Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » MikeH » Read entry Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
MikeH's Journal
Posted by MikeH in Religion/Theology
Sat Aug 16th 2008, 08:38 PM
Response to OP about Agnosticism
I used to be a Christian. However I found that Christianity, and my supposedly having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, had not been of any help to me personally. That being the case, I felt, and feel, that it was the right and healthy thing for me to part company with the Christian faith (or at least with any explicit outward practice of the faith), and to absolve myself of any duties and obligations specifically imposed by the Christian faith (as opposed to duties and obligations incumbent on any good or moral person).

However I do not consider myself to be an atheist, and strongly feel that there are certain reasons which, even if they are not absolute proof of the reality of any God or Godlike figure, at least make the idea of God, or some intelligence or reality higher than ourselves and the natural universe, to be not entirely ridiculous.

When I was a Christian, one of my favorite writers was the noted apologist C. S. Lewis. I do not accept his arguments any more regarding the person of Jesus Christ or tenets of the Christian faith, but I have always liked, and still like, his argument that our sense of reason, and our moral sense (sense of right and wrong), must be rooted in some intelligence higher and greater than our own, and in some reality higher and greater than ourselves and the natural universe. He particularly makes this argument in the first six chapters of his book Miracles.

I would now consider myself to be a Deist. I accept the argument that there just might be a God or higher intelligence than ourselves (or at least I do not consider the idea of there being such to be absurd or ridiculous); however I do not accept any alleged revelation from God, such as the Bible, the Koran, etc.

I understand the attraction to the idea of God having given us some authoritative, dependable revelation from himself/herself, such as the Bible or the Koran. However I think there are many more problems (and serious problems at that) than benefits from actually believing that the Bible (or the Koran) is an authoritative revelation from God. (One obvious problem is that Christians consider the Bible to be the "Word of God", and Muslims consider the Koran to be the revelation from Allah; who is right?)

There are a number of web sites about Deism, which are easy to find.

I consider myself to be just on the believing side of agnostic. For me the arguments for the reality of some intelligence higher and greater than our own make sense; at least I do not find them to be ridiculous. However I consider myself to be agnostic because I accept the fallibility of human reasoning; I accept the possibility that I might be mistaken in thinking that the arguments which seem to favor God, or a higher or greater intelligence than our own, or God, actually do favor God or a higher intelligence. Even though the arguments which seem to favor God or a higher intelligence make sense, it is still a possibility that those arguments might be wrong, and that there might actually be no God or higher intelligence.
Discuss (0 comments)
Profile Information
MikeH
Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your ignore list
913 posts
Member since 2002
San Diego, California, USA
Male
Morality and Duty, and Access to Spontaneous or Childhood Feelings
Morality and performance of duty are artificial measures that become necessary when something essential is lacking. The more successfully a person was denied access to his or her feelings in childhood, the larger the arsenal of intellectual weapons and the supply of moral prostheses has to be, because morality and a sense of duty are not sources of strength or fruitful soil for genuine affection. Blood does not flow in artificial limbs; they are for sale and can serve many masters. What was considered good yesterday can--depending on the decree of government of party--be considered evil and corrupt today, and vice versa. But those who have spontaneous feelings can only be themselves. They have no other choice if they want to remain true to themselves. Rejection, ostracism, loss of love, and name calling will not fail to affect them; they will suffer as a result and will dread them, but once they have found their authentic self they will not want to lose it. And when they sense that something is being demanded of them to which their whole being says no, they cannot do it. They simply cannot.

Alice Miller, For Your Own Good

http://www.nospank.net/fyog10.htm#central
Learning from Hitler and his childhood
What point is there for us today in learning about Hitler and his history? For me, the main point is this: our knowledge will serve as a warning against our blindness and encourage us to give it up once and for all and to struggle against collective repression. This is what I do consistently in all my books in order to help people understand the psychodynamics of the mistreatment of children and its immeasurable danger for society, as demonstrated by Hitler's case. My explanations are by no means intended to suggest pity for a man as merciless as Hitler.

it was in large part owing to Hitler and his history that I became aware of the dangers of our traditional morality. We are exhorted to honor our parents and never question them no matter what they have done. Yet when I realize that millions of human beings had to die so that Adolf Hitler could keep his repression of childhood trauma intact, that millions were subjected to humiliation in concentration camps so that he never had to recognize how he had once been humiliated, then I believe that one can't point out these connections often enough in order to shed light on this unconscious production of evil. How should young people be expected to recognize and reject inhumanity and crime if these continue to be disguised instead of being pointed out as plainly as possible? Only when young people are permitted to know exactly what happened and how it could happen, only if they don't allow anything to stifle their curiosity and are not afraid of the truth, can they free themselves from the burden placed upon them by their forebears' blindness.

Alice Miller

http://www.naturalchild.com/alice_miller/a...

See also
http://www.nospank.net/fyog13.htm
http://www.nospank.net/fyog2.htm
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.