Skip to main content

The Science of God

I just read this:

http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2015/09/22/442486129/the-true-meaning-behind-the-popes-rejection-of-god-as-magician

I was initially intrigued by the headline, which should make the author and/or editors pleased. :) I was not familiar with the Pope's remark (there's a link to it in the article), but I find that it jives pretty closely with what I have felt for a long time.

Some people, as the article points out, want God to be "the God of the Gaps" - meaning, that God fills in the interstitial places between what is otherwise easily known and understood. How did the Big Bang start off? God did it. How does cellular mitosis occur? God is behind it all. And why are we inspired by a beautiful sunset? Clearly, it's the hand of God.

Some of this may be true, but for me, it's always felt insufficient. It's felt like a cop-out, an excuse to not explore further, to not ask further questions. And that can be deeply dissatisfying for someone like me, to whom questioning is not only a natural occurrence, but it is the very warp and weft of life. The threads of my understanding are carefully woven, strand by strand, in a series of experiences with doubt, fear, questioning, struggle, and often (but not always!) sweet resolution. Some of these threads are easy to comprehend, thick, solid, and substantial. Others are thin, gossamer strands that are so very real, but are also almost ethereal and insubstantial. Some strands are dull and common, while others glitter with pure gold... And some are not a part of any pattern at all, but provide incredible interest in the vast (and growing!) tapestry that is my life.

What really inspires me about this thought, though, about God not being a magician, is that He is NOT a magician. I think sometimes people grow impatient with God, and in their finite understandings of how the world ought to be, they shake their fist at the heavens and grow disillusioned. They want God, who is all-powerful, to come down and make things right. To take away their pain and sorrow, to fix their dwindling bank account, and to make everyone peaceful and right. In essence, I think, they want God to be the grand Magician of the universe, always coming when summoned, and making things work out in the way desired at the time demanded.

This is not the case. President Kimball spoke of this. To paraphrase, he asked why God would allow tragic and terrible things to happen, when He could intervene and make things right. The question is why doesn't He do something? Why does He intervene in some instances and not in others? It all seems so arbitrary, and it makes it so very difficult... What we are to learn from this seems to be, in part, that we ARE led by a loving Heavenly Father, who can and does intervene, but according to His knowledge and love and mercy.

I'm reminded of Isaiah 55:

8 ¶For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
12 For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands.
13 Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree: and it shall be to the Lord for a name, for an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off.

I love this quote from the article:

Coyne begins speaking in a language that is deeply personal: "God is not found as the conclusion of a rational process like that. I believe in God because God gave himself to me. That was not a miracle. It does make sense that there is a personal God who deals with me and loves me and who has given himself to me. I have never come to love God or God to love me because of any of these reasoning processes. I have come to love God because I have accepted the fact that he first made the move towards me. While reasoning has not been adequate to this experience, I find that it is profoundly coherent with all that I know by reason, including science. In fact, it is not only coherent but my scientific knowledge enriches that experience."

I only take exception with the idea that it is not a miracle. I believe it IS a miracle, this process of believing, and giving one's self to God. In fact, I believe it is the only real miracle in the universe - that the process of coming to faith and a belief in God (and it is a process, not an event) is the most sublime, indefinable, but also indelible experience one can have.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is this thing still on?

 Does anyone even blog anymore? I remember when it first got started and everyone was having a blog. I like writing, and I do a lot of it in my professional life, but not everything makes it onto this blog, which is where a lot of my personal thoughts come out. I put more into Facebook lately, too, because it's a little easier. But there's something to be said for this long-form writing exercise, and I think I will continue here periodically. You don't mind, do you? Well, in my last post I wrote about how difficult things were for me at the time. That changed in July when I finally got a job working for the State of Utah. I was the program manager for the moderate income housing database program, and that meant I worked from home a lot but also went in to Salt Lake when needed, mostly on the train. It was a good experience, for the most part, and I'm grateful for the things I learned even in the short time I was there.  In October I started working for Weber County in t...

The Other Art

I'm not sure we appreciate photography as much as we do other art forms. Part of this comes from the reality that surrounds and permeates a photograph - it's very, very real, and the photographer strives for clarity and crispness in the representations. Perhaps this is why black and white images continue to be relevant - they strip away extraneous information (color) and leave us with something that is at once familiar and also non-existent - for nothing exists in black and white. Nothing. I also think that pictures are becoming too common-place... Everyone has a camera in their pocket, and while that's a very democratic thing (everyone can express themselves in a picture easily and readily, and can find an audience for these images, which are casually taken and casually viewed, and perhaps just as casually forgotten) I think that we embrace that casual attitude, and it spills over to all aspects of the media, making it impotent. So I read this article this morning: h...

A Romantic Encounter

Him (tears in his eyes, heartbroken): I want you to know that I love you, that I'm sorry for my weakness and frailties, and that I will try and do better. I think I am doing better than I was before, and I just want to please you and make you happy. I am very grateful for your continued patience as I try to be the kind of man I want to be. Her: You need a haircut. It's getting a little long.