Unapologetics

I received a much greater response to announcing my agnosticism than I ever intended, and while it caught me off guard, I like to think that I welcome the resistance. After all, what are beliefs or opinions if they cannot be challenged. I'm no a priori skeptic and I gladly welcome any and all evidence to the contrary. In fact, I would gladly change my mind if such evidence presented itself.
I feel the need to expound a wee bit on my current position for the sake of those who would understand, rather than condemn out of hand.

My feeling on Christianity at this point is as follows: It's a perfectly nice story, with positive and negative elements, much like anything in this world. It makes a lot of claims about things unseen, things intangible and things that are completely unfalsifiable. It is entirely possible that such claims are true. Since they are not testable, then they cannot be shown untrue. Not definitively at any rate. The old "you can't prove a negative" dilemma.

There are many such negatives in the world today. Homeopathy, psychic powers, demon possession, exorcisms, UFOs, 9/11 conspiracy theories, bigfoot, loch ness, ghosts. While I am a firm believe that anything is possible, I think it's important to stress the weight of the qualifier not everything is probable.

So, it means a trust science. This is trite, I know. This is the most common rebuttal to religion and it holds very little weight with Christians. That's fine, I wouldn't expect to phase a true believer with such a soft ball. The main problem with Christianity, in my book, is that it demands blind allegiance to ideals that are clearly refutable by science, and then assumes knowledge about all that is outside the realm of science.

One might argue, well, Faith takes over where science ends. This is true, by definition. My position however is this: Why have faith at all? If science, in its limitation, can not explain something, then why make guesses and act as though they are fact? Sure, you could be right, but you probably aren't. It's not even a million to one, it's infinity to one. And what makes you so sure that your faith based claims carry any validity over another's faith based claims. Christians vs Islam, or Buddha, or Judaism, or Aliens, or anything. How can you really be sure?


This is where most people, in my estimation, fall back on emotion. If you can't know yourself, you have to trust someone who does know (i.e. God, holy spirit, bible). How do you know what they know, well technically speaking, you don't. But say you get a feeling, you read a verse, you feel that God has communicated something to you in someway. You are still basing your conclusion on what you feel god is saying, or how you feel you should proceed. Sometimes, christians make very logical decisions based on carefully reasoned arguments about bible verses.
This still operates under the assumption that the Bible is indeed true. This is a very scary and unwelcome question to many a christian. How dare you challenge the word of god? What arrogance! How can you think you know more than God! Sound familiar?

But the beliefs we hold most dear should be the ones we question the most.

Think about a belief that is very important to you. Think of the most important belief after your religion. Whether it be political, social or what have you, focus on it. Think about how it makes you feel, think about what the opposition might say against your idea. Think how their words might make you feel. What would you say back to them? How would you defend your cherished belief? What would you say to show them they were wrong? What is wrong with their logic, with their line of thinking? What are they missing that you can so clearly see?
Now, turn that magnifying glass on yourself. No, but really do it. Don't make any assumptions, don't let anything you think be true by default. Its just you, in your mind. No one will know if you say something stupid or make a mistake. Let your guard down a little and challenge yourself like you were your opponent. Be vigorous!

If you are resistant to really let the gloves off, then how honest are you really being with yourself? How do you know that you're right if you haven't explored the other side, if you haven't tried to prove yourself wrong? If you are right, as you believe, then it shouldn't matter. You're beliefs will hold water, they will stand up to questioning, they will remain solid when shaken.

Are there any questions you don't want to ask yourself? Is there anything that you've said "well, that's obviously true" about? Why would you say that? What can be so obvious that it requires no scrutiny? Is there anything in your life that you can take for granted 100%. (hint: there isn't)

Your car might not start, your chair might break, your job may be lost, your family member may die, you might have misunderstood something, your perception/memory may have made a mistake. You are human after all, mistakes are normal.
You know that the authors of the bible were human as well? They didn't fall from the sky and neither did the Bible. There is no evidence, no written word that says these writers went into a trance and somehow managed to write error free documents sometimes 30 years after the fact. So where does this belief in the inerrant nature of scripture come from? You know that it doesn't count to quote the bible when trying to prove the bible is correct. So what external source taught you it was true? I can say with absolute certainty that it was someone you know. So who told them? and them and so on. It's such an old idea that it must be true, right? Lies can't last throughout history, the truth always prevails. At least that's what someone told me once.
It was under such scrutiny that, for me, Christianity was found wanting. If you apply the skeptical method to any portion of the Bible, it cannot answer with any degree of certainty. The bible is its own source and it's only source.

There is much more to be said on this issue, but this post is already far too long.

Which of your beliefs have you questioned lately? Any? Have you ever questioned your beliefs? Are you being a priori, looking to disprove any opposition without considering the evidence by itself? Are you looking to prove what you just know to be true already, or are you following the evidence itself to a conclusion? How much of what you believe did you really decide on your own and how much is something you've simply memorized from repetition?