Letter 5: Let's Bring God Into The Picture

So far in these letters, I’ve only covered one of life’s big questions: What is matter made of? This is because the question is so fundamental to everything else. I apologize if I seem to be stuck on the subject, but we need to cover it further before moving on to other questions and ideas. What I want to do is now cover this question under the assumption that there is a God. In doing so, I am not declaring that there is one. Whether God exists or not will be covered later. For now, given that it is possible that God exists, I want to explore the question as if such were the case. Before doing so, I want to introduce a concept.

 

If God is all that religion tells us He is (all knowing, all powerful, etc.), then trying to understand life’s great questions on any other terms than His is illogical. In my search for truth, I have spoken with people from many different religions and disciplines of science, and I don’t think they are aware that they are trying to understand these questions on their own terms. It is hard for me to explain, so let me try to expound by referencing the thing that gave me the idea in the first pace. I stumbled across a passage in the Holy Bible, and when I read it, something captivating came to mind.

 

In the Book of 1st Corinthians, chapter 2, it says, “But as it is written, eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God”.

 

Upon reading this, a picture formed in my mind of a man locked in a room with no windows or doors, and I understood that he was stuck there with no way out. The thought continued that if he were born in the room and lived his entire life there, what ability would he have to know about the world outside, let alone understand anything about it? As I saw this picture in my mind, I understood the analogy: Mankind is like this man, having no more ability to discover the things of God than what this man has to discover the outside world while confined to his room with no way out.

 

Now, when I present this analogy to people, especially my science friends, it tends to ruffle their feathers. Why? Because they contemplate life’s great questions, including the possibility of God’s existence, on their own terms. For instance, if I want to have a little fun with them, I present this analogy and tell them that the man represents the human race and the closed room represents the Earth. Thereafter I leave it to them to interpret, and invariably they assume that the world outside of the room represents the universe. Thus, under this set-up, they have no problem with the analogy because they view their ability to peer out and study the universe as their means of “breaking out of the room” and going outside exploring. But there is great error in their assumption. What if the closed room represents the entire universe? Then what?

 

People make the assumption that the universe encompasses all that exists, and if God exists, he must be somewhere in the universe and therefore detectable. They assume that studying the universe is a valid means of proving or disproving God and/or answering life’s great questions. Well, such is merely an assumption, isn’t it?

 

I kept the concept of the man locked in a room tucked away for a long time, not knowing what to make of it. However, when I learned more about what science has discovered regarding matter, the concept came back up and hit me over the head.

 

I am not sure about anyone else, but the information that science has discovered regarding the universe and the matter that makes it up (all the things we have been discussing in these letters) startles me. I have listened to and read the theories of many quantum mechanics scholars and other scientists, and the more I read, the stranger things get. Many scholars believe that we are not the solid physical beings that our senses have led us to believe, but are rather manifestations of light and/or energy, a consciously connected energy that fills the universe.

 

In a previous letter, I used the analogy that we are hologram-like beings living in a holodeck-type universe. This isn’t the best analogy, and none of them are perfect, but I think the film The Matrix is a better analogy. Consider just for a second a world comprised of computer-generated people living in a computer-generated world and universe. For a time the folks in that world would be ignorant, but sooner or later some of them would become curious and start trying to figure out what it is that they are made of. Well, we know where that would lead. Eventually they would discover that they aren’t made of anything. As far-fetched as this analogy sounds, that is where we stand if science is correct, or at least something similar to it. Humans face a concept that is so damn weird that when I listen to the experts, it makes me happy to just settle for a hologram universe.

 

Now, returning to religion, nearly all faiths are based upon a God or Gods who created all things. Many books exist claiming scriptural status (directly inspired by God) that state definitively that He did create all things. However, these religious texts say virtually nothing about how He did it. We ourselves take it from there and presume that He made things the way that we make things, assembling and shaping and molding existing materials. For most of history, what else could be presumed? Humans have lacked the information to do otherwise. However, aren’t we in a unique position today during the Age of Enlightenment? Even as we discover facts like “We aren’t made of anything but light and conscious energy,” we invent and use computers and program them to create alternate worlds and universes, where people live virtual lives.

