Spiritual questions: Part 4
On the Dar Alluding blog, Tichius commented: "Science cannot and will never answer the larger questions of life, such as: Why are we here? Where are we going? How did we get here?" Part 1 discussed underlying assumptions of that statement; Part 2 outlined the scientific answers; Part 3 discussed Christian answers.
When comparing the scientific answers to the Christian answers, many things start bubbling to the top, and I find it very revealing to my struggle with faith.
1) Christianity's answers are much simpler and much more comforting. Science's current answers--at least the way I understand them--hold very little comfort. No one is taking care of me. No one is looking out for me. I am it. I am totally responsible for not only me, not only the human race, but for this planet. And there's no Omnipotent Being with a Master Plan to help me. Global warming? I'm responsible for doing something about it. Hate my life? I'm responsible for doing something about it. Those problems are complicated. I'm not sure I'm that smart or that powerful. Those problems are really, really scary.
2) Christianity's answers make it easy to turn off your brain and to abdicate responsibility. Don't want to worry about global warming? It's in God's plan; let's go buy a Hummer H2. Why are we here? Just serve God and everything will fall into place. Hate your life? Don't worry, you'll go to Heaven if you believe. Push the anger down. Squash the hurt feelings. Put it on Jesus. There ya go. Doesn't that feel better? (And yes, having done that before--it does feel better.)
Oh, how I (sometimes) wish I could just turn my brain off and believe. But it's not that simple. And all the contradictions in religious texts, and all the physical evidence against the "facts" of the Bible, and all the weird ways everything needs to be interpreted in order to not contradict itself -- it's not that simple. In fact, if the Bible were rewritten so that it was simple, I'd find it much easier to believe. Many people tell me that I think too much in the physical world and not enough in the spiritual world. But I don't even know what that means. In fact, I don't even know where to start.
One thing I've done, therefore, is to live my life in a way that I believe is moral. I want to do everything I can to save our fellow humans and help my brothers and sisters. That means solarizing my house. That means donating to Heifer International and the One Campaign. I need to live right now as if there is no reward for me at the end, that there is no meaning to this life beyond what I have and what I am and what I can do.
Perhaps I will find God at the end of that tunnel. As always, I have my doubts.
When comparing the scientific answers to the Christian answers, many things start bubbling to the top, and I find it very revealing to my struggle with faith.
1) Christianity's answers are much simpler and much more comforting. Science's current answers--at least the way I understand them--hold very little comfort. No one is taking care of me. No one is looking out for me. I am it. I am totally responsible for not only me, not only the human race, but for this planet. And there's no Omnipotent Being with a Master Plan to help me. Global warming? I'm responsible for doing something about it. Hate my life? I'm responsible for doing something about it. Those problems are complicated. I'm not sure I'm that smart or that powerful. Those problems are really, really scary.
2) Christianity's answers make it easy to turn off your brain and to abdicate responsibility. Don't want to worry about global warming? It's in God's plan; let's go buy a Hummer H2. Why are we here? Just serve God and everything will fall into place. Hate your life? Don't worry, you'll go to Heaven if you believe. Push the anger down. Squash the hurt feelings. Put it on Jesus. There ya go. Doesn't that feel better? (And yes, having done that before--it does feel better.)
Oh, how I (sometimes) wish I could just turn my brain off and believe. But it's not that simple. And all the contradictions in religious texts, and all the physical evidence against the "facts" of the Bible, and all the weird ways everything needs to be interpreted in order to not contradict itself -- it's not that simple. In fact, if the Bible were rewritten so that it was simple, I'd find it much easier to believe. Many people tell me that I think too much in the physical world and not enough in the spiritual world. But I don't even know what that means. In fact, I don't even know where to start.
One thing I've done, therefore, is to live my life in a way that I believe is moral. I want to do everything I can to save our fellow humans and help my brothers and sisters. That means solarizing my house. That means donating to Heifer International and the One Campaign. I need to live right now as if there is no reward for me at the end, that there is no meaning to this life beyond what I have and what I am and what I can do.
Perhaps I will find God at the end of that tunnel. As always, I have my doubts.
posted by SuperSkeptic at 11:23 PM
7 Comments:
I've always wanted to put solar power on my house and become more self-sufficient.
