The God-Question and What Really is “Faith in God”?

 

PART 1: Dimensions of the God-Question

“God” as a “Symbol” of the Human Effort to Wrestle with Life 

     As humans, we wrestle with life and its many apparent absurdities. I have come to conclude after many years of studying religion that, seen from a humanistic standpoint, “god” is primarily a symbol of the human effort to wrestle with life’s difficult questions … such as the “why” of natural calamities or epidemics (very relevant to us in now 2020-21 as I write!). In other words, when humans try to make sense especially of great suffering (such as the one caused by the COVID-19 pandemic), many of them have and continue to invoke “god,” imagining a supernatural and powerful Being with the ability to stop disasters from happening or to turn things around when the situation becomes quite bad. Again, analyzed from a humanistic standpoint, a god who might directly intervene to alleviate the world’s suffering primarily seems to be a symbol of the trust and hope that continue to live on in our hearts, which in turn give us the strength and courage to go on with the struggle as we face the different painful challenges that beset us in life. I understand and respect that. However, I also want to acknowledge its severe limitations.

     On the positive side, “god” is also a symbol of the human effort to dance with the glorious aspects of life. This has to be kept in mind too although here we will deal with the connection between “god” and dealing with suffering.

     Now, as we have seen, Christianity (and, as far as I know, any other religious tradition) has no easy and conclusive answers to the question of <why do life’s sufferings happen?>. To expand on that by rephrasing it, let me say unambiguously that the “God” invoked by Christianity usually does not have answers to the big “Why” question of calamities such as chaos-generating and deadly epidemics. It’s enough to look at God’s answer to the fabled Old Testament character Job when he requests some answers to the question of his undeserved suffering. God in the book (Job 38-39) proclaims that human wisdom just cannot plumb the mysteriousness of God’s ways (recall “limit experiences”) and so it (human knowledge-wisdom) amounts to nothing before God. That is another way to say that all our human efforts to understand the wherefore and whither, the why and the <to what end?> of suffering are practically pointless in a sense, because we will never get any satisfactory answers.

     Even Jesus in the New Testament gospels does not make an effort to answer these questions. Rather, what the Christian tradition (embodied especially in Jesus) presents is an invitation and a summons (and this is very important), first, to refrain from judging, because we really do not know everything; second, to be compassionate for the sufferings that all of us have to endure; and, third, to act resolutely and lovingly to alleviate suffering.

     But the plot thickens with regard to the god-question. If that is so, what use is there for “god” then? Is it any good to have faith in a god who seemingly cannot even supply us with adequate answers to our questions about the apparent random suffering that is visited upon us in life (such as COVID-19)?

     I think that this question is crucially important especially for people who consider themselves religious believers. Some will simply choose to ignore it for fear of rocking the boat too much and losing their “simple, childhood” faith. As a scholar of religion and theology, I have wrestled with this question through the years and I’ve realized that unless one faces this gnawing question squarely in the face and attempts to give some response to it, I’m afraid one will never shed a childish faith and advance to a more mature stage of being a believer. So let me share my two cents’ worth coming from some of my efforts over a long time to make sense of the God-question.

 

“God” as a Hypothesis about Reality

     One of the most useful and thorough books (although a bit on the cerebral side) on the questions of
God’s existence and nature that I’ve come upon thus far has been the Catholic theologian Hans Küng’s Does God Exist? An Answer for Today [1980]. There Küng uses a good amount of space to survey and analyze the many efforts to prove, be agnostic about, or deny the existence of God through the centuries. When he comes at last to stating his major conclusions about God’s existence and nature, he starts by positing God as a human hypothesis. God as a hypothesis, Küng proposes, would be the answer to humanity’s most ultimate questions. Apropos that, we can say that these three following questions are probably the most important and consistent “ultimate” questions that human beings have asked:  Who are we? Where do we come from? Where are we going?

     Küng points out that if God does exist (hypothetically!) there would be meaningful answers to those questions. Therefore, in answer to ‘Who are we?’, God would be the ultimate ground of being that defines our identity: We (and all of reality) are all grounded in God; we carry in ourselves—as the Bible says—the divine image (Imago Dei). Thus, God is the “primal ground” for all life and reality.

     In answer to ‘Where do we come from?’, God would be the source, the creator and sustainer of all human and natural existence. God is then the “primal support” of everything.  Finally, in answer to ‘Where are we going?’, God would be the (primal) goal in whom everyone and everything will ultimately find their fulfillment.

