A biographical note on why my new framework of understanding God is so important. Part 4

A biographical note on why my new framework of understanding God is so important

Part 4

I must say that I personally prefer the traditional view of God as an independently existing personal agent. I am very happy to take the leap of faith, and as I have done this throughout my life, I have found that I have landed on a firm foundation of the reality of God. However, my concern is to try and bridge the gap between faith and reason. It is all very well for me and countless millions of others to live by faith, the difficulty is that some people are not able to take this step of faith, and there is a growing gap between how atheists and theists see things. In a way, I am happily leaving faithful people living their life of faith, while I go in search of those who are not able to find faith. I want to show that a life of faith is completely reasonable. However, instead of arguing this from within a believer’s frame of understanding (that God is an independent agent within a metaphysical reality), I want to argue from within the atheist’s framework of understanding. It seems to me that the ultimate unchallengeable framework of reality for atheists rests on the foundation of the Big Bang and evolution. Therefore, I have used this as my foundation for reality and sought to show that faith has reasonable justification within it. In other words, faith is not a matter of having to have faith in it (precisely the thing some people are unable to do), instead faith is a part of this reality – an indubitable, proven part of reality.

A biographical note on why my new framework of understanding God is so important. Part 3

A biographical note on why my new framework of understanding God is so important

Part 3

Note: I am not saying that the new framework must be better than the old framework. I am not saying that the old framework is wrong; it could be right – in fact, I prefer it. All I’m saying is that, if it’s right, it goes beyond what a scientific explanation of reality can say, and goes beyond what Enlightenment principles of reason can say in their pursuit of truth and justice. Religion is (unsurprisingly) a speculative set of ideas that depends on faith, and a trust in God cannot be had without taking the leap of faith, beyond what can be known. This leap of faith is extremely precious to me, and I need to watch that my new framework does not inadvertently destroy the very thing that is most precious to me: faith in God. I don’t think it does, because the leap of faith is still essential if you are going to make a commitment to live this spiritual and religious life, and still depends on faith that the voice of God can indeed be created in your own mind (and that this voice will be “true to God” and so not delusional or destructive or merely self-interested). I nearly said that the new framework removes the need for faith in the intellectual sphere of removing the question: “Is God really there or not?” because that has a definite answer: definitely yes. Therefore, faith is only required in the sphere of making a commitment to live this way. However, what I’ve just said above is true: you still have to have faith that this inner spiritual life will develop and you will not just be talking to yourself or meditating on profound principles.

Christ untaintable

Christ untaintable

One of the things I love most about Christ is that he is untaintable.

There is, in the very best of our human nature, a desire for purity. We recognise that we are compromised by our living in the world. It is too difficult to keep our hands clean – even when we desire it. Too often – so very often – we fall from our ideals and find ourselves wallowing in the mud, scrabbling for crumbs, fighting for a slightly better seat in the gutter. If we do not fall, we are often pushed, and, kicked and beaten, we crouch in fear and find that, against our will, our hands are dirty again. And in our darkest moments we revel in the filth.

Yet all the time – all the time, except perhaps for those very few who are completely lost in corruption – a flame still burns. Against all the odds, it still flickers. In blessed moments, a shaft of light pierces our gloom, and, gazing up, we remember. We recall the innocence of our youth and the clear, simple goodness of our ideals. We lift from the earth a half-forgotten object, and, stripping away the layers of dirt, rediscover our dearest treasure, still somehow intact and untarnished, like gold, and holding it gently, it becomes a chalice for our tears.

And so, we find ourselves kneeling, and in the most sacred moments, we take the hand of the person kneeling next to us, and we remember that once we loved, and once we hoped together.

But, there is, in the very worst of human nature, a desire to blame others. To demonise them in futile attempt to cast out our own demons. To pour on them all the dirt and filth that we can conceive of, and then, in comparison, we find ourselves clean. All the anger and hurt that we feel at our own struggle to stay clean, we turn against them, and then imagine ourselves righteous – when really we have simply become self-righteous.

Then, most sinister of all, having made others dirty, we consider that all that they touch becomes dirty. Like a stain that can never be erased, like a contagious disease, they are unclean, and everything that comes into contact with them becomes unclean. Such fear prevents anyone from reaching out, rules out compassion, for it is the unclean who threaten me with infection.

But Jesus touched the leper and made him whole.

Instead of Jesus being tainted by touching him, the leper became clean by touching Jesus. The chain of contagion stopped and was turned back. No, more than that, the disease was transformed into health.

This is what Jesus stands for: absolute untaintability. All who want to condemn him, exclude him, eradicate him are confounded. He is not made unclean; instead, all who are condemned, excluded, on the brink of being eradicated, are made pure. His untaintability is complete and infinite; there is no false accusation that cannot be dismissed by his word, no distorted judgement from which we cannot be acquitted by his authority. And suddenly turning his gaze on us, there is not the shadow of a doubt that some sin could be too great for him to cure.

