Conversation with an Animist
Occasionally, someone sends a message through the MarketFaith Ministries website that ends up becoming a conversation about some element of worldview. Recently, an attack message came in from someone who claimed to be an Animist which began just such a conversation. The reason for sharing it here is to help you, as a Christian. In particular, you can gain insights into the mindset of someone who claims to be a Animist. In addition to that, I hope that you will find some nuggets that can help you as you interact and share Christ with people in your world.
Notes:
1. The name of the person who initiated the dialog is with has been. Peter is not his real name.
2. There are several cases where the end of Peter’s post ends abruptly. This was due to the fact that he was using the website form which only allowed him a certain number of words. The places where this happened is noted.
3. Peter’s spelling and grammar is not stellar. You will simply have to read through this. Limited edits have been made to separate run-together words, left out punctuation and the like in cases where not doing so made it difficult to read. Bad spelling, wrong grammar and punctuation was not changed in most cases. Nothing has been tampered with in the content of what was actually written.
Fri, 09 Sep 2011
Animists work on the princible that there are many paths to the truth, they would view Christ as right for us and there Ancestotal faith as rightr for them. This is why your method is rubbish.
Peter
Fri, 09 Sep 2011
Peter,
Interesting observation, but you have not described Animism at all. What you have described is a form of Postmodernism. In fact, what you seem to be representing is Wicca (this is only a guess since you have not stated explicitly). Modern Wicca uses Animistic concepts and mixes in your postmodernist idea and uses it as a precept. But this totally contradicts the beliefs of any true Animistic system. Animists actually believe that there are spirit beings in nature and that a Christian concept of God is not true.
Truth represents the way reality is actually structured and it cannot be structured in more than one way at the same time. It is not possible for there to be many gods and one God at the same time. There can be none or many or one, but not all of them. Thus, your idea that everyone can have their own truth is self-contradictory.
The evidence is very strong that the Christian understanding of reality represents actual truth and what you have described is not (because of the internal contradictions). You should be careful when being so strong at trashing someone else’s beliefs when you are not consistent with your own logic.
Blessings,
Freddy
Fri, 16 Sep 2011
Thank you for your time (Freddy), I do not agree, it is more than possible for there to be more than one truth, we just do not have the means to see this, with time this will become clear, remember when earth was the centre of the solar system, can you really beleive that for a universe as big as ours everything humankind will ever need to know is contained in 1 book? What has your book to say on Hermaphrodites, dinosaurs, neandertholes, the ice age and space travel? nothing because the men who wrote the bible lived in an ignorant age and while we are still ignorant of much we are further advanced than your bible writters. And those socal bonding elements in the bible came from Pagan society it being a fact that the cult Yarwy and his consort Ashara came from tribal Mt Sinai and was reformed and mixed with cannanite religion and reformed again and again, this book deleted that book reworked this traditon kept but changed that traditon dropped untill we have the Jewish people and then with a litle or more, or likely a lo (ending cut off)
Fri, 16 Sep 2011
Peter,
Agree or not, your logic does not work. Contradictory beliefs cannot be reconciled under any conditions. For instance, God cannot exist and not exist at the same time. Human beings can’t be only mortal and immortal at the same time.
Beyond that, it seems that you are trying to address issues that I have not even talked about. You are trying to make the Bible into something that it is not. You really didn’t even make good sense in some of the things you said. What do hermaphrodites, neanderthals and space travel have to do with anything?
And, you are completely off base with your assertions about the advancement of human society. Technology has ebbed and flowed throughout history, and in some civilizations more than others. But that does not really affect the issues I have discussed.
And, your assumptions about the historical development of religion has no historical basis. Yours is a set of assumptions that you seemed to have plucked out of thin air.
If you are really interested in discussing things like this with me, you need to do two things. First, you need to get your logic together. Secondly, you need to study a bit more fully what I have written. There are dozens of articles and resources on the website (www.marketfaith.org) that can help you with this. Then, we can discuss these matters in an intelligent way.
