Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Mar 10, 2023 5:42 pm
Christ was arguably the most compassionate human being who ever existed. I don't believe he was the God who created this universe, though. Christ would never have created a universe like this.
What interests me is what is implied here in the contrast between the world as it really is, and the imposed world, or the ideal world, of the Christian visualization.
Recently I have been reading David Attenborough's
The Life of Birds. I have some background in natural history and ecology but up till now had not read detailed accounts of bird's survival strategies, mating and roosting habits, etc. What is mind-boggling is to consider the intense struggles in the lives of biological entities in this world. The struggle of life is so strange, so brutal, that to really understand life here is a sobering undertaking.
Humankind, in fact, arose in and out of this context. As I sometimes say we are 'subsumed' into that biological world.
Strangely, if we see ourselves -- human beings, human animals, human culture -- as creatures of the biological context, what we call immorality and also *sin* is simply part of the context of life.
Theft of resources for example, or taking over a territory. There is absolutely no 'morality' in nature. Surely we all know this but yet it remains a dim perception I think.
I was struck by what Lacewing said -- that nature is the true temple or something to that effect. The reason this is a strange statement to examine is that, if it is true, what is considered a 'temple' or even as 'sacred' is a world that is, from top to bottom, terrifying and terrible. Life consumes life in a brutal -- though I agree beautiful -- cycle that has existed from the beginning and will never end (until biological life ends).
What Christianity is, again when examined (and this is so for all religious conceptions) is an 'imposition' on and against nature, and by that I mean 'reality'. There is no 'Christian ethic' in nature. Nor will there ever be such an ethic. If a creature did act, or could act, in accord with such (human, imposed) ethics that creature would be consumed.
The closer to nature then, the closer to *reality*, and the farther away from unreal impositions.
Gary's rebellion seems to be 'against the nature of reality'. How could such a strange and terrifying biological and material world as our is have been 'designed' or to put it more precisely willed or intended?
If there is a 'god' what sort of a being is this? And yet nature in all its complexity is thoroughly and unreally infused with 'design intelligence'. What *thinks all this up*? How does chaos form itself into unbelievable, but unbelievably weird order? What design idea brings all of this into manifestation?
And then what
purpose could the sort of awareness that we human beings have serve? Take Gary's 'lament' (or opposition). The more awareness of the way things really are here, and the rules that function here, the more pain in the realization that these conditions are immutable.
Strangely, this explains the desire or the need to become 'numb' or to use intoxicants (of all sorts and varieties) to cover over the harsh realization.
I agree that Christ was compassionate. The only caveat is that he (inadvertently) crushed the skulls of numerous money-changers when he went on that famous rampage. This did not get reported in the Gospel. One of the men -- a shark I admit, a real dirty dealer -- was reduced to the level of mental retardation when Jesus whacked his avaricious head with that hardwood stick! It literally bashed in his skull. He become a drooling retard and his mother had to feed him gruel and change his soiled clothing for the rest of his life.
It is just part of the way things are here. Strange but true.