I just caught a bit of 'Cataclysm' there, the C4 series about the genesis of earth and life on it, interestingly presented by Tony Robinson, who last time I checked was a man who besides a talent for playing Baldrick had a religious, dare I say it Cn faith. But that's an aside. A couple of Bob's images that have stuck in my mind of late, to capture a sense of the fulfilment and 'living life in its fulness' that the Christian way offers (not wishing to sound exclusive), are of the fish made to swim in the river and the 'upswelling desire' for 'God'... I'm acutely aware of a key difference in the way I think of God and how atheist fellow passengers view God, god, yahweh,... It's to do with the size and texture of the conception we entertain. About who or what we worship. You see, I have every sympathy with the atheist's exultation of a developed morality, high regard for the power of reason etc. And I'm curious why I as a 'believer' I don't stop there but choose to have faith in 'The LORD'. As I see it, the atheist's view of God is commonly a very small one, a conception which I myself couldn't possibly hold to with any sanity or dignity. 'A cruel local storm god', 'a petty deity', these are some of the kind of phrases I've come across. Like a little statue on a mantelpiece. Who indeed wd want to be devoted to such a being? But the God I commit to, not without my own doubts and questions, is both as big and as small as can be conceived: the ground of the universe or multiverse, yet embodied in the delicacy and vulnerability of a new born babe - to offer a momentary reflection on the import of my last post's sketches in amidst the cartoon humour. So one task in 'bridging the gap' here is how to convey this view of the Godhead as awesome, beautiful, tender etc as the heart of Cn theology holds he is, rather than this contemptible tinpot deity that atheist friends hold up for ridicule.
I wish I cd go on, I wish I cd go back and answer some qs, but I have buses to book, bills to sort, recycling to take out, tidying to do... but if a discussion is sparked, all well and good, and I'll be back next time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.JPG)
15 comments:
The ground of the multiverse. That's quite a big concept to convey. I remember at a catechism class we were all asked to write on a board words we assosciated with god - I waited near the end of the queue - and watched as people tagged some of the heavyweight titles on the board : mysterious , ineffable , omniscient , benificent. I pondered as the queue made its way forward. Then I made my mark : "big". Its one of the key ideas for me - well that and the smallness :)
As an aside, I wasn't aware baldrick was a chistian - I have heard him give more credence to the Assyrian account of the siege of jerusalem in 701 BCE than than the biblical one.
Anyway, I t sounds like you are creating your own god. It happens to be the same god that I stopped believing in. So my quetion is what is so awesome abput a god that would do that? Life was crap as a christian, so I have to point out that your faith offers nothing of any value to me. I think your post is myopic and self centred (and patronising) in the extreme.
I have a question for you - does the idea that there is no god fill you with fear?
Have you lived the alternative? If not, how can you possibly think your way is better than mine?
Has your faith ever caused you deep despair? If so, what's so good with that? How many christian books are there written by people talking of their constant struggle? What's so brilliant about that?
However comfort does not make something true. If you want to convince us, then provide some evidence and actually show that you are thinking carefully about opposing points - I see nothing other than a knee jerk reaction where you put your fingers in your ears and sell us we dont understand - you want to make inroads - try tackling that!
You were born to a christian family - you probably had jesus rammed down your throat at sunday school - could that be why you think the way you do. Indoctrination does work after all - or do you deny that it does.
I might need to re-read my post Billy, but I think your assessment is a bit harsh; it certainly wasn't written in the spirit you accuse me of. I realise perhaps the comments I wrote recently on your and J's blogs might not have been as wise and diplomatic as they cd have been; I'm not meaning to dismiss your views... every post I write is meant to be in some way a step along a path of exploration of the qs I'm interested to ask, but is never meant to be definitive or the last word. All I was doing here was raising a thought that I'd wanted for a while to begin to express and explore.
Hi Bruce,
I hope you didn't take it personally. It was just an honest assessment. I do however think that it is not good to claim that atheists (or even other christians) have the wrong idea of god. The god of the bible for example is petty. Two questions are do you have to jump through hoops to believe otherwise, or is that the way it really is? You are interested in exploring why you think the way you do. My questions are intended for you to think about in that light - what is the role of upbringing or environment? Do you start with your conclusion that god is love, then have to fit everything into that view - even if it means taking a sledgehammer to smash a few square pegs into round holes?
I think these questions have to be addressed if you are interested in why you think the way you do. These were questions I had to face too.
