Νοέ 05

Divine Creation (reductio ad absurdum)

 
Columnist:EvanT

Before I admitted even to myself that I was an atheist, while I was still struggling with my faith, I was always troubled by the very first chapter of the Bible; God creating the World. Does this even make sense? Why would a God want to create a material World? The more I delved in theology, the more this bothered me. I won’t even touch the rest of the story here, the original sin, the problem of evil, or the grand philosophical problems of heavenly clouds, pits of hell, demons, imps and angels. I’ll stop here, on the first page. After all, if a worldview has a problem right from the start, there’s little point in dealing with details.

There are two alternatives for the Universe having a divine creator. He either created it on purpose (voluntarily) or by accident (involuntarily). Let’s start with the second case, being the most implausible one.

Involuntary Creation

There are many examples of accidental creation in world mythology and two characteristic examples come from Ancient Greece.

Once upon a time, while Hera (wife of Zeus) was sleeping, the newborn Hercules approached her and started nursing. Hera woke up and slapped the infant away, some of the milk got spilled and our galaxy was created (hence the name, from the Greek word “gala” meaning “milk”). It was just an accident.

The birth of Aphrodite, goddess of beauty, was also coincidental. The myth goes like this: Cronus (father of Zeus) took a sickle and slashed at Uranus, his father, killing him. His blood trickled in the Ocean and Aphrodite was born from that. Similarly, the birth of Aphrodite was a random event. There are similar stories in other world mythologies.

What would this mean for Christian Cosmogony? What if Yahweh had created the Universe by accident? What if he had no intention of creating, but somehow it came about? What would that mean?

For starters, it would mean that Yahweh is not omniscient, since he didn’t predict the results of his actions, especially with the theory of a divine subconscious that acts independently. (This second alternative is more extreme, but the intense anthropomorphisms of the Old Testament allow me to assume yet another one. After all, I’m trying to cover all possibilities here.)

In this situation of unintentional creation there are four alternatives:

  • a) Yahweh creates the World unconsciously and is not aware of it. In this case, the World is ruled by the divine subconscious and consequently Yahweh and the Christian God that people worship isn’t God per se, but they’re worshipping the divine subconscious directly. This might explain the unstable behaviour the divine exhibits in the texts of the monotheistic religions (Islam included).

  • b) Yahweh creates the World unconsciously, but becomes aware of it at some “point”. This alternative could have been the natural evolution of the Marcionites, had they survived long enough to develop apologetics. The Marcionites believed that the World is the creation of an inferior deity (the god of the Old Testament) and that Jesus was a superior god that came to save us. Assuming this inferior deity is the divine subconscious, this explains several things in monotheistic scriptures (in this scenario, God sends Muhammad; he just realizes the error later in human history).

  • c) The Universe is a by-product of some other divine action and Yahweh is just trying to work out the “bugs” without radically changing it. Human beings, since they were not designed from the start in the image and likeness of God, misunderstand the various revelations, and it becomes necessary for God to take human form (this could be the basis for all messianic religions).

  • d) The Universe is a by-product of some other divine action and Yahweh has not become aware of it nor will he (being atemporal and all). This Yahweh is a clearly deistic God. The World evolves naturally, it retains the traces of perfection people perceive today as signs of divine creation, but God doesn’t intervene, nor will he ever and all religions are human constructs.

Naturally, for the Christian Worldview the very idea of involuntary creation is blasphemous, since it presupposes several weaknesses in God. And if the divine operates like a human being with a conscious and subconscious mind (if, mind you), then it is equally unthinkable to assume imperfections in the divine subconscious. Furthermore, Christians reject the concept of a deistic God as non-personal. Involuntary creation cannot be incorporated into the Christian Worldview, as it is deemed completely incompatible with it.

I will also ignore the idea that God was somehow compelled to create the World. For a divine being, let alone a perfect being, it would be inconceivable to have created the World not because it wanted to, but because it was coerced. In this case, the word “God” shouldn’t apply to the creator, but to the one that forced his hand.

This entire train of thought on involuntary creation can be safely ignored.

Voluntary Creation

This is the standard Christian point of view. God wanted to make the World, he did so and has been maintaining it ever since, trying to lead intelligent beings to theosis (the reunification with the divine essence). But this concept has a serious philosophical flaw, perhaps even more serious that the previous ridiculous scenarios.

