"in G!D we doubt"

[bananabrain]

an extract from the broadcaster john humphrys' new book, which i think is both thought-provoking and worth starting a discussion over.

In God we doubt -Times Online

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by In God we doubt - Times Online

Believers may very well find comfort and solace in all those things but where atheists are wrong is in failing to recognise and understand that most believers want something else as well. It is hard to talk to Christians about religion without them eventually using the word “love”.

I'm a deluded fanatic who has a relationship with an imaginary God (Hello, Harvey!). This thing called "love", that's what does it for me. I cannot explain away the marked change in my life when I found myself confronted with such an intense feeling of love upon entering that relationship. And the subsequent changes I've seen in my life, my relationship with others, with my wife, with my children. How I've learned the value of loving to give rather than to get. If this is all a delusion of mine, then put me in the insane asylum, 'cause I fear I can't be "cured".

Do I doubt? Of course. Nothing is "proven" beyond a shadow of a doubt. There are about as many indicators of the existance of God as there are for the non-existance of God. You can get you mind into such an oscillation about such things. So we have to face up to the fact that we won't know the answers until we're dead and gone. And even then, it's not a guarentee, providing the atheists are right and all consciousness ceases. But it profits me more to believe in God than not to.

[bananabrain]

it profits me more to believe in G!D than not to.

that's pascal's wager, isn't it? but surely love isn't about profit - and certainly the belief system i believe in arguably imposes more restrictions than it delivers benefits, that's why we call it "accepting the yoke of heaven". or am i wrong?

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Impqueen]

Very interesting, and it reminds me I'm shying away from reading 'the God Delusion' because it will probably make me angry. I'd like to read Humphrey's book. But if I do that I really must read Dawkins.

The poll unfortunately has no space for me. No surprise there though....

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

that's pascal's wager, isn't it? but surely love isn't about profit - and certainly the belief system i believe in arguably imposes more restrictions than it delivers benefits, that's why we call it "accepting the yoke of heaven". or am i wrong?

b'shalom

bananabrain

I'm not even talking about Pascal's wager, at least not in the sense of an afterlife. I'm speaking of the how my belief profits me here and now. Perhaps I worded this wrong, or your perception of it is misunderstood. Love is about sacrifice. I admit that I do seek love, and in that regard, I guess I try to profit. But I also see the value in giving love, which in itself doesn't really profit me anything, except the satisfaction that I profited someone else.

You are right about the restrictions. Following a moral code of ethics seems to runs counter to our sense of freedom. But if you view it that way, you are missing the point, and any adherance to it will seem like a drag. However, if you view those restrictions as boundaries which God has set up in order to maximize one's enjoyment in life, then embracing those will not seem a burden, but a delight.

My own children once told me that they are glad that I'm sometimes strict with them, though not too strict. They understand the value of discipline, for they have seen the lack of discipline in other children and how that has affected them. They don't want to end up like that. My oldest daughter has on her own taken a pledge of purity until marriage. Do you not understand how I, as a father, am so pleased to know my daughter's intentions? Do you reckon God feels the same way?

[bananabrain]

possibly about the parental discipline thing. however, i don't think the daughter metaphor flies - G!D is interested in the intention, naturally, but also in the outcome - but as a human, i feel that once my child is an adult, it is not necessarily appropriate for me to know about all aspects of his/her life. for example, if/when, insh'Allah, i have a daughter, i won't be expecting her to make any declarations or report back to me on her conduct - i'll want to have taught her enough to be able to trust her with her own privacy, as much as my inner patriarch may want me to sit outside her bedroom door with a shotgun and a shovel to warn off any testosterone-fuelled youths. as i understand it, G!D expects us to take responsibility for our own actions, but is not about to ride herd on us any more now we're supposed to be grown-ups, as it were.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Snoopy]

A little doubt,-- a little enlightenment. A big doubt,-- a big enlightenment.

- Han Shan.

s.

[17th Angel]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

A little doubt,-- a little enlightenment. A big doubt,-- a big enlightenment.

- Han Shan.

s.

No offense meant, but don't you ever get tired of sayings like that? Like... Sometimes feel there isn't any wisdom or inspiration? lol... Just they reverse the freaking words?

Like errr... I should now really at the moment be taking heed of Sage 17... "Master your manners or they shall master you." - 17th.......

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by 17th Angel

No offense meant, but don't you ever get tired of sayings like that? Like... Sometimes feel there isn't any wisdom or inspiration? lol... Just they reverse the freaking words?

Like errr... I should now really at the moment be taking heed of Sage 17... "Master your manners or they shall master you." - 17th.......

No offence taken! Personally, sometimes these “things” may seem like obvious expressions, but that is perhaps because they are the truth; but knowing them and living them are not the same, as perhaps your little aphorism suggests? Other times, there may seem a paradox which is counter-intuitive but may seem to point to a truth. “Ordinarily” some folk with “great faith” have “little doubt” and so may continue with living an unquestioning life, mouthing the mantras of their faith…and yet this expression of Han Shan is saying the opposite is the true way, as per the thread about Mother Theresa.

s.

