Thoughts on God
Any discussion of God often begins with a precising definition, lest particularistic sectarian types assume their God is the subject. I however prefer to exorcise the loaded term from the discussion. Let's call it the ultimate reality.
In light of our current knowledge - which will one day be deemed primitive - it is impossible for an intellectually honest thinking person to believe such nonsense as biblical inerrancy, divine authorship, the literal readings of Noah's ark, the garden of Eden, Jonah and the great fish, Job, Joshua and the stilled sun, etc.; or, for that matter, the preposterous teachings of the resurrection, virgin birth, trinity, and prophecy.
Having cleared that debris from the table, I would say that belief in the ultimate reality is not incompatible with experiential evidence. The intuitive notion that life has an underlying relevance need not be demonstrated by empirical tests. However, when one presumes to prove the existence of ultimate reality, or to impose their subjective convictions on their fellow man, one must establish their claim with universally verifiable objective evidence.
Consider the apologist (defender of traditional Christian dogmas). He is constantly devising contortions of logic to prove what is prima facie absurd. The apologist is a case of a reasonably intelligent and creative mind attempting to rationalize ex post facto that of which he has already been emotionally persuaded.
If there is a transcendent consciousness in the universe, I suspect that entity is more pleased by the employment of cerebral faculties in solving human problems and the genuine appreciation of the wonder of life than the dutiful worship of sycophantic toadies.
The God portrayed in the dubiously canonized collection of Judeo-Christian texts is not one that I wish to emulate. He is frequently petulant, peevish, intemperate, jealous, vengeful, hateful, deceitful, intolerant, unfair, and impersonal. It amazes me how far the standard packaged God of Christians has strayed from that often-unpleasant biblical deity. This once again demonstrates the human tendency to construct a god palatable to one's own ideals and tastes. It is the projection of the ideal man onto a mythical figure - an archetype.
If there is a God or family of Gods in our universe, he/she/it/they could not conform to the primitive deity of the Bible. I have no doubt that such a one/ones would be far more advanced than the tribal god of an ancient semi-nomadic Canaanite tribe.
In light of our current knowledge - which will one day be deemed primitive - it is impossible for an intellectually honest thinking person to believe such nonsense as biblical inerrancy, divine authorship, the literal readings of Noah's ark, the garden of Eden, Jonah and the great fish, Job, Joshua and the stilled sun, etc.; or, for that matter, the preposterous teachings of the resurrection, virgin birth, trinity, and prophecy.
Having cleared that debris from the table, I would say that belief in the ultimate reality is not incompatible with experiential evidence. The intuitive notion that life has an underlying relevance need not be demonstrated by empirical tests. However, when one presumes to prove the existence of ultimate reality, or to impose their subjective convictions on their fellow man, one must establish their claim with universally verifiable objective evidence.
Consider the apologist (defender of traditional Christian dogmas). He is constantly devising contortions of logic to prove what is prima facie absurd. The apologist is a case of a reasonably intelligent and creative mind attempting to rationalize ex post facto that of which he has already been emotionally persuaded.
If there is a transcendent consciousness in the universe, I suspect that entity is more pleased by the employment of cerebral faculties in solving human problems and the genuine appreciation of the wonder of life than the dutiful worship of sycophantic toadies.
The God portrayed in the dubiously canonized collection of Judeo-Christian texts is not one that I wish to emulate. He is frequently petulant, peevish, intemperate, jealous, vengeful, hateful, deceitful, intolerant, unfair, and impersonal. It amazes me how far the standard packaged God of Christians has strayed from that often-unpleasant biblical deity. This once again demonstrates the human tendency to construct a god palatable to one's own ideals and tastes. It is the projection of the ideal man onto a mythical figure - an archetype.
If there is a God or family of Gods in our universe, he/she/it/they could not conform to the primitive deity of the Bible. I have no doubt that such a one/ones would be far more advanced than the tribal god of an ancient semi-nomadic Canaanite tribe.
posted by DoubtingThomas | 6:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home