tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7984344.post9054341984762534998..comments2023-10-18T03:19:36.584-04:00Comments on outWORD by Matte Downey: God questionsMatte Downeyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13475890740790772858noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7984344.post-50726265004656100282015-01-21T17:31:23.419-05:002015-01-21T17:31:23.419-05:00I don't believe theology (at its best, anyway)...I don't believe theology (at its best, anyway) insists that it alone channels the infinite, as you say. Theology is inquiry into who God is and at the same time, inquiry into who the theologian is. Any definitive claims, other than the ones Jesus made about God, are suspect, and most theologians are humble enough to recognise this. Nevertheless, the questions can lead us to discover much about the divine/human dynamic.Matte Downeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13475890740790772858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7984344.post-57512589974510259832015-01-13T18:06:57.601-05:002015-01-13T18:06:57.601-05:00"Asking for scientific evidence for the exist..."Asking for scientific evidence for the existence of God might seem important, but it tells us little about who God is or what kind of God we are trying to prove exists."<br /><br />From a historical perspective the problem you are addressing here is two-fold. Before Newton in the West science and religion had a better understanding of their place. <br /><br />The religious purpose of asking questions about the infinite is to achieve particular ways of being. We consider mythology and engage in religious practice in order to achieve particular existential states. The focal points of religious existentialism are compassion for the other and meaning making (mythology). <br /><br />Science was meant to ask a completely different set of questions, none of which are mytholigical.<br /><br />Dawkins is confused on several points. He does not understand the purpose of religion, he believes people can live without mythology, and he believes he can live without mythology. He's wrong on all accounts: his mythology is the teleology of the technical society (a deeply irrational mythology lacking compassion that has taken root in many religious systems post-modernity including evangelicalism). But we can't blame Dawkins & the New Aethiests for their impoverished aetheism (aethism is after all capable of being meaningful mythos). Christianity--by focusing on the one best way, by insisting on the one way to God, by claiming to channel the infinite--has exascerbated the bad infinities of Neo-Platonism. By insisting that only it channels the infinite it has crafted a world where the infinite cannot exist. The primary tool of this bad infinity? Theology (of course)! <br /><br />"Who is God?" is a great question of faith, a great religious question. But faith requires that this question not be answered, except by finding new ways to live.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com