The other day I realized that I have been omitting writing about God in my blog and I started to wonder why – because I definitely do have many things on my mind about this issue. I guess I was trying to be nice, to not rock anybody’s boat, to play it safe, to not upset (and lose) my readers… A nice guy, you see, that’s what I am. 
But, upon realizing this I immediately decided to express what’s on my mind about this topic as well, and so in the next months I intend to write posts on subjects like which God among many, the reasons for talking about God, God’s books, the plans of God, the personality and the values of God… and perhaps other things as well. And I will start with the questions of the need for God.
To begin with, let me paraphrase an old Zen saying:
If you believe in God,
things are just as they are.
If you do not believe in God,
things are just as they are.
In other words, it doesn’t matter what we think or believe about God or anything else, things are and will be just as they are. So, relax, this is what I suggest… 
Anyway, the questions whether there is an omnipotent creator of everything is definitely an utterly fundamental question, but there are other questions like this too, like whether there are multiple universes or is this time/space the only one, or whether this universe is expanding or not (and what is it expanding into), and whether we are alone in the universe… All these questions are important, crucial and all-embedding, but in general we do not talk about them all that much and definitely we do not fight or even kill each other over them. Apart from the questions about God. We do kill each other over them.
So why is the question about the existence of God so important and special? Why would we want to stress and expose it over and over again? There are a few possible reasons that pop up in my mind when I ask myself the above questions:
- The existential dilemma of freedom is a scary one, since being completely free to choose also means being completely responsible for these choices. Full responsibility for our lives, for our existence. Therefore the external locus of control, the feeling that control is not within us but out there, in the hands of destiny, God, some ultimate authority, is a very comforting one and perhaps also the reason why we have the need to reassure ourselves, over and over again, that we are children of God. Not fully responsible. Thus not having to fully face the scary freedom of choice.
- Another reason for talking that much about God may be that there’s yet another existential dilemma we are having difficulties to face, and this is the question of meaning of it all. The question of the meaning of life seems to be rather unanswerable and it is not easy, we all know that, to go from day to day without some sort of a steady meaning. Now, the paradigm of the existence of God makes picture perfect and simple, bringing peace of mind. Or at least pacifying the horror of the meaninglessness. You do not have to know the meaning, as long as there is God who knows. So all you need to do is just trust and continue. Knowing that you are on the right side, on the side with a meaning.
- The third possible reason I see for talking about the question of God all that much in our lives could be in running away from the dreadful feeling of being isolated, of ultimate loneliness in this dark and cold universe. If you remind yourself every day that you are actually warmly held in God’s lap, you have this warm feeling of safety and eternal belonging. So the notion of God brings a relief from this isolation. Now, this lack of ability to be alone could be seriously problematic. Fromm said that the ability to be alone is the condition for the ability to love, and I could not agree with him more.
- The last, and to my mind the most powerful possible reason for having God on our lips that much could be that having a living connection with the supreme force in the universe gives one a tremendous power. By being the child of the greatest and the one and the only God means being in the right club. This connection gives you power over others, the unbelievers, the unfaithful. It was so easy for the Crusaders to kill everybody around by screaming: “God wills it.” It is so easy to fight God’s wars, to be the hand of God, to have this connection to the ultimate authority. Frankly, I have personally met so many “Godly” people, various religions, various cultures, with God on their tongues all the time, but no respect for other people, no love, no empathy, no acceptance, just the will to judge, control, change, punish… On the other hand, so many loving, gentle, respectful, empathic, warm, wise people never mention God at all.
So, these are some possible reasons that I see for the question of belief in God not being just one of the many intimate personal matters we are all having, mentioning them here and there, but rather an ultimately important concept that is not only shaping lives of individuals, but the history of humankind, to a such dramatic extent.
And I wonder what your thoughts are.
This is a tough one. I agree with you on why we speak or not speak about God. I have the same struggles. I never talk about God in my blog. Most likely because it is something I still struggle with myself. (Ha! As if I don’t talk about my other struggles!) But it is difficult because you know you will offend people you actually like. Politics is easier. You offend those who are against you in most other ways. I’m not making sense here! It just shows… Talking about God makes it difficult to come across in a rational manner. Maybe it is also because I don’t just want to talk about it but dig a bit deeper. And that brings out the fundamental differences between the different beliefs out there. Thanks for the thought provoling piece. Maybe I should try and write about it.
Comment by angryafrican — November 9, 2008 @ 11:30 pm
Huge subject, Robert!
