What, if anything, is "God"?
Looking back in history, we find that virtually all cultures have a central body of myth that defines, in broad terms, the role of the human being in the Universe. Supernatural beings called "gods" feature prominently in these myths, but they don't have enough in common to allow us to define what we mean by a "god". When we speak of another culture, especially a dead culture that can no longer speak for itself, we can clearly see that these myths and the characters that inhabit them are the works of human imagination.
I see no reason to suspect that the popular myths of major religions are any different. One interesting thing we see in our own "Judaeo/Christian" tradition is the constant free-wheeling re-definition of God. Paradoxically, our tradition frowns on thinking of God as strictly mythical or metaphorical. Yet we seem to be free to re-define what we mean by God - sometimes in an openly political process. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity, was adopted by the Council of Nicaea in an attempt to make sense of the New Testament idea that Jesus was somehow God but somehow the same as God but somehow the same as God but for some reason sacrificed himself to himself to make a deal with himself (being his own father) ...
The Council of Nicaea then suppressed all other opinions as heresy. From that point on God "had" three persons. If you thought otherwise, your life could be in danger. The "doctrine" of the Trinity is clearly a symbolic or aesthetic approach to appreciating the "inner meaning" of the New Testament myth. Shhh.
These days, anyone can stand up in front of a group of Christian believers and confidently tell everyone what God "wants" and who God "is" without worrying that anyone will leap to his feet and call "bullshit". Such groups are echo chambers, where each member tries to be holier than the rest or, at the very least, keep quiet about his reservations. "Struggling" with "faith" is seen as a sign of progress.
The problem with this is that the Judaeo/Christian God can be just about anything you want, which reveals Him to be a creature of personal myth. In our culture, we no longer have much in the way of common myth, unless we lock ourselves up in an echo chamber. That means that the figures in our myths tend to be enormously flexible and vague. We see no problem in this. In "secular" myth, such as the ones surrounding Santa Claus, we gleefully elaborate stories about Santa, his elves, his reindeer and his whole Christmas project without any trace of self consciousness. We do the same with God who has become the subject and main character of a whole genre of movies.
This is not to say that many people don't genuinely seek to get a glimpse of "ultimate reality" and what Taoism calls the "source of all things". But for such seekers, the cultural baggage carried by the word "God" gets in the way. Zen would say that all ideas get in the way, but that's another essay ...
I deeply appreciate myth and human imagination. I enjoy a good story as much as anyone. But I'm also engaged in a life-long project to discover (as much as any human can) the true nature of reality. Therefore, if I use the word "God" in a conversation, I'm usually using it to bridge the enormous gap between my own perception of reality and that of so many good, honest and serious people who are still living inside some version of the Judaeo/Christian myth. I understand that myth very well and I'm comfortable with it, just as I don't feel like pulling the beard off of Santa in the shopping centre. That would be just rude.
It is not for me to go around trying to persuade people that their myth is not my reality. "Atheist" crusaders are just another echo chamber, talking only to each other. To me, they often seem disrespectful, ignorant and just plain rude. On the other hand, when somebody preaches to me about what God "says" or "wants", I have a strong impulse to cry "bullshit".
I see no reason to suspect that the popular myths of major religions are any different. One interesting thing we see in our own "Judaeo/Christian" tradition is the constant free-wheeling re-definition of God. Paradoxically, our tradition frowns on thinking of God as strictly mythical or metaphorical. Yet we seem to be free to re-define what we mean by God - sometimes in an openly political process. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity, was adopted by the Council of Nicaea in an attempt to make sense of the New Testament idea that Jesus was somehow God but somehow the same as God but somehow the same as God but for some reason sacrificed himself to himself to make a deal with himself (being his own father) ...
The Council of Nicaea then suppressed all other opinions as heresy. From that point on God "had" three persons. If you thought otherwise, your life could be in danger. The "doctrine" of the Trinity is clearly a symbolic or aesthetic approach to appreciating the "inner meaning" of the New Testament myth. Shhh.
These days, anyone can stand up in front of a group of Christian believers and confidently tell everyone what God "wants" and who God "is" without worrying that anyone will leap to his feet and call "bullshit". Such groups are echo chambers, where each member tries to be holier than the rest or, at the very least, keep quiet about his reservations. "Struggling" with "faith" is seen as a sign of progress.
The problem with this is that the Judaeo/Christian God can be just about anything you want, which reveals Him to be a creature of personal myth. In our culture, we no longer have much in the way of common myth, unless we lock ourselves up in an echo chamber. That means that the figures in our myths tend to be enormously flexible and vague. We see no problem in this. In "secular" myth, such as the ones surrounding Santa Claus, we gleefully elaborate stories about Santa, his elves, his reindeer and his whole Christmas project without any trace of self consciousness. We do the same with God who has become the subject and main character of a whole genre of movies.
This is not to say that many people don't genuinely seek to get a glimpse of "ultimate reality" and what Taoism calls the "source of all things". But for such seekers, the cultural baggage carried by the word "God" gets in the way. Zen would say that all ideas get in the way, but that's another essay ...
I deeply appreciate myth and human imagination. I enjoy a good story as much as anyone. But I'm also engaged in a life-long project to discover (as much as any human can) the true nature of reality. Therefore, if I use the word "God" in a conversation, I'm usually using it to bridge the enormous gap between my own perception of reality and that of so many good, honest and serious people who are still living inside some version of the Judaeo/Christian myth. I understand that myth very well and I'm comfortable with it, just as I don't feel like pulling the beard off of Santa in the shopping centre. That would be just rude.
It is not for me to go around trying to persuade people that their myth is not my reality. "Atheist" crusaders are just another echo chamber, talking only to each other. To me, they often seem disrespectful, ignorant and just plain rude. On the other hand, when somebody preaches to me about what God "says" or "wants", I have a strong impulse to cry "bullshit".
Comments
Post a Comment