Interesting quote from Richard Dawkins, who is usually called an atheist, but actually has a more nuanced view…
My mind is not closed, as you have occasionally suggested, Francis. My mind is open to the most wonderful range of future possibilities, which I cannot even dream about, nor can you, nor can anybody else. What I am skeptical about is the idea that whatever wonderful revelation does come in the science of the future, it will turn out to be one of the particular historical religions that people happen to have dreamed up. When we started out and we were talking about the origins of the universe and the physical constants, I provided what I thought were cogent arguments against a supernatural intelligent designer. But it does seem to me to be a worthy idea. Refutable–but nevertheless grand and big enough to be worthy of respect. I don’t see the Olympian gods or Jesus coming down and dying on the Cross as worthy of that grandeur. They strike me as parochial. If there is a God, it’s going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed.
…captures how I often feel when faced with Christianity’s colloquialisms. However I think there’s sufficient reason to think that the life, death and New Life of Jesus means more than a personal antidote for sin, a mandate for a Church, or any other particularistic agenda. It includes those things, but is much, much more too. I hope, and have to believe.
> …means more than a personal antidote for sin, a mandate for a Church, or any other particularistic agenda. It includes those things, but is much, much more too.
Well, you’ve raised my curiosity! Do you have an idea what that much, much more might be? I have ideas myself.
Hi Chris
I’m a big fan of Frank Tipler, though I have been critical of his particular “Theory of Everything”, but I think he has made a testable hypothesis about Jesus and the action of a sphaleron field during his Resurrection, and he may well be right about the Cosmological constant and matter.
Another aspect is Jesus as God for All, as John Robinson put it. Jesus means many things to many people even non-Christians, Gandhi for example. As the Saviour of All Men, he’s bigger than Christianity.
There’s lots of esoteric speculation about what Jesus meant – look at Patrick Tilley’s “Mission” for one example. Perhaps there’s more secrets to be revealed, if we’re willing to look deeper.
Tell me about your own ideas? I came back to Christianity after questioning a lot of Orthodox teaching and I’m open to ideas – though I’m also critically sceptical of just about every novelty I’ve heard. Hopefully I’m humble enough to know Truth when I see it.
Hi Chris
Well your tale is pretty regularly presented by plenty of preachers – “the Devil” is obviously the ‘rebel’. But do you see how Dawkins criticism applies to your tale, that it seems rather limiting a picture of God, that it’s almost idolatry – if I can say that – to reduce God to one particular image.
Of course I think you’re right. We’re blaming the wrong person for the mess that we’ve created of our collective lives as the human species.
What ‘particular’ background are you from, even if you don’t identify with the Church that raised you anymore?