Thursday, October 4, 2012

Why I Suck at My Religion


Not so long ago, The Oatmeal guy wrote a comic called “How to suck at your religion.” I think he has some really great points about hypocrisy, but it was his closing point about keeping your religion to yourself which convicted me that I do, indeed, suck at my religion.

Here's why: If I believe what I say I do, why don't I act like it's the best thing in the world? Why don't I go around saying “Hey everyone, there's hope for us all! Hope for a life full of meaning and worth in the midst of this imperfect and struggling existence”? Because wouldn't that be a message worth spreading? Is a religion even worth believing in if it isn't worth sharing? If it were an inconsequential belief, it might as well just be an opinion, like “I think Andrew Garfield made a better Spider-Man than Tobey McGuire.”

It's so much easier to assert things that are inconsequential. If you agree or disagree with my above statement regarding actors, it doesn't matter, because as long as we all stay sane and sober, it won't come to fisticuffs. The worst thing that will happen to our friendship is that you'll shake your head and vow never to invite me to the movies with you.

But when I make assertions about my life-course-altering belief in a God who knows us personally and loves us fully and wants us to know him personally and love him fully, there's a lot more to take issue with. Again, probably not to the point of fisticuffs (because do fisticuffs ever actually convince someone to change their mind?), but now the worst thing that can happen to our friendship feels a little worse, which is that you invalidate my life's purpose and meaning, because you reject my God. (Some may not equate rejecting another person's god with rejecting the validity of the person's faith in that god, thinking everybody should believe what's right for them. For me, though, I don't see the point in believing in my god if I also think yours might be okay, too. Acceptance of multiple conflicting ideas precludes the notion of truth.)

I allow my reluctance to be rejected coupled with my unwillingness to force my beliefs on anyone to render me silent on the subject of religion, even amongst my closest friends. While I don't think I should foist my beliefs on you, I do think I should get over my fear of rejection, because that is how I'm sucking at my religion! Because I really do believe there's a God and creator who wishes to bestow grace and blessings on us if we're willing to accept our need for them, and I really do believe faith in such a God makes a worthwhile difference in my everyday life. If I truly believe that humbling ourselves to these facts is the only way to find true peace and perspective in this world, then it is very selfish of me to not share that hope of peace with you.

3 comments:

Becky said...

I love this post.

Confusatron said...

Well said.

I do think, however, that acceptance of multiple conflicting ideas is not hypocritical when dealing with faith. By definition, belief does not go hand-in-hand with truth - that is, if you're forced to put your faith in something, it's because the truth about that thing is not known (otherwise we can just do an experiment to prove that God exists, right?). In this case, the belief that there are perhaps alternate truths can be as valuable (and just as valid) as the belief in a single over-riding truth. At that point, it's only a matter of how much comfort and peace you (the royal You) can derive from such ambiguity.

Rachel Dull said...

Thank you for your comments, friends!

Confusatron, I am not 100% sure I understand you but am interested in exploring your ideas more. I agree that "faith" is so called because the truth cannot be known for sure, but I don't think I have to sacrifice the belief that there is one truth to make the leap of faith that I have chosen that one truth to believe in. (Though my believing in it doesn't make it any truer than it was before I decided to make that leap of faith--I just can't really know if I chose correctly.) Are you offering alternate truths as a different approach for beliefs in truth? As in, someone can believe that there are alternate truths, and someone else can believe that there is one truth, and those two beliefs are just as valid? If so, I don't think the someone else would be able to find the first someone's beliefs valid without invalidating their own.

We don't necessarily have to continue this discussion in the comments of my blog, as it might be easier in person or elsewhere, but I didn't want to respond in person and then look rude to the internet because I left your comment seemingly unappreciated online. :)