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

possibly about the parental discipline thing. however, i don't think the daughter metaphor flies - G!D is interested in the intention, naturally, but also in the outcome - but as a human, i feel that once my child is an adult, it is not necessarily appropriate for me to know about all aspects of his/her life. for example, if/when, insh'Allah, i have a daughter, i won't be expecting her to make any declarations or report back to me on her conduct - i'll want to have taught her enough to be able to trust her with her own privacy, as much as my inner patriarch may want me to sit outside her bedroom door with a shotgun and a shovel to warn off any testosterone-fuelled youths. as i understand it, G!D expects us to take responsibility for our own actions, but is not about to ride herd on us any more now we're supposed to be grown-ups, as it were.

b'shalom

bananabrain

Absolutely, outcomes are what matters. I can't say for certain that she will keep her promise. But it's nice to know that she is taking a step toward the right direction with the right attitude. My job as a parent is to point her to the right direction and hope that she has sense enough to follow.

"Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it." - Proverbs 22:6

Originally Posted by bb

...i'll want to have taught her enough to be able to trust her with her own privacy, as much as my inner patriarch may want me to sit outside her bedroom door with a shotgun and a shovel to warn off any testosterone-fuelled youths.

I'm hoping she'll have her own shotgun.

[InLove]

Hi All--

My hat is off to Humphrys for the simple fact that even though his views are at least agnostic, he speaks out against the arrogant attitudes which so often accompany the no-God argument. Of course, the arrogance factor doesn’t appear to me to be limited only to those whom Humphrys characterizes as “militant” atheists. There are arrogant believers, too.

Encarta’s online definition of “arrogant” reads as follows: proudly contemptuous:feeling or showing self-importance and contempt or disregard for others.

When intellectual deficiency is cited by athiests as the catalyst to faith, I’d say that qualifies as arrogance. I’d also say that when a believer refuses to acknowledge that some of what the athiest presents is the product of diligent research and contains elements of merit, that is also arrogant. But it continues to happen on a regular basis. I guess the classic lessons surrounding hubris are just not easily learned until experienced by the individual, and even then they often seem to be quickly forgotten.

Personally, I think arrogance is most often born of insecurity. In other words, sometimes I think we work and work at trying to understand things to the best of our abilities, and we may have managed a pretty good rough draft in our heads—then someone with an opposing viewpoint comes along and interjects something that might suggest a rewrite on a couple of points, and we do not want to hear it because we worked so hard on that last idea and we are tired!

Is it that we really are that uncomfortable with doubt? Maybe. But like Snoopy pointed out, doubt leads to questions which can lead to answers. There are some here in C-R who strongly disagree with me, but I think a good mystery has intrinsic value. For me, it is not so much the questions I have that make me uncomfortable, but the fact that sometimes I cannot prove the answers I receive to anyone else. And that really should not bother me—I would hope that everyone receives answers that are their own personal revelations. Perhaps I just know from experience that eventually, somewhere down the line, I might say something about mine, and someone will call me “stupid” or “lazy” and I will probably hate that!

I guess my point is that if we spent less time trying to convince “the other guy” that we are more intelligent or clever than he is, we might actually learn from one another. After all, both athiests and believers have based their opinions on a preponderance of “evidence” of some kind or another. A willingness on the part of each to understand the nature of that evidence could go a long way toward reducing the endless waves of condescension that flow between athiests and believers.

Thanks for the link, bananabrain. Dawkin’s review of Christopher Hitchens on that page is interesting, as well.

InPeace,
InLove

[I, Brian]

Richard Dawkins, in his bestselling The God Delusion, was reduced to producing a “study” by Mensa that purported to show an inverse relationship between intelligence and belief.

Lol!! I once looked at joining MENSA. They suggested that if I sent them £30, they'd send me a certificate saying I was intelligent. I'd say joining is anything but a sign of intelligence.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by InLove

Personally, I think arrogance is most often born of insecurity.

InPeace,
InLove

Hi Deb

I agree! (so no need to hate you just yet then )

And what about certainty? Can this also show itself as arrogance?

Perhaps insecurity leads to a search for certainty which in turn creates a display of arrogance?

Perhaps it's just our natural desire to make sense of the world that, if not kept in check, leads to arrogance.

I know I do it on a daily basis, so I hope I'm not unique.

s.

[bananabrain]

personally i put it down to the fact that science doesn't seem to deal with the concept of compromise. i mean, either a hypothesis stands (which is, of course, not the same thing as fact, but if you're talking about gravity, for example, i'd feel fairly comfortable describing it as such) or it doesn't, in which case it can be demonstrably disproved. the thing is that science is not philosophy, although it is still based on axioms, it's just that the axioms of science are less arguably axiomatic than those of religion, or stretch credibility a bit less if you see what i mean.

b'shalom

bananabrain