angels and demons

I've always enjoyed reading Dan Brown. On two levels: the excellent thrilling storylines and the philosophical debates he provokes. Da Vinci Code has already been done to death, but Angels and Demons is touted by many to be even better.

In the book, Harvard symbologies Robert Langdon and Vittoria, scientist daughter of a Catholic priest, have several heavily theological discourses. From their credentials alone, the reader must certainly lend some weight to the views they expouse. In fact, they articulate opinions that are not uncommon; yet very eloquent and convincing:

Do I believe in God? He had hoped for a lighter topic of conver- sation to pass the trip. A spiritual conundrum, Langdon thought. That's what my friends call me. Although he studied religion for years, Langdon was not a religious man. He respected the power of faith, the benevolence of churches, the strength religion gave so many people ... and yet, for him, the intellectual suspension of disbelief that was imperative if one were truly going to "believe" had always proved too big an obstacle for his academic mind. "I want to believe," he heard himself say. Vittoria's reply carried no judgment or challenge. "So why don't you?" He chuckled. "Well, it's not that easy. Having faith requires leaps of faith, cerebral acceptance of miracles- immaculate conceptions and divine interventions. And then there are the codes of conduct. The Bible, the Koran, Buddhist scripture ... they all carry similar requirements- and similar penalties. (pg 108)

"Yes. As a scientist and the daughter of a Catholic priest, what do you think of religion?" Vittoria paused, brushing a lock of hair from her eyes. "Religion is like language or dress. We gravitate toward the practices with which we were raised. In the end, though, we are all proclaiming the same thing. That life has meaning. That we are grateful for the power that created us." Langdon was intrigued. "So you're saying that ... Faith is universal. Our specific methods for understanding it are arbitrary. Some of us pray to Jesus, some of us go to Mecca, some of us study subatomic particles. In the end we are all just searching for truth, that which is greater than ourselves." Langdon wished his students could express themselves so dearly. Hell, he wished he could express himself so dearly. 'And God?" he asked. "Do you believe in God?" Vittoria was silent for a long time. "Science tells me God must exist. My mind tells me I will never understand God. And my heart tells me I am not meant to." How's that for concise, he thought. "So you believe God is fact, but we will never understand Him." (pg 110)

If I may summarise their statements above, they are basically saying two things about religion:
1) There are many religions, and they are more or less the same. They are good because they teach good values and provide comfort and stength to many people.
2) Perhaps God does exist, but we will never understand, and our belief must be based on faith and miracles, not intellect.

The first is a comforting view of the world and religion. While not discounting the existence of God, it puts the responsibility of understanding divinity beyond the reach of mere mortals like us. Why not just accept the religion that best matches our world view and values, and live life as best we can? This was precisely the view articulated by my boss in a recent conversation.

I was surprised that a very logical person like my boss should take such a position, rather than trying to get to the bottom of things. Anyway, he likes to argue (or 'spar' as he calls it), and this is as interesting a topic as any. So I offered some thoughts: It's all very well to choose a religious that teaches good values, but what if one of the religions is actually true? What if there really is only one right religion? Many of these religions also teach the consequences of following or deviating from their teachings. You can attain nirvana or go to heaven. You could also go to hell, or be reincarnated as a chicken. (Or as my colleagues always say, we are sure to be reincarnated as trees because of all the environmental damage we cause.) Some of them give provision for a second chance; others do not.

So consider the possibility that there is a single right religion, and we only have one life, one chance, to decide where we will spend eternity. Shouldn't we, as a rational people, at least spend some effort in considering our options and weighing the consequences? Indifference and ignorance hold no water in a human a court of law; we should expect no less of divine judgement. (In this modern age, there is abundant information on all major world religions out there, when it is time to face the consequences it will be difficult to plead ignorance merely due to apathy.)

At this point we reached our destination and I started to get out of the car. "I hope you can understand," I told him, "that since I do believe that there is just one chance and one God, I have to try to get the people I care about to at least think about it."

To be continued ...