Skip to main content

Life of Immanence

Paul So ~

Immanence is the opposite word for transcendence in that transcendence refers to God being beyond this reality, whereas immanence is about God being in this reality. However I want to talk about the duality of Immanence and Transcendence in terms of human values: that immanence involves living life here and now, whereas transcendence is to live life as merely instrumental to the life beyond this world.

I think most of us Ex-Christians are familiar with transcendence, even if we haven’t heard of the word before. Most of us are told what we are suppose to do, and what we are not suppose to do. When we ask why, our parents or pastors will tell us it’s because of God’s will, and that our purpose is for God’s will not for our own. What this suggests is that every command, prohibition, and permission in regards to our will is for the will for someone else who exist beyond this reality. All our actions and livelihood is not in accordance to our interest, but in accordance to something beyond our own interest. Without God, there is no interest or will beyond our own, to direct our will to some transcendent end. Many Christians deem this kind of life meaningless, but Nietzsche, a German Philosopher, argued otherwise.

Nietzsche argued that contrary to what most Christians believe, Christianity is nihilistic because it trivializes every value, pleasure, individual will, and interest in and for this world, for the sake of the values, pleasures, will and interest of someone beyond us. It is the will of the higher being that trivializes our will in order to make our will in conformity to his own will. It restricts the creativity and freedom of our will for the sake of the will of another being. Whenever we act according to our own will apart from the will of a transcendent being, it is called “selfishness”, “sinfulness”, or “blasphemy”. Our will is only for the will of another being who is beyond this world that we love. This world that we love is considered trash, but the world beyond is considered to be a paradise. Anything in this world is to be perceived with contempt. Even if we were to value this world, we should not value it as much as the world beyond this world.

So Christianity is nihilistic because it devalues everything in this world, including our own will, in favor of the will of a being beyond this world. What we will is not important, but what God will is important. But if God does not exist, then all there exist is this world, including our own will. There is no other will out there that trivializes or instrumentalizes our own will. Because there is no will out there to instrumentalize our own will into its own end, our will is our own and we have our own ends. Because there is no will out there to trivialize our will, our will is more important than we previously realize. What we do, what we experience, what we value, and what we desire is more important than ever.

All the success and failures belong to us, and nobody else. Our success is no longer due to someone out there who takes undeserved credit for it. Our failures are no longer measured in respects to the expectation of some being out there. All the success and failures belong to us, and nobody else. Our success is no longer due to someone out there who takes undeserved credit for it. Our failures are no longer measured in respects to the expectation of some being out there. Our failures are measured by our own expectations and our own needs. Our success and failures are also measured in terms of our relationship with our fellow human beings: our family, friends, co-workers, neighbors, countrymen, and eventually humanity as a whole. What we do here is so much more important without God than it is with God, because with God what we do is not important unless what we do is for the sake of God. There are millions of aspirations, desires, love, values, interests, and dreams that we have in contrast to only ten commandments God gives to people; all of these are denied for the sake of ten things God wants people to do, out of millions of equally valid things that people want to do. If we reject the existence of God, all we do is reject ten things God wants us to do (well…most of the ten, since murder, cheating, and stealing are out of the question). By rejecting God’s existence as well as very few of his commandments, we have almost infinite possible things that we can do for our own sake!

So this is my wager here: either we believe in the existence of God, do ten things that gets people to heaven, where we do one thing for eternity (that is to praise God) or we simply shrug off the God-question and return to our life here and now where we have so much things to do with so little time. If God exists, what we do here does not matter; if God does not exist, what we do certainly matters much more than ever. I personally believe that what I do matters, because I aspire to graduate University of Maryland to go to a graduate school in Princeton University to study Philosophy as a PhD so I can teach philosophy as a professor. I aspire to find peace of mind without God, I aspire to meditate and appreciate nature. I aspire to philosophize with myself and my fellow thinkers. None of this is for the glory of God; rather it is for the glory of living here and now in this world where life is a finite speck of eternal gratitude. '

Instead of longing for some kind of reunion with a being “out-there” to be a part of its life, I want to realize that I am already part of Nature, which is much more beautiful, mysterious, harmonious, and gratuitous; I am a node connected to all other nodes in a greater cosmic web without a weaver, for all things are weaved by themselves through the laws of Nature. I am sustained not by the will of God but by the air and food provided by the planet Earth, alongside with people who care for me. I am not subjected to the will of God, but rather I am circumscribed by my environment which is subjected to the laws of Nature. Life here is already sufficient enough for me.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not

Why I left the Canadian Reformed Church

By Chuck Eelhart ~ I was born into a believing family. The denomination is called Canadian Reformed Church . It is a Dutch Calvinistic Christian Church. My parents were Dutch immigrants to Canada in 1951. They had come from two slightly differing factions of the same Reformed faith in the Netherlands . Arriving unmarried in Canada they joined the slightly more conservative of the factions. It was a small group at first. Being far from Holland and strangers in a new country these young families found a strong bonding point in their church. Deutsch: Heidelberger Katechismus, Druck 1563 (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) I was born in 1955 the third of eventually 9 children. We lived in a small southern Ontario farming community of Fergus. Being young conservative and industrious the community of immigrants prospered. While they did mix and work in the community almost all of the social bonding was within the church group. Being of the first generation born here we had a foot in two