Category: Atheism
The Idea Of The Holy
The Idea Of The Holy
Albert Einstein said, “The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed. This insight into the mystery of life, coupled though it be with fear, has also given rise to religion. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms — this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness. In this sense, and in this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men.”
Rudolf Otto wrote a book entitled ‘The Idea Of The Holy’ in which he attempts to explain the spiritual experience that Einstein describes and what Otto goes on to refer to as the numinous, which he believes is a sign which points to the deity and could be likened to the voice of God that beckons man to his true center.
The sub-title to Otto’s book of ‘The Idea of the Holy’ is ‘An Inquiry into the Non-Rational Factor in the Idea of the Divine and its Relation·to the Rational’, In the book Otto points out that numinous is not rational or reasonable but it not irrational or unreasonable, it is simply outside of those categories. You might call it is super-rational.
It is this numinous experience that the atheist lacks. Because he has not experienced it, it is impossible for him to understand someone who has experienced it like Albert Einstein. Einstein had experienced the Totally Other which was beyond his explanatory powers to communicate it to those who had not experienced it, those that he referred to as dead or blind. Otto’s book is the best attempt I have seen to put the experience into words. You can get a PDF copy at the below address.
Paradigm shift and the Loss of Faith
The Logic of Believing In A Supreme Being
The problem with believing in a supreme being or God is that it no longer fits in our paradigm. Our paradigm used to be one of kingship or feudalism, now it is one of democracy and egalitarianism both of which does not fit well with a belief in a supreme being. What is a paradigm? A paradigm is a framework of beliefs containing the basic assumptions or ways of thinking, that are commonly accepted by members of a culture. Often paradigms are held subconsciously by the group. They are looked upon as just the way things are, or reality itself.
Under a feudal paradigm it was much easier to believe in a supreme being because it seemed normal and natural. It actually reflected our culture. However, that is no longer true. In the west today, the dominant paradigm is democratic, which leaves the West open to atheism and agnosticism.
The loss of faith in the 20th century is largely the result of a paradigm change from hierarchy to democratic and has little to do with evidence for or against God, nor does it have much to do with one’s intelligence. The decline of faith and its institutions has more to do, for the larger part of the population, with paradigm changes and group think. Being a believer in God in a democratic society is much harder than having faith under a feudal or kingship paradigm.
This brings us to the question, is it logical to believe in a supreme being? For many, the answer would depend on the paradigm that they have accepted. If you accept the hierarchy paradigm, the supreme being would be the one on the top of the pyramid or hierarchy, and it would be reasonable. If you accept a democratic paradigm, logically you cannot have a supreme being, for all beings are equal. A hierarchy would seem strange and maybe unreasonable.
The big question, is does reality or nature support one paradigm more than another? When this question is asked the democratic paradigmatic is totally void of evidence and seems to be totally opposite of a paradigm based on nature. There is nothing democratic about the universe. Everything in nature represents hierarchy moving from the simple to the complex. In this, the natural paradigm supports a hierarchy of being. Taken to its logical conclusion it supports a supreme being paradigm. In this, it is reasonable to think that nature would reflect its creator and the created order.
The end of a democratic paradigm can be seen when you attempt to force a hive of bees to live without a queen. The obvious outcome is the death of the hive. This might explain the reason why, that when a democracy fails it usually is replaced by a totalitarian system ruled by a hierarchy. We see the force of paradigms at work in Western culture and we are witnessing the demise of the hive for accepting a paradigm which is contrary to the natural order.
The Logic of Believing In A Supreme Being
The Logic of Believing In A Supreme Being
The problem with believing in a supreme being or God is that it no longer fits in our paradigm. Our paradigm used to be one of kingship or feudalism, now it is one of democracy and egalitarianism both of which does not fit well with a belief in a supreme being. What is a paradigm? A paradigm is a framework of beliefs containing the basic assumptions or ways of thinking, that are commonly accepted by members of a culture. Often paradigms are held subconsciously by the group. They are looked upon as just the way things are, or reality itself.
Under a feudal paradigm it was much easier to believe in a supreme being because it seemed normal and natural. It actually reflected our culture. However, that is no longer true. In the west today, the dominant paradigm is democratic, which leaves the West open to atheism and agnosticism.
The loss of faith in the 20th century is largely the result of a paradigm change from hierarchy to democratic and has little to do with evidence for or against God, nor does it have much to do with one’s intelligence. The decline of faith and its institutions has more to do, for the larger part of the population, with paradigm changes and group think. Being a believer in God in a democratic society is much harder than having faith under a feudal or kingship paradigm.
This brings us to the question, is it logical to believe in a supreme being? For many, the answer would depend on the paradigm that they have accepted. If you accept the hierarchy paradigm, the supreme being would be the one on the top of the pyramid or hierarchy, and it would be reasonable. If you accept a democratic paradigm, logically you cannot have a supreme being, for all beings are equal. A hierarchy would seem strange and maybe unreasonable.
The big question, is does reality or nature support one paradigm more than another? When this question is asked the democratic paradigmatic is totally void of evidence and seems to be totally opposite of a paradigm based on nature. There is nothing democratic about the universe. Everything in nature represents hierarchy moving from the simple to the complex. In this, the natural paradigm supports a hierarchy of being. Taken to its logical conclusion it supports a supreme being paradigm. In this, it is reasonable to think that nature would reflect its creator and the created order.
