Hints that God Exists: Other Invisible Minds

Think of your best friend and what really makes a person a person. Of course, you know that your best friend exists, but how do you really, actually know that?

“That’s easy,” you say, “I know that my best friend exists because I see her walking towards me.”

I agree that you see a body that looks exactly like your best friend, and that you identify that body with her, and that’s not a bad reason. But does seeing a body fully support the conclusion that your best friend exists? I think not. A body alone doesn’t make a person. For example, what if that person walking towards you was actually a robot made to look like your best friend. I don’t think the robot would fool you just based on looks. For example, if the robot didn’t have the same non-verbal communication as your best friend, or the same thoughts, feelings, mannerism, actions, or beliefs, then you might begin to wonder. That is because your best friend is not a body; rather, she is a person with thoughts, feelings, intentions, and patterns of action. In a word, she is an invisible center of thought, a center that produces all sorts of visible effects (e.g. speech, action, writing, building).

So…back to the original question: how do you know that your best friend exists? If the answer is not that you see her, then it must be that we experience intelligible effects that are characteristic of her center of thought. We do not see the center of thought, but we do see the effects, the output, the sigs. Again, the body is certainly part of your friend, but not necessary. When you are chatting on the internet with her, you don’t need to see her body to know that you are communicating with your best friend.

Now, by analogy, look at the natural world. You don’t have to look far to see that nature has its own storehouse of visible, intelligible effects. For example, everything happens in an orderly fashion according to the laws of nature. Who is responsible for these effects? Should we not make the same inference that we did in the case of your best friend? Why not? Many people naturally do, and say that God is the cause behind all the effects that we see in nature, the invisible person or thought.

If it troubles you that you cannot see God, it shouldn’t: strictly speaking, you cannot see your best friend either.

Hints that God Exists: Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem

Kurt Godel shocked the mathematical world by proving that all systems are inherently incomplete, meaning that there will always be truths within the system that can only be explained by stepping outside the system.

Think about that for a minute. All systems are inherently incomplete. Now apply it to the world. See where this is going?

Godel and Einstein were apparently friends

The entire universe, with all its laws, is a system. And it constantly has truths that beg for an explanation that transcends it. Indeed, the entire system itself begs for an explanation—why this universe? Why any universe at all? Why not nothing? The big bang was an explosion that started the universe. We know that. But the question of beginnings can never theoretically end.

Laws of nature are curious entities. They exist, they explain what happens in the system, but they don’t explain themselves. They don’t explain why these laws of nature holds as opposed to a completely different set (or no set at all). Even science cannot help but ask these sorts of questions. The tendency is seen in theories of so-called “multiple universes”. Our minds cannot help ourselves! The universe calls out for something beyond itself—whether that be other universes (which only pushes the question back), or God or some other metaphysical entity. It’s a hint.

In the Matrix, the writers were well aware of Godel’s theorem. It’s part of the point of the movie. I believe it’s the Wachowski brother’s unique justification for faith. Neo, the “anomaly”, was created specifically as an attempt to complete something that was inherently incomplete (the matrix itself). Neo exposed the incompleteness of what others considered “reality.” That’s why he represents Jesus.

God is the ultimate anomaly, the ultimate explanation for the totality of all systems. God, for those who believe in Him, is not a system, not incomplete, but rather simple, transcendent and perfect. To ask “who started God” is to not understand the point. God gets a free pass on such questions. God is the author who writes the system and leaves it open, not closed.

Hints that God Exists: Introduction

This was a book project I started a long time ago. I imagined a small, 30 to 50 page book, each page having a new ‘hint’ for the existence of God. A blend of philosophy, religion, and science. Something fun to read but also substantive. I’ll share what I have so far.

---

 

Introduction

I believe that we must all come to the conclusion that it is not 100% certain that God exists or that God does not exist. And if God does exist, it is certainly not certain that you or I know what God is like, or know how God acts (if God “acts” at all). Philosophers have been arguing over this paramount question for millennia, and still no universal agreement. Yet people everywhere, across time and space, have been consumed with the question. Both religious and non-religious think about it. Even without certainty, people take sides; people claim that they know; indeed, they build their very life around it.

This says two things about people. First, that the question of God’s existence is important for many peoples’ lives. Second, that some questions are worth pursuing even if they have no certain answer. This is both normal and ok. Science, after all, is one of the most important endeavors of human knowledge; but it rarely, if ever, comes with 100% certainty. It deals with probability and induction. It produces knowledge, but not certainty. Very few things are certain, and that’s something we are familiar with by now.
So is the existence of God a matter of probability as well? Now we are getting somewhere. I believe (as the title of this book shows) that it is. But here I am not talking about probability in the statistical sense in which numbers and percentages are involved. It seems absurd for anyone to say that it is 75% probable that God exists, or 90% probable that God does not exist (although people have tried). There is no way to put numbers on the evidences and reasons for believing or not believing in God. The evidences and reasons are various in number and weight, and each has a different convincing impact on different people. For example, let’s assume that the existence of evil in the world is a hint that God does not exist. What percentage could we possibly put on this fact as it relates to the existence of God? It doesn’t work. We must carefully look at the hint, judge how strong it is, and proceed from there.