And that is why I kneel at his feet: Jesus untaintable! No longer kneeling only in penitence and grief, but in joyful liberation. Till he takes me by the hand, lifts me up and says, “Walk with me”.

A biographical note on why my new framework of understanding God is so important. Part 2

A biographical note on why my new framework of understanding God is so important

Part 2

Note: my new framework does not require all religious people to adopt it. I would expect the majority of people who are currently religious to prefer going on with the traditional framework of understanding.

This is fine.

I don’t see any reason for conflict between “traditional Christians” and “new Christians”. (Of course, I am being too optimistic. Some Christians (eg at the end of the evangelical spectrum) like to compete for being the most pure and orthodox in faith, and anyone who disagrees with them is seen as “failing to be a true Christian”.) However, from the point of view of the new framework, a new Christian is not saying to traditional Christians that they are wrong and must change. Their message is that traditional Christians are completely entitled to continue with their understanding – they must just therefore accept that there are points of conflict with what science tells us about the universe, and internal difficulties within the religion to explain (eg evil and suffering). So, the new Christian has no difficulties with traditional Christians. However, the new Christian also has no intellectual problem with atheists in terms of provable facts, and raises no points in this area on which atheists might criticise them. (Of course, there are likely to be huge disagreements based on the different values and outlook that Christians have compared to atheists) So, many people today are not able to make the leap of faith necessary to make a commitment to traditional Christianity, but there are no stumbling blocks to prevent an atheist adopting a new Christian life.

(There would be an interesting philosophical discussion to be had as to whether such an atheist who converts to the new framework of understanding is still an atheist or has become a theist. In the traditional framework of understanding, the atheist has not adopted a theistic point of view, but they have accepted that the term “God” is what the new framework of understanding defines it to be, and in this respect they are now theists because they believe in and have made a commitment to this God. I think it would only be sensible to call them theists. In a way, God has now been defined in atheistic terms)

Give your life to Christ

Give your life to Christ

In a stormy ocean, a rock,

A place to stand,

To haul yourself out of the battering waves and be grounded,

Secure.

But also a boat.

A rock and a boat.

Freedom to go wherever you want.

No confinement, or isolation,

Safe, but a prisoner,

Limited.

Instead, liberated,

Freer than a bird flying over the rock, or boat,

Soaring in the sky.

Such is Christ to me.

He creates the foundation on which to stand.

I cannot, in truth, plumb the ocean to drive in a stake

On which to build a platform on which to live.

It is too deep, and all is shifting mud,

But he is a floating rock,

Held up by God’s love.

The impossible man,

But someone just like me,

Who holds out his hand, and hauls me onboard.

In him I find truth sufficient in itself to hold me above chaos.

If I look away, the waters rage,

But, looking at him, the deep is stilled.

He sends me out.

The rock is a refuge, not a hiding place.

It becomes the boat and the breath of God fills my sails.

A chill of fear melts in the warmth of his smile,

As I remember he is still in the boat with me,

Even while his voice far out at sea calls to me:

“Follow me”.

All is well.

I have learnt to make sense of the way life with him makes no sense,

Until you leave behind the nonsense of the world,

And open your heart to his truth.

In truth, I could not do it, till I trusted in him,

And then I knew he loved me.

A biographical note on why my new framework of understanding God is so important. Part 1

A biographical note on why my new framework of understanding God is so important

(Coming in 4 parts)

Part 1

I have lived my entire life as a religious and spiritual person. At the heart of this is a rich inner life, which I experience as a personal relationship with God, which brings me immense psychological benefits. So, my worry is that, if I had to give up belief in God, I would also have to abandon my inner life.

I am aware of the possibility that there is a secular equivalent of my inner spiritual life. I find it hard to believe that it could be as good as the inner life that I have developed through a religious route, but we must note the possibility. (Note: I am not here drawing any distinction between “psychological benefits” and “inner spiritual life”. As we are trying to justify a life of faith entirely from within categories that atheists would accept, I am happy to use the term “psychological benefits”, and imply no hierarchy between spiritual matters and psychological matters)

However, in the unfolding of my life, it is important for me to be able to show that the religious and spiritual life that I have committed to is “a good thing”. It would be distressing to think that I had made a mistake! I am also concerned that my life should not just be valid for me, but that it should be a valid way of life to recommend to everyone else.

If the ideas expressed in my new framework are valid then I think we have:-

  • An unimpeachably valid basis for religion, even within a secular understanding of reality
  • The vast majority of the good things about a religious life are still intact – notably the personal relationship with God
  • All (that I can think of) of the puzzling stumbling blocks to religion – notably: why is there evil and suffering – have been removed
  • All of the sources of conflict and opposition between religious and atheist points of view in terms of, “Is it true?” have been removed
  • I will also have justified my own stance in life

The parable of the allotment. Part 4

The parable of the allotment

Part 4

I think this parable is an accurate portrayal of the spiritual life.

