Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 8:19:47 GMT -8
Tis the season to think deep thoughts. And I was thinking that I’d never met or read a philosophical atheist. Every atheist (in person, online, or in a book) has been either a social-atheist (a group identity of Superior People, not a metaphysics) or an anti-religious-atheist (a grievance, not a carefully articulated Philosophy of Everything).
And it is not even an atheist position to say “matter and the laws of physics are all there is or can ever be.” A child could grasp the concept that these things did not create themselves. Some hierarchy must exist. Simply denying the questions is not a carefully laid out philosophical or metaphysical position.
And so it’s likely you don’t actually know anyone who is an atheist, who simply believes in no god (or higher power) because they have determined there is no need for one through careful and considered reasoning. You have almost assuredly run instead into emotional people who identify as atheist — if only because the label now belongs to a list of stale (and mostly left wing) shibboleths. But these shibboleths give the illusion of certainty and authority — and certainly do no require one to address the metaphysics honestly.
Thus I will say I’ve never met an honest “atheist” either. I’ve met plenty of Christians who have doubts. But atheists don’t have doubts. They are sure. They are basically fundamentalists.
Our culture breeds disappointment and alienation. The Democrat Party makes it the cornerstone of their politics. Who hasn’t been hurt or disappointed in this world? Therefore we look for scapegoats. And the idea that there is a Creator overseeing it all becomes a truly ludicrous idea, especially for the emotionally aggrieved or alienate. The idea of a good God doesn’t mesh with their lives. God is thus, for many, an offensive idea. And not because of some well-laid-out atheist philosophy. But because they are deeply aggrieved and alienated and nothing virtuous can touch them easily.
Been there, done that. Who hasn’t? Sin is fun! And given the immediacy of life and all its pains and problems, the idea of a benevolent Creator remains, at least for me, more of an idea than a reality. So I do understand the cult atheists and aggrieved atheists. They can circumvent all the conundrums of reality by simply rejecting the issues and simplifying everything into a munge of fortune-cookie philosophy that is embarrassing in its lack of weight or heft.
But tis the season. God rest ye merry, gentlemen. Let nothing you dismay. Why not? Beats the hell out of being a punk atheist.
|
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Nov 4, 2021 8:48:29 GMT -8
philosophical atheist. They are as it is said rare as hens teeth. The only philosophical atheist that has a case in writing is a crazy frenchman, Jean-Paul Sartre. The problem is as it always is with existentialists that the life you live is always out of step with the philosophy you promote. Thus, the so-called morality of a non-G-d universe is contradicted by the reality of a universe that only makes sense with a creator. Being and Nothingness is his main book. His one point that actually has much sense is that every action is the result of choice, and often we choose by not choosing. For example, we have a problem and seek advise from a friend. By choosing which friend too ask for advise we are actually choosing the advise to receive. A religious person may seek advise of a minister or priest and so on. |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 9:16:01 GMT -8
I remember reading some Sartre in high school as part of an assignment. I didn't know it then (but surely know it now) that it was my first encounter with an "intellectual." I have been called that ugly word at times. And at times it has fit me.
An "intellectual" is a philosophical demagogue...or just a philosophical juvenile. They construct castles in the clouds. Without a doubt, they have a gift of language like some men have the gift of a muscular body. And both show off their gifts to impress others.
