Thinking about the vastness of space and our relative size on earth always lulls me off to sleep. Trying to imagine the surfaces of the planets and keeping in mind that they're actually out there, barren and alone, can be a challenge. Seeing them on television or in pictures seems to render them as something almost fictional. It's hard to keep in mind that they're actually out there floating in space at this very moment.
Then to think about it on a more philosophical level, I ask myself, why? If there were a God. Why would he create/design these far off, vacant worlds? I can postulate a purpose for some of the planets in our own solar system. The giant planets outside the asteroid belt serve as gravitational barriers against inbound astral bodies. Much like our moon is earth's personal body guard against such celestial bodies. But what about all of those planets for which we will never know of, or even if we do, still apparently serve no purpose in regards to our place in the universe. Why would god create them? The only answer I could come up with is that they are there just as a homage to his power. This is a really weak and reaching explanation, but it's the best one from a religious standpoint. Another cop-out explanation is that they serve a purpose that we may not currently, or ever be aware of. This is just an adapted version of the saying, "god works in mysterious ways" and really does nothing in the way of explaining anything. It's useless and begs the question.
So what of all the worlds that we'll probably never see or even know about? What purpose would a god have in spending time to create those? There is no good or satisfying answer. So if you want to be intellectually honest with yourself. You need to consider answers outside the metaphysical realm. That perhaps there is no actual purpose for them respective to our existence. They are just another random occurrence in the universe. This at least satisfies the question of why they're there. Just apply Occam's razor. It's usually a pretty good rule of thumb. Unlike answers regarding our origins that just create more questions. A naturalistic explanation fits them perfectly. While this does not necessarily negate the existence of a god, it just shows that using god as an explanation isn't necessary.
The god of the gaps is continously finding less and less space as our understanding of the universe, from the quantum to the galactic becomes increasingly comprehensive. I remember, as a creationist, I would read up on things atheists would bring to my attention and often find myself without a reasonable answer. I would remain outwardly steadfast in my faith, but in the back of my mind, I would wonder. Doubt would creep in and I'd quickly blame it on Satan, my human frailty and a lack of understanding.
What it eventually came down to was that I could see no way in which the bible could be true if all the discoveries regarding biological and cosmological origins were true. The creation story is completely wrong, and it's the very first thing in the Bible! If the Bible is wrong there, or anywhere for that matter, then it isn't the inerrant word of God. If it isn't the inerrant word of God, then it's merely a collection of desert scribblings written by superstitious sand people. Not a book to live your life by.
Once you take a step outside of Christianity and look at it through the same lense of skepticism that you apply to all the other religions, fairy tales and myths that you know to not be true, you begin to see parallels. Their outrageous claims for which there's no evidence, become negligible. For example, say your child lost a tooth. The next morning the child comes to the breakfast table with a fresh, crisp, ten dollars bill. Only you nor your spouse put it there and this child is your only child. Would you jump to the conclusion that there must be a tooth fairy? Of course not. It may be quite mysterious as to how it wound up there but it would be utterly delusional to genuinely believe that the tooth fairy actually existed and was responsible. Take that very same rational, common sense reasoning you have for not believing in the tooth fairy and simply apply it to the story of the talking snake in the garden of Eden. Or any other miracle story in the Bible for that matter. Now ask yourself. Which one do you have more evidence for? The tooth fairy or the talking snake? Well, your child has an unexplained ten dollar bill, therefore more evidence. So how is believing that the creation story of the Bible is true, not completely delusional when it carries less evidence than the tooth fairy? Yet you find a belief in the tooth fairy to be absurd.
I know that the tooth fairy example is hypothetical and doesn't represent any specific case but the implication is still valid.
For the sake of clarity let me give you a quote that represents the absurdities associated with faith. “Tell a devout Christian that his wife is cheating on him, or that frozen yogurt can make a man invisible, and he is likely to require as much evidence as anyone else, and to be persuaded only to the extent that you give it. Tell him that the book he keeps by his bed was written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim about the universe, and he seems to require no evidence what so ever.”
