2009-05-16

Activist appears on a tortilla in mexico god

Yesterday, while attending a poetry slam session in a Nairobi suburb, it dawned upon me that a central theme in the Christian belief goes against my morality. I find it interesting, because non-believers are often lead to believe that their morals are inherited from Christian doctrine. Appearently, not so. I suppose it's a relief to me, which is why I feel like sharing. An apology for posting this here is due being wanton off-topic, but rest assured that the word "science" does appear. For the record, the title of this piece was inspired by a friend who said, "I honestly don't even think I believe in God more than like some levelling force of good in the universe, I don't believe in this activist appears on a tortilla in mexico god". I'm not personally seeing much of this levelling force and not very compelled to spirituality in general, but the rest of the remark does make for a good title.

Spirituality is strong in Kenya and most of the poems recited in the session carried religious messages. I took note of one piece in particular, which had a female poet ask her would-be suitor if "He was your king, your leader" (he would then ask her the same). This lead me to think about the concept of judgment, e.g. the notion that after we pass away, divine judgment awaits (protecting the kingdom of heaven). Another poet introduced his piece by reminding the audience that "scientists should stick to formulas". While a fair proposition, I hope it does not exclude me from employing logic, because I will need it in the following.

You'll recall that in Christian doctrine, Purgatory is the station just before Heaven and Hell (there's a notion of being in "limbo" as well, but that's irrelevant here). I've always thought that eternal damnation was an odd concept, but I've been lead to believe that it's a scarecrow idea that will never materialize (surely if it did, it would undermine the entire foundation of Christian morality, being such as cruel punishment). As such, we all go to Heaven eventually. What's important is that we don't know this while down here and so there's still this judgment awaiting us which could prove detrimental.

I call this morality of Purgatory "The Carrot or the Chariot", inspired by Malcolm X's speech "The Ballot or The Bullet", which in 1964 warns the United States government that if African-Americans are not given full equality, armed struggle will ensue. Mine is a pun on the obvious flaw of using Heaven as a carrot, while Hell is the actual destination should anything go wrong. The opposite of a carrot must be neutral, else it's no carrot.

We must believe in reform and morality while down here and we cannot instill this using fear for divine judgment. The carrot is the joy of living a moral life with all in which entails of honesty, modesty, humility, and so forth. With the morality of divine judgment comes reasoning that leads us to such cruelties as capital punishment (the secular counterpart to eternal damnation).

Further, if Purgatory is merely a scarecrow institution, we must question whether Heaven is even possible. Can such a state of being truly be different from that which we experience here below? The same petty thiefs, thugs and defilers will dwell there, too, demanding justice.

To observe this belief of happiness in living a life in morality and accepting happiness as a carrot is thus to reject the existance of Purgatory, Heaven and Hell, all of which are central to Christian morality.

11 comments:

Michael Foord said...

Purgatory makes no appearance in the Jewish faith nor in the teachings of Christ. It is therefore only 'Christian' in the instutional sense and not a genuine teaching of any real Christianity.

I'm not a great believer in institutional religions, but I have found the faith in Christ and a living spirituality transform my life. YMMV...

(Note that purgatory was always an exclusively Catholic invention and never part of most Christian sects anyway...)

JohnMc said...

You don't look far enough afield.

Ask yourself this -- why is it so many cultures around the world throughout history have this concept of a good after life and a bad after life? Egyptians, Norse, Mayans to name a few. How is it that this concept keeps recurring?

I have no answer. But I don't think the seed is a cultural one.

limi said...

The brain is wired for monotheism and superstition.

Why we're even discussing whether religion is relevant at this point is, frankly, beyond my understanding.

But hey, people should do whatever they want with their lives — as long as it doesn't negatively impact others, I am willing to accept that they believe in something I do not. But it shouldn't guide politics or morality.

rgz said...

@JohnMc

Saying that the mind "is wired for" implies too much intentionality, it's actually very simple.

Most people don't understand the mind as what it is: A machine with discrete but integrated parts that processes nervous input into both intelligent behavior and subjective experience.

