Is religion at the root of present day atrocities?

[marco]

In Manchester, England, we had a suicide bomber murder 22 people, many of them children. As usual the perpetrator was a Muslim and as usual we are reminded that Islam is a religion of peace. But it spawns people to murder innocent folk, usually with the pointless observation that Allah is great.

It is possible to leaf through the Koran and find verses that justify cruelty and we can also find verses that condemn it.

Is there an answer to this never ending circle of violence?
Does the problem reside with values that belong to a barbaric age?

[marco]

If you know Him, know who He is you do not need a public declaration from him. If you do not, a public declaration wouldn’t change your mind anyway.

You think not? My ignorance has many times been converted to acceptance by an appropriate statement.
As for "knowing" God, I think you mean if I endow God with infinite goodness I can then make the right deductions. I understand the mechanics of belief, having been there.

If someone claimed killing someone in my name, I shouldn’t have to respond. What people can see with their own eyes should suffice. I am not on a trial. If I am -- bring forth the evidence.

You take a wonderfully optimistic view of police investigations. What seems to be what is so. In any event you are not on trial but in this discussion the Abrahamic God is, however reluctant he is to step forward.

Every story of every Saint is an example of God displaying His presence. Every holy awesome human being I have ever met is an example of God displaying His presence. Every time I held all 8 of my newborn children in my arms was an example of God displaying His presence. Fatima. Every Eucharistic miracle. The countless God moments I have heard my fellow men tell me. Snowflakes. Beauty. Love.

Nice. When good is displayed, God is there. Hopkins saw God in the morning hawk rising into the sky. God is a beautiful artefact of beautiful minds. And when tragedy strikes; when people are evil, when people hurt God is not there. That is the topic here, not his universality at the banquets of the best.

I see you have wittily placed La Pucelle among God's witnesses. She was burned as a witch, by God's authority (suffer not a witch to live.) Religion again!

Do you believe that colourful cartoons shed light on the Creator or are they examples of how the human mind can find gold at the end of any rainbow?

[RightReason]

[Replying to marco]

You think not? My ignorance has many times been converted to acceptance by an appropriate statement.

Perhaps, but it has certainly been shown, especially with regards to anything having to do with God that people will not allow anything into their existing view of no God.

“ Mr. McCabe thinks me a slave because I am not allowed to believe in determinism. I think Mr. McCabe a slave because he is not allowed to believe in fairies. But if we examine the two vetoes we shall see that his is really much more of a pure veto than mine. The Christian is quite free to believe that there is a considerable amount of settled order and inevitable development in the universe. But the materialist is not allowed to admit into his spotless machine the slightest speck of spiritualism or miracle. Poor Mr. McCabe is not allowed to retain even the tiniest imp, though it might be hiding in a pimpernel.�

Scripture shows many times those who even when miracles were performed right before them, they did not believe.

As for "knowing" God, I think you mean if I endow God with infinite goodness I can then make the right deductions.

No, I think one can acknowledge the world is full of both pleasure and pain and I think one can see God in both

You take a wonderfully optimistic view of police investigations. What seems to be what is so. In any event you are not on trial but in this discussion the Abrahamic God is, however reluctant he is to step forward.

Why is He on trial? Because you do not understand Him? Because any Tom, Dick, or Harry can claim to be acting in His name? Because He is smarter than to defend Himself against those whose only objective is to denigrate Him? Because He doesn’t play by your rules?

Nice. When good is displayed, God is there. Hopkins saw God in the morning hawk rising into the sky. God is a beautiful artefact of beautiful minds. And when tragedy strikes; when people are evil, when people hurt God is not there.

Funny that you wrote that. I was actually going to include in my response all the horrible times in life when we know God’s presence as well. I was going to say, I knew He was there when I had my 3 miscarriages, I knew His presence when my husband was diagnosed with cancer, etc. But I went back and deleted those comments because I felt it was introducing an entirely new topic – “How can a Good God allow evil?�, but now I see that does seem to be the crux of this topic.

That is the topic here, not his universality at the banquets of the best.

