Ignorance and blind faith poor partners for life's journey
I was addled by reader David Eason's letter (April 29). Winnowing his mass of statements and analogies entails considerable effort and I hope I did not misinterpret his viewpoint. Overall, he seems to disapprove of idolatry on one hand but extols the virtues of worshipping a Christian God on the other.
There lies the root of my befuddlement because I see no distinct difference between the two. The former is based on ignorance whereas the latter is based on blind faith. But blind faith is considered a form of un-enlightenment, too. Rationality and reasoning are ostensibly absent in both rituals.
His litany of reasons for the failing health of the wishing tree, saying it is emblematic of the omnipotence of God, is so logically and scientifically flawed that it will be truly amazing if there are others who subscribe to this preposterous notion. Tossing aside the indubitably materialist rationale that the tree was dying because damage was caused by things being thrown at it, I doubt even the most faithful devotees will readily embrace the hypothesis that somehow God is having a role in this episode. The association seems too implausible and the possibility is too flaky to imagine. It is indeed sad to see the affinity with God descend into the realms of absurdity.
I respect Mr Eason's religion and his strong adherence to his belief. Nevertheless, projecting an aura of righteousness merely upheld by an ancient document is misguided if not downright baleful. Using an ancient scripture as a guide to personal conduct is palatable insofar as the doctrine is confined only to oneself. Any pugnacious attempt by zealous acolytes to cross the threshold beyond the individual perimeter and force their decree upon others is a recipe for disaster.
Lots of past and present calamitous conflicts in human history bear witness to this type of hubris and intolerance, notwithstanding his outlandish claim that 'the most successful civilisations since the time of Christ are those which have had a faith in God'. Finally, Mr Eason's opening statement 'the issue for non-believers should not be whether God is real or not, but what it means if he is' resembles Pascal's wager and advice on taking a view.
You should live your life and try to make the world a better place for your being in it, whether or not you believe in God. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent God, he will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in him.
