Feature
Heavens to Betsy!
A severe empiricist reveals his deepest longings.
(Page 3 of 3)
Did you notice that unspeakable chill in your deepest heart at those last words?
Um, no. Should I try again?
I guess I just have no patience with this stuff. I try to behave well, according to my nature (a product of Nature) and acquired habits. I am not aware of having had any existence before my birth, and do not expect to have any after my death. It’s an odd business, all right, being alive; but the most parsimonious account of it is the one offered by a Russian novelist: a crack of light between two eternities of darkness. The rest is tales we make up for our comfort.
I’ll hedge my bets and add this, though. If there is a heaven, and if the admission standards are low enough that I can get in, I hope it will be a place where I never have to read anything as boring, self-referential, derivative (of guess-who), clogged with misplaced superlatives, and devoid of interest or narrative or wit or empirical observation as Peter Kreeft’s Heaven.
About the Author
John Derbyshire is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism (Crown Forum).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (107) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by John Derbyshire
More Articles From Feature
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/06/20/heavens-to-betsy
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
The #FreeKate Narrative Melts Down: Lies Exposed in Florida Teen Sex Case
Robert Stacy McCain | 5.25.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 6:53AM
As usual, the Derb writes a top-notch piece.
Wish he would write here everyday.
C. Vernon Crisler | 6.20.12 @ 10:17AM
Can't Amspec find any better writers than these atheistic, Darwinian racists?
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 10:41AM
You couldn't write an article 1/10 as good as the Derb's.
No one at this site could.
C. Vernon Crisler | 6.20.12 @ 11:26AM
It would certainly take a lot to write an article like Darwinshire's.
Seek| 6.20.12 @ 1:14PM
Evolution isn't "merely a theory." Any genuine scientist knows that nothing in the world of science is more highly prized than having a theory attached to one's name. Theories lend themselves to empirical observation; tales, even magnificent ones, don't.
C. Vernon Crisler | 6.20.12 @ 1:20PM
Evolution is a modern fairy tale.
ZZMike2| 6.25.12 @ 2:47PM
Only in the eyes of people whose main source of material is fairy tales. There are new species being discovered every year. Over 99% of all species who have ever lived on Earth are extinct. We even see species evolving during our lifetimes: moths in Edinburgh, once white, are now dark, to catch up with the smog.
Try not to confuse "evolution" with "creation".
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 1:35PM
Stating such is a misunderstanding of the term "theory." I find that both sides of the debate treat the term poorly.
A theory is not a hypothesis (how creationists treat the term), and it is not "law" (how evolutionists treat it many times).
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 3:39PM
A Theory can NEVER be a Law. A law tells you what 'is', a theory tells you WHY.
Ryan| 6.21.12 @ 8:12AM
Eh, I would say "how" and religion answers the "why."
Jack in Wi| 6.20.12 @ 7:19AM
I can define atheism in 3 sentences. We come from nothing. We are here for no reason. We are going nowhere. Is it any wonder that most of the world's people look for some answer in religion? I personally can't believe all this, came about by a bunch of accidents. We buried my cousin 2 weeks ago. He returned to the Church of Rome where he was baptised 3 weeks before he died. He was a religious scoffer most his life and hadn't gone to church, except for a wedding or funeral for 60 years. His last words to me were. " We have hope." I could not believe it when he returned to God at the end of his life. It truely was a miracle. I will pray that you too John, return to God before the end. God bless.
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 7:50AM
Main thing is, the Derb doesn't bury us under smarm as 80 percent of Christians do.
DougD| 6.20.12 @ 2:43PM
Brooksifer, as a comitted evangelical Christian I could not agree with you more. Most of my fellow Christians seem to immediately devolve into regurgitated pap, mostly without any thought whatsoever.
Having said that let me also quickly assert that this in no way takes anything away with Christianity itself - other than its representives are so often doing a very poor job of, well, representing.
Christianity, understood as defined in a straightforward reading (and STUDYING) of the early documentation has always held up to close scrutiny. It's just that the signal to noise ratio is all-too-oftwn way too low.
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 3:40PM
"Having said that let me also quickly assert that this in no way takes anything away with Christianity itself "
Nothing wrong with Jesus Himself, he was blameless.