At least the body-builder can likely get the lid off of a pickle jar while "intellectuals" have often been the builders of mankind's most horrible and destructive ideas.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 9:31:24 GMT -8
And it's difficult to create a morality out of "nothing matters." This is where atheists show their core dishonesty. They will say on one hand that the universe is pointless and yet there is an ethic that should be adhered to. Dennis Prager (I forget who was talking about) gave kudos to some famous atheist for basically acknowledging that there is no good or evil if you believe in atheism. Prager has a short essay: Monkeys and Atheists |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 9:40:26 GMT -8
I found a quote online that highlights clearly one of the main atheist conceits, dodges, or tricks, if you will: The idea is, the idea of a supernatural metaphysics of any kind is out-of-bounds because "science" doesn't make the mistake of attributing Gods to unknown phenomenon. Gosh, there are all just so philosophically humble. We know that atheists are amongst the most self-righteous, arrogant people on the planet. And they are either dishonest or misinformed about who and what the God of the bible is. Christians and Jews are arguable responsible for de-linking natural phenomenon from the old pagan beliefs that God was in this tree, and another God was in that river yonder. This de-linking made science possible. Christians and Jews believe all of nature is a creation with a coherency that speaks of that rational mind that created it. So it is either a lie or an intentional misunderstanding of theism that guides atheists to write this kind of rubbish. Christians and Jews believe that God created nature and the laws that govern her. But they also believe (with good reason) that nature did not create itself. The dime-store philosophy and critiques of atheists are immature, at best. Dishonest, at worst. |
|
kungfuzu
Member
Posts: 10,469
Member is Online
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 4, 2021 9:47:29 GMT -8
I am almost through Hoffer's "The True Believer." I will probably comment about the book under the string started by Artler. But I believe the following quote from Hoffer is pertinent to this discussion.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 10:12:05 GMT -8
Wow. Good quote, Mr. Flu. That fits my experience.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 10:24:32 GMT -8
What has me thinking along these religious lines is, in part, I've started the Christmas tunes a-goin'. (Now playing: Frank Sinatra: Jingle Bells)
And I was reading the bible and hit that quote by Mr. Christ about loving darkness rather than light. Put aside the Messiah question: Who can deny that this loving of darkness rather than light doesn't intersect our country and its politics? It's in everything. It is a central explanation for why many people do what they do.
Humility and gratitude are the antidotes to cynicism and alienation. But that is just half of the equation. Becoming a wet noodle of "can't we all just get along" with no moral center is the other problem. It is not being a fundamentalist kook to uphold basic standards of right and wrong, of truth, of facts, and moral standards. The waffling white male is arguably the bane of our society right now.
Stick and carrot. Jesus healed the sick while castigating the hypocrites. He is good but not "nice."
|
|
kungfuzu
Member
Posts: 10,469
Member is Online
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 4, 2021 12:22:05 GMT -8
Atheists are unable to get to the fundamentals. If one looks at existence from a very basic point of view, everything that happens is a sort of miracle. This is because the fact that matter exists, that we exist and are able to think, enjoy and differentiate one thing, one idea, one sensation from another, the fact that we can even consider whether something is a miracle or not a miracle. The universe is a miracle.
|
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Nov 4, 2021 12:30:57 GMT -8
He believes in atheism as though it were a new religion.” Hoffer continues on that the religious fever can be blunted by an equally potent fever. Thus the fanatical Nazi can become an equally fanatical communist or even reject both and take up the mantel of fervent religion. The true believer fishes in the same stream with other fanatics and often it doesn't matter what the catch is. The one commonality is that all have surrendered a present for a glorified future which will never be obtained. The Nazi sees a future free of racial impurities. The communist sees a future of worker control of industry and government. The priest, clergyman, or rabbi sees a world of justice and love of G-d. None are content with the here and now, good and bad, normal and obscene. The last place a moderate person wants to be is in the middle of a fervent uprising. The fever pitch of excitement and constant movement is necessary for the fanatic to feel he is alive. Any who counsel restraint or moderation will be shouted down, dismissed, and discarded as unfaithful to the revolution. This is why so many democrats today are in lockstep with the radicals of the left. They fear becoming irreverent and non-persons. |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 13:31:30 GMT -8
"Mystical" thinking is possible and I do think it can be legitimate. One's senses can be cleansed, if you will. The veil removed. The bland habits redacted.
Day-to-day, we don't tend to live thinking that everything is a miracle. Often is seems more like everything is an inconvenience.
But it helps to touch base, as you just did, with the reality that everything is indeed a miracle.
There's another quote (and I can't find it...from Paul, I think) about nature (its wonders) being proof of God's existence.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 13:35:19 GMT -8
Oh, goodness. That's a great turn of phrase, Artler.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 13:46:52 GMT -8
That's such a good thought, Artler. This is why it is considered a heresy (as some Christian sects have had it) that the world is inherently evil and something to be escaped.
Still, there are plenty among the religious (and understandably so, given the hard circumstances of many) who long for Paradise and to escape this world (or as a means to endure this world). I have no beef with them.
The saint loves this world perhaps not despite the hardships but because of them. They can suffer like Christ. Indeed, it would be common for a saint to give their suffering to Christ in sympathy with him.
