I originally wrote:
> My question is: if the whole idea of religious belief is such a ludicrous
> delusion, why would anyone feel insulted or condemned? I wouldn't feel
> insulted if a psychotic individual held the delusion that I was going to
> burn in Hell unless I performed a solo tango at midnight (everyone knows
> this is a delusion since it obviously takes two to tango). I would just
> consider the source. I guess people are just more easily offended today.
for which Mike Scoles had an easy answer:
Easy answer: Psychotics do not have the political power of organized
religions.
To which I reply:
So, in that case, it would be more correct to say that you are frightened of
their power than to say that you are personally insulted or condemned by
their belief. You are afraid that they will get some law passed that will
infringe on your freedom. That is different than taking personal offense at
their beliefs about Hell and your future residence there. The original
comment to which I was referring said it was highly offensive to atheists
and believers of other religions for Christians to believe that Christ is
the only way to salvation.
Robin Pearce has come up with another approach to interacting with
Christians that is worthy of consideration. Instead of believing that
Christians are delusional, she believes that it is
"one of those areas where what is true for one person may not be true for
another. It's not irrational--it's a-rational. Sort of like being in love.
*I'm* in love
with my boyfriend--that's my truth, which no one else has to share. It
doesn't make me deluded that others don't feel as I do. It's not the kind
of truth that requires consensus."
I (probably unfairly) refer to this as the postmodern approach to the
problem: everyone has their own truth. That may work for the personal aspect
of religion (loving and worshipping God) but that is not really what has
people up in arms about the doctrine of Hell. If Christians just claimed to
love God, no one could argue with that -- it is their personal belief and
who is to say that they don't love God? The problem is the paradox that the
truth Christians believe they have ascertained includes the fact that it is
true for everyone whether they believe it or not -- kind of like the law of
gravity or the truth about how babies are conceived. So how could this idea
of universal truth be true, even for the Christians, if it isn't true for
everyone? Can the idea of universal truth be true only for some people? I
will have to read up on my postmodern philosophy but I would say either that
idea of universal truth is true or it is not for everyone equally. If so,
then we are back to Christian holding a false belief and why anyone would be
offended by such an obvious falsehood. Scared, yes (if the believers of the
delusion have power), but offended? I don't see it.
BTW, I wonder if anyone other than those posting are reading these messages.
A last philosophical question: if an e-mail is posted and everyone deletes
it unopened, was it really an e-mail?
Rick
