Why I Believe, and What I Mean

Soren Kierkegaard

Soren Kierkegaard was correct. The biggest hurdle to understanding and/or practicing Christianity is the mistaken conviction that one already understands and/or practices it. How many atheists reject the life of faith because they assume they know what this means, when in fact they haven't a clue; having received their impressions of religion solely from the most popular, dogmatic, and ignorant conceptions? From the esoteric or mystical perspective, atheists do not contradict the common believer, but concur with him, in their superficial and erroneous notions of God and Christ. One rejects and the other accepts, yet neither has any relation to true religion; both are utterly mistaken as to the deeper meanings of words like "God", "Christ", and "faith".

Soren Kierkegaard was an individualist. Every individualist, -- particularly, those who align themselves with a tradition which has long been obscured and corrupted, in the hope of reforming and redefining it (or merely recalling its original, intended meanings), -- lives under the cloud of near-constant misunderstanding. In order to speak his own truth, from the heart, he makes all things his own, and must insist on undermining the conventional interpretations of things. Naturally, this makes some demand on others; namely, that, if we wish to know his meaning, we must make some effort to be open-minded and to think independently of our habitual conceptions. First, we must recognize that we are in the presence of a strikingly original mind; a mind which reinterprets and, so, requires that we also reinterpret, if we would understand. He can meet us half-way without betraying himself, but we will have to take some steps in his direction as well, if we wish to know his meaning.

The Existence of God

First, we must agree on a definition of "God" before we can debate the question of "God's" existence. Alas, every mystic in history teaches that God, in "His" true nature, is beyond definition, and that all our attempts at defining "Him" are necessarily flawed, and can only carry us so far. The rejection of easy answers is common to both atheists and mystics (i.e. authentically religious people). In fact, mysticism may be defined as a process by which we tear through these easy answers, or veils, which hide from us the reality of God's true nature. It is said that, at the highest levels of revelation, language breaks down and the appearance of paradox is unavoidable. As the Upanishads of the Hindus put it: "God is and is not."

"God" and religion are much more mysterious than most self-professed Christians would have you believe. In fact, what so many atheists are rejecting is the same superficial, dogmatic form of belief which every true mystic in the history of the world has also rejected. However, while atheists seem to think they've rejected belief in God and religion, all they've managed to reject is the popular view held by people who have no concept of what the spiritual life is all about. While believers and non-believers may antagonize each other, most of them take essentially the same view: Neither grasps the possibility that something may be figurative without being fictional.

The Spirit, Not The Letter

When the Bible says "Read the spirit not the letter of the law; for the letter killeth but the spirit giveth life," it is warning against a literal interpretation. Curiously, though, most believers interpret scripture literally (and believe), while most atheists also interpret literally (and disbelieve). Both are mistaken.

What is required is the ability to think abstractly, and to understand that something may be truthful without being factual. The historical reality of Jesus, for instance, is fairly irrelevant compared with the eternal reality which is symbolized by Jesus Christ. He may never have existed as we exist, yet, he may exist no less than you or I, as an idea (perhaps the best idea) which has emerged from, and taken hold of, the imagination of mankind. He may be figurative, but he has exerted a more powerful influence on history than anyone who has existed in a more limited, less abstract, sense. This alone ought to suggest that there is something substantial in him, whether or not it accords with our narrow definitions of what is real.

God Again

"God", too, may be a figurative reality. There is undoubtedly a state of mind in which one experiences profound peace, compassion, determination, clarity of vision, and submission to the present moment. For good reason, many have elected to name the reality of this experience, or the force which engenders it, "God"; probably because no greater name could be found. Some would argue that it is, in fact, impossible to experience this state without a feeling of reverence, and that it is impossible to feel reverence without exclaiming, "It is God!"

This is essentially a value judgement, for it is not so much an assertion that God exists as it is an assertion that something exists which is worthy of being called "God". It's like looking at a beautiful painting and saying, "It is divine."

It's really not up for debate.

The Incarnation

Christ is an exemplar, a prototype for what we may become, at our best. He is the idea of unconditional love and acceptance "incarnated" or personified as a man. Thousands of people have attained to incredible ethical heights by contemplating this figure. Understood in this way, -- that is, spiritually, -- we may easily give our approval to the words of Athanasius: "God became man so that man could become God."

The Christian Legacy

Yes, the meaning of Christ has also been misinterpreted by the masses, and willfully twisted by some for selfish reasons. But we find this in all walks of life; in all ideologies, not merely in religion. If the Crusades should be seen as an embarrassment to Christians, then the Holocaust should be seen as an embarrassment to atheists. The Nazis were not interested in religion when they put 9 million people to death. And the Communists were "devout atheists" when they murdered untold millions in their gulags.

So we see that men can be foolish and corrupt even without religious dogma, but it is much harder to find instances of men being martyrs for love without some religious prompting; there are plenty of thieves and murderers among those who consider themselves secular and among those who consider themselves religious, but where are the "secular saints" who sacrificed everything in order to share a message of unconditional love and community?