GOD How did you first hear about God? This is a very important question. I think it's safe to say that most of us heard about Him from a parent, or at least a parent figure. Everyone knows that you can't prove God one way or the other. You can't prove that He exists, or that He doesn't. Whatever position you take will most assuredly be one of faith. Even the Bible suggests as much:
... he that cometh to God must believe that he is ... (Hebrews 11:6)
There is nothing wrong with a belief system. In fact, everyone has one, even atheists, most of whom probably have faith in science and logic. I have no problems with either side, theist or non-theist, as long as they don't start posturing in such a way that clearly suggests that their belief is something other than a belief. I must admit, the non-theistic types do seem to have more of an open mind about things than the theists, many of whom can be downright aggressive about their faith in God. Some of them even go around talking about how the Lord spoke to them about something or other. Personally, I don't believe that God ever spoke to anybody. And I've got a very good reason for saying that. It all has to do with my own beliefs regarding the God idea. I do not have a problem with God as a general idea. I do, however, have a problem with God as a particular idea, especially the specific idea that is offered to us in the Old Testament. The God that I might be persuaded to believe in would be more like the one that Aristotle suggested, a perfect, and utterly complete Being, what we might call a pristine entity. Do you know what a complete person would be like? I daresay that I've never met one, maybe because I live in the United States, where no one seems to be complete. I mean, it's like we always need something or other; at least, that's what we keep telling ourselves, every time we buy another car, or house, or acquire a whole new wardrobe, or another spouse. Have you ever heard some character in a romantic movie talk about the way another person completes them? Like they're not quite finished without that person? It's supposedly a key ingredient in a long-lasting relationship. If there is any substance to this idea, it would surely suggest that a person who was already complete would not need another person. As a matter of fact, they wouldn't need much of anything. A need, you see, is surely a mark of weakness. So how could an omnipotent Being need anything? In case you don't quite see where I'm going with this, let me say it plainly. God (the real One) has absolutely no requirements. He doesn't need our prayers, praise, thanks or fellowship. We may have some sort of a need to offer these things to God, but God doesn't need them at all. If He did, He wouldn't be complete and all-powerful, which means that He would not be God in the first place. A real God (a Supreme Being) would not give a solitary damn if we ever spoke to Him. It's not like He's going to be pissed over it. Getting "pissed," if you will, is a human weakness, and any representations of an angry God are nothing more than our own anthropomorphic projections. A pristine entity would be a God that we would actually want to talk to. The Dude in the Old Testament is another story. Who wants to talk to someone who wants to go around killing people all the time for disobeying? When it comes to God, I think we would all much prefer a liberal to a conservative any day. A truly eternal God could not be contained in the pages of any book, including the Bible, a literary collection that is clearly associated with a particular culture's (Israel's) perception of God. I don't think anyone ever expressed it better than Lao Tsu:
The Tao that may be told of is not the eternal Tao.
These are the opening words of his famous (and still popular) book, Tao Te Ching. I wrote an entire book using these words (Tao, An Enduring Ancient Wisdom), applying them to a whole list of things, including God. What you do, you see, is replace the word, Tao with something else, in this case, God:
The God that may be told of is not the eternal God.
I'm sure you've noticed that a lot of people are talking about (i.e., telling of) God these days, and they're relying quite a bit on the Bible as a source of authority. But according to Lao Tsu, you can't speak of something eternal. It's like the numbers. You can't count them all. You can't speak them. If you could speak them, they wouldn't be eternal (although, when we're referring to numbers I believe the appropriate word is infinite). Now it's true, since we do have the power of speech and may discuss any subject we wish, we may indeed speak of God if we so desire, but considering His eternality, what kind of significance would those words have? What kind of significance does a thousand have compared to infinity? We could say thousands and thousands of words about God, but if millions and millions of words, even billions and billions of them, could not begin to describe Him, what would be the point of our mere thousands? Why even bother? It's like a drop of water in the ocean. In other words, we should probably never speak of God, except perhaps to say that it's pointless to do so, a waste of time, and so on. Somehow, I believe that God Himself would agree with this. It's another reason I don't believe He had anything to do with the Bible. A true God would never speak of Himself. He would also never inspire anyone else to do it for Him. The inspiration issue is one thing that has always troubled me about the Bible. I could never figure out why God would go to the trouble to inspire someone to write for Him. What is with that? He can't write his own book? He has to go tap someone on the shoulder and say, "Excuse me, I wonder if I might trouble you to take some dictation for me?" Somehow, I don't think so. But without doubt, the biggest reason I don't believe that God had anything to do with the Bible is related to another aspect of His character which has to do with His humility. Yes, even the Supreme Dude has humility, and in His case, Supreme humility. To understand what I'm getting at, consider what a truly humble human being would be like. Just ask yourself one question about them: would they ever come forward and claim to be humble? I don't know about you, but I can't make something like that work. If someone were to go around vocalizing about their humlity, it would only mean that they really didn't have any. It is simply not in the nature of humility to boast of possessing it. It is also not in the nature of greatness to speak of that quality. Can you imagine a person spouting off about being great? Wouldn't you think just the opposite, that a truly great person would never say such a thing? If we think this about mere mortals, how much more should we believe it about God? The true God would never step forth and proclaim His Godness in any way. He would always remain hidden, placing mortals in the position of having to believe in Him. Can you imagine God walking right up to you and introducing Himself, or wearing some sort of I.D. badge? How Did We Find Out About God? The Bible: Why God Had Nothing To Do With It
|
