Sunday, June 10, 2007

Flat Faith - 2

As opposed to 'fact based faith', I developed a character trait that says 'Don't confuse my theory with your facts'. Once I have come to understand something it is hard to change it.

Belief systems fall into this category, so 'Once I have come to believe something it is nigh on impossible to change it'. Why is this?

Well perhaps it's that much of what we believe is actually unbelievable. If we make it over the hurdle to get to believe the unbelievable, no reasoning, argument, fact or persuasion of any kind can undo that process. So what then can change it?

Well facts, real undeniable facts are good. I once had a beautiful knife and I practised throwing it hoping to turn it into a more useful weapon or something. My uncle, (the farmer) warned me that it would break if I was not careful. I didn't believe him. I believed in my knife until I threw it badly and it broke. That fact was now undeniable. My heart was broken too. I loved that knife.

I have already hinted at my aversion to 'facts' as a basis of belief. Unfortunately, facts are often misused and unreliable.

Facts bombard us by the dozen daily. Some are rather transparent - 'Nothing washes whiter than …' Hearing that persuades me to use the nothing, as it is better.

Some people prefix facts with millions of years ago. How could anyone prove what happened millions of years ago? Anyway, those who use this technique change their facts regularly.

People use statistics as substitutes for facts …. Need I say more?

Almost without exception, we are given facts that are impossible for us to verify.

A very common trick is to use non-scientific users of products to quote scientific facts about the products. How could they know?

All too often hypotheses masquerade as facts, especially by the scientific community. I stopped at the non-fiction science shelf in a bookshop recently. My opinion of the books was that I would find more truth in the fiction shelves than there. Scientists today have an impossible task. They must tow their academic establishment's official line and at the same time announce astounding new discoveries. I would say that they needed to accept (believe) the official line completely in order to make any completely honest announcement. Do you think this makes for open and honest scientific facts?

However, don't only blame the scientists for this. The churches do the same and they do it in the name of God. The church decides in a council what the Bible says. They claim that the Bible is the Word of God, but they still have the arrogance to make a collection of teachings, they call doctrines, and declare this is what the Bible says. Thus, on the one hand, we have the writings of men and on the other hand, we have the Word of God. You choose.

Have a declaration of belief, by all means, but don't cast it in stone. Casting something in stone makes it law and the apostle Paul wrote a strongly worded letter to the Church in Galatia about the danger of reverting to law after receiving freedom and grace from God - the grace was freedom from the law. Read it in a modern translation, so you can understand it easily. It will take about half an hour to read.