“Jack” on Slackers

C-S-LEWIS     A good reminder from our old friend C.S. Lewis:

It is, of course, quite true that God will not love you any the less, or have less use for you, if you happen to have been born with a very second-rate brain. He has room for people with very little sense, but He wants every one to use what sense they have. … God is no fonder of intellectual slackers than of any other slackers. If you are thinking of becoming a Christian, I warn you, you are embarking on something which is going to take the whole of you, brains and all.

from Mere Christianity

Honest Q & A: The Existence of God (2) – Our Quest for Meaning

“’Vanity of vanities’ says the Preacher, ‘vanity of vanities! All is vanity!’” begins the Bible’s book of Ecclesiastes.

“History is the nothing people write about a nothing,” wrote Sir William Golding, the English novelist, in Darkness Visible.

Finally, Shakespeare, in MacBeth,
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
           That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
           And then is heard no more: it is a tale
           Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
           Signifying nothing.

We humans desire significance. Incurably so. The thought of a meaningless life is enough to crush us. It is distressing or dispiriting if it is not maddening or all of the above and more at the same time. If we only have some significance, we can taste hope.

But consider, if we or anyone and everyone and everything are ultimately a crowd of meaningless things, the paraphernalia of a meaningless universe, driven by meaningless forces to no significant end, then why should our meaninglessness even matter? Why should we find that the least bit disheartening? Do clouds care that they come and go without anyone even noticing? Does the grass contemplate its fairly modest existence? How about dolphins? They may be fairly intelligent, but do they care about their place in history, their porpoise, that is, purpose in life? (Sorry!)

Yet we self-centered, species-centered humans want to matter, even if we only matter because we devote our lives to the betterment of other species – which implies that they matter, which means the universe ultimately matters. And here we go again, trying to see significance in the whole thing. If that significance is not really there, if we are only kidding ourselves, then it’s all pointless and we have no real reason to care. At all. About anyone or anything.

On the other hand, we may be made in the image of God, for reasons known best to himself. And he may be willing to reveal these plans and purposes to us little by little, in his good time, especially if we seek him with all our heart. He may have his very own sagacious motives for giving us life and we may have a bottom-line reason to be. In that case, our lives do have meaning and will retain meaning, and perhaps even increase in meaning throughout all eternity. Everlastingly significant. Every last one of us. And hard-wired to want our lives to matter. Such a state of affairs would not only begin to explain our significance, but explain why we so badly desire significance in the first place.

Religion in Rome – nothing to do with the Pope

First put this put this up about 4 years ago, and got to thinking about it again.  The key point is the title has to do with “decline and fall.  Not hoping for that by any means, just noticing a similarity.”

I recently stumbled upon this and thought it sounded a lot like the USA.  It’s from Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. I, ch. II:

“The policy of the emperors and the senate, as far as it concerned religion, was happily seconded by the reflections of the enlightened, and by the habits of the superstitious, part of their subjects. The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world were all considered by the people as equally true; by the philosopher as equally false; and by the magistrate as equally useful. And thus toleration produced not only mutual indulgence, but even religious concord.”  (Emphasis added.)

In the yet-to-be-written The History of the Decline and Fall of the American Empire, vol. I, ch. II, it will state:  

“The average American was vaguely religious believing that it didn’t matter what one believed as long as one was sincere.  The devotee of science was convinced that all religion would become unnecessary if only people knew better.  Most politicians identified themselves as, ‘Christians who support Israel’ (but didn’t always give convincing evidence of either), and knew that Islam was undeniably a ‘religion of peace’ (while uncertain that religious knowledge even existed).  These points of view (though on the face of it contradictory) actually harmonized well enough in the public mind that the most of the diverse population managed to somehow get along with itself.”

Religion in Rome

I recently stumbled upon this and thought it sounded a lot like the USA.  It’s from Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. I, ch. II:

“The policy of the emperors and the senate, as far as it concerned religion, was happily seconded by the reflections of the enlightened, and by the habits of the superstitious, part of their subjects. The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world were all considered by the people as equally true; by the philosopher as equally false; and by the magistrate as equally useful. And thus toleration produced not only mutual indulgence, but even religious concord.”  (Emphasis added.)

In the yet-to-be-written The History of the Decline and Fall of the American Empire, vol. I, ch. II, it will state:  

“The average American was vaguely religious believing that it didn’t matter what one believed as long as one was sincere.  The devotee of science was convinced that all religion would become unnecessary if only people knew better.  Most politicians identified themselves as, ‘Christians who support Israel’ (but didn’t always give convincing evidence of either), and knew that Islam was undeniably a ‘religion of peace’ (while uncertain that religious knowledge even existed).  These points of view (though on the face of it contradictory) actually harmonized well enough in the public mind that the diverse population managed to somehow get along with itself.”