I am optimistic about human nature. I see the bad in all of us because I see the bad in myself. But at our deepest level, I see good. And this carries over to our honest pursuit of knowledge and truth. Yes, some people lie. Yes, some people are wrong about a lot of things and simply don’t know it. But at our deepest level we are all trying to figure out the world the best we can. We are all trying to interpret the world to the best of our ability, with the best we have. We are all seeking the truth the best we know how, with the best resources available to us. Atheists are seeking the truth the best they know how. Theists are seeking the truth the best they know how. Let us respect each other. Let us keep the respect that is required from a decent theory of human nature. We are not trying to deceive ourselves. In general, we are not trying to tell people things that we know are false. There is no conspiracy. In an age of skepticism, political lying, and information overload, this view of human nature is hard to find, and sometimes hard to believe. However, pessimism is not the answer and never will be. At its root, a poor view of human nature is nothing more than a confused form of conceit and pride; because it is always them that are the pathetic, and rarely I. No, friends: people are good. That is the truth. I wish people would at least find it true of themselves, and if not, change; and after they’ve done this, apply it to everyone.

When it comes to God, I think there are several hints that God exists. John Woolman, the American abolitionists and Quaker mystic, tried to describe his experiences with God. But all he could give was “hints.” By “hints” I simply mean there are several reasons, and evidences, and experiences, and arguments. But they are hints because they are not certain, and they don’t come in tight little packages, and they come from all sorts of experiences in life. They are like little clues that I pick up randomly while trying to figure out the quest of life. They come in various forms and through various human faculties. Some are stronger than others; some are more rational than others, some you will find silly. Indeed, some are purely emotional and others inaccessible to most people. In this presentation I tend to keep to the more rational, and therefore accessible, hints that God exists. These are hints that I have collected throughout my life. They have come from personal experiences, thoughts, readings, and movies. Some of them capture what are known as the traditional theistic “proofs” for God’s existence (which I consider hints as well), and others are mind puzzles that suggest a God. They overlap and have similar structures. They all have objections and answers of different strengths. A philosopher could tear a hole in all of my hints; but I know that. If you try hard enough, you can tear a hole in anything. Tearing holes is great, but first we should listen, and see if the hints have anything positive to say. I repeat: all the hints for God’s existence can be questioned, doubted, and objected to on rational grounds. That is why I call them hints. But they still have convincing power, especially taken together as a whole. They are still rational and real. I hope you enjoy reading them.

Matt Smith

On Myself: a Spiritual Memoir

I can’t remember when I wrote this spiritual autobiography. Perhaps late high school, early college years? Like most projects I didn’t finish it, but….

On Myself

Preface
I. Potential
II. Physical and Spiritual
III. Early Years
IV. Rebirth
V. Personality
VI. Inner Self
VII. Brother
VIII. Rebellion
IX. Nature; a link back to the World

I write this essay, On Myself, with certain beliefs and assumptions about myself that the reader should know in advance.

As a human being, I believe to be a part of all humanity; I am a link to all humanity; I am another representative of human nature; I am the human condition; I am as much of you as you are as much as me. Like you, I have a heart; like you, I have a mind; like you, I have a soul; like you, I have a body. If you were to put myself under a microscope, I believe you would see yourself, and all of humanity.

The trick is that we appear to be different. We appear to have different genders, personalities, bodies, languages, ways of thinking and doing, occupations. To me, these are all smoke in mirrors; they trick us into believing that other people are different than us, better than us, worse than us. When we learn about the differences of mankind, we are amazed at the realization that we are so much more alike than we are different. Biologically speaking, the difference between male and female is strikingly slim. Individuality and personality is merely a fabrication of the times. In researching language, we find the striking similarity of all languages. It seems that people have different purposes in life, or destinies. After all, how could this world survive if we were all teachers, or artists, or hunters? But again, I believe this also to be an appearance of the world. Ultimately, we all came from the same place, and we all want to get to the same place. So in my final analysis, we are the same in every significant way.

Taking these beliefs and assumptions into consideration, the reader must now realize what it means to complete the daunting task of writing an essay On Myself. By taking on this challenge, I am describing not only myself, but humanity; not only my soul, but the soul of humanity.  As Walt Whitman continually chants:

I celebrate myself, and sing myself,
And what I assume you shall assume,
For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.

