Religious Fundamentalism: A Man at a Table

Opinions expressed here are my own, not those of the church I serve, or any other person. 

  The story of a man at a table is now done. Or is it?

   He is left, there, actually, to ponder. If he is ever to leave the chair at the table in the dark room near a single, bare light, he has to resolve some issues. The resolution of all of them require some thinking and certain faith actions. He has to decide about the passage of time, if there is time when time cannot be measured, and, in so doing, he can also determine if his actions in time have validity.

   He has to decide about validity in actions and in time. Do his actions mean something now? Do his actions give him hope for later? When he is all he is going to be, what is he to be? What is it he must do when he finally comes to the point where the one thing he cannot do is to stay where he is, the way he is?

   Somehow, he must begin to quest for the whole truth. He is where he is, he thinks, in part because he once offered opinions about matters he could not actually influence. What does he do now? He remembers a defenseless being he victimized. His self-hatred for this act is appropriate, but what can he actually do with self-loathing, without forming of it an idol, as if personal repugnance is sufficient penance?



2 thoughts on “Religious Fundamentalism: A Man at a Table”

  1. He could read the book of Haggai for a start! It might help him figure out that he really can trust the promises of God.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.