Which are you?

If you have to ask … set the mood so I had to run with it. And what I ended up with is this:

It seems to me that the English language needs some new words that avoid some of the mental baggage that's tied up with existing ones. Which existing ones am I talking about? Words like religious, atheist, agnostic, don't knowistic, and so forth. Say atheist to a Baptist and he'll turn and flee. Say Baptist to an atheist and the eyes will roll. Is this helpful? I don't think so.

So, in an attempt to spread some clarity, let's start with new words that cut to the heart of what matters and don't bring preconceived negative connotations along with them. And by cutting to the heart of what matters I mean really taking a hard look at what truly distinguishes the fundamental approaches to life.

I'll start with a secular analogy. Consider three games. The first is American football (we'll call it Football A), just as it's currently played every SuperBowl Sunday. Football-B (which I just made up) is identical except that there's one addtional player on the field. And then there's Football-C (which I also made up). Same as Football A except that for field goals they use a round ball (similar to a soccer ball but 10% smaller and colored pink).

All three of these games have a ton in common and just a little that's different. Anyone who played  one could switch to another without much effort. Seems to me that many religions are largely in the same boat. By and large,  the beliefs of a Baptist are similar similar to the beliefs of a Seventh Day Adventist. Both give the nod to a God in heaven. Both are fine with Jesus and so forth. All in all, there's really a ton of agreement. And of course, Christianity evolved out of Judaism. Cousins for sure.

Moving farther afield we bump into Islam. Hugely different? Wellll. It springs from the same basic source as Christianity and Judaism. We're talking perhaps the difference between soccer and American football. Broad brush the same (large playing field, two teams, one ball, two designated goals at either end, and so forth, but some bigger variations as well (What do you mean I can't touch the ball?).

Shinto and such? No Jesus there. But we do find a sense of "love thy brother" and "don't be a jerk to others" in pretty much all of them. Definite commonality there. Temples instead of temple and multiple gods instead of just one but the reality is that there's us (the people below) and them (the gods above).

The thread that runs through them all is a reliance on faith. That seems to me to be the underlying bedrock of most all religions – that faith is both necessary and sufficient.

Atheism, on the other hand, won't give faith the time of day. Outcomes have causes, causes that can be analyzed and discovered. It's not enough to know that that the grass grows; "why" it grows is important. The stars aren't dots of light in the sable velvet veil surrounding our watery orb but unquenchable nuclear fires that set the universe ablaze in an endless and silent conflagration of unbridled energies. (See, both approaches can be poetic!)

So why not start afresh by introducing, and using, two new five syllable words?

Everyone whose world-view revolves around faith is an ACCEPTARIAN. They accept the Word and don't try to prove it.  

And if you need proof before you buy in? Then you're an EXPLANATIONIST. If there's not a logical explanation then you're not interested.

If you can't figure out which camp you're in I've got you covered as well. But, due to your lack of decisiveness, you're only going to get a triple syllabler. You're a BeatsMeite. Pretty much the same as an agnostic but with a classier sounding name.

Which approach will lead to the absolutely best life? I wish I had time to tell you but it's time to get to work on the next Not Just Nicky so that'll have to wait for a future post.

- And that's today's word from the bird