Hi Joe,

I hope my opinion helps you. I used to have an interest in having a justified belief regarding the existence of God.  However as I went on, I saw that there are many questions and doubts and if one wants to be strict, it would be extremely cumbersome to form a justified opinion. Even if one narrow his/her scope and considers only Christians, he/she finds strong contrasts in terms of opinions (e.g. W.L. Craig and E. Feser). You can even consider the user by the name 119 here who in numerous occasions has argued against Christianity and rejected it based on Old testament. Assuming that everyone is being honest with their opinions, these observations would mean that it is impossible to reach at ultimate truth with complete certainty.

Therefore, I shifted my focus from establishing the truth to the practicality of a given religion (not necessarily the mainstream interpretation, for example I like the Sufi version of Islam even though the main stream Shia Islam rejects this interpretation). Let us grant that a given religion and its practices are true, can you actually follow its standards and practices? Can you actually become a better person (Also don't bring the topic of ethics here, except the issues of abortion and homosexuality, we are aware of the goodness/badness of almost all situations we face in life). Now, if you have earnestly tried to follow the model of a given religion but yet have failed miserably a thousand times, it would no longer matter whether it was true or not. What's the purpose of these teachings if you cannot follow them? (e.g, pedophiles in catholic church) 

Rather what I am finding more intersting these days, is to find which path (as prescribed by a religion) provides better self-understanding. A path is true as long as it endows us with knowledge of ourselevs, our strengthes, weakenss and ways of improving ourselves so that one can get closer and closer to living a moral life. Any path that does not satisfy the above conditions should be discarded. This is how I treat religion these days. It also another reason why I no longer pursue philosophy; even if you have the truth, it would not enable you to live a moral life. People do not live an immoral life because they do not know good or evil, they live a immoral life because they do not know themselves enough to change their ways. I would like to finish with a quote from my favorite Sufi:

"There are more fake guides, teachers in the world than stars. The real guide is the one who makes you see your inner beauty, not the one who wants to be admired and followed"


 

Last edited by nojoum (11/19/2018 10:27 pm)

I have a lot of sympathy for you. Philosophy demands inquiry; Christianity demands child-like obedience. Philosophy teaches that we can't have truth in this life (or, at least, that we're rather unlikely to); Christianity that we have it revealed to us in Christ Jesus. To live as both homo philosophicus and homo religiosus is, I think, to live inside a contradiction. 

The purely philosophical man will tell you that you should subject everything to the harsh light of reason. He will say that we have no way of knowing whether the “certainty” of faith is anything more than a subjective certainty.

The purely religious man will tell you to subordinate philosophy to religion. He will say that you should start from the truths of religion and reject any conclusions that contradict them. He will make philosophy into religion's handmaid. Philosophy is the search for truth; Christianity requires the cessation of that search. This is why most Christians see philosophy as a tool to clarify and understand the truths they already have (and, perhaps, to turn others towards those truths).

I confess that I come down on the side of the philosopher. I want religion. I want demanding religion. I have the “religious urge”. But I'm a philosopher and I can't imagine living my life any other way. I can't help but subject everything to the lumen siccum.

Anyway, like I said, I have a lot of sympathy.

Begin with the beginning. How to get close to G-d.

Thanks for all of the responses--it really helps. I tend to gravitate towards John's comment. It does seem that there appears to be a contradiction between the life of the religious and the life of the philosopher which I find somewhat puzzling considering some of the greatest philosophical minds both living and dead are and were religious. I think there's more to it than mere contradiction. Maybe it's just a seeming contradiction. I appreciate Nojoum's advice on seeking the practicality of religion while  foregoing truth--or redefining, rather, truth as that which leads to a greater self-understanding--but my attraction towards religion is prompted by a feeling of transcendent subordination towards a reality both unknown yet intimately a part of history and its genesis. The consolation of religion is that it purports to be the Truth, it saves one from dilly-dallying in metaphysical struggles to understand the world. It gives one a cosmic narrative to inhabit. 

Last edited by RomanJoe (11/23/2018 4:12 pm)