The employment of a creative analogy, would seem to be the most effective of all available tools, in making a possibly, controversial presentation. Accordingly, we have chosen to use two separate and distinct minerals, for the analogous expression of our desired distinction, between avowed religionists and those who aspire to agnosticism and free thought. For this distinctive difference, we have electively chosen the minerals “adamantine” and “marble.” The first, adamantine, is, in actuality, a fictional mineral, often used in action novels, purportedly so constituted as to be resistant to any penetration or change. The second chosen geological specimen is Marble, an authentic metamorphic, rock, whose properties are such, that it is capable of having its form altered, or shaped, for the purposes of art or architecture (examples, Michelangelo, Bernini, the White House).
We have, in the past, diplomatically refrained from writing on the topic of organized religion, except to observe that one’s particular ethnic and religious affiliation, are merely the result of the simple accident of birth; and that early childhood lessons taught in the (accidentally acquired) family religion, often produce the seeds of future religious discord, resulting, ultimately, in warfare and related atrocities, examples, Sunni v. Shia, The Thirty year’s War, Tutsi v. Hutu, Hindu v, Muslim, Northern Ireland v. Dublin, and so many other such travesties, far too much, as a practical matter, to recount.
The present post, however, is an attempt to understand the mindset of moral religionists, [whose inner direction, founded on the Bible, or some other applicable, “Good Book”, and/ or congregational and Ministerial criteria and seem, generationally, is enclosed in unalterable Adamantine beliefs], and by bright contrast, the population of moral freethinkers, whose positions have been remarkably altered, as can the properties of Marble, far from their former religionist Adamantine intractability.
Any student of the founding of our Nation, will have learned that the origin of our country, was the establishment of the first secular Nation, in the entire course of World History. The founders were of the unanimous opinion that, to put God in the Constitution, would be to put man out. Those who adamantly (“Adamantine”) persist in declaring that the United States was, originally, founded as a “Christian Nation” are ignorantly and self-servingly wrong. We would recommend to such Adamantine person, especially, the readings of Tom Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, or the 20th Century scholar, Robert Ingersoll.
Despite the more enlightened Marble-like alterations as the creation of the Protestant Church and of Reform Judaism, the Adamantine nature of atavistic superstition, persisted. The spirited outcry against Darwin’s theory of Evolution, the 1925 Scopes Trial (wherein a teacher was arrested for the “felony” of teaching evolution), and the present, misbranded, “Right to Life” movement, are but a few of the best known, of a myriad of examples of the persistence of superstitious prejudice. Religious belief should play no part in the administration of the law or the operation of our democratic government. The few examples cited, show the foresight and wisdom of the Founders, who, wisely and unanimously agreed, that, as cited above, to put God in the Constitution (government), would have the effect of keeping man (reason) out.
We had the recent experience of being confronted by a “Seventh Day Adventist,” an authentically, pure specimen of Adamantine, who persisted in asking us if we have read the Bible. Thinking that we could conclude the interview, we then responded, “Yes, for its value as cultural literature.” He appeared to be taken aback, and stated angrily, don’t you know that it is the holy word of God?” I succumbed to the challenge, and stated, “But it was written by several men, at different historical periods”. He replied, in true adamantine spirit,” Maybe so, but the words were all inspired by God.” I abruptly left, in order to avoid telling him, that the “divinely inspired” words in the Bible stated that the Sun traveled around the Earth (rather than the other way around), provided for stoning and capital punishment, permitted slavery and xenophobia, placed women in the position of men’s servants, provided for a caste system and indentured servants, condoned “just” war, and severely punished non-belief. With regard to the belief that the sun travelled around the Earth, many good people were put to the torch, for believing otherwise, until the European, 19th Century Period of Enlightenment which witnessed the approval of the heliocentric theory of Copernicus. We could also have accurately informed him, that every religion has its own respective, “good book” several of which, we are advised, are mutually inconsistent with each other, in many of their “inspired messages.”
Living in accordance with the tenets of reason, science and lessons of empirical experience, is the mature, healthy responsibility of man. If religious beliefs are found comforting, and there are no untoward attempts to enforce the beliefs on others, it should not be the subject of disapproval; but any falsely claimed, arrogated superiority of superstitious, or “religious” belief, over empirical science and reason, if permitted, would be an atavistic, adamantine, regression, and would impose needless roadblocks, in the continuing journey of homo sapiens, towards maximal progress, to the full extent of his natural capability.
2 thoughts on “Post # 379 COMPARATIVE GEOLOGY”
Does this explain your antipathy toward Israel?
I do not have antipathy for Isreal. This issue, in ny event is entirely inapposite to your remarks. I am arguing for enlightenment and reason and not with politics,