Sacred Games

“Gods too decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we, murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? That which was the holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to invent?”

Friedrich Nietzsche

Perhaps I say this too often (and perhaps others are annoyed by it) but I will say it again: society is very secularised. That may be stating the obvious, I know, but it never ceases to amaze me how fast people are becoming “irreligious” and abandoning a belief in any sort of “supernatural” deity. Indeed, our society is becoming so secularised that many people feel the “battle” is over, or is nearly over, and that everyone with a “faith” should toss it away and adopt a more Atheistic mentality.

In fact, I myself have struggled with my own beliefs at times and have wondered whether I’m right in holding them. It’s not so much that I feel any pressure to conform to the Atheistic mentality as it is,“What if I am wrong?”.

What if I am wrong? What if everyone who holds a belief in a supernatural deity is wrong? What if we die and nothing happens to us? (not that we would know, anyway…) What if, as the philosopher Daniel Dennett once commented on, we’ve wasted our whole lives having such beliefs?

Many people also think that because there are so many different religions that there is no “right” belief to have- every religion just more-or-less believes the same sort of thing, just in different forms. Some of the current religions are:

• Christianity
• Buddhism
• Hinduism
• Jainism
• Sikhism
• Taoism
• Judaism
• Paganism
• Islam
• Shinto

As well as those, you have lesser-known beliefs such as Deism, Gnosticism and Scientology (to name a few). Of course, on top of that, you have numerous philosophical positions as well, all with their own outlook on existence. In some ways, all of this is overwhelming and it’s very easy to be confused and ask yourself, “Which is the right one then?”

Is it just a case that everyone believes what they want to believe? Be a Buddhist if you agree with Buddhism? Be a Christian if you agree with Christianity? Be a Hindu if you agree with Hinduism?

I don’t really want to include, “Be an Atheist if you agree with Atheism” because Atheism, strictly speaking, isn’t really a “belief” as such. The word “belief” is often casually thrown around to mean “belief in the supernatural” but you can have a belief in anything.

You can believe that apples are nicer than pears; that Ferrari is better than Lamborghini, or that roses smell nicer than onions. However, “Atheism” (while a lack of belief) is more a lack of belief in the supernatural.

“Theos“, in the Greek language (from which the English word “Theism” is derived), means “god” or “belief in God/gods”. “Atheos” in Greek means “lack of belief in God/gods” (the “a” meaning “without”). However, most Atheists prefer not to say “don’t believe in God” because that is to suggest that a thing called “God” exists (belief in God). Rather, they say, “don’t believe that a God or gods exist”.

The “in” and “that” issue seems like an insignificant one at first glance but I do think they’re fundamentally different. If I was to say, “Do you believe in me?” I would asking if you trusted or supported me. If I (or someone else) was to say, “Do you believe that James McConnell exists?” I (or another person) would be asking you if you believed that I was in some form of existence (or existed in some form in reality).

The “in” presupposes (or assumes) that a thing already exists, while the “that” presupposes that a thing could exist or might exist.

The whole issue surrounding the “existence of God” is one which has gained quite a bit of “steam” lately.

I think most people who call themselves a “Christian” don’t really know why they are a Christian. Some are Christians because they were told at a young age, “You have to be saved from your sins; accept Jesus Christ”; they did so and have never really questioned their decision or beliefs since- it’s just something they’ve grown up with- they believe the Bible is the One True Word of God, accepted it and have never stopped to think, “Are there other Holy Books as well?” or “Are there other Holy Books as well which also claim to the One True Word of God?” The same could be said of those brought up as Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists.

Even if you weren’t brought up to believe that Christianity (or any other “religion”) was the “one true belief” would you just blindly follow and believe a book just because it “told you so”? Would you believe “The Communist Manifesto” without question? Would you believe “Mein Kampf” without question? In fact, would you believe any text or person without question? Why believe the Bible just because it “says so”? If the Bible said that there are green creatures with ten heads, eight legs and nine arms which fly through the sky every morning, would you believe it?

One possible analogy that could be drawn from this is that of political parties, their proponents and supporters.

It’s said that the BNP (British National Party) has been gaining quite a lot of support lately, considering the fact that their leader, Nick Griffin, was elected to the European parliament back in June (which, as a little side-note, I am terribly confused by. Nick Griffin is supposedly “anti-Europe”, wanting Britain withdrawn from the EU, yet he is now an MEP, a “Member of the European Parliament“…Maybe I’m missing something…).

The point being is that, when it comes to politics, people usually just don’t vote for a random party or politician. They assess each one individually, analyse what they stand for (their beliefs and policies), weigh each of them up and then decide on which one they would rather have in power, according to what they believe to be true.

For instance, if you were going to vote for the Communist Party you would have to justify your reason for doing so (and you’d probably be more-than-happy to). The same goes for if you were to vote for a Socialist, Conservative, Liberal or Fascist party. People don’t vote blindly- they have a clear idea of who, or what, they agree and disagree with and then act accordingly.

So, why is it sometimes the case that some people blindly follow the Bible, the Qur’an or any other religious text and ideology?

Take, for example, a scenario in which I tell others that I’m going to become a Buddhist. They would probably want to know why. They’d want to know what my reasons are for embracing Buddhism and rejecting Christianity. Why do I want to become a Buddhist? Is it because I agree with Buddhist philosophies? Usually when you agree with one thing, you disagree with another- or the opposite to that which you agree with.

I believe that some Christians (I repeat “some” because it doesn’t apply to all) think that it’s wrong to question the Bible, that’s it’s wrong to question the Minister or Preacher, or even that it’s wrong to have doubts about your Faith.

I sometimes think that I question too much. To be honest, I do have my own little “philosophy” in life and that is: question everything. I don’t question for the sake of being rebellious, I question because I want to know the truth. I question because I want to be certain that what I believe, or what I’ve been told, is true.

As I’m sure some people will know, I am quite keen and interested in Philosophy (I say that with a capital “P” to denote, I suppose, the “specialist” subject of “Philosophy”). In all truthfulness, my first initial view of Philosophy was quite cynical (if not naive). I saw it as just a matter of, “You believe that, I believe this” and I did think that Philosophy had no “right-and-wrong” answer to it- everything was just a matter of opinion and that, to use the cliché phrase, “nothing is certain”.

Now, looking at it a bit deeper, I don’t think that Philosophy (or even Science and Theology) is just a matter of one person believing A and another person believing B. Yes, that is involved, some people believe A and some people believe B. But the difference, or fundamental necessity, is that of justification. So you believe A? Tell me why. Justify your belief. Show me evidence. Give me your reasons.

I once had a conversation with a friend over Facebook and she too, perhaps unknowingly, used the phrase (and this is paraphrased, by the way) “nothing is certain”, or, “we can’t be certain of anything”. To me, as the comments in a previous post of mine mentioned, the phrase “nothing is certain” rings of pure Agnosticism (and possibly even subjectivism).

If nothing is certain, then I don’t really know if I’m sitting on my chair typing away at my computer. In fact, if nothing is certain, how can I be certain that my computer even exists? How do I even know that this Blog exists? Could this just all be a figment of my imagination? But how do I know that my imagination exists? What if it doesn’t exist, then who am I? And on it goes…

The Bible itself isn’t explicitly against “testing”, or people testing their beliefs. If anything, it encourages it and regards it as a virtue:

“Do not treat prophecies with contempt but test them all; hold on to what is good, reject whatever is harmful.”

1 Thessalonians 5 v 20-21

“Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”

1 John 4 v 1

I’m quite a cynic when it comes to “modernising” the Church. I see it as pointless, superficial and (in a twist of irony) “conforming to the world”.

I’m uncomfortable mentioning names explicitly, but there are certain Christian organisations who (to use the phrase) “drive me up the wall”. They are usually organisations who think that Christianity needs a lethal injection of “modernity” in order for it to be “cool” to the rest of the world. I’ve already made my disgust of so-called “liberalism” apparent before but I want to say it again that we, as a society, are much too liberal.

For instance, I’ve heard of people going to another church because their current one “doesn’t have enough single men/women”. Quite frankly (and I’m not exaggerating) I find it downright despicable that people move to another church or go to a church meeting in the hope that they will “find a girl/guy”, or do so on that basis.

What sort of an image is that for Christianity? What message does that put across? “Hey, it’s singles’ night tonight! Come along and get ‘personal’!” I can’t help but feel that some people use Christianity as a means to an end- as a means of grabbing that “special someone” while forgetting what Christianity in itself is all about. In other words, they go along to a meeting, get “hooked up” with someone and go away happily saying, “Yes! I got someone! Score!”

Congratulations! Have a hat!

Sarcasm aside, what is the whole point in that? What is the point in going along to a Church service, meeting, evangelical team (or anything else) if the only reason is so that you can “grab a girl/guy”? No, don’t go along to hear the message; don’t go along to hear Christian doctrine; don’t go along to hear things like “salvation”, “hope” or “redemption”; go along to get “hooked up” with whoever it is you “fancy” there…

Now, I do understand that when a guy sees a good-looking girl his eyes bulge, his mouth drops and he turns a bit crazy. I’m not against a guy asking a girl out (or vice-versa) at a Christian event. I am against the notion that the only reason for going to such events is to go away having gotten “hooked up”.

Perhaps this comes back to the issue of Church “modernity”, especially that of the youth.

I, very often, get the impression that people in the Church try to make Christianity unnecessarily “cool”. There are all sorts of wacky names that people come up with for organisations or events like, “Cool Christianity” or “Jazz Jesus” (I apologise for my poor alliteration ability(!). This is why people don’t ask me for “cool” names..!).

Last month, in the Ballymena Showgrounds in Northern Ireland, there was a Christian “music festival” over a period of three days called “Fuel” in which various bands, singers and speakers took part:

GRAMMY-winning international artists will be entertaining thousands this weekend as a massive Christian music festival gets under way in Ballymena. An estimated 6,000 revellers will pack into the town’s Showgrounds over the course of the three-day event which starts today [5th June].

“Fuel is all about the best Christian music coming to Northern Ireland.