DougD| 6.20.12 @ 4:18PM
Exactly, and since he was blameless so would be his words, n'est-ce pas?
'You must be born again', 'No man comes to the Father except through me', "I am come that you may have life', etc.
TinaB| 6.25.12 @ 8:00PM
Nicely put, DougD.
MK48| 6.20.12 @ 10:25AM
Jack.......do you believe in RELIGION or do you have FAITH.......just in case you don't know there is a difference.
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 2:21PM
Since when did 'Faith' as defined by religious people even become a virtue? I would think the belief in something absent evidence would be the realm of an idiot.The worst part is that it wasn't ALWAYS that way, people supposedly KNEW Jesus firsthand and STILL didn't believe, they needed to stick their fingers in his wounds, did they SUFFER for this insolence? No they became Saints...
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 1:12PM
Just because we WANT something doesn't make it True or Possible. Do you think ANY young Mother who has a sickness would CHOOSE to die and leave her young children Motherless? Atheism doesn't say we came from NOTHING, the correct answer is we don't know and may NEVER know, YOUR answer is to put 'God' did it in every unknown.
Occam's Tool| 6.20.12 @ 4:56PM
Well, I like John, personally. And Jack, you are not worth John's used underwear, the use being cleaning up skunk urine in the shed. That is regardless of religious belief.
John Navratil| 6.20.12 @ 6:54PM
Mr. Derbyshire had written a column discussing boxed wine then told a story of having taken a limo home from an event to which he had driven only to wake up to discover the car "stolen" from his home. I emailed a note to him recounting a similar experience resulting from my having parking my car in an unusual spot at the airport. I was sipping two fingers of Scotch handed me by my brother-in-law as he leant me the proverbial shoulder. My ephinany came with the second sip while Mr. Derbyshire's came during his giving the "stolen car" report to police.
In my note, I asked if he thought boxed wine would have been as effective.
His reply was that the boxed wine was only good for helping the food go down. For epiphanies, he preferred Scotch. It still gives me a grin.
Life-lover| 6.20.12 @ 7:33AM
Always a treat to read The Derb (even when it's anathema)! But, Derb, (I presume to call you that), as an Empiricist you should know where to draw the line. You may want a brief refresher on some of the modern treatments of Anselm's Ontological Argument. He didn't give us Logic and Reason so that we could prove that He exists. Jus' sayin', is all.
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 7:54AM
In other words Heaven is necessary fiction.
Mimi | 6.20.12 @ 7:54AM
In C.S. Lewis .."Mere Christianity", he asks..."What if you die and then find out it is all true?" Most of us believers in God, throughout our lives here from him..He is Nigh! in times of LIFE and DEATH, in struggles and doubt..his strength is there behind us when we do what we never thought we could, in our GOOD times and BAD. We thank God for the GRACE and FAITH given freely. Life is so much easier, and free-er!
Mimi | 6.20.12 @ 7:55AM
ERROR= HEAR from him NOT HERE!
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 8:41AM
Then why purchase funeral plots if you think Heaven exists.
Mimi | 6.20.12 @ 9:36AM
From earth to earth..to dust thou shall return!
Aha...the soul lives on!
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 10:43AM
So sell your plot at Forest Lawn-- if you go to Heaven (or Hell) you wont be needing it..
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 1:15PM
We have honored the dead as a species LONGER than we made up Gods, even Cave men buried and honored their dead.
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 2:35PM
Then lay up your treasure in Heaven, if you really believe in Heaven.
allanius | 6.20.12 @ 7:54AM
We agree that Lewis is a tough knot to chew on, with the exception of The Abolition of Man. I remember forcing myself to read the Allegory of Love in grad school and wondering--how would he know?
Still, it would be interesting to hear just how much our "severe empiricist" really does know about the "world of nature." Bad news for you, John: that crusty Humesian brashness of yours is quickly losing its cachet as science uncovers the majesty of the unseen world.
"The fool says in his heart there is no God." Some things never change.
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 8:44AM
I do not reject God, I reject your smarmy religion as I reject your smarmy politics.
Agape love is a myth- you deep down only care about your families.
Pharisees.
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 8:58AM
Define "smarmy" for us, please.
Mimi | 6.20.12 @ 9:39AM
BROOKSIE....YOU are in our prayers!
