Elizabeth’s response to my post, On Faith, Fear and Public Discourse, left us with these questions:
“…would it not be an easier tolerance to just stay away from those subjects? Not have the conversations that you know will not end in consensus? Or, conversely, if everyone knows going in to the discussion that no consensus will be reached, why do we get upset when consensus isn’t reached?”
Which got me thinking about why people feel so compelled to talk about their beliefs, whether it is their belief in God or in the New York Giants. I see it two ways:
1. I talk about my faith because it is the most important and most wonderful thing in my life. Because it is so wonderful, I really, really want everyone in my life to experience the joy it brings.
2. Belief is about how we experience life rather than how we analyze it. As Elizabeth put it, you don’t believe or disbelieve in the existence of God based on some rational argument. In your experience, God is there or He isn’t. Telling someone that the life they are living isn’t real is absolutely aggravating. I mean, it’s like telling them they don’t exist. We assert our beliefs because it is our way of saying, “here I am, I am real, and this is who I am.” When you cross the line between knowledge and experience, telling a person what is real or right becomes a direct comment on who they are–and that is tough to swallow no matter how nicely it is said.