大象传媒

I liked the Good Book Company's Pre-thumbed Bible: and the Ship of Fools' article on Dawkins' de-evangelistic tour:

I wonder if I might add another observation?

It seems to me that it may be a little rash for those of us who take the name "Christian", to assume that we, by our actions, have never said in our hearts that there is no God.

There is such a thing as 'practical atheism'; and perhaps each 'believer' who reads Psalm 14 might ask, 'is it I'.

Careful religidiots
whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire
burn baby burn!

"Atheism is a comparative new-comer to intellectual history"

You mean no-one used to lack belief in God? I find that very difficult to believe.

Will was right to sense the teasing nature of my comment, which was typed with a smile rather than a sneer. It was designed to provoke reaction....and worked!

However, since the Bible says: 'The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom', the clear implication is that those who don't acknowledge Him have not yet reached square one in terms of really understanding what life is about.

Christians have discovered that faith in God gives life meaning.
As Augustine put it: " Thou hast made us for Thyself, and our hearts are restless till they find their rest in Thee."

He had a point, don't you think?

Phillip, RE: However, since the Bible says: 'The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom', the clear implication is that those who don't acknowledge Him have not yet reached square one in terms of really understanding what life is about.

I find that reading a little simplistic. Wisdom and Understanding are not so easily correlated as that. Being wise does not mean that one grasps things as they are - rather, it means one is in a position to observe and appreciate the complexities of things and the position of one's self relative to them.

I don't think it right to talk about what God brings as "meaning". The notion is much better thought of as "perspective". Meaning seems to be more about social practice rather than anything about one's relationship to the world and their own lives, and while I get that it's easy for people to think that God also informs social practice, there is a coming apart between Religion and Faith that seems to hang precisely on that distinction.

William:

First, whoever wrote this psalm was certainly not refering to anything like the modern notion of atheism. Atheism is a comparative new-comer to intellectual history. I'll leave you to speculate about what Psalm 14:1 might actually have referred to, but we can be reasonably sure that it wasn't aimed at some ancient world equivalent of Richard Dawkins.

Lucretius:

When in full view on the earth man鈥檚 life lay rotting and loathsome,
Crushed 鈥榥eath the ponderous load of Religion鈥檚 cruel burdensome shackles,
Who out of heaven displayed her forehead of withering aspect,
Lowering over the heads of mortals with hideous menace,
Upraising mortal eyes 鈥檛was a Greek who first, daring, defied her;
鈥楪ainst man鈥檚 relentless foe 鈥檛was Man first framed to do battle.
Him could nor tales of the gods nor heaven鈥檚 fierce thunderbolts鈥� crashes
Curb; nay rather they inflamed his spirit鈥檚 keen courage to covet.
His it should first be to shiver the close-bolted portals of Nature.
Therefore his soul鈥檚 live energy triumphed, and far and wide compassed
World鈥檚 walls鈥� blazing lights, and the boundless Universe traversed
Thought-winged; from realms of space he comes back victorious and tells us
What we may, what we much not perceive; what law universal
Limits the ken of each, what deep-set boundary landmark:
Then how in turn underfoot Religion is hurled down and trampled,
Then how that victory lifts mankind to high level of heaven.

"As Augustine put it: 'Thou hast made us for Thyself, and our hearts are restless till they find their rest in Thee.'

He had a point, don't you think? "

Nope.

I'm quite content.

@ 6 PaulR wrote:
I find that reading a little simplistic. Wisdom and Understanding are not so easily correlated as that.

Paul needs to ask why in the Hebrew poetry of the Old Testament Job, the Psalms and Proverbs use the words wisdom and knowledge and understanding together and often in parallel. He may then discover that pastorphillip understands them much better in context than he is prepared to admit.
(cf Job 28:28, Ps 111:10, Prov 1:7, 9:10)

William writes
First, whoever wrote this psalm was certainly not refering to anything like the modern notion of atheism. Atheism is a comparative new-comer to intellectual history. I'll leave you to speculate about what Psalm 14:1 might actually have referred to, but we can be reasonably sure that it wasn't aimed at some ancient world equivalent of Richard Dawkins.


A reading of the whole Psalm shows that it applies to its own day. This was written many centuries before Paul. Writing to the church in Rome, Paul still sees it as completely relevant to all in his day despite the many years of development in intellectual history since it was first penned. The same is true for today. The words of this Psalm remain relevant and applicable to all - including atheists and Richard Dawkins.

I do think, however, that the pastor who wished atheists on their special day (with Psalm 14:1 as text) is as far off the mark as William is. Both, in the way they have used this verse, have done a grave injustice to the passage (Psalm 14) which goes to the heart of the Christian faith and which alone can explain the foolishness of the cross.

I was being facetious. I know it's a relative newcomer and modern. Not least because your life would have been in danger to claim you didn't believe until relatively recently. Not even Hume would go so far. Nor Darwin nor Huxley. Thanks for the link.

Sade was pretty bold though.

Michael, RE: "pastorphillip understands them much better in context than he is prepared to admit."

