Absence of Mendacity
[Spinoza in a nutshell]
In this universe -- the one in which we are -- chaos is unimaginable. We can say the word, but because the body that speaks the word is itself an expression of the orderliness of God, chaos cannot be conceived as anything other than an imagination. The mind of God is that which explains the difference between chaos and cosmos. It is the logos.
The "creator" (that is, God) is not a part of nature. Nature, as we know it and can know it, is a part of him. Natural processes do not happen by "direction." That would imply some sort of design. Nature unfolds by necessity. The appearances of "randomness" and "chaos" grow from our prejudices. We see that we, as finite beings, arrange matters with some end in mind. Those ends -- to the extent we arrange them reasonably well -- work to perpetuate us in being. But God, being infinite, need have no fear for his existence. Nothing that happens in nature can possibly threaten God's existence. Hence, God is inerrant.
Humans have a tough time accepting God's inerrancy. So much of what we experience in nature appears to be harmful to us (tsunamis, mudslides, smallpox, etc), we have invented a vengeful God and original sin and retribution and blood sacrifice and many other expressions of mumbo jumbo to explain away God's inerrancy. If we could simply grasp the fact that the universe was not created for our benefit, that it simply is what it is, the mumbo jumbo would all go away, and we could be about our lives without all the distractions . . . and (as Twain would say) "at much lighter expense."
In this universe -- the one in which we are -- chaos is unimaginable. We can say the word, but because the body that speaks the word is itself an expression of the orderliness of God, chaos cannot be conceived as anything other than an imagination. The mind of God is that which explains the difference between chaos and cosmos. It is the logos.
The "creator" (that is, God) is not a part of nature. Nature, as we know it and can know it, is a part of him. Natural processes do not happen by "direction." That would imply some sort of design. Nature unfolds by necessity. The appearances of "randomness" and "chaos" grow from our prejudices. We see that we, as finite beings, arrange matters with some end in mind. Those ends -- to the extent we arrange them reasonably well -- work to perpetuate us in being. But God, being infinite, need have no fear for his existence. Nothing that happens in nature can possibly threaten God's existence. Hence, God is inerrant.
Humans have a tough time accepting God's inerrancy. So much of what we experience in nature appears to be harmful to us (tsunamis, mudslides, smallpox, etc), we have invented a vengeful God and original sin and retribution and blood sacrifice and many other expressions of mumbo jumbo to explain away God's inerrancy. If we could simply grasp the fact that the universe was not created for our benefit, that it simply is what it is, the mumbo jumbo would all go away, and we could be about our lives without all the distractions . . . and (as Twain would say) "at much lighter expense."
posted by Benedict S. at 10:35 AM
8 Comments:
Ah. So that's it.
and what would we do "without the distractions" that we are not doing now?
Maybe go to Disneyland?
Well, no. I actually had in mind, not new things we might do, but old thngs we might stop doing, like flying airplanes into tall buildings, like strugglng to substitute comfortable imaginations (Genesis 1) for reasoned therories, like, finally, living in a make-believe world . . . yes, like living in a Disneyland we have concocted to relieve certain fears.
But then, going to Disneyland does seem like a good idea. Do they have a roller coaster? I love roller coasters.
So how do you account for men who , seemingly, don't believe in the distractions you imply doing horrible things; or for that matter how do you account for the vast majority who do believe in the distractions living lives of relative peace?
Insanity plays no favorites, but sane people who "do horrible things" for sane reasons (like killing Hitler-like animals) can do so w/o benefit of the moral support afforded by the "distractions."
Those "distracted" individuals who apparently behave sanely, perhaps do so for imaginary reasons, like the fear of Hell or the promise of Heaven. But it is nonetheless possible to do the right thing for the right reasons while at the same time holding false ideas. Moral behavior makes sense, and I am sure Moses needed no firey-fingered "God" tell him that. The Jewish people were moral (and immoral) long before they conceived of an afterlife.
"(T)he fear of Hell or the promise of Heaven" seem like over-rated reasons for moral behavior.As a commited Christian I rarely spend time thinking of Heaven or Hell, it is enough to get through the day without stubbing one's toe. Love is the motivation we strive for in living out lives that are pleasing to our Lord.We are living now and in living now we must live the best lives we can, now.
And neither does sanity play favorites. Anonymous, you sound like my kind of folks.
Post a Comment
<< Home