I. Potential

If we would go outside every night and gaze at the stars, we would realize the meaning of life: that life is much more, that we are much more, that there is much higher we can reach, more to tell, more to wonder, ponder, and love. In our amazement, we become humbled; and in our humble state, we would realize another spiritual lesson: the love for humanity, the compassion for human nature; that everyone is like us and is us, in need of and in search of the same things. You and I are connected so strongly in this web of life, but we forget. When we look to the sky with a clear mind, we see God, and we see our potential self, waiting for us in the stars.

I always believed to be great, and that someday, if I would reach my state of potential, I would do great things. There is a divine part in every one that wishes to do the will of the Divine, and to do great deeds that are beyond the measure of man. The divine voice of possibilities is always with us. I have listened to its voice. It whispers to me at moments, telling me that I can transcend the world. If I have done anything truly good, or truly inspirational, it is because of this voice. It is not only me. That is what separates greatness from arrogance.

If I could capture, in words, the feeling of electricity at a child’s birth, then I could capture the feeling of human potential. Why are we so happy at a birth? Because a baby is a blank slate; it is a perfect form; it is a potential Buddha, a potential Christ; it has full freedom, full free will. That is the feeling of hope and potential at a birth.

The potential I speak of is spiritual, not physical. Anyone can be physically great: attractive, powerful, wealthy, popular; but that is a greatness based on worldly standards. This kind of greatness can get us far in the world, perhaps even happy; but this happiness is always temporary, and will die with our body. But spiritual greatness many times is the opposite of worldly goals. Spiritual greatness comes with humility; the more lowly one becomes the more great he is in the eyes of God. Humility is not an attractive trait in the world of men. It is no coincidence that the greatest spiritual leaders have never pointed to themselves for recognition, but always to the Divine.

The Philosophy of Jesus

Like so many things in my life, this was a big project I started probably 10 years ago, in college (my Google Drive is now filled with a bunch of stuff from 10 years ago). In this essay or book, I wanted to treat Jesus as a philosopher. What is his philosophy? How does he relate to other philosophers? Obviously I barely scratch the surface, and only discuss  Socrates, Aristotle, and Kant, but feel free to laugh at my obtuse philosophical language:

—————————————

Philosophy of Jesus

Commands of Jesus
When thinking about Jesus’ moral philosophy, we tend not to think of it as containing rules or commands; but, in fact, it does have them. The commands, or laws, or imperatives, of Jesus’ philosophy seem not to be “rules” at all. This is simply because rules seem to have negative, or restricting, overtones. Commands, in the word’s typical sense, tell us what not to do. Many times Jesus is not worried about telling us what not to do, but what to do. In any case, they can still be formulated as commands, as I will show. Instead of taking the form do not do X, they take the form do X. The two forms have a curious relationship, where the latter form, do X, usually implies and contains the former form, do not do X. So in most cases, the second type of command is simply an expansion of the first. For example, when we say give unto others, the command do not steal is implied, or contained, in it.

We can break Jesus’ moral philosophy into three, general commands, all of which need grounding and explanation.

Command #1: Seek with every single human faculty, and up to the potential of every faculty.
Command #2: Love God absolutely and above all things.
Command #3: Love humanity in proportion to how much one loves oneself.

The first law presupposes a theory of human nature. By the phrase “every single human faculty,” we can already see that it suggests a division of the self. How does Jesus divide human nature? We will turn to several passages for clues:
Jesus and Other Philosophers
In many ways Jesus expands on, and responds to, the ancient Greek philosophers. Whether Jesus was aware of this is irrelevant. He may or may not have studied Plato and Aristotle, but either way his philosophy does have intimate connections.

Jesus and Socrates
Divine destinies. Jesus the Savior. Socrates to find the meaning of wisdom, and the three days after prophesy (or dream before his death).
Rejection of society’s expectations. The idea of the Messiah is an ancient one, going back long before the time of Jesus. We find the expectation of a Messiah in Old Testament writing. Most Jews were expecting a political savior, one that would rightfully restore the Jewish people in their place of political power, and usher in a time of peace. Christians, in recognizing Jesus as the messiah, would revolutionize the conception of the purpose of the Savior.
The trial of Jesus and Socrates. They were both convicted of the same charges. Jesus: stirring up a revolt against the state; heresy, or claiming to be the Messiah, a form of worshipping novel gods. Socrates charges: corrupting the youth of Athens, worshipping false gods, and not worshipping the gods of the state. They were both religious in nature.
Calling out hypocrites. Jesus calling out the religious elect, the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes. And Socrates showing the ignorance of people who claimed to be knowledgeable (using the Elenchus).
Focus on morality. All of Jesus’ knowledge was related to moral action. In this respect, it was not only true, but practical—a way to live. Socrates admits that he is only interest in moral issues. What is justice? holiness? piety? love? These are the subjects of Plato’s dialogues.