I will happily admit that he understands biblical context better than I. Your suggestion is "this reading is the contextually appropriate one, simplistic or not". Fine. Neither of these seem to bother my assertion this reading, contextually appropriate or otherwise, is overly simplistic. Unifying Wisdom and Understanding is a mistake, regardless of who said it and when.

2. peterm2 wrote:

"...it may be a little rash for those of us who take the name "Christian", to assume that we, by our actions, have never said in our hearts that there is no God"

As it is rash of we who are called 'atheists' to deny that we haven't made an appeal to a higher and invisible authority at some point.

The most annoying thing about God, to this 'atheist' at least, is that He apparently doesn't exist.

newdwr54

You leave me a little uncertain about what to say, perhaps I'll try the following -

In a conversation with his brother Christopher, Peter Hitchens said, "I doubt all the time 鈥� endless, incessant doubt. I think that both the atheist and the Christian fear that there is a God, but the Christian also hopes that there is one."

There may be many who will disagree, but in light of your comments (for which I thank you), his perspective is interesting.

the full transcript is available on

As Touchstone says in 鈥楢s You Like It鈥�, 鈥渢he fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool鈥�.

Actually, I was told it is foolish to think with your heart. The wise man thinks with his head,

I am not quite sure what William means by the 鈥榤odern notion of atheism鈥�. Yet I suppose it鈥檚 fair enough. After all, the modern notion of Christianity bears little relationship to the 2,000 year-old original.

鈥淭urn the other cheek鈥�. You can鈥檛 be serious. 鈥淟ove your enemies鈥�. You must be joking. 鈥淒o good to them that hate you鈥�. Get out of it. 鈥淔irst be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift鈥�. You鈥檙e kidding me.

What quaint notions of Christianity they had back then. Actually, far from being a newcomer to intellectual history, the truly Christian philosophy awaits its arrival. The last Christian died on the cross.

Mr Crawley;

This may come as no great surprise, but i think you give "the modern notion of philosophical atheism" an unrealistically exalted status. It seems rather like putting so much of the sheer refuse that is optimistically called "modern art" on the same level as the great artistic movements of the past.

Congratulations to pastorphilip on achieving the 'Holy Grail' of the Will and Testament blog - a whole thread inspired by one of your posts! I thought my comments about Harry Redknapp might have done the same thing, but it wasn't to be...

I thought there was a minor classic in this genre ages ago when the Guardian had a spoof "father and son" interview with Bamber (erstwhile host of University Challenge) and Paul Gascoigne. Seeing this year's offering from the Telegraph, above, reminded me that their could be a rich vein of humour in the idea of a third Miliband brother - Steve!*

*'The Steve Miller Band' (geddit?), whose string of seventies hits included "The Joker".

Hello William.

Dsmissing such greats as Van Gogh and Picasso would be a whole lot more difficult if the people they paint didn't have ears sticking out of their foreheads ;)

I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder after all?

Bit tongue in cheek humour there (I think he paints that too) but I suppose the real conundrum here is how any painting can fetch the sums that some do?

"American businessmen snap up Van Gogh's for the price of a hospital wing"

The surreal truths expressed in song lyrics are often easier understood than the multi eared paintings of the "greats".

But I suppose the mention of song lyrics brings us back to Psalm 14

"The fool says in his heart, "There is no God" .

The Hebrew word "谞指讘指诇" translated as fool here carries the meaning "senseless". As pointed out previously those who are able to see the eloquence and skilled expression of a modern art classic may only be able to do so because "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". They are able to "sense" something others are not.

Could it be that those described in Psalm 14 as "Fools" or "senseless" simply cannot see the "eloquence and skilled expression" in existence that many others can?

Doubtless you and I could suggest to Mr Theophane that if he only took the time to study Van Gogh, his life, his style, his technique etc he could come to understand and see the beauty and skill in the masters creation.

But perhaps Mr Theophane, like other "fools" simply don't want to try?


Though it seems that Mr Theophane has got the "sense" to know which matters most.


Beece

To Will Crawley and Beece;

It's interesting you should mention the Impressionists, because they were the first artists to turn their attention exclusively to non-religious themes. I suppose being a secret admirer of Cezanne is a bit like having a serruptitious appreciation of the Beatles (even if, as the then Cardinal Ratzinger correctly pointed out, 'pop' music is a "vehicle of irreligion"*). But the 'modern art' i really had in mind was the stuff where the price tag is - literally - more interesting than the work itself. It isn't to say that magnificent art isn't being produced in our day, only that "fashion", or "modernity" is no indicator of true value.

*I think that's what he said

I think a lot of Christians miss the point of Psalm 14:1 / 53:1.

It doesn't say "the fool has said in his *mind* 'there is no God'", but "in his heart". I am well aware that the Hebrew word for heart ('lev') can include the mind, but it refers to the centre of one's being.