Bruce-
"As I see it, the atheist's view of God is commonly a very small one, a conception which I myself couldn't possibly hold to with any sanity or dignity. 'A cruel local storm god', 'a petty deity', these are some of the kind of phrases I've come across. Like a little statue on a mantelpiece. Who indeed wd want to be devoted to such a being?"
A question, Bruce. Where do you think that atheists get their ideas about God from? From the Bible itself, and from the arguments, claims and assertions of religious people.
My latest post, for instance, attacks a claim made by William Lane Craig, a supposedly respected theologian. We do not just pull ideas out of the ether.
We read and listen to what believers have to say. So if what we say in response is not to your tastes, perhaps it would behoove you to consider the implications and contradictions implicit in the religious claims that you take for granted.
Hi Bruce,
Sorry I’m late :-)
Busy at work and not much time at home for blogging.
Anyhow… I’ll dive in without reading any comments so I hope not to repeat anyone.
I will have to be brief, so I hope I do not sound rude.
to capture a sense of the fulfilment and 'living life in its fulness' that the Christian way offers
Erm… if you say so.
I obviously not fully understood what this heaven and life after death business is really about.
80 years or so (if we are lucky) on Earth and then an eternity ‘somewhere else’ isn’t it? If you are lucky (and good) Christians believe you get to go to heaven, naughty and bad it’s hell.
Nope – cannot see where a Christian gets their fulfilment in living… it’s all about what happens next – the unproven ‘life after death’
Of course, never been a Christian as you know, so maybe you can educate me
I have every sympathy with the atheist's exultation of a developed morality
Sympathy? I’ll let that one go for now…
As I see it, the atheist's view of God is commonly a very small one, a conception which I myself couldn't possibly hold to with any sanity or dignity.
Erm… again, isn’t it the bible that describes the small God?
I always like to remind myself that it is Genesis that sums up the whole friggin universe outside our solar system (ignoring the planets and asteroids men cannot see with the naked eye when I state solar system here of course) with the nice little phrase “He also made the stars”
If you want small – look no further than Genesis 1 I say.
But the God I commit to, not without my own doubts and questions, is both as big and as small as can be conceived
Ah, not the one described in the bible then :-)
but if a discussion is sparked, all well and good, and I'll be back next time.
Time for me to read the comments then I guess.
Lee
Jon I think youve made a mistake - william lane craig is actually an character from the harry potter films. As far as I was aware He played the defense against the dark arts teacher in the chamber of secrets.
I am confused...
bbb-
"Jon I think youve made a mistake - william lane craig is actually an character from the harry potter films. As far as I was aware He played the defense against the dark arts teacher in the chamber of secrets.
I am confused..."
Yes, you clearly are. :)
bbb-
But my point still stands.
I once met an old man pointing at the moon with his finger - he said "look how beautiful this is" - and I did - when I looked at his finger it wasn't beautiful at all - it was old,wrinkled and thin.
So you know what ? I grabbed him , pinned him down on the ground and broke his frosty old finger - and stamped on him - so that he wouldn't try and decieve any body any more.
It was just as well it was a moonlight night - otherwise I wouldn't have been able to see the
lying old git.
And the moral of this story is: avoid BBB when he's been drinking.
jon,
"moral" - singular - shouldn't that be "morals - one of which you percieve to be" ? With such a hegemenous approach to textual interpretation - you're starting to sound like a reformed churchman. Have you ever analysed the parables of jesus for empirical consistency - that would be fun. I'm writing a book on the logical inconsistencies of buddhist koans - care to join me ?
lee,
clearly the mistakes which you think i made in talking about zeno show a misunderstanding of science can exist . I once met a tramp at the bus stop who claimed einsteins theories were to do with morality - so I think its best give up on science and religion. Or shall I disprove Einsteins theories by exposing the confusions of a tramp ?
billy
word up
billy,
i sincerely hope indoctrination works - if it doesnt there was no point sending my son to a church school. The only question is does it work well - does my sons school produce rounded children with a critical understanding of their own faith tradition - or does it produce aggresive and twisted bigots who can never embrace another persons way of living...
Bob, that's going to depend - isn't it. However, it seems that you are forcing your faith on your child by snding him to a church school in the first place. Is this the foundation of your own faith?
PS, GUN's version of word up is better than Cameo's - just to be controvertial for a change
Just watched GUN - nice. It might upset people who have grown used to the red codpiece of Mr Cameo. But I can live with a little contemporary improvisation.
Indeed our school expects kids to create their own worldviews and ethics from the red codpieces of faith which we hand onto them - the more of them that do a GUN the better.
I think thats in our mission statement...
Post a Comment