(139) Logic Is Not a Path to God

Author:  JOHN
To: Mostly Bob, Steve Perking Up His Ears

Warning warning: I have no idea what I’m about to say, but something wants to be said, so I’m going to let it go where it will. Maybe I’m reacting to what I see as an over-emphasis on logic in Bob’s last piece. Well I ain’t going to try to be logical, or even organized!

         So first, I have to say that I found Bob’s attitude about the possibility of God intervening in our lives entirely too dismissive and too reliant on what he obviously sees as irrefutable “logic.” Many a philosopher throughout history has attempted to either prove or disprove God’s existence or aspects of his relationship to us through the “logical premise” approach, and what I have read of that has ultimately been unconvincing and left me cold.
        Yes, Bob’s arguments "make sense" according to the rules of logic, but logic itself is a limited human tool that breaks down when you try to apply it to the really big questions. It is certainly illogical that the universe could burst into being out of nothing, but here we are, poking each other in the chops via the internet while we sit on this ball of earth as it goes rolling around the sun, which goes rolling around the galaxy, which goes rolling around the universe.
        I believe there are other things around that just may bring us closer to a knowledge of God than logic: such things as revelation, epiphany, poetry, meditation, instinct, music, art, emotion, and yes, faith and prayer just to name a few. And none of those have anything at all to do with logic.
        As for me, I find it quite easy to throw logic aside and say God could be constantly intervening in our lives. Now you may think I am contradicting myself in my previous pieces, and to some degree perhaps I am, because as I hinted last time my beliefs seem to be changing. But also, what I tried to say before is that I don’t believe God intervenes in ways that we can prove or necessarily detect, and that’s saying something quite different than saying he is not intervening. We must be open, I think, to the idea that God acts upon our lives, both individually and in mass, but does so in ways we are not able to identify or trace. In fact, that might be exactly the case, exactly the nature of our existence and our relationship with or to God. (I am tempted to once again get into the issue of faith versus proof here, but I will let it lie).
        Further, I don’t find Steve’s analogies involving the parent and child far afield at all. In fact I would take them furher. Think for a moment about your relationship to your daughter when she was still an infant. Most of the actualities of her life, moment to moment, were in fact determined by you to a great degree, but she did not have the ability (yet) to perceive this. Every night she was placed in a protective crib of certain dimensions and design, which you had acquired probably even before she was born. She slept on sheets you chose, in a room where you opened or closed the window and set the thermostat, in a house you acquired before she was born. In the morning she was dressed in clothes you picked and bought for her, was placed in a high chair you chose, was fed the strained carrots and the applesauce you chose, was placed in a playpen or the back seat of your car, went where you took her, saw what you gave her the opportunity to see, etc., etc., etc., all the day long, for many months. Obviously, YOU intervened in her life heavily and constantly without her understanding much of the specifics of that intervention. Only later as she became more independently conscious and aware could she begin to appreciate that it was ma and pa and not chance forces that were operating on her and determining much of her very existence.
        Granted that’s a rather simple analogy, but Bob’s latest has me thinking that his God is way smaller than I assumed. My concept of (better to say my belief in) God comes down to this: if I am going to accept his existence as God, then I also have to think that he is aware of every single thing that happens to every one of us, and every thing that passes through every one of our consciousnesses. Further, either through willful intervention or through the universal laws (i.e.. karma or something like it) which God himself has set up, God COULD very well be continuously placing experiences in our path, but in such a way that we cannot attribute them to him. I am talking about moment to moment living, moment to moment consciousness, moment to moment obstacles, challenges, learning experiences, and perhaps even rewards and punishments. Bob accepts the idea of earthly life as a kind of schooling; well then how exactly does he think that schooling is accomplished? Bob sometimes speaks of “serendipity,” which I had until now assumed meant some form of intervention by God, but either I misunderstood or, has he changed his opinion?

           And I ask again (and so is Steve asking) a highly related question: Does Bob believe that prayer is completely useless? How about a direct answer to that one, Bob? As for me, it is a question I have been seriously contemplating lately. And what has come out of that contemplation is, I guess, a kind of sub-question, which is this: Is it not possible that whether God acts to answer our prayers (again maybe without our ability to prove it) at least partly depends on what we pray for? That was an awful sentence but English majors have a special license for those.
        I ask myself, what would seem to be the “right” things to pray for? And immediately I find it much easier to come up with things I intuitively feel (got that Bob? Intuitively!) it would NOT be “right” to pray for. Surely it would not be right to pray for riches, for fame, for status, for sexual favors, for injury to someone, or other things that are purely selfish or vindictive. If one does, then I go back to that old joke that perhaps has a lot of truth to it: “God answers ALL prayers; it’s just that sometimes the answer is NO.”
        Then what does my intuition tell me are things I CAN (and perhaps should) pray for? Wisdom, guidance, perhaps courage, help in getting my heart right about various issues, help in overcoming the selfishness of my ego, intervention to help others who are in need, intervention to correct the horrors as war, genocide, disaster, or disease, and perhaps wisdom for our not-so-wise leaders. And I am….how to say this?….experimenting with these kinds of prayers. I don’t mean testing God. I mean trying to limit my prayers to such things. Are you surprised that I even pray? Well dare I add that in many cases there does seem to be a change that results from those prayers --and a change in the direction I am seeking.
           All this possibly seems out of character for me, huh? What can I say? I grow older (just passed my 60^th birthday) and mortality no doubt has something to do with it. But also, my retirement simply has given me additional time to actually examine (I want to say meditate upon) my own attitudes toward various things.

        Here’s another. (Note: that was a transition.) You will certainly recall my experience (experiment?) listening to Christian radio and how negatively I reacted to it. Lately I have been listening some more, and asking myself exactly why I had that reaction. Well, the answers to that are still the same, and include (1) way too much certainly by commentators about the meaning of the scriptures, (2) way too much emphasis on salvation and an obvious assumption that the commentators themselves are in fact saved, (3) way to much support for political leaders whose attitudes seem very UN-Christian to me, and (4) more emphasis on the role of Jesus (as opposed to God) than I can readily accept.
           Most of those still apply. However, I find that in regard to #4, if I simply substitute God for Jesus is nearly every point the radio commentators make, I am able to relate to their point of view and accept their beliefs much more readily. In addition, when I listen to the kinds of advice that certain Christian (“family values”) commentators give regarding such important issues as child-rearing, dealing with tragedy, daily interactions with others, I find that I agree with much of what they are saying.
        And finally, I have also lately been consciously trying to listen to Christian music on the radio (which Steve tells me somewhat discouragingly is “big business”). I had always been dismissive of this music….simply switching the channel when it started playing. But I find when I really listen to these songs, many of them appear to be intensely heart-felt and are dealing with issues that are to be found nowhere else in popular media (except to a lesser degree in Country music, about which I seem to be experiencing a similar appreciation for the same reason).
           Now, Steve is probably nodding and thinking, hey there’s hope for this guy yet. Well, not so fast. I still have HUGE problems with a lot of issues (some of which neither of you guys appear willing to even comment on): homosexuality and abortion to name two. And looking at the Episcopal church these days, it appears I am not alone in having problems with the church’s stands on these issues.

        Well, this horse is threatening to ride off in all directions, so I’m going to dismount. But just to summarize, in reverse order: (A) I am finding a new sympathy for certain aspects of Christianity that I formerly tended to dismiss, and (B) God is never going to be found through logic.