I like your thoughts. I was reading your response in Dar Alluding's blog about Christians being upset about gay marriage but not about heterosexual marriage outside Christianity. It's a great argument. I'd love to see you post about this subject so I could link to it in my blog. Very thought provoking.
Sorry it has taken me so long to respond to your posts again. I switched over to Blogger beta, which for some reason kept me from making comments on regular Blogger blogs. I'm so daft that it took me this long to figure out that, instead of signing in through Blogger to leave my comment, I could just sign in as Other.
Anyway, to the substance of your most recent posts:
While I have not been to the Dar Alluding blog, and so have not read Tichius' comments there, I suspect that while he phrased his point clumsily, his deeper point is nearly universally accepted. For a moment forget the language which he used to convey his thoughts, and forget as well the arrogance which most likely went into them, as he (perhaps) attempted to demonstrate the superiority of religion (as he understands religion, anyway) over science.
His broader point, more charitably constructed and with new questions attached to it, might be something like this:
Science and religion have different areas of concern - a fact which keeps religion from being superfluous even in the face of science turning many metaphysical questions into physical ones. Science is principally concerned with the nature of the material universe. As it advances, we learn that many of the metaphysical assumptions of religious systems of thought are not literally true, and as such see science as replacing religion.
But religion's primary concern (to the extent which one can say there is such a thing as religion, with a single, unified concern) has less to do with describing the material world, and more to do with working within a cultural description of the material world (the "Christian" world-view in antiquity and the early Middle Ages was, for instance, a mixture of Hellenistic and Hebraic metaphysics) to find meaning.
The questions asked by religion - questions which fall outside the concern of science - are what we call ultimate questions. The questions asked by Tichius were hastily constructed, and on a literal level fail as ultimate questions.
Why are we here?
If by this we mean, by what mechanism did we come to arrive here, then science can, of course, answer this question. The same is true for each of the other question which were posed here as ultimate questions (though not by that name).
But when we ask such questions we are not really asking for mechanism. We are asking for meaning. We are asking the existenital questions, such as Sartre's Why is there something instead of nothing? We are asking questions which are principally concerned with meaning, and as such we are asking questions which are not rationally constructed, and so cannot have rational answers.
They lay outside the bounds of science - something which Carl Sagan especially noticed. One of his best projects can be seen as an attempt to mythologize science; to mix science with myth, or to create myths built on the foundation of the modern scientific view of the universe, as he understood it.
This is, traditionally, the ground of religion. But not just religion. This is the ground of myth, of story. This is why we need the humanities, an area which is appropriately named because it explores what it means to be human. To say that this lays outside the bounds of science is not really to place limits on scientific inquiry, nor is it to say that the insights of science are not crucial to understanding the physical and material nature of the universe. But it is to say that, as we inhabit this universe so majestically described by science, we need more than just rough and ready mechanical descriptions. We also need to find ourselves in stories, in myths, which describe not the world, but our experience of the world, helping us attach some sort of ultimate meaning to that experience.
Sandalstraps: as always, I appreciate your thoughtful, insightful comments.
After reading your comments, I admit that I just did something that I regularly take other people to task on: setting up science and religion as parties on opposite sides of the same conflict. And on four really long posts too! Shame on me. Believing that science and religion can peacefully coexist is one of the biggest reasons why I am skeptical of atheism.
Addressing your last paragraph: as a former English major and a failed novelist, I daresay there are few who appreciate a good story as much as I do. There is a satisfaction with finding myself in a story (or a song, or a painting, or a sculpture) that is deeply satisfying on a level that I cannot scientifically explain.
That's why it makes the most sense to me to interpret the Bible (mostly) metaphorically: as a story we can learn from, not as a collection of historical facts. But this is troubling. If the Bible is metaphorical:
- What of all the rules we must follow to get to heaven and save our souls?
- Where does morality come from?
- What does it mean to accept Christ?
- How do we find ourselves in a story that may or may not be accurate?
Superskeptic,
I wrote a very long response to your comment and questions, which I hope has not been forever lost in cyberspace. I am growing frustrated with the way in which Blogger does comments. I'll check back later to see if that comment ever posted. In the meantime, know that I hear your concerns, even if my answer to them (such as it was) is lost.
Morality has evolved along with us, as it was advantageous for our success as social animals. We humans mythologized our acquisition of morality in the same way we mythologized our acquisition of agriculture.
