“God”. What a word. A name, and exclamation, a blessing, a curse, a fact, a mystery. There is hardly a more controversial word in the whole history of human language. And so there is hardly a more important question we can ask than “What does this word mean?” However, there are already too many questions being asked about God. Here I seek to clarify the most important ones.
The most common and most obvious question relating to God is “Does God exist?” At first glance, the motivation behind this question is obvious, and either answer has the potential for far-reaching implications. But I am convinced that this is not truly a relevant question. The mere existence of something called “God” means nothing without answers to more questions. And it is those questions that we should be asking.
Let us examine Deism, the classic “Watchmaker God” belief. Under this belief, god is the ultimate cause of existence and the one who created everything that is, but this god does not interact with the world he or she created in any way. This kind of god is not relevant. In this belief, god is simply the first cause, and can be easily replaced with a multiverse-style universe collision or a quantum-level leap into existence. Deism simply gives us a convenient place to start in the story of the world, and a deistic god is nothing more than a hand-waving “whatever it was, here is where we find ourselves” type of explanation. I understand this is a bold and possibly offensive claim, but the point is that a god who no longer has any interaction with the known universe is simply an idea, not relevant to anyone on any practical level. Such a God cannot help me, hurt me, punish me, reward me, love me, hate me, know me, or disown me. As far as I am concerned, god without interaction simply isn’t there.
Now let us look at Pantheism, which, as I use it here, is loosely defined as the belief that everything is simply part of the divine nature. In other words, “god” is simply a term used to describe everything that is, and anything that exists contains part of god by the mere fact that it exists. This is a very limited explanation, but hopefully it is enough to point us in the direction of the types of beliefs I am talking about. This type of god is a god without distinction or separation; a god who is not separate or distinct from anything else in the world. But under this belief, god can be replaced with “existence” or “physicality” or “mass” or “desire” or anything else that unites all those things included in the term “god”. Sure, perhaps it is the part of god in me that makes me feel a connection to my cat or a tree or a the ocean. But perhaps it is also just my innate desires, brought about by chemicals or a soul or a spirit. Maybe those desires or spirit or soul are what we mean by “god”. But once again, we see that this is no more than a convenient place to start, and this pantheistic god is nothing more than an arbitrary label attached to the baseline of all things. In deism, “god” is so far away as to be completely irrelevant in any practical discussion. In pantheism, “god” is so close and so small as to be indistinguishable from any other characteristic or object. Thus, as with interaction, god without distinction simply isn’t there.
So then, the answer to the question “Does god exist?” is made irrelevant without answers to the questions “Does god interact?” and “Is God distinct?”. In other words, when question the existence of god, what we really want to know is, is there some thing or being separate from the other things and beings and forces in this world, yet still able to interact with and exert influence on this world? Take, for example, Poseidon, the Greek god of the sea. While he is the god of the sea, Poseidon is not the sea itself. He is his own being, complete with desires and personality and strengths and flaws. Yet he is very clearly able to influence nature and exert power over people and this world. Thus, Poseidon is a god we should care about, should he exist. Please note that I am taking Poseidon as described by the Greek belief, not as an actual god that exists. Also note that existence is, by default, covered in the questions of interaction and distinction, as a god that does not exist cannot be distinct from anything and certainly cannot interact with anything.
However, there are still a few troubling things about the Poseidon-style god. Even though this kind of god may pass the existence, interaction, and distinction tests, and is therefore a god we should at least pay attention to, there is nothing to suggest this is a god we should follow or worship. This is because, as clearly described in Greek myths, these types of gods are fallible. They can commit the same errors of pride that human heroes do, and they can suffer the same fate of death and defeat. Kronos, the titan father of Zeus and Poseidon, was killed by Zeus. For a follower of such a god, this is a disturbing possibility. Why devote your life unquestionably to the service of a god who is, for all intents and purposes, no different from a powerful political or military figure? The two big problems are that either your god can make a decision that you don’t agree with, or that your god could simply be defeated by a hero or another god. Thus, we have two more questions to ask any potential god. The first is, “Is God good?”, or “Is God above making mistakes or doing something wrong?”. The second is, “Is God great?”, or “Is God powerful enough to accomplish his will and avoid being thwarted by any other, be it god or man?”.
Thus, a god who merely exists deserves nothing from us. A god who is both distinct and interactive deserves our attention. But only a god who is both unquestionably good and indisputably great deserves our worship.
No comments:
Post a Comment