Monday, April 27, 2009

A.N. Wilson's Return to Belief

Read the very excellent entire piece here.

Excerpts from "Why I believe again"
A N Wilson

Published 02 April 2009, New Statesman

But religion, once the glow of conversion had worn off, was not a matter of argument alone. It involves the whole person. Therefore I was drawn, over and over again, to the disconcerting recognition that so very many of the people I had most admired and loved, either in life or in books, had been believers. Reading Louis Fischer’s Life of Mahatma Gandhi, and following it up with Gandhi’s own autobiography, The Story of My Experiments With Truth, I found it impossible not to realise that all life, all being, derives from God, as Gandhi gave his life to demonstrate. Of course, there are arguments that might make you doubt the love of God. But a life like Gandhi’s, which was focused on God so deeply, reminded me of all the human qualities that have to be denied if you embrace the bleak, muddled creed of a materialist atheist. It is a bit like trying to assert that music is an aberration, and that although Bach and Beethoven are very impressive, one is better off without a musical sense. Attractive and amusing as David Hume was, did he confront the complexities of human existence as deeply as his contemporary Samuel Johnson, and did I really find him as interesting?
...
Do materialists really think that language just “evolved”, like finches’ beaks, or have they simply never thought about the matter rationally? Where’s the evidence? How could it come about that human beings all agreed that particular grunts carried particular connotations? How could it have come about that groups of anthropoid apes developed the amazing morphological complexity of a single sentence, let alone the whole grammatical mystery which has engaged Chomsky and others in our lifetime and linguists for time out of mind? No, the existence of language is one of the many phenomena – of which love and music are the two strongest – which suggest that human beings are very much more than collections of meat. They convince me that we are spiritual beings, and that the religion of the incarnation, asserting that God made humanity in His image, and continually restores humanity in His image, is simply true. As a working blueprint for life, as a template against which to measure experience, it fits.
...
For a few years, I resisted the admission that my atheist-conversion experience had been a bit of middle-aged madness. I do not find it easy to articulate thoughts about religion. I remain the sort of person who turns off Thought for the Day when it comes on the radio. I am shy to admit that I have followed the advice given all those years ago by a wise archbishop to a bewildered young man: that moments of unbelief “don’t matter”, that if you return to a practice of the faith, faith will return.

When I think about atheist friends, including my father, they seem to me like people who have no ear for music, or who have never been in love. It is not that (as they believe) they have rumbled the tremendous fraud of religion – prophets do that in every generation. Rather, these unbelievers are simply missing out on something that is not difficult to grasp. Perhaps it is too obvious to understand; obvious, as lovers feel it was obvious that they should have come together, or obvious as the final resolution of a fugue.
...
I haven’t mentioned morality, but one thing that finally put the tin hat on any aspirations to be an unbeliever was writing a book about the Wagner family and Nazi Germany, and realising how utterly incoherent were Hitler’s neo-Darwinian ravings, and how potent was the opposition, much of it from Christians; paid for, not with clear intellectual victory, but in blood. Read Pastor Bonhoeffer’s book Ethics, and ask yourself what sort of mad world is created by those who think that ethics are a purely human construct. Think of Bonhoeffer’s serenity before he was hanged, even though he was in love and had everything to look forward to.

My departure from the Faith was like a conversion on the road to Damascus. My return was slow, hesitant, doubting. So it will always be; but I know I shall never make the same mistake again. Gilbert Ryle, with donnish absurdity, called God “a category mistake”. Yet the real category mistake made by atheists is not about God, but about human beings. Turn to the Table Talk of Samuel Taylor Coleridge – “Read the first chapter of Genesis without prejudice and you will be convinced at once . . . ‘The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life’.” And then Coleridge adds: “‘And man became a living soul.’ Materialism will never explain those last words.”