The end of a democratic paradigm can be seen when you attempt to force a hive of bees to live without a queen. The obvious outcome is the death of the hive. This might explain the reason why, that when a democracy fails it usually is replaced by a totalitarian system ruled by a hierarchy. We see the force of paradigms at work in Western culture and we are witnessing the demise of the hive for accepting a paradigm which is contrary to the natural order.
Jordan Peterson on the New Atheist
More Nonsense of the New Atheists.
More Nonsense of the New Atheists.
The new atheist claim that they have no burden of proof because atheism is not a belief but rather a non-belief. Right, atheists or no one else can or cannot proof a non-belief. Nor can they argue for or against a non-belief. In fact, you cannot even speak about a non-belief other than simply to say I do not believe. However, I know of only a handful of atheist who refuse to speak about the subject of God and they offer arguments against his existence.
If you are arguing for or against something you are not arguing from a non-belief because that is impossible. Moreover, When arguing against something, the argument “I don’t believe” is insufficient. It is an opinion, not an argument. If you argue you must be argue from some other position or ideology not a non-belief. You cannot as atheists do argue against God and then claim atheism as a non-belief. Atheists must argue against God from either materialism or naturalist ideology which are beliefs. In other words, the minute they open their mouths the burden of proof lies on the one trying to proof their un-belief by the means of other beliefs. In essence, they have to borrow believes from other ideologies to speak against the belief in God. If they don’t want any burden of proof they should simply shut their mouths and not form arguments from materialism, scientism and naturalism.
What is Religion
The Value Of Religion and the Problem With Atheism
In the following video Carl Young present some material that should make the new atheist type rethink the virtue of their constant attacks on religion as though their attacks are in somehow virtuous. Young’s points out that a loss of faith and religion is the reason why so many people today are despond. Young also shows that a loss of faith tends to move a culture towards State-ism and the development and growth of a will for power in the human spirit which results in metal disorders and the totalitarian state.
In a past article I pointed out that atheism is a phenomenal which seems to take place at the end of a civilization and is one of the marks of a decaying culture. It is hard to tell whether atheism is causal or the fruit of atheism. However, either way it is not a positive force in the human community.
Find Me God
Find Me God
Remember your Creator in the days of your youth, before the days of trouble come and the years approach when you will say, “I find no pleasure in them.” Ecclésiastes 12:1
Have you ever wondered why Solomon told people to remember God when they’re young? I always thought that as you got older, one should remember God more often because you’re getting closer to death. However, Solomon says to do it while you’re young, but why? I think one reason is that when you’re young, you’re pure in heart. Your mind has not been filled with crazy ideologies and belief systems which make it hard find and know God. Jesus said, “Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.”
One of the greatest insights I’ve read on finding God was written by C.S. Lewis; it’s about God finding us, or us finding God. The quote is quite lengthy, however, it is rewarding. “When you come to knowing God, the initiative lies on His side. If He does not show Himself, nothing you can do will enable you to find Him. And, in fact, He shows much more of Himself to some people than to others—not because He has favorites, but because it is impossible for Him to show Himself to a man whose whole mind and character are in the wrong condition. Just as sunlight, though it has no favorites, cannot be reflected in a dusty mirror as clearly as in a clean one. You can put this another way by saying that while in other sciences the instruments you use are things external to yourself (things like microscopes and telescopes), the instrument through which you see God is your whole self. And if a man’s self is not kept clean and bright, his glimpse of God will be blurred-like the Moon seen through a dirty telescope. That is why horrible nations have horrible religions: they have been looking at God through a dirty lens. God can show Himself as He really is, only to real men. And that means not simply to men who are individually good, but to men who are united together in a body, loving one another, helping one another, showing Him to one another. For that is what God meant humanity to be like; like players in one band, or organs in one body. Consequently, the one really adequate instrument for learning about God is the whole Christian community, waiting for Him together. Christian brotherhood is, so to speak, the technical equipment for this science-the laboratory outfit.”[1]
Jesus gives further insight when he says to his disciples, “If you love me, you will obey what I command. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him” (John 14:15-24).
In the context the commandment that Jesus is referring to is the commandment to love one another as he has loved them. From this, we can gather that it is not the intellectual or the person who knows the most about the bible that Jesus will reveal himself to, but rather to the man who loves his brothers. We can also gather that there is a knowledge of God in Jesus that is beyond knowing the Bible. It is the knowledge that comes from having a deep relationship with someone; we could liken that to a man knowing his wife in an intimate fashion. After being married for 50 years I can say that I know my wife. I know what she likes and I know her desires even without her telling me. You could say I know her will; and I know it apart from her writing me a letter every day about her wants and desires. Knowing God in Christ on this level is getting close to the meaning of what Paul says when he tells Christians to “live by the Spirit and not the flesh”.
Let me conclude by saying if you want to be found by God, or find God, you can begin by loving his image and likeness in other Christians and your fellow man in and through the body of Christ which is his church. Love is the way to God.
[1] C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (1952; Harper Collins: 2001) pages164-165
Lyle Duell 