I can't bring myself to believe something unless I'm convinced it's true, even if believing is more convenient or profitable. Blaise Pascal made an interesting argument like this for belief in God called Pascal's Wager. He argues that you should believe in God because it's a better bet. If you believe in God and you're right, you win big, If you don't believe in God and you're wrong you lose big. If God doesn't exist, then it makes no difference whether or not you believe. Since the worst outcome of belief is the same as the best outcome of unbelief, it's a better bet to believe. There are lots of issues with his argument, but in any case I can't make myself believe on this basis.
For me, truth matters. To live as if God existed even if perhaps he doesn't is dishonest. That isn't to say that I can always identify the truth without error or uncertainty as you'll see later. It does mean that attempting to find the truth rather than making a useful choice is important to me. For some people, this isn't an issue. They can simply believe without a lot of soul searching and contemplation. I'm not wired that way.
The specific "world-view" questions that need answers before making any "life-view" progress are:
- Does anything exist?
- Does God exist?
- If God exists, what is his nature?
1. Does anything exist?
Yes. Although, as far as I know there is no way to prove this. A little reading on the topic of "existence" leads me quickly into realms of thought I can't even follow. Reading some of the essays on the philosophy of The Matrix makes it pretty clear that nobody has figured out how to prove anything actually exists.
That's not to say I'm going to simply toss a coin, pick a position, and move on. I am a realist. According to metaphysical realism, the world is as it is independently of how humans take it to be. Unless this is so, none of our beliefs about our world could be objectively true since true beliefs tell us how things are and beliefs are objective when true or false independently of what anyone might think. This seems to me to be an obvious truth, and the alternatives seem contrived.
2. Does God Exist?
Again, my answer is yes, and again, I don't think it's provable. C.S. Lewis makes a great run at the topic in Chapter 4 of Mere Christianity. In the first few chapters, Lewis argues that God exists because we all seem to have a very similar set of things that we consider to be "right." He asserts that this must be because there is an "absolute" or objective right, the source of which is God. This is known as Normative Morality and I believe it to be a strong argument.
3. What is God's nature?
To answer this question we will ultimately need to go to the Bible and encounter God personally, so I'll be back to this topic again. For now, there are some of basic questions that seem to be taken for granted by many Christians. One was asked in one of Plato's dialogs called the Euthyphro. In this dialog, Socrates asks Euthyphro, "Is something good because the gods will it, or do they will it because it's good?" Is morality higher than religion or vice versa? I believe the answer is found in the nature of God. God is good. In a sense , God defines goodness. Goodness is God's nature, so both are absolutes.
Here are some of the links on metaphysics I have used:
7 comments:
Rob - Thanks for a great post. This is exactly what I've been thinking about.
How do we know God? God is known only as He chooses to reveal Himself. I believe that He has revealed Himself thru creation, thru other people, but mainly thru His Word. We are guilty of trying to make God into our image...i.e., the Divine Co-pilot, the Celestial Santa, the Heavenly Repairman, the Gallactic Grandpa. We can slip into these silly notions of God if we don't saturate ourselves with His Word.
I guess I'm trying to move my thinking about what I think about God - to what the Bible says about God.
For this is what the high and lofty One says - who lives forever, whose name is holy: 'I live in a high and holy place, but also with him who is contrite and lowly in spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly and to revive the heart of the contrite.' - Isaiah 57:15
Heavy stuff for Popcorn on a monday moanin' but here are some kernals poppin' this a.m....to use metaphysispeak, the "nature of the reality in which I exist" is wholly defined for me by two of its components: I am a thinking organism and I have a physical body housing all of the mechanisms that support the machinations of my thought processes. The why of my existence I simply accept, through faith, that I was created to worship God. That reason provided to me by what I believe to be the Holy and divine word of God, the Bible. I thought that the theory that "you might as well believe in God" was mine! because as a little girl I came up with that idea as I sorted through the whys and hows and what ifs on my little girl faithfinding journey.I think Mr. Blaise lifted it right out of my Mrs. Beasley diary. I'm amazed that it is a documented "theory" of thought. Who'da thunk it?? While the line of thinking is true, once the existence of God is accepted, truly realized, then the Holy Spirit floods our souls and now what sounds like a styrofoam theory on paper, becomes a force greater than ourselves in our God -indwelled new "reality". You mention the Matrix. The premise driving Matrix was the quest for what's real and what's not, which is extremely thought provoking but here on earth has no credence. Why? Because it doesn't matter to us. Apparently what we see, feel, touch, etc. is real or at least is the "real" God provides for us in the here and now and the reason we are here is to do His work, walk His path, and praise Him for who He is, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. The reality in which the Christian lives is actually on a different plane than that ofthe non believer! We are actually in an enhanced dimension. Our existence becomes expanded with spiritual eyes, spiritual ears, and tendered hearts, allowing us to see, hear, and feel things in new ways that without the Holy Spirit, others cannot! A new reality. We now enjoy the state of being "set apart". An existence in which we can live along side the happenstances of our lives whatever it brings, insulated from the wretched and gnawing quesions of why, how, when,and why not. What's the insulation? The Holy Sprit and the fruit He produces in our submitted lives. Peace, patience, joy, kindness, gentleness, goodness, faithfulness, and self-control. Which brings us back to the divine Word of God. This is the source of all true theories of existence. The Bible's truths supercede, define, and often negate man's stupid thoughts on existence. We cannot expect to find the words to justify divinity against the backdrop of man's finite thought. We simply walk out on the bridge of faith and leap. Trying to measure it with the standards of Plato, Socrates, and other thinkers of yore is an excercise in time wasting futility. Faith is the balm for man's excruciating search for answers to burning questions surrounding the existence of God, self, matter, galaxies, dimensions, quarks, black holes, worm holes, poverty, suffering, everything. This is the comforting truth to which I cling and for which I live.
