Religion
Related: About this forumOpen Letter to a Too Small God
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-sandlin/open-letter-to-a-too-smal_b_4958492.htmlMark Sandlin
PC(USA) Minister & co-founder of The Christian Left and owner of TheGodArticle.com.
Posted: 03/14/2014 12:04 pm EDT Updated: 03/14/2014 12:59 pm EDT Print Article
I don't really know how to say this. Honestly, if you were bigger this would be so much easier. If you were bigger, you could take the questions and I wouldn't be so worried about hurting you.
Look, I've been trying to make this "us" thing work for awhile now, but it just feels so increasingly and shamefully dishonest that I can't take it anymore. This is it. You are just too small of a god. We're finished.
I've known it for awhile, but it all came together when I was watching Cosmos. I'd never heard of this Giordano Bruno fellow but I like what he had to say when the institutional Church of the day came after him for entertaining rational thought (a.k.a., thinking for himself, not towing the party line). He said, "Your God is too small." Frankly, in those five little words he completely nailed the problem.
Any understanding of God that cannot withstand questions and rational thought is a "too small" god.
I'm sorry, but that's you.
more at link
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)who knows deep down that the "god" he believed in most of his life withers into unlikelihood under the cold light of reason and critical scrutiny, but who still desperately needs to call something, anything "god", and to try to appear rational to people whose approval he craves at the same time.
rug
(82,333 posts)Arkansas Granny
(31,535 posts)cilla4progress
(24,782 posts)god is not a scientific hypothesis. S/he is the great unknowable, the ultimate mystery (I believe "they" want to keep it that way...it keeps the power in their hands...to define her).
That's what s/he's selling; not rationale, not fact; faith.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I have been reading more about how futile it is to try and define a god and how the harder you try, the less godlike the entity becomes.
longship
(40,416 posts)They claim all sorts of specific attributes for their gods. He -- it is almost universally a he -- can do miracles. He punishes bad doers and even whole countries. He judges people by what they believe, punishing some for wrong thinking. They claim all sorts of other things as well. Omnipotence. Timelessness. Omnipresence. But when they are challenged on these things, they often retreat to the "God moves in mysterious ways" ploy. Or, the one I really like is "One cannot know the mind of God." In other words, they play the transcendent god card. This is in spite of all their previous arguments that the know explicitly the mind of their gods.
But if they are going to play the transcendent god card, why don't they drop the other shoe and call themselves agnostics?
I guess that maybe I just don't understand religion. Or maybe there is no rational understanding of it.
cilla4progress
(24,782 posts)Ditto everything you said!
I was raised a Humanist by parents who were "born" Jewish, raised my daughter within a Unitarian Universalist fellowship, and have become something of a Pagan in my later years, though I don't practice anywhere or with anyone. I simply felt, or became aware, of the "divinity" in nature. I probably throw a little Taoist thought in there as well: I can tell when things are going right, feel like I'm going with the flow.
I haven't spent as much time studying Buddhism as I would like to, some day!
cilla4progress
(24,782 posts)I am referring to those who hold religious power, the entrenched religious establishment to whose benefit it is to claim to know who or what god is, and to have the direct uplink. Be they the Roman Catholic Church, the "owners" of the fundie movement in the Christian church in this country, or hard-right Imams...those who feel entitled to have us send them money to keep their gig going. They define god, as it serves their own purposes - money, power. If they keep her/him a "mystery," then we are beholden to them.
On the other hand, the writings of Karen Armstrong ("A History of God" and other books, makes it clear to me, that for some, many perhaps, this mystical aspect of an unknowable but all-powerful force, is simply a comfort and a solace...and who am I to deny them that?
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I have been reading more about the unknowable god. It's similar to the blind men and the elephant. Perhaps people touch a different part and that is why so many come away with a different idea about what they have touched.
In looking for language to describe where I find myself, the word "skeptic" has an increasing appeal, but apatheist also speaks to me.
And I agree about letting people have whatever it is that gives them strength, comfort, guidance and solace.
cilla4progress
(24,782 posts)to be on the same page with you!
pinto
(106,886 posts)became a cop. All the chaos, uncertainty, and day to day dealings with his era's ne'er do wells may have been the backdrop for his staunch Catholicism. Mass every day at 7AM, day in and day out. Orderly and familiar.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I know a lot of people who went to church after 9/11.
And then there is community and the sense of belonging.
cilla4progress
(24,782 posts)A way of dealing with the chaos. I think that's essentially why humans invented religion, and god!
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)and said openly "I know this doesn't really make sense, I know it really isn't rational, but I need it to get through the day".
cilla4progress
(24,782 posts)"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."
Beautiful, really...