[Find part one here: Religion]
"Conscience" is the revaltion of morality.
"Transcendence" is the hyper-resolution of an experience that elevates one above mere existence. It is the swift, sharp kick to the head that alters our perceptions and informs our morality. So, to tie that concept into my last post, one can translate that as "transcendence realigning one's priorities." One can see from this that transcendence can be of critical importance for us. The search for transcendence seems to be relatively constant across cultures, across demographics within cultures, even though it takes on many, many forms. Transcendence is different for each of us. Some find it in music, others find it in cooking, some in mathematics. As far as I can tell, few of us have not found something transcendent. It is as universal as truth or morality.
So, how do you prioritize your life? What truths do you find meaningful? How does the employment of those truths in pursuit of your morality manifest itself? That is your religion. It doesn't matter that you identify as an anarcho-communist-nihilist. That doesn't mean that you have no religion, because that state-of-being actually defines the religion that you're acting out. The a-priori structure that you're demonstrating simply belies the fact that you are expressing the exact same solution-set as a priest or pastor does.
This solution-set, completely independent of belief structure, is the answer to the ubiquitous question: "How should I behave?" How one pursues that behavior set is a religion. One who steadfastly maintains that there "is no God", and "believes in nussing", is just as religious as the most zealous pastor, priest, rabbi or imam. That individual is pursuing a morality, based on accepted truths, and conducts himself according to a corresponding ethical code. How could it be any different? Despite that individual's "identity", he has DNA and that genetic code has been passed down for several million years in a very specific manner. This a-priori structure is ubiquitous within the human experience.
So I believe that Christ is the "way and the life", why is my religion good? Because pain equalizes us all. I dare you to argue against it. If pain exists, then something opposite has to exist. That "opposite" is transcendence. The elevation above the pain. What is described in the Bible is the story of how to live, stories told many times over and from various perspectives. If one accepts that the most awesome superhero is a guy who did nothing wrong, but who consciously volunteered to be betrayed by his friends, denied by his church, and tortured to death by his government, so that he could sacrifice himself to atone for the inherent fallibility of all mankind, then one might be aiming at an example that is worthy of following. If one understands that each individual is made in the image of the creator, then one might be able to judge each individual according to his character. If each individual should act in a manner in Christ's example, then society becomes enriched incrementally, as each individual lives up to his potential. I can't see a downside to that, and societies that have encouraged those criteria have been wildly successful in providing their citizens with the resources that are required to remain free.
On the other end of this, each society that has chosen to disavow God or fail to live up to Christ's example have resulted in corruption of its leadership, wholesale slaughter of its citizenry, and the destruction of truth and ethics, while attempting to redraw morality in a manner that doesn't recognize the inherent divinity of the individual. In those nations, transcendence is only possible by becoming an enemy of the state. See: Solzhenitsyn, Gandhi, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer.
Moreover, individuals who choose to pursue a morality that is counter to the tenets of Judeo-Christianity generally find themselves bereft of meaning (unable to identify truth, or deny that any truth exists). If there is no truth, no ethics, and a denial of morality, then how does a goal-oriented individual function? For what does one aim to achieve?
That last question, to my mind, gets down to the bottom of this. If you are not striving in a manner that serves your family, your community, while you grow by your sacrifice for something other than yourself, then how does the "religion" that you're serving improve anything? To quote Tyler, "Those things that you own, end up owning you", unless those things serve some overarching purpose to drive forward and assist you in achieving your purpose, that reinforce the meaning of your life, that allow you to transcend the suffering of this mortal coil in that pursuit of purpose and meaning.
"Religion" involves picking up a burden, and carrying it, with as much grace as one can summon. It isn't about your "inalienable rights". It is about your inescapable responsibility to yourself, to your family, and to your fellow man.
Such is my perception.
Unclean
2 comments:
As a former atheist I appreciated both of the last entries you made. Via great hardship (most self induced) I was forced to finally recon with things bigger than myself and I realized this- When a man finds the end of himself... that’s where God is. It took a lot for me, some people are less stubborn. Johnny Cash put it so well “You can run on for a long time, but sooner or later God will cut you down”. In the end, being “cut down” is the only thing that can stop us from sinning (see the entire Old Testament as reference) and through Christ, a means to rebuild (see the entire New Testament as reference). Finally, you put the entire Word as the foundation of living and you find that this cutting down and redemption is continuous... so long as you allow it.
It is my experience, after half a century on this planet, that the vast majority of hardship is "self-induced". I'm glad that these words spoke to you, and I pray for your continued effectiveness in the face of temptation.
Post a Comment