The relations between Jesus and Socrates are numerous. Many aspects of their life story match up. They both had, or, were supposed to have, political aspirations. Although friends, disciples, and society wanted them to be politically active, they both rejected the political life; Socrates because it was corrupt, Jesus because it was superficial, and wasn’t his destiny (and probably because it was corrupt too). So instead, they both lived a life of moral perfection; a life on the road, a life of wandering throughout the city and countryside.

Socrates claimed to know nothing. He claimed that wisdom was only for “the god.” A very modest claim, but many scholars think he was being too modest. He does, after all, claim to know some things (i.e. that one should respect their superiors). But as a general rule for Socrates, wisdom is not a human quality. Finding the truth of this statement was his destiny, which started with the prophesy from the Oracle of Delphi. The prophesy—that Socrates is the wisest man—puzzled him, because he was aware that he had no wisdom. Thus, part of wisdom is realizing our own ignorance. Socrates revealed ignorance in every single interlocutor he spoke with. Many scholars shun Socrates because they think ridiculing was all he did, and that he did nothing good for society. But I would disagree. Socrates taught people to self-reflect, self-examine, to look inside oneself for answers. Socrates thought that if one could not explain why they were doing a certain thing, then they had no justification for doing it. And these were not trivial matters—they were moral matters.

Jesus, in relation to his conceptions of truth and wisdom, is striking similar to Socrates. He too also claimed to know nothing. Everything Jesus claimed to know did not come from himself, but from “the Father who sent me.” When asked to justify himself, Jesus replied: “Wisdom is justified by her children,” or “the tree is known be its fruit.” So any knowledge that Jesus had came from God. This makes us wonder about Socrates: if he claimed that all wisdom resided in the god, did he not think that wisdom could be passed through humans, from god? Scholars would debate. I believe that Socrates knew many moral truths; it seems absurd that such a respectable and just man of history would know nothing.

Jesus and Aristotle
For Aristotle, the “good for man”, or summum bonem, or goal of life, or aim of all action, is happiness. Happiness is composed of two elements. The first element is rationality, which comes by using our rational capacity, our ability to think, deliberate, and philosophize, to the fullest. This amounts to an intellectual and moral life, a constant life of deliberation and contemplation in regards to morality and virtue. He describes it as an “activity of the soul;” and not merely an active soul, but one “exhibiting excellence…” It basically amounts to thinking (and then acting) well. The second element of attaining happiness is through sheer fate, chance, dumb luck, coincidence. This includes any thing that happens to us, the things we have no control over. This includes our genetic make up, our parents, our environment, schooling, race, gender, tragedies, etc. According to Aristotle, a child that happens to have bad parents is, for the most part, doomed to a life of unhappiness. Nature simply dealt him a horrible fate, and there is little he can do about it.
We see, then, that Aristotle’s idea of happiness includes an element that we are in control of, and involves our free choice, namely Rationality; and an element that we are in no control of, and have no choice in the matter, namely fate. At first glance this doesn’t threaten us as a problem, until we learn that both of these elements are necessary conditions for happiness. Happiness requires both elements, not only one. In other words, a rational person, exhibiting an excellent soul, can only be happy if he also has a decent and bearable fate. And alternately, a man with the best fate in the world isn’t necessarily happy. When we insert this ethical theory into Greek religion and society, it can read like this: A man’s happiness depends on the will of the gods. This leads to many disturbing conclusions: Am I to blame for my unhappiness? Are the gods to blame? What is the reason for my horrible fate? Do I have any choice in the matter? Why should I be rational, if it can all be taken away with a series of tragedies? These are sad and helpless conclusions, followed by an indifference towards life, a cold and selfish attitude, and a reason to stop trying, leaving men powerless to the forces of fate. Certainly this is an undesirable aspect of Aristotle’s ethics. They all lead us back to Aristotle’s problematic second element of the Good for man; I will call it the problem of fate.

Jesus solves the problem of fate theologically. This is best expressed in his Sermon on the Mount:
“…Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth…”
and:
“Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
Blessed are you who hunger now, for you will be satisfied.
Blessed are you who weep now, for you will laugh…”

For Jesus, the people who have been given a bad fate are the most susceptible for the summum bonum. The child with bad parents need not fret, because God is his true Father. The man born blind is not at a loss, for “the work of God may be displayed in his life.” Tragedy takes away our earthy attachments, which in turn brings us the God, which is the good for man.

Jesus and Immanuel Kant
I would not be exaggerating to say that, in many respects, the moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant is simply the moral philosophy of Jesus, only clothed in philosophical language.
The idea that morality consists of universally true principles, or laws, is shared by Jesus and Kant. These principles are a priori, not based on experience or circumstances. For Jesus, “you ought to love all people” was such a principle—it is true in all situations, and therefore we should follow it in all situations. We should not modify this principle with experience and situation because that would dilute it, even though many times we often do this. Many times we think it is morally right to love our friends, and hate our enemies. But this is a violation of the first principle, “you ought to love all people.” This is why “love your enemies” is simply another formulation of the first principle.

Free Will and Determinism
It is unclear whether Jesus believe in a completely free will, or determinism. In fact, it seems like he believed in both; there are sayings that support both views.

“But if you are oppressed by Satan and are persecuted and you do the Father’s will, I say that he will love you and will make you equal with me and will consider that you have become beloved through his providence according to your free choice.”
This saying is the most obvious proof that Jesus recognized the existence of human free will.

Religion cannot solve Poverty, so Government must

The religious virtue of Charity is great indeed, but that alone cannot solve poverty. After thousands of years, the results are in. Poverty still exists, at alarming levels. Even the great secular charities, like Oxfam and Unicef, which do incredible work, cannot solve poverty. 51% of African American children grow up in poverty today – in America, in one of the richest countries in the world. That should make any decent person cringe. And that, my friends, is only the tip of the iceberg. World poverty – that is, living on a dollar a day – is even worse. When you stop and put people behind the numbers, it’s beyond comprehension.

Charity, by William-Adolphe Bouguereau

So charity isn’t working. Therefore, it falls on government. What else is there? Who else could it possibly fall on? It is the greatest, most important political issue of human history. What we need is governments that eliminate poverty through compassionate and rational policies and laws. It’s not as hard as it sounds. Budgets are a set of priorities. There’s enough money for whatever you want; it depends on what you want. We could probably solve domestic poverty and world poverty at the very same time, although I suspect that governments would start domestic and then spread outwards. Okay, fine. The only problem with that approach is that Third World poverty, if you look at the impact that one US dollar can make, is technically easier to solve…it would help more people faster. But these are details to consider after you make the commitment to solve poverty. That must come first.

Consider the billions of dollars that is wasted on corrupting the political process in America. That could solve poverty. Consider the billions of dollars of funding given to the comically giant Department of Defense, an outdated agency that should be shrinking every year. That could solve poverty. Consider the all-consuming, cut-throat profits, that corporations make, who don’t pay their taxes to the government. That could solve poverty. Consider one percent of the income of the richest people in the world. That could solve poverty (actually, it could probably solve poverty 12 times over…go read Peter Singer’s book The Life You Can Save).

Above we see Charity depicted as a mother with children. There are many layers of truth here. The irony, I believe, is that women – if they were in power – would probably solve world poverty. It’s time for women to stop being the object of men’s charity (a creation of men to begin with) and start being the solution to it. Still…..vote Bernie for President.

White People Talking about Racism

It’s a sick irony that a person like me – white, male, privileged – is in a privileged position to talk about racism in America. The epitome of privilege! Several months ago, after giving a talk at work that briefly touched on racism, a fellow African American colleague of mine approached me and basically said that my voice was powerful because I’m white. I was a strong ally. I hadn’t really considered that.

Matthew Ahmann (left of King…the white guy) was an important part of the Civil Rights Movement

My voice is powerful because white people need to be convinced of racism, because white people have the power, always had, and, sadly, because white people won’t believe black people when they talk about it. White people listen to me because I don’t need to talk about racism, ever. I have no skin in the game. It doesn’t affect me directly. In fact, I could just shut up and enjoy my white privilege thank you very much. I could live a happy, insulated life without troubling my delicate little mind. Yet the search for truth and love prevails in my heart, and the hearts of many. And once I learned about the facts of racism, and the history, and the disease that it has become, I could never look back.

And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he got up and was baptized. Acts 9:18

Yesterday I learned that 51 percent of African American children are born into poverty. The ability to comprehend these facts in an empathetic, compassionate way; the ability to put faces behind these monstrous numbers, the ability to realize that your experience might be different than others. It cannot be denied. Such a light cannot be put under a basket.

White people talking about racism is comical, especially if hidden behind the internet. On one side, you have white people that don’t see it, or don’t want to. They also get highly offended if you mention “white privilege” because it suggests that they didn’t completely control their own destiny, that they didn’t pull themselves up from their own bootstraps. I get it, I really do. It’s hard to take credit away from yourself. On the other side of the argument, you have white people that are correct.

Yeah, I know, that sounds arrogant. But it’s time to be blunt. This is a debate composed of facts and one side has them. The other side has opinions, fears, anecdotes. When a rational person considers the facts, statistics, and trends of racism in America, there is one logical conclusion: that racism still exists on a systemic level. So, anyways, the two groups of white people basically talk past each other, shakes hands, agree to disagree, and life moves on. Agree to disagree?

We need to stop talking about race!  Right? That’s the problem, say some white people. Colorblindness. Well, it’s a nice thought. We tried that. It doesn’t work. When a group of people are getting the shaft, and those people happen to be black, then we must consider race at that point. That’s step one. In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have to talk about race. Because racism wouldn’t exist. We don’t live in that world.