Blessings,
Freddy
Sun, 18 Sep 2011
Hello Freedy,
First I must say you are right in your Animist/postmodern/Wicca theory, however you are off base when you claim that truth and logic is static and never changing. This was my point about the early views on the solar system, with time our eyes were opened, as to Hermaphrodites given the Churches stand on man and wife I think the existance of a natural 3rd sex is of great import, as to the ice age and dinosaures why are they also not in the bible, can’t answer? As to history and the scientific backing of Christianity, the fact is sience backs Paganism, Hinduism and shinto much more than Christianity. And while I will give every one a fair chance I suspect your posts will be more of the same pro Christian veiws and I don’t need to read these as I already know them, being raised as a catholic. The discovery of old Isrealite Temples like the one in the nile valley were God has a female consort and other discoveries (all dismissed by rightwingers) along with many other things from the near east all point in on (ending cut off)
Sun, 18 Sep 2011
I’m sorry, Peter, but you still don’t make a great deal of sense. Your inconsistencies are legion. Just because humans are able to understand more fully the scientific principles involved with astronomy, biology and other scientific disciplines, does not mean that truth and logic have changed. It is human understanding that has changed. Truth (the actual structure of reality) is constant.
And I don’t know where you are getting off on this idea of a third sex. You are making a deformity to be a norm. They are exceptions based on medical problems.
Thirdly, you obviously have not spent much time understanding the various Animistic belief systems if you say science backs them up. Not even close.
And, the fact that you were raised Catholic doe not impress me. There are many things about Catholic theology which are wrong to begin with, then there are various Catholic groups which go off again in strange directions. You need to understand the Bible rather than Catholic theology if you want to understand more fully.
Finally, the fact that at times the Israelites drifted off into Baal worship is not something that is ignored by biblical Christians. It is fully acknowledged, even in the Bible, and dealt with as a very bad thing.
I appreciate your interaction, but if you are going to challenge me like this, you really do need to do a little more study. I hope you will do so and begin to recognize the real truth about reality which is found in the Bible.
Blessings,
Freddy
Mon, 19 Sep 2011
Dear Freedy
the reason I make no sense to you is because of your closed mind. I would also add that the inconsistencies in the bible are also legion. Truth may be constant but it is total arogance to claim a monopoly of it. As for what you term a deformity, past cultures honoured these people for what they are, a gift allowing us a better understanding of ourselves (hence there naming after Gods). While I have to agree that there is not much in Catholicism to impress I would go one step further and add all Christianity to this. The Isrealites drifted and were pushed into monotheisism in the same way as others, first the King is converted then the court there follows laws against traditional religion and within 2 or 3 generations everyones Christian (or Jewish, Muslem) or then there is conversion at the point of a sord (look at Kafiristan to see this Islamic process in action). And no my ideas are not made up. I have read much (some by Christians also) but most to do with history, archology, religion ect (Pagan, Mandean, Gnostic, Zo (ending cut off)
Mon, 19 Sep 2011
Peter,
I’m sorry, but the reason you are not making good sense has nothing to do with my closed mind, rather yours. You keep making statements that have no basis in reality. For instance:
The inconsistencies in the bible are also legion – This is a generalized statement that gives absolutely no specifics and has nothing to back it up.
Truth may be constant but it is total arrogance to claim a monopoly of it – Whether you realize it or not you have just substituted my exclusive truth claim for your own. What makes your assessment more right than mine? You have given nothing to back it up, while I have produced dozens of works to back up my assertions. You attack me in generalities, but have made no specific references to anything I have written, and have not laid out anything of your own.
As for what you term a deformity, past cultures honored these people for what they are, a gift allowing us a better understanding of ourselves (hence there naming after Gods) – Besides not making a lot of sense, this statement is based on your own worldview beliefs, and you have given no evidence that there is any truth to it. What past cultures? Do you really believe that an Animistic worldview represents reality? If so, what evidence do you have to back it up?
While I have to agree that there is not much in Catholicism to impress I would go one step further and add all Christianity to this. – This is nothing more than a pejorative statement and has nothing to back it up. You have to be above that.
The Israelites drifted and were pushed into monotheism in the same way as others, … – That statement is purely a statement of faith. You have no objective basis for making a statement like that. The scenario you have proposed is purely opinion based on unsubstantiated worldview presuppositions. Without your faith presuppositions, there is no way that what you said makes any sense.
You can say all you want that you have read much, but you have not given any evidence that the way you have compiled your knowledge has any connection with actual reality.
