Spiritual/Political/Philosophical Blog on the Nature of Truth and Falsehood and Heaven
|
|
| Sunny Days in Heaven Spiritual/Political/Philosophical Blog on the Nature of Truth and Falsehood and Heaven |
|
|
Monday, August 05, 2002 Self-anointed Gods The Christian ideologue is as intellectually incapable of rational argument and the application of logic as an atheist is. The atheist denies he ever makes a contradiction of terms which leads to absurdity. By denying God, the atheist asserts an omniscience of his own which makes him God. The Christian ideologue by having no other defense than an Argument from Authority to justify all his dogmas, doctrines, and creeds insists on an equally absurd position that is circular. The Christian ideologue determines ownership of God and Truth by assertion - a peculiarly odd condition of claiming to know God to the extent that one (or a body) must be God. ********* I used to wonder if I was out of line or off the beam as I began to deviate from Catholic orthodoxy. When a great tradition throws its weight around, a single person feels pretty small and put to task. After all, it is much more likely that one person is wrong than 2000 years of intelligent, inspired, and sincere people arrayed against him. But then I began to argue and reason with some of our modern orthodox defenders on the web and elsewhere. When called to justify with reason and logic their Arguments from Authority (the great, I Said So), they invariably failed. They would try to invent whole new categories of 'faith', 'knowing', and 'belief'. Which meant shifting the claim of objective authority from the church to themselves as arbiters of the True, the Inspired, the Infallible. It is sort of like saying, "God has given me faith to trust in what the Church says about itself." "You know this faith comes from God because....?" "I feel it to be true. I feel it has to be so, and thus I order my mind and opinions in accordance with this feeling." "Is it possible you could misinterpret this feeling you have?" "Not a chance." "Then your feelings are infallible and the judgments you form from them?" "Of course not. The Church tells me I am right in my feeling and judgment." "Is it possible that the Church could be wrong?" "No." "How do you know?" "Because the Church says it can't be wrong." "And you know this to be true because...?" "That's what I think." "Your thinking which is derived from...?" "Yes, my feelings, of course!" And round and round we go in the absurd motion of the church chasing its own tail like a dog. This kind of thinking is ideological, lacking examination and reality testing. It is emotional and infantile thinking, but as such the most prevalent on earth among humans. It is not the kind of thinking that Faith teaches, but that which Fear inhabits. Love does not explain The nature of Faith, the desire to make one's thoughts, feelings, mind and will correspond to God, is a process. The church attempts to stand above this process and say, there is nothing about Faith which we do not understand (and thus act as perfect guide), or will not through development. The church on the one hand identifies itself as part of a process, while on the other insisting all its knowledge is adequate. Whatever the Church understands, it fails to understand that it knows too much about God. It says too many things, assumes too many principles on the basis of flimsy premises, and takes votes on reality rather than testing reality. To anyone of rational disposition and skeptical nature, such posturing can only be judged as ridiculous and absurd. The ideologue believer, though, attempts to mollify his sense of despair at being derided as a fool, by insisting that his 'faith' and knowledge transcends ordinary reason and logic; that his fantasia is a superior form of mental activity - its proof being in its ecstasy, feeling, intensity, emotion, and relief it brings. The ideologue always fumes, though, because others don't understand him, and he can't explain it to them so they will. He gets angry, curses, and condemns people to hell. (Jesus does a bit of this in Matthew and elsewhere, which always sets disinterested readers teeth on edge when they encounter such passages which seem so uncharacteristic of him.) The ideologue can never prove his ideology which will always be a source of disappointment, and thus makes him dangerous and revenge seeking when given power. The man of real Faith can never adequately prove his experiences of Truth, either; but then, he doesn't care so much if he does or not since Faith is its own reward (to alter an old adage), and needs no chorus of believers to console and comfort him. If all you have is Love, and no one else wants it from you, you don't stop having Love. But if what you have is merely belief, and you need others to agree with you, then you don't really have anything. Jesus died alone. No one understood him. But he did not die in despair. In pain, in agony - yes, but not in despair. He was not afraid. He was certain. Lonely, but not without hope. A Footnote The ideologue complains that critics merely set up straw men and knock them down. But the natural reply is for them to put up or shut up. Set up their own impregnable defenses and see if they can withstand the force of reason and logic. But they never do. They always attempt to rely on the great, I Said So. If they are honest enough to recognize the absurd circularity of it, they run from the battle, claiming victory as they depart rather than admit their position is untenable. posted by Mark Butterworth | 10:07 PM | |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
 |
||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
