Karen Armstrong is right. Any book about God is not going to be an easy read. At least she put it upfront via one of her readers’ feedback. Compare “The Case For God” to her shorter books I have read “Islam” and “The Bible”, this book is an intense read for two reasons. One, the variety of topics. Not only is she well versed in the three monotheism, but also the ancient religions too. Theology aside, Karen Armstrong ventures deep into philosophy and science supported by historical events that spans a vast timeline of 30,000 BCE to the present. Two, “The Case For God” requires the readers to think deep into the unfamiliar grounds (unless you are of the author’s caliber) as the author builds up the case that only becomes clear at the second half of the very last chapter: Death of God?
We live in a perplexing time, according to the author. For the first time in history, many of us (especially in the West I suppose) do not want anything to do with God. New atheists insist that all the modern world’s problems are entirely due to religion. At the same time, religious fundamentalists also develop an exaggerated view of their enemy as the epitome of evil. As for the faithfully devoted, do we have the right concept of what religion really means? The good news is, as observed by the author, we are currently experiencing a religious revival. But the question remains: Where shall we go from here? In what form?
On that end, Karen Armstrong aims to bring something new to the table, in this perplexing time of ours. Her aim of this book is not to give an exhaustive account of religion in any given period – her other books have taken care of that I believe – but to highlight the trend of the apophatic (of the belief that God can only be known to us as what He is not, i.e. God is unknowable). This trend speaks highly of our current religion perplexity.
To understand this trend, Karen Armstrong brings us back to the caves of 30,000 BCE where religion was first practiced. Back in the old days, religion is an attempt to construct meaning in the face of relentless pain and injustice of life. For our ancestors, to experience religion is like to experience ekstasis (a Greek word ecstasy, literally ‘stepping out’, to go beyond the self and to transcend normal experience). It is to step out of the prism of ego and experience the divine. In the beginning, no one knows what God is, set aside God’s existence (more correctly, in the beginning, there was no concept of one God). When Buddha’s disciple asked was there a God, had the world created in time or had it always existed, Buddha’s reply was: What difference would it make to discover that a god had created the world? Pain, hatred, grief and sorrow would still exist. And in the beginning, the two aspects of the religion – logos (reason) and mythos (myth) – coexists. Mythos is an important aspect as a living religion needs to be practiced upon, via rituals and the various forms of meditation.
Pre-modern religion according to the author has three principles that are of importance to our trend. First, the nature of the ultimate reality (later called God). Second, religious discourse was not intended to be understood literally. And third, the truth of religion are accessible only when you are prepared to get rid of the selfishness, greed and self-preoccupation that, perhaps inevitably, are engrained in our thoughts and behaviour but are also the source of so much of our pain. Besides exploring in detail of Aryan’s Brahman as an illustration to pre-modern religion, the author also highlighted that religion as defined by the great sages of India, China, and the Middle East was not a notional activity but a practical one.
With the story of Eden came the concept of one God, of which Judaism – and later Christianity and Islam – was born. As we progressed, we entered the age of reasoning. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and other fellow philosophers all played an important part in shaping our religious trend. To Socrates, an unexamined life is not worth living. According to Plato’s The Laws, there are three articles of faith: that gods existed, that they care for human beings, and that they could not be influenced by sacrifice and worship. And to Aristotle, the life according to reason is best and pleasantest since reason, more than anything else, is man.
Towards the end of 1500 CE, the influx of the new knowledge – of religion and philosophy – sparkled an intellectual renaissance. We created faith (it was purely a matter of commitment and practical living), doctrines, and we elevated theology to a state of arid theoretic. What happened to the old mystical theology that had been accessible all the faithful? As we were reasoning with the unknown, without the discipline of the apophatic, we were in danger of becoming idolatrous. And with that, Karen Armstrong has ended part one – The Unknown God – and moved onto the era of The Modern God starting 1500 CE.
In modern time, we see a constant conflict between science and religion that it ought not to be. The two are not supposed to be merged. According to Augustine’s principle of accommodation, a scriptural text should be reinterpreted if it clashed with science. Early science was rooted in faith. Scientists often linked their discoveries to the divinity. Kepler mentioned that the study of geometry was the study of God, and by studying the mathematical laws that inform all natural phenomena, we communicate with the divine mind. Similarly, Galileo, Isaac Newton, and many others during that period of time.
16th century sees the acceleration of Secularisation due to three crucial and formative movements: the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Scientific Revolution. And in the mist of all the conflicts of that time, philosopher Descartes attempted to find a truth on which everybody could agree – Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, deists, and ‘atheists’ – so that all people of goodwill could live together in peace. His most famous phase, I believe, is cogito ergo sum – ‘ I think therefore I am’ – making the experience of doubt the foundation of certainty.
Back then (probably even now), science, and not religion, was the path to the truth. We examined things of the smallest scale through the microscopes to the things of the largest scale through the telescopes and we could not find God. Religions in reaction to the attack by science have become more and more rigid. We have moved into the age of Atheism led by the ideas and discoveries by Karl Max, Charles Darwin, and Sigmund Freud. God did not exist (Max), God had certainly not created the world exactly as we knew it (Darwin), and God was indeed dead (Freud).
To make things worst, advance in military strength led us to the world wars. Holocaust survivor and Nobel Price winner Elie Wiesel believed that God died in Auschwitz after witnessing the slow death of a child hanged by a Gestapo in front of all the prisoners. Where is God in our modern world?
The last chapter of the book “Death of God?” is perhaps the climax of the entire book. In that chapter, Karen Armstrong highlighted the flaws of the new atheism and pledged for an open dialogue between the theologists and the new atheists. She also highlighted the origin of fundamentalism, with Islam as the last of the three monotheism to develop a fundamentalist strain. In this challenging time of ours, not all hopes are lost. We have advanced science to such a state whereby we know there is always an unknown and whatever we have proved today may not be correct in the future. We too should stress the importance of the apophatic. God is unknowable and religion is to be practiced upon, for that ekstasis. I in especially enjoy reading the epilogue and the following paragraph has much impact on me, a good example of mytho.
One day a Brahmin priest came across the Buddha sitting in a contemplation under a tree and was astonished by his serenity, stillness and self-discipline. The impression of immense strength channelled creatively into an extraordinary peace reminded him of a great tusker elephant. ‘Are you a god, sir?’ the priest asked. ‘Are you an angel … or a spirit?’ No, the Buddha replied. He explained that he had simply revealed a new potential in human nature. It was possible to living this world of conflict and pain at peace and in harmony with one’s fellow creatures. There was no point in merely believing it; you would only discover its truth if you practised his method, systematically cutting off egotism at the root. You would then live at he peak of your capacity, activate parts of the psyche that normally lie dormant, and become fully enlightened human beings. ‘Remember me,’ the Buddha told the curious priest, ‘as one who is awake.’
Afterthought: “The Case For God” is certainly no easy read for me. It took me a long time to read, re-read, make notes, and to get to the bottom of what some of the words mean for this is not a familiar topic of mine. This book mostly focuses on the theology, science, and the philosophy of the West. I don’t think it really matters which religion you are from (I am a Catholic). We live in an extremely connected world today. And hence, this trend affects you and I, no matter how far apart we physically are.
