I just posted a rather provocative, no—really provocative—post in the middle of the night. It comes from something I’d written several weeks ago, around the time of Christopher Hitchens’ death, which by the way did make me quite sad as much as I found him to be a highly exasperating character most of the time. He was brilliant, as we all have noted, but also infinitely sad and oddly defiant about his Atheism which touched and interested me. But his presence and the news of his death did squarely put this debate between God, no-God, and “maybe God” squarely in the center of this blog/opinion table.
So late last night in a fit of frustration that I’d been unable to keep this blog going due to writer’s block, performance anxiety, shyness and alarm at how quickly my words hit the blogosphere (but determined not to give up entirely), I ran downstairs, grabbed this little bit of poetically written but half developed thought sitting in my notes and posted. Oh, my. What have I launched? But this morning waking up, I find a response, a response with a question no less. Now that does inspire me to keep going. In spiritual lingo or god-talk, I’ll call it a sign which does embolden me.
My confession is I am not truly torn, or not truly torn any longer. Yes, I did go through some bouts of non-god belief -- my atheism years, I fondly call them—but I was returned to the God-fold where I have continued to struggle with certain aspects of my so-called faith for as long as I can remember. This post comes from my frustration, indeed impatience, for the limitation of the language with which we try to describe our God affiliation. Our language for holiness, for that longing for something larger than ourselves, which on good days can deliver us an experience of higher transcendence---that language is all so limiting. It is essentially meager in its vision, non-pliant, dualistic, and starkly codifies us into this or that box making many of us unable to speak at all. Thus my post.
My belief is that God is not dead, not yet. My belief is that in our effort to be sure and definitive and confident of ourselves and our so-called affiliation with this or that god club, we round off all the corners, smooth the edges, and fill in the gaps leaving very little emptiness inside ourselves which is the only space the divine can truly enter anyway. It is my belief that the divine has more of chance of entering the empty places of doubt and disbelief than of entering the god-chattering circus.
My atheist friends carry more credibility for me than the chattering god and jesus talkers just because they are living with no answers. I believe that this longing for ‘more’ that resides inside us is a quality of being human, no matter our god/no-god affiliations. Some fill it with self-medicating potions, some with numbing and debilitating habits, some lucky ones fill it with a holy presence that some others like to call God.
This I believe: there exists an emptiness inside us that longs to be filled as much as it longs to keep emptying itself. That is the nature of my seeking and, I guess, might be the guiding theme for this blog. I pray for the audacity with which to continue ....
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Chandra Kamaria
Ann Nichols
Maureen J Andrade
Bob Simpson
marytkelly
L in the Southeast
Salon.com
Comments
like most americans, i first worshipped the god of ancestors (parents, actually). at school i became aware that many other kids worshipped a different god. this one wasn't any better than the one my parents worshipped, but it was surprising to see the strength of his following.
in college, i took a comparative religion course, and i found out that neither my god, nor the one of my public school classmates, had any serious claim to fame. neither was the oldest god, the newest god, the largest following, or the most "internally consistent" when it came to reconciling sin and human rights.
after college i gradually came to the conclusion that most people who purported to speak on behalf of god were probably making it up. its unlikely that god is telling people to fly airliners into skyscrapers, incinerate a building full of kids, relegate women into second class citizens (or worse, chattel on the level of livestock).
believers told me that it is unfair to question the evil that is done in god's name, because "he has a plan, and we can't know it, because we're mortal"
and that's my conundrum. i'm pretty upset that god's plan calls for things like artillery barrages of syrian apartments, or buying pre-teen girls in thai villages to work in brothels. i refuse to worship such a god, if those are his plans. i'm actively working against those plans, so you might even say i'm opposed to gods will . .. if those things are actually part of his plan.
i guess if someone really believes their god has a plan, and it includes atrocities and tortures, they're probably just annoying their god when they attempt the occasional good deed.
since i worship no gods and fear no demons now, i realize that the only one and true heaven is the here and now, and the good deeds we do for each other. its a harder path to follow, knowing that i'm not going to live in a cloud somewhere forever and ever, and have only this one shot at getting it right.
but it does tend to focus the mind on getting it right.
My view is god schmod - it's obviously up to us to make and remake our world, and just bloody live with that daddy-hole in our psyche.
If there is a God - spirit, unknown other, whatever - he/she/it doesn't care whether you believe he exists or not. His existence does not stand or fall depending on whether we publicly believe in him or not. He does not need public acknowledgement, as if his self-esteem depended upon it. If there are any benefits that this God provides - love, joy, peace, and so on - they are available to you free of charge, no religious requirements necessary. (Notice I said "religious" because, I think, to fully take advantage of those positive qualities, something more is required...)
If he has a grand plan for the future, we're all going to be part of it whether we want to be or not. Surely that's no bad thing...if God has a grand plan, it's going to be pretty cool!
Just your choice of words here speaks volumes.
More than the rest of your post does.
He wrote:
I like to differentiate between "belief" and "faith". It seems to be that "belief" needs evidence, it needs to be bolstered with facts and figures. "Faith" does not rely on those things.
I would respectfully suggest that in a religious context, “belief” is not based on evidence at all…certainly not with facts and figures. “Belief” in a religious context is simply a guess about an unknown. It is based on nothing; it is a guess, pure and simple.
Some people guess there is a GOD; some guess there are gods; some guess there is a soul; some guess there is a Heaven or Hell; some people guess the Bible tells them what the god they guess exists is like…and of course, some people guess that none of that is so at all…and guess that the exact opposite is the case. Neither side of any of those things are based on evidence, facts, or figures. They are blind guesses.
And it is important to note that they are blind guesses using the words “belief” or “believe” to disguise the fact that they are blind guessing.
Faith is nothing more than INSISTING that the guesses are correct. Faith is, in effect, bullheadedness.
It has never, ever, been about "guessing". Since as far back as whenever, man has believed in something based on the evidence he was presented with - even if it was merely the heat of the rising sun, leading him to believe it was a god in the sky. The apostle Paul did not "guess" that the Christ was risen, he presented what he thought was compelling evidence: Upwards of 500 people had witnessed him alive.
I'm not saying I believe in the risen Christ, I'm just saying that to use the word "guessing" is to present purely a personal view, and I don't buy it.
Perhaps a different word than "faith" is needed to describe that gut feeling. I only know that when I use the word "faith", I don't mean "belief". Further to that, I don't agree with your sweeping assessment that, "Faith is nothing more than INSISTING that the guesses are correct." I'm sure that with some faith can mean bullheadedness. However, I think that real faith is not about bullheadedness because - completely contrary to your assessment - it is unconcerned with getting other people to agree.