On Religion
I still remember why I took Philosophy of Religion back in Year 2. Debates with friends, family and my own self about the existence of God had yielded no answers for me, and I was so frustrated that not a day went by that I didn't think about the existence of God. When I saw that SMU was offering Philosophy of Religion, I enrolled without a second thought, because I thought that I would finally get an answer to my question. The struggle and conflict within me would finally stop, and I could move on from this question.
It's one year on, and I still don't have an answer as to whether God (as how we conceive him in every day terms) exists or not. I am strongly of the view that the image of the God of the main monotheistic religions has been twisted and manipulated such that it is an object of ridicule for atheists. One thing also disturbs me greatly; that so many people enter a religion without careful and intelligent consideration, and blindly devote themselves to this religion. Pragmatically speaking, it is better to err on the side of caution, hence it is better to believe, rather than not believe. I think these people's reasoning goes something like this: What's there to lose from being in a religion? Well, only the pursuit of truth, and understanding.
I attended a couple of sermons by this guy, Joseph Prince (I will not go so far as to call him a pastor. Terrific public speaker, though.) at New Creation Church back in 2006, 2007. Good-looking guy, maintains his looks well, with his trim physique in a sleek black suit. My seventeen year old self was quite taken by his arresting presence and his charismatic and eloquent words. I quite willingly drank in all his words about Christianity as Grace, that Jesus forgives all (as opposed to Law) and stories about people bestowed upon with God's grace. Back then, I considered myself a free-thinker, and frankly, was quite ready to believe in Jesus and God when Mr. Prince was preaching.
Then, he said this. "There is no such thing as free-thinkers. These people are not free to think. Their minds are closed off to God. Only those willing to accept Jesus into their lives are free to think." And the absolute worst thing was, everyone in the huge-ass auditorium began to clap and cheer as if Mr. Prince had made some wonderful revelation.
What he had said was so dangerous that I have never quite recovered my respect for these "charismatic churches". His statement to me was a renouncement of science and reason, and was so plainly meant to divide and create the illusion of those in the auditorium as being better than others.
It was because of this incident (and some direct experiences with religious followers) that I decided organised religion really was not for me. And I also decided God could not possibly exist if his followers turned out to be such awful people as this one Joseph Prince, plus I used to get really uncomfortable when people said "Thank God" earnestly after getting good grades on their exams, or getting a job. (I still do get uncomfortable, but I have now taken to asking people why they thank God, instead of crediting themselves for their hard work. I find it funny when they reply proudly that they didn't study much and yet got good grades, as if getting something you did not work hard for is something to be proud of.)
But it was here that Philosophy of Religion showed me a whole different world and opened up the possibility of investigating religion calmly and rationally. Issues like the problem of evil, best possible worlds God could have created, fear of death, immortality of the soul and the design argument enlightened me. I found it particularly ironic at first that religion, which is supposedly based on faith and not reason, was now being analysed using scientific frameworks and logical reasoning.
But I loved every minute of it. I especially love the phrase ex nihilo nihil fit - "nothing can come from nothing". Philosophy of religion is what I think all people who take religion seriously must explore, whether in a classroom setting or on their own. All beliefs must have justification, and to get the most out of religion, one simply has to seek to understand the rational arguments for God.
What do I believe now? I certainly still am not convinced of the God which gives you manna from heaven and sends a rainbow after a storm. Or for that matter, a God who will give me an A+ for my exams. Unless that God is my professor. (You know, I've always wondered how the believers reckon it works. Are you suddenly possessed with all these information you didn't have and was not capable of having without studying during the exam? Does God's huge hand suddenly guide the professor's when marking? Is the optical marking machine suddenly marking things according to God's answer sheet?)
But I believe in one original source of power that created or led to everything else, if we base it on the cause-and-effect argument. Everything in our world has a cause and an effect. It is not possible to regress infinitely, although it is possible to regress very far back. There has to be a starting point then, before which nothing existed. What this starting point is, if this point is still around, I have no idea and I don't think I will come to a decision anytime soon.
But I am happy with this for now.
It's one year on, and I still don't have an answer as to whether God (as how we conceive him in every day terms) exists or not. I am strongly of the view that the image of the God of the main monotheistic religions has been twisted and manipulated such that it is an object of ridicule for atheists. One thing also disturbs me greatly; that so many people enter a religion without careful and intelligent consideration, and blindly devote themselves to this religion. Pragmatically speaking, it is better to err on the side of caution, hence it is better to believe, rather than not believe. I think these people's reasoning goes something like this: What's there to lose from being in a religion? Well, only the pursuit of truth, and understanding.
I attended a couple of sermons by this guy, Joseph Prince (I will not go so far as to call him a pastor. Terrific public speaker, though.) at New Creation Church back in 2006, 2007. Good-looking guy, maintains his looks well, with his trim physique in a sleek black suit. My seventeen year old self was quite taken by his arresting presence and his charismatic and eloquent words. I quite willingly drank in all his words about Christianity as Grace, that Jesus forgives all (as opposed to Law) and stories about people bestowed upon with God's grace. Back then, I considered myself a free-thinker, and frankly, was quite ready to believe in Jesus and God when Mr. Prince was preaching.
Then, he said this. "There is no such thing as free-thinkers. These people are not free to think. Their minds are closed off to God. Only those willing to accept Jesus into their lives are free to think." And the absolute worst thing was, everyone in the huge-ass auditorium began to clap and cheer as if Mr. Prince had made some wonderful revelation.
What he had said was so dangerous that I have never quite recovered my respect for these "charismatic churches". His statement to me was a renouncement of science and reason, and was so plainly meant to divide and create the illusion of those in the auditorium as being better than others.
It was because of this incident (and some direct experiences with religious followers) that I decided organised religion really was not for me. And I also decided God could not possibly exist if his followers turned out to be such awful people as this one Joseph Prince, plus I used to get really uncomfortable when people said "Thank God" earnestly after getting good grades on their exams, or getting a job. (I still do get uncomfortable, but I have now taken to asking people why they thank God, instead of crediting themselves for their hard work. I find it funny when they reply proudly that they didn't study much and yet got good grades, as if getting something you did not work hard for is something to be proud of.)
But it was here that Philosophy of Religion showed me a whole different world and opened up the possibility of investigating religion calmly and rationally. Issues like the problem of evil, best possible worlds God could have created, fear of death, immortality of the soul and the design argument enlightened me. I found it particularly ironic at first that religion, which is supposedly based on faith and not reason, was now being analysed using scientific frameworks and logical reasoning.
But I loved every minute of it. I especially love the phrase ex nihilo nihil fit - "nothing can come from nothing". Philosophy of religion is what I think all people who take religion seriously must explore, whether in a classroom setting or on their own. All beliefs must have justification, and to get the most out of religion, one simply has to seek to understand the rational arguments for God.
What do I believe now? I certainly still am not convinced of the God which gives you manna from heaven and sends a rainbow after a storm. Or for that matter, a God who will give me an A+ for my exams. Unless that God is my professor. (You know, I've always wondered how the believers reckon it works. Are you suddenly possessed with all these information you didn't have and was not capable of having without studying during the exam? Does God's huge hand suddenly guide the professor's when marking? Is the optical marking machine suddenly marking things according to God's answer sheet?)
But I believe in one original source of power that created or led to everything else, if we base it on the cause-and-effect argument. Everything in our world has a cause and an effect. It is not possible to regress infinitely, although it is possible to regress very far back. There has to be a starting point then, before which nothing existed. What this starting point is, if this point is still around, I have no idea and I don't think I will come to a decision anytime soon.
But I am happy with this for now.