Experiencing God II

(For previous sections see below)

Title

         God II: a God for atheists

6. Experiencing God II

Brian Davies in his "An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion" has a chapter 7 titled "Experience and God". In it he ruminates on the proposition that direct experience of God can teach us about God and can provide grounds for a belief in the existence of God by a route other than reason. Davies is largely concerned with the rather rare but very striking occurrences, what we might call "burning bush" or "Joan of Arc" experiences, anecdotes essentially, because rare. But he wisely admits that some of these "experiences" could be cases of mistaken identity; hallucinations, or even fibs. He goes on to ponder how an enquirer could know that he is experiencing God if he does not already "know God"; the feeling of certainty is clearly not enough.

I wish to turn the whole discussion round and approach it from the other end. Suppose we wonder whether we should be honest or dishonest (speak the truth or tell lies), whether we should help our neighbours or hinder them, share (at least part of) our possessions with less fortunate individuals or take from others without asking, indulge or abstain. Suppose we discuss our feelings with others and find that they have similar thoughts, and similar dilemmas. I believe that such discussions would show a consensus. More than that, I believe that they do show a consensus. Indeed, I think I can truthfully go further still and say that I know they show a consensus, at least within certain groups.

What I am talking about here is not philosophers discussing general propositions but each individual experiencing hundreds, maybe thousands of particular little instances of a dilemma. How many times have I found something that does not belong to me? Should I keep it or hand it in? Will the proper owner ever recover it? It may be impossible to generalize, for each case is different and must be judged afresh. With the current world population there are potentially 6.8 billion individuals each involved in making a myriad similar judgements. Complicate that further by letting the 6.8 billion individuals discuss each case with a dozen 'friends'. The moral conscience of the human species is highly diffuse, but it is not nebulous. It would be hard to determine the complete answer to the question "Is it wrong to kill your unborn offspring?" But there is an answer. And there is a perfectly straightforward way in which we can approach an estimate of the answer.

There are religions where it is taught that morality derives from 'God'. Breaking God's law is called 'Sin'. The sinner is banished from God's presence (i.e. heaven), unless he seeks, and is granted, forgiveness. This is an old tradition. It is therefore by no means twisting words to conclude that 'God', as the moral conscience of mankind, is located in the collective mind of mankind. We find that the judgements of good and evil, the condemning and the forgiving of sinners is indeed done by 'God' — what I have called God II. I think an extension of this train of though will show that other judgements are similarly located, questions of human worth, and 'the purpose of life'.

It is not everyone that ponders and discusses questions of right and wrong. Some people have a clear 'inner voice' on such matters, but others do not, and may be content to rely on the consciences of their neighbours. It greatly simplifies matters for the lazy or insecure if codes of practice are produced, and books written, and a sort of 'case law' established whereby individuals do not need to access their own feelings but can rely on clear-cut rules. Some individuals are seen to speak with a clarity that their neighbours recognize and support. Others speak with an inner confidence but fail to convince their neighbours. However, just as it is important in a democracy for the citizen to vote, so in questions of morality and on questions of human value it is important for everyone to take part, to ponder and discuss. It is far too easy for single individuals to miss the faint promptings of conscience and to be distracted by worldly and material things. See how the Popes got distracted from the care of Christendom into murder, indulgence and deceit. See how the vicars of the established church in England grew progressively richer and fatter and gave progressively fewer sermons while their curates scurried around doing the vicar's duties for him. Seeking the 'will of God' is a human duty. Where it is neglected, or too much delegated, humanity dwindles.

+++++++++++++++++++

Is God II something objective and outside ourselves? — yes.

Does God II exist as a real object? — no; rather as a spirit or idea or set of ideas.

Is the God II of Moses the same as God II today? — in large part yes.

Is God II aware of each and every one of us? — yes.

Does God II care for us as individuals? — yes.

Does the Bible and the Koran represent the 'word of God II' ? — in part yes.

+++++++++++++++++++