From: Sam Norton (elizaphanian@kohath.wanadoo.co.uk)
Date: Fri Aug 19 2005 - 10:44:59 BST
Hi Kevin,
> My concern Sam is not that you're a hypocrite but that
> you're missing the point.
> People aren't lead to God through argumentation (e.g.,
> "[...] I'm denying [...]
> the _existence_ of God [...]") and brickbats (e.g.,
> "The trouble comes with
> people who think they know what the word God means
> [...]").
Ha! One of life's little ironies, in that I completely agree that people
aren't argued into an acceptance of God. When I stopped my PhD at Cambridge,
it was precisely because I felt that the academic path wasn't the road to
enlightenment, for the reason you specify, and I wrote to my Bishop saying
pretty much what you said above.
That was the gist of the Wittgenstein quote I gave to Chuck:
"A proof of God's existence ought really to be something by means of which
one could convince oneself that God exists. But I think that what
*believers* who have furnished such proofs have wanted to do is give their
'belief' an intellectual analysis and foundation, although they themselves
would never have come to believe as a result of such proofs."
However, I DO think that people can be prevented from drawing closer to God
through an acceptance of bad ideas. In other words, the static patterns need
to be broken down, and probably 90% of what I say about God in this forum is
a reaction against being pigeonholed as someone who believes things which
are demonstrably barking mad. Hence I am often found arguing 'this is not
barking mad'. This might seem as if I am trying to make a positive point
(that belief in God is the most rational outcome - which is what I believe)
but it's actually rooted in a denial of the negative points made against me.
In other words, whilst there can never be positive work bringing someone to
God by persuasion, there can be negative work in the sense of removing
barriers to understanding. (Hence my strong reaction to your language about
'stumbling blocks'.) I do believe that a) there are people who can't bring
themselves to look closer at the Christian tradition, because they can't
bring themselves to believe in 'God'; b) that the Western church as a whole
suffers from a severe intellectual neurosis as a result of hundreds of years
of propaganda saying that Christianity is intellectually defective; and c)
it is as much a pastoral task as respect for the truth to point out where
people are misinformed.
But I probably do veer off too far in the course of arguments. Being highly
intellectual and academic I do have a perennial tendency to slip back into
bad habits I was trained in, which is doubtless what has given you your
impression.
If nothing else, God certainly has a good sense of humour.
Cheers
Sam
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 19 2005 - 11:08:55 BST