This piece is so excellent. I don't care about scoring points by noting which atheists have changed their minds. Rather, I am taken aback by the deeply emotional and honest depiction of a man who, learned and serious, has met intellectual issues with the devastating sting of what it means to be human. That God is difficult to comprehend is a given; that His love seems sometimes distant or gone is admitted; that He still provides and manifests Himself so perfectly to all who are willing to hear is the most wonderful and glorious truth of all. I aim constantly for a better understanding of God, His existence, His attributes, His nature, His truth, and do not generally look down upon science or the natural explanations given thereby. But perhaps there is a part of life itself, that part pricked by Wilson, which exposes so majestically the near-infinitely narrow scope of human understanding. Indeed, "we are spiritual beings, and...the religion of the incarnation, asserting that God made humanity in His image, and continually restores humanity in His image, is simply true."

Amen.

[All italics mine]

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Rainy Days

5 superb rainy day records:

Unwed Sailor, The Faithful Anchor
The World on Higher Downs, Land Patterns
Mono & World's End Girlfriend, Palmless Prayer/Mass Murder Refrain
Bitcrush, Epilogue in Waves
Yndi Halda, Enjoy Eternal Bliss

Maybe someday I can live where the rain and fog never dry or clear.

Monday, April 13, 2009

Vox Day on the Problem of Evil

The answer of evil
Posted: April 13, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

For more than 2,000 years, men have wrestled with the so-called problem of evil. Presumed to have first been formulated by the Greek philosopher Epicurus and also known as the Epicurean Paradox, the problem concerns balancing the obvious existence of evil with belief in the existence of God. How, Epicurus wondered, could evil and an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God exist simultaneously? Centuries later, the problem was addressed by the Scottish historian and philosopher David Hume, who considered the matter in his "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion." Hume wrote:

Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?

The most obvious flaws in these proposed problems lies not so much with their logic, as with their improper definitions and misapplications to specific religions. For example, it is clear that the omnibenevolence queried by Epicurus does not fit the description of the biblical God, due to the way the biblical God's curse on various individuals and nations is chronicled throughout the Bible. It's worth noting, however, that Epicurus is not believed to have ever applied his paradox to the biblical God for the very good reason that he died in 270 B.C. Hume, on the other hand, does not have the benefit of the same excuse, and indeed, the error in his formulation verges on intellectual dishonesty. For no competent philosopher could possibly describe an unwillingness to prevent evil as requiring malevolence. While it would be reasonable to describe one who causes evil as malevolent, the worst accusation that can be reasonably hurled at one who merely fails to prevent evil is one of indifference. This may explain why Epicurus formulated his paradox as a justification for a philosophy of indifferent stoicism, not as a logical argument against the existence of God.

However, the main reason that the problem of evil has no reasonable application to Christianity is that the entire basis of the Christian religion is predicated on the existence of evil. Without evil, Christianity makes no sense. It has no purpose, its Savior has accomplished nothing, and Christians are, in the words of the Apostle Paul, "of all people most to be pitied." Christianity absolutely requires the observable existence of evil, for both logical and documentary reasons.

The Bible is very clear on the existence of evil. It even goes so far as to explain, in part, the immutable evil of human nature. The Old Testament is full of one party or another doing "evil in the eyes of the Lord"; the phrase resounds like an ominous drumbeat leading toward the ultimate fall of the kingdom of Israel. The New Testament, for its part, repeatedly describes the world as an evil place ruled by an evil spirit, the customs of which the believer is to avoid. In fact, there is no science more readily falsifiable than Christianity, as finding a single individual, just one single man or woman, entirely free from sin will suffice to dismiss Christian theology once and for all time.

If evil did not exist, then man would not be condemned by God. If man were not condemned by God, there would have been no reason for Jesus Christ to incarnate, to die and to rise again to pay the price of man's redemption. Therefore, while one may use the problem of evil to argue against the existence of an omnibenevolent and omnipotent God, only an irrational fool would attempt to use the problem of evil as the basis of an argument against the existence of the Christian God or the tenets of the Christian faith.

The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that what it does is evil.

– John 7:7


Yesterday, today and tomorrow, Christians celebrate a risen Lord Jesus Christ. We celebrate him because we know the evil of the world, we know the evil of our hearts and we know he has defeated them. Christus resurrexit! Resurrexit vere!