Is This It?
I can never answer the question ‘Do you believe in God?’ without first asking the inquisitor to define what they mean by ‘God’. People devoted to their established religion will often describe their exposure to their deity as being deeply personal, inferring that even their own relationship with whatever ‘God’ means, is deeply personal to them.
What am I missing?
Perhaps it would be only fair to say at this point in my article where I stand on the question of God and religion, if only as a reward for those of you kind enough to take time to read this, and also to give a general understanding of what to expect as your finger draws ever further up the page, but I’m afraid I cannot give a succinct, coherent answer in this way. That is, this entire article is my attempt to clarify, define and explore my own existence, in the context of whatever, or whoever it is that has given rise to my consciousness.
According to visualcapitalist.com, 84% of the world’s population identifies with a particular religion. This may not come as a surprise to many, but it’s quite an astounding figure to me. So much so that I find myself immediately questioning what is meant by ‘identifies with’. I currently live in an Asian country which, by all definitions, would be regarded as overwhelmingly Buddhist, and almost everyone I have met here identifies themselves as such, however, very few can be seen in the pagoda during any given month, with most seeming to crumble with ignorance at even the most casual questioning about the religion they purport to follow. I suspect this to be true of followers of other faiths to a similar degree.
As a concept, established religions, for me, have always been more about the human psyche than faith in something that, to my mind, is not based on any tangible scientific evidence. I have always struggled with the idea of people taking at face value the words of a book that was written thousands of years ago, at a time when, compared to the modern era, for the majority, education was incredibly sparse and superstition rife, which, one could reasonably conclude, would inevitably lead to simple and gullible thinking.
But of course, 84% of the world’s population would tell me that my conclusions are incorrect, my thinking distorted, and my opinions are based on a misunderstanding. And whichever way I think of it, 84%? Well, that’s a pretty high number to brush to one side. So, what, if anything, am I missing here?
Science vs. Religion
On the question of creation, be it intentional or without cause, the consensus seems to be split into two camps, the scientific and the religious, with very little to be placed in the middle of such a Venn diagram. There is an assumption that if someone doesn’t fall into the religious camp, they must have pinned themselves to the mast of the contrasting scientific. However, I have just as many reservations about what I am asked to believe by ‘the science’ as I do with ‘the religious’.
I accept that there are now many scientific theories that disprove that which are written in holy books or are believed to be true by dedicated followers of religious faith. I also accept that those very scientific theories are backed by peer-reviewed, evidence-based studies which have been conducted many times, with the same result, by minds much cleverer than mine. I take no issue with the fact that we humans are the result of an evolution that has been continuous and ever-changing for the best part of 1.5 billion years. This, to me, makes more sense than God putting a man named Adam into a garden, snapping off one of his ribs to make a female, and then going on to punish them both for eating an apple. Forgive my nonchalance, but I find it difficult to speak of such incredible matters in any other way.
Whilst matters such as evolution I have no issue with, there are questions within the scientific domain that I can’t be quite as accepting of. As much as I find the idea that “God created the heaven and earth and said let there be light” scarcely credible, I can’t help but hold notions such as the universe coming into existence out of nothing, or extra dimensions of space, in just as much contempt.
It appears to me at least, that religion attempts to provide answers to the why. Science, the how.
Since the scientific method was first devised around the days of enlightenment, it has become clear to us just how ignorant we were to trust our senses. We imagined the earth was flat because our senses told us that it was. We assumed we were the center of the universe because our senses showed us that we were. We believed that thunder and lightning were messages from angry Gods because our senses told us that was the only possible explanation. If science has taught us one thing, it’s that our senses should not, and must not be trusted. So to not believe that a universe can be created out of nothing, based purely on the fact that my senses tell me this is impossible, is a very bold stance to take. Although perhaps better-educated minds than mine may replace the adjective bold with ignorant.
Separating one faith from another
Whilst I doubt many in the scientific community would agree, as science continues to modify its latest theories and models, one can be mistaken for believing that the sole purpose of science is to disprove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the existence of a deity. When we encounter things we cannot explain, such as dark matter, dark energy, or merely the fact that against unimaginable odds, the universe appears to be very finely tuned to harbor life, science appears to go out of its way to dispel the possibility that any external force could be at play. With elaborate theories such as the simulation theory, whereby we are all ignorantly living inside of an elaborate computer program, or the multiverse theory, in which we have beaten near-infinite odds to inhabit an incredibly rare type of universe that exists within an infinite ocean of universes, it can sometimes be difficult to separate one type of faith from another.