My immediate thought was that my relation to and understanding of God is a personal, private matter to be experienced and explored rather than talked about. Then again, exploring and talking with others is more fun and brings me greater understanding!
I’ve always (and still do) have a problem with God as ‘deity’ or ‘supreme being’. The difference between spirituality and religion. I think the four problems you describe are more problems with looking for a deity which I see as an attempt to explain God in human terms. Yes, it’s comforting to imagine an all powerful being looking over me, determining my destiny and a constant companion. And yes, it’s a huge risk if I believe my own picture is the only one, the right one. Even more risky if I choose to believe someone else’s picture and if that someone else (church?) then uses that to direct my life in the name of that deity. That way has been (and continues to be) a path of much pain and violence in our world. it doesn’t have to be that way!
I haven’t yet written about God in my own blog … just that it didn’t occur to me yet. Your post has stimulated me to add it my list of topics to write about.
Thanks again for a provoking piece.
Ian
Comment by ianpeatey — November 10, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
I have no need of a god. I stand on my own and make decisions that I think are right. Not right in a religious sense but right in an ethical sense. Sure, much of the ethics of the society that I live in stem from Judeo Christen beliefs, but to me they are only a starting point. To me doing the “right” thing because it’s the right thing to do has much more “honour” than doing something because some religious dogma says it’s right.
I think Richard Dawkins is right in his hypothesis that complex things evolve from simple things and that it’s extremely unlikely that such a complex thing as a god would be the beginning of everything.
Then there is what Epicuris had to say on the matter of the power of gods.
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
Having said all that, I still pronounce myself an agnostic because, just as I can’t prove there is a god, I also can’t prove there isn’t one. I just think that there most probably (in the extreme) isn’t a god.
The major bone I have to pick with theists (particularly people of “the book”) is that if we were are made in the image of god then we have godlike perception and reason. I can’t understand why some people think that it’s reasonable to jettison our “godlike” reason and replace it with “blind faith” (a belief unsupported by facts).
To me, it’s all nonsense designed to control people.
Comment by razzbuffnik — November 10, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
This is so well thought out and written. You covered all the possible reasons here. It would have taken me a month to do that. LOL. It’s impressive. Such a stimulating post!!!! I love it!
I once was talking with a close male friend; we have great spiritual discussions, and I don’t mean religious discussions as neither of us go to church or follow any standardized religion. BUT as we were talking he said, “Well, what do you think of ‘Spirit or God’, what do you think it is? I mean, we need to define what IT is.”
I looked at him somewhat mystified, (without judgment, but nonetheless forgetting that some people experience that need), and then innocently and genuinely asked, “Why do we need to define it?”.
He said, “Why?!!! Because we need to know what God/Spirit is!”
I said, “I don’t need to know.”
Him: “But you are SOOOOOO spiritual and aware, and you have all these insights and you go around hugging everyone, even people you don’t know. You are kind to people and reach out fearlessly, and you don’t judge anyone. You accept people as they are and just love them.”
ME: “And so?”
Him: “Well, that must come from knowing WHAT God is, from having a clear definition of WHAT God is.”
ME: “No, that comes from experiencing what one might call God, Spirit, the Creator….more importantly it comes from being at peace with my own emptiness, alone-ness, or self…and in that now peaceful emptiness I feel the most intense love. It comes from being in love with the mystery, the magic, the unknown. I am comfortable just being. I don’t have to have all the answers or fill up all the space. In fact I prefer not to…in that ‘NOT knowing everything’ lives the infinite, a grace so sweet it heals everything it touches.”
Him: “How can you just hang yourself out there like that?!! It’s too raw and scary…unknown. We need know what we’re dealing with. I have to think about this and sort it out and find a finite answer. Then I’ll feel safe and settled. Don’t you want to feel safe?”
ME: “I already feel safe and completely loved, a love that touches me and hovers all around me every day, a love so tender that it brings me to tears. I am in love with the unknown, the infinite, the ALL, a love so powerful that I can’t contain it. I have to share it, live it.”
________________________
All that said, I have had trouble in my book as to what word to use to describe the Love I commune with. I think in my whole long book I use the word God only once. Everywhere else I say LOVE, IS or some other word, as I too did not want to lock people into Christianity. As I said I follow no religion and don’t even read about religion. But I do go into the wild to commune with my ‘god’. Not that I don’t automatically do it at my desk every day; I do, but in nature I FEEL more of myself and Life.
