Am I Crazy?

So I can understand the reactions I have been getting from various people who read my blog and watch my Youtube channel. Ever since I started expressing my new found thoughts on theology and psychology I have been met by a number of interesting reactions. Many people, although not fully embracing what I have been saying, have been understanding and supportive. Another camp of people have expressed interest but don't really seem to care either way. There are those that have responded in a more critical level, attempting to explain that my views and expressions are in error and that I should rethink what I have been saying and understanding based on the research I have been conducting since the beginning of this year.

Even when I was a Christian I had specific way of understanding my faith in God and my religion. I would read the Bible, but I never allowed my faith to solely be derived by the scripture alone. I was aware of the use of History, Psychology and Anthropology to fully understand why I had faith. A large part of the reason I began doubting Christianity was not only the issues I had with the doctrine of the Trinity and divine incarnation of Jesus, but also the issues the Bible has with internal contradiction on a level of text but also contradictions with history. The more I investigated these issues the more my faith in Christianity began to leave.

In reading into the Psychology of Religion, most psychologist have determined that there are a number of levels of belief, in other words why people have faith in a religion/God. Many people follow a religion or belief in the lowest, most simplistic level, one of simple tradition and being raised in that said tradition. One can understand this particular level of belief based on why a child believes in Santa Claus. If you ask a child why he/she believes in Santa, it will appear to be rather simple. Mommy and Daddy have told the child that Santa is real, seeing an empty tree with no presents, and setting out cookies and milk. The next morning, presents are under the tree, the cookies and milk are gone, and the parents explain that this is all done by Santa. In other words a believer at this level has faith in what they have grown up with and not really considering the why of the affair, just the immediate experience gathered from the happenings. This is a type of reaction when a religious person at this level, when asked why they have faith, simply respond: "because I do," or something simple to that effect. The idea of understanding their faith outside of scripture, is a surprising one, that might, for some, not feel as solid as just professing faith.

The higher level of belief is when a person derives their faith from outside scriptural sources, or for some use reason along with understanding their personal theology. Many religious persons do this in their daily lives. Among certain Christians and Muslims the interpretation of sacred scripture in light of science aids believers in feeling their text is speaking about topics which we as humans have come to a factual understanding via other areas of knowledge. Others, use archeology, the discovery of documents, clothing, structures that we know relate to scripture, boosts ones faith. Reading historical records that describe events that correlate to sacred text, gives us the foundational understanding that scripture is speaking of events that occurred in our species historical development. Why does any of this matter? In my opinion, and this is also the opinion of psychologists of religion, that when we use outside scriptural sources to aid in our understanding of religion, it makes us feel closer to our beliefs, gives us that boost of knowledge with which we can understand the traditions of whichever religion we follow. I have always felt this way, and this is why my views on any religion, regardless of a particular one I currently follow, must remain consistent.

My research on the Exodus, as seen in my previous post, utilized outside scriptural sources to aid in my understanding of faith. My major tool in this area is history and archeology. Much of what we know about our past is found in the historical records and artifacts found in digs around the world. Without these areas of study we would not have a record of our species developments and history. This is why the lack of historical evidence for the Exodus is so amazing. This is another reason why I cannot personally read the story of the Exodus in a literal fashion, but have decided to read it metaphorically. One of my favorite discussions with a user on Youtube regarding this topic challenged my use of history with regards to understanding scripture. I was then asked if I wanted to take the verses of the Exodus in the Quran metaphorically, then how could I explain away the verse that states that Allah swt would preserve Pharaoh's body so that future generations would know the truth of the events of the Exodus. I smiled at this, realizing that a perfect opportunity to understand my point of view further, had been given to me by this point. If I am to take this verse literally, then without history or archeology how am I to know which dead body I am suppose to be able to see with my own eyes that fulfills this verse? The answer is: impossible. One must know history and archeology in order to follow this verse literally. Although my own true opinion of looking at this verse metaphorically does not mean I have to go see a mummy in a museum to gain an understanding of what the verse is trying to convey.

The fact is that many religious persons, not just Christians and Muslims, although they might be in the lead, use many areas of study to create foundations of belief. Scholars and intellectuals of all religions have been doing this for centuries, so I am not saying that I am being totally original in this context. However what I have learned is that many people would rather trash these subjects when they do not suit their perceived ideals as opposed to considering the alternative ways of looking at "the truth." If you are going to take scripture on a total literal level then you must be prepared to ignore the overwhelming evidence that contradict that view point. If you choose to do this, that is of course one's own choice, however it does leave one on a very small road to travel. Science is used a lot in societies current debates about reason and religion. I will say more on this is future posts, but I bring it up now because many Muslims and Christians use it in relationship to understand the Bible and the Quran. If they are allowed to do this, at their own risk of a literal reading, then why can't I use history, archeology, psychology and philosophy in the same light? Perhaps its because my conclusions run counter to the "orthodox" position, and that might be why I am in such negative light with many persons. I will discuss orthodoxy in the future, but for now it should be noted that many people do use outside scriptural sources to aid in their understanding of faith. Once and understanding of that need is established for oneself, then we can begin to understand others.