On this blog, we have explored the evidence provided by science (evolutionary, biological, genetic, geological, paleontological, cosmological, and many other areas of both classical and modern physics), scriptural (and other religious traditions), history and personal experience. Taking all of the available evidence together (see previous posts on this blog), a clearer picture begins to emerge about both the nature of God, and what that entity appears to intend for us.
First, the evidence suggests to us that God has constructed a reality which tends to hide and obscure the true nature of things and has initiated complex, repetitive and long lasting processes that govern the day to day operation of the universe which we inhabit. Hence, we are left with the distinct impression that God is NOT actively/intimately/regularly involved in creation. However, I believe that the available evidence suggests that God is actively monitoring the operation of these processes and can (and does) occasionally intervene to produce a particular outcome. In short, the evidence suggests that (in the words of a popular song) God is watching us from a distance. And, finally, it also appears that God has designed these processes to be progressive in nature; OR, at the very least, building toward some desired outcome.
Second, as relates to humankind as self-aware creatures, it appears that God/Nature has designed us to be very conscious of our vulnerability and lack of control over our surroundings. The obvious corollary to this conclusion is that humans seem to have an innate need/desire to believe in (and appeal to) the supernatural. Moreover, as relates to God and the universe around us, it appears that God/Nature has designed us to be explorers and seekers of truth and understanding. Likewise, as with all other living things, the evidence suggests that humankind is preoccupied with the perpetuation of itself – Stated another way, it appears that the pursuit of immortality is an inherent part of being human. And, finally, the evidence suggests that humanity is very often preoccupied with the tension between love and hate, good and evil; and the choices which this tension engenders.
Now, I realize that these conclusions at first blush appear to be very general and anticlimactic. However, if we look at these conclusions as pieces of a whole, I believe the outlines emerge of a God and a design that provide a firm foundation and substantive framework for further exploration and other more precise conclusions which we might reach as a consequence of that pursuit. Moreover, the weight of the evidence which is available to us suggests that the Fundamentalist/Literalist dogmatic perspective on God, Scripture and religion is contradictory, incoherent and does not offer a sustainable approach to further spiritual growth and enlightenment. What do you think?
Well I can agree with you on the biological seeing how I studied medicine from my youth. There is a wonderful process at work within the body, and for what purpose remains as it is mean't to be, hidden. Anything else is speculation.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of the reasons I say that I am an atheist when it comes to a holy book , and an agnostic when it comes to the subject of a creator. I just don't know for sure. How can you? One cannot prove God nor disprove.
James,
DeleteAs with most things, there is a lot of room between the two extremes of theist and atheist (and the truth is that most of us exist somewhere on the continuum between them - some degree of agnostic). This post was intended to be a summation of other posts I've written which address all of the disciplines I mentioned here. I am well aware that most folks (whether they are believers or atheists) regard Scripture as an all or nothing proposition. I believe this to be a false dilemma which clouds an objective evaluation of the Bible (and any value it may have or any contribution it might make to understanding things spiritual). This is one man's evaluation of the evidence. Obviously, I believe it demonstrates the existence of a Creator and a purpose, but you are right to assert that I cannot "prove" that to you or anyone else. In the end, we must all evaluate the evidence for ourselves and arrive at our own conclusions - In fact, for me, it appears that this was the intention of the entity responsible for our reality (think Schrodinger's cat).
"...regard[ing] Scripture as an all or nothing proposition. I believe this to be a false dilemma which clouds an objective[subjective] evaluation of the Bible"
ReplyDeleteThe difference is, as time goes on, science will change but the Bible, or any supposed holy book, will remain the same. You see, there is a certain amount of truth in all fiction, and a certain amount of fiction that grows in the truth of non-fiction as time goes on. And if we fail to understand that, we will find ourselves at a dead end.
The book "Who Knows?" by Raymond Smullyan, saved me from my atheistic phase.