     Therefore, the ideal hypothetical situation is that all human and natural life takes on a deeper meaning with this awesome “God” as the ground, support, and goal of everything that is. And that would make life definitely worth living to the full, despite the acute menace of fate and death, apparent emptiness and meaninglessness, sin and suffering. This, I can say, is a rather sophisticated way of expressing the traditional God-believer’s ultimate reasons for having belief in God.

 

The Unprovability of God - Revelation

     Let me underline that in the reflections above, God, we can say, is a hypothesis that humans have and continue to put forward in order to make sense of life. However, there is one big problem that is seldom stated in a straightforward way: It is commonly acknowledged in the discipline called the philosophy of religion that, despite the best efforts of many brilliant minds throughout history, there is actually no definitive way to prove conclusively this hypothesis that God exists. What Küng has stated above is merely that, if the hypothesis of God were true, then all life and existence would take on a deeper and fuller meaning.

     Meanwhile, religious traditions (such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) have emphasized the notion of divine revelation: that God has—it is believed—revealed to some chosen humans the very nature of the Divine and also certain firm truths about God and about life which are trustworthy and reliable.

     Well, I don’t like to enter too deeply into this line of discussion here. Let me just state my personal and very honest opinion on the notion of revelation. I may sound like an agnostic here but bear with me: I honestly think that the concept of revelation just does not speak anymore to many people in our contemporary world—especially people who have not been raised to believe that there is a God. Moreover, a detailed historical study of, say, Christianity and of its different supposedly firm and solid revelations (as I have done professionally for practically my whole life as a scholar of religion) will reveal instead that these grandiose claims about “revealed truths” should always be taken more modestly because all so-called “truths” (that not only Christianity but practically any religion proclaims) actually bear the tell-tale marks that they are all too human (more than divine!)—that is, these “truths” are anthropologically, historically, and culturally conditioned in a radical way. 

    It is seldom acknowledged that these very “human” truths have been imbued with an aura of sacredness and infallibility by some authority in the tradition’s history more than anything else for the purpose of forging a given community’s identity through a common belief in supposedly “revealed truths” rather than as a witness to conclusively demonstrable truths. Despite that, I continue to be a person of faith-trust for reasons I cannot explain sufficiently here but let me just say now that I am a very, very “modest” believer (hoping that I will have to explain my reasons for being so on another occasion). For these reasons, I do not usually like to take the path of “divine revelation” when attempting to speak about “God” to present-day people (to myself first and foremost!) who are on the whole historically conscious and are trained to think critically through things.

     The more fruitful path to take for me when we attempt to study religion and the idea of God (or gods) nowadays, especially when it is done in the context of a growing number of people in my (Western) context who consider themselves SBNR (Spiritual but not Religious), “Dones” (We’re “done” with religion!), or “Nones” (We have NO religion!), is rather to understand religion and the idea that there might be a God as first and foremost a human endeavour to search for meaning. “God” functions then as a way that humans have made use of in order to add meaning to life or to make some sense of life—life which many times can be very mysterious indeed.

     Can there be other ways of making life meaningful other than positing the God hypothesis? Of course there are! This is by no means the only way to “create meaning.” But it is probably the way by which most people have tried to make sense of life and reality throughout human history. That is why it is still important that we study the God-question if we are to understand humans and everything connected with them.

What Comes After Religion? - Transcript and Annotations

 

School of Life: What Comes After Religion? (Please watch the video first!)

Published: Feb 4, 2015

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL--1Z_g4DE&list=PLV7Diz4DTv4mnAutv5CEqN7Y9HRKmejor&index=18

Accessed: 2021-02-01

(The main text is a transcript of the ‘School of Life’ video. Sub-headings and parts in blue are my own annotations. The concluding reflections are also my own)

Secularization

Fewer and fewer people believe nowadays. It's possible that in a generation, there simply won't be religion across Europe and large sections of North America, Australia and Asia. That 's not necessarily a problem.

Above, we find a brief description of the rapid process of secularization taking place in the so-called “developed world.” Of course, institutional religions think that this loss of faith and belief is a problem. How do you see the matter? Is the demise of religious belief and institutional religions a problem?

Why Religions were/are Important

But it's worth thinking about why people made up religion in the first place and what we're doing with the needs and longings that led them to do so. 

