I have always felt an internal conflict between my faith and reason, almost as if two aspects of my psyche are in constant conflict with each other. Being an academic, especially one who has been influenced by post-modernist reflections on discourse and the social construction of norms values and so forth, reconciling my intellect and my faith has always proven difficult.
You see I can accept that religion was a form of mind control for the masses, I can see that society, the family, the relationships between men and women are all social constructions but if I then deny faith and embrace atheism I am left with the void. What is the point of life, there is no point, we become apes clinging to a rock... our existence merely contingent on so many historical and evolutionary accidents. And whats the point then of anything, of being 'good' rather than evil, of love (it will die with us), children (they will die), the only constant then becomes the second law of thermodynamics -- entropy. Trouble is I cannot accept that, therein lies the problem, I cannot accept that that is all there is, I stare into the 'void' and recoil. Which invariably leads me back to faith.
This has been compounded by the fact that so few of my colleagues are anything other than agnostics at best. Indeed for many years I expounded atheist views but was always drawn back to faith by the bleakness of the atheist message. To paraphrase Nietzsche I looked into the void and the void began to look back. So I returned fully to my faith about 3 years ago and have been more comfortable in my own shoes than ever before, however I continue to be plagued by the conflict. Just as the part of me drawn to faith recoiled from the void of atheism, equally the intellect in me finds it hard to reconcile with the answers Christianity sometimes gives -- be it on the evil that men do and the apparent indifference of God to that evil, on the judgement of non-believers (even if they have lived selfless and virtuous lives), on sexuality and so on and so forth. This weekend I have had a recurrence of the 'Is this all there is' thought process and feeling and the despairing that such thoughts engender.
So I will continue this conversation about faith, and solider on the difficult journey that I know faith is...
1 comment:
I received a link to your blog from a friend and found the description of your struggle on this entry refreshingly honest and, in my opinion, quite accurate, but I think that you may have overlooked an option that can possibly reconcile your intellect with your faith. I think the consequences of athiesm that you spell out are undeniable - about ultimately leading to meaninglessness, and I share your attitude of feeling intellectually unsatisfied with the answers that religions provide, including Christianity. I was an agnostic for a while, but after plenty of research and thought about the matter, came to the conclusion that it is more reasonable, than not, to believe that God exists. This is, to a certain extent, a matter of faith, but no more so, than any other belief that is based on what is considered to be more likely or probable. The atheist that comes to the conclusion that it is less likely that God exists is in exactly the same position in regards to their "faith" in their belief. This "reasoned faith" is the best we can ever hope to achieve, because we can never know with certainty if God exists or not. From this point (belief in God), if a person maintains the same standards of intellectual rigour that would be expected in any other area of human enquiry - especially philosophy and the sciences - then I believe that they would naturally be led to embrace Deism. In case you are not familiar with it, Deism is basically the belief in (a creator) God, without the accompanying beliefs of any existing religion. All associated beliefs are considered on their merits and consistency with the concept of God and are accepted or rejected accordingly. There is a decent description and history of Deism on Wikipedia if you're interested, at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
For me, Deism seems ideal in some very important respects - it provides a perfect basis for morality and meaning, and it does so without sacrificing the demands of reason.
By the way, I personally consider the "Fine-Tuning" design argument to be the most rationally compelling argument for the existence of God at the moment, and if you want to read more about this, a good introductory article is at: http://biologos.org/questions/fine-tuning/
Another good resource is Robin Collins Fine-Tuning website at: http://home.messiah.edu/~rcollins/Fine-tuning/ft.htm
The site hasn't been updated for a while, but has some good essays on the subject.
I hope this helps you at least a little in your quest.
All the best
Andy
Post a Comment