SEARCHING FOR GOD

Joe Wilkins

The concept of God is no longer entrenched as firmly in the minds of people as was in the past. Ancient people always had a god or gods they worshiped, were fearful of, looked to for answers on the human condition, and other aspects of their world that were a mystery to them. They looked to these spiritual guides to tell them why good people suffer, how humankind came into being, what lay in the future, what happens when they die, what was the purpose of their existence, etc.

To answer these questions certain people, such as priests, medicine men, shamans, preachers, prophets and others, developed “callings” to help get the answers. These were usually men, who were anointed or called into these professions, and were given high status by their peers and community for their unique abilities. In some cases they were elevated to be the objects of worship themselves. The qualities they all had in common was the belief that they possessed personal deity or had communication with higher powers, who would communicate with them about the realities of the spiritual world.

This essay will deal mainly with the Christian religion, since the author is a Christian and is not well versed in other religious belief systems. However, they all have some common ground, so the reasoning in this essay will apply to all in varying degrees. It should be noted, however, that this essay falls into the category of informed personal opinion, and is not intended to devalue any religious belief system. The possibilities inherent in this treatise are that it is completely or partially off base, or at least has some connection to reality. The subject matter is difficult, and may be difficult for some people to accept. The author apologizes to anyone who may be offended. Your opinion and reasoned critique of this writing is valued.

One of the problems that religions struggle with today—and have since the advent of Renaissance scholars such as Galileo, Copernicus, and others—is that some of the findings of science call into question some of the specifics of the various religions. If a person is well trained in the scientific method, and accepts it as a valid means of exploring and seeking the truth of this world and the afterlife, often there have occurred inevitable conflicts between scientific discoveries and certain aspects of religious belief systems. The paradox, of course, is that the scientific method was created to study the nature of our world and the universe, but it is grossly deficient at discovering the realities of the spiritual world.

Assuming there is a spiritual world, the scientific method has failed to verify it. There have been anecdotal experiences of individuals who claimed to have had experiences and knowledge of the afterlife, but none has held up to rigorous scientific scrutiny. From a scientific perspective, religious beliefs may seem to be much like believing in flying saucers or visitors from alien worlds, and we just have not been able come up with evidence that withstands rigorous investigation. The transition from our real world to the spiritual one seems to have an impenetrable wall, through which science is woefully deficient at penetrating.

One explanation for this deficiency is that the scientific method was developed by the finite minds of men, which, while brilliant and with vast potential, finite minds cannot comprehend an infinite universe. Our minds can only understand those parts of infinity that are “visible.” For example, suppose the universe is infinite, with no end, and goes on forever and ever. Can we really understand that? I contend that we cannot, because we are limited by the cause-and-effect phenomenon, a limitation imposed on our limited minds, dictating that when viewing the Milky Way and the rest of the Universe on a clear night, we cannot really understand the immensity, how it all began, and perhaps someday will end.

One current scientific theory as to our beginning is the “Big Bang” theory, which hypothesizes that several billion years ago all matter or energy in the Universe was confined in one small spot, which “exploded” and evolved into what we know today. This stretches our common sense brains—but we are finite–so there is obviously more here than we can understand. Even acceptance of the Big Bang leaves us with the question of what went on before that event. Some cosmologists have used higher mathematics to devise theories or explanations about all this, and have come up with the ideas that there may even be eleven universes—or perhaps an infinite number of them! How can our finite minds even begin to comprehend such matters, always remembering that any system devised by our finite minds– in this case higher mathematics–will have its finite limitations, incapable of understanding an infinite universe—if indeed it is infinite. Finiteness can never understand infinity; it can only present the concept, but is doomed to never “get inside” and fully understand it.

If we consider the possibility that the universe is not infinite, but does have limits, then our endeavor is simpler, and we may possibly come to an understanding of it someday. For then our finite minds will be able to use the scientific method—or any other method we devise—to come closer to the reality in which we find ourselves in the cosmos. Even with this scenario, however, we still face a monumental problem: finiteness itself can be complicated beyond comprehension, as evidenced by the complexity of our DNA structure or the neural pathways of the human brain. It has been estimated that our brains have about one hundred billion neurons, which have a number of interconnections that exceeds the number of atoms in the known Universe! Now, this may be an over-calculation, but all will agree the number is huge. Even so, the brain is still finite and has its limits.

I am a great admirer of science, without which we would all still be living in caves or the savannahs, trying to stay alive by eating whatever wild creatures or plants we could scrounge up. Thus, it is my contention that until future humans develop infinite brains, we are doomed to understand our universe just one small part at a time, but we will never be able to comprehend the entire picture. If one could do that, would not he or she be God?

