Journal
"Challenges to Faith"
Faith, within itself, is often times very difficult to possess and maintain as it requires the one possessing it to take a risk and to believe in something that is outside his or her immediate grasp, something that may or may not be true. In addition to this initial risk, however, which truly does present a challenge to anyone seeking faith as many people are unwlling to take this risk in believing in that something outside of their immediate grasp, several other outside forces exist which present a threat to this faith, some examples being atheism, scientism, and dehumanization. Atheism, identified with the philosphers Nietzsche and Hobbes, presents a direct threat to our Faith in God as Christians as it directly denies the existence of a God. Nietzche, claiming that belief in God "is dead," embraced his atheistic ideas as he called religious practice "a crutch that is for the uneducated." A nihilist, Nietzche denounced the idea that reason is capable of revealing any truths, and instead, believed that beliefs arise from our emotions, gut, or will. He further described a more specific will, a will to power, that all humans possess--the desire to have as much power as possible. Believing that humans are meant to act on this will to power, Nietzsche criticized those who denied it, specifically Jews and Christians, and emphasized the idea of "survival of the fittest." Nietzche, as well as Hobbes, a philospher who was quite different from Nietsche, accepting reason as an outlet for truth, and unlike Nietzsche, looking down on the human race as selfish and violent, both accepted the idea of relative morality. Unlike objective morality, which agrees that one set of morals and values exists for everybody everywhere as a result of one God who sets these standards, relative morality says values and morals are differnt from person to person and we must set our own values. St. Ignatious of Loyola, however, accepted objective morality, and in additon to agreeing that God exists in every age and culture, believed that both reason and the help of God's grace can help bring about our beliefs and morals. In addition to atheism, science has challenged faith in religion throughout the centuries. While experiencing a "unreflective unity" with science, religious ideas during the periods 500-1500 AD often times used scientific and logical concepts to provide backing for doctrine. However, during the Renaissance and Enlightenment periods, the gap increased as religious doctrine conflicted with new advancing scientific discoveries. As we see more today, however, that gap is being bridged as we are beginning to realize that "if a personal God really did create the universe, it logically follows that no honest, thorough investigation of nature can cantradict this fact." It would be ideal to one day be able to use all scientific advancement to enhance our faith in a loving God. Finally, the third threat to our faith in God and in ourselves is that of dehumanization as posed by the advertisements in our culture and our dependency on commodities. Our materialistic outlook that associates the products we buy with higher values takes away partial realities of what love is, what relationships are, and what God is, and replaces these with the associations we make with the products that we are told to buy in order to achieve these values.
Three Important Ideas of the Section:
1. "God is the source of objective value."(RB) While reflecting on this statement I soon found myself accepting parts of what it had to offer while simultaneously accepting parts of Nietzche's beliefs on relative morality. While accepting that there is a God who exists and has existed in every age and culture, I was quick to identify with Nietzche's idea that "a person had to sit down and really think about what's important to him or her [and hence decide what they believe to be right and wrong.] After reflection, I cautiously came to the conclusion that when I do find myself asking myself "What is right and wrong?" or perhaps "What is important to me?" I am merely attempting to uncover, or gain a greater understanding of what God's standards for right and wrong are in attempt to grow closer to him through knowledge of him. Since I want to know God, it makes sense that I want to know what he values and what his will for me is. Therefore, these questions, although immediate to my personal life, help me gain a fuller understanding of God's will and intention for me.
2.Science focuses more on the questions of "How?" instead of "Why?" While science attempts to explain how the universe works, it fails to answer the question of why it does so. Just as Ignatius maintains that reason is not to be worshiped, but to be used along side of God's grace, religion, like that, attempts to answer the questions of "Why?" that science is not capable of answering. While sometimes feeling that science's practical explanations can answer all my questions about the universe, I soon recognize that it is incapable of satisfying my questions of "Why am Ihere?" "How should I live my life?" and several other questions. This is where religion comes in. Just as Ignatius points out, God's grace leads us to the answers to these questions through religion. Since our loving God gave us logic and intellegence as well as a sense of curiosity, it is important to recognize that science as well as religion can lead me closer to God.
3. On reflecting on Nietzsche's concept of a "Superman" or an individual with a strong will to power and the ambition to attain it, I thought of the following: God is much like the figure of a Superman. Why? God "creates the world in HIS IMAGE because he believes that his way of thinking is the best." While Nietzche totally denied God, criticized Jesus, and would probably be insulted and enraged that I used his concept to relate to things he does not acknowledge as truthful, God, to me somewhat portrays this Superman. If objective truth refers to the standards of what is right and wrong created by the one God ( and it logically follows that God's standards are set according to what He thinks is best/most love affirming or the thing that would bring us closer to him) then God created the world the way he wanted it to be, "in his image" (as the Bible says), because his way of thinking is the best--the ultimate and correct. Just as the Superman sets the standards for the masses in Nietzsche's theory, God sets the standards for what is right and wrong for us--the objective truth.
Images of Key Ideas:
Challenges to Faith in My Life
I would say that the greatest challenge to faith in my life is one reoccuring thought that seems to haunt me when I reflect on my faith and religion. This thought is one that connects religion and the progression of time. Specifically, it is obvious that as science advanced throughout history, several religious ideas were displaced. For instance, ancients used religion to justify things that they couldn't expalin. However, as science advanced and discoveries were made about nature, these religious explanations were disregarded. I can't help but wonder if we are similar to our ancestors and merely use religion to explain things that we don't understand. Will people hundreds of years from now look down on us as primitive for religious beliefs we have now that they might be able to explain perfectly with science in the future? Are there ideas out there that we explain with religion that truly have logical explanations that we are unaware of? It is these questions that pose a challenge to my faith in religion.
(I do, however, realize that it is possible for science and religion to coexist in harmony, and that religion can answer questions that science cannot and vica versa.)
