Having read countless debates on who created God, whether God created us, and so on, I have decided to revive my long forgotten blog, and throw in a word or two on my take on the nature of God. First things first, I am what people would call a believer in God, but I am not a particularly religious person. Although I do subscribe to a certain religion, I believe it is irrelevant in this case. This post is not intended to answer any of the questions mentioned above. Instead, it is merely a reflection that could perhaps point those who ask such questions to where they could find the answers.
Before I begin, a bit of a background… In a nutshell, the scientifically-oriented atheists or agnostics want a physical, or at least a logical proof of God’s existence. All they get from “believers” is the assertion that God exists, and that one needs faith to accept this. As expected, this response won’t cut it for the first group, and one doesn’t have to be a genius to understand why. As ardent as the debate is, there is a strong likelihood that neither side is “scientifically correct.” The scientific method implies that a theory can only be considered correct if it is testable, that is if predictions based on it can be verified through observation. I will leave to the reader to decide whether either of the viewpoints can be tested and proved using the scientific method.
The universe is a clockwork that we know next to nothing about. Scientists keep coming up with cosmologies to explain the creation and the existence of universe, yet none of the cosmologies can be used to explain any of it in its entirety. Reviewing different cosmologies is beyond the scope of this post. I will only say that if we go back to the scientific method then no current cosmology can be regarded as true and complete. Things don’t look any better in the faith department. As a matter of fact, scientific method does not even seem to be applicable in this case. Before I proceed, I will say that I am a scientific person in nature who happens to believe in God. Two juxtaposed concepts that yield an entire world of difference.
What is, then, the nature of God? The universe, in all its complexity, has to be at least initiated with a set of rules that keep the clockwork working. If we look around us, processes that we have control over have to be started and stopped. We often fall into a trap of assuming that processes that we have no control over are either not directed at all or directed by nature. If the latter was true, the nature itself would be a process. Who directs nature then? Another process? Or God? Is God a process too? Obviously, the quest for God is bound to be a journey filled with self-deprecating questions. But it is the self-deprecation that implies an extremely important conclusion. Our logic and rational apparatus, in general, are very likely to be lacking in necessary tools to discover a viable and rationally plausible representation of either universe or God. In other words, our reasoning is self-deprecating. We are likely incapable of discovering the fabric of scientific truth simply because we do not seem to have the necessary software to make conclusions that would yield an answer to the question posed at the beginning of this paragraph. Nor are we (still) able to define a cosmology that would render the conception of God redundant.
