Reflecting on my most recent post here, I am encouraged that yesterday and today two posters at Experimental Theology have asked some fundamental questions about how one is to live a moral life apart from religion. Whether they receive any answers is yet to be seen.
The reason I am thinking about this is because I do not wish that anyone would take my most recent post here as an attempt to portray myself or my family as better than others, or uniquely moral. It is not. We are pretty much just like the people and family we know. We simply are not religious. And all the things I spoke of in that post ("Free Will") are true, and not hyperbole. I am willing to admit that we may simply be lucky in that regard.
But I often wonder why we have lived the way we have, since we have not attended church, and our families of origin were not the best launch by any means. I think we both have taken some of the teachings of the Bible, such as the Golden Rule, and tried to incorporate them into our lives, but basically I think empathy is the key to both our lives.
When a child suffers, I think one of two things happen once they become an adult. Either they are resentful and bitter, acting out against society, or they become empathetic to the struggling of others, and have an easier time than most tuning in to that battle. I don't have any other explanation.
In any case, it has certainly made it easier to "win friends and influence people", and has made our lives much more satisfying and less problem-filled. It also proves that being part of a faith, or attending church are not necessary to live a good and decent life, helping others and yourself in the process.
Sam, I think you hit the nail with the word empathy. It took me 45 years to realize that that was the key quality missing in my mother (still is), and why any attempt to reconcile with her would require me to bear all blame and wrong, even where undeserved, and exhonorate her without any accountability. I think I'm very opposite of her in that regard.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I get bristles from church people when I point out that the protagonist in Jesus' story that illustrates the Big 2 of God's priority commands is the most theologically incorrect character that Jesus could have portrayed. Samaritans were just "wrong" in every way.
Sam,
ReplyDeleteI think the basis of morality is found in the two great gifts which humans possess and which set us apart from the animal kingdom: reason and conscience. Animals live their lives bound almost entirely by impulse and instinct. Humans of course function this way too (children and criminals especially), but most of us at least have the ability to transcend our animal natures and be much more than beasts; but only by utilizing reason and conscience together.
I really don't know why some people seem to think that it takes belief in some convoluted theology to make a person moral. As you said, empathy for others goes a long way towards loving ones neighbor as oneself. Isn't that enough?
I enjoy studying American history, especially of the frontier, and I'd like to leave a brief quote from a letter that frontiersman Daniel Boone wrote to his sister in law in the year 1816 when he was nearly 82 years old: (spelling edited)
"[H]ow we live in this world and what chance we shall have in the next, we know not. For my part I am as ignorant as a child[.] All the religion I have [is] to love and fear God, believe in Jesus Christ, do all the good to my neighbor and myself that I can, and do as little harm as I can help, and trust on God's mercy for the rest, and I believe God never made a man of my principle to be lost."
[from Daniel Boone-The Life and Legend of an American Pioneer by John Mack Faragher, 1992, page 312.]
Boone was a Quaker, and was unchurched most of his life. I realize some might find his theology too simple. But this brief statement reveals a life philosophy based more on simple decency towards others and less on doctrinal purity.
Patricia,
I've heard people use Jesus' parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man as proof that hell is real because Jesus "talked about hell more than he did heaven", all the while neglecting to point out that the fate of both characters had nothing to do with their theology or faith.
BTW, I'm still reading MacDonald's Justice sermon. Like Sam said, it's slow going, as I often have to read a paragraph a number of times before I grasp what he's saying. But one thing I've picked out is MacDonald's contention that God is more interested in destroying sin than punishing sinners. That's not something I've heard from too many other sources in the past.