The problem was first pinpointed by Epicurus and his deistic philosophy about the gods. He said that the gods are “makaria” beings (that is, existing in a state of bliss, self-absorbed introspection and basking in one’s own perfection) that do not involve themselves with matters of the world, nor did they create it, since their only purpose is existing in “makariotis”. Divine makariotis was considered by epicurean philosophy as the ultimate, but untenable goal of the human search for happiness and peace of mind (“hedone”, as he called it). On this level, epicurean philosophy is similar to Buddhism, with the difference being that the goal is not the untenable divine makariotis, but the union with the Universe and the fading away of the self (that is Nirvana, a goal that humans can reach).

This brief analysis is a direct attack on the very essence of the Christian God, even if it’s not apparent at first glance. It emerges when we ask “Why did God create the Universe?”

So why did Yahweh create the Universe? Did he want to feel the joy of creating something? Did he want to have creatures to love and be loved in return? Whatever one assumes here, God is made to desire something and, unfortunately, desire presupposes a lack of something. You must lack something in order to desire it and lack suggests imperfection. God cannot be perfect and desire. He cannot be perfect and be lacking something (especially if that something can be provided by imperfect, material beings).

Even though we’re speaking about the material world, the same goes for Yahweh’s immaterial troupe (material for God, immaterial for humans; a middle ground between matter and divine essence), and the question remains the same: “What was God lacking when he created such beings?” (I won’t even touch the calvinistic approach, that God wanted beings to praise his magnificence. This thrusts upon God a worse flaw; an ego).

For those that grew up with christian mythology this is equally inconceivable. A God that merely floats around inside or outside the Universe thinking about nothing but his own makariotis? Unthinkable. What about God being Love? Unfortunately, this analysis doesn’t even let God reach that stage of Love, since it doesn’t allow him to even create something. The conclusion is simple. A perfect God DOES NOT CREATE. He is either imperfect and a creator or perfect and not a creator. The two options are mutually exclusive.

There is of course a third scenario.

The Divine as not a creative agent

Could it be that if there is a God he did not create the Universe? We’ve already stated that for God to retain his perfection he couldn’t have created anything.

In this case we might have to default to one of these alternatives we’ve already mentioned:

The World is the creation of a mighty, but imperfect being, but then it would be doubtful if it would deserve to be called “God” in the classic philosophical sense. A being like that would be like an imperfect ancient Greek deity. Or perhaps God and the Universe are completely independent of each other. God is self-contained by Epicurean makariotis and the Universe was caused by natural causes and evolves by itself. God never creates the Universe and there is no philosophical issue to be tackled.

But perhaps one might assume that the Universe is made of transubstantiated divine essence. God used to exist, but became the Universe, and once the Universe runs its course its matter will revert back to its original state and God will reform. Bah… all this see-sawing from God to Universe and back again doesn’t sound perfect at all!

The last alternative we’re left with is Pantheism: God and the Universe as a single essence. It’s a clearly dualistic theory. God is the mind and the Universe is the body of a single entity with intelligent beings acting as neurons of sorts. This theory solves the problem of the Universe having to be created, but turns God into a finite being (or rather an organ). He exists as long as there is intelligent life, so if intelligence had never arisen God would not be (and of course, if all intelligent life is wiped out, so is God). Either God continues to exist or he has always existed, only inert and unobserved.

God in this case might be finite, but in effect immortal inside the confines of the Universe. It’s also doubtful if his properties can be divined, since he is dependent on material beings. I’m not entirely sure if the collective consciousness of all intelligent beings in the Universe can be called a “Being”, let alone “God.”

It’s definitely a very enticing idea and has been used repeatedly by New Age religions and Sci-Fi (my favourite appearance is in “Babylon 5” where intelligent life is cast as the Universe trying to understand itself). Even though the idea is a very romantic one and joins all intelligent life in a single whirlwind of consciousness and exploration of being. If we encounter other intelligent beings in the Universe (and I’m convinced that we will at some point) it might be used as a good argument for universal peace, but I doubt we can call this “God”.