Examining the origins of religion and what were/are the human needs that religions have met in human history --- is a very important task!

At one level, religions are about asking us to believe in something. And when people say they can't believe, they tend to stop right there with the whole religion business. And often point out all the horrid things that religions have undoubtedly done and continue to do. But in this sense, belief is almost the least important and definitely the least interesting side of religion.

“Religious belief” often involves trying to give our intellectual assent to mythological ideas that cannot be proved by science (or has been disproved) by science.

The Valuable Things Religions Teach even in a Secularized World

What's fascinating is all the other stuff religions get up to. For example, the way they regularly gather people around and, strikingly, tell them to be nice to one another. Or the way they create a sense of community, acting as hosts, making sure that granny and the child, the big chief and the little guy learn to see each other as human beings rather than abstract entities.

Religions use rituals to point stuff out to us and lodge it in our fickle minds. For example, that the seasons are changing or that it's the time to remember your ancestors. That the moon looks pretty or you can atone and make a fresh start or that it's rather amazing that there's food on the table. Religions know we're not just intellectual creatures so they carefully appeal to us via art and beauty. We think of beauty in one category a frivolous and superficial thing, and truth and depth in an another. Religions join them together. They build temples, cathedrals, and mosques that use beauty to lend depth to important ideas. They use the resources of art to remind us of what matters. Their art is didactic. It's directed at making us feel things: calm, pity, awe ---

Those are the things (above) that—the School of Life’ thinks—are the valuable lessons we can learn from religions which we ought to continue practicing today, even in a secular age. The following statements below are why we still need the things that religions used to and still deliver to its adherents.

We may no longer believe, but the needs and longings that made us make up these stories go on. We're lonely and violent. We long for beauty, wisdom, and purpose. We want to live for something more than just ourselves.

Below we find critiques of the superficiality and inadequateness of contemporary society from ‘the School of Life’

What Modern Society Focuses On

Society tells us to direct our hopes in two areas: Romantic love and professional success. And it distracts us with news, movies, and consumption. It's not enough, as we know. Especially at three in the morning.

The Lessons We Need to Learn

We need reminders to be good, places to reawaken awe, something to awaken our kinder, less selfish impulses. Universal things which need tending like delicate flowers and rituals that bring us together. The choice isn't between religion and a secular world as it is now.

 The challenge is to learn from religions so we can fill the secular world with replacements for the things we long ago made up religion to provide. The challenge begins here.

***

Some Concluding Comments (by jkk)

On the one hand, the ‘School of Life’ adheres to an atheistic, materialistic worldview. It does not believe that there is any “Greater Power” (such as God, the Spirit, the Holy) out there. On the other hand, it thinks that there are many valuable things we can continue to learn from religions aside from the supernatural claims (which it does not believe).

My own (as well as many other “scholar-believers”) position is a bit different. I continue to hold that a standpoint of faith (in a Greater Something or “God,” if you will) is still possible and even important today, even for someone who believes in the value of science and progress but is also aware of its limitation. My definition of faith is that it is primarily a trust in the goodness of reality and life – that trust is often linked with a greater power, but it need not be. It is enough to hope that there is some greater power with which all of us are connected (For a more detailed description, see: https://spiritual-notandyet-religious-jkk.blogspot.com/2020/04/part-3-epidemics-and-god-covid-19.html )

I absolutely agree with scholar-spiritual practitioner Roger Walsh MD, PhD that if we think of life and reality as—in his words—“disenchanted” (just material) as ‘the School of Life’ does, we run the risk of living in a world devoid of meaning and significance. That would lead to us feeling adrift, without any sense of a higher purpose. That, in turn, would lead to more meaninglessness and depression. (See Walsh, Essential Spirituality, 1999, pp. 195-196)

I do agree with ‘the School of Life’ though that religions over-emphasize mythological beliefs. This is a problem for contemporary people who live in a world with an advanced level of science and critical thought. I am, therefore, also for shifting the emphasis on—what the same Roger Walsh—calls “transconventional religion” (I’ll write more extensively about this in a future post) with a greater emphasis on ethical and spiritual practice that would enable one to have genuine “awakening” experiences. These in turn will lead to a deeper experiential sense of the “spiritual” unity of everyone and everything. And that is the core truth that all spiritual-wisdom traditions (aka, the religions) teach.

---