MK48| 6.20.12 @ 10:30AM
Brooks.......just like Jack you have no clue...it's not about a RELIGION it's all about FAITH.
But you wouldn't know about that.......
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 10:45AM
Smarm is when you pretend you care.
You all only care about your own families and friends, everyone else can just drop dead as far as you are concerned.
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 11:07AM
Here's a question, then...
Why are there so many Christian charities and such helping the poor? Why are there so many organizations with Christian purpose out there helping people?
Not trying to be sarcastic here. It's just that I believe that your argument - which I see regularly - is unfounded.
Quartermaster| 6.20.12 @ 8:25PM
Brooksie is a good example of a reprobate mind. He thinks everyone is just as cynical and self-centered as he is.
Jack in Wi| 6.20.12 @ 11:07AM
You are a moron. Religion leads people to faith.
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 11:09AM
Debatable, but I'm a Calvinist and see faith as a gift from God, not a product of religion.
Quartermaster| 6.20.12 @ 8:23PM
Which means, being a Calvinist, you are a semi-Gnostic.
Ryan| 6.21.12 @ 8:16AM
Eh, the label more or less could be leveled at any Protestant.
But hey, total depravity is Biblical...so they got something right.
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 8:33AM
Methinks that Derb missed the backbone of Lewis's conclusion - if the historicity of Christ is true - or even a good portion of it - then He could NOT have "been mistaken." There are simply too many supernatural issues which occurred there to deal with.
Lewis is used in many pulpits mostly because he was so gifted at making things so plain and breaking down complex ideas with concise, imaginative wording.
I do agree however, that Lewis may speak better to the philosophical atheist than the scientific one.
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 8:49AM
What would Jesus think of Joseph Smith, Mitt Romney?
Would He urge us to vote for Romney?
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 9:00AM
What does that have to do with anything?
BTW, no real data to remark on whether or not Jesus would have voted for the practical or the ideological. Outside of "render unto Ceasar," no modern political conclusions can be described from His words.
Brooksifier | 6.20.12 @ 10:47AM
Then Jesus isn't much use, he wont give you stock tips or tell you where to go for the best cigars.
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 11:08AM
I can get those from men. I need something greater from Christ.
Mimi | 6.20.12 @ 3:13PM
God has his arm around Mitt Romney....he has a job for him ! With his help he can not fail... his motives are for the GOOD !
Dave Williams| 6.20.12 @ 9:15AM
Of all the things I never expected to see on this site, this is an absolute prize. Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU, sir, for daring to engage in some actual, reality-based THOUGHT. Yes, it would be nice if some part of us did survive death, and we did get to see our grandparents again: there isn't, and we won't. So, let's have the courage to live as adults, and not get all confused and tangled up in metaphysical goop...and it's ALL goop.
Mimi | 6.20.12 @ 10:23AM
What if you die and then find out your so called "GOOP" is true!!
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 1:21PM
You don't 'understand' Atheism Mimi, it's NOT that secretly we actually BELIEVE in God, but just want to live wicked lives, We simply see no convincing proof, so we are TOTALLY unable to believe. If tomorrow, the faithful were taken up to Heaven a la 'Left behind' that would become the FIRST day as a Christian and would follow God forever more.Till than...
Mimi | 6.20.12 @ 3:18PM
Who has the actual so called " PROOF" ? It is by FAITH we believe...it is yours too, if you would believe....your GIFT...yours to choose!
Occam's Tool| 6.20.12 @ 4:59PM
"Doubting Thomas," then, King? As for myself, I like what the Rabbi said, and I hope he beats the crap out of his Liberal, Democratic opponent. (Boteach is a Conservative Republican running for Congress against Hamas' man.)
Occam's Tool| 6.20.12 @ 5:04PM
Dear Dave: I respectfully disagree with your religious views, but wish you the best, as you are a very decent person.
However, might I note that atheism predominant cultures do NOT breed to replacement. I note this in a purely utilitarian fashion. Why would this be?
Truth to Power| 6.20.12 @ 9:54AM
I think John is better on what part of a city to avoid.
Tim the Enchanter| 6.20.12 @ 10:14AM
I think Mr. Derbyshire should try G.K. Chesterton.
