Re: Re: Re: RE: God

["Greg Schofield" <g_schofield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Carrol, presupositions are funny things. Yes, saying that God is a projection of (hu)man does sit upon the foundation that God does not exist. Existence being a natural state.

However, existence is not an issue with theists (at least the less stupid kind), as God is conceived as being Super Natural and thus beyond such simple proofs and disproofs. , Not in the Begining there was God.

What matters to reasonable theists is the relationship to God not its separate existence. Hence Hegel could have God made into the Absolute idea and still remain a consistant theist, an idea, or word for that matter, does not have a corporal being and there is a long tradition of theist arguements along similiar lines.

Feurbach's assertion was that God far from being a supernatural being was in fact a subnatural one, a product of natural life, a reflection of (hu)man existence rather than the otherway round.

Now far from dismissing theological concerns on the basis that the object of the concern does not have a corporal existence, which is an obvious point to most theologists, such concerns have a historical interest (in revealing human comprehension of itself over time) and because many still subsribe to this ideology some political relevance as well.

Bertram Russels' agnosticism was always a slieght of hand, just a more sophisticated application of old fashion materialist atheism. There has always been a quaintly Edwardian flavour to such debates, a reaction to an imperial ideology where God was an Englishman pure and simple.

Atheism (without God) is not necessarily dependant the question of the existence or otherwise, but putting the belief in God into proper perspective (as a subnatural comprehension, rather than a supernatural revelation). I would go as far as to say that an atheist who takes this philosophical understanding seriously must be fairly well versed in theology, have some sympathetic understanding of the religious impulse and some understanding of how it fits into the full flow of human history.

Mostly what passes for atheism is no such thing, rather just anti-clericalism dressed up as strongly biased agnosticism (ie concerned in this case with the non-existence of God). It is the complementary opposite of fundementalism where the corporal existence of God is taken as the begining and end of belief (some faith that must rest itself not on faith but fancy - to make a theological point).

Carrol, my disagreement also has a practical aspect to it, especially in reagrd to fundementalism. A militant "atheism" tends to drive all Christians into one camp, this should be avoided where-ever possible. More effectively is to, from time to time, use purely theological arguments to deny that fundementalism is Christian at all - accusing them of being modern Pharasees seems to have a shaking effect and allows alliances to made with the more sophisticated theists.

I make a point of never accepting a declaration of Christian belief go unchallenged, and always assualting fundementalism on theological terms first and foremost - the arrogant sods usually find this unexpected and many I believe have never really had to think about religion much at all, and most are innocent of any theological knowledge.

--- Message Received ---
From: Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>
To: pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:13:19 -0600
>Subject: [PEN-L:23272] Re: Re: RE: God


Greg Schofield wrote:
>
> It could be said that God exists is so far as it
> is a projection of (hu)man (which puts a different
> twist on atheism then the simple contention that
> it does not).

Carrol:
No it doesn't; the claim that god is a human projection _presupposes_
the non-existence of god, the simple contention that it does not." For
unless one first assumes the simple non-existence of god there is no
need to develop an explanation for human conceptions of and belief in
that which is not.


Greg Schofield
Perth Australia
g_schofield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________

Use LesTecML Mailer (http://www.lestec.com.au/)
* Powerful filters.
* Create you own headers.
* Have email types launch scripts.
* Use emails to automat your work.
* Add comments on receive.
* Use scripts to extract and check emails.
* Use MAID to create taylor-made solutions.
* LesTecML Mailer is fully controlled by REXX.
* A REXX interpreter is freely available.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________