It's not for me to make assumptions about other people's 'hearts', but from my observation I have more than a sneaking suspicion that there are 'intellectual atheists' who are not so 'in their hearts', and conversely there are plenty of 'intellectual theists', who ought to give our very own Helio a call and join his 'Church of JC Atheist'.

So I suggest that we Christians cannot use Psalm 14:1 as a pretext for finger pointing, but rather it is description of something known only to God.

I'm with Rob Bell on this one: there'll be a lot of surprises 'on that day' (if you understand what I mean!)

Hope this post comes out OK, as I don't have a preview function on this thread, and the whole thread looks a bit sorry for itself on my browser. (大象传媒 cost cutting perhaps??)

You needn't fear LSV, we are receiving you loud and clear!

BTW thanks for your kind observations on a previous post. :)

What's interesting for me is -

Why would Pastorphilip think that an atheist would place anymore credence or wisdom in that bible verse than any of the other ones we think are untrue, nonsensical or (as in this case) self serving platitudes. Here is another quote ;

"There is none so blind as those who will not see?"

I had to break off from this reply to answer the door to a very nice lady trying to give me a bible tract (laughingly with the word truth on the front). I asked here whether she ever felt the futility of handing out nonsense to people who regard it as trite and untrue. She didn't seem to understand where I was coming from .....

"There is none so blind as those who will not see?"

She just smiled bemusedly and went on her way, tract in hand and obliviously blind.

I couldn't have asked for a better example, maybe a supernatural force sent her to help me put forward my point, I can't come up with another logical explanation why she should appear at this crucial juncture in my musings so it must be supernatural.

@24 Dave:
Perhaps someone's prayers directed the lady with the tract to your door.

mscracker,

exactly my point, "it woz the supernatural wot did it" it not a credible argument for anything even coincidence or serendipity. It simply shows a lack of knowledge of the paths and decisions which allowed for the confluence of events and the probabilities involved. The fact that it gets trotted out as an explanation whenever it suits (usually for good things though) does not add weight to it's plausibility.

@26 Dave:
I hear you & I did wonder if you were just using the incident to make a point, but I also believe in the supernatural explanation & the power of prayer.
God bless!

mscracker,

It's interesting that you're willing to accept supernatural providence in those people turning up at Dave's door, are you just as willing to accept that the same providence is also responsible for those improbable events that lead to someone's death or serious injury?

You can't claim god's responsible for only the good improbable events.

@28:
I was thinking of the power of prayer specifically.As in Christian prayer.
Those folks who believe in black magic & suchlike might agree with the proposition of invoking harm to others.That's way outside my realm of expertise & I hope to keep it that way.
But if you are talking about truly good events, I believe God can be responsible for those.And the lady who showed up at his door might have been inspired to do so through another's prayer.
(And someone needs to sprinkle a little Holy Water on this thread, the software or something is a bit messed up.)

Talking of prayer- reminded me of something I read about chanting and the Solfege or solfreggio scale . This is just a quote from Wiki-

"In the eleventh century, the music theorist Guido of Arezzo developed a six-note ascending scale that went as follows: ut, re, mi, fa, sol, and la. A seventh note, "si" was added shortly after." The wording was taken from a Latin Hymn "Ut queant laxis"

"Ut" queant laxis "Re"son膩re fibris
"Mi"ra gestorum "Fa"muli tuorum,
"So"lve polluti "La"bii reatum,

When the scale is converted to Hz frequency. There's supposedly a therapeutic aspect which can be observed. One of the scales converts to 528hz- the same frequency bio-chemists use to repair DNA

@30:
My youngest son has been reading about that recently, too. Interesting you should mention that.

Ryan,

Couple of things:

Mi (the annotation in question) is a 'note' of frequency 528 Hz ( Middle c I think it converts to in our Western octave based system) not a scale which is a series of notes of different frequencies.

I have read that David Icke uses this note to repair DNA not bio - chemists, I could be wrong but all the references I can find to it are from new age folk and the like.

K well Ive never heard of David Icke, but if something works - it works. Id rather not disown an idea because it's somehow been degraded in other peoples eyes. Id rather not be influenced by association

That was to 32

Ryan,

Your point?

Correlation doesn't imply anything. Now, if Guido of Arezzo knew about DNA and planned his scale to directly affect genetic strings then sure, give him the credit. But I don't get where you're going with this; that somehow, someone once did something that happens to do something else?

Wow.

Ryan,


You have not read about David Icke, one of the proponents of this - you should it's rip roaring stuff. You will be out in your blue shell-suit by evening and no doubt hailing him as the second coming like his followers do. Just be careful of the aliens next door and the programmed woman at the checkout. Its scientology on acid.

@ 32-36:

I bet this link won't work, but regardless, there are several books out there addressing music therapy & neurological repair.Princeton University has something online, per my son, but I can't locate it.I only found a lab which shut down in 2007.
But yes, there's much New Age stuff online, as well.

mscracker, looks like an interesting book.They say even playing classical music to kids in school can have a good effect on learning and concentration. A friend of mine has cerebral palsy, his mum went down the route of music therapy and exercise techniques and he surpassed the prognosis of the doctors