A Second Response to Tara

Ok, so I'm still thinking about Tara's question in response to the Aristotle quote...

Do you think this statement implies that only an ignorant/naive person believes something they are told, to accept something before understanding it?

I’ve now processed the question from a whole different angle.

I would not go so far as to say that one who accepts something simply because he or she was told such is ignorant or naïve. What then would be trust? And, how could you then ever believe almost anything without extensive personal experience? (for to even read a book or manual would to be to accept something I was simply told)

I would go so far as to say that simply accepting second-hand is a potentially dangerous thing. Let me try and explain.

I do not understand electricity. Does that mean it doesn’t exist or that I am unwilling to use it? No. In fact I do both believe in it and use it (you might be surprised at that – HA!). However, my lack of understanding of electricity can be a dangerous thing. I can use it on a superficial level to my benefit, but to play with electricity on a more technical level without more extensive study, practice, and experience is very dangerous and could get me killed. Likewise, if I were to instruct another how to use electricity on a superficial level might also be beneficial for that person. However, if I were to instruct another on electricity at a more technical level, with no appropriate training and experience on my or their part could also get that person killed.

Here’s my touchy correlation. I may not understand the idea of God or theology. It doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist or that I can’t practice such belief. However, that lack of understanding can be a very dangerous thing. To assume that I can play with God by holding beliefs on a more technical theological level without more extensive study, practice, and experience is very dangerous on a psychological, social, and spiritual level. So, to encourage and instruct another on a theological level about the nature of God may be beneficial for that person on a more superficial level. However, to instruct (or condemn) without extensive study, practice and experience is very, very dangerous.

The church in the 15-1600’s subscribed to the Greek philosophical idea that the earth was the center of the universe and that the sun revolved around the earth. In fact, they had adapted their biblical understanding and theology to fully support that idea. To believe otherwise was heresy, sin, and deserving of death. However, this belief was adamantly held in the face of consistent astronomical evidence that such was not the case. Today we think this to be ridiculous. Everyone knows the earth revolves around the sun and no one interprets the Bible to support such a notion.

But my fear is, how many of these such beliefs still exist today. How many such attitudes and biblical interpretations are out there that are actually holding us back from discovery, better understanding about our universe, and interaction and relationship with God? I really don’t know. I don’t think anyone really can. And for that reason I hold many of my personal beliefs loosely.