恶人谷

[This is for Helen, who recommended the book to me.]

I had never read any book that explained and explored Judaism so extensively. The author apparently converted to Judaism and is a religious scholar.

So the perpetual question is: Is God just and good and benevolent? If so, why is there so much evil in this world? Does God love man? If so, why is there so much pain and suffering?

Rebecca, the heroine of the book, a female rabbi and college counselor, was visited by God and invited to read His biography. And her answer is: God is both good and evil. He is responsible for the evil and pain and suffering as much as he is for the beauty and good and love in the world.

For a people who endured a long history of suffering and persecution, really this is the only logical conclusion for anyone who can bear to consider all the facts.

It is moving that for Rebecca, and probably Lester himself, knowing God is not all loving and benevolent does not diminish their love for Him. They still love Him even though He does not love them back.

Yet I have no love in my heart for Him.

This is what bothered me so much after I saw the movie "Frailty." It instilled fear and agony in my heart, because it proposed the possibility that this is what God wants -- evil and killing and brutality, merciless punishment, random suffering and violence. After seeing the movie, nightmares haunted me until dawn, because I was faced with the terrifying (and persuasive) likelihood of a God like this. Certainly, such a God is far more plausible than an almighty, just, and loving God, if one only looks around in this world.

But at the end of that night, I finally came to a conclusion that allowed me to sleep again -- Even if this is what God wants and He has infinite power and I have none, I still have a choice, and I still choose to reject violence and murder in the name of revenge and justice, reject hate and suffering, reject injustice, reject evil. Even if I can never have and reach any of these ideals, I still choose to love mercy, compassion, kindness and good, however difficult and impossible they are. Sorry, if You had given me this thing called "free will," then You would have to accept that at some point I could reject what You also put into this world and in man, and that I choose NOT to love You.

I had said elsewhere that now I know why I have always clung to science and logic and thus the (highly likely) possibility that there is no God, for it hurts less to believe that I'm living in an indifferent universe, where good has as much a chance to prevail as evil, that all that is human is as insignificant and temporary as the shooting stars, that none of the pain and agony is for ever. I need the assurance of oblivion like others need the assurance of believing in a loving and good deity who watches over them and gives them a good life and a good afterlife.

Yet I am not an absolute atheist. I am agonostic. Even though I have never loved Him or firmly believed in Him, I have always a tinge of fear of Him in the back of my mind -- what if Him indeed existed and cared what I think of Him? It's never a good idea to cross the powerful, especially the most powerful of all.

Ted Chiang ends his story "Hell Is the Absence of God" with what eerily similar to Orwell's 1984. Once in hell, the previously skeptical main character who suffered throughout his life now whole-heartedly believes in God and loves Him, even though he no longer has any access to Him. At the end of 1984, the hero whose will was finally crushed by the totalitarian power of Big Brother, now loves Big Brother with all his heart.

So what is it that forces them to love Him who puts them in hell? Is it power? Is it just another manifestation of the Stockholm Syndrome?

I am nothing. I am weak. I am afraid. I am as full of fear of power as anyone in the world. So, in my tiny, terrified, trembling voice to God: I choose to stand by ideals of good, however unattainable and false they are. I choose to reject ideals of evil, even if they are as much a part of You, too.

Or is it the fear and revulsion of the absolute aloneness that drive people to loving God? Is a God who does not love them back good enough as long as they love Him, as long as the universe is not an absolute void in which their love would just dissolve and disappear into the cold darkness without a wimper?

Then I am lucky, for I was made into a person who does not mind and perhaps even embraces the absolute aloneness in the cold darkness of the universe.

There are still others who seek assurance and comfort in suffering and pain, like Graham Greene. Somehow Catholicism attracts these people.

People seek a thousand different things. People may find all of them in religion, or not. There may be a God, or not. God may be good, or not. God may be omnipotent, or not. I'm still betting on the absence of God and am gladly living in Ted Chiang's hell, but it doesn't matter, for physics grants me a destination that says, as long as there is the promise of the ultimate nothingness, all is fair and fine. That promise alone makes me almost believe that there is a just, fair, and kind God after all.

天地不仁, 以万物为刍狗.
JUN内心真是个完全的理想主义者.

To some people, the ALMIGHTY is benevolent and omnipotent. So in frustration and pain, God lends them a shoulder to cry on and gives them the confidence and hope to continue living. Human beings are weak, too weak to accept the possible cold fact that there is no destiny and meaning of lives.