I would love to help you, Peter, but you are not in learning mode, only in attack mode. Before you attack further, you really do need to understand the basis for your own beliefs and come up with some kind of evidential structure for supporting it. As of now, all you are doing is making unsubstantiated assertions.
Blessings,
Freddy
Tue, 20 Sep 2011
Your claims that my ideas are false are baseless, archeological evidence from KuntilletAjrud sinai, ElQom Judea, Ugarit and elsewere paint a picture that contradicts othodox Christianity, monotheism came to Judaism not by devine revelation but by a process of theistic evolution, polytheisism took so long to abolish because it was so ingrained, no out side influence here, the many hostile polemics against Asherah, her statue in Yahwahs temple along with her priestesses (recalling no Baal statue ever stood in the Temple) all go to show her Isrealite origin and then one remembers how the prophets of Baal were killed on Mt Carmel while those of Asherah went unharmed, lets recall the words of Asherah devottees who answer Jermiah in Egypt thus “we used to have plenty of food we prospered saw no misfortune, when we stoped making offerings and pouring out libations to the Queen of Heaven we perished by sword and famine”. Following along from the example of Akhenaten biblical engineers re wrote much of the bible, consider the 32 (ending cut off)
Tue, 20 Sep 2011
Peter,
The problem that you have is not nearly so much in your quotation of the facts as your interpretation of them. Your whole concept of theistic evolution is a theory which is based on worldview presuppositions which cannot be supported. It is your faith position. You are certainly entitled to hold them, but to assert them as fact is irresponsible, especially since you are still doing it without giving evidence that your interpretation is correct. There are other explanations of the facts which I believe have more veracity because of the evidence.
Your interpretation of the Bible is also quite twisted. You are totally misrepresenting the passages you refer to. You really do need to get some hermeneutical training as it relates to the Bible.
Almost everything you say seems to be through the filter of an Animistic worldview. What are your beliefs, anyway?
Blessings,
Freddy
Wed, 21 Sep 2011
Why are you and your fellow Christians entitled to assert your beliefes as fact while peolpe like me are not? At the end of the day all we have is faith and personal experiance and dispite what you say the theistic evolution of monotheisism is completly supportable, taken not to an othodox Christian but to any one else with that thing you would seem to depise an open mind, I think you will find that all your evidence in the end is pro-othodox Christian and there fore closed minded.
Wed, 21 Sep 2011
Peter,
You seem to truly not understand the nature of faith. That is why it would behoove you to spend some time learning what is on my website.
You claim that Christians reserve for themselves, only, the right to assert our beliefs. But the fact is, you are, and have from the beginning, asserted your beliefs. Based on your statement, I could ask you the same question: Why are you entitled to assert your beliefs while people like me are not? After all, you wrote me first lambasting my beliefs and claiming that what I believe is not true.
It is not true that all we have is faith and personal experience as evaluative tools for analysis. You have left out logic and empirical evidence. All of these are part of the picture and true reality coordinates in every area.
Once again, the concept of Theistic evolution is only supportable if you begin with non-theistic assumptions (which cannot be demonstrated empirically). This is purely based on faith assumptions which you have not even tried to support. My challenge to you is, and has been, back up your assumptions.
I, actually do understand the assumptions you are working from (as well as the other possibilities), so I can legitimately make an evaluation that your analytical method is skewed. The evidence supporting the validity of the Christian faith is far beyond anything you can dispense (which, by the way, has been quite lacking in your rebuttals). All you have done is to make unsupported attacks.
If anyone is closed minded, it has been you. There has been no objective observation in anything you have said, only attacks on me and my faith.
BTW: You never did answer my question about what specific faith you follow.
Blessings,
Freddy
Thu, 22 Sep 2011
Dear Freddy,
I am sorry if you felt attacked personally but you set your self up for it. Everybody is entitled to assert there beliefs, it is the diversity of belief which I support, my problem with monotheisism (not only Christian) is that it seeks through conversion to blot out other belief systems (and does in practice). Why can theistic evolution not be supportable? Empirical evidence is personal experiance and we need beleif (faith) to understand logic. All the evidence supporting Christianity is based on faith, any item you could mention to surport your view I could give an equaly valid answer opposing it. If you were not raised as a christian or been born in a Christian society and one day you found a bible it would end up in your mythology section because that is were it belongs. As I do not beleive you understand were I am coming from I do not think you can legitimately make any evaluation. Having asked for examples of the 3rd sex in the world and being given many (I forgot Indias Hidra caste, an ancient semi religo (ending cut off)
Thu, 22 Sep 2011
Peter,
I didn’t feel personally attacked. What I responded to was your assertion that I was dissing your belief when I did nothing more than respond to your attack on mine. Rather hypocritical, I thought. But I certainly don’t have any problem with you telling me your beliefs. In fact, I really wish you would. I have asked several times and you have yet to respond. All of your discussion has been attacks on mine.
