God3’s Blog

I recently watched Richard Dawkins on a Sunday morning BBC program expounding the awesome wonder of the world science has uncovered and how meaningful a life without pretensions to an existing  Deity can be.

This is not an unfamiliar comment from an atheist-but I cannot get my little head around it no matter how many words are spilt , there remains to me a few questions that have yet to be answered:

1.Why do atheists evangelise ?

If the chief final end of man is to spend countless eons in  a cold,empty, ever expanding  ’nobody at home’  universe -what does it matter what a person believes, as long as they are happy for the few  short years that they are alive  -who cares about whats right, whats wrong, whats true whats false ? In the final analysis how will atheists promoting atheism change the end result of man one iota ?

If what we do has no effect on the fianl outcome -why does really matter what we do in the now ?

Why should atheist care ? Why should we be seeing the rise of nu-atheism, a more virulent aggressive  form of the old atheism, which  has spawned a whole section on its own in my local bookshop! Its a great money spinner -but is that the only motive for spreading the word, the ‘good’ news of Gods death ?

2.What has a sense of wonder to do with anything ?

Dawkins said:

‘I have a very positive, I’d almost say poetic, vision of the universe from a scientific point of view. I feel people are missing something if they content themselves with what I think of as an outdated, medieval view of the world, when they could be latching on to something much more exciting.’

I’d like to know whats scientific about a poetic view of the universe,sounds subjective to me and  not the stuff of  science  at all ? What does it matter if you have feelings of a poetic nature -there just neurons and neural networks firing -so what ? Why should that be valued more highly such that it deserves mention more  that the fact that my neck itches (different neurons firing) for example?

All this sense of awe atheists are feeling …so what ? It doesnt change the end result -with nothing that went before having any impact on the final outcome…so be good  or be bad it really makes no difference -as it doesn’t impact the final final outcome for you and me of death.

Athesits talk about family and friends adding to the meaning of life-but why?

What does it matter in the end ?It doesnt matter at all.

I read this on a forum recently:

Pascal :

“We run heedlessly into the abyss after putting something in front of us to stop us seeing it.”

Phillipm (whom I couldn’t contact-sorry Philipm) wrote this :

‘Whenever atheists address the claim that without God life is meaningless, I feel like they really stop thinking about it in an objective mindset. The point is about our ultimate meaning, which is a category in everyone’s minds I think. It is not a point about your life from point A to point B, but rather is a thought about humanity’s place in the universe.’

I agree its the ultimate final outcome thats important.Within Christianity there is the notion that what is done now has eternal consequences this has the effect of making every moment charged with import and precious.

 

 

 

‘I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient.

It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously.’

Erwin Schrödinger

James reminds us in James chapter 4 verse 6, that ‘God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble’. Pride comes in two flavours –the puffed up –self proclamation of achievement or ownership, an orgy of arrogant self importance and then there’s the less obvious less extravagant pride which denies; it denies our value before God, calling God a liar and stops us accepting compliments from others, making men out to be mistaken.

The Uriah Heap stance of wringing hands and bowing acceptance of our lot ,not wishing to trouble others or offend. The type of pride that tries to closely resemble Humility yet is nothing like it.

Reading the Telegraph this morning, there is an article about a new TV adaption of the Passion to be shown on BBC 1 on Sunday .In the article the actor playing Jesus Joseph Mawle describes what it is like to play this person, what caught the interest of the Telegraph Writer Cassandra Jardine was that Joseph had to deal with being both dyslexic and deaf,these ‘thorns in the flesh’ may  propell us towards God, Mawle provides the antidote to pride:

Jardine writes, quoting Mawle:“…As I learnt more about Jesus, I found he had a more positive message: use your gifts” That thought gave him Joseph Mawle courage, but still he was often so nervous that he turned for help to David Oyewolo, who played Henry VI  for the RSC and is Joseph of Arimathea in The Passion . “He’s straight down the line religious and that was very calming. I was getting mixed up with words and so I asked him what it meant to be humble. He said, ‘It means asking for help’.” Mawle’s humility turned out to be his best qualification for the part.’

Andrew Fellows (English L’abri) my brief notes on his –‘The future of Christianity in Europe’ lecture Europe as part of western Christianity no longer represents the future of Christianity –that now lies elsewhere-we in Europe are in a desperate situation.Psalm 11 1-3: In the LORD I take refuge.
How then can you say to me:
“Flee like a bird to your mountain.

2 For look, the wicked bend their bows;
they set their arrows against the strings
to shoot from the shadows
at the upright in heart.