The first step of alcoholism is admitting you have a problem. Have we reached the first step? Not even fucking close. I do think things are getting better, and I’m optimistic in the long run, but it’s hard to be happy when looking at the causalities – and the years roll by.

The Teachings of Jesus

Early in college, I undertook a project that took several years to complete. I went through all the teachings of Jesus, as recorded not only in the Gospels but the extra-canonical texts as well (most importantly the Gospel of Thomas which might have been a source for Mark, Matthew, and Luke). I read them, wrote them down, and categorized them. I wanted a complete understanding of the most important part of Christianity. I wanted to see how the teachings of Jesus fell into categories, themes, focal points. The moral teachings of Jesus, and this project, changed my life forever, more than any other person living or dead.

We start with what Jesus said was the most important teaching of all: love for God and love for your neighbor.

Love and Forgiveness

[after being asked what the greatest law is.]
Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Mt.

Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing. Lk

But I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye?…And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than other?…Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Two men owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he cancelled the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?…You have judged correctly…Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little. Lk

Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.

Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word many be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two of three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Mt.

If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. If he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you and says, ‘I repent,’ forgive him. Lk

Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.

Moral Teachings

For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light. I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings. Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches? And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else’s property, who will give you property of your own? No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money. Lk.

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock.

Become haters of hypocrisy and evil thought. For it is thought which gives birth to hypocrisy, but hypocrisy is far from the truth.

But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?…Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

[after being asked what the greatest law is.]
Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Mt.

The most important one (commandment) is this: “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.” The second is this: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” There is no commandment greater than these. Mk.

Do not be judged, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Lk.

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. Of someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you. If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. But love you enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as you Father is merciful. Lk.

(On being asked if circumcision is profitable):
If it were beneficial, their father would beget them already circumcised from their mother. Rather, the true circumcision in spirit has become completely profitable.

(On being asked how to receive eternal life, and a scribe answering with the ‘greatest commandment’):
You have answered correctly. Do this and you will live.

Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions. Lk.

[after Jesus tells the parable of the rich fool]
But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?’
This is how it will be with anyone who stores up things for himself but is not rich toward God. Lk

Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat; or about your body, what you will wear. Life is more than food, and the body more than clothes. Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap, they have no storeroom or barn; yet God feeds them. And how much more valuable you are than birds! Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life? Since you cannot do this very little thing, why do you worry about the rest?
Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. IF that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today, and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith! And do not set your heart on what you will eat or drink; do not worry about it. For the pagan world runs after all such things, and your Father knows that you need them. But seek his kingdom, and these things will be given to you as well.
Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there you heart will be also. Lk

That servant who knows his master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Lk

Why don’t you judge for yourselves what is right? As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate, try hard to be reconciled to him on the way, or he may drag you off to the judge, and the judge turn you over to the officer, and the officer throw you into prison. I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny. Lk

The Small Faith of a Philosopher

I wrote this several years ago but it still rings true to me:

Religion is nothing but the systematization of the experience of the divine. Let me explain: first, someone sees a shooting star. Then, they turn to the person next to them and say: “did you see that?” The person replies: “See what?” Then religion begins. It is based on the experience of God, but is more properly the articulation of what God is and how we ought to act in light of God’s existence. Thus, we get creeds, religious texts, and rituals. The most important part of religion, I propose, is the experience of the Divine. (Any mystic would propose the same thing.) This is the part that all religions share. The systematization part is important too for each particular religion, because it brings people together; but this part should not be taken as seriously as the experience of God. Many bad things can happen from considering that there is only one particular way to articulate, worship, or think about God. I’m not saying that there are many Gods. I’m simply saying that if one God existed, would not people have different experiences of that God? And would not people, living all around the world, come up with different descriptions of those experiences? And would not people come up with different ways of worshiping God?

My faith is small in the sense that it is minimalist. I believe that God exists. It’s easy to say the word god, but when we understand how powerful and beautiful this idea of God is, we would realize that a small belief in God is larger than any system of belief that you could ever make up. The belief in God is enough for me, and has been enough for many in the history of the world. I need no more. God is too large. The simple belief in God is too incomprehensible and amazing to worry about other beliefs. Indeed, I suspect that the more beliefs a person has, the more that he actually doubts the existence of God, which is supposedly foundation for all these beliefs!
What God do I believe in, you ask? My simple answer is this: if you believe in a God, then it’s probably the same one I believe in. What I mean by “God” is fairly simple and universal: creator of the universe and perfect. Theology can try to add more to the idea of God, but probably in vain. The idea of God is fairly simple and yet ungraspable, understandable to children and yet transcendental. In a sense I do not understand God, and in another sense I easily do—and I’m content with that.

