ken's exchange

The following is an email with an attachment that tabulates the dialogues between brother Ken and his friend and my response to it some time ago. Hopefully you'd find them interesting or thought arousing if you could patiently finish reading them :) 

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Ken Hsu <keyeeh@gmail.com>

Date: Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 2:55 AM

Subject: If you got time, I like your input on this exchange I have with a friend...

To: David Liao <dsliao888@cox.net>, David Wong <cdwong@gmail.com>, Edmond Liou <lioued@gmail.com>

Guys, last week I got caught up with a friend in a discussion that started from media bias in United States but ended up in God, bible, and Christian belief in general.  It's a long email discussion back and forth for about 2, 3 days.  I put the entire exchange in MS Word document in a tabular form.  I was just wondering, what would your answer be?  I know this is a lot to ask.  Take the time you need.  Also I certainly understand it if you don't have the time to do so.  I just simply like to know your answer for future reference.  Seems like I'm having these conversations more and more these days, I would like to be prepared for them.

In Him,

Ken

from: David Wong <cdwong@gmail.com>
to: Ken Hsu <keyeeh@gmail.com>

cc: David Liao <dsliao888@cox.net>,
Edmond Liou <lioued@gmail.com>

dateFri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:19 PM
subject: Re: If you got time, I like your input on this exchange I have with a friend... 

Ken,

Your friend brought up lots of issues, and each of them can take thousands of words to respond, but overall I think his value/belief system is, in my hunch, many middle-class secular intellectuals', i.e., live-and-let-live, do-what-I-think-is-the-right-thing, and "tolerate" or supposedly keep an open and fair mind about things they don't understand, such as God and human nature.

To me this smacks of settling on "second best" instead of "the best," but this would be my "religious" mind talking, from your friend's perspective, since I already accept there is an absolute truth while I assume your friend does not.

Though not exactly his words, but I agree with your friend that religion probably started because humans want to have meaning for their life, and here's the crux of the issue: without meaning or purpose, or more specifically, recognizing and embracing the Lord of the universe, in a very personal way, how can one do good--Camus' existentialist novels have some brave humanists trying to do so in disastrous situations, but the stories usually end up in confusion or helplessness, as I can recall. Again this circles back to the "best" vs "second best" issue: without a supreme but very intimate power with you, how does one "enjoy it as best as I can, at no expense to other people, and trying my best to be a positive in the lives of any people I deal with," quoting from your friend's.

This is still of course my "religious" mind talking, your friend would say. I think if you really ask hard the humanists what they base their work or optimism on, they mgiht ultimately say it's "humanity" itself, or something like "I believe human beings are basically good." You may also see some people who seem to truly live an active and happy life as if their genes are just programmed that way, without need of any official belief... Then these are people I would really like to approach and get real close with, to try to find out what's the real story behind it--are they really as anchored by their humanist belief as they claim, are those instinctive, good-natured behavior really good enough for these lucky-gene people, does God give out blessings to some people without needing them to respond back, etc..

Some not-so-intellectual responses to the highly intellectual exchanges between you and your friend :)

Have a nice weekend,

DW