From: J5J@psuvm.psu.edu (John A. Johnson)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: WEEMBA jests or admits atheism? (Was: Re: WEEMBA and DABROWSKI Ang
Date: 10 Apr 92 17:59:54 GMT
 <92099.140742J5J@psuvm.psu.edu> <73453@netnews.upenn.edu>
Distribution: world,public
Organization: Penn State University

In article <73453@netnews.upenn.edu>, weemba@libra.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P
Wiener) says:
>
>In article <92099.140742J5J@psuvm.psu.edu>, J5J@psuvm (John A. Johnson)
>writes:
>
>>Let me try some reflective listening.  Matthew Wiener, are you saying that
>>god(s) have been so poorly defined for you that you do not have sufficient
>>information to decide whether or not to believe in any of these gods?
>
>Uh no.  There's the Christian version, which I certainly don't believe
>in.  There's the Big-Guy-in-the-Sky-with-Beard version which I certainly
>don't believe in.  They may be poorly defined, but they are defined well
>enough for me to reject them.

What about the Jewish version, as understood by yourself?

>
>>If I got that right, the next question is, are you jesting?
>
>I am trying to have fun.  Did you not notice the hidden kibo baits?

I noticed, I smiled, and then ignored in order to act like we are
having a serious discussion.
>
>>If not, then I have changed my mind and now assume you are an atheist.
>>Anyone who does not have a full and clear enough description of gods to
>>profess belief in gods is, by default, an atheist (a-theism = without
>>belief in gods).  Have I solved the riddle, or does the game go on?
>
>It depends on whom you ask.  Smullyan has, in one of his books, a
>conversation between an ideal theist and an ideal naturalist.
> . . .
My response to this would be very similar to Ken's.
>
>There's a Chassidic story told about a disciple having deep anxiety over
>his philosophical doubts regarding God.  He goes to his rebbe and tells
>him his troubles.  The rebbe asks him if he's eating the pork, cursing
>his parents, working on the Sabbath etc.  The disciple is shocked and
>repulsed at the suggestions.  So the rebbe tells him he doesn't have any
>real doubts (ie, in the real world), just imaginary ones (ie, in his mind).
>
>There are many points to this story, but the one relevant here is whose
>notion of theism-vs-atheism should I hold by?  Yours?  Or Judaism's?

None of the above.  The correct answer is (c) the disciple's.


Not only is this the most intelligent, thought-provoking, useful
thing you've posted here to date, I think it qualifies for one of the
best instructive stories posted by anyone in alt.atheism.

Your story obviously illustrates one of the major lessons you have been
trying to get across to atheists about Judaism, viz., that actions
rather than beliefs define the religosity of a Jew.

IMHO, the disciple's perspective is all important.  If he buys the
rebbe's distinction, then he is no atheist.  If he doesn't buy it,
then the doubts in his mind are real and he is a candidate for atheism.
>
[Big Bang deleted; this seems to be a species of the God=Nature
 position]
-----------------------------------
John A. Johnson (J5J@psuvm.psu.edu)
Department of Psychology Penn State DuBois Campus 15801
Penn State is not responsible for my behavior.
"A ruthless, doctrinaire avoidance of degeneracy is a degeneracy of
 another sort.  Getting drunk and picking up bar-ladies and writing
 metaphysics is a part of life."  - from _Lila_ by R. Pirsig
Newsgroups: alt.atheism