In Conclusion

All in all, is a being such as the one christian theology and apologetics describe possible (let alone plausible)? A perfect being, omnipotent, omniscient, timeless, immaterial, omnipresent, creator of the Universe and personification of love? It’s obvious what I think and equally obvious why I’m not a Christian. I have no idea where my spiritual quest will lead me, but I cannot reconsider the Christian God unless I can find a satisfactory answer to the question that jumps off the first pages of the Bible. It’s a short question, like most hard questions are; seven words long:

How can a perfect being have desires?


Keep reading…

This article was originally posted on the On the Way to Ithaca blog in Greek. It has also been posted in English and you can direct your comments there.

Οκτ 17

Religion and Free Expression II

 
Columnist:Darkchilde

A few days ago I had written the first part of this post. But there are new developments which happened just today, and I am really angry and sad at the same time. But let me first explain what happened.

About 3 months ago, my niece’s teacher gave them various small projects to do. My niece’s project was about the myths of Italy. Along with my sister, they sat down, and found three beautiful myths from Italy. Today was the day that my niece would present the project. The school owner, though, does not want my niece to present her project, on religious grounds yet again, because, in the myths, there were witches, ghosts and the devil! She now wants to look and read through the projects so she can “religiously” approve them!

I really don’t know what to say about this person, who is trying to make children into dogmatic soldiers for Jeebus, who is trying to impose her own dogmatism into children, who is forbidding every expression of imagination and inventiveness…

I do not care what that fundie believes. She can believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster for all I care! But she has no right to impose her own religious views, her own ideology, her own fantasies to anyone, not to my niece, let alone any other child!

She has no right to hurt not just my niece but any child in this way, she has no right to terrorize children in this way, she has no right to treat children in this manner, as if they are non-existent, as if they are nothing. And all the above because of religion! Children have their own characters, their own personalities, and they must be respected.

And yet again, my niece does not fully comprehend why. How can anyone explain to a 9-year old girl about people having attitudes like the fundies, and are trying to impose those on others without any respect for the individual? How can anyone explain to her what dogmatism and fundamentalism are? And what they do to people? How can anyone explain to her that this person is living in a fantasy world, one very much removed from reality?

I never understood, and still do not understand, why the Abrahamic religions need to impose their views, their ways to others. Why you are considered a sinner or whatever if you use your own logic, your empathy, your sensibility. your critical thinking skills, and find your own way in this world. I don:t want your religious views or your ideology; I don:t want to be preached at; I do not want you to judge me before you get to know me in person; I am not a soldier for Jeebus or Allah or whatever deity you believe in, and don:t want to be. I want to be free to choose and decide for myself; I want to be free to think for myself!

Keep reading…

This article was originally posted on the Snippets and other stories from the Net blog in English and you can direct your comments there.

Οκτ 16

Religion and Free Expression

 
Columnist:Darkchilde

This article is a response to an event that happened to my 9 year old niece, who is attending a school in Athens Greece. Unfortunately, schools in Greece are not secular, and neither is the state secular. We still have a Ministry of Education and Religion, the constitution says that this is a christian country and part of our taxes go for the salaries of the greek orthodox priests! To explain a bit, even in state schools we have a class called “Religion”, which actually is a propaganda for the Greek Orthodox religion.

When she chose the school that my niece is attending, nobody told her that it was a religious/faith school; it was understood that it was just a good school where religion was taught as part of the curriculum, just like in every other school. Nor was it in any way written anywhere that there would be any kind of religious problems or anything else religious except for the usual religious crap that all schools have to abide by.

My sister has explained to my niece that most of the things she is being told in the “Religion” class are myths and legends, and that they are not true; that there is no evidence for mystical resurrected zombies or parthenogenesis in humans…

Anyway, to continue with the story, my niece wanted to dress up for the annual school carnival party as a little devil girl, nothing frightening for other children. The owners of the school, though, forbade her the costume on religious grounds! They said that it is blasphemy to dress as such! Blasphemy again, the “protector” of religion from any kind of criticism, from logic, from critical thinking, from being human even, as it seems, from having fun! I wrote my ideas about blasphemy in a previous article in this blog, when I criticized the new blasphemy law of Ireland.

This is a clear fundamentalist attitude and as such my sister has complained but to no avail. Those people are set in their illogical, superstitious, irrational, dogmatic mind set, they have been lobotomized by religion and cannot think outside the box.