I am a Christian in the sense that I believe in what Jesus taught. I think that Jesus was right about pretty much everything he said. But his message is a universal one; available to you, to me, and to the kid growing up in an unknown African village. He simply preached the will of God, as he saw it. As far as I can tell, he was the most perfect person who ever lived, and has always been the best role model for me. A friendly, unbiased reading of the Gospels—one that is free of built-in assumptions or beliefs about who Jesus was or what the Bible is—confirms my sentiments. Was Jesus God? To be honest, I don’t think that makes much sense. To believe that Jesus is God is to believe that when Jesus refers to his “father in heaven” he is referring to himself; and when Jesus is praying to his father in the garden of Gethsemane, he is praying to himself? That doesn’t make sense. I do not see how making Jesus God helps faith or theology or my life one bit.

I am open to the fact that Jesus may have sacrificed himself for me in some way. To be honest, I’m not exactly sure why Jesus’ death has anything to do with my sins, but I am still open to the possibility. Why? Because Jesus was a great person, and his death must have meant something extraordinary, especially since he did it voluntarily. He wouldn’t have given his life for any ordinary reason. I’m tempted to think that his sacrifice was much like Socrates, that is, in the name of justice; but it seems slightly different. When it comes to salvation, i.e. Jesus dying for my sins, my only worry is that people might use this belief to justify a life of habitual sin. After all, if Jesus died for my sins, doesn’t that continually take the blame off me? Therefore, if I sin, perhaps I should feel guilty for a moment, and then feel relieved that Jesus takes the guilt? No. That is certainly wrong and a direct contradiction of his teachings. If we are to believe in salvation, it must be interpreted in such a way that does not allow for this behavior. In my own experience, I believe that Jesus has “saved” me, but perhaps I’m using the word in a different way. The truth is that his teachings saved me, not his death. His teachings brought me from a life of questionable moral worth, to a striving for moral perfection; to amazement, to the belief in the greatness of human potentiality. An unbiased reading of his words truly touches our hearts and gives us a longing and passion for being a moral person in the kingdom of God. His teachings completely changed my life, more so than any living or dead person has; and this can certainly be called “salvation,” especially when those teachings brought me closer to God Himself than ever before.

The existence of God, intellectually speaking, is more likely than not. Many people are surprised by that statement, but those are the people that either haven’t pushed themselves intellectually or are too biased to see the truth. There are many more hints that God exists than hints that God does not exist. The theist has a stockpile of arguments, and a solid intellectual defense against all atheistic arguments. The problem of evil is, I believe, the only serious objection to theism, and it is answerable. This is why a person can both be a philosopher, in love with rationality, and a theist, in love with God.

What does faith amount to? That is one of the best questions we can ask; because if belief in God does nothing, and has no practical effects, then what would that say about belief in God? In my experience, faith does several things: firstly, it gives us a philosophical foundation. What I mean by this is that it gives our metaphysical questions grounding in the face of groundless, intellectually void alternatives. What was the first cause of the universe?—God, an uncreated mind-like being. How can we trust our senses?—God, a benevolent being. What is the source of the laws of nature?—God, a perfectly wise being. Do I have a permanent, unchanging identity?—A soul, created by God. Where do moral commands ultimately come from?—God, a perfectly rational being. Some would say that my answers—“God”—really amount to nothing but a word; that they explain nothing. In a sense, I agree! Perhaps they don’t explain anything, but they do give support and foundation, which is precisely their role. Those questions remain no matter what; they constantly nag at our intellect. Theistic answers give me a great sense of intellectual satisfaction, completion, and peace of mind. The alternative to these questions is no answer at all, which would only be intellectually satisfying it the answers were of an empirical, discoverable nature; but they are not. They are metaphysical questions and answers, which is why “God” is not an explanation in the scientific sense of the word; rather, it is a metaphysical explanation—a grounding.

Secondly, faith amounts to a radical change in perception: belief in God changes our perception of the world in a psychologically real and beneficial way. After all, a schizophrenic has a changed perception, but not beneficial. To believe that God exists is to believe that everything is a creation of God: and thus sacred, meaningful, and beautiful. We must admit that there is a fundamental difference in looking at an object as a) an accident or b) a purposeful creation. Why is a child sad to hear that his parents did not mean to have him? Why are parents unwilling to tell their children this? Either this universe was meant to exist, or it wasn’t. The truth of either claim changes our perception of the universe. Which do you think is true? Furthermore, to look at every object as sacred immediately has environmental benefits. All theists, according to their beliefs, should try to take care of nature because it is a purposeful creation. Environmentalism follows from the belief. Of course, in practice this does not follow from some peoples’ beliefs, but this is contradictory to their beliefs. Furthermore, to look at all objects as sacred and meaningful is to look at all people as sacred and meaningful. Usually theists think of all people as “God’s children.” The practical effects are obvious: if all people are created by God, then all people deserve respect, love, and care. Nobody is expendable. Nobody is not worth it. This is precisely what Jesus, and all great thinkers, taught as the most important moral principle.