Nevertheless, the evolving principles of modern cosmology require one to have a very high IQ to understand these theories, which dooms most of us to some vague notion of what is going on, and Heaven help us in explaining them to others. Recently, one very brilliant scientist stated that he had read Stephen Hawkings’ book on the nature of the Universe twice, and he still did not understand it!

Therefore, we are in need of some understanding that will be beneficial to us all. That is the purpose of this essay; but we must remember, it is being written by a person with a finite mind.

Let us examine a few religions that have been unproven scientifically, but are held strongly within our belief-faith systems and see where that takes us.

Christians, first of all, have the belief that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin mother, and after execution was raised from the dead, and ascended into heaven. Now, science says all this is impossible. There has never been a scientifically, verifiable instance where a dead person came back to life, much less ascended into Heaven and reappeared on Earth. And there has never been any proof of a virgin birth. But this does not mean these events could not have happened; it’s just that science cannot confirm or disprove them. Moreover, if there is no omnipotent, universal, infinite God, these events are most likely impossible! However, just because something has never happened before or since does not mean it could not have happened that one time. The Big Bang was supposedly a onetime event, and was much more miraculous than the events recorded in the New Testament. However, if there is an infinite God, then all this is possible, because an infinite creator of either an infinite or finite universe, has infinite power and can use that power to do anything He desires. Put yourself in such a God’s shoes. You have created your Universe, with the planet Earth among others, and you decide to make a virgin pregnant, and she births a son who can relate to the rest of your creation in ways finite humans can understand. It is easier for the average person to understand Jesus—because he is flesh and blood—than to comprehend an omnipotent Creator. However, people cannot scientifically understand virgin birth and bodily resurrection, so they are forced to accept them on faith, or reject them.

So, Mary has God’s baby, Jesus, and he preaches and spreads his wishes to his finite-thinking followers. Then Jesus angers and confuses many, so they crucify him. Then God brings him back to life, which with His infinite power is possible, because if you can create a Universe from nothing there is no problem in bringing a dead body back to life. Moreover, just because God has never done it again, does not mean it did not happen. Jesus is then witnessed by many people for a short time, according to historical records—which is not scientific proof, but is eyewitness testimony, and is better than no evidence. All this is the basis of the Christian religion, and if it is true—as many of us believe– then that’s all there is to say about it. But we must remember that there are many thoughtful, intelligent people people who do not believe Jesus was the son of God; they acknowledge that he did exist, but was more or less like the rest of humankind, and was a great teacher and prophet.

Muslims have their Mohammed, who had a different relationship with God than did Jesus. Moses and Joseph Smith were different also. The record of their relationship and experiences with God are each unique and slightly different, but we cannot scientifically say their experiences did not happen—they just can’t be proven scientifically. There is only faith.

Thus, we find ourselves somewhat at a dead-end scientifically. Faith leaves many people hanging between belief, partially believing, not believing, wondering, hoping, or any other mental state that gives them comfort–or induces anxiety–about this whole business. In short, we are doomed to never know for sure—leaving us only with faith to cling to if we choose to believe in God.

However, there is a part of humankind’s achievement that can comfort us with some assurance when appplied to what science has found about the Universe thus far. And that achievement is mathematics. Strictly speaking, mathematics is not a science, but is a special language we have devised, and it is used to investigate certain aspects of reality in which scientists are seeking knowledge. Specifically, I am talking about the laws of probability. In mathematics, probability is defined as the likelihood of the occurrence of any particular form of an event (the existence of God in this case), estimated as the ratio of the number of ways in which that form might occur, to the number of ways in which the event might occur in any form. Rephrasing, this means that, of the various ways things could have formed in our solar system to give us humankind, compared to the other ways things could have happened, is the probability that we exist as we are. If the probability is very high it suggests that we are not likely the product of chance, but might just be the result of some divine, intervention plan of God—or other First Cause.

Let us look at some of the events that science has determined to have happened and how they add up, demonstrating that we are likely more than the result of chance occurrences.

We will use the simple formula for probability familiar to students of advanced algebra. This formula is expressed as follows: Probability = probability 1, x probability 2, x probability 3, etc. For example, the probability that I can toss a coin and come up with heads 5 times in a row is P=p1xp2xp3xp4xp5 where each toss has one chance in two of being heads. Our formula would then be P=1/2×1/2×1/2×1/2×1/2, with P =1/32, or one chance in thirty-two that I could get five heads in a row. .

