Night Vision and Insight
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." - Galileo Galilei
I took a Humanities course at USF and wrote a paper called The Historicity of Jesus Christ. Unlike my lauded "LSD Should Be Legal" thesis, this paper was not embraced by professors and peers alike. However, it helped me. Confused about my own spirituality, I put faith in what could be proven. Research left me relieved. Although it ultimately exposed doubts regarding his followers, my work convinced me that Jesus did exist and his very existence made the world a better place.
Plus he was Jewish. So nice!
A new movie says Jesus was a myth. Watching the trailer, I found myself nodding more than a few times. Many good points. Christianity did borrow pagan rituals (trees and eggs) and mythological ideals (a virgin birth). Early Christians also held tightly to false beliefs (Sun revolving around Earth) for far too long.
The incendiary irreverence caught my attention. Questioning and provoking discussion even if only for discussion's sake can often lead to revelatory thought, no? Plus I like a good row. But don't get me started on my hernia.
On the other hand, are these filmmakers any different from Holocaust deniers? And if not, then why not? Why does one get a free pass to question while the other makes me want to hurl? I've known only one or two true atheists and even they acknowledge the man existed. Now they also tend to poo-poo empirical data that casts shadows on their own doubt. But I looked past such stubbornness because of their wicked cute asses. Sue me.
However, why do I respectfully allow atheists their opinions but laugh and poke fun at Scientologists? Yes, Hubbard clones take the "I don't believe" one step further with the whole "aliens planted these thoughts in our heads" hypothesis. I suppose that's what makes them an automatic disinvite to dinner parties.
Still. Nonbelievers share similarities just like believers. Those posing questions should be given the same grain of salt we give those clinging to opposite beliefs. After all, they're not all Galileo.
6 Comments:
"On the other hand, are these filmmakers any different from Holocaust deniers?"
Do you mean they're alike because they both question what's accepted at the time? In that case, then you'd have to compare Galileo Galilei (whom you quote) to those Holocaust deniers, as well.
I suppose on one end of the spectrum there is Galileo who truly enlightened mankind and the other end is reserved for deniers who are haters disguised as intellectuals. I'm just recognizing that the deniers who evoke such a strong reaction in me are at least a little like Jesus deniers for Christians. Oh - and for historians, too.
As a non believer I just want to defend myself.
Most Atheists start out as believers, than we ask questions. I found the scientific answers to be more my speed. I find the theistic answers to be a bunch of spins.
While every new scientific find falls into place with existing scientific theories usually, religious fundamentalists either put their head in the sand or claim that science is a big conspiracy theory.
That being said, 40% of Americans believe in Theistic Evolution, but I just look at everything observable and I say, why do we need a God to explain it all, and where is there any evidence God exists.
Going back to Jesus, I always believed he was a living breathing human being until a year and a half ago, when I started looking at the history and archaeology surrounding the time he was supposedly alive, and I've concluded that he was most likely just a myth.
I don't know for sure, but the evidence seems to indicate this.
As far as comparing Atheists to Holocaust deniers, I think this is unfair.
There is plenty of evidence that the Holocaust happened. However, there is not one shred of evidence God exists, or even that Jesus existed, or even that the Exodus happened.
Can I tell you how many Jews were murdered? No. But I know it was many. And I know there are reasonable estimations.
Did Jesus exist? This is the question?
There are and have been a lot of people in the world named Jesus.
The question should be: was there one particular Jesus who was the son of a particular god?
And the answer is no.
But if you want to believe in such things as gods, why not? He/she could have had -- could still be having -- as many sons and daughters as can dance on the head of a pin. And it can mean whatever you want it to mean.
OTOH, the Holocaust really happened. It's not a matter of faith.
Nance
I understand both your points. However, most historians agree that Jesus of Nazareth did exist - put as much faith in them as in any scientist or historian. The faith-based issues surrounding his existence are for Christians to base their faith around. I would caution these people who want to label Jesus The Man a myth. Years, centuries from now - holocaust deniers will have more of an audience because witnesses will be dead. If we are not careful about "histories" we debunk - they will benefit, too. Debunk interpretations all you want. I have no problem with that.
It all comes down to which doctrine makes the most sense to us. Which faith? Which belief system? If most educated scholars agree that Jesus the Man existed - that's good enough for me. Until evidence proves otherwise and it stands the test of time, that's my story and I'm sticking with it.
kate, i love your above comment. Nicely put!
Post a Comment
<< Home