One of your main problems is that you don’t understand the exclusive nature of worldview beliefs. Opposing beliefs cannot both be true at the same time. If the Christian faith is true, what you are saying is not true. On the other hand, if what you are saying is true, the Christian faith is not true.
Interesting statement that I am trying to “blot out” other belief systems. I suppose, in one sense I am because I would love for you to come to know Jesus Christ. But what do you think you are doing? You are trying to convert me to your thinking in order to “blot out” Christianity. You can’t have it both ways, you know.
There are several things that you have said which simply can’t be supported.
First, (and I mentioned this before) your idea of theistic evolution is based on a faith presupposition. Give me your evidence that it is true. Just saying it does not make it true.
Secondly, evidence for the support of the Christian faith is not all “faith.” The beliefs supporting the evidence is based on a faith foundation (as with all belief positions), but the evidence itself fits into several categories (empirical, experiential, logical). I am not sure you understand the differences between these.
Thirdly, anyone can say they can disprove another position. If you are so confident that you have valid arguments against Christianity, out with them. I contend that you are not even able to support your own faith position. So far you have been very coy about saying what it is, though.
Fourthly, your assertion about “what I might believe if …,” is nothing more than a hypothetical which really means nothing in a discussion. You really don’t know how I might react in any given situation.
Fifthly, you have no way to judge my abilities to understand “where you are coming from.” I understand how belief systems work, and probably understand what you believe better than you do. What I don’t know, yet, is specifically what you believe because you have been afraid to share it.
Your last point didn’t make it to completion about the “3rd sex.” It seems there must be a limit on the amount of info you can type into the website form. Feel free to reply to this e-mail if you want to make longer replies. However, in spite of your assertion, there are only two sexes in humanity male and female. Assertions to the contrary are simply silly.
In spite of your opposition, the evidence supporting the truth of the Christian faith is stronger than the evidence for any other belief system out there. The evidence is very strong that Jesus Christ was who he said he was and he proved it by his resurrection from the dead. I know him in a personal relationship and you can, too, if you will turn to him.
Blessings,
Freddy
Thu, 22 Sep 2011
Dear Freddy,
You only believe that you have a personal relationship with Yeshua, if that works, fine. Christianity or rather Tarsusan Saulism has it’s own well known theistic evolution just like all other religion. I do see all the good and the many riches in Christian religion all I really want you to see is the same richness that is in all religion (may be not mohamedism) and not seek to robe other faiths of life by useing power, money, influence and resouces to win converts, this is not what Yeshua wanted, conversion is only exceptable by example, the good life principle. You would be wise to hear what I say here. Why are you, a slave to lable’s? classify me as an Agnostic Animistic Nazerite. I do believe othodox Christianity has gone wrong and needs a good shake up, to many christians have to much (to say nothing of mohamedans) once again thank you for your time.
PS the 3rd sex is a cultural thing not a physical reality, encompasing Hermaphrodites, Transsexuals and even at times Homosexuals
Thu, 22 Sep 2011
Peter,
You seem to be quite a confused person Agnostic, Animistic, Nazerite? Quite a combination. I see elements of at least three worldviews combined into one internally contradictory system (don’t know whether or not God exists, many gods + some kind of belief in some kind of Nazarene something which who knows whether or not it has anything to do with a god). Hard to tell from your description what else there might be. Just an observation, but whatever it might be you can’t support it.
Tarsusan Saulism I get it From Saul of Tarsus. Cute, but there is way more to the Christian faith than simply the writings of Paul. You have left out Matthew, Mark, Luke, Peter, John, James, Jude and the writer of Hebrews. Pauline teachings go hand in hand with the writings of all of the others. You obviously don’t have much background in understanding Biblical Christianity. It almost seems like you are spitting out the teachings of some cult leader or maybe you are the cult leader (you haven’t indicated anything about yourself).