― Sam Harris
Then to think about it on a more philosophical level, I ask myself, why? If there were a God. Why would he create/design these far off, vacant worlds? I can postulate a purpose for some of the planets in our own solar system. The giant planets outside the asteroid belt serve as gravitational barriers against inbound astral bodies. Much like our moon is earth's personal body guard against such celestial bodies. But what about all of those planets for which we will never know of, or even if we do, still apparently serve no purpose in regards to our place in the universe. Why would god create them? The only answer I could come up with is that they are there just as a homage to his power. This is a really weak and reaching explanation, but it's the best one from a religious standpoint. Another cop-out explanation is that they serve a purpose that we may not currently, or ever be aware of. This is just an adapted version of the saying, "god works in mysterious ways" and really does nothing in the way of explaining anything. It's useless and begs the question.
So what of all the worlds that we'll probably never see or even know about? What purpose would a god have in spending time to create those? There is no good or satisfying answer. So if you want to be intellectually honest with yourself. You need to consider answers outside the metaphysical realm. That perhaps there is no actual purpose for them respective to our existence. They are just another random occurrence in the universe. This at least satisfies the question of why they're there. Just apply Occam's razor. It's usually a pretty good rule of thumb. Unlike answers regarding our origins that just create more questions. A naturalistic explanation fits them perfectly. While this does not necessarily negate the existence of a god, it just shows that using god as an explanation isn't necessary.
The god of the gaps is continously finding less and less space as our understanding of the universe, from the quantum to the galactic becomes increasingly comprehensive. I remember, as a creationist, I would read up on things atheists would bring to my attention and often find myself without a reasonable answer. I would remain outwardly steadfast in my faith, but in the back of my mind, I would wonder. Doubt would creep in and I'd quickly blame it on Satan, my human frailty and a lack of understanding.
What it eventually came down to was that I could see no way in which the bible could be true if all the discoveries regarding biological and cosmological origins were true. The creation story is completely wrong, and it's the very first thing in the Bible! If the Bible is wrong there, or anywhere for that matter, then it isn't the inerrant word of God. If it isn't the inerrant word of God, then it's merely a collection of desert scribblings written by superstitious sand people. Not a book to live your life by.
Once you take a step outside of Christianity and look at it through the same lense of skepticism that you apply to all the other religions, fairy tales and myths that you know to not be true, you begin to see parallels. Their outrageous claims for which there's no evidence, become negligible. For example, say your child lost a tooth. The next morning the child comes to the breakfast table with a fresh, crisp, ten dollars bill. Only you nor your spouse put it there and this child is your only child. Would you jump to the conclusion that there must be a tooth fairy? Of course not. It may be quite mysterious as to how it wound up there but it would be utterly delusional to genuinely believe that the tooth fairy actually existed and was responsible. Take that very same rational, common sense reasoning you have for not believing in the tooth fairy and simply apply it to the story of the talking snake in the garden of Eden. Or any other miracle story in the Bible for that matter. Now ask yourself. Which one do you have more evidence for? The tooth fairy or the talking snake? Well, your child has an unexplained ten dollar bill, therefore more evidence. So how is believing that the creation story of the Bible is true, not completely delusional when it carries less evidence than the tooth fairy? Yet you find a belief in the tooth fairy to be absurd.
I know that the tooth fairy example is hypothetical and doesn't represent any specific case but the implication is still valid.
For the sake of clarity let me give you a quote that represents the absurdities associated with faith. “Tell a devout Christian that his wife is cheating on him, or that frozen yogurt can make a man invisible, and he is likely to require as much evidence as anyone else, and to be persuaded only to the extent that you give it. Tell him that the book he keeps by his bed was written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim about the universe, and he seems to require no evidence what so ever.”
― Sam Harris
No comments:
Post a Comment