HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
July 20, 2005 I've been reading a number of columns over the last year at Useless Knowledge Mag on the subject of religion, in particular the debates over God by Christian and atheist authors. As a Christian I should find agreement with those arguing for God's existence but I am generally not able to. Either because they link God up with a particular set of socially conservative views which are prevalent in the US now or because they define God as some supernatural being existing outside of space and time. The problem with the latter move is it makes God unknowable, since as humans we reside in space and time and experience things as such. And the problem with the first move is that God is bigger than a set of politics. But as of late Christianity has been used as a divine stamp of approval of a party and an agenda but monotheism is what it is when it challenges our parties and agendas and rallying cries. It's that which is not us which calls us into account and relativizes our programs and beliefs. In that manner atheism, in it's criticisms of various religious doctrines and texts is more fitting with the monotheistic impulse than most Christian apologetics. But the question for atheism is whether it can take that critical eye to itself and to its commitments and values. Or is it simply directed at the other, something which is rather easily done. Atheists also have commitments about reality, the nature of truth, what counts as valid that have much of the same social history and human foibles as any other human enterprise. Criticism can only be effective when it is unleashed and not confined to simply those who we disagree with. Of course I haven't mentioned what notion of God I'm working with, so I best do it so I don't close my views off to the critical eye of others. God, for me, is a valuational term. It's identifying those features of this world which solicit a reverential response. This could be a love which creates for mutuality between peoples or perhaps a kind of creativity which builds human communities and social relations and which allows people to develop their full potentialities. But whatever it is, when we find aspects of the world which humanizes us, calls us to account, and allows us to grow, relating to such a reality become important for human living. But the value of such things cannot be demonstrated by the standard apologetics that many atheists and Christians engage in. There are no "proofs" for God, there are only ways of seeing the world and finding what is of value within it so as to respond in a fitting manner. I can say, let's look at this world in this manner, let's value such and such because this can make for human betterment. But I can't nor can anyone coerce a way of looking at the world. In this way the religious response is rooted in confession, not apologetics. ------------ About the author: Dwight Welch is a graduate student in philosophy at Southern Illinois University and is vice president of a mainline protestant student campus ministry. He also authors the Religious Liberal Blog. Email: servetus@gmail.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
