Welcome to "The Gods Are Bored," taking nothing seriously since 2005! Sorry, but when it comes to deep thinking, we didn't pass the swimming test.
In last Saturday's Wall Street Journal, they published one of those point-counterpoint editorial pages that I so love. Say what you will about the quickly-disappearing Fourth Estate. It's still one of the only places where you'll find reasoned arguments that are diametrically opposed, both being given the same amount of space and respect.
On this day the topic was "Man vs. God." The opponents were Richard Dawkins, celebrated atheist author, and Karen Armstrong, whose book The Case for God, will be out later this month.
First, as part of this deep-thought post, I would like to ask all you men out there why it's you against God. Chill, dudes! Let that testosterone ease up a bit! You'd never see a headline called "Woman vs. God," even though I know for a fact that there are many women who read this blog who hold no particular respect for this particular deity.
Anyway, I read both editorials, Dawkins's and Armstrong's. Old Rich makes great points. It's hard to refute the atheist arguments in this era of super-science, and as I just said, I'm not the deep thinker to do it.
Ms. Armstrong, apparently, is a deep thinker, so she took on the task. And by golly, she's practically an atheist herself! Here's a bit from her:
"Religion was not supposed to provide explanations that lay within the competence of reason but to help us live creatively with realities for which there are no easy solutions and find an interior haven of peace."
Let me see if I haven't drowned in this fancy talk. Religion exists to give us creative brain-blankies to ease our worried minds.
Dawkins must have hooted when he saw that "defense." And I must say that I'm glad Ms. Armstrong's book is called The Case For God, and not The Case For Deities Everywhere. Perhaps it's just Yahweh who's the security blanket deity.
To all these deeper thinkers, I, Anne Johnson (basically shallow as a fishbowl) would like to say:
1. Having developed thought to the point of creative endeavor, members of humankind have experienced contact with higher powers through a variety of experiences, not all of which can be conveniently explained away by the laws of physics and circumstance.
2. Atheists assume that we have learned so much about the laws of physics that we need learn no more in order to nail shut the coffin on deity. If that is the case, why are we still training new physicists and setting them to work? We could use that money to build skate parks.
I don't think some bright young physicist is going to take a few measurements and find him or herself looking Yahweh in the eyeball. I'm just saying there's more to the universe than we know to date ... more to our own brains than we know to date ... and more about Higher Powers than we know to date.
I'm not going to make a case for God. But at least for me, religion ... yes, I know it's a bad word, bad bad bad! ... for me, religion is more than just a mystical chill pill. Can't you just feel something to be true and leave it at that?