Nonetheless, I do not consider myself to be
on a road to unbelief, or in danger of "abandoning the faith" anytime
soon — or ever, for that matter. I decided a long time ago that the
issue really comes down to which set of bothersome, unanswerable
questions you're more at peace with — those you're left with when you
believe, or those you're left with when you don't. (One of my gripes
about unbelievers is that they so often give the impression that the
choice is between belief and lots of stubborn, unanswerable questions,
or unbelief and full intellectual satisfaction.) Always I have been of
the opinion that the unanswered questions of belief are much easier to
live with than those of unbelief. For example (and this is a huge one
for me), if I choose naturalism (which I see to be the only real
alternative to theism), then I must accept that somewhere, at some
time, something came into existence out of absolutely nothing. (For all
the efforts of contemporary atheists to escape what Frank Hoyle saw
clearly as the implications of big bang cosmology, this consequence
still stands undefeated.) And this is a claim I don't even know how to
begin to get my mind around. The perplexities (and they are many) of
the problem of evil pale into nothing by comparison. Which is harder to
conceive, that one powerful enough to create a universe might have
plans too complex for us to fathom that somehow make some kind of sense
out of the state we find the world in, or that everything from quarks
to DNA to dwarf stars to the whole of the cosmos came out of
absolutely, positively, indefinable emptiness??? Sometimes, when my
doubts are raging, this is the only place my faith has to stand. But,
even at those times, it is enough.
I do have to say that my
faith has evolved in recent years to something that most conservatives
or evangelicals might not consider "true Christianity." That's okay,
though. I long ago stopped worrying about what anybody else thinks of
my faith. I have withdrawn from most forms of church leadership — I am
honestly tired of the hassle, tired of the crap, and just plain tired.
Furthermore, I find it harder and harder to sanction the bigotry and
hard-heartedness that so often goes under the guise of redemptive
behavior. Also, I'm much more inclined to a broadly inclusivistic
respect for and even openness to other religious traditions, to the
point that I am not ready to express anything like the
quasi-exclusivistic "There is no other name" xenophobia that most
conservative Christians insist on as a sine qua non of the faith.
When
you add all of this together with the fact that several years ago I was
divorced and remarried, I do tend to fall well outside most circles
that many Christians are comfortable with. But, like I said, I long ago
stopped worrying what anybody else thinks of me. It's a very serene way
to live. I'm very happy, I'm very much at peace. Like Tillich, I
meditate; unlike Tillich, I also pray. I've learned a great deal lately
from the Pali Canon and the Tao te Ching. I've also gotten to know
Jesus perhaps better than ever. I still know that the intellectual case
for faith is good, but not overwhelming. But I'm becoming more and more
convinced that the existential case for faith can be — for those who
seek it — downright irresistible.
James F. Sennet on Doubtful Belief
Cited in "Still a Believer" at debunkingchristianity.com (March 29, 2009).
I have doubts. I think I know too much for it to be otherwise. And I think I'm far too honest with myself about the best that unbelief has to offer. I have not mastered the blissful ignorance or self-deception that so many conservative or evangelical Christians manage to shelter themselves with. I don't mean that to sound perjorative, but the fact of the matter is that I find it very difficult to convince very many "Bible believing" Christians that the case for unbelief has a single shred of intellectual strength, and that really bothers me.
Filed in...

Comments
James F. Sennet on Doubtful Belief
Return