Intellectual Righteousness and Faith

Intellectual Righteousness offers a logical defense of monotheism using common sense and math.  Even though it seeks to clearly define the word “god”, its concept of God is no different from what the founders of the ancient monotheistic religions attempted to reveal in their times.

The main difference between Intellectual Righteousness and religion is the source of inspiration.  Religion assumes the mere mention of a reality that cannot be seen or imagined should leave you open to accept whatever arouses and/or appeases our urges and fears the most.

Intellectual Righteousness contends belief in God should not require anyone to forfeit their ability to think critically or blindly believe anything just because someone claims to be a man of God.  Even though most common depictions of God are fallacious and contradict the concept of a creator, the idea of God itself makes sense because:

  1. Whatever we can witness or imagine must have a beginning, so the idea of a singular origin of everything is so plausible, it goes unquestioned.
  2. We prioritize our affections whether we monitor them closely or not.  Since the giver that keeps giving is better than any give by itself, the Creator is worthy of more affection than any creation.

Just because God is unimaginable doesn’t mean God is not understandable.  Typically, those who confuse the two are open to believe nonsense.  Faith should be a willingness to accept the evidence without the ability to get any tangible proof.  Ironically, those who claim to have it accept the irrational in order to hold on to their imagination.

Intellectual Righteousness keeps its focus on why we are willing to believe in God instead of getting distracted with editing other people’s imaginative interpretation of God or making up our own.  The study of God should be about the discovery of absolute truths through objective thinking.  It should not be a refuge from reality.

Even though no human being knows what it is like to create in the literal sense, common sense says a creator wouldn’t be like what was created. Why?  It’s simple.  To create is to bring something into reality that was previously non-existent.

A creator, by definition, must pre-date what got created.  That means the Origin of all that we can witness or measure isn’t made of, dependent on, or limited by anything originated.  To get to God without distraction or opinion, take away all that God created, which would be everything.

If you take away everything, you are left with “nothing”.  As a word, nothing has a few meanings and connotations. None of them are flattering, so it’s understandable that people would want to refute it.  To avoid the confusion of using words with multiple meanings that could keep a debate going based on semantics alone, Intellectual Righteousness switches to math with the analogy: God is to reality what zero is to math.

Zero gets a bad rap too because it represents no value.  That’s a personal problem, not a mathematical one.  People believe because zero has no value it doesn’t exist, but every other number in math depends on it to determine their values.

If you want to dispute that last statement, you should get out of the history books looking for a date of discovery and take a deeper look at number theory and absolute value (the basics).  There you will find indisputable truths that either went unnoticed or were forgotten:

  1. In order for there to be a first of anything, there must have previously been none.  Ignorance of zero’s existence or importance is irrelevant when it comes to its use.
  2. Absolute zero, as used and illustrated on the number line, is the only true absolute value. All others need it, so zero is the necessary that can only be defined through the absence of all else.
  3. Even though it can be ignored or overlooked, zero is the basis for all the rules while being the lone exception. It has every attribute and role in math that belongs to the general monotheistic concept of God except those involving personification or imagination.

Intellectual Righteousness eschews and abhors faith as it is practiced because it leaves so little room for critical thinking.  If you come to God expecting things to not make sense, you are extremely likely to believe something that insults the intellect.  There is no way to convince such a believer of what is true using things like: evidence, logic, or reason.  It is difficult to get the attention of the non-believer because there is an expectation that belief is based on nonsense and baseless emotions.

Understanding God is to reality what zero is to math eliminates the need for faith and closes the door on deception in the name of God.  It is the first step in unlocking self-mastery and lasting inner peace.  Intellectual Righteousness.  Why?  Because God exists, and you shouldn’t need faith to believe it!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *