Dealing with existential nihilism

[bennyboy]

If there are thousands of different gods that people strongly believe in, then what's the most likely position?...billions of others think each other's God is made up.  I think theirs is made up.  They think mine is made up.  So clearly one's cultural beliefs, one's religious experiences or feelings, and one's logical attempts to justify them cannot establish the truth of a religion.

Personally, I'm not seeing the problem here. MK and I do significantly differ with respect to the special revelations we accept. And yet when I read the arguments and observations he brings to the table, these are nearly always based on general revelations of the divine with which I agree. I see nothing wrong with the idea that God meets us where we are (in this fallen creation) and would expect Him to take into account the culture and temperaments of those He is trying to reach. Ultimately, religion is about loving God with all our being and loving others as we would love ourselves.

That's certainly the essence of the Christian position, and I've met many muslims who seem to project this principle as well.

But I don't think it's true that religion is ultimately about anything. Religion is the linguistic expression of the human capacity for awe, a lack of knowledge about the nature of reality, and a sense of mystery. It depends on the feelings we as a species get when we engage in ritualized behaviors, the breaking-down of everyday mundanity.

The problem with MK's sermons is that he's projecting a gnostic position into an area in which he can't possibly be gnostic. In other words, he's bullshitting.

This particular objection, that religions have various doctrines, is the flip side of TrueBelievers where uncertainty and indeterminacy cannot be tolerated. For example within Christianity, some doctrines, such as the Resurrection, are nearly universal. Meanwhile, other doctrines, such as eternal conscious torment versus annihilationism, are indeterminate. I have heard good arguments on both sides. It makes for interesting inter-Christian debate but is not a great source of division. Similarly, MK and I have different views on the authority of the Koran versus the NT Synoptic Gospels, Pauline letters, etc. I have heard arguments on both sides and have come down on the side of the NT. That in no way lessens my respect for MK or gives me cause to doubt his sincerity, just as I do not doubt your sincerity.

MK doubts the honesty of everyone who he think fails to get his message. He cannot accept that people see his view as a cultural artifact-- he thinks we are deliberately ignoring the truth. The truth is that there are clearly great mysteries at work-- but the mysteries of creation, of consciousness, and so on, do not require a personal God idea. They require diligent real investigation much more than the suspension of disbelief. To be frank, your religion hasn't really progressed much in the past 2000 years-- right or wrong, it is not growing in interesting ways, and not adding new contributions to our society.


My position is this: a real believer in God must look to facts as the expression of God's truths. That means dropping mythology and investigating actual truths through observation and experimentation. In other words, if you aren't primarily interested in Scientific inquiry as the best tool for learning the truth, you are shouting about God while covering your eyes and ears to avoid being exposed to the truth. The deliberate suspension of disbelief, then, isn't service to God-- it's evidence of a lack of faith that wherever in the Universe you look, you will necessarily find God written in everything from QM particles out to the farthest reaches of the Universe.

Real faith isn't to be found in the 3000 (or in MK's case 1500) year-old texts of desert dwellers. If God is alive, then find a way in which he matters to anyone who isn't looking for fairy-tale sunglasses that give the world a nicer aspect.