I guess so. It should have occurred to me this thread was really about the age old question of “How can a Good God allow evil?�

I see you have wittily placed La Pucelle among God's witnesses. She was burned as a witch, by God's authority (suffer not a witch to live.) Religion again!

So, you believe people were told by God to burn her? Quite a statement from a skeptic.

Do you believe that colourful cartoons shed light on the Creator or are they examples of how the human mind can find gold at the end of any rainbow?

Do you believe pleasure could never be found amid pain and suffering? You’ve never been in labor have you? Or in love. Seeing God’s goodness does not mean we overlook evil in this world.

[marco]

You’ve never been in labor have you? Or in love.

I should have been overcome with shock had the former happened and I can happily report positive on the latter.

Perhaps, but it has certainly been shown, especially with regards to anything having to do with God that people will not allow anything into their existing view of no God.

The godless have found God and the believer has ceased to believe. This is what one would expect in a world of chance.

But the materialist is not allowed to admit into his spotless machine the slightest speck of spiritualism or miracle.

Well then I'm not a materialist. I feel no such prohibitions. But silence is no miracle. However, I am open as to what is meant by other dimensions, having discovered them mathematically.

Scripture shows many times those who even when miracles were performed right before them, they did not believe.

We must judge every case on its merits.

Why is He on trial? Because you do not understand Him? Because any Tom, Dick, or Harry can claim to be acting in His name? Because He is smarter than to defend Himself against those whose only objective is to denigrate Him? Because He doesn’t play by your rules?

Well he doesn't play by his own rules: Ask and ye shall receive. You speak from certainty and your comments therefore carry meaning. I doubt your ability to be certain - that's all.
I am very sorry to hear of your pain. I understand it very well. You have taken a benign view which speaks volumes about the person you are. I hope your God is appreciative, but I suspect you believe he is more than that.

So, you believe people were told by God to burn her? Quite a statement from a skeptic.

You've misunderstood. God issued the edict: Suffer not a witch to live. It is a short step for man to find a witch.

I appreciate your unblemished faith; my lost saints once sang such songs for me. Go well.

[RightReason]

[Replying to marco]

I should have been overcome with shock had the former happened

Well, IMO, like other experiences in life as well, labor can be both a wonderful and awful thing, which I think is the wisdom in how a Christian sees the world . . .

Pain, suffering, bad experiences can often have meanings and purposes we don’t always see.

Anyway, it is possible for what seems like two contradictory things to both be true. I think understanding that God is all Good while He permits evil is one of those things.

“If he saw two truths that seemed to contradict each other, he would take the two truths and the contradiction along with them. His spiritual sight is stereoscopic, like his physical sight: he sees two different pictures at once and yet sees all the better for that. Thus he has always believed that there was such a thing as fate, but such a thing as free will also. Thus he believed that children were indeed the kingdom of heaven, but nevertheless ought to be obedient to the kingdom of earth. He admired youth because it was young and age because it was not. It is exactly this balance of apparent contradictions that has been the whole buoyancy of the healthy man.� –G.K. Chesterton

and I can happily report positive on the latter.

Glad to hear it. I am still convinced it is through our earthly loves that we will find God. Whether that is the love of a parent and child, lovers, or friends.

The godless have found God and the believer has ceased to believe. This is what one would expect in a world of chance.

IMO, it has less to do with chance and more due to free will.

"God exists whether or not men may choose to believe in Him. The reason why many people do not believe in God is not so much that it is intellectually impossible to believe in God, but because belief in God forces that thoughtful person to face the fact that he is accountable to such a God." –Robert A. Laidlaw


"The chief reason people do not know God is not because He hides from them but because they hide from Him." –John Stott

RightReason wrote:



But the materialist is not allowed to admit into his spotless machine the slightest speck of spiritualism or miracle.


Well then I'm not a materialist. I feel no such prohibitions. But silence is no miracle. However, I am open as to what is meant by other dimensions, having discovered them mathematically.

Good to know because science rarely answers the really important questions.