I've always had trouble with the idea of God's Absolute Goodness. If God defines what is good, if it is impossible for Him to NOT do good, then isn't it kind of meaningless to say that he is good? If He doesn't have a choice to do wrong, then what's the big deal that He always chooses right? To simplify matters greatly, isn't it silly for me to give my son a pat on the head for getting into the bath when I never gave him a chance to NOT get in the bath?
And for Pascal, I do agree with you on this one. The problem with that philosophy is that it's not based on any sort of reality, just on what's convenient. It seems like it'd be very hard for me to believe in something just because it made sense for me to believe that, not because I had any evidence towards its truth.
Maybe I'm misquoting here, but if I had the faith of a kernel of corn...
Popcorn, you are, of course, exactly correct. This all boils down to a question of faith. But faith in what? We jump quickly to the Bible to get an answer, but why believe the Bible? That's just pushing faith out a step further. I'm really struggling to avoid using Mark Twain's definition, "Faith is believing what you know ain't so."
I also agree that we tend to underestimate God, and create a god in our image. Lots of bad theology comes from this.
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD. "As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts." - Isaiah 55:8-9
I don't think that means we should give up. God gave us the ability to reason, and I think he expects us to use it. We should try to figure out what's true, and it should make sense.
eMonk, I don't think good loses its meaning because it's a characteristic of God. Could God be bad? Well, yes, but he isn't because he's good. It's a bit like saying, "Could a rock be a bird?" Well, yes, but it isn't because it's a rock. The fact the bird could not choose to be a rock doesn't make it less a bird. God is the definition of good. He is the absolute, final word on goodness. God is how we know what good is. It's not a matter of choice.
Wow, you struck a nerve here, Rob! Seems there are budding philosophers all over the Internet who can't wait to chime in on this one. Me, for instance...
On the question of whether anything exists at all, I think I can conclusively say yes, because I know that I exist. If nothing exists, then I don't exist either. It is self-refuting for me to claim that I don't exist. But I think you were really more interested in talking about whether anything besides me exists. This is perhaps enormously complicated conceptually, but practically speaking it is a non-issue.
On the question of whether God exists, I believe there many good arguments. I discussed several of these at length last year on my blog:
No Excuses
Hath God Wrought?
Mind vs. Matter
There are, of course, many others, including the moral argument you mentioned. That particular argument was very compelling to me when I was returning to God after a period of apostasy. Our children were young and I wanted to teach them right from wrong. I knew that in my materialist worldview there was really no basis for objective morality. But my heart rebelled against that idea. I could not convince myself that morality isn't real, or that morality is subjective. This quandary is one of the things that drove me back to faith in God.
As to God's nature, the short answer is that he has revealed it to us through both general and special revelation. That is unsatisfying for the folks who are still stuck at Question 2, of course. But the real answer to both the second and third questions is that each of us must have a personal encounter with God. It's fine to have a number of good arguments, but in the end we believers know that God exists and know what he is like because know him.
In practice, I know God the way I know you. It doesn't occur to me (on most days!) to doubt your existence. And I have a very good idea what kind of person you are. (Don't worry, I won't tell!) That is because we have spent a lot of time together and I've had a chance to get to know you. My personal knowledge of you will always trump whatever theories have been spun about you by people who have never met you.
All the philosophy is really only important to the extent that it can bring an unbeliever to the point of being open to an encounter with God. It will never be a substitute for knowing God.
presumptive thot:
it is definitely true that belief is not a voluntary action, therefore non belief should not be punishable because it is out of our control.
we know that at least thought exists: i think therefore thought exists i.e. i think therefore i am
whether God exists or not depends on ones definition of God i.e. does your God exist, does my God exist? one must have the correct and true definition of God before it can be said tht God exists
"to find the nature of God we ultimately need to go to the bible"
that presumes the bible to be true. maybe so but again unprovable,what about the Q'ran?
I've never had trouble with #1. The fact that reality is present because I am present seems understandable enough. All of that is led by my senses. I guess you could say that my senses could mislead me. But everyone else around me is being led by their senses in the same way, so why bother questioning it?
#2: I've found solace in St. Thomas Aquinas' theories of reason. That God could be proven by reason and intellect. Maybe not proven in the scientific sense, but proven in a thinking sense. Bill, I didn't get a chance to look at your links, so you might have stated these there.
One reasoning being that we are contingent beings. It is observable that all creation's existence is contingent upon something happening to bring it into existence. The tree needed a seed and water and sunlight. The animal needs the union of male and female to be brought into the world. These things would never exist if some other thing had not been what it was or had done what it did.
So, the theory goes that if we are all contingent upon something previous, then contingent beings could not exist at all unless there is a being which differs from them, possessing existence in its own right. There must be an originator of existence or it doesn't make sense. Contingent beings are receivers of existence, and can pass on existence, but never originators themselves of existence. To quote Frank Sheed, "If nothing exists save beings that receive their existence, how does anything exist at all?"
The answer must be God.
#3 is given to us because God chose to reveal himself to us. Instead of man trying to figure out God, God gave himself to man, revealed himself to man. Through the Jews, and I think the ultimate proof of this is Jesus. Yes, to believe in Jesus you must believe the Bible is true. Whose historical accuracy is verifiable. Jesus was a real human being who walked the earth. It is hard to deny this. And if you believe this, you have to take into account what he said, and ultimately, his ressurrection.
Post a Comment