"I repeat, what really matters about any individual is not what he thinks, but how he thinks. Our conversation has been about the constituents that might go to make up an independent and a questioning person; a dissenter and freethinker. This project cannot best be approached or undertaken in a kneeling or prostrate position."
We use faith as a guide and tool for making our OWN decisions based on our own freethinking mind. He thinks that because someone has faith that they cannot think for themselves. However, this is never the case. Dare I say never? I do. I say this because having faith in a higher power does not cause our mind to become brainwashed mush, but rather to look at the world in a different light. One can simultaneously think freely and also believe in a higher power.
Believers (myself included) doubt, question, and challenge our faith in God on a regular, if not daily, basis. It is only human to think freely; the belief in something does not hinder your mind from making its own decisions. That's like saying because you think aliens exist that you look for aliens everywhere you go and it effects every decision in your day to day life; absurd.
Wouldn't someone who considers themselves to be a "freethinker" consider the possibility of a higher power?
Can someone who counts it out as an option completely consider themselves to be a "questioning person?"
He seems to question things, but only things that he wants to. Does that make him a dissenter or biased and arrogant ass hole?
Does the authors absolutism make him a hypocrite?
Does his judgmental and biased book serve as a tool for creating a dissenter, or for creating a follower?
No comments:
Post a Comment