I am not a atheist because I couldn't deny the possibility of the existence of so-called God. But I think that if there is a God, he is highly likely irresponsible,selfish and brutal as us. Only a God full of eveil can create another creature which is also full of evil because he knows it too well. And I tend to believe that there is such a God in the universe for a selfish reason. His existence provides me an outlet to let go of my anger. Otherwise I cann't explain and accept the horrible fates of the nice people I loved.

So as I stated above, either way, the different thinkings of God reflect the same nature of human being. It is our weakness which calls for the exitence of him. I know so many people who claim themselves atheists. But in their lives, I really doubt there is no single moment (actually more than one or ten moments) that they sincerely, desperately pray for the existence of God. Only in pain and hopeless does human being realize their weak and insignificant being in the wolrd.

I tried to learn more about religion because I resort to religous explaination of lives, the meaning of lives, the reasons behind lives to relieve my anger and grief. However, the more I read, the more I am convinced that I am just a dog, inferior, dumb and easily controlled at will, in the eyes of God just like a dog in the eyes of human being.

找到这个：http://search.barnesandnoble.com/bookse ... 889&itm=61
作者确实是皈依犹太教，他的祖父是犹太人，也算有血统了。
Jun写得真清楚明白。
我读过<<Left Behind>>之类的混帐小说后，尤其欣赏Julius Lester的真诚和探索精神。

我也不是坚定的无神论者. 以前我说过, 神是否存在这件事情没法证明或者证伪, 所以我也没法相信有神还是没神.
但是我基本上不相信任何教的神, 因为都比较不合逻辑.
可能我该算是deist?

dropby wrote:但是我基本上不相信任何教的神, 因为都比较不合逻辑.
可能我该算是deist?

No necessarily. Nobody chooses to believe in God because of "逻辑". It could be that because right now you don't have the need.

It might be true that Nobody chooses to believe in God because of "逻辑". But it is also true that many people choose not to believe in God because there is no logic in God.

dropby wrote:It might be true that Nobody chooses to believe in God because of "逻辑". But it is also true that many people choose not to believe in God because there is no logic in God.

Are there people who chose to belive in God because of "逻辑"? That's new to me.

When I say not necessarily, I didn't deny "it is also true that many people choose not to believe in God because there is no logic in God." Actually, that is the main reason so many people claim that they couldn't believe in God. But I think the deep reason behind that claim is because the need of religion is not strong, especailly when things are good and life is delicious.

信神的起因虽然不是逻辑, 但是信了以后, 基本上每个信神的人都认为他们信神是非常符合逻辑的一件事. 只不过他们的逻辑在你看来并不逻辑而已. 对他们来说, 在承认神的存在的前提下, 逻辑非常自恰. 你到CND去看看很多这方面的超强长贴就知道了. 那些信神的人不见得逻辑课没我学得好. 其实不少人恐怕比我学得强得多.

我从来没有研究过"人们"为什么不信神, 只是说"我不信神"的原因是"我"认为没有特定的神, 比如耶酥, 合乎我的逻辑. 而且我知道有人不信的原因和我相同. 你非要认为是因为我没有信神的需要, 我只能认为那是你对我的片面之词, 和我为什么不信神没啥关系.

虽然传教的人经常说"人的尽头"是"神的开头", 我自己倒觉得苦难并不一定总是把人引向神. 生活顺利的人也不一定就更不虔诚. 至少我自己就认识不少生活美满得不行对神也虔诚得不行的人. 九一一以后一方面有很多人到神那里去寻找安慰, 一方面有很多人对神出离愤怒, 再也不能信了.

有信神的需要和会不会信, 能不能信, 信哪个神, 也是两码事. 我见过不只一个非常想信但是信不了的人. 还有从一种宗教改信另一种宗教的. 还有从不信到信再到不信再到信反复不已的人.

有没有信神的需要和讲不讲逻辑更加两码事. 不信神也不讲逻辑的人多了去了. 随便去哪个BBS一抓一大把.

water wrote:

dropby wrote:It might be true that Nobody chooses to believe in God because of "逻辑". But it is also true that many people choose not to believe in God because there is no logic in God.

Are there people who chose to belive in God because of "逻辑"? That's new to me.

When I say not necessarily, I didn't deny "it is also true that many people choose not to believe in God because there is no logic in God." Actually, that is the main reason so many people claim that they couldn't believe in God. But I think the deep reason behind that claim is because the need of religion is not strong, especailly when things are good and life is delicious.

dropby wrote: 在承认神的存在的前提下, 逻辑非常自恰.

water wrote:

dropby wrote:

Easy, fella. You said it right there about the relation between logic and believing in God, which agrees with my statement above.

Besides I am not trying to make a general conclusion to apply on everybody. It is only an observation I drew from many people. If you don't fall in that category, you are not in that category. Definitely not something I will stick to it.