3 When the foundations are being destroyed,
what can the righteous do ?

When the foundations are being destroyed what can the righteous do?

King David is being tempted to hide, the real world is dangerous, just bring a few souls into the kingdom and keep our collective heads down –this is the temptation of the European church today as we become more and more ‘the beleaguered church’.Europe is now being referred to by those outside of Europe as the Dark Continent – a term once used to describe India in the 18^th century by European Christians!

The draft constitution of Europe was refused and voted down –the draft constitution was devoid of all references to Christianity in Europe –described by some as a Christophobic constitution, the commitment was to secularism and saw Christianity as the problem.Why? Fellows considers that two vacuums existing today in Europe:

1. The decline of ALL European populations –‘demographic suicide’ –Niall Ferguson described this as ‘The greatest suicidal reduction in European population since the black death’. Financial incentives are being rolled out to encourage a third child. The outworking of this is an increasing aging populations coupled with a lack of economic growth. Why aren’t we concerned –this is the sign of a declining civilisation. There is a lack of forward thinking, a lack of vision for the future. There is a turning inwards a narcissistic tendency. What is going to fill the demographic vacuum of Europe?

1. There is an ideological vacuum-which ideology will fill the vacuum?

The Europe we are seeing is committed to exclusive Humanism –excluding all transcendent reference points-Christianity is seen as an obstacle to a peaceful Europe –Christianity is a problem-beyond that we have a collective amnesia about the Christian foundations of Europe –we are pretending that they do not exist.

The ideology that supports Europe currently has an anti-ideology. We look back at our recent history –which has had the most devastating impact for Europe, leading to an attitude where there’s a neutrality of all worldviews-‘Never again!’ Perhaps Europe’s recent past has brought us to the point of fear in regard to worldviews.

The worthy goals of Europe are tolerance and freedom as part of the EU constitution –that’s excellent –but with an anti-worldview stance there is no basis for this commitment other than a pragmatic one. The foundation is not there, we need reasons for freedom and tolerance.

 Within Christianity there is a basis for these ideas of Europe.Freedom is about choice –the exercise of the will –self expression –freedom is reduced to individual choice, very Nietzsche, the will to power that creates the self-Freedom is no longer related to anything outside of our selves.

 There is a loss of universals-the idea is that we gain more freedom the more we strip away these worldviews such as Christianity. From a Christian perspective Freedom has to be FOR SOMETHING –freedom includes a historical memory and moral imagination as well as choices. We must have freedom and responsibility.The Christian worldview provides a basis for the public square and continues to provide a foundation for modern Europe. 4 foundational pillars from Christianity:

1. The reality of the trinity, the principle of the one and the many: The Lord our God the Lord is one –as a unity God exists as three persons with unique roles and functions –also displaying diversity. The reality of the trinity guards against 2 movements: a. An emphasis on unity to the exclusion of diversity-if we allow unity to dominate we lean towards a totalitarian state. When unity becomes everything the individual looses everything. The other extreme is an emphasis on diversity to the exclusion of unity and here the individual becomes all there is, there is nothing bigger or any collective to belong to no health democracy can exist in that situation. A Trinitarian confederation of states would be loose association, allowing diversity and unity.

b. The reality of the creation order –our universe is not accidental or random but is purposeful and personal –the creator is dynamically involved in the unfolding of creation and we are part of a dynamic partnership ( A dance –a conversation –not coercion on the part of the creator , not the use of force –this represents a model for European civilisation) with God in ruling over creation.

1. The Imago Dei (image of God) Human beings created in the image of God-that is the foundation and basis of Human dignity-the individual has sacred value. This is the basis for a tolerant and free Europe –because we carry the image of God. We should resist brutal regimes where ever we find them, because of the Imago Dei.

1. The reality of a moral universe- the creator is a moral being there is a right and a wrong –these rights and wrongs are a reflection of what God is. The moral value has a transcendent character because it represents God character. It stands outside of people.

These four pillars built the basis of Europe. The state is there to support and protect which is why a limited state is a Christian ideal. Andrew Fellows talks about the Volunteer sector as an expression of the Imago Dei –in post Communistic Russia the voluntary sector is only just beginning –the state is not meant to be the sole arbiter of care we are citizens within a civic society.

Will Europe return to its foundations?

Who will help us?

Here is an example of David Robertson’s thoughts on youtube.

Also a more indepth discussion with Q&A from the audience can he obtained here.

He is the author of ‘ The Dawkins Letters‘ which grew out of a series of posts which were placed on Dawkins website and generated many responses most of which are unpostable regarding David’s oposition to the God Delusion.

