My recent discovery that a man celebrated as one of the foremost intellectuals of the twentieth century—William F. Buckley, Jr. [1925-2008]—
devoted a considerable portion of his brain power to theology (the invention of loopholes to avoid certain problems of religious belief) has inspired me to revisit my March 30 post, "
Definition of theology," and add a few more examples of theological concoction:
Problem to Avoid: It is unendurably sad to contemplate that after a loved one or I myself die, we shall never again see one another.
Loophole: We don't really die! We will be resurrected (so long as we believe the prescribed things) and will enjoy each other throughout eternity.
Problem to Avoid: But I can't stand many of the people I might have to spend eternity with.
Loophole: When people are resurrected, only their pure parts are revived. If they were personally insufferable and hideously ugly in real life, they will in heaven be exceedingly nice and gloriously beautiful to look upon.
Problem to Avoid: The good die young and even those who are not so terribly bad often die before their time.
Loophole: Whoever dies before his or her time (and believes the things prescribed to get into heaven) will be proportionally recompensed in heaven so that by the time eternity has elapsed, it will all have evened out and everyone will have gotten his or her precise due.
...And those who live beyond their time (perhaps because of having been put on life support against their DNR order) will be proportionally penalized, etc. As I said, it'll all have evened out by the time eternity has elapsed.
Problem to Avoid: But eternity will never elapse! In fact, heaven could become terribly boring at some point.
Loophole: The Director of Heavenly Amusements already has (and has always had, throughout preceding eternity) a continuously diverting program planned. No one will ever, ever get bored. For one thing, we will sit around a lot and play theology.
The half-gainer concocted by Buckley in his son's book (not that it was original with Buckley) isn't any more convincing than the ones above, now, is it? All such concoctions down through the ages (since those recorded in the Israelites' ancient literature) have similarly been in the service of trying to demolish unpleasant, inconvenient facts or beliefs about the world in which we live. It is ironic that some such concoctions (starting at least with the Israelites' attributing jealousy to their god in order to avoid the problem of his vengeful destruction of people who offended him) have been accorded special authority as "revelations of God": the author of Exodus 20:5 had his god "reveal" the attribute in his own voice: "...for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God."
Revelation of God is the
reverse 3½ somersaults of theology, and the writer in question was undoubtedly one of our earliest theological geniuses.
My recent discovery that a man celebrated as one of the foremost intellectuals of the twentieth century—William F. Buckley, Jr. [1925-2008]—devoted a considerable portion of his brain power to theology (the invention of loopholes to avoid certain problems of religious belief) has inspired me to revisit my March 30 post, "Definition of theology," and add a few more examples of theological concoction:
The half-gainer concocted by Buckley in his son's book (not that it was original with Buckley) isn't any more convincing than the ones above, now, is it? All such concoctions down through the ages (since those recorded in the Israelites' ancient literature) have similarly been in the service of trying to demolish unpleasant, inconvenient facts or beliefs about the world in which we live. It is ironic that some such concoctions (starting at least with the Israelites' attributing jealousy to their god in order to avoid the problem of his vengeful destruction of people who offended him) have been accorded special authority as "revelations of God": the author of Exodus 20:5 had his god "reveal" the attribute in his own voice: "...for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God." Revelation of God is the reverse 3½ somersaults of theology, and the writer in question was undoubtedly one of our earliest theological geniuses.
Your Problems 2 and 4 have often given me the means to have a little fun with the more outspoken fundamentalist members of my extended family. It’s amazing just how quickly such good Christians can explode in a fit of temper if you dare to question the tenets of their faith. ;-)
ReplyDeleteDon't you just love to witness that explosion of temper! So much that I suspect your appetite is ever whetted for an opportunity to ignite it. But don't you sometimes feel in danger of becoming the victim of physical violence? You know, something written up in one of those local happenings columns in local newspapers. "Devout Christian strangles unbeliever in a fit of rage. 'I was justified. He got me going.'..."
ReplyDeleteHave you ever read Robert Heinlein’s The Number of the Beast? It’s a wonderful send-up of western theology; well, all theology. The protagonist is a fundamentalist protestant of the mid-to-late 20th Century. On Judgment Day he winds up in the Christian Fundamentalist Heaven. There are as many Christian heavens as there are sects, denominations, cults, etc. Surly angels run this particular heaven. Surly because they not only have to put up with fundie humans, but they have to serve these humans (just the description of the humans waiting in line to get into heaven on Judgment Day is hilarious). The protagonist’s girlfriend is (if I remember correctly) a devotee of the Norse Asgard. The protagonist spends much of his time in the Christian Heaven trying to get to his girlfriend in Valhalla. When he finally does get to her, he learns that she thinks that Ragnorak has occurred, and that she really doesn’t want to leave Valhalla to be with him. Her position is, Who wants to leave the party of all parties to be with a bunch of dour fundies? If you haven’t read the book, you might want to waste a few hours with it.
ReplyDeleteThe Number of the Beast definitely sounds like a read that I must undertake. I see that the Library for the Blind & Physically Handicapped seems to have ordered it on audiocassette, for it is "not yet available," but I've put it on reserve for myself. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteHah! As for whether I've ever felt in danger, that local story’d be front page, above-the-fold news in Snow Hill’s The Standard Laconic! “Dat boy done moved up yonder to Care-ee wid all dem damnyankees. See whut it done done to ‘im. Made ‘im into a sacreligious, blasphemin’ heathen!” That would be a direct quotation from several of my cousins, including the redundant “done done.” I might be a hell-bound heathen in their eyes, but they should view themselves through my eyes. No, I don’t think I have to worry about spending eternity with them, regardless of where any of us wind up after our passage on this mudball.
ReplyDeleteI think that I’ve related this story to you before. At a funeral for a family member (aunt, cousin, I don’t remember) in the 1970s, I told the two ministers that it took to pray the dearly departed into heaven that my hope of heaven would be simple – the universe, eternity, and a means to travel throughout the universe to experience its every detail, wonder, and glory. I got several, “I’ll pray for you” comments after that!
ReplyDeleteLOL! Ha! I almost snorted my ice cream up my nose when reading this (I can't believe I can actually access it from work!) Thanks!
ReplyDeleteHa! And you made me laugh by saying that you can't believe you could actually access [something likely so disgusting to your employers as my blog is] at work. [That is sort of what you meant, isn't it?]
ReplyDeleteWell, what I meant is that we can hardly access ANYTHING at my job...almost everything I try to look at that deviates from construction materials is "Access Denied" and even some of those sites are, too....
ReplyDeleteMaybe Moristotle was allowed because it deals with the construction of theological loopholes? I just revised the post to cover the point about dealing in heaven with people who live LONGER than their time....(A very knotty problem to be avoided at all costs!)
ReplyDelete