Of course, my sister’s family will not be attending the school party; entrance per person was priced at 28 euros, and since my sister has 3 kids, you can understand how much these cost for a total of 5 persons.

One of the worst things is that they run a school which is supposed to give an education to children. But the worst of it all is the way they made a 9 year old child feel. My niece at this moment has been hurt, is feeling humiliated. All I can do, as her aunt, is to try and explain some things, but she does not understand why she cannot dress as a little devil in the school party; she does not yet understand religion and its implications.And right now she is wondering why she was forbidden to dress as a little devil, and she is angry at the school’s owner.

Of course, the school will lose not just one student but three, as my sister has 3 children in all and none will be attending that particular school.

Children need to be free from such attitudes, they need to be free to think and express themselves; parents and the surrounding environment, have the responsibility to guide them and help them think logically, think critically, to use their empathy for other people, to be human.

How are children going to develop logic and critical thinking skills, when religion is superstitious and dogmatic? How are they going to be free and to express themselves, when religion limits that freedom? How are they going to learn to be responsible for their actions when religion teaches people to put responsibility to mythological beings (god and satan)? How are they going to learn to be human, to have empathy and to care for others when religion teaches them that they are sinners, and thus bad, and ugly? How are they going to be responsible citizens and be sensitive to major current events, when religion teaches “Have faith in God”? How are they going to consider themselves as an equal member of society, when religion teaches misogyny and racism?

Keep reading…

This article was originally posted on the Snippets and other stories from the Net blog in English and you can direct your comments there.

Οκτ 15

Are we free to choose our religious beliefs?

 
Columnist:Invisible Ink (Αόρατη Μελάνη)

As I read the recent publications and follow conversations in blogs and fora concerning the decision of the European Court for Human Rights to abolish crucifixes from the school rooms of Italy, I reflect on the difficulty of seeing the obvious: that the presence of religious symbols reflects partiality in favor of a particular religion, and what is more, it is a declaration of power, an indirect imposition, and therefore it limits the citizens’ freedom, regarding both the choice and the expression of their religious beliefs.

All of us know of people who have sworn in court with their hand placed on the bible, simply in order not to risk displeasing a possibly religious judge. How free can we feel to declare that we are not christian, in a country were christian symbols reign?

How can a child choose whether to join a religion or not, and if yes, which religion that would be, while the crucifix is still hanging over the blackboard? How easy do you think it is to take a posture against the prevalent belief of society? How can nobody realize that the symbols and rituals of a religion (crucifix, icons, prayers, etc), when displayed in places where all citizens must go in order to fulfill their obligations or claim their rights (schools, courts of justice, police, army, public services), represent an imposition of that religion?

Oh but of course, it is not forbidden to belong to another religion or to have no religion. Let someone please go tell this to my daughter, who makes the sign of the cross during the morning prayer in the school yard, because all children do so, in spite of the fact that we are not christians and she has not been taught christian customs and traditions. Apparently nobody has ever taught her to, neither has anybody imposed this on her. She could of course go to the empty classroom on her own and wait for the others to finish, or stand apart, alone, next to the others, without crossing herself. I ask you to imagine a six year old, on first grade, in a new place, among new people, with new responsibilities, trying to adapt to a new situation, and on top of that having to make a statement about her religious beliefs – let’s face it, failure to participate in a christian ritual such as the prayer is an ideological statement. How can we possibly demand of young children to take such a grave ideological decision and assume its weight, either crossing themselves or not?

I would like to tell those christians who feel that their faith is being threatened, that they ought to be glad at the prospect of symbol removal from schools. Will the display of religious symbols make good christians out of the children? Probably the opposite is true: it will teach them to pretend, like my daughter does now, in order to be integrated. The essence of faith can not be taught by pure formalism of ritual. Those who truly care for christian faith will want the abolition not only of symbols and prayer from the schools, but also of the christian catechism euphemistically called “religion class”.

And all us fools, citizens of this country, divide into “christians” and “others” and fight over the display or removal of “their” symbol, instead of realizing that this symbol is a Damocles’ sword hanging over the heads of us ALL.

