Sorry I have not posted anything in a while; I've been working on a political campaign.
I recently came across the idiom "God is Love," which I believe refers to a requited loving relationship between the biblical God and his (or it's, because why would God have a gender?) worshipers, i.e. if you promise to love God, he/she/it/them will love you in return. Instead, I began thinking about this phrase in what could be it's most literal meaning: God, or a belief in God, is in fact love.
I suppose I'll have to have a different definition of love than is typically adhered to; love, in this sense, would represent a feeling or acknowledgement of belonging and acceptance regardless of personal or physical faults, traits that are often mocked or scorned in society. The fact (as claimed by proselytizers) that God would accept a person regardless of their downfalls is a comfortable feeling, almost like being wrapped up in the arms of a lover. That someone, whether they are a supernatural deity or not, is willing to accept the totality of a person means that those who consider themselves faulty will have some chance at redemption, since God is all-forgiving and understanding (at least in some beliefs).
Thus, the feeling of embracing the notion of a God is one of love- acceptance, comfort, a jovial quid pro quo of love and forgiveness.
One would wonder whether this would set a bad precedent, i.e. if one's relationships always fail, there is always the love of the intangible God to fall back upon. Does that mean that instead of attempting to improve one's acknowledged faults, one would simply turn towards the comfort of a supernatural being? Does this negate human love in any way? Would a love (a true love instead of a superficial one that many hold) of God require a diligent and constant devotion towards maintaining the preternatural relationship? There are too many open-ended questions for my taste.
Being the ardently Socialist-Communist-Jedi-Lennonist (not misspelled) Atheist that I am, the consideration of a relationship with an omnipotent being doesn't concern me. I go about my life as anyone else- seeking comfort, warmth, love, friendship, happiness, prosperity, etc. If I do, mazel tov; if not, tough luck.
Anyway, there's my two cents on that. In other news, I need to study for the GREs. They're in a month. Hooray.
That's all for now,
Das Flüg
Showing posts with label atheist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label atheist. Show all posts
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Friday, August 13, 2010
Thought Experiment
Imagine this: an Atheist runs for president and has a viable chance of being elected. Assume that he or she is a Democrat, as an Atheist in the Republican party is about as likely as Glenn Beck passing a math test. (An Atheist being nominated for president for the Democratic party is unlikely as well, since the party as a whole hopes to gain votes from moderates.) What would happen?
Firstly, the morals of the Atheist nominee would be challenged; the common belief is that morals are grounded in religion, and those without religion are immoral, rabid sexual monsters (cough*catholicpriests*cough) who would destroy all civilization because of a preference for mass anarchy.
It's more than likely that religious groups would protest fervently, heckle, send death threats, etc.
Why should belief in a deity factor into politics, a seemingly non-theocratic institution, especially in the United States, which was built on religious tolerance? I suppose that's my question of the week to you, my single reader. Feel free to comment if you like.
That's all for now,
Das Flüg
Firstly, the morals of the Atheist nominee would be challenged; the common belief is that morals are grounded in religion, and those without religion are immoral, rabid sexual monsters (cough*catholicpriests*cough) who would destroy all civilization because of a preference for mass anarchy.
It's more than likely that religious groups would protest fervently, heckle, send death threats, etc.
Why should belief in a deity factor into politics, a seemingly non-theocratic institution, especially in the United States, which was built on religious tolerance? I suppose that's my question of the week to you, my single reader. Feel free to comment if you like.
That's all for now,
Das Flüg
Saturday, November 7, 2009
To be or not to be
To tackle a subject as broad as "God," I would have to write my own novel. I will have to try to condense everything, unless someone actually wants me to write a novel. I wouldn't mind.
God: the ultimate power of the universe, the matter of all creation, the father of all being, or, simply an illusion. God is the factor that divides and paradoxically unites humans the most. For centuries, those believing that they are of righteous piety have struck down others with the claim that their god is superior. For what reason would humanity have so much devotion to a character neither seen nor heard?
This necessitates an understanding of the origins of the concept of god. The most well-known example of this would be the ancient Greek religion, whose mythology continues to strive in contemporary society. Greeks, unlike today's major religions, were polytheists. They deified rivers, oceans, mountains, and anything that seemed mystical or phantasmagorical. We can analyze their reasoning through a very simple idea: lack of scientific knowledge. While the Greeks were aware that the world was round and that the stars were (to some extent) heavenly bodies, most ancient peoples attributed all life to some creator. Many couldn't comprehend living on a planet, orbiting a sun, which orbits the center of the galaxy amongst billions upon billions of other galaxies. People were unaware of the structure of a living cell or natural selection. They believed what ego taught them to believe, and that is a subject all in itself.
Ego, the part of the self which creates personality, pride, and determination, one might say. It also allows us to be arrogant and obdurate. As Aristotle put it, man is different from animal because we have the ability to reason. That being said, it would then be logical to reason that because only man has the ability to reason that we are, by some standard, special. This raises the question of "why?" Why were humans chosen instead of deer, or platypus? This hearkens back to ego; the arrogant belief that nothing is chance. Thus, a higher being created us. Logical? Perhaps. Perhaps not.
