What It Means To Believe In God

Clear thinking should result in consistency; certainly among propositions, hopefully in one’s beliefs, and ideally, in one’s life.

If, for example, you can’t see why it is inconsistent to assert, “believe those who are seeking the truth. doubt those who find it”, then you are not thinking clearly.  The statement is contradictory.  Presumably the author thinks he has found a truth.

A most interesting inconsistency involves belief in God and those who reject, ridicule, or take that belief lightly.

Belief in God carries with it certain assumptions and implications.  If you take belief in God lightly, think it a matter of sentiment only, or reject it entirely, then you should give up other beliefs.

The point, really, is to get you to read Dennis Prager’s latest column in which he urges us to think clearly about what it means to believe in God.  In his article Prager lists fourteen implications of belief in God.  I quote three.

If there is no God, then:

there is no objective meaning to life. We are all merely random creations of natural selection whose existence has no more intrinsic purpose or meaning than that of a pebble equally randomly produced.

. . . there is little to inspire people to create inspiring art. That is why contemporary art galleries and museums are filled with “art” that celebrates the scatological, the ugly and the shocking. Compare this art to Michelangelo’s art in the Sistine chapel. The latter elevates the viewer — because Michelangelo believed in something higher than himself and higher than all men.

. . . there are no inalienable human rights. Evolution confers no rights. Molecules confer no rights. Energy has no moral concerns. That is why America’s Founders wrote in the Declaration of Independence that we are endowed “by our Creator” with certain inalienable rights. Rights depend upon a moral source, a rights giver.

What I find odd is that those who reject, belittle, or make light of belief in God still want to take such things seriously.

The challenge then is this:  if you do not take seriously a belief in God, on what basis do you believe in any of Prager’s list of fourteen?  Of course, you can choose to believe such things, but what is the rational justification for such belief?