I recently came across a chat I had with Adrian. It was really quite illuminating; it wasn't just the subject matter (homosexuality, religion and the existence of God) but also my thoughts on them. Reading it, I was surprised at my own clarity of thought on paper, and some of these beliefs that I held in me that was coaxed out in the discussion. Adrian is a very good conversationalist, because he's one of those rare people that actually isn't just consumed with getting his point across, but also willing to listen to yours.
On homosexuality
Me: Do you think that it's a nature thing? I'm kinda convinced it is..
Adrian: that God created them gay? if that is so, then the bible has a serious flaw. here's a startling fact: they have linked homosexuality with the use of plastic baby bottles. apparently, a substance called "BPA" and Phthalates inhibit male hormones - potentially causing effeminism and homosexual tendencies
Me: There's this thing that's recently been coined silent evidence. It's a long story, but basically, the gist of it is this: Imagine people stuck on a rowboat in a storm. They prayed, and were saved, and went on shore telling about the goodness and mercy of God. And thaat He exists. But there is a problem with this assumption, because what about those guys who prayed to God and still died? That's not part of the sample. I know I know, there are plenty of examples proving God and all. It's the same with the twin study to study gay tendencies. They advertised in gay magazines, and because of that their sample populations are compromised. I don't think that people willingly want to become gay. It's an alternative lifestyle, and most gay Christians who continue to be faithful to God are leading miserable lives (I expect) because they are suppressing their tendencies.. Because of this, although I cannot conclude that homosexuality is innate, but I am tending more towards that.
Adrian: yah, that's exactly what my friend said. gay-converted Christians have to live with the fact that part of them will always be attracted to men. not sure if that constitutes to miserable, but it's definitely a struggle. i don't know. I'm thinking it's a choice thing. but i can see how they don't feel so, just as i did not have a choice ( in a sense) to be heterosexual, they didn't have choice to be attracted to the same sex
Me: Yeah, That's what I mean. And I see that this tendency was not restricted to modern times and it's also recorded in the Bible.
Adrian: anyway, God condemns it and all. if that is true that it is nature - then God's justice is warped, no? and if we cannot count on him to nail down sexual matters, then what of salvation? i recently had a really long discussion with a presbyterian on predestination, and i came out of it more disillusioned than ever. but, that's a long story.
On the truth of the Bible
Me: Yes, I've come to terms with predestination. I think that Christianity is either made up, corrupted, God isn't all-good, our conception of justice is not quite right, or there's more that we don't know.
Adrian: hey, you know about that predestination thing, doesn't that mess up faith and everything, like not knowing who God is? seeing how there's this shifty idea of "good" and "just" and all.
Me: Yeah. My faith isn't absolute. It changes with changing information. And the thing about me is that I question, and I doubt. And I believe that science, should corroborate with the stories in the bible.
Adrian: doubting's good, because it means you care. if you didn't care, nothing would matter, don't you think? but yeah. science has a knack of making the bible look bad. okay, 80% of the time, that is
Me: Yeah.. I think that it's about accepting that there are discrepancies, and deciding if these discrepencies are important. Immaculate conception – IMPORTANT! I can't figure that one out yet though. In the absence of evidence, it's just faith.
Adrian: actually, any discrepancy is tough on the bible, because the bible says that scripture is perfect
Me: Then there's a question if the original perfect scripture is the one we hold in our hands and call the Bible. The scripture may be perfect, but it may not be the same one we use. There are plenty of questions..
Adrian: which is also trouble, because the bible says that the bible itself is preserved by God somewhere along the way, if the Bible's credibility is called into question - any part of it - God's credibility is affected too. it's like, there's no middle ground for this. i dunno. i'm screwed up in that way too
Me: So the bible cannot be questioned? The thing is that our entire faith is built around this book. Questions that we have cannot be proved emperically. If the basic premise that the bible is preserved is wrong, then we're in trouble. And it's so likely, with scribes making mistakes, persecution etc, for the bible NOT to be faithful to the original. And it becomes a circular reference.
Adrian: yeah.. see, God himself promises preservation. wanna see the verse?
Me: Because we say God preserves, and the Bible points to God. So if the Bible is not credible, how can we prove that GOd is real? My question is more philosophical.
On the existence of God
Adrian: that's my uni major! it's not that God isn't real, it's just that the Bible becomes unreliable in its representation of God? because, if it weren't perfect, then no one would know where to trust it, and where not to. since it's all unempirical and all, or rather, unverifiable
Me: Yeah. THat's what I mean. And the very promises we stand on are shaky.
Adrian: So, as many of the atheists are saying, you can't be sure, then why are you using the ten commandments as a basis for creating legislation? are you so certain in your faith that you can deny millions of cancer patients stem cell treatments? can you justify stalling responsibly genetically modified food from saving millions of starving people? when i read sam harris' book "letters to a christian nation", i was floored. very, very hard to answer. but then i realised, there's a great counter to that: Can Sam Harris offer an alternative, that doesn't end in anarchy and hedonism, and unethical practices?