Due to innate limitations (stupidity), people think of the mind as a magical (because they can't look it at work) indivisible (because few have experience dissecting the mind) and immaterial (because there is no obvious way to connect a material being into subjective experience, completely ignoring that there is no obvious way to connect an immaterial being into subjective experience either). And since it is immaterial, it might as well be immortal (which is great because we don't really want to die).

Immaterial immortality of course offends our sense of justice because it allow criminals to escape punishment, so we invented ways to impose justice upon our imaginary world.

malthe said...

@JohnMc: I acknowledge the fact that the concept appears in many cultures. The point I was trying to make is that the seed must be cultural since it is against my morality (I can't permit divine concepts to be immoral).

@limi: Today while getting onto a bus in the outskirts of town, a woman told the conductor that "some of us are saved", as to explain why she would like the stereo to be turned off. I would have said "please turn off your headache-inducing mainstream junk". With born-again saved worshippers luring around every corner, I think there is indeed a need to discuss religion, even amongst non-believers and non-institutionalized believers.

nnis said...

Most people (and atheists are especially prone to those type of generalizations) automatically assume that Roman Catholicism (or whatever the state church is where they live) is equivalent to all Christianity. Not only is there no purgatory in protestantism for example, but even the existence of eternal hell is not universally agreed on ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annihilationism )

So I would qualify your statement:
"...Purgatory, Heaven and Hell, all of which are central to [Roman Catholic] Christian morality". Otherwise your statement is imprecise at best or false at worst.

malthe said...

@nnis: Duly noted, thanks for clarifying.

To be honest, I am not really in the know on this topic. For the point I'm trying to make, I don't think the details matter though. The three big ones all share the idea of divine judgment, which is really the key instrument here.

Please correct me and maybe other readers if I'm wrong.

elarson said...

One thing I think is important is that from a Protestant standpoint (and Roman Catholic perspective from what I understand) the idea that you live your life in hope of making some undefined grade is wrong. God defined laws that required sacrifice, so Christ served as that sacrifice for all humanity. The divine judgement then is not some sort of a weighting of your positives and negatives, but simply an acknowledgement of whether or not you chose to accept that sacrifice.

Many people have an incorrect concept of judgement that suggests the church or people define right and wrong, when in fact it is something that is between a person and God.

I say this because there are entirely too many people who feel judged by Christians and the Church. This kind of judgement does not reflect the truth of what Christianity teaches, IMHO.

nnis said...

@malthe
Oh OK, I guess I didn't follow you then. I thought you were talking about the lack of effectiveness of punishment inflation as a deterrent to crime (i.e. let's declare death penalty for everything).

If it is just about judgment (i.e. eternal death or eternal live), I don't see how happiness of living a moral life NOW would contradict the desire to continue to live that moral life forever. Just the opposite, only a moral life of respect toward each other is sustainable. A life of spiraling hate and violence destructs itself in the long term. At that point it is just a matter of separating the groups of people that desire morality to the ones that don't and you pretty much have created heaven and hell. It is really in the HOW to achieve morality in a person where humanism and christianity part ways. One tries it through strictly human efforts. The other includes divine elements. The how, is a deeply personal matter though and forcing people to a particular system against their will creates antimoral people.

malthe said...

@nnis: It seems to me that eternal life will not be granted to everyone. You somehow need to have lived your life in a particular way to be granted admission.

Let's define extraterrestrial beings as non-human. I find the notion that a non-human will judge my life post-mortem wrong, because it embodies a disbelief in reform. There should not be a need for a second verdict hanging over our heads; we should be perfectly capable of administering justice through reform-friendly policies.

The idea that true justice awaits after this life may also harm our attempts at building peaceful societies. It may very well serve as an excuse for injustice ("God will know you did bad things and judge your accordingly.")

nnis said...

malthe: I commend your idealism. And again I don't see how if it was really possible to have perfect justice in this life, an appeal to a second, higher instance (assuming it had a sense of morality very superior to ours) would hurt. Neither do I follow how the knowledge of eventual justice would negate the desire for temporal justice right now. What it does do is temper desires to take things into ones own hand in revenge when justice is not done now.