Hume's purpose in writing Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion isn't to prove the existence of God, but to discover the nature of God. Being an empiricist, or someone who believes that knowledge only comes with experience, Hume wonders why must we have a very perfect God when we are apart of a very broken world. Wouldn't a flawless Creator create a flawless planet? Why would God willingly produce imperfection? So, to answer his own dilemma, Hume writes of three characters that have three totally different viewpoints. They all debate one another, trying to find a solution in the midst. Demea, devoted to religious orthodoxy, insists we cannot come to know the nature of God by reason because the nature of God cannot be comprehended. Philo, the skeptic, agrees with him in this matter. And Cleanthes, who sides with empirical theism and the idea that the nature of God can be seen through nature's evidence, opposes both what Demea and Philo are claiming.
I have to say the two groups have somehow caught me in the middle. While I agree there is a good bit to God's nature that we will never find out until we die and meet Him face to face in heaven, I feel safe to say there are still some aspects to His nature hidden in the evidence He left behind in creation. Romans 1:20 makes that clear enough. Looking at a sunset, I know my God is beautiful. Looking at the ant's very important role, I know my God, while very big, values even the littlest things. Looking at the seasons, I know my God, though He never changes, sees change in our lives as a necessity.
To me, these two opposing sides shouldn't fight. They have no need to. Yes, there is a lot God keeps a mystery, but there is also a lot that He's kind enough to show.
By the way, I commented on blogs by Jacob Clabo and Eliza Colbert.
I have to say the two groups have somehow caught me in the middle. While I agree there is a good bit to God's nature that we will never find out until we die and meet Him face to face in heaven, I feel safe to say there are still some aspects to His nature hidden in the evidence He left behind in creation. Romans 1:20 makes that clear enough. Looking at a sunset, I know my God is beautiful. Looking at the ant's very important role, I know my God, while very big, values even the littlest things. Looking at the seasons, I know my God, though He never changes, sees change in our lives as a necessity.
To me, these two opposing sides shouldn't fight. They have no need to. Yes, there is a lot God keeps a mystery, but there is also a lot that He's kind enough to show.
By the way, I commented on blogs by Jacob Clabo and Eliza Colbert.
Comments
In all honesty, we will never be able to fully comprehend all that God is. That's why I find it so funny whenever people try and condense who God is, so that they can brag to others about having Him all figured out.
We constantly try to put God into a box so that we can understand Him better. However, what people don't realize is that, when trying to fit God into the box, different people will have different views on how He is meant to fit!