In a video by Peter Santenello the American videomaker, traveler, and entrepreneur who produces videos about travel and human stories, Peter visits a man named Titus Morris who has been living in a remote part of the Appalachian Mountains for eight years with no electricity, mains water, no cell phone, no car and even no shoes in the summer. He says he lives in a similar way to the Amish community, but he does not follow their religion and practices pure Christianity instead.
Titus talks about what he learned from animals. Since he owns a horse that he uses for transportation, plowing, and so forth, when he talks about the frustration he felt at the horse for not following his direction, God speaks to him about how HE often gets off the path and goes the wrong way. But God does not treat him as such, so he shouldn’t treat the animals in the same way. This seems to suggest that for Titus, animals reflect the scriptural view not of domination but of responsibility. That just as God watches out for us. We should watch out for the animals he has entrusted us with.
He expresses the view that animals teach him patience. That they don’t always understand what you want them to do and you have to be patient with them. Now this isn’t a lesson that is obvious with one that HAS an animal as a pet. For Titus HE WORKS WITH the animals. They get food from him and he gets food as well. But they aren’t pets, they are not just companions, but they are partners in nature. WHen we in the modern, technologically advanced world seek wisdom from animals, we do so in an inappropriate relationship of expecting companionship rather than partnership. It is much different and the respect is much less authentic.
Titus expresses his view on talking with God. He states that he doesn’t hear God audibly, but he hears God in his mind, he feels a strong idea, thought, message, and he claims since it is so strong and it is against his own will, since he is angry at the time and not wanting to reason, that it must be God. Now this I think is probably the most telling aspect of this simple, but profound theology. For, the simple theology of Titus suggests that the reality of God is expressed not through evidence in the natural sort, but through experience and relationship. One could argue that these are evidence. But nonetheless, these are warrant for his belief.
The atheist may suggest that this may very well be just his mind. For a schizophrenic, for instance, has a strong sense of an otherness, or a thought that is too strong and against their own will to be their own. Likewise, the dissociative personality that creates multipersonalities would also seem to dictate against this. And yet, this assumes that these other personalities are a.) just in the mind and b.) a part of the individual themselves. However, it is quite possible that these multiple personalities are not the individual themselves but rather an influence from some other individual. If thoughts merely emerge from the brain then the multiple personalities would have to come the brain and thus the individual. However, again there are reasons to believe that consciousness does not emerge from the brain, such as the categorical distinction of matter from the mental (as well as all qualities). As well, there is reason to believe that consciousness is not identical with specific neurological algorithmic systems and relationships given representational drift to where memories, thoughts, etc., do not map onto these specific identical neural relationships but is more like patterns that influence brain states, which is what is observed.
With this in mind, I think this is a rational and sufficient reason to believe in God given He speaks to the individual as a separate will imposed upon a person. Indeed, reason itself, which is what Kant recognized as a deontic imposition upon the individual, could be seen as God’s will which would be the warrant for God’s existence for a person in their lives.
This could even extend to the gospel itself. For inherent in the story of Christ giving HIs life for us, the examples of Love, Faith, Miracles, while not evidence historically that these things happened (though there is historical evidence that Jesus existed, died by crucifixion, and resurrected) is also warrant for their belief as a myth, or a story, which maps onto the deontic rationale for living in Love, in humility, with Faith (trust), and so forth. One could argue that just because one comes up with a story that maps onto our desires for peace does not mean it is true. But this reminds me of the quote from George MacDonald when little DIamond is challenged about suggesting his friend Nanny’s dream is true. She says, it is too good to be true. He then states that it is impossible for something to be too good to be true, since the good is true and if the true is true and if something is too good to be true, then it cannot exceed truth since the good is true and the true is good. The concept of something as too good to be true is comparable to saying a circle has 4 sides. THis sounds a lot like an ontological argument. However, I am of the opinion that metaphysical possibilities that are logically impossible not to be true can inform us about something being ontologically true. And so, the compelling nature of the story of Christ, particularly for someone not capable of evaluating historical claims, can recognize that a story is true even if there is no physical evidence. Ultimately, on some level the story of Christ is true. How we cannot say (whether Christ lived in an empirically verifiable history or in some ethereal, transcendental history or foundation of events) that Jesus is not true given the name for the protagonist of the story of the gospel we call Jesus is what we call Jesus and is our best understanding of the foundation of the logos, His incarnation in the cosmos as related to the foundation for the holy spirit which is the action of the words of the will that we experience, is God and is based on Christianity. And further, what is funny is that the atheist calls himself a naturalist and yet here Titus, who actually is closest to Nature than any of these computer-addicted, neckbearded keyboard warriors.
And so, Titus’ simple faith needn’t have a thorough justification in a complex string of arguments. It can have a simple warrant that is compelling enough for Titus to choose to believe in his experiences and what he has been taught about his faith.
No comments:
Post a Comment