My  favourite quote from  G.K.Chesterton is :

‘The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid. ‘

Can we make up our minds, can we have ideas that are absolute -must tolerance  mean  we are undecided?

From ‘Miracles’ by C.S.Lewis

‘It is always shocking to meet life where we thought we were alone. ‘Look out!’ we cry, ‘it’s alive’. And therefore this is the very point at which so many draw back–I would have done so myself if I could–and proceed no further with Christianity. An ‘impersonal God’–well and good.

A subjective God of beauty, truth and goodness, inside our own heads–better still. A formless life-force surging through us, a vast power which we can tap–best of all. But God Himself, alive, pulling at the other end of the cord, perhaps approaching at an infinite speed, the hunter, king, husband–that is quite another matter.

There comes a moment when the children who have been playing at burglars hush suddenly: was that a real footstep in the hall? There comes a moment when people who have been dabbling in religion (’Man’s search for God!’) suddenly draw back. Supposing we really found Him? We never meant it to come to that! Worse still, supposing He had found us?’

HT: Kindlings Muse

(late night ramblings)

Imagine a barren landscape where nothing grows ,a salt lake, Mare Tranquillitatis,a rock orbiting a neutron star bombarded with radiation or my back garden after the dog has been out there.

Life’s origin, it seems, is a singularity,its ubiquity is not apparent, but not shown to be false.

Science assumes a closed universe,the method both dictates that assumption, and is limited to making only that assumption. A case of the media dictating the message ?

In which case the instigation of life on our barren rock, quite possibly a singular event, was non teleological and could only be the product of chance or contingency.

Imagine that salt lake, mare tranquillitatis or the rock orbiting a neutron star, on that sterile barren landscape imagine atoms in chaos finding there thermodynamic equilibrium, from this imagine some means of self assembly of these atoms into complex machines that are characterised by having not just one initial function, but many, all critical to survival and necessary from the outset.

The commonest of these functions our newly assembled machines have, is to be able to reproduce other self assembling machines. Spontaneous generation by chance or by contingency?

If these are the only options we have, then a problem arises, if life is written into the make up of every atom and into natural law, then where are the Klingon’s ?

The Chance of life’s self assembly, our other option, is widely considered to be so small as to off the scale for anyone to seriously consider.

So what are we left with? Well I guess we can but imagine.

Are we hard coded to believe in God? Is the fundamental reason why approximately 95% of all the humans living on Earth subscribe to God in some form or other  due to a gene product?

Did we evolve the idea of God to comfort us in our realisation that the universe is cold, dark, empty and never had us in mind. That we are adrift on an endless ocean without a shore ?That we alone face our mortality, we know we will  die.

As the author of ‘The God Gene: How Faith Is Hardwired into Our Genes’ Dean Hammer says :

“I think we follow the basic law of nature, which is that we’re a bunch of chemical reactions running around in a bag.”

Where is the god gene,what loci is it parked on ?

If the reason we believe is to be found within, the assumption is, that there is no objectivity to God . An assumption which is beyond  the remit of science and relies on scientism.

It follows that if one idea, that of God, requires a gene then of course there are lots of other ideas, will they also require the genes  ?

The agnostic gene, the atheist gene, the  science gene ? the simpsons gene?PhD  Studentships anyone?

The notion that the ideas we have  are as the result of  materialistic forces alone, brings a circular argument that undermines  truth, if we except that  ideas are  generated from evolutionary forces and  genetic pressure,  then this must include the idea that ideas are generated from evolutionary forces and genetic pressure. How do ya like that objectivity ?

C.S.Lewis hinting at the hearts true genetic desire hidden behind all our chasing down of the days.

Here’s the quote :

“There have been times when I think we do not desire heaven; more often I find myself wondering whether, in our heart of hearts, we have ever desired anything else…inklings (but faint and uncertain even in the best) of that something which you were born desiring, and which, beneath the flux of other desires and in all the momentary silences between the louder passions, night and day, year by year, from childhood to old age, you are looking for, watching for, listening for. You have never had it. All the things that have ever deeply possessed your soul have been but hints of it–tantalizing glimpses, promises never quite fulfilled, echoes that died away just as they caught your ear. But if it should really become manifest–if there ever came an echo that did not die away but swelled into the sound itself–you would know it. Beyond all possibility of doubt you would say ‘Here at last is the thing I was made for.’ We cannot tell each other about it. It is the secret signature of each soul, the incommunicable and unappeasable want, the thing we desired…which we shall still desire on our deathbeds, when the mind no longer knows wife or friend or work. While we are, this is. If we lose this, we lose all.”