The bottom line is that the fruit is definitely real. The allotment is always near to hand once you’ve found where it is. The spiritual gifts bountifully and freely available within the spiritual sphere you’ve discovered will nourish your soul and satisfy you completely. Arthur – God – is a mysterious person; ultimately inexplicable and uncertain. But the fruit is real.

Framework of understanding. Part 4

Framework of understanding

Part 4: A life of faith is a legitimate choice for everyone

Of course, this experience of God does not provide any compulsion to believe. Life offers all sorts of great experiences, but we don’t have to take them all up. Moreover, God has lost his role as judge and arbiter of who goes to heaven and who to hell. Life after death may still be a reality, but this is in the realm of speculation, which we ruled out of order earlier, if we are to argue our case entirely from the atheist’s side of the debate of scientific materialism. So, our life of faith has to stand for its value in this life alone – which the list above clearly shows it can – but it’s still a matter of personal choice as to whether or not each person takes up this way of life. Though, to repeat the point, why would you not want such a life?

Our new understanding is now “confining” God to within our minds rather than being an external, independently existing personal agent. However, this experience operates in exactly the same way as an external, independently existing personal agent (See my ideas on God as the voice we create in our heads). Nor are our ideas denying that there are alternative ways to achieve fullness of life. All sorts of ideologies could achieve similar – though it is hard to imagine any of these producing something better than our new basis for religion does.

In the same way that we ruled out life after death as just speculative, we also need to face the fact that it is just speculation that God ever actually does anything to alter the physical universe. In this respect, God does not answer prayers in terms of producing a different outcome to what the material universe would have suggested in the first place. However, this still leaves in place all of the immensely powerful and beneficial effects of what believers experience as their personal relationship with God. So, God continues to change the world for the better, and to transform believers’ lives, but entirely through human agency.

The parable of the allotment. Part 3

The parable of the allotment

Part 3

Now, earlier I claimed that this parable is completely true, and some people may think that this completely discredits the story because it just is not possible to claim with any certainty that God is real. So, let’s home in on the parable a bit more closely.

I am saying that the allotment definitely exists, and the fruit definitely exists – there is not a shadow of doubt about that. But Arthur is a rather shadowy figure – very mysterious indeed, in fact. So, let’s go back to the conversation between neighbours. Hearing about this marvellous allotment and its fantastic fruit for the first time, the neighbour wants to enquire a bit more about this wonderful Arthur figure: who is he? What’s he like? Back to the story.

“Oh”, says the first neighbour, “you never really see Arthur. He seems to do most of his digging and planting and harvesting very early in the morning. By the time I get there he’s usually pottering about in his shed. I just call out, “Morning, Arthur!”, give him a wave, and I collect my stuff and off I go. I can usually just pick out the outline of his hand waving back from inside the shed”.

“So, you’ve never actually seen him?!”

“Well, I’ve had glimpses of him from time to time. It’s funny now that you mention it; he does seem to be always just off somewhere to do something, or he’s lost in the undergrowth busy pruning something. But I hear him call back pretty often. And when I go, I often find Susan from up the street there and she says she chats to Arthur for ages, and it always makes her feel better. I’ve heard her, nattering on to the shed while Arthur’s inside”.

“So, you’re not actually sure what he even looks like? Are you sure he’s even there?!”

“But look! The fruit is right here; I’ve brought you some to try it. It’s delicious! How could I have this fruit unless Arthur had grown it?”

Framework of understanding. Part 3

Framework of understanding

Part 3: The experience of God is definitely real

So, theists are still entitled to hold their traditional beliefs – they are just not entitled to expect atheists to give them any weight.

However, the experience of God is a reality within the atheists’ understanding of reality. It really, truly exists, and it is a something – but what?

Religious experience has traditionally relied on its connection to a truly existing God for its validity, but it is God’s existence that is now speculative. However, in our new framework of ultimate reality, religious experience can be self-supporting. The experience definitely exists. On a par with all other experiences, the experience of God exists. Theists want to “jump the gun” and say that it’s (the traditional) God that they’ve experienced, but now we are not allowing them to do that. But their experience is real. Moreover, it has all the qualities that theists love about God.

So, what believers are able to say is:-

  • There is an experience of transcendence
  • Of the absolute
  • Of union with the infinite and eternal
  • This experience can be experienced as personal
  • This experience communicates immense qualities of love, joy and peace
  • It provides inexhaustible strength and guidance
  • It is an experience of complete fullness of life
  • It gives meaning and purpose
  • It is a sufficient foundation for a fulfilling personal life
  • And a foundation for a just and compassionate society
  • This experience can be enhanced and facilitated through committed practices currently associated with a life of faith
  • This experience is there waiting to be discovered
  • Countless millions discover this experience (and potentially everyone could if they tried)

Clearly, what we’ve just described is God. What we have called “the experience of God” is exactly in tune with what believers have always said about God.

Given the immense benefits of what we’ve just said, why would anyone not want to engage in this life of faith by which you have the experience of God?