Monday, April 02, 2007
Most physicists, including the provocative Richard Dawkins, do not believe in a God, at least not a God as represented by religion.
There is the God of Einstein: He who does not play dice with the Universe.
And there is the God of Teilhard de Chardin: the mystical (and real physical) body of Christ – which comprises the Universe and reality, in toto.
A review of Dawkins’s book, The God Delusion, had this to say:
Dawkins not only portrays the "psychotic" God of the Old Testament as "arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
Dawkins view is a ripened take on the Gnostic view of the Old Testament God, Yahweh, propounded in the years after the death of Jesus/Christ.
Carl Jung’s view in his “Answer to Job” is that God finally recognized how badly He had acted toward His creation, and thus atoned by sacrificing Himself, as the Second aspect of The Holy Trinity, Jesus/Christ.
The demi-urge (demiurgos) of the Gnostics was not God, but a god beneath God, the Supreme and ineffable deity.
Yahweh was only a pretend God, and accounts in the Hebrew texts (The Old Testament) seem to confirm that.
Whatever the power of that God, Yahweh, was, it was tremendous but required the intervention of man, just as the Bible had to be written by men because God/Yahweh was incapable of doing so Himself apparently.
The Hebrews had to do the killings that God required or wanted. And the Hebrews were constantly rebuffed by their God, long before the Holocaust.
But what happened to Yahweh? Yes, He died as Jesus, but did He die altogether?
Did Jesus/Christ replace His Father? And where is Jesus/Christ? Neither aspect of the Trinity (and maybe not even the Holy Spirit) has made communion with humankind after the alleged Ascension of Jesus/Christ, forty days after his Resurrection.
(We’re discounting the vision of Saul of Tarsus, St. Paul; it seems likely to have been an hysterical hallucination brought on by the guilt he felt for his persecution of early Christians, his Jewish brethren.)
But Dawkins, and his cohorts in the scientific community, just plain out reject a God altogether.
God is not a part of their reality, never existed, and has nothing to do with human life, the evolution of humankind, or even the laws of physics.
The belief is palpable, to reasonable persons. The sufferings of mankind can’t be explained away by theological arguments such as the one that states God has a plan for humanity and we, his creatures, just don’t understand it or can ever know it.
But we contend that, perhaps, the inscrutability of God is what one might call The Game of God: The God Game.
God, not Yahweh, is, indeed, ineffable, but hoping to get His creation to discover Him, and this is what physicists, and all of us, are supposed to be doing; that’s the purpose of His (our) creation.
Some scientists and philosophers contend that God is simple; others say He is complex, like the universe.
And, as noted above, some say He is the universe.
Then there are those who say God is dead or has gone underground, disappeared:
Nietzsche and Richard Elliott Friedman (in The Hidden Face of God) respectively.
So, in this spot, we shall examine the parameters of the arguments, for and against the existence of God, and the cultural elements affected by the pro/con debate.