Given this understanding, let us look at the probability factors of events that have occurred on earth, which have resulted in life as we know it on our planet. We will then speculate as to whether God caused all this to happen

1) The Earth’s geological composition. Originally, the Earth was a hot ball of rocks and metal, resulting from an amalgamation of cosmic particles that coalesced to form our planet. There was no water originally. Odds of this happening: Let us be conservative, and say 1 chance in 10.

2) The Earth’s size, composition, and gravitational pull is just right to hold on to our atmosphere, something Mars and other moons and planets do not have because they are too small—if they ever had much atmosphere at all. Odds: 1/10

3) Earth’s acquisition of water is the result of icy asteroids, comets, or moons hitting the earth, and at the right time, helping to cool down the crust, providing the planet with a basic necessity for the formation of life. Odds: 1/100

4) The Earth is just the right distance from the Sun to support life as we know it. Mercury and Venus are too close, with Mercury having no atmosphere or rotation, with Venus having an atmosphere, but the surface temperature being about 800 degrees. Mars is too far. Odds: 1/1000

5) The earth has a magnetic field, due to an iron core, which protects us from fatal cosmic radiation from the sun. Odds: 1/5

6) The earth rotating as it does, giving us the seasons. Odds: 1/5

7) There is evidence that the moon was formed after a collision between another astral body and the Earth during the solar system’s formative days. Our moon’s size and distance from Earth is precisely what we require and is critical to our existence. This confluence of events regulates the tides at the optimum rate, prevents wobbling as the Earth spins. If the Earth wobbled there would be radical rising and falling of temperatures and tides. Odds: 1/1000

8) The asteroid that hit the earth 65 million years ago at the end of the Cretaceous period and caused the demise of the dinosaurs, allowed life as we now know it to form. A little known fact about this episode was that most of the dominant plants and animals were reduced or wiped out, leaving animals and flowering plants we have today to evolve. Odds: 1/1000

9) For reasons too complicated to illustrate here, the size, structure and position of the planet Jupiter caused our solar system to form in its present manner. Without Jupiter, humankind would not exist. Odds: 1/1000

There are numerous other things that have occurred which have contributed to life as we know it on Earth. But with just the above 9 factors, the estimated odds of all these events occurring is huge, represented by the formula of: P = 1/10 x 1/10 x 1/100 x 1/1000 x 1/5 x 1/5 x 1/1000 x 1/1000 x 1/1000. This gives the probability that the Earth as we know it had only one chance in 250 quadrillion of becoming what it is. And, realistically, the figure has to be much higher than that, if we plug into the equation many of the other events that occurred in Earth’s formation and development.

What does this mean? Either we are strictly the result of a series of monumental, cosmic accidents, the probability of which is unimaginable, or we are the result of some planned creative effort over billions of years, resulting in a planet that gave birth to and supports our form of life.

There is some speculation that there are lower forms of life on other bodies in our solar system, many of which have water, and future space probes will investigate this. There is also the supposition that life may have originated on other worlds, and was transported to Earth in the early days by comets and/or meteors. If this proves out, what are the odds of this happening also?

In approaching the hypothesis that God created the Universe, we are faced with the limits of science, which can only investigate objective reality– that which is measureable. Science has to assume that there is an objectively real Universe if it is to be investigated. Moreover, what science has discovered about the Universe thus far has been objective—though there are still many unknowns, but they promise to be discovered and analyzed in the future.

Thus, science can only determine the real, substantial, objective Universe around us. It cannot determine the existence of God, or anything of a spiritual nature. That reality is only known through faith, but it cannot be proven.

So how do we get to the next level, given that science cannot prove there to be a God?

Consider that philosophical rule called Occam ’s razor, which states that any theory that introduces the least new assumptions is preferred by science. Otherwise, we could introduce any number of theories as to how the Universe was formed—which is what all the cosmologists are doing today. However, if the Universe is infinite, and is unguided by a Creator, all things are possible—and in fact will occur! There is the old story that if the Universe is infinite, and you seat down an infinite number of monkeys at typewriters, and if they typed away forever, then they would ultimately produce every piece of literature that mankind has produced—and would produce forever. Since the human mind is finite that avenue of discovery is doomed to an ambigious journey, which is what is happening with the theories of multiple or alternate Universes, black hole speculation, quantum theories, etc.

Science, and the scientific method, are thus stopgap measures that our finite minds use to determine the reality around us. This means that we are doomed to uncertainty, and we will remain is this fog of unknowing if the Universe is infinite. However, if the Universe is finite there is hope that someday we can figure it out. Nevertheless, don’t hold your breath.