Most of us are not saints. We might hold an esoteric understanding of God but probably don't actually live as if "everything is miracle" was a reality. The day-to-day of it all intervenes.
That's why I think it's important to have these discussions, to remember.
|
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Nov 4, 2021 16:41:56 GMT -8
Most of us are not saints.
How dull would our lives be if all men were saints. The non saints are the yeast that makes man the explorer, the warrior, leader, and champion of the oppressed is the difference in the ways problems of life are approached. Man is born under a wandering star and as appealing as sitting back in your rocking chair and watching the world go be it is not the forte of most men.
We want to know what is down that street, over that hill, down that valley, across the next county, state, river, mountain or even on that next planet. Saints don't do that. No one knows what happens after death. Our religions have great mystical stories about it but actual knowledge ---none, nada, zip, zilch.
We are challenged only by the certainty of death, an enemy we cannot defeat. We can and should say to death not today, not now, wait for when I am ready. Is there as some Christians say predestination? Are all of us destined to live and die at pre determined times? No one knows, but it seems like a lot of heavenly bookkeeping to me. The idea doesn't fit into an eternal realm of efficiency of purpose.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 17:19:43 GMT -8
Your point is well taken. But nearly all the saints I've read about were extremely active. St. Francis, for one, was all of those things you mentioned (some before forming his Order). He would totally get what you're saying.
But when man has quested he may still find a yearning. A commitment to god, instead of one's own ego or will to power, is the next step for some. I can understand that. But many a saint you describe. St. Augustine is famous for his line, “Lord, make me chaste – but not yet!” It is a common misconception that saints have been removed from life. The common theme is that many have lived a rough life -- scratched every itch -- and then return to the one and only thing they felt was home.
More than a few saints might agree that our temporal view of our lives is but one view. Death/life are not false but things are probably ordered in a more complicated and unexpected way than we can imagine. Many did not have a binary view of here and hereafter. They were to experience God in the form they were in now, come what may.
|
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Nov 4, 2021 17:48:36 GMT -8
In an imperfect world I tend to agree with Saint Augustine, "Lord make me pure, but not yet."
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 4, 2021 17:58:46 GMT -8
The conundrum seems to be that if it's natural, it must be good (naturalistic fallacy). If sex is good, more sex must be better. If you have an impulse to cheat on your wife, go for it. It must be good. If you want to kill your neighbor in order to take his wife, all that matters is what you want.
An atheistic world does not recognize the idea of natural moral laws. We are all just a bunch of random, jumbling atoms. If we ascribe anything "moral" to anything, it is just a convention because at the heart of things, there is no meaning. There is no right and wrong. There is nothing objective about reality on which to base moral laws.
Christians and Jews obviously disagree with this hollow view of existence. And Catholics have resolved this idea of "anything goes" with the idea of "ordered appetites." Sex is not wrong. But when out of proportion, it can wreak havoc. Eating is not bad. But too much is unhealthy. Etc. etc.
Saints obviously take it to another level. But the claim is never that sex is wrong, that living in the world is wrong, that it somehow makes you base. The point is that one voluntarily abstains from certain things in order to enrich one's life in ways that are, frankly, incomprehensible to most.
|
|
kungfuzu
Member
Posts: 10,469
Member is Online
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 4, 2021 18:00:01 GMT -8
I tend to believe that God would answer something like, "That's your responsibility. Don't put it on me. Get control of yourself."
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 5, 2021 18:53:53 GMT -8
Say what you will about John Denver, but I don't think you can totally fake what he puts into this song:
|
|
kungfuzu
Member
Posts: 10,469
Member is Online
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 5, 2021 20:27:32 GMT -8
I am not sure how to say this, but I think that the song is the impulse which gives Denver the inspiration to put into it, what he does. Some music is more inspirational or touching than other music. "Silent Night" is demonstratively one of the most inspirational pieces of all time.
Denver's version was also true to the origins of the song, which was first performed in a small Church/Chapel in Austria. The writer, a priest, wrote the song for guitar accompaniment and played it himself, as I recall. I suspect Denver's guitar picking is better than the priest's, but the underlying simple, pure beauty is the same.
While listening, I could see myself with my family in an Alpine cabin, sitting in front of a fireplace with a low-burning fire, which is the only light in the room. Tasteful Christmas decorations are sprinkled around the room. It doesn't get much better than that.
|
|
