I was just reading this article on Life Hacker and it hits pretty squarely on some of my thoughts about religion.
http://lifehacker.com/5907299/embrace-the-supernatural-how-superstitions-placebos-and-rituals-encourage-you-to-achieve-your-goals
I feel like once I pulled back from religion and going to church, the whole God and Jesus thing became less real. So it seems like it's only real if you choose to believe it and make it real. Absent the constant encouragement to see the world a certain way - i.e. going to church and listening to sermons and other people talk about their "God experience" - it ceases to be real and true.
To be honest, since I haven't be "interacting" with God, he hasn't been interacting with me either (as far as I can tell). If he was a real entity and we were in a real relationship and he loves me regardless of what I do, why wouldn't he still at least try to maintain some connection? Why isn't he "calling me up" so to speak and asking me what's up? Surely he can see that I'm still interested. I'm taking the time to write this blog and attend a bible study and read books on the subject. So you couldn't entirely argue that since I've walked away from him he's just letting me be (or has gotten mad and walked away himself perhaps).
It just encourages me to think that God is more superstition that real person. Is it just self-delusion? I don't want that to be true. I want something to hope in. But I want that something be real, not a figment of my (or someone else's) imagination. Someone please tell me that Richard Dawkins isn't right.
A relationship with God is more than a spiritual pep rally in a building. When you are no longer in the crowd chanting “We’ve got spirit yes we do!!” you are going to feel differently when you are not there. This does not mean that there are not sound, logical reasons to believe in God.
ReplyDelete“You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart.” Jeremiah 29:13
Searching with all of your heart does not mean requiring God to meet you on your terms. The truth is objective, absolute, and there is evidence for it if you are truly searching. Most people reject this evidence for emotional reasons, not intellectual reasons. The truth is not based on feelings or other people or church.
Richard Dawkins isn’t right. I tried reading “The God Delusion”, but it was so illogical and incoherent that I could only skim through it. Here are some basic reasons why I believe. I’d be happy to expound on these if you’d like, but a face-to-face discussion is probably a better format.
1. The universe must have a cause, otherwise the fundamental laws of science have been violated
2. The universe is fine-tuned for life in a statistically impossible way
3. The existence of life could not have happened randomly, otherwise the fundamental laws of science were violated
4. Objective moral values exist
5. The historical evidence of Jesus’s crucifixion and post-mortem appearances
6. Personal experience
#6 is subjective and subject to delusion. Please give answers for the other five.
You say you have read books as part of your search. Please add this to your list by Dr. William Lane Craig: On Guard – Defending your Faith with Reason and Precision (currently reading and very good). This book gives solid evidence for the existence of God.
I'd love to discuss and hear your thoughts face to face. Regarding your 6 points:
Delete#1 & #2 I completely agree with.
#3 I more or less agree with (I'm just not sure how the fundamental laws of science would be violated if it did happen randomly).
#4 I mostly agree with as well, but after a few big ones morals seem to devolve into a grey area pretty quickly where issues tend to be more culturally driven.
#5 causes some problems for me. I feel that history in general, not just the history of Jesus, is more subjective than most people think. Clearly the more accounts you find for a particular event the more credible it is. But if all accounts stem from one source (or from one small group of people who share a common world view) it would be more likely to represent a skewed point of view and would be less accurate. So I still have some questions on the historical "facts". Besides the gospels (which as I understand Mark was first and the others did a lot of borrowing from that one), and a brief nod from Josephus acknowledging that Jesus' followers believed he came back to life, what else do we have as historical proof of the resurrection?
But at any rate, the main thrust of this post was dealing with #6. I feel like I can't rely on my experience because there's been nothing really concrete about it. There's no photos, no letters, no recollection of conversations or sounds or physical contact or anything to hold on to. So I have to wonder if anything I did experience was just a mind game I'd been playing along with.
I struggle with the idea of a relationship with God. The only thing I have to compare it to is a relationship with a person. But it is in no way the same to me. There's no physical contact; I can't literally hear God's voice; there are no letters or postcards or photos; there's nothing tangible about it. Minus any of that stuff, how do you know you're not just making it all up based on what you've read and what you've heard other people say? When you step back from it and try to look at it from an outside perspective, it looks crazy.
If it were all so obvious, wouldn't it be really hard for anyone who isn't a Christian to justify their beliefs. But other religions (including atheism) seem to also have rational people that can defend their beliefs.
I guess I'm looking for it all to be very clear and logical, but maybe that just isn't possible for whatever reason. But then that just makes me frustrated and angry. That, to me, makes it seem like God is playing a game where failure to solve the riddle lands you in a lake of fire forever. Not a fun game.
Done rambling for now...