But, here are your problems.
1. You continue to assert Theistic evolution without giving any evidence for it. Your repetitive assertion that it is a fact is not evidence.
2. Your idea of Theistic evolution is based on Naturalistic beliefs, while you also seem to assert Animism and, perhaps, some kind of Theism. These simply cannot go together. They literally contradict each other. You cannot hold contradictory beliefs and expect an intelligent person to receive it.
3. You are making assumptions about the motives of Christians who are seeking to share their faith in Christ something you seem to know nothing about. First, your assumptions are wrong and secondly, you wrote me first. It seems to me that you are the one seeking converts (and notice I didn’t say anything about your motives).
4. I am not a slave to labels, but you do have some kind of beliefs (even if they are confused) and descriptions in language is the only way to talk about them. You have labeled me and even tried to define my beliefs using labels. How hypocritical is that?
5. The defining of a 3rd sex in cultural terms requires worldview assumptions which do not reflect actual reality. Why would you want to do that?
Define for me orthodox Christianity that you say needs a good shake up? There are certainly things wrong in a lot of churches and denominations, but the essence of Christianity is not organizational, it is relational. People become Christians by entering into a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ, not by connection with a church. A church is simply a group of people who believe in Christ (flawed as they might be). You really do need to understand what you are talking about before you try to attack other people. You are making yourself look less than stellar.
Blessings,
Freddy
Fri, 23 Sep 2011
Dear Freddy,
a cult leader, confused – no just honest. Agnostic = I don’t know for certain, Animistic = Mother Earth is alive (and entitled to rights) we only lack the will to see it, a gift our ancestors had, Nazerene = I beleive in Yeshua’s message of love and brotherhood but not his divinity, Apostate = I reject my Christian upringing – these are my views and for me they do not conflict and that is all that count’s. I could easily rubbish virgin birth and resurection both of which have no evidence other than generation’s before beleived it, but I will not, in any case I don’t support it. One only needs to view some of the Nag Hammad library to know there are many other writters of Yeshua’s teachings. I don’t want you to be another me, I only hope you can recognize that religion is also the storehouse of culture and it is from this angle I have been coming, as one who seeks to preserve cultural heritage as to theistic evolution (T.E.) I gave some evidence for which you had other opinions which you did not share, I still can see no oth (ending cut off)
Thu, 22 Sep 2011
Peter,
I do appreciate the summary of your beliefs. It makes it much easier to have this discussion. I do appreciate your honesty and respect your right to believe anything you wish.
That being said, there are still some significant problems in what you are saying. Your beliefs at a worldview level are still contradictory and your agnosticism about them makes it hard to know how seriously to take what you are saying. What I mean is, you say you believe in a “living” Mother Earth and in Jesus’ message of love and brotherhood, but you are not sure about them. So, do you believe them or not?
You do realize that Jesus’ message was not all love and brotherhood, don’t you? I mean, he did destroy the tables of the money changers in the temple and said some pretty strong things against the religious leaders of his day (among other things).
As for the divinity of Christ, on what basis do you reject it? You really run into a problem here because your agnosticism should lead you to admit that it is at least a possibility. Makes me wonder if your agnosticism is really just a cop-out from truly facing the possibility that God may actually be who he has revealed himself to be in the Bible.
I sense that you had some kind of bad experience related to your Christian upbringing. This is actually more common than you might realize. For some it was interacting with hypocritical family or church leaders and for others the acceptance of Naturalistic worldview assumptions over Christian ones. I truly do understand the questions that these kinds of things raise and how it causes people to question the Christian faith. But those kinds of things are actually not at the core of the Christian message in fact, they are perverted expressions of it. The actual message is very strong and supported by many layers of evidence. Your assertion that the virgin birth and resurrection have no evidence is simply not true, it is just that you don’t seem to want to accept the kind of evidence that exists for it.
I’m not sure what you are referring to in the Nag Hammadi library, but there are no other writers who recorded the life and works of Jesus than the ones found in the Bible. Perhaps you are thinking of some of the Gnostic writings which are certainly not Christian documents and which are dated much, much later.