Along a similar vein is the perspective shift that comes with belief in a transcendent Being. To believe in a transcendent Being (beyond time and space) is to believe in a mode of existence that is entirely different from the one we all live in. Perhaps only God exists in such a place—a space-less, time-less, and eternal place—but perhaps not. At any rate, the effect of such a belief is an expansion of your mind, a broadening of your conception of what exists. More specifically, it has brilliant effects on how we handle the situations of life. Your job interview goes badly; you break your arm; your best friend lies to you; you get in a bad car accident. To the normal human being, these are bad things that warrant depressive behavior. But with the perspective shift that comes with belief in God, all these events seem much smaller, a tiny speck in the grand scheme of things. We can easily brush them off our shoulders, perhaps shed a tear or two, and simply move on with a smile. I’m not saying that life’s events are less meaningful or insignificant—only smaller.

Thirdly, belief in God is a great source of happiness and joy. Personally, happiness for me comes down to believing that God exists. Out of all the possible sources of happiness—food, money, friendship, family—belief in God is the most permanent and life-sustaining. Why? Because if God exists, then the universe is a great place to be. Every time I seriously consider God permeating throughout the universe, I immediately become happy. This is the greatest psychological benefit of belief in God because happiness is the greatest psychological end. By “happiness” here I mean two things. Firstly, we have emotions that tend to flare up daily; some are happy, and some are sad. Belief in God can affect these in a positive way. After hearing a song that promotes belief in God, for example, we can have an emotional reaction that only can be described as “happiness.” Secondly, happiness can be thought of as a more permanent mind-set. Belief in God promotes this sort also.

What Causes Atheism?

Now of course there are many causes for atheism–personal, intellectual, emotional, societal–and I respect them all in varying degrees, but the one I come across a lot is this: a bad experience with a particular Christian or with a particular Christian institution. In other words, I believe that hypocrisy and setting a bad example accounts for much of it (not all of it, much of it). (I tried to research the causes of atheism in academic journals but didn’t come up with anything…so this is just my anecdotal opinion).

What I’m saying is not to be confused with the reasons for Atheism, the justifications and arguments that support it. That’s a different topic. And as I’ve said in the past, explaining the cause of something doesn’t explain it away. Theism has psychological causes too. What’s interesting about atheism is that only 2 to 11% of the world is atheist, and many in China apparently, making it an anomaly.

Atheism is the view that there is no God and that religion is generally false; but when you talk to most American atheists, 90% of what they say is actually just about one religion: Christianity, and usually a particular version of it – fundamentalism. Chances are they think Buddhism is super cool (most people do). That’s a hint. Atheism is the drawing away from something, a revolt, a critique.

Update! I stand corrected. The title should rather be “What Causes Agnosticism?” I was told by someone, and I agree with him, that religious hypocrisy can and does lead a person towards agnosticism, away from organized religion – but not necessarily atheism. That’s a good point.

What hypocrisy? Hating gay people and abortion, just to take two big examples. If you are gay, you probably were judged and hated by Christians throughout your life. I don’t blame any gay person for being hostile to Christianity; it’s only natural. And as the world moves on and young people are more and more okay with gay people, and as Christianity drags behind on this issue (except the new Pope and more progressive forms of Christianity), this will still be the natural reaction. Now hating abortion is one thing (hate the sin, not the sinner…right?), and I think there is a compassionate way to be pro-life, but Christians have taken this to another level. To the point that I don’t want to be part of that crowd anymore. Sometimes pro-life is thinly veiled sexism or classism. Also, where’s the perspective here? On the one hand, there are real people dying from hunger, war, and poverty all over the globe. On the other hand, there are potential people being aborted for various reasons (including rape protection of the mother, or poverty). Hmm…I wonder where we should spend our resources, and time, and judgment on? I wonder what Jesus would do? When we have solved all the worlds imminent problems (hunger, poverty, discrimination, war), then maybe we can start yelling about abortion and how terrible it is. It takes up too much of our moral outrage.

Alas, this is how it was, is, and will always be. A significant percentage of the Christian population will be hypocrites. That’s human nature and math really, and Jesus predicted it:

“For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.”

Religion tends to set the bar pretty high in terms of morality, so, for example, loving your enemies will be difficult for Christians. This goes for any religion. Calling yourself Christian is very easy, but it should be the hardest thing to call yourself. This explains why Jesus called out the hypocrites, chastised the religious people who were keeping people from God. It made him angry. I suppose he was judging them, but it was by their own standards (Jesus teaches that God judges people by their own words). I suppose Jesus loved the hypocrites too, and would easily forgive them, but they were blinded by their own self-righteousness; the same blinding, ignorant self-righteousness that infects religion today.

Judge ye not, yet Christians love to judge. When you are constantly around religious people, it’s very tempting and natural. Keeping my distance from religion, while accepting its teachings, is one way I try to cope. The only perfect Christianity is the one in your heart.