Thus, our Occam principle says that we should go with the theory that has the fewest assumptions about Creation, which is that God created it. This theory has the advantage of being the simplest, most understandable and encompassing, and gives us answers that science cannot. The only other alternative is to believe in nothing, that the Universe came into being on its own.

However, this does not conform to what science has thus far proven. For example, there is evidence for the Big Bang from telescopic observation and cosmic investigation, but there is no explanation how this explosion from nothing created all the matter we can see with our telescopes. Agnostics and atheists cannot give us an answer to the question: How did a secular Universe come into being from nothing?

The God-cause gives us the only answer at this time. Our finite minds can conceive of a spiritual being—separate from our material Universe, with infinite power—who could create something out of nothing, but this cannot be proven—only taken as an act of faith. Then we are faced with the same problem the agnostics and atheists have: how did God come into being? This is the question that causes the gulf between non-believers and believers. The agnostics and atheists say it all started with the Big Bang, but cannot explain what there was before, while religious folks cannot tell what was before God—if anything. Religious folks can only say, “God always was, and always will be! Thus, we come to an impasse between the two groups.

Thus, we seem to be at an epistemological dilemma, whereby our quest for knowledge comes to a dead-end.

It is at this point that we have to use some finite, scientific, common sense. Looking at the God-concept, we can ask someone to come up with a better idea, recognizing that most of the great minds in history have done so, and have convinced themselves there is a God, because it answers most of the unknowable questions. However, we find that no one has given us a good alternative. Many people go through life believing there is no God and accept that at the end of their lives there is nothingness. That is discomforting, because most people, when they get to their final days, psychologically need to believe in something beyond them. The old adage that there are no atheists in foxholes is almost 100% true.

Therefore, we can use the probability suppositions we have discussed to circumvent the limitations of science, and with great confidence propose that the formation of our universe had a God creating it. Otherwise we have a one chance in 250 quadrillion that He did not. This would then mean that we are the result of a great cosmic lottery, that out of all the possibilities of things that could have happened to produce the planet earth as it now exists, our existence is just one big accident. Now an accident like ours could have happened in an infinite or exceedingly complex universe, beating those odds of one in 250 quadrillion, but it does not appear likely.

So where does all this leave us? An informed opinion by this author proposes that there has to be a God. It’s clear that we cannot scientifically prove there is a God, but humankind definitely does need a God. We have demonstrated throughout history that our existence alone is not enough. Some thinkers have continually believed that we could create heaven on Earth if we would only pull the pieces together. Revolutionary forms of government have been the methods we have tried the most: the United Nations; US Constitution; Articles of Confederation; the British unwritten constitution; Russian, Chinese, Cuban, North Korean, and Vietnamese communism; etc; but they have proven themselves severely lacking in many areas. They certainly have not created a non-violent, peaceful world. Actually, these systems made things better in the short term in many cases, with the American system arguably the best of the lot, but they all have been plagued with a lot of dysfunction and evil, as anyone looking around the world today can testify. The world has not been free of war and strife during humankind’s entire existence.

Thus, we have proven that we are unable to create Heaven on Earth. Moreover, those today who believe that it is possible to do so forget, or are ignorant of our history. All attempts, either social or political, have failed because of humankind’s many sins of commission and omission. We seem to be able to calm things down for brief periods, but later we always degenerate into dysfunction.

Therefore, it is my contention that we cannot count on the world to improve beyond what has already been demonstrated. For all who believe and try to practice the Golden Rule, to love our neighbors as ourselves, they are countered by significant opposition that does not believe this, and the two factions are continually at war with one another.

While humankind wants a peaceful world, we have thus far been unable to achieve it. But mankind needs peace to counter the violence and dysfunction. If we cannot get it in this world, then perhaps we will in the afterlife, which offers hope from our Earthly despair. In one sense, it does not matter if there is a God or not—we need one! So, many believe in a God who offers hope, on which we can live a better life for ourselves and our neighbors. If there is no God then we have to invent one, because the God within each of us will never let us down as do the systems of this world.

In conclusion, there are those who believe that science is the enemy of religion, a thesis with which I disagree. The further I have explored both science and religion, I have concluded they are not in opposition with one another, seeming to compliment each other more and more with the passage of new discoveries and insights. The God of my understanding is good, because if he is evil then what’s the point… A good God would not allow humankind to develop the system of science, allowing us to deceive ourselves with deceptive thinking. Thus, science is a tool of God’s, which with each new discovery, draws us closer to all of His magnificent creation. The fundamental religions of the world are fearful of this progress, because it means they may have to alter some of their beliefs, which is, admittedly, very difficult to do. Fear of such change can hold us back, but the mysterious truth of God will draw us closer and closer to Him, if we will only keep our minds open.