Skipping ahead a few millenia, past the cold-blooded killings of the crusades and the dank, unproductive time of the middle ages, we stop at a man called Nicolas Copernicus. Many (hopefully) would know that he was the literal beginning of the scientific revolution. While it may have been Galileo who was persecuted for believing in heliocentrism, it was Galileo who defended Copernicus' views on the solar system. As many know, it took the church approximately 500 years to issue an apology to Galileo.
Continue ahead to present day, past the discoveries of Newton, past the postulates of Da Vinci, past Kepler, past Einstein, to today, November 7th, 2009. Consider the great scientific strides made between the time of Copernicus and today: the invention of the telescope, the discovery of the animal cell, the invention of the microscope, the invention of the atomic bomb, planes, space shuttles, an international space station, and computers. One would think that with all those scientific innovations, religion would become less important as humans discover their place in the universe.
Pictured: Andromeda Galaxy
Instead, we see the persistence of theocracies and the denial of basic human rights based on someone's religion. We also see this (warning: not for those opposed to reason):
God is now the reason for everything. Some pray to him on daily basis, thanking him for bread. If that is the case, why not pray to the farmer who grows the wheat? Why not pray to the owner of the Stop & Shop, thanking him for importing this bread from Kansas? Hell, why not just pray to the cashier, thanking him/her for not telling you to go f*ck yourself? One can plead in court that one was "inhabited by the devil" when one commits a crime. Since when is NOT taking responsibility for one's actions the human action?
It is interesting to note that only one brain chemical separates the cognitive processes of apes from humans. One. Imagine if a different kind of ape had become the dominant species on the planet. Would they have worshiped the same gods we have? Would they have killed in their names? Would they have the same struggles that we do today? Possibly. One can only speculate how similar we are to our simian ancestors; however, one thing is certain: we may not consider ourselves animals, but at our core, we are not human either.
I could continue on this subject, but most people would not read it.
Das Flüg
God: the ultimate power of the universe, the matter of all creation, the father of all being, or, simply an illusion. God is the factor that divides and paradoxically unites humans the most. For centuries, those believing that they are of righteous piety have struck down others with the claim that their god is superior. For what reason would humanity have so much devotion to a character neither seen nor heard?
This necessitates an understanding of the origins of the concept of god. The most well-known example of this would be the ancient Greek religion, whose mythology continues to strive in contemporary society. Greeks, unlike today's major religions, were polytheists. They deified rivers, oceans, mountains, and anything that seemed mystical or phantasmagorical. We can analyze their reasoning through a very simple idea: lack of scientific knowledge. While the Greeks were aware that the world was round and that the stars were (to some extent) heavenly bodies, most ancient peoples attributed all life to some creator. Many couldn't comprehend living on a planet, orbiting a sun, which orbits the center of the galaxy amongst billions upon billions of other galaxies. People were unaware of the structure of a living cell or natural selection. They believed what ego taught them to believe, and that is a subject all in itself.
Ego, the part of the self which creates personality, pride, and determination, one might say. It also allows us to be arrogant and obdurate. As Aristotle put it, man is different from animal because we have the ability to reason. That being said, it would then be logical to reason that because only man has the ability to reason that we are, by some standard, special. This raises the question of "why?" Why were humans chosen instead of deer, or platypus? This hearkens back to ego; the arrogant belief that nothing is chance. Thus, a higher being created us. Logical? Perhaps. Perhaps not.
Skipping ahead a few millenia, past the cold-blooded killings of the crusades and the dank, unproductive time of the middle ages, we stop at a man called Nicolas Copernicus. Many (hopefully) would know that he was the literal beginning of the scientific revolution. While it may have been Galileo who was persecuted for believing in heliocentrism, it was Galileo who defended Copernicus' views on the solar system. As many know, it took the church approximately 500 years to issue an apology to Galileo.
Continue ahead to present day, past the discoveries of Newton, past the postulates of Da Vinci, past Kepler, past Einstein, to today, November 7th, 2009. Consider the great scientific strides made between the time of Copernicus and today: the invention of the telescope, the discovery of the animal cell, the invention of the microscope, the invention of the atomic bomb, planes, space shuttles, an international space station, and computers. One would think that with all those scientific innovations, religion would become less important as humans discover their place in the universe.
Pictured: Andromeda Galaxy
Instead, we see the persistence of theocracies and the denial of basic human rights based on someone's religion. We also see this (warning: not for those opposed to reason):
God is now the reason for everything. Some pray to him on daily basis, thanking him for bread. If that is the case, why not pray to the farmer who grows the wheat? Why not pray to the owner of the Stop & Shop, thanking him for importing this bread from Kansas? Hell, why not just pray to the cashier, thanking him/her for not telling you to go f*ck yourself? One can plead in court that one was "inhabited by the devil" when one commits a crime. Since when is NOT taking responsibility for one's actions the human action?
It is interesting to note that only one brain chemical separates the cognitive processes of apes from humans. One. Imagine if a different kind of ape had become the dominant species on the planet. Would they have worshiped the same gods we have? Would they have killed in their names? Would they have the same struggles that we do today? Possibly. One can only speculate how similar we are to our simian ancestors; however, one thing is certain: we may not consider ourselves animals, but at our core, we are not human either.
I could continue on this subject, but most people would not read it.
Das Flüg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)