Let us all together turn our home into a FREE country, where nobody will need to cross themselves unwittingly, nor swear hypocritically, in order to feel socially integrated.

UPDATE: Following the example of mrs. Lauci in Italy, eight parents in Greece have sent petitions to the Greek Ombudsman asking for the removal of religious symbols and the abolition of prayer from their children’s school. Also, the Humanist Union of Greece has sent an open letter to the prime minister on the subject of the removal of religious symbols.

Keep reading…

This article was originally posted on the Invisible Ink (Αόρατη Μελάνη) blog in Greek. It has also been posted in English and you can direct your comments there.

Οκτ 14

Towards a new philosophy

Columnist: Astron
Adaptation and Translation: EvanT

In naked darkness we travel,
in naked endless seas.
New untamable lands,
new dreamy travels,
wonders we never dared imagine,
eternal unfulfilled desires wait to be fulfilled.

We inhabit an enormous galaxy consisting of at least 200 billion stars. Nearly since the dawn of time, for 14 billions years, it wanders the endless dark, its sparkling arms rotating around its luminous centre. Like a flying saucer it travels and travels with no destination set and with it so do we. But it’s not a lonely traveler. There are relatives everywhere, close and distant. Other galaxies traveling and trailing their destiny through our known dark sea. And anywhere we turn to look we discover even more of these relatives in this huge galactic family. The total number of galaxies in the cosmos is an unimaginable 100 billion. But our heart is not large enough to bear such wealth… so I return to our familiar territory; our own galaxy and that miniscule corner where our solar system lies. That little corner we can call “home”. The corner where the Earth is; the planet that was meant to have such a different fate than all the other planets of the solar system. This would be the planet where the children of the stars would be born, the planet that would become home to the wonder of life.

The epic of life on Earth began 4.5 billion years ago with the formation of our solar system from a nebula. The moment the first living cell appeared on Earth the path was set. In time with small, but steady steps life evolved from simple to even more complex forms, more and more capable of surviving in this inhospitable world. The journey would sometimes end smothered in the adverse conditions and the difficulties of survival, but at times chance would lead it to triumphant victories. Even more important than luck was the mechanism already entrenched in life: Natural Selection. Through this process the descendants were more able to survive than the parents and gradually, through millions of years, we arrived at organisms that appear at first glance perfectly adapted to their environment. One could say that it is remarkable how harmoniously animals coexist with their environment, as if a very capable architect placed everything so it fits just right. In reality this image is just the culmination of a struggle that lasted billions of years, from the first organic compounds to man. We, the beings on this planet had to fight hard from the dawn of our existence in order to manage to adapt and survived. We sculpted our bodies, our senses, our organs and our brains so the wild environment would appear hospitable and familiar. We have every right to be proud of our ancestors and most of all for the gift they imparted us through their wondrous struggle: the right to call Earth “Mother”.

All life forms on Earth today are more or less related to each other. There are no lower or imperfect forms of life. Evolution through natural selection has lasted the same amount of time for all beings on the planet. The differences between the species are due to the fact that each adapted to the special circumstances it encountered during this long process. In its attempt to adapt to its environment a species of mammal, a species of ape, was forced to evolve a form of consciousness a bit different from the rest of the mammals. A form of consciousness that many generations later would lead to philosophers, artists and scientists. It is man who, in contrast to other animals, wonders about the “why” and the “how” of this world and tries to understand it. We learned to survive this way. We explored our environment seeking answers to the endless questions our mind gave birth to. We keep doing the same. We have an eternal lust for knowledge, perpetually enamoured with the unknown towards which we travel.

Man and his contemporary animals of this planet are, as a matter of fact, the most complex structures in our known universe, since it took us 14 billions years to reach our present form; the exact age of the Universe. We rest at the top of the evolutionary chain of the world as we know it. It is more than likely that we share this position with other beings, unknown to us, living on other planets somewhere in the Universe. Knowing how rare life is, how difficult it is to arise and evolve and, mainly, how long it’s required for a conscious being like man to evolve, we cannot but be awed by our very existence.

