Dogmatic positions

Michael Shermer vs Douglas Jacoby: A debate on evolution and God.

For me, one of the most interesting moments in this debate between Michael Shermer and Douglas Jacoby occurred at the beginning of the Q&A section, when a young gentleman from the audience asked the first question: «What sort of new evidence would it take to get you to change your mind?»

That is a question that helps us to ponder how different or how similar are the positions held by the debaters. The debaters held opposing positions, but this opposition is superficial. Actually, based on each response to the question, both of them share a dogmatic* position. Both of them could encourage the use of reason, evidence, and questioning before accepting any truth claim, yet none of them have exerted self-questioning to their own opinions.

I see very little value in such a “debate” between apparently opposing positions which are deeply similar.

* Dogmatism is the tendency to express strongly held opinions in a way that suggests they should be accepted without question; and dogma is a forcibly asserted opinion expressed as incorrigible, immutable, and unchallengeable.

A single orthodoxy

I recently read this on Facebook: “Jesus always was God and still is. If you write otherwise then you are a blasphemer and a decieving wolf. (sic)”

That comment was written by someone (here called “Dude”) in response to a note posted by Dr. Bart D. Ehrman. The note referenced this blog entry: Visions of Mary. Although similar comments had been written by Dude in response to notes about the book Dr. Ehrman is currently writing. His new book discusses, historically —not theologically—, how Jesus became God.

The comments from Dude reminded me of my younger years. A time when my Christian faith meant upmost certainty and such level of conviction completely filled me emotionally and intellectually. What was good for me must be equally good for everybody, I thought, and any idea that could stop my Christian proselytism had to be seen as a dangerous idea, worth fighting against it.

The only thing I currently fight against is ignorance.

Next is my response to Dude’s comments:

«Dude: I have seen your comments on this Facebook page (Dr. Ehrman’s page) since some days ago. I guess you have a profound faith in Jesus Christ and I also guess you are certain of the infinite value and significance of the character of Jesus as God himself. Perhaps you know that his divinity is the cornerstone for Christian salvation. I held myself those beliefs in my youth; before I entered thoughtfully in the study of theology in general, and Christology and Christian soteriology in particular. Perhaps your local ministers are not equipped for the task of answering profound theological questions, so you must do the hard work of researching for yourself. That very thing is what I have done since almost two decades ago, just because the truth, ample and deep, it is something very important for me. What I have found is something that I could not believe in my past: there is something even greater that such certainty of my younger years.

I won’t tell you the details of my case because my path is not the same as yours. You have to find out your own way.

I no longer hold similar beliefs as yours, mainly because there are better ones: more thoughtful, benevolent and caring beliefs. And by this I do not mean that a given person have to leave Christianity in order to hold those other beliefs.

Also, apparently your current beliefs, whichever they might be, have led you to make suspicious judgments over a person you pretend to know: “a blasphemer and a decieving wolf (sic)”.

What is next? Are you going to agree to punish someone just because he doesn’t hold your orthodoxy? You seem to be a Christian; I have no doubt about it, but please consider that Christianity is much more than a single orthodoxy.»