Frances| 6.20.12 @ 11:25AM
Mr. Derbyshire, since you are very wise, I would suggest you read "The Resurrection of the Son of God" by N. T. Wright. This is for people of faith, people with doubts and unbelievers alike. Wright is a gifted English theologian, New Testament scholar and a retired Anglican Bishop. His writings are superlative and compelling. The triune God is reality, heaven is for real and I pray God will reveal himself to you.
Tom Kyba| 6.20.12 @ 12:06PM
The only fact of relevance to this discussion is that both sides will try to negatively stereotype each other and neither side will change the others' mind. The subject is interesting but the debate is really nothing but same old same old. Brooksifier is not about to be born again, and the those who disagree with him are not about to abandon their faith.
Petronius| 6.20.12 @ 12:42PM
We are a parlor game for The Almighty. The problem is most of us players believe we can rewrite His Rules. Some are the earthly referees in Holy Orders. I knew a hand full who never landed on Go To Jail. Most can do as they will while here. But when we leave we cannot roll the dice again. And all accounts must be settled with The Banker.
Dai Alanye | 6.20.12 @ 12:47PM
Though not a believer myself, if there is a more boring group of people than militant atheists, I haven't yet run into it. Conforming to the norm, Derbyshire, merely a quasi-militant and normally a stimulating writer, becomes unusually tedious in this pointless screed. You don't believe, John? Fine, but can't you simply shut up about it?
I'd rather fight off a pack of Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormon missionaries than spend ten minutes with one outspoken atheist.
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 1:24PM
Atheists aren't trying to put OUR prayers in schools, or crash planes into buildings for OUR beliefs. Would you like me to go on?
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 1:37PM
Actually, I would say that, in the removal of prayer, the atheistic stance is placed within. There's no real neutral ground.
Religion is inside our schools in one way or another.
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 1:52PM
Who's Religion?
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 3:36PM
The agnostic/atheist. It's religion in the general sense.
Quartermaster| 6.20.12 @ 8:29PM
Atheism is religion in the actual, and fullest, sense. And they are doing all they can to force their religion down the rest of our throats.
Dai Alanye | 6.22.12 @ 11:33PM
King asks, "Would you like me to go on?"
No, I'd like you to either shut up or else offer examples how well the atheists of the world have handled themselves. Start with Joe Stalin.
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 1:07PM
Religion is a Crutch, but here is the thing most of my fellow Atheists don't get, Crutches are useful things. The idea is to find peace and harmony in a tumultuous world. But some crutches are better than others, you can follow Bodybuilding, Martial Arts, the Fine Arts, Music, Yoga and Humanism(Helping Others) just to name a few, ALL are better than Religion, All don't require you to inject yourself and beliefs into the political or social arena, and all are FAR MORE productive than standing around worshiping a non-existent entity.We are ALL weak and wish and hope there is MORE to our existence than what we see, after all it so damned unfair, the Cancer kid who dies at 12, the rich mean bastard who has a great life, while crushing the little guy under his boot. Pol Pot dying a natural serene death after what he did. There just HAS to be some 'Final Justice' otherwise, whats the point? Than you realize there isn't one and you GROW as a person.
DougD| 6.20.12 @ 2:50PM
I need a crutch.
I need a savior.
I needed help when I buried my 6 year old only son.
I did, in fact, get that help, even though I cannot give you my experience.
God does love us, warts and all, and needing a crutch is for those who need it. If you are perfect and without fault or error then you are truly a unique human being.
Pride is awful. It prevents us from seeing the truth.
Who Knows?| 6.20.12 @ 1:15PM
It’s not about believing in God, which is opium for dummies.
It’s about Realizing God.
Jesus was indeed a God Man, as was Buddha, Krishna, and many God Realizers, down through history.
All these egos, running around in worry about an after life, for ME ME ME, are just Absolutely deluded. Yes, in our apparent slice of space-time, the miniscule part of the electromagnetic spectrum we inhabit and ARE, it’s fine and dandy to keep order by maintaining our self-identity.
However, the sooner one sees through the empirical assumptions, and heartily embraces Absolute Radiant Transcendental Being, the sooner one can have a huge Cosmic laugh. This reality is as much of a dream to a God Realized Being as the dream of one who wakes up in our contracted world.