Me: But it could just be that our human inclination is to determine that there IS an alternative. Maybe there isn't, and we're all headed straight to hell. Or wherever it is if hell doesn't exist. Moral and ethical standards apart from God's unchanging ones are an illusion, and change with better arguments, or more compelling reasons.
Adrian: so God's standards are outdated, your're saying? because God used to approve of dashing babies against rocks
Me: No, I'm playing devil's advocate here. I'm saying if there is no God.
Adrian: ah. yeah, if there isn't, all this is nonsense
Me: Because you're saying can you provide an alternative to God's commands.
Adrian: but i guess there's a human pining for (1) someone out there, (2) someone who cares. yah. but there isn't any alternative, see. there's no other standard apart from those outlined in popular organised religion which actually tells atheists something, since they believe that there's no God - the majority of humans have a capacity for good, or rather so called "God-like goodness", which means it is possible to agree on some basic principles of ethics
Me: Yes I think so. But ethics is not God.
On whether God is good
Adrian: my philo tutor asked me this, "What if God is not Good?" before i totally lost my mind, he answered, "well, that's not possible, because God is Good, Good is God, and the two are inseparable. Such that, we can only define evil as something that is "not God". ethics may not be God, but they are intimately linked
Me: well, that's not possible, because God is Good, Good is God, and the two are inseparable. ß Why? I don't study philo, and am a bit slow on the uptake. So explain why please..
Adrian: that's because the Bible says so
Me: See? Circular reference!
Adrian: exactly
Me: Hahah.
Adrian: but really, He has to be. God has to be good defined, since he is perfect, so it does make sense for God to be good, and good to be God. it's like how marriage, by definition, is a union between man and woman. no lobby can change that.
Me: Hm. You're bound by your religious conceptions I think. If God is just defined as a higher being, rather than perfect, this can hold.
Adrian: exactly. he is defined as perfect in the bible. but this assumes that the same god that the bible talks is entirely right about himself. if not, he would just be like a greek god
Me: Yes, referring to the Bible again. Which, if God isn't perfect, won't hold. I could write a book saying how perfect I am. And perpetuate the myth. The book isn't telling the truth, and neither am I.
Adrian: yeah. for all we know, he could just be an alien guy with loads of powers, like what the mormons believe. even if it's half true, like you being born on 30th Jan 1956, then the book would still be a unreliable source to find out who you are. so i guess your issue is that you can't trust that the Bible is true? mine is that i'm having monumental difficulty trusting God
Me: Not really. I'm just stating that our entire faith is based essentially on this one book. Like balancing an entire building on the foundation of one tile. Trusting God? Trusting that He's good?
Adrian: trusting that he is all he says he is. Christ is the Solid Rock I stand, All Other Things Are Sinking Sand. it's one book, but pundits would say that it's a really big book, or a really big tile
Me: And the justification for that?
Adrian: That Christ is a living person, and that he died and rose again, historically proven, apparently
Me: I'm not sure about the "rose again".
Adrian: history only proves he lived, though. not that he died and rose
Me: Yup.
Adrian: muslims insist that the romans were confused and crcucified judas instead
On life’s philosophy
Me: Haha. Right. That's quite an interesting theory. I think the journey of faith is just that you see. Each step you take is a step of faith. You just have to make a decision in the face of all the noise around you. And if evidence appears contrary, evaluate as you would any scientific piece of evidence.
Adrian: that's a good life philosophy. wonder if it's worth sacrificing life and limb for? i ask that because i once considered being a front line missionary
Me: I think of it this way.. Something like Pascal's wager. If there is no God and there is no other religion, then what matters is how you feel when you're alive. And if you think being a frontline missionary is living for a cause, that would be your satisfaction, and you'd think it was a life well lived. If there IS a God, then you'd have earned your eternal reward. I think only the people who stand outside look at the delusional and feel pity. The delusional himself doesn't feel the same sort of pity for himself.
Adrian: haha... ending an argument on Pascal's wager! :) then it is all up to perception then. No absolutes, and reality is what you make of it.
Me: Yes, that's basically the cynical way of viewing it. But for obvious reasons, living your life hedging your bets is not the best way to live a passionate life. So I'd say pick a side, live it out, but don't be a blind fool. Know what you've gotten yourself into and constantly be aware of the odds.
I think that as I go through life, I refine my views on God. Sometimes I think I'm a bit more harsh with myself and with God and Christianity in general, but sometimes these more sobering counter-faith thoughts help me to strengthen my faith, and the questions help me to dig deep into my own beliefs, and the truth of the God I know, or believe to know.