“
The real trouble with this world of ours is not that it is an unreasonable world, nor even that it is a reasonable one. The commonest kind of trouble is that it is nearly reasonable, but not quite. … It looks just a little more mathematical and regular than it is; its exactitude is obvious, but its inexactitude is hidden; its wilderness lies in wait.� -Chesterton



“The riddle of life is simply this. For some mad reason in this mad world of ours, the things which men differ about most are exactly the things about which they must be got to agree. Men can agree on the fact that the earth goes round the sun. But then it does not matter a dump whether the earth goes around the sun or the Pleiades. But men cannot agree about morals: sex, property, individual rights, fixity and contracts, patriotism, suicide, public habits of health – these are exactly the things that men tend to fight about. And these are exactly the things that must be settled somehow on strict principles. Study each of them, and you will find each of them works back certainly to a philosophy, probably to a religion.� –G.K. Chesterton

“Christians believe in the virgin birth of Jesus. Materialists believe in the virgin birth of the cosmos. Choose your miracle.� –Glen Scrivener

Well he doesn't play by his own rules:

It is your rule that He must play by what you think are His rules.

Ask and ye shall receive.

I’ll never understand how the skeptic can really claim God does not fulfill our requests.

You speak from certainty and your comments therefore carry meaning. I doubt your ability to be certain - that's all.

I am imagining telling someone who tells me they are in love with their spouse of 50 years and I tell them I doubt their ability to be certain.

I am very sorry to hear of your pain.

Thank you. I wouldn’t change it for anything though. Well, actually if I were given a choice I would likely cowardly beg to have it taken away, but thank God I wasn’t given a choice.

I understand it very well. You have taken a benign view which speaks volumes about the person you are. I hope your God is appreciative, but I suspect you believe he is more than that.

One of my favorite books is “A Severe Mercy� https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Severe_Mercy

It beautifully describes the love from God is often His severe mercy with us.

You've misunderstood. God issued the edict: Suffer not a witch to live. It is a short step for man to find a witch.

I feel like we’ve had this conversation before. Exodus included rules for a pagan and barbaric society. God was taking man where he was. The verse of course is intended to show the seriousness of Sorcery and witchcraft. Clearly, death was the punishment for a great number of wrongs in the past. In fact, death is still the punishment in our society for certain crimes. We’ve simply changed which crimes we think deserve death and which ones don’t.

It is so important to understand history and context. In the NT, the very same God declared, “Let Him who is without sin cast the first stone.� So, why pretend God was all about torture when what has been revealed via Scripture and history show a different story. Though it is the world who seems to remain quite barbaric even today.

[marco]

“If he saw two truths that seemed to contradict each other, he would take the two truths and the contradiction along with them.......–G.K. Chesterton

G.K. writes in nice conundrums. If one examines closely what he says, I suspect we will find soft tissue paper, but he disguises it very well.

"God exists whether or not men may choose to believe in Him. –Robert A. Laidlaw


"The chief reason people do not know God is not because He hides from them but because they hide from Him." –John Stott

I suspect that in coining these litanies, the two authors believed they were inspired. Oscar Wilde uttered outrageous aphorisms which reduced, in daylight, to nonsense. But they provoked thought, as do these quotes. One can ask whether man exists or what it means to say man exists. We were advised by Aquinas that sight, touch and taste are deceivers. John Stott knows nothing of chief reasons why - his guess is no better than mine, though his means of expressing it may be superior.

“Christians believe in the virgin birth of Jesus. Materialists believe in the virgin birth of the cosmos. Choose your miracle.� –Glen Scrivener

For my own part I do not believe in the virgin birth: it was a declaration, not an actual event. Nor do I believe in the virgin birth of the cosmos: I am not arrogant enough to suppose my feeble brain can offer explanations. However, suggesting Yahweh or Atlas holds the world together is, I think, nonsense. I am here and I am apparently conscious and able to think; there is no onus on me to explain why.

[RightReason]

[Replying to marco]

G.K. writes in nice conundrums. If one examines closely what he says, I suspect we will find soft tissue paper, but he disguises it very well.

I see quite the opposite in his writing. He seems to unveil what many others attempt to disguise. His insights into reality are often perfectly articulated.

“Men do not differ much about what things they will call evils; they differ enormously about what evils they will call excusable.�


“It is assumed that the sceptic has no bias; whereas he has a very obvious bias in favour of scepticism.�

“Religious liberty might be supposed to mean that everybody is free to discuss religion. In practice it means that hardly anybody is allowed to mention it.�

“We can always convict such people of sentimentalism by their weakness for euphemism. The phrase they use is always softened and suited for journalistic appeals. They talk of free love when they mean something quite different, better defined as free lust. But being sentimentalists they feel bound to simper and coo over the word “love.� They insist on talking about Birth Control when they mean less birth and no control. We could smash them to atoms, if we could be as indecent in our language as they are immoral in their conclusions.�

Oscar Wilde uttered outrageous aphorisms which reduced, in daylight, to nonsense.

I’m sure all of us have thought we reached some brilliant epiphany only to realize the uselessness of our contemplation. Of course, I think there are other times when we see something for what it really is and realize the uselessness of our previous adherence.

For my own part I do not believe in the virgin birth: it was a declaration, not an actual event.

How can you be so sure?

However, suggesting Yahweh or Atlas holds the world together is, I think, nonsense.

"Here is the peculiar perfection of tone and truth in the nursery tales. The man of science says, 'Cut the stalk and the apple will fall'; but he says it calmly, as if the one idea really led up to the other. The witch in the fairytale says, `Blow the horn and the ogre's castle will fall'; but she does not say it as if it were something in which the effect obviously arose out of the cause. Doubtless she has given the advice to many champions, and has seen many castles fall, but she does not lose either her wonder or her reason. She does not muddle her head until it imagines a necessary mental connection between a horn and a falling tower.... [The scientific men, on the other hand,] feel that because one incomprehensible thing constantly follows another incomprehensible thing the two together somehow make up a comprehensible thing" -Chesterton


“Blasphemy depends on belief, and is fading with it. If anyone doubts this, let him sit down seriously and try to think blasphemous thoughts about Thor.� -Chesterton

[marco]

Of course, I think there are other times when we see something for what it really is and realize the uselessness of our previous adherence.

That captures perfectly my view of the religion that so bewitched Chesterton. His fluid prose and his passion are the gold candles and the incense around the catafalque that conceal the horror of death to perfection. I love the love I had then; I love the world I saw in beautiful benedictions; I see no better contender for my prayers. But I think Chesterton confuses fiction with reality. I think he is wrong. I envy his blindness.

I see you have got his corpse to speak on your behalf. Able writers are accomplished seducers. We are always in danger of falling for the singer, not the song.

[RightReason]

[Replying to marco]

That captures perfectly my view of the religion that so bewitched Chesterton. His fluid prose and his passion are the gold candles and the incense around the catafalque that conceal the horror of death to perfection.

Again, very interesting to me how your world view brings you to that conclusion. I see the very opposite in his writings. His words show the beauty of the Church, but they also don’t ignore the problems within the Church. His words also reveal quite adequately the problems within the secular world and the problems without the Church. The horror of death you reveal is present in the world – in mankind, but it is the Church who tries to help us rise above it (even though she herself sometimes stumbles).

I remember reading an anecdote about Chesterton having lunch in some restaurant and he must have used some rude or inappropriate language that a nearby woman overheard. The woman stood up and scoffed at Chesterton scolding him, “And you call yourself a Catholic!� To which Chesterton replied, “My dear woman, if it weren’t for my Catholic faith I should scarcely be human.�

To me that is the truth. No one or no thing is perfect, but truth does exist and we are all in need of salvation.

A few Chesterton quotes . . .


“As for the general view that the Church was discredited by the War—they might as well say that the Ark was discredited by the Flood. When the world goes wrong, it proves rather that the Church is right. The Church is justified, not because her children do not sin, but because they do.�

“Christendom has had a series of revolutions and in each one of them Christianity has died. Christianity has died many times and risen again; for it had a God who knew the way out of the grave.�

“Now the best relation to our spiritual home is to be near enough to love it. But the next best is to be far enough away not to hate it. It is the contention of these pages that while the best judge of Christianity is a Christian, the next best judge would be something more like a Confucian. The worst judge of all is the man now most ready with his judgements; the ill-educated Christian turning gradually into the ill-tempered agnostic, entangled in the end of a feud of which he never understood the beginning, blighted with a sort of hereditary boredom with he knows not what, and already weary of hearing what he has never heard.�


“Pessimism is not in being tired of evil but in being tired of good. Despair does not lie in being weary of suffering, but in being weary of joy.�

“If you look at a thing 999 times, you are perfectly safe; if you look at it for the 1000th time, you are in danger of seeing it for the first time.�

“There are two ways of getting home; and one of them is to stay there.�

I love the love I had then; I love the world I saw in beautiful benedictions; I see no better contender for my prayers. But I think Chesterton confuses fiction with reality. I think he is wrong. I envy his blindness.

What is fiction with regards to the Church?

I see you have got his corpse to speak on your behalf. Able writers are accomplished seducers. We are always in danger of falling for the singer, not the song.

Yes, I love my Chesterton, but certainly don’t idolize him as a person. Have heard he has a few skeletons in his closet – some things about being an anti-semite???? Not sure how much of that is true. I just like his insights and really like the way he can expose the reality of something – break it down into what something actually is.

I don’t put any human being on too high a pedestal – not even the Pope.

I truly hope some day you will give the Church another look. Chesterton spent years of his life looking for the truth, and eventually settled on Catholicism. He started out skeptical of the Catholic Church.

“I never dreamed that the Roman religion was true; but I knew that its accusers, for some reason or other, were curiously inaccurate.�

“Merely having an open mind is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.�

[marco]

“There are two ways of getting home; and one of them is to stay there.�

The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho makes splendid use of this aphorism. If we stay with what our infancy accepted I doubt if what we have will be "home."

What is fiction with regards to the Church?

The book on which it is based. One reads Genesis and one is in deep fiction.
Skilled writers have built marvels from fiction. So has the Church.

G.K.Chesterton is a fine writer. David's lament is fine writing too. Does that make God any closer?

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 49 by marco]

RightReason wrote:


“There are two ways of getting home; and one of them is to stay there.�


The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho makes splendid use of this aphorism. If we stay with what our infancy accepted I doubt if what we have will be "home."

Hmmmm . . . kind of the typical slight against those who are born into a religion and simply accept? Or the typical calling religious belief infantile, as if faith is something we ought to out grow.

There obviously has to come a point in every believer’s life when he examines what he has been taught, but if one has been told the truth from the beginning and we accept that without feeling like we need to necessarily re invent the wheel then no I don’t think such is an immature process. In fact, logically it would be the opposite.

If you’ve already been presented with the truth, one can take that and really soar. OTOH, if never presented with truth, we undoubtedly will go down many wrong paths before we discover the right one.

I think Chesterton’s quote touches on that. There are some who feel compelled to test even the obvious and in doing so end up realizing the answer was there right under their nose the whole time. But both methods work – sometimes it takes an immigrant to help someone understand patriotism. We don’t always realize what we have until we leave and come back again.

IMO, there is nothing infantile about accepting truth.

Also Chesterton describes God as having “the eternal appetite of infancy� which is a beautiful and good thing – not a bad thing as the world would sometimes claim.

RightReason wrote:


What is fiction with regards to the Church?


The book on which it is based. One reads Genesis and one is in deep fiction.
Skilled writers have built marvels from fiction. So has the Church.

First, all of Genesis is not necessarily fiction. Second, it is the lessons learned that are the point.

Fiction contains truths – which is generally their appeal and as such is a wonderful tool for learning. Could one ever think the entirety of man’s knowledge could come only from non fiction? Man can read lots of books about how to build a nuclear bomb, but not whether we should use it.

“Fiction is the lie through which we tell the truth.� ― Albert Camus

“Fairy tales do not tell children that dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children that dragons can be killed.� -G.K. Chesterton

G.K.Chesterton is a fine writer. David's lament is fine writing too. Does that make God any closer?

Couldn’t it? Can’t a good story draw distinctions between good and evil, right and wrong? Teach us about charity, arrogance, and courage? I would think any beauty and truth that lifts the spirit brings us closer to God, seeing how God is the embodiment of beauty and truth.