collection of many stories, written by many different people, all of whom claimed to be inspired by God. However, there are many more writing which are ignored, despite the same claims of divine inspiration. How was it determined which should be added to the Holy Canon? A group of priests got together and after long hours of prayer and thought and deliberation, they determined whose word was in fact the act of divination and whose was not. That's right, more HUMAN BEINGS claiming to be messengers of the will of God.
It all just smells. It smells bad. And I cannot stomach it.
But like I said, I am a cynic.
Most things in this world are possible, however, few are probable. An immaculate conception for instance, is possible, if simply because there is so much about our bodies that we STILL do not understand. However, it is not probable. Of course, if such an event were to be guided or aided by the hand of a supernatural being, I suppose it becomes increasingly possible, however no more probable. The Bible seems to consist of many possibilities which are not quite probable. It almost seems like it was set up to be something that could not be proven, and equally could not be disproved.
I know that is simply speculation, but it is how I have interpreted it all. I welcome anyone to challenge any of it. However, I will not believe, simply because you say "it is the word of God".. Clearly I am too cynical to jump into that pool.
Is it logic, or just pessimism? That I do not know, but it is what I think. In no way am I trying to belittle believers for believing what they believe, they are willing to take a leap of faith that I cannot. That is all, nothing more, nothing less.
No comments:
Post a Comment