Coincidence

I *Heart* Huckabees begins with the premise that sometimes coincidences aren't merely coincidences. Sometimes, random meetings, conversations, etc begin to devleop a pattern.

I don't believe in coincidence.

In the past three weeks, I've had the book The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins brought up in approximately every conversation I've had. A few memorable instances

1. The 1st quasi-theological conversation I had post-college. This could have easily been blown off had it been the end all of the chat.
2. A later conversation about the evolution of the soul with an old professor.
3. While not a conversation, brought up on Speaking of Faith the first time I actually had the time to tune in to the program in the last three months.
4. Again, in another conversation with a friend who's cheerfully agnostic.
5. Finally, last night with someone I haven't spoken face-to-face with since graduation. She informed me that she had a copy and would lend it to me.

This was all too much to ignore. I agreed to take it, and spent last night beginning the book. I can tell already that this is going to be one of the hardest things I'll read in the course of my life. I'm only on page thirty-one and I'm ready to throw the book in the trash for a variety of reasons (I'm really in to lists today)

1. I HATE the implication that I'm somehow lacking in the normal number of braincells because I happen to be faithful. Hello, I know that emperical thought makes the idea of God absolutely nonsensical. I know that I can't prove that God exists, and even on my best days as a Christian, I realize how ludicrious my faith seems to an outsider. I get it. That doesn't stop me from being faithful, and I don't think that it makes me idiotic for believing in something.
2. I think Dawkins grossly misunderstands and misrepresents God as portrayed in the Old Testament. Normally, this wouldn't bother me as much as it does. Scripture is hard to read and even harder to understand. But the fact that he doesn't even seem to try makes me want to throw something. You wouldn't try to read & interpret Shakespeare or Milton without (at the very least) line notes. What makes you think you can do the same with a text that's over TWO THOUSAND years old.
3. I dislike anyone who holds that their position is THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH. Come on, how does asserting that Science=Good and Religion=Evil make you any different from the fundamentalists you revile?

More when I get deeper in to the book. I'm trying my hardest to be an objective reader, but I don't think it's going to work.