Maurizio – Omnologos

Where no subject is left unturned

On the Nature of God

with 2 comments

“(God) leaves you (on purpose) in doubt… were He to speak out the Truth, stating “I exist” or “I do not exist”, the world would end”
Roberto Benigni

So where is this God (or gods) that can elicit strong passions not only in the believers, but even in those avowedly opposed to the very idea that such a thing as Faith exists? Why doesn’t He (or She) just show up in front of everybody and settle the question once and for all, instead of appearing obsessed on concealing His/Herself?

An answer can be elaborated starting from two basic hypotheses: (1) God actually exists; (2) is the Creator of the Universe (or Multiverse).

As a consequence, God is not part of the Universe/Multiverse, because the Creator obviously cannot create the Creator.

Therefore, there is no way to relate to God in a scientific manner, i.e. objective, observable and measurable under repeatable, controlled conditions: in a word, impersonal.

Hence, it is a waste of time to look into Nature for evidence of the existence of God. Physics, chemistry, astronomy, biology will never show anything of the sort, just as there can be no soup on the fork.

And just as radio waves do not “hide” from the human eye, but simply can only be transformed into images and sound with a TV set: so God does not “hide” from scientific research, but can only be experienced using the appropriate tool.

That tool is Faith, a very personal endeavour made up of belief, trust, commitment and conviction in a combination that is the very opposite of impersonal and objective

===

God the Creator, if He/She exists, is extraneous to scientific reality.

Does that mean that for all intents and purposes, God does not exist at all? I would advise against taking such a strong science-is-everything stance.

Science by definition can only deal with scientific stuff. But there is a lot that can and does happen to each one of us, that cannot be repeated nor written about in a scientific article: probably, most of one’s life, and definitely, all of one’s dreams.

I am afraid I cannot repeat my dreams in a controlled situation.

===

How can Faith function then, between a Divinity that is quite literally outside of this world, and the physical brain?

A topic that will deserve its own blog.

Written by omnologos

2007/Aug/22 at 21:00:48

Posted in God, Religion

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. But faith in what?

    As you rightly indicate in the opening sentence, there is no agreement on the nature (or singularity or plurality) of God or gods.

    Those of us who have rejected the notion of god, are left wondering which God or gods we should disbelieve. As Russell said: “… I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.” (Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic Bertrand Russell (1947))

    In essence, the only difference between an Atheist and a Theist is the extent of their disbelief. An Atheist doesn’t believe in any gods; a Theist doesn’t believe in any gods except his pantheon of choice – and in the vast majority of cases the reason for his choice is not through studying scripture from various available religions and selecting the one which makes the most sense, but is simply an accident of birth. He believes in the gods his parents believed in.

    It is not necessary to postulate the existence of God for the universe to exist. Why add complexity when it isn’t necessary?

    Derek Sorensen

    2007/Aug/22 at 21:23:02

  2. Derek

    There are many people happily leaving without radio or TV. They may be left wondering why so many more pay the TV licensing fee to add un-necessary complexity to their lives.

    At the end of the day Faith is an extremely personal experience. If I could explain it, it would not be the way it is…

    omnologos

    2007/Aug/22 at 21:37:58


Leave a comment