Of course, religion is a storehouse of culture. No one disputes that. But when you say that Christianity evolved through many stages beginning from an Animistic foundation, I must disagree. And to come to that conclusion, you have to make certain assumptions that cannot be backed up. Specifically, you have to assume that what the Bible teaches about God is not true and that all human religion is strictly a cultural construct. You can’t demonstrate that an approach like that is actually true. That is why I keep saying what I do about that concept. What if there really is a God and he is the one who is revealed in the Bible? How could you possibly know whether or not that is true based on your presupposition that it is not? You dismiss that possibility out of hand, so you must look for some other possibility.
Unfortunately, once again, your message got cut off at the bottom. It seems that the form on the website only allows a certain number of words.
Hope you have a terrific day (I guess it is day in NZ at this time).
Blessings,
Freddy
Fri, 23 Sep 2011
Dear Freddy,
It would be very comforting to believe that for the sake of Yeshua’s sorrowful passion God has mercy on us, but I can not believe such anymore and I am agnostic only in that I admit I don’t know I only believe I know, so therefore yes you could have it righ, but so could I.
Best wishes
Fri, 23 Sep 2011
Yes, but at the very least I have something to base my beliefs on and some way to evaluate it. Agnosticism provides nothing more than a kind of hope that is like swatting in the air.
If you are really serious about wanting more than that, you really ought to at least become familiar with the worldview materials that are on the website (www.marketfaith.org). A good place to start would be signing up for the newsletter which delivers to you an overview of the concept of worldview (in 9 parts, but each is very short). After those articles come, you can unsubscribe if you don’t want to keep getting the newsletter. You might also be interested in just taking the worldview survey. There you will get a good sense of the worldview possibilities. And under Worldview Resources, there are some articles under “Understanding Worldview” and “Implications of Worldview” that will help you get up to speed. All of this will, at the very least, give you a sense of the belief ocean you are swimming around in.
I really do understand different possibilities as to why you may have turned away from your childhood faith. However, you should also consider the possibility that the reasons you became turned off may not relate to genuine biblical Christianity. You might also consider the possibility that the foundation for your current belief structure may have fatal flaws. There is something that represents objective reality. I believe that genuine biblical Christianity is it and there is very strong evidence for it.
Blessings,
Freddy
Sat, 24 Sep 2011
Dear Freddy,
It seems obvious that we will never agree, I have outgrown Christianity, you seem preoccupied with definitiion and branding. All we have in the end is our selves. My beleifs are based on life, my life and is thus evaluated. It is far more than swatting in the air. When did you get the wrong impression that I was not serious about my views? I can’t see any flaws fatal or otherwise. Where you see absolutes I see degrees and were you would see us as on different paths I would see us as on the same path in different shoes. There can be no question we must all recognise the rights of our Mother the Earth, who is alive. One day everyone will know this and respect her rights, the right not to be raped and murdered so some overwait self-appointed bigiot can have more than they could ever possibly have needed while an other starves. I will continue to maintain that Ashereh Queen of Heaven was the legal wife of Yahweh God of Isreal, an origionaly Animist people with Altars of Incense – Asherim – Bronze serpents – High Places – Necromancers and the like and that all monotheiastic religion is mythic in foundation. I could give you all the evidence in the world but you still would not be convinced so I won’t. Talk of this needing to fit with that in order to work misses the point that personal belief is that, personal. I can say you have made me think about much but you have not convinced me and will not. Abkarzian Paganism which is ancient, revolves around family altars every Abkarz is Pagan with Christian and Mohamedian veils. the situation is simular in MariEL which has maintained a network of ancient groves were sacrifical rites are carried out by the worlds oldest priesthood (The Karts). In both eastern European republics along with Mordivinia, Georgia and Ossetia to a lesser decree Paganism is an ancient unbroken line giving people like yourself the oppotunity to know the real Pagan thruth. I would also look into Vodou and Santereia you can learn a lot here, is it not wonderfull how slaves were able to maintain there essental Paganism under a Christian cloak. I am more than aware of the ocean of religion I swim in and the current that takes me and the implicatio of it. It has interesting comunicating with you and I do realy wish you all the best.
