I reject this idea.

I believe in humanity. I believe we have the strength of mind, will and spirit to become better than what we are. To improve ourselves, individually – and collectively. To find methods of group governance that actively serve everyone, and aren’t willfully ignorant of subsets of our majorities.

Many of my peers are driven through fear. Fears long drilled into their heads, fears which I empathize, and sometimes sympathize from my own upbringing. These thorns in their mind convince them of various lies:

• the enemy will consume us
• time is short
• ‘they’ are out to destroy us
• many souls are lost and irrecoverable
• the solution is simple and turn-key
• embracing of our self-interest will bring freedom
• that all Great Institution is a derivation of a Great Plot to control and subjugate us all

And while I acknowledge corruption is a hallmark of humanity, I believe that we can transcend this scar and become that which we were created to be – a community of humans who react to tragedy in love, who reject cynicism for ideas that better the future,  who work together to see those ideas to fruition, and who acknowledge that we don’t have all the pieces in this mystery of existence.

I believe this transformation will take generations, has been in process for much longer than my brief existence, will see many casualties sent to the next life, and will hopefully outlast me far into the future.

There is this attentive blindness that we seem to have inherited from some of our religious traditions that has us convinced he is ready and willing to have conversations with us.  Being as relationally driven as I am, I’ve translated that into a certain expectation with what a ‘personal relationship’ with God is.  I want a conversational dialogue, the opportunity to discuss and understand what he was thinking, where he is coming from, and why we are swimming through this ocean of chaos.  And to my disappointment, such a conversation is not feasible, does not exist.

But still, in my mind’s eye, I see me and God, sitting across from each other in a Starbucks, discussing existence, purpose, suffering, and the eternity of the soul.  I dearly, dearly long for that conversation.  And I fear it may never come.

Budget Planner – Mint.com

A corollary axiom is ‘ignorance is bliss’, the idea that assumed certainty gives rise to perceived safety, and is on the whole a reliable saying.  Before learning of cholera one may see no reason to drink from an otherwise untainted slough.  Before examining bicycle death statistics, one may feel comfortable riding without a helmet.  Being blissfully ignorant is something many children enjoy for the duration of their childhood.

And this idea goes far beyond physical safety, into popular culture, politics, governments, economics, sexuality, cultural norms, and of course religion.  Not knowing facts or ideas outside of your worldview gives you the freedom to feel certain you are right.

Most people claiming religious insight or understanding are frequently biased by their affiliations; that is to say they will give you ‘the party line’ when it comes to theological answers.  A true expert in a particular religion would be a rarity indeed; someone possessing unbiased viewpoints that have been aggregated as the best known answers from multiple sources.  I dare say such an expert does not exist, although I hope I am wrong.

In our quest for certainty in reconciling our beliefs, and with our lack of capacity to absorb huge amounts of arguments, we surrender much of our critical thinking ability to others, deferring to them and trusting their answers implicitly.  Particularly in religious interpretation the danger of this approach is apparent, as few groups have such expansive agendas as religious organizations.  Organized religions are less interested in the truth of their texts or prophets and more interested in how their set of derived conclusions can be used to further their assumed worldview.  The irony, of course, that such world views can degrade over time becoming muddied and not in order with the original ideas.

With our desire to be certainly right strongly prescient, this cannot end well.  It is our collective arrogance that will (or has) ultimately devolve our religious affectations into something utterly unlike their original intention.

And to widen the lens, perhaps we have already derived a product utterly unlike the original, and with no other sources to rely on, have stuck to our guns to our own peril.

A friend at work balked at the news story of Scientologists landing in Haiti to help in the aftermath of the disaster.  He questioned their intentions as to landing in that nation during crisis.  Were they going to help clear some survivors with their e-meters, or were they simply there in a humanitarian capacity?  And moreover, what purpose would an organization that is – to us – so clearly setup as a a very profitable scam have to offer the nation of Haiti; who are inexorably poor.  I can think of two reasons: it is a fantastic PR opportunity, or the most alarming conclusion; they are true believers.

They are certain.  Beyond doubt.  And perhaps in a thousand years people and documents wise to the scam will be extinct.

http://www.wetherobots.com/2007/10/01/intro-ch-001/

And mostly, the part that really bugs me about it, is that there is so little I can do to adjust how I live.  To adapt into someone better.  I’m trapped in my little paradise, unable to change the order of things, passively condoning the way we treat each other as human beings.  And it’s going to get worse.

I miss the ignorance.

And here I am, actively choosing to not walk away, for various purposeful reasons:

• If my perceptions are correct (and truly, that is all we have) I have experienced the influence of God, not necessarily ‘talking’ to me, but certainly directing me (only twice, and it had to do with pursuing after my wife, and having a child… no small things)

• Christ was on to something. I can’t *prove* he was God, but I will make that leap of faith for someone who just *got it*. Again, choosing to believe in him. And yes, the bible is fallible, so the gospels might not be perfect. But the spirit of Christ is in there, and that’s what I’m following.

• Do you remember the fundamentalist ‘tactic’ Christians could use for helping non-Christians understand the concept of God where:
  

  “Let’s say this whole chalk board is all knowledge possible. Now lets assume that this dot is the knowledge that you possess. Don’t you think you could have missed the knowledge of God’s existence?”

  The irony of this tactic is that the reverse is true:

  “Don’t you, Sir Christian, think you could have missed the knowledge that God doesn’t exist/doesn’t care?”

  And beyond that I realized that both are true: I just CAN’T know either way. My little febrile mind, and my limited capacity to understand all knowledge, space/time etc etc. It is beyond human grasp.

So I’ve reduced it to my experiences and a logic problem:

I’m relying on the infinite power and wisdom of God to catch my ultimate fall into the (possibility) of hell. I’m doing my best to understand something completely not understandable, and if I’m right and he exists, and he acknowledges my efforts, he may accept me. To follow the structure of that belief: he created me with the limited intelligence and capacity to understand him, so I rely on the fact that he knows I’m inherently flawed.

If I’m wrong, and somehow picked the wrong path, or God turns out to be a lot more diabolical that I hope him to be… well, its a Shakespearean tragedy at that point.

Or, it could be a gigantic cosmic joke. But that’s more Douglas Adams’ territory.

Essentially I’m a discriminating pluralist who is a Christian. There’s no way I can know with certainty that Christianity is ‘the one-truth’.  I’ve chosen to believe it because of my upbringing, personal experiences (‘Holy Spirit’ if you will) and the fact that Christ makes the most sense to me.

I irrationally believe in a God who threw this all together, and is watching us tear it apart.

And why can’t private health insurance companies compete with a government health plan? Oh, cause they need to make profits… riiiight.

Oh, and I had no idea people die from cancer.

Good thing Pat is keeping me ‘informed’.

The only reason I see it *not* working would be low populations densities causing under use. (ie: you have to drive to the bike) However, in summer time I think it would be viable in the downtown area from say the museum to Chinatown.

Thoughts?