Who Knows?| 6.20.12 @ 1:20PM
It All is such a paradox!
There is the Absolute, in itself indeterminate. No category of thought applies to it. Ignorance invests it with all the colorful terms we come across in ordinary experience. It is the cause of appearance.
Ignorance hides the Real from us, and in its place puts forth the unreal appearance. There are two functions---obscuring, covering the real nature of things; and constructive, throwing up a false appearance.
The precise nature of ignorance consists of the inveterate tendency to indulge in conceptual construction. The Real is indeterminate; the viewing it through thought forms is ignorance.
Go out in the woods, away from the sights and sounds of civilization. Stand still, look steadily at nature, the “out there”, not thinking—where are “you”?
Even cutting edge science Realizes that it’s the brain that plucks wavering energy packets that “touch” its special openings—especially the eyes.
When one sees, the Truth is they are having a vision. We are ALL seers, as “saintly” as St. Bernadette of Lourdes fame.
Attending to only WHAT we see, instead of the seeing ITSELF is a---mistake.
Ryan| 6.20.12 @ 1:39PM
What did Jesus say which backs up anything which you are talking about?
Who Knows?| 6.20.12 @ 6:16PM
When asked what His Teaching was, Jesus repeated what was found in the Old Testament---Love God with your whole being.
He also preached one should love his neighbor as himself.
And, He confessed that He and God were One.
The Absolute implication is that separation is illusory.
“Your” human body is One, so only a fool would purposely use the right hand to harm the left one, no?
Therefore, wisdom is to Absolutely love your neighbor, since the otherness is only apparent. Self-other is, too.
God Realization---love it, or leave it. And, in the case of human existence on the third planet from the sun, there’s a whole lot of leaving going on.
Or, better put—chosen.
Choice is.
The Zen master, Huang-Po provides a wonderful answer to the following question—
“Illusion can hide from us our own mind, but up to now you have not taught us how to get rid of the illusion.”
Answer---“The arising and the elimination of the illusion is illusory. Illusion is not something rooted in Reality; it exists because of your dualistic thinking. If you will only cease to indulge in opposed concepts such as ‘ordinary’ or ‘Enlightened’, illusion will cease of itself. left of anything on which to lay hold. This is the meaning of: ‘I will let go with both hands, for then I shall certainly discover the Buddha in my Mind.” Page 59, “The Zen Teaching Of Huang Po”, translated by John Blofield, 1958.
The arising AND the elimination of illusion are illusory!
Who Knows?| 6.20.12 @ 6:18PM
oops--delete "left of anything on which to lay hold"
Ryan| 6.21.12 @ 8:24AM
Except Christ's - and the claims of God in the Bible - are exclusive as to divinity; and there is a definite separation between God and man.
Who Knows?| 6.21.12 @ 11:38AM
There sure SEEMS to be “definite separation” between God and man, and conventional religion does rest on the exclusivity of Christ’s Realization.
God forbid we mere mortals, sinners all, should even dare to hint that Christ was offering a discipline for “ordinary” people to ALSO be Realized. Bruno died for our sins, too, is what Christ would say.
What is “sin”? It comes from Greek, and means “to miss the mark”. The whole essence of modern Christianity meets that definition.
If Jesus were alive today, he’d be railing against the priestly “religion” debasing his name, exactly as he did against the Jewish ritual-lovers in the temple.
There are always taboos. These days, the key one is the taboo against Realizing who you really are.
Sometime around the age of 3, normal humans start to create a “useful” identity, a personality, in order to function in a society filled with older, more developed AND RIGID people. Separation is a choice.
Besides, do you really know what “separation” is?
Where, exactly, do you physically end, and not-you begin? Just think! All boundaries are ARBITRARY, and depend on group acceptance---for a while.
Truly, whenever you vacuum, realize most of the “dust” is sloughed off dead skin, from your “boundary”---never not changing.
Dust to dust, instant by mysterious instant.
Ryan| 6.21.12 @ 3:14PM
Here's the realization Christ offered:
"For He who believes is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, for he has not believed in the only begotten Son of God." John 3:18
"Bruno" did not die for our sins. He couldn't have.
What is the "essence" of modern Christianity, in your eyes?
If it's the lack of teaching the Gospel - man's sin, Christ's redemption - then we agree.
If you think that it's some sort of nirvana-esque transformation, then you don't have a Biblical leg to stand on, just man-made philosophy as bad as any being taught in a "modern" Christian church.
Mistral| 6.20.12 @ 1:19PM
Come on you darwinists. Not one aspect of his hypothesis has been objectively demonstrated valid. There are scores of suppositions and even insults thrown at those who do not accept his subjective ideas but when all is said and done, this is not scientific. Those who call creationism a fairy tale can be appended to the darwinian alternative - another fairy story.
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 1:37PM
So now Scientists are 'Darwinists', I guess Nuclear Scientists are Atomists, you wanna see a THEORY that is pretty impressive? E=MCsquared, wanna see it in action? About 20 megatons will make you a believer. As far as Natural Selection being a Theory, it is settled science that has ALREADY proven itself with discoveries EVERY year namely the yearly 'Flu-Shot'
John Navratil| 6.20.12 @ 6:57PM
Kingofthenet,
That would be variation, not evolution, wouldn't it?
Quartermaster| 6.20.12 @ 8:34PM
Darwin attempted to appropriate natural selection for his fantasy, but it doesn't fit anything he taught. There is a type of evolution which is true, micro-evolution. We have used that fact in selective breeding. Darwinian Evolution, Macro-Evolution, or "molecules to man" evolution, is an utter fantasy at best.
Darwin's Philosophical meanderings are not scientific. It is the Darwinian that harbors hatred of science.
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 11:14PM
How do you tell 'micro' evolution NOT to go too far, and change a species into another one?
John Navratil| 6.21.12 @ 8:31AM
Kingofthenet,
That begs the question doesn't it? You don't have to tell it not to go too far if it already doesn't.
Let's ask the question from the other perspective. How can a population of a species become so depleted so as to not be sustainable, yet a random variation can produce a sustainable population? Can extinction be possible if a single member of the species exists?
Mistral| 6.20.12 @ 1:21PM
Read about the stigmatist Padre Pio (now St Pio da Pietrelcina). You will discover Jesus Christ exists.
Peter McGrath| 6.20.12 @ 1:30PM
Debryshire is obviously "mailing it in" with this witless, school boy rant. Perhaps he overlooked some of the events attendant to Christ's ministry on Earth such as ... hmm, changes major (such as the the seismic shift in the mores of western civilization) and minor (such as the reformulation of historical chronology to adapt to the advent of Christ - B.C. & A.D.)
Many of the great thinkers of our western - and other - civilizations have pondered these changes, the miracles he wrought, the words he is credited as having said, and those of his contemporaries in the Gospels and Epistles and concluded that, indeed, Christ was the expression of God in our world, meant to reconcile our lives to His purpose, through faith.
Lesser (albeit clever) minds such as Derbyshire poke fun, asking why it isn't possible that Jesus might "have been mistaken" (tee hee). No, Derby-boy, it isn't necessary for anyone to explain such to the likes of you but, rather, you might try a different approach and ask - of yourself - the very same question.
You might succeed in making somewhat less of a fool of yourself by pursuing such insight.
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 2:05PM
The whole IDEA of Heaven makes no sense, you go in some non-physical way to live with God and other dead people, It would be FILLED with BILLIONS of people who are everything from Cave Men to BILLIONS of Chinese down thru the centuries. People you can't relate too at all. Now assuming it's YOU, your mind is filled with TONS of Sins that are who you are, and are enjoyable to recount, you know that HOT girl you shagged at 17, that would be gone? And if you died as a child or as someone who suffered from Dementia when would the 'soul' stop recording? Would you have to live an eternity as a child or Demented?What if your entire life you had a mental or physical condition, would that be gone, would that be YOU?
Occam's Tool| 6.20.12 @ 5:02PM
King: Does "Hot Child in the City" go through your mind on a continuous loop?
