Reflection: "Can an atheistic worldview support the...sacred?"

Can an atheistic worldview support the concept of the holy or sacred?
by Professor Randal Rauser


MY REFLECTION on that short article:
Baptist professor Randal Rauser gave this quote by Dworkin: “religion is deeper than God. Religion is a deep, distinct, and comprehensive worldview: it holds that inherent, objective
value permeates everything, that the universe and its creatures are awe-inspiring,
that human life has purpose and the universe order.”

Huh?! This conundrum seems to show that a HUGE amount of discussion of theism versus atheism is semantic and based on differing definitions.

For Dworkin's definition would appear to be the very definition, not of religion, but of God!

Rauser wrote, "For this discussion, I will define “God” as a personal being who is the ultimate explanation for everything else that exists."

The first general definition of the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary is somewhat different:
God "1 capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality:"

Those definitions don't necessarily disagree, but the M-W C. D. one would seem to make Drwokin a theist, not an atheist.

For Drwokin wrote, "...inherent, objective value permeates everything, that the universe and its creatures are awe-inspiring, that human life has purpose and the universe order."

Such a statement is so incredibly different from what most famous atheists claim.

The latter atheists emphasize that existence-cosmos has no value,
that everything is "meaningless," "purposeless," and "pointless,"
that human primates are without worth,
that humans have no choice,
that everything is fully determined from the Big Bang,
that ethics are "subjective," "relative," and only personal "preferences," "likes or dislikes,"
and that liberty, equality, and human rights are all "myths."

That atheists can so completely disagree about the very nature of the reality astounds me.

Though I guess I shouldn't be that surprised. Heck, theists do this as well. John Wesley once wrote he would rather be an atheist than believe one version of Christianity.

A few central reasons why I am a theist is that I think that ethics are real, that creativity is possible for humans, and that the cosmos and life are amazing, that the ultimate nature of reality is full of meaning. (I do speculate about whether or not panentheism or some form of Enlightenment description might be true, BUT I know that is only educated guessing.)

So I am curious, would you characterize me as an atheist or a theist?


In the Light of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful,

Daniel Wilcox

"Good without God," "Colorful without Color"?

A very popular phrase of late, among many, is "Good without God." It's even the title of a secular humanist book by Greg Epstein.

It would seem based on history that many, probably most, theists think that God is Good. That doesn't mean that they don't contradict themselves. They do that in spades. Because most of them also claim that God creates, foreordains, wills, causes, (etc.) all evil. Just take a look at the Bhagavad Gita, the Hebrew Bible, Quran, and so forth. But, at least, in general belief, most religious humans do think that God is Good in some sort of way or to one degree or another.

In contrast, secularists of various sorts and types claim that God isn't,
but that yet humans can be Good.

However, doesn't that sound like thinkers asserting that Color doesn't exist,
but that yet humans can be Colorful?

If there is no God, how can there be Good?

And if there is no Color, how can there be Colorful?

Ah, semantics, again...



In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Important Guest Post on Same Sexuality

See below past the brief intro. for the guest post: "A Man with No Past" by Fernando Alcantar

Brief intro:
There are so many Christians and other theists who have recently come out as same sexual. Has this always been true--that many spiritually concerned and focused people have hidden their same sexuality?

And there are so many churches and denominations including Friends arguing over same sexuality, even splitting up as Indiana Yearly Meeting did, and North Carolina Yearly Meeting and Northwest Yearly Meeting are doing now.

Check A Friendly Letter, Chuck Fager's recent blog articles for the details:
http://afriendlyletter.com/breaking-split-over-lgbt-planned-for-northwest-yearly-meeting/
http://afriendlyletter.com/another-day-another-split-attempt-new-target-north-carolina-ym/

Even the huge United Methodist Denomination may split over the ethical issue. Other major denominations have in the recent past.
Etc.

So much division and misunderstanding and sorrow!

But the worst tragedy of the current controversy is that, too often, the very real individuals who are at the center of the controversy get left in the wreck:-(

Think of the loving couples who only wanted to get marriage licenses in Kentucky, but the clerk Kim Davis wouldn't let them.

Remember when Marsha Stevens of the music group Children of the Day announced that she was a lesbian and thankful for being same sexual. What a storm of trouble.

And remember when it came to the news that Lonnie Frisbee, the famous Calvary Chapel assistant minister, was same sexual.

Etc.

I wonder why.

I wonder what all of this controversy says about theism, about Quakerism, about the Christian religion, human nature, human psychology, life, and reality.

Do you have any thoughts about this huge topic?

GUEST POST:

A Man with No Past by Fernando Alcantar

"Fernando Alcántar was born and raised in Mexico and immigrated to the United States as a teenager. He has a Bachelor’s Degree in Psychology and a Master’s Degree in Organizational Leadership from Azusa Pacific University, one of the top Christian Universities in the nation.

He is an author, activist...He worked at APU's Mexico Outreach for eight years as Senior Coordinator of North American Partnerships. There, he oversaw hundreds of churches in Mexico and helped mobilize over 9,000 missionaries a year from all over the United States and Canada.

He innovated dozens of new ministries and developed unprecedented partnerships with government officials, nonprofits, schools, businesses, and churches. He has spoken in front of thousands sharing his faith and motivating people into Christian ministry, and traveled around the world serving marginalized communities."
--

Fernado Alcantar:

"I am a man with no past. And you are probably one too.

When I was born, my family put the seal of Catholicism on me and taught me that since I was Mexican, I was Catholic just as much.

The rest is a story I’ve shared on the book To the Cross and Back: An Immigrant’s Journey from Faith to Reason. A story of how as a teenager I converted to Protestant Christianity trying to escape loneliness and seeking healing from childhood trauma.