Thank you dear friend for such a wonderfully thought provoking post. I think it’s a GREAT and brave idea. It gets people feeling and thinking. I enjoyed my time here…as I ALWAYS do. Sending hugs and love to you and yours. Robin
Comment by Robin Easton — November 10, 2008 @ 5:55 pm
AA – yes, it is tricky to write about God since so many identities and emotions are linked to it and it is so easy to be misunderstood. Well, I chose to do it anyway and until now things look pretty peaceful…
Ian – hm, this is a sharp thought you are expressing there, that I am actually talking about looking for a deity… I like it, makes a lot of sense, thanks.
Razz – I guess you have left the deontological approach far far behind and live out of virtue ethics, good old Aristotle’s way. I like the virtue ethics too, resonates with my values. Hey, what a great quote here, I love it. You seem to have read really a lot, I love your references and quotes, your thoughts and approaches and your unique way of approaching life. Ever thought of writing more of that stuff and thoughts on your blog? I would definitely love to read it.
Robin – well, things like that are something I keep thinking about most of the time and so it is really not that difficult to pour it out in an hour or so. But hun, I LOVE the dialogue you have desribed. You are a pure Zen master! May you live long and prosper!
And, by the way, I am always very grateful for your long and thoughtful comments, they bring so much life to me and this blog.
Comment by Robert — November 10, 2008 @ 11:27 pm
“deontological”? Gee Robert, I had to look that one up and I came across the word “Teleology” which is closer to how I feel about things, except that I think that reason and purpose don’t mean all that much in the grand scheme of things. Reason and purpose seem like such human constructs to me. Therefore your diagnosis of my “virtue ethics” is spot on.
I’ve always liked the label, “dialectical materialist” in the literal sense (not the Marxist one).
As for reading a lot, I only occasionally graze in the pasture of literature but I do think about what I’ve read, for years and years; and thanks to you, I get to discuss it occasionally.
Comment by Razzbuffnik — November 11, 2008 @ 1:50 am
And thank you my dear friend for your kind words.
What you see in me is SO in you.
I am touched to be seen.
Comment by Robin Easton — November 11, 2008 @ 7:13 am
I see that God has had her say – all the comments (1 – 7) were unavailable for quite a few hours today (Force Majeure, they call it…or… God). Sooooo…..?
Comment by Marjeta — November 12, 2008 @ 10:57 pm
Well, don’t you look at me like that, my post was here all the time, it was THEIR comments that were gone! Soooo….?
Comment by Robert — November 12, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
The word ‘god’ has been hijacked and driven into the ditch by religion. The god-concept can be as simple as Mr. Razzbuffnik’s sense of “right.” For where else in nature do we see anything approaching a moral law other than our present self? It is the exploration of this god-concept that I find intriguing, and often wonder if we’d be better off talking more about god and less about the box religion has put he/she/it into.
I do have to disagree with Dawkins on the hypothesis mentioned. It makes no sense to me that complexity would arise from simplicity. Chaos, entropy and increasing order don’t seem to be good bedfellows imho. Add in some law of nature that produces life (the way gravity attracts), and now we’re talking about a potential science/spirit intersection. It depresses me that these questions are so often taboo and/or polarizing.
Face it, even IF Dawkins has it all right, that doesn’t increase/decrease the chance of a supernatural force out there! God could be entirely outside of, and detached from, space-time. The universe could be as-is with or without a Creator. For me, the fact I am only present in the now tells me I’m not fully contained in the space-time continuum (as everything else is)…I see space-time like a canvas splashed not with paint but with Life. And I do want to know the artist!
Comment by Dingus — November 14, 2008 @ 7:17 pm
Dingus – thanks for stopping by. I find your thoughts really interesting and certainly adding additional aspects to the matter. Thanks for that! (And I wouldn’t mind meeting the artist too!)
Comment by Robert — November 16, 2008 @ 7:20 pm
Sure there are things that we can’t explain at the moment, but we will. Gravity, left handedness (in molecular biology)(or matter not antimatter…i’m sure they’re interrelated), music, harmonies. And why can’t we be sophisticated computers. To simplify: processors, 0,1: neurons…possibly 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5…and so on to the power of n neurons….sentience could simply be a factor of mathematics. Theres another thing, math is very much intertwined with nature/reality
Comment by opinion — November 29, 2008 @ 9:34 am
And another thing. Why the hell do we need a handler…why cant we accept reponsibility for ourselves.
Comment by opinion — November 29, 2008 @ 9:39 am
Opinion – welcome. I love your expression: “Why the hell do we need a handler…” Great way of putting it! And yes, this is my question too and what I tried to explore in my post
Comment by Robert — November 29, 2008 @ 1:55 pm