I accept that those who have greater discipline in these matters would accuse me of speaking from a position of ignorance and, perhaps, innocence, when I opine my doubts about some commonly held scientific beliefs, and to some degree, I wouldn’t argue with such a conclusion. But as I sit here, nothing more than a random collection of atoms — as science would have me believe — that has somehow managed to not only become aware of itself and its surroundings but has the dexterity and cognitive function to press buttons on a keyboard in such a way that I can succinctly communicate aspects of my consciousness to other random collections of atoms that have also, somehow, inexplicably come together, to form a conscious entity not too dissimilar to myself, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to raise the question of how science alone can explain how this has come about.
Instinct and gut-feeling
So, the question remains, do I believe in God, and if so, what form would my definition of God take? As I mentioned earlier, I certainly have no faith in established religions that stem from ancient texts, detailing the lives of people who claimed to have been sons of a creator who gave them messages to pass on its children and mystical powers to prove they were the real deal. It all seems a little too fantastical and outlandish for my cynical and suspicious personality to accept.
But that doesn’t mean I don’t subscribe to the notion that a hand of intentioned external force isn’t at play in the coming together of my atoms and my conscious ignition. Like 84% of the world’s population, I too appear to have a difficult-to-shake-off, gut feeling that this, all of this, could not possibly have happened merely through a chain of sheer accidental, random, chance physical interactions. Physical interactions that have occurred in a universe that, as we’re led to believe, is the only effect to have ever happened without a cause, and which was born with just the right, specific, finely tuned conditions for me to somehow come into conscious existence 13.7 billion years later.
Clearly many don’t share the same instinct as I do, and I understand their arguments. Questioning why the universe is so finely tuned for life is a little like a puddle asking why it appears to fit inside of its hole so perfectly. Of course, the universe is finely tuned for life, for if it were not, we could not exist in order to question it. Instinct may appear to strongly suggest the existence of a deity, but science has shown us time and time again that we cannot trust our instincts. I don’t deny that arguments such as these don’t have validity. Of course, they do, but I think I am speaking, for good or for ill, from a place I have not chosen to be. I don’t mean that with a negative connotation, but in the same way, we do not choose many aspects of our personalities and character, I believe it’s also fair to say that we also don’t have a lot of choice in much of our beliefs and opinions. Sometimes, while we can’t explain where our gut feelings and intuition come from, they are too difficult to shake off or ignore.
Conclusion
As I enter the autumn of a life filled with wonder and fascination at questions such as these, a life where my beliefs, opinions, ideas, theories, views, and judgments have changed wildly with every one of the many orbits I have made of our star, my current, and possible concluding belief is that many aspects of my, our, existence will forever remain in the shadows. Forever out of reach of human understanding. I do believe there is something out there, something more to this existence than meets the eye, but I don’t believe it is something we could ever possibly even begin to comprehend. We may pat ourselves on the back and call ourselves intelligent beings, but what are we comparing ourselves to when we do that? When we compare ourselves to other life on our single, solitary planet, a speck of dust in the vastness of space, it’s reasonable to recognize a level of intelligence and consciousness that we do not see in other life forms, but with nothing else to reference ourselves against, how could we possibly assume we are we the peak of intelligence and consciousness within an entire universe and even perhaps beyond?
In the same way that a monkey can be trained to put one brick on top of another, but could never comprehend the meaning of a house, or a parrot can be trained to say a hundred or so words but could never comprehend how to use syntax to make cohesive sentences, I believe we are the monkeys and the parrots of the universe. We are prisoners within our own cognitive abilities. Whatever it is that has given rise to all of this thing we call reality will forever remain outside the realms of human knowledge, understanding, intelligence, and consciousness. In the same way that we cannot imagine what it would be like to live in a universe with more than three spatial dimensions, aside from equations on a piece of paper, we could not possibly know or even imagine what it is that has driven and possibly continues to drive this existence within this reality.
So, do I believe in God? The best answer I can give to that is that I feel within myself that something exists that is beyond anything I could ever hope to understand. However, I am acutely aware that this belief is born from nothing more than instinct and gut feeling. With this in mind, I am perfectly willing to accept that I may be wrong and that there is, in fact, nothing.
But in a strange paradoxical twist of irony perhaps, one thing I am sure of is that my life would not have been anywhere near as enjoyable, fascinating, captivating, or enthralling as it has been, had I known the answer to such matters as this all along.