Sat, 24 Sep 2011
Peter,
It is not totally obvious to me that we will never agree. It is possible that some day you will come around. 🙂
So, are you Abkhaz? Interesting that you have a NZ e-mail address.
Seriously, though, your observation about “defining and branding” is not a valid point. All we are talking about here is speaking language so that we can understand each other and understand our own beliefs. Without this we are simply babbling. You have done exactly the same thing you have accused me of, only your “defining and branding” is so much less precise that it has made it difficult to respond to you. That is why I kept asking you to explain yourself more fully. If you had done that at the beginning, I would not have had to ask so many questions.
Thank you, by the way, for finally sharing the basis of your belief. Quite interesting, I must say. I knew that there was something you believed that is much more defined than what you were telling me before. You used just enough technical language to let me know at least that much.
So, what you are telling me is that you are not an agnostic after all. You have shared with me a very specific belief that you follow and advocate for. My “wrong impression” came simply from taking you at your word that you were an agnostic. I can see by your explanation here that you are very serious about following a very specific set of Animistic beliefs.
Your particular verison of Animism is, essentially, no different than others; I recognize that whether they are found in Europe, Asia, South America, North America, Africa, or wherever. I understand the basis for it. But I also understand the basis for Naturalism, Far Eastern Thought and Theism. The broader understanding allows me to understand not only where you are coming from in your beliefs, but where that fits into the larger context of belief systems. It also provides me the means of comparing and evaluating for truth in a way that is impossible without it.
You may outwardly say that you don’t believe in absolutes, but you have defined in your explanation of your beliefs a set of absolutes. What you have basically said is that what you believe represents the actual, objective structure of reality and that what I believe is not. That is pretty absolute.
The only problem is that what you have described simply does not reflect the reality that human beings actually experience as we live life. The idea that we are on the same path, just in different shoes, is not real. For instance, the difference in a Theistic and an Animistic worldview foundation is as different as night and day entirely different ways of understanding reality. Your statement is purely an expression of your worldview beliefs and have no connection whatsoever to mine. You don’t seem to understand the significance of the difference between worldviews. They are so contradictory that they are impossible to reconcile. It is possible that they could both be wrong, but impossible that they could both be right. That is why I suggested in my last post that you get up to speed on that.
So, you think “Mother Earth” is alive? And on what do you base this conclusion? Have you talked to her? Has she written you a letter? I don’t mean this to be condescending, but you have no basis for making a statement like that. There is no empirical, logical or experiential evidence to back it up.
You are basing everything on your “beliefs.” And, I agree that ultimately one’s worldview is based on a faith foundation, but it is not blind faith. It is faith based on evidence. If the evidence doesn’t back it up it is nothing more than presumption. I certainly don’t question your sincerity, but your beliefs fall into the category of presumption. It can’t be backed up with anything but tradition which has been passed down by those before.
For instance, how do you know:
that Ashereh Queen of Heaven was the legal wife of Yahweh God of Israel?
that Israel was originally an Animistic people?
that all monotheistic religion is mythic in foundation?
All of these beliefs are based on (primarily) oral tradition and founded on Animistic worldview presuppositions. You can’t verify the tradition and can’t back up the presuppositions. Just because you believe it doesn’t mean it is actually true.
There is another way of evaluating reality that does have empirical, logical and experiential evidence to back it up. I have suggested already that you do a little more investigation to understand Biblical Christianity. I don’t know any specifics about why you turned away from Christianity in the first place, but I suspect it was because of the reasons I speculated on before. But what I feel pretty certain of is that you do not truly understand the basis of the faith outside of the “church shell” that you saw it delivered in as you were growing up. It likely has obscured the full understanding from you. You, obviously, are resisting my suggestion, but once again, I suggest that you do some due diligence and learn what you don’t know.
I, too, am enjoying our conversation. Hope you have a terrific day.
Blessings,
Freddy
This was the last communication. I never received a comment back after this.
The most important point that I believe can be gleaned from this conversation is that most people you interact with do not know the basis of their own beliefs, much less they true basis for the Christian faith. All Christians need to get up to speed in understanding worldview in order to have the ability to help people move beyond their unsupportable beliefs and into a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.
As believers in Christ, we have all been called to share our faith with those who do not know him. To be effective in doing that, it is essential that we equip ourselves with the tools to make that a possibility.
© 2011 Freddy Davis