Hi There. I haven't read much of your blog, but I did read some. I, like you, searched for spiritual answers for a long time. I finally found something that fulfilled my need. I'm not saying it's right, wrong, or indifferent, but it does work for me. I found it in a nondenominational, non-sectarian, Bible Study and Fellowship ministry. Not a "Church" mind you, but a place that helped me understand the Bible in its original languages, and then explained how to apply its principles in my life if I believed in them. It's not one of those "we're right and everybody else is going to hell" kind of places. It's a place where they say "if you are seeking to understand, we can help you." Then you decide for yourself whether you believe what was explained, and then apply it if you wish.
As an aside, I grew up in a religion that is not Christian, and did not come to the knowledge of this ministry until I was 40 years old. So I was truly searching and I opened myself up to seek without limiting myself to any religion or doctrine. I just wanted answers to life. I didn't want "religion". One of the things that I found out is that the way that the Christian God is described in most churches doesn't line up with what the Bible says. That was surprising, but at the same time, refreshing.
I don't want to name the organization I found because I don't want to be accused of "recruiting". I am simply saying that satisfactory answers are out there.
I hope that you find whatever it is that will give you peace and happiness.
Hi SuperSkeptic. This is the same "Anonymous" as in the prior comment. You spoke of interpreting the Bible metaphorically, etc. The Bible says that we are not to "interpret" the Bible, but rather to understand the Bible. If you believe that the Bible was revealed to people by God who then wrote it down (which is what the Bible says about itself), then God probably has a specific meaning for the things He was trying to get across. It was not intended for people to "interpret", but to understand.
Not sure if you have kids.... but if you are a parent, and you tell your kids something or give them an instruction, do you want them to interpret it into something that they think you meant, or do you want them to understand exactly what you meant and then act accordingly? When I tell my son that I don't want him to drink and drive, I don't want him to "interpret" that to mean anything but "don't drink and drive". I want him to understand that because it's what's best for him. I don't want him to interpret it to mean, only drink 2 beers then drive" or "drink, then drive home real slowly". Anyway.... I hope I am making sense. I am not preaching or saying I have all the answers. I am simply conveying what I understand and believe, for whatever that's worth.
In your response to SandalStraps, you asked some questions. I have found answers to these questions right from the Bible. Again, I want to emphasize that beliefs are personal and I am not judging what is right/wrong, truth/untruth. I am simply saying that I found answers that were fulfilling and rang true for me. I can explain to you what the Bible says, but it's up to each individual to decide to believe it or not.
So.... let me try to respond to your questions and see if the answers make sense to you.
Question: What of all the rules we must follow to get to heaven and save our souls?
Answer from the Bible: There are no "rules to follow" to get to heaven and save our souls. The Bible teaches that salvation is by grace which is given when you accept Jesus Christ as Lord of your life (your example to follow, and believe that God raised him from the dead. Those are the criteria. Read Romans 10:9-10. Once you decide to do that, then we attempt to live as best we can according to the instruction in the Bible because we are thankful for what God made available through His Son, and because we believe that our Heavenly Father gave us instruction that is best for us.
Question: Where does morality come from?
Answer: If I understand what you are asking, I will attempt an answer. Sorry if I miss the mark. every society, in order for it to exist in peace, must agree on the "rules" it will follow so that people will be able to co-exist peacefully. Those "rules" are what I believe you are calling "morality". Take your family for instance..... is it peaceful when everyone lives by different rules and standards? Not likely. Society is a macro view of that. Now.... who decides what those "rules" are is the big question. Everyone wants to live by the set of rules that serves their own interests. But that doesn't seem to work very well. I believe (now it's just me.. not trying to judge) that the Bible (NOT religion or churches) provides us the framework of moral rules for individuals to live by. It's not for me to force someone else to live by them, however. Each person is personally accountable, and not accountable for another. If I believe that I should pray to God, it's my responsibility to do that. However, it is NOT my responsibility to see to it that anyone else does. That's where you run into issues of people dictating morality to others.
Question: What does it mean to accept Christ?
Answer: See the answer to question number 1.
Question: How do we find ourselves in a story that may or may not be accurate?
Answer: Not sure what you are after here..... sorry.
I hope this is helpful/insightful. If I sound preachy, I will apologize in advance. That's not my intention.. i just and expressing some things I've come to learn.
Post a Comment
<< Home