Echoes of Eden

In the serpent's scheming, doubt is his ally and the ambiguous conversation, seemingly unpretentious, is his most effective method. He makes doubt to emerge as a virtue, not a weakness, for it was through doubt that Eve was discovering what God was "hiding" from her. The serpent suggested that doubt would be the way to a more comprehensive view of reality: - "your eyes will be opened" - the serpent whispers. He proposed that there is another way to interpret the word of God than what was originally and naturally understood.

Once doubt is established, it leads to distrust. If there is distrust, insubordination comes to be considered: - "God knows what will happen on the day that you eat the fruit, so he forbids it," - concludes the serpent.

The sophist triumphs by means of controversy. To this, he adds his ambiguous speech to abundant questioning, thus, he induces others to respond to what he himself has the due care not to say. About this, the writer Abraao de Almeida says:

"Looking for intelligent ways, only by means of demonstrating superiority, the Sophists transformed one of the most worthy science in the art of denial and destroy by reasoning. With their flexible morals, they were able to sustain the pros and cons with the same likelihood. They use to condemn all law imposed on man as an arbitrary convention, and the virtue they preached was confined to the art of achieving success or to the desire for power. Thus, of all major philosophical projects of the previous ages, the Sophists had retained only the scientific pride. They wanted to be great for science, and they believed in it, but they did not believe the truth. (...) They taught the art of speech, the technique of persuasion, the penetrating argument, and used controversy as the main method, teaching to criticize and discuss."

Sophist preachers have also used this clandestine effort to impress or influence with intrigue instead of clarity and simplicity. Doubt is not just a method but also the essence of their teachings, taken as the highest form of knowledge. They depend on doubt to be able to cause deconstruction of previous foundations in order to replace them with their new proposals. Within this new Christianity, therefore, doubt is regarded as an asset.

But such an attitude, which seems to be nothing more than the sincere and devout search for truth, is nothing but secular conformity. The Bible warns us not to be conformed to this world. The term used by Paul in Greek means "not to take the form of". It implicates the idea of a mass being pressed against a mold, a pan. But one mold and what it is formed of it are not necessarily equal, actually, they are practically opposites - if the mold is concave, what is formed will be convex, and so on.

From this perspective, therefore, Paul warns us not only that we care not to reproduce exactly the world, but also, to care that our actions, words and way of life may not fit the dictates of the world.

You need to understand this concept to be able to recognize the subjection of the neoliberals' thoughts to the contemporary secularism. When their theology is compared to the secular philosophy, one realizes they were made for each other - worse, one was made from the other, fitting just like a mold and what was molded from it.

The post-modern world is based on the rejection of the certainties on which Western life has been structured in the past centuries. In a more incisive way, there is a rejection of the notion that absolute truths even exist - especially in moral and religious matters.

This thought is nothing but an incredible and absurd fallacy, and this is evident because he, who claims it, is absolutely convinced that this is true. It is like saying: - "The truth is that there is no truth."

These preachers know it would be impossible to adopt this insane thought and at the same time continue using the Bible as a reference. Therefore, they face this dilemma: if they decide to get rid of the Bible, they will be assuming themselves as heretics. But if they adopt the Bible as a reference to what is the truth, they gain the postmodern society dislike.

Thus, the output is, instead of denying the existence of truth, they deny the human capacity to get to know the truth. They need to teach the "certainty of maybe". And it's here that the concave and convex fit each other. So, doubt becomes an instrument to deny absolute certainties about what the Bible says - it is an echo of Eden saying, "That's what God said?"

To sustaining the absolutism of the biblical doctrine, then, is seen as arrogance and a means of oppression and domination by the clergy - and a fading echo whispers: "They teach this because they know that otherwise our eyes will be opened ..."

For these speakers, the opposite of faith is not doubt, but certainty. If we are sure, then we do not need faith, they conclude. Thus, according to them, in order to live by true faith is necessary to deconstruct convictions. It is as if their motto was "all I know is that I know nothing." The goal of Christianity becomes then not to confirm creeds, but undo "unfounded" beliefs so that we can worship God in mystery.

Some of the biggest best-sellers among evangelicals and non-Christians are more successful due to its controversial nature than for having any real content. They sell not for offering answers, but for encouraging many questions. They sell wind and doubts.