I then became a state leader for the Foursquare denomination in Baja California...a globetrotting missionary for Azusa Pacific University—one of the largest evangelical colleges in the nation.

And then became head of youth and young adult ministries for the almost 400 churches in the Southern California-Hawaii region of the United Methodist Church.

For about 30 years I obeyed the rules of the Bible as best as I could, including hiding the darkest secret—even from myself—the fact that I am gay. For at least a decade I fought a depression anchored in a never-ending doubt. What happens if I lose faith?"

Read the rest of Alcantar's powerful, sorrowful article at http://fernandoalcantar.com/man-no-past/

What are your thoughts on Alcantar's crisis?

What are your thought on this whole issue?


In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Part #3: REALITY--CREATIVITY and the OPENNESS of the FUTURE

SUBPOINT C: CREATIVITY AND THE OPENNESS OF THE FUTURE

Previously:
Part #1: Monads, Quarks..."I," and God
Part #2: Ultimate Becoming, Divine Process
Point #1: Bottom Up
Subpoint A: Choices
Subpoint B: Ethics and Human Rights


Remember, we left off last time delving into the extremely complex controversies of determinism versus ethics.

A large number of religionists (in history some Jews, the vast majority of Muslims, many Christians, nearly all Hindus) and lots of atheists think that everything is fated, that humans have no choice.

If everything that will ever happen in the future, down to the slightest movement of the smallest quark and atom was totally fated--completely determined at the moment of the Big Bang about 13.4 billion years ago—then we conscious primates exist
in a gigantic many trillion-zillion-kilometered
petrified swirl of amber.

All conscious entities in the whole cosmos including us homo sapiens (in the multiverse, if it exists) are but momentary infinitesimal aware specks in solid ‘granite’
—lock, stock, and barrel.

As so many determinists give the analogy--We humans are but only "shot bullets" headed toward whatever target. locked in, without any choice.

Everything is freeze-framed forever.

If so, then there are no ethics, no choices (the ability to choose between good and bad, rights or not), no creativity, no future as commonly meant, as defined by dictionaries.

Then, life is, indeed, absurd.

HOWEVER, don’t lose hope, don’t despair.

There are plenty of other scientists, philosophers, and deep thinkers who reflect,
that while, it is true, that we do exist within a physical matter
and energy system, within that very complex existence, there is openness,
uncertainty, some chance, and even creativity at play.



Form and freedom both exist!

It is true that our lives are situated within certain parameters of our physical nature,
our temperament, our background, culture and society, family, etc.,
BUT
within that complex system, we as finite conscious entities can make creative choices,
can make a difference in the real world.

Within existence, to a certain limited degree, there is openness to the future, at every moment.



Form and creativity interplay.

First, let’s take care of the “within a limited degree,” before we launch into the wonder of creative openness.

Many cosmologists speculate based on very real world facts that Existence--all of the cosmos--will expand forever, creating space as it spirals out and out.

Our infant universe, from 13.7 billion years ago
By NASA / WMAP Science Team - http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/media/121238/ilc_9yr_moll4096.png, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=23285693

The astronomy professor Chris Impey, of the University of Arizona, Tucson has written a number of science books on cosmology and astronomy including How It Began,
How It Ends,
and The Living Cosmos.

Impey makes a number of excellent points:

How It Ends: From You to the Universe by Chris Impey (W.W. Norton)
"The universe is made of stories, not of atoms," said poet and political activist Muriel Rukeyser. I agree. One of the greatest myths of science is that is consists of nothing more than dull, obdurate facts. The myth dissolves in the face of the powerful narrative that science has created to help us organize and understand the world.

We have a story of how the universe grew from a jot of space-time to the splendor of 50 billion galaxies. We have a story of how a broth of molecules on the primeval Earth turned into flesh and blood. And we have a story of how one of the millions of species evolved to hold those 50 billion galaxies inside its head.

This is a book about endings. Science mostly answers the question of how things got to be the way they are. Yet if we stop at the present day, the job is only half done, as every good story needs an ending....As a result, the material in this book is rooted in fact but it extends into conjecture. Scientists steer toward the boundary between what they know and what they don't know because that's where the excitement is."

"The material moves outward in scale from the human to the cosmic, and outward in time span from the familiar to the nearly eternal...As feisty apes with more piss and vinegar than wisdom we may not survive troubled adolescence, but visionaries are imagining ways we could transcend the limits of biology."

"Time is the ruler for these stories. We follow it on scales from a heartbeat to the 1080 years it takes for the galaxy to dissipate. Physicist John Wheeler reminded us that we take it for granted when he said, 'Time is what keeps things from happening all at once.'"

"Everyone likes a good ending...[but]this book is factual and it talks about the actual death of our planet, our star, our galaxy, us. It's not a cue to be glum, however, because the universe is filled with such magnificent possibility."
How It Ends by Chris Impey, pages 11-13, Norton & Company
--

AH, there it is--a word I as a freethinker and free-willer, love--"possibility."

That is the key point of this 3rd subpoint, that we conscious entities DO have possibilities in our very brief finite lives.

We can make a difference in our own life, in the lives of other people, even in the future of our planet!

Qualifier:
All of this does show my own intellectual bias, I admit. I earned my university degree in Creative Writing, taught creative writing to high school students, have spent my life in creative pursuits, am an avid poet and novelist, and an active science enthusiast. Therefore, from the get start, I take a dim view of closed systems, rote determinism.

Form without freedom is slavery, and philosophical determinism is the worst form of enslavement.

Form without creativity isn't even death, because that presupposes life.

Becoming is the opposite of determinism. It is openness to this next moment.

https://globaldigitalcitizen.org/30-ideas-to-promote-creativity-in-learning

Go to that website for some excellent methods to enhance your creativity.


Reach for the gold--what could be.

To be continued--




In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox