Have you ever asked yourself how the concept of God made its way into your thinking? If there has never really been "God" as we believe, then how did we feeble human beings come up with such a concept? If we believe what the experts say about thinking, or cognition, it really is rather impossible for the concept to have been, first, created by man, and then sold as truth for such a long period of time. Getting into the middle of cognition means dabbling inside the various semantically interpretative opinions of the many. There are some concrete theories on cognition, but no one really knows, in an absolute way, how we think. Most will promote their subjective theories in the language of objectivity, but the reality is that there are still more questions than answers.We suspect that cognition, or sensory cognition, is a material process that supplies the material foundation for the sensible form to become existent within the mind. According to a Dictionary of Philosophy, copyright 1965, "cognition is, therefore, 'assimilation' of the mind to its object." The entry goes on to state that "the cognitive mental state as well the species by which it originates are 'images' of the object, in a metaphorical or analogical sense, not to be taken as anything like a copy... the senses, depending directly on the physical influence exercised by the object, cannot err; error is of the judging reason which may be mislead by imagination and neglects to use the necessary critique."
Looking at many of the modern semantics surrounding cognition, not much has changed about the general idea. Yes, there are many theories about the environment's impact on the mind and the subconscious, but a simple fact remains: most will agree with the above definition of cognition. If that is true then the concept of God must have originated in man in much the same way that the Bible describes. A Holy God revealed Himself to His creation.
Those who now claim that there is no God are doing so in judgment and are just as the dictionary described: mislead by imagination and neglecting to use the necessary critique. We have allowed many to use subjective theories as objective truth in explaining away the existence of God. There is always a realm of unexplained possibility and as long as that realm exists man will never become the god he so desires to be. Man is only right until the next discovery, and then he must adjust once again and redefine himself. Next time you are thinking about thinking...think about a Holy God who sent His Son to die for your sins and mine!
3 comments:
I have often asked myself how the concept of God made its way into my thinking, and I have come to a conclusion very different from your own. It's unfortunate that you delved so deeply into the semantics of cognition while leaving untouched the tremendous richness of the word of greatest import: "God." This omission is mostly circumstantial, I'm sure, since you write exclusively from the worldview of Reformed theology, and as such leave certain things presumed. However, let me illustrate a bifurcation that helps me reach my dissenting opinion, such as it is.
We have to separate the historical emergence of "God" as a concept from the implantation of this concept in an individual's mind. The latter is easy to explain, and I will use terms near and dear to both of us to do so.
From the time I was six years old, I was told on a daily basis about the attributes and influence of the God described by the Bible. My teachers (some of whom probably read this blog and may well read this comment) were all individuals who were convicted of the veracity of the stories they told, and as such, their stories were persuasive. Even when their stories were not persuasive, their authority was. Thus, my inculcation, indoctrination, and initiation into what we?ve deemed the ?concept of God.? Most of the thousands of students who have now passed through your institution share this experience with me.
But, in illustration of the second branch of the bifurcation, a problem has already developed: the continuance of the concept of God is shaped heavily by those who choose to adopt it. Surely, if this were not the case, new books on doctrine and theology would long ago have ceased to be written. Denominations would collapse into a kind of Grand Unified Theology, and, far from disputing endlessly over sprinkling, dunking and tulips, all believers really would have all things in common (to grossly abuse Acts 2:44).
Instead, we now label them only by their differences.
This is an enlightening viewpoint since it shows that there is a rather vast swath of concepts under the umbrella of the ?concept of God.? One could more accurately term it the ?conceit of God,? since God has become the representative metaphor of man?s conception of the different aspects of greatness. How rife is the Bible with synecdochical figures, such as His glory, His hand, His might, His wrath?
Far from actually being the almighty Creator which Nature purports, God is an amalgamation of what humankind would like to believe perfection is. We are wrathful and vengeful. God is more so. We have notions of justice and righteousness. God has these in spades. One of our most wondrous capacities is love. And the God we create in our image is, we say, Love. Around the fringes, though, we disagree about what perfection entails, and our doctrine likewise grows fuzzy.
You contend in your opening that God is beyond our capacity to initially conceive, but this is actually a presupposition that receives no support from your argument. It is, taken to its logical extent, a statement of despair, for you as an educator know that our surety of concepts is strengthened only through repetition and experience; yet, how could we actually internalize any concept but that it first entered our minds as a small glimpse and shadow of things to come, only then to be reinforced and yes, modified, by further experience and tutelage?
It is then thoroughly likely that the way you indoctrinate the youth actually recapitulates the very primordial formulation of the ?concept of God,? an iterative, patchwork best-guess as to what we would be if we maximized the traits we deem most admirable. This is a useful exercise, but the history of theology tells us that in the wrong hands, it will be taken far beyond its instructive usefulness and actually used to subjugate vulnerable minds.
Warren,
Thank you so much for your comment. After reading your comment twice (to make sure I understood you) I have but two questions. In your choice to focus on the word "God" do you not have to go deeper, into the semantics of the word itself? Two, while I agree that inculcation, indoctrnation, and initiation are part of every child's upbringing, I still ask the question: from where did the concept of God first come? The question is meant to be the blade of Occman's Razor, and the process of cognition the razor. As one who spent 25 years believing in only myself, I welcome any who have hard questions about God. What I share is my journey. Again, thank you for your comments. I look forward to more. Happy Thanksgiving!
Post a Comment