DougD| 6.20.12 @ 2:35PM
Mr. Derbyshire, Thanks for the article. I always appreciate those who fall into the category that my worldview would label as 'non-believers' (thought they DO belive things :), just not what I do. I'm not sure who 'owns' the right to define the phrase but I'll happily assert mine. :)
Anyway, I'd recommend reading Lee Strobel's book, "The Case for the Creator" which can be found on Amazon here:http://astore.amazon.com/theamericansp-20/detail/1594150753
It strikes me that you are attempting to emperically 'suss' out something that, by definition, is outside of the material universe - our 'playground' of 'sussing' *G*
Mr. Strobel was as you appear to be, a non-believer who has also not abandoned his intellect - a relatively rare breed if I do say, since so many are so easily prone to histrionics at the drop of a hat. As you can see from so many of the comments there are immediate reinforcements of the preconceived notions one side has of another, all around. And the usual and almost immediate descent into defensive namecalling. Sad.
I do believe in God. I believe in the God that is presented in the pages of the Bible. I am cofortable if the reader does not. I wish that weren't the case in so many cases but it is what it is.
Warm regards.
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 3:45PM
The term 'worldview' is really something ONLY a religious person would use, the way you use it i expect it means, 'The way things OUGHT to be'. I am an Atheist and a Liberal, I have thoughts on how I would LIKE things to be, but that is different.
DougD| 6.20.12 @ 4:23PM
Wouldn't your definition also apply to you as well? IOW, don't you think your worldview is the way things ought to be?
Unless you are presuming and asserting (thought not explicitly stated - here's a way out :) ) that you think I would approve of some sort of coercion. I do not, but must admit that some of my brethren aren't so like-minded. :)
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 5:26PM
It really is a bit of a Philosophical argument, I admit but when I say I don't 'like' something just means it isn't right for me. I don't like sushi, if a sushi restaurant were to open up next to my home, it would do NOTHING for me, but I wouldn't dream, even if I had the power to have it shut down that is something I shouldn't have the 'right' to do. I have no interest if forcing others by law to do as I want, sure if I can convince you in my ideas, fine nothing wrong with that.I guess it's the whole guest/host argument, my friend who is a Christian believes the burden is on GUESTS because it's his house, I have ALWAYS believed it's my duty as a HOST to be the one willing to bend.
DougD| 6.20.12 @ 6:22PM
Was that a real answer? :) Because I assert a different worldview than you it is NOT axiomatic I favor compulsion to my position. How is it that me disagreeing with (figuratively) you equals compulsion but the other way around it isn't? If true I call that hypocrisy, plain and simple. And I'm not asserting it is true, but what it would be.
When I say I have a specific worldview I too am admitting I like (agree with) that worldview, so what's the difference I am reading from your comments? I do not mean that in an agressive manner, just curious because it sound like a distinction without a difference from here.
As far as houses go, I'd welcome anyone as a guest and certainly attempt to 'bend' to their perferences but I would also expect the same consideration in return. If I came to your home and you offered me bell peppers I'd politely decline. They are EVIL! LOL e.g. No smoling in my house but outside is just fine. Smoke all you want in your home. If I visited I'd not like it but it's your home.
The issue I see is what I call The Preposition Problem. People talk AT each other, not WITH each other.
Of all the athiests I've ever conversed with there has only been one who was honest enough to admit to me that athieism is as much an belief system as any other. That I respect even though I disagree with the position.
Kingofthenet| 6.20.12 @ 6:53PM
Mutual respect is ALWAYS the best, but i can assure you this Christian couple will NEVER stay at my home as a guest IF I am not welcome in their house with my long-term girlfriend. NOT collecting stamps is NOT a hobby and extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. We are ALL Atheists to MOST of the Gods of man, you don't believe in Zeus or the Sun God Ra, nor a host of current ones. I just add one God more.I really don't think 'not believing' when the 'proof' of God(The Bible) is so shoddy and unreliable is really fair. Now IF ANY of the more spectacular claims of the Bible are proven,say we find the tablets given to Moses, or the Ark of the Covenant, well that could change everything.
DougD| 6.20.12 @ 10:31PM
Here's a good place to start: http://www.alwaysbeready.com/
If you dare. :)
One question I'd have would be this; IF, and I really do mean IF, at some point you looked at the evidence presented regarding the Bible (Anglicized Latin for 'books'), vetted it and came to the conclusion it was, in fact, correct would you CHOOSE to believe?
Not COULD you believe but WOULD you? I assert that many people could believe but refuse to do so. At that juncture it's a moral issue not an intellectual one.
