Certainty (not?) in God alone

I act based on a moral compass – comprised of values from my upbringing and my understanding of the world and its consequences. However, there is always a tendency at certain times to return to total submission to God and find rest in my salvation freely given to me by God through Jesus – as it cannot be taken away regardless of my earthly actions. The only true certainty that seems to exist is that which is in the omnipotence and omniscience of God. When I cannot act or be what I feel is personally ‘right’ based on my knowledge of scripture and the way in which I generally feel is asked of me by God – I chalk it up to my innate failure secondary to the fall of man. I find consolation in that I’m supposed to be broken and life is supposed to be difficult. God knows I’m a failure, he loves me anyway, and only he is perfect anyway.

I struggle, however, with seeking to live in a way in which is to be glorifying to Him based strictly on my knowledge of scripture (which is totally insufficient), sermons, fellow believers, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit which -- ?? is that just my conscience? Something about it doesn't feel complete.

The following, from chapter 2, are in line with my current thought process:

*Because man was unable by means of the arts of practice to personally direct the course of events, he sought an emotional substitute and all sorts of other things to provide the feeling of certainty. This feeling gave him courage and confidence to carry the burdens of life more successfully.

*Values which are unstable and wavering in the world, and goods which are defeated here are believed to be triumphant in a higher realm – and to many this provides consolation to the depressed.

Dewey describes his main attempt as being “to show how the actual procedures of knowledge, interpreted after the pattern formed by experimental inquiry, cancel the isolation of knowledge from overt action.” He suggests what we should seek knowledge beyond traditional dogmatic frameworks in order to live and act rightly and with certainly.

I loved this: “just as belief that a magical ceremony will regulate the growth of seeds to full harvest stifles the tendency to investigate natural causes and their workings, so acceptance of dogmatic rules as bases of conduct in education, morals and social matters, lessens the impetus to find out about the conditions which are involved in forming intelligent plans.” Thus, the individual must seek after the corporate good beyond the traditional Christian pursuit of striving for personal salvation.

Example time! So, from everything I can find in the bible, and every bible study I’ve had on the topic, and what I feel in my heart secondary to my moral compass – sex before marriage is a no go. There are definitely good reasons behind this – prevents unwanted/unplanned pregnancy, prevents spread of STDs, keeps emotions out of relationships until it is the right time for those emotions to be present, blah blah blah. Great! So just don’t do it.

Dewey says, “the quest for cognitive certainty is the need for security in the results of action.” He also writes the following:

“As long as the notion persists that values are authentic and valid only on condition that they are properties of Being independent of human action, as long as it is supposed that their right to regulate action is dependent upon their being independent of action, so long there will be needed schemes to prove that values are, in spite of the findings of science, genuine and known qualifications of reality itself. For men will not easily surrender all regulative guidance in action. If they are forbidden to find standards in the course of experience they will seek them somewhere else, if not in revelation, then in the deliverance of a reason that is above experience.”

I’ve continued to not follow this no sex before marriage rule of conduct. Why? Maybe it’s because sex is great, God made it to be awesome, and I just really like it so I do it because I want to which puts me in direct disobedience to what God says is the proper way/time/situation in which sex should enter a relationship. Or maybe I do it because it feels right – because it is a natural, beautiful, wonderful thing, because the array of emotions and feelings it opens up for two people and connection it forms between them and the world is so magnificent that it absolutely should be desired and shared when you truly love someone.

Does this make Gods word not strict, not truth? Is my interpretation of God’s word off? Is he not trying to say don’t have sex before marriage? Or has God created the world we live in all its beauty, truth, and goodness, a world that we should live in in the complete fullness of what it was created to be recognizing that:

“Action, when directed by knowledge, is method and means, not an end. The aim and end is the securer, freer, and more widely shared embodiment of values in experience by means of that active control of objects which knowledge alone makes possible.”

And furthermore, if I live in a world, in a faith, under a God, with values created not by spoon fed beliefs – not by a scientific understanding of physical particles and laws – but by the qualities which make the world beautiful and congenial to man, will I be able to live a more morally sound life, with a greater certainty and thus a greater happiness, joy, contentment, understanding. Are the evils and perils of this world only insomuch as I try to live in a world where a “magical ceremony will regulate the growth of seeds to full harvest” disregarding truth in reality and practical activity for a cognition of antecedent Being?

This could take years...

Well, this book is, to put it lightly, blowin’ my dang mind. I feel lost and a lot stretched in terms of my mental capacity to understand what I’m reading. I feel incapable of even mediocre analysis.

Perhaps I should start with why the heck I’m reading this book, which I suppose is half because Aaron said it would be good for me and half because I’m in a place of intense desire to challenge my traditional ways of thinking particularly about science and religion. I desire a deeper, more personal understanding of the world – and my thoughts, feelings, emotions, actions in relation to the world.  

I’m not sure where to begin in thinking about chapter one. I tend to not like uncertainty, but as the book notes it is not the uncertainty, per se, but the perils of evil that are unsettling.

Dewey contrasts knowledge and action – knowledge being a precursor to the mental act of observation and inquiry, unaffected by these acts. In the same way, thought is described as an inner activity, intrinsic to “mind”, complete and self-sufficient in itself. It becomes imperfect when followed upon by action. Practical activity is connected with uncertainty, make a choice then act and trust the remaining to fate, fortune, providence. Said differently, these two modes are beliefs about actual existences and the course of events and beliefs about ends to be striven for, policies to be adopted, goods to be attained, evils to be averted. I understand that Dewey will speak to the connection of these two kinds of beliefs.

I don’t really think I understand the premise on which it is stated that knowledge is certainty and action is uncertainty. Is that even what is being said? Is that put too simply? I cannot in my mind separate knowledge from the intake that affects it and thus cannot see how it could ever be described as fixed and unchanging – unless I suppose I look at the spectator theory which makes some sense.

Tonight I was reading James 1 and was struck by James 1:2-3.  “Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness.” My belief in the ends to be striven for, policies to be adopted, goods to be attained, evils to be averted to steer clear of or deal with ‘trials of various kinds’ are many. I spend countless hours consumed with the above thoughts. Act to avoid as much negative as possible. Is there any validity in that way of life as opposed to the extraordinary, higher order, the Lord, who  requests a different path – one of joy regardless of the things of this world which in turn (reading on in James) leads us to perfection, “complete, lacking in nothing” (James 1: 4). Should one path, one solution overshadow the other? Should knowledge or action prevail – and which leads to greater contentment? Which one brings greater certainty? Are they mutually exclusive? Do I have enough faith?

Oh heavens. What to do from here?