You are correct, just because God exists doesn’t mean that Christianity is true. These are two separate issues. I’ve had many of those same questions regarding the reality of my experiences. I’ve often wondered if I have brainwashed myself. Why does everything have to be “spiritual” or based on a feeling?? I don’t trust feelings. I have also been extremely frustrated and angry at God for staying hidden when I desperately needed something that couldn’t just be explained away. My family background makes this extra difficult. My dad wasn’t around much growing up, so I’ve always had a difficult time believing that God was active in my life. Don’t get me started on my trust issues!!
DeleteI couldn’t understand why God would let me anguish in my doubt. But, I have come to realize that God cannot reveal himself in a way that removes all doubt without taking away free will. I would always have the ability to question any experience, regardless of how radical it was. You and I have a mutual friend who claims to have seen Jesus. The apostle Paul believed he saw Jesus (even Bart Ehrman acknowledges that). The Gospel authors and Paul spoke of numerous people who claimed they saw Jesus after the resurrection. Ravi Zacharias tells stories of people he has personally met that have come to know Christ in the Middle East from dreams or visions without even knowing who Christ is or talking to a Christian. My guess is that at this point you view these experiences as hallucinations or some other form of deception, but not real. So, let’s say that you also had a vision of Jesus or an angel came knocking on your door. Would you judge your experience differently than these? This is like the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in Luke 16. Jesus says, “If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.” The Israelites saw God work in mighty ways, yet they still turned away from God. They did not doubt his existence, but doubted his nature and promises. Thousands of years later, we have not changed.
Most NT scholars consider the following to be true:
1. Jesus existed.
2. Many people believed Jesus performed miracles.
3. Jesus was crucified, dead, and buried.
4. There was an empty tomb.
5. The early followers of Jesus believed he appeared to them post-mortem and were willing to be tortured to death rather than recant.
The debate is not if these are true, but what is the best explanation of these events. Did Jesus perform miracles or magic tricks? Where did his body go and why didn’t the apostles claim Jesus had a spiritual resurrection? Did his apostles see him after his death or hallucinate? Was he Lord, lunatic, or liar? Here is a very good/long article about the evidence of Jesus.
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/the-evidence-for-jesus
I have found the similar to be true John as you but different. When I started seeking things out about God/Creator/Jesus etc with the purpose of trying to disprove all of it i did it with the prupose of making up my own mind about what i wanted to believe and what i did not want to be told to believe.
ReplyDeleteI have also found that I am not overly disciplined to following through on doing what i believe works to connect with God. (prayer/searching/meditating, etc) I want to have experieinces with God for sure but it seems that I need to make myself available to be connected or work to be able to see God in real time. I find that if i make myself available that He is already present and has been.
i think the voice of God is often subtle and i don't hear the ring when he is calling because i have my phone on vibrate and often locked away in a pair of other jeans or in another room. I would like to think that when I spend time seeking connection that I can connect but this is not always true for me either.
There seems to be way more of the undefinable parts to God that subjective thinking does not make sense of. This connection with a creator is more than thinking about him or reading what others say about him. it is about finding a way to plug into feeling his vibration and understanding what it is he is trying to engage us about.
that sounds way kookie if you ask me to think about it but it seems that rationalizing about God and this thing or that thing does nothing more than open the door to more thinking and rationailzing. i want to know him and experiencing him. I don't always feel connected or desire to be connected but going beyond what I think and trying to connect in a spiritual/metaphysical way does seem to work for me.
thinking about it all and seeking more information about it all does not get one closer to connecting to it all. kinda like describing sex. until you do it you just dont know it. uou only know about it. it seems that my questioning and maybe yours too is more about knowing more about the creator than actually know the creator more. sorry about rambling.
In reading the article I can see how someone's belief (superstition / placebo) colors the way they view the world and influences their own behavior. It's not surprising at all. Each member of my household sees the world in a different way and it directly influences our actions and responses to things that happen around us.
ReplyDeleteBut while what we think and believe changes our perception of reality, it does not actually change reality. So, our beliefs and superstitions have no impact on who God is or weather He exists. Dawkins arguments from what I have read are smoke and mirrors, more like a Politian’s non-answer. He likes to try and dazzle others with his intellect. Yes he is a very intelligent person, but that doesn’t make him right.
Now for your personal experience, not feeling a connection with God since you are not interacting with Him… well, that would be tough for anyone to explain. Assuming God exists, which I believe, who can know the mind of God? Perhaps he is giving you space or being patient. I mean, it’s not like your decision would have been a surprise to Him. He knows how much time you have left, maybe he’s not in the same hurry that you are.
I have been through some difficult situations and have wondered where God was in all of it. I even got mad at Him and didn’t talk to Him for a full year. It didn’t change who He is. It changed who I am. My experience is that He is patient in a way that we barely scratch the surface of understanding. He is not needy or has some ego that needs stroked. He is.