Also, think about the difference between "believe in [Christ][God][Bible]" vs. "believe [Christ][God][Bible]". There's a huge difference.
The Devil believes in Christ - he just does not believe him.
DougD| 6.20.12 @ 11:46PM
One other item of note.
When Rome was in its ascendancy Christians were considered atheists because they did not worship Caesar. :)
E B | 6.20.12 @ 3:13PM
Add Mormons to the list of American Christians who love C.S. Lewis!
www.conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com
Quartermaster| 6.20.12 @ 8:37PM
Mormons are not Christians, although they wish to be accepted as such. Because of their view of the nature of God and Christ (both being created beings) they stand completely outside of Christianity.
Sir Mark| 6.20.12 @ 3:34PM
So, John, let me get this straight. If I said that I am the Son of God, it might just mean that I am wrong? Sorry, my friend, that would make me crazy--really, really, really crazy.
DougD| 6.20.12 @ 4:37PM
Unless you really were THE Son of God. :)
I know of only one person in history who backed that claim up and, trust me, I've seen my share of wanna-bees :)
William G. Haynes| 6.20.12 @ 3:36PM
I quite agree. Can't understand why anyone would disagree with such an eminently rational view.
Occam's Tool| 6.20.12 @ 5:01PM
Well, I hope everyone commenting here hopes that John does very, very well. I disagree with his belief structure, but he discusses it pleasantly and well, and, as a human being, he is a delight.
Quartermaster| 6.20.12 @ 8:40PM
I agree. I've swapped emails with him over the years and have always had very good feelings about him, even after he came to public unbelief. The Rich Lowry (who is a pseudo-Conservative coward) , and his NR minions really were cowardly in their dealings with him and lost a lot of credibility as a result. Not that they had a lot to begin with.
C Smith | 6.21.12 @ 1:58AM
John,
There is a day when you will remember what you have written i.e., when the books are opened, and C.S. Lewis will as well:
"I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened." (Dan 7:9-10)
Teflon93 | 6.21.12 @ 8:13AM
Wow----I didn't know Kreeft was black.
Bob Armstrong | 6.21.12 @ 3:22PM
Call me a neo-Pythagorean . Of all the ancient sects , his actually found some verifiable eternal truths .
I find the redundancy of religions' lithified venerations of ancient tomes by people who had only a primitive understanding of the nature of the reality they inhabited ungodly boring . Same bloody stories sabbath after sabbath .
I see the ever deeper understanding of , as a hindu friend of mine would ask , "what is happening?" thru math and physics the true religious quest . And it has not just one messiah bringing truth to humanity , but an ever growing pantheon .
But , it's extremely hard work to actually map your mind to the awesome interrelations of our physical reality .
It is much easier to fall back on what Kurt Vonegutt called "foma" : harmless untruths which make life livable .
Stevenski| 6.22.12 @ 8:28AM
Mr. Derbyshire, Here is a little bit of what I can offer as evidence. Three disparate things; whenever I "hear" these words of Jesus, "Before Abraham was, I am." It sends a chill up my neck. Two, once while walking to a place called Deep Lake I happened upon a box turtle and as I was admiring it I heard in my mind these words; "Do you like the turtle Steve? I made it for you" At that moment as I gazed out over the Lake, a poignancy enveloped me, An otherworldly sense of something more. Finally, In a time of extreme doubt I spoke at God. It was about 4:00 in the morning and I was standing out front of my house drinking coffee. I spoke these words; "Lord, if you exist please give me some kind of sign cause I'm having a hard time believing". Instantly I saw a shooting star from the top of the sky to the western horizon. This may all seem like little enough, but I offer it to you because it is things like this that I cling to when my faith burns cold. See you on the other side. I hope!
ZZMike2| 6.25.12 @ 2:42PM
I'm glad to see you've reemerged as Resident Curmudgeon at American Spectator.
It seems that in "hedging your bet", you're siding with another serious doubter, Pascal.
One must admit, though, that empirical evidence for heaven, hell, purgatory, even barzakh, or God, is singularly absent from the world stage.
At least, for the past 2 millennia.
TinaB| 6.25.12 @ 11:16PM
Stevenski, you got it right on da nose, bro. And you said it with eloquence, and I will definitely see you on the other side. With bells on.