The Fuel 09 team is dedicated to offering a weekend of the best and most exciting musical talent out there whilst impacting our culture,” he said.

“Our aim is to reach the wider community in Northern Ireland and introduce more people to the Gospel of Jesus Christ through music.”

Newsletter

It was (at least in my view) the “Christian” equivalent to something like Glastonbury. Although not as large as Glastonbury, the hype surrounding it certainly felt (and does feel) like it was. I also find it strange how the Newsletter writes, “Grammy-winning” as if that justifies the bands or event. Of course, that may be true, I’m not denying that (they may have won loads of Grammys) but I don’t see what difference it makes…

In a week or twos time, another Christian “festival” (not too sure if that’s the right word) will begin on 18th July in the form of “New Horizon”, which runs to 24th July. My first time at it was last year when I went to a Blogging seminar a friend invited me to. It’s quite a large Christian “festival” and quite a lot of people attend it (or so I’m told- I certainly got that impression last year). Like I said, I only went to that one seminar and I’ve never been to the worship sessions beforehand so I can’t comment on those.

When I arrived there and was waiting on my friend, I was struck at how many people there were coming out of the main pavilion where (and someone can correct me if I’m wrong) the main speakers and worship sessions took part. I honestly have no idea how many people attend New Horizon every night but I’d say, for the entire week, that the numbers are in the thousands. Again, that may be over (or under) exaggerating it a bit and someone can correct me if I’m wrong…

According to the New Horizon website, the speakers this year are Don Carson and Ray Ortlund. As I’m sure is the case every year, lots of people will “flock” to the pavilion and subsequent places to hear the speakers. While it is good that the organisers have been able to bring in such prominent speakers (last year they had John Lennox who debated Richard Dawkins) I can’t help but wonder if the same number of people who attend each night, or for the entire week, would still go if ordinary Joe Bloggs was giving a talk or lecture. Do people go just because “John Lennox” or “Don Carson” is giving a talk? No doubt these are famous, respectable people, but is that why New Horizon has them; because they are “famous”?

If the organisers were to say that “James McConnell” was giving a talk, would the same number of people attend? To be honest, I doubt it (because they’d just get a ramble for an hour, unfortunately…). Of course, they would probably mistake me for the other James McConnell (of which I am no relation…I think…).

I think there is a sense among youth that the Gospel is “uncool”. Maybe it’s just the nature of our liberal society but I get the impression that not many young people are interested in the Bible or Christianity (or any other religion or philosophy). Again, our society is much more secular than it used to be. I’ve heard it said that you are no longer allowed to talk about matters of “Faith” or “Religion” in the workplace. Why not, I do not know. I think this is very strange. After-all, we are all allowed “freedom” to say what we want in regards to politics. People can talk about their favourite political party or politician in the workplace but not talk about religion.

It seems to me that workplaces ban such activities, like talking about “Faith” and “Religion”, for the sake of “equality” and “liberal values”. If an Atheist wants to talk about their lack of belief in the supernatural, fine, but extend that same right to someone who has a belief in the supernatural. I don’t want to keep reiterating my disapproval of “liberalism” but there is a very “politically correct” mentality floating around.

It’s very easy for churches to get caught up in the process of “modernisation” and I think this is where a lot of them have to be careful not to abandon values for the sake of fun. It’s easy to get caught up in the modern technology-centered, hedonistic lifestyle. I have nothing against projectors, power-point presentations, lights, videos or cameras. However, I am aware that these can “possess” some people and make them strive for the latest-and-greatest in everything new and modern.

No doubt a lot of these things help in evangelism and such, but that’s all they should be for (in the Christian sense): aids in helping to get the message of the Gospel across. They are not ends in themselves, they are not (as Busted sang in “What I Go To School For”) what we “go to church for”.

I think people try too hard to make the Gospel accessible to young people. Indeed, I think they sometimes go way over-the-top in their attempts. No doubt there is a gap to bridge between the older generations and the younger generations, and I do understand that the two sometimes can’t relate to each other, or are hostile to one another. I think there is also a feeling among the youth that the Bible writers were old men who only cared about their own affairs, which I think isn’t necessarily true:

“I am writing to you, young people,
because you have overcome the evil one.”

“I write you, young people,
because you are strong,
and the word of God lives in you,
and you have overcome the evil one.”

1 John 2 v 13, 14

At the end of July, I will be leaving the age of eighteen and turning nineteen-years-old. It is, in some ways, a scary prospect to me- it means I only have one more year left in my “teens” before twenty looms on the horizon. Nevertheless, I’m trying to avoid the label of “old” and instead trying to think, “Young at heart”. Maybe I’m kidding myself…

This entire post, in many ways, is addressed to my fellow “young people”; if not entirely dedicated to them.

I’m not asking that you believe Christianity. I’m not even asking that you become Christians. I’m not begging or pleading. All I’m asking for is that you assess the world; assess those grand things called the Universe and existence; assess values and beliefs; assess morality and ethical standards (yours and others); assess who you are as a person- not just physical appearance, but (more importantly) your character.

Perhaps the most important thing is: never stop questioning…

“For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility…”

Ephesians 2 v 14

“Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.”

Acts 17 v 11