Truly, all these lead to an idea that gives me goosebumps from head to toe. A philosophical paradox or a grand philosophical truth lies before our eyes. The Universe, by means of the Earth, after 14 billion years produced a life form, self-conscious and self-aware. A life form whose main goal throughout history has been to explain the world and conquer knowledge. It sounds odd, but we are the Universe analyzing itself, we are the very stuff of stars that has matured, gained consciousness and wonders why it exists. The scientist exploring the Universe and its properties is in fact trying to understand himself. As the English romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley once wrote “I am the eye with which the Universe beholds itself…” And our ancient desire to explain the stars and space seems like sweet nostalgia, as if we want to return to where we came and get to know the primordial womb that gave birth to our existence.

All this knowledge about the structure and the age of the Universe and the appearance and evolution of life on our planet is the achievement of the past 200 years. It is the first time in the history of mankind that we reach such a degree of self-consciouness/knowledge of the cosmos. Philosophies and religions of old pant in order to adapt to the new image of the Universe as it is being unravelled by science and the discoveries of mental giants of our civilization. At this crucial crossroads we can no longer afford to conserve such old ideas that keep our wings folded.

—

Our life lasts but an infinitesimal moment compared to the age of the Universe. “Life eternal” has been for sure an enticing idea for millennia. But now we’ve matured. We can look truth straight in the eye without feeling paralyzing terror. And if the thought that life comes and goes may seem sad and depressing at times, then we should read the thoughts of the famous biologist Richard Dawkins to fill our hearts with optimism: “We all die and we are the lucky ones. Most people will never die, because they will never be born…” Indeed, DNA research has shown that we comprise a very small percentage of the people that could have been. According to Dawkins the number of all possible DNA combinations is larger than the number of the grains of sand in the Sahara desert. If we take into account all the countless events, all the details, that led to our conception and birth, then our existence truly seems miraculous!

Our presence here is such an unlikely even that we probably don’t have the mental capacity to fully comprehend in all its glory. If one adds to this the complex phenomenon of human consciousness, a product of billion of years of cosmic and terrestrial evolution, we’re not just lucky to exist against all odds, but to be part of a species barely 200,000 years old and endowed with the unique ability to discover the world around it, philosophize about its existence and read these very lines.

With these thoughts in mind I look outside my window at the small, busy streets of the city. Suddenly the people walking the streets of Athens seem completely different. What I took for granted is now remarkable and unique. “Carpe Diem” -seize the day- resounds almost defeaning, louder than ever. How many of the restless passers-by realize that? How many live as if they recognize how really unique is this moment they’ve been granted, their only moment in billions of years of cosmic evolution? Most of us enter a routine and live that way till the day we die. Like the cogs in an automaton we follow the musts of everyday life without ever raising our heads to see the truth, without wondering about the “why” of our existence. And the saddest thing is that we think that our little, insignificant and socially predetermined routine is the most important thing in the world. But if one sees the universe in its totality and, most importantly, when one realizes mankind’s place in it, then everything takes a new shape, novel and optimistic. It is enough to recognize that we’ve been granted this wonderful chance to be part of this cosmic feast, part of this wondrous world which keeps amazing us even more as our understanding of it increases. Every doubt, every postponement seems ridiculously absurd. This moment is truly ours and we should live it to the fullest, we must seize every second of it.

And if our death or the death of a beloved are notions that break our hearts and fill us with terror, let us console ourselves because “what once was cannot cease to have been”*. This is the only truth that will live on throughout the centuries to come: “We were!” Even for an infinitesimal moment in time we became part of the amazing phenomenon of life, in this grandiose fiesta of senses, where the Universe gets to know itself.

—

I make an attempt to visualize the philosophy of an ideal, wise and peaceful humanity that has survived against all odds and has left behind for good the danger of self-annihilation… When men will offer each other happiness like brothers and live every single moment. Captains of knowledge, with sails spread wide they will sail to conquer new untamable lands and witness wonders we never even dared to dream of. Unfulfillable desires will be sated as the children of the stars will get to know the world that gave birth to them.

The time has come. The Universe is conscious. The greatest journey of introspection begins…

*The verse “what once was cannot cease to have been”
is from the poem “Summers of old” (“Παλιά Καλοκαίρια”) by Lena Pappa.

Keep reading…

This article was originally posted on the Sparks (Σπίθες) blog in Greek. The article has also been posted in English on the “Sparks of Thought” blog and you can direct your comments there.