 

Now, am I postulating that God has a big computer in the sky and we are just images on His screen? Of course not, that would be overly simplistic. But, everything points to our lives being something like that, if He exists. Remember, in this letter, the assumption is that He does exist.

 

So, with that assumption, let’s play around with a few scenarios for exploration purpose. Going back to the analogy of the man living his entire life in a room without windows and doors, he would be 100% helpless to have any knowledge of the outside world, somewhat like the prisoners in Plato’s Cave Analogy. However, unlike these prisoners, not even turning his head and looking around the room would help for there is nothing in his room to shed additional light. However, he could learn of the outside world if someone came to visit and teach him about it, but then he would be 100% dependent on them for information.

 

Next, let’s consider that we make his room fancy, like the Holodeck on the Starship Enterprise. With this, our means of educating the man would be greatly increased. If our programming were perfect, we could show him the outside world as if he were there. However, we would likely encounter some limitations. Our visual presentation may be perfect, but what about the other senses? I’m not sure how good a Holodeck is at smell, feel, taste, and sound. So then let’s move on to the analogy of The Matrix. What if we had control of his mind, his intellect?

 

If, after the man were born inside the room, we instantly plugged him into the Matrix program, made him experience himself as the same baby in the virtual world that he was inside the room, and then left him plugged into the virtual world, experiencing himself grow for his entire life, what would the result be? If the Matrix program was perfect in exactly replicating life on this Earth, and we exactly replicated him as he grew, would this man be able to know the difference in what he had experienced (life in a room plugged into a Matrix-type Earth versus life lived on Earth in the normal manner)? In theory, would it not be the same?

 

From what we know of the human mind, the man would never know the difference. The experience would be identical. However, the scary concept of the Matrix is not the man living life inside his own consciousness, but rather the programmer. If you had to experience the rest of your life plugged into a Matrix-type world, whom would you trust to be the programmer? If placed in either of these analogies, the Holodeck world or the Matrix world, you would be 100% dependent on the programmer for what you experience. You would be 100% at their mercy. Thus, I ask again, whom would you trust with such power over your life and the world where you live?

 

If I had to make that choice, I would go straight to the scriptures and hold the programmer to everything I can find on God. He should be all-knowing and perfect. He should have unconditional love and concern for me. I would have to be able to trust him in every way, wouldn’t I? And as I sit here thinking, it all comes home. I am in the Matrix, or something strangely similar to it, from what science tells me, and somebody had to have programmed this whole thing. Who is the programmer?

 

We have plenty to talk about, don’t we?

 

Until next time,

 

Joshua

Reviews

[RainQueen]

Again, a thought-provoking write!

However, the following phrase is a sticking point for me:
"If God is all that Religion tells us he is, all knowing, all powerful, etc. then trying to understand this world and universe on any other terms than his is illogical."

This is a big "if." Using this definition of God as the foundation for a discussion regarding the Judeo-Christian god's existence is fair. However, there are many differing frameworks for the concept of God. Panteists are certainly not atheist, but they might take exception to that baseline argument, as their "god" is not necessarily a sentient "being."

If one wishes to argue for or against the existence of any God, it becomes important to define what God is...A relatively disinterested but still-sentient force? A loving/omnipotent father? A diffuse life force?

Once those definitions are established, arguing for or against them becomes simpler...but then, the argument becomes more limited, an d we find that we have only argued for/against those presuppositions.

Again, a thoughtful and well-written post!

[kjsa]

I like this a lot, I ponder about whether or not there is a god. Not about what a god would be or how he would do things. I liked the programmer analogy quite creative. I think god is a man-made explanation to the unexplainable, to subdue the fear engulfed by masses, and to give a reason for people to fight.

[JRB]

God is only a concept imposed upon our universal reality principle of consciousness and its laws of thought, by humanity to explain natures existence, that became our experience of what is in actuality, nothing more than our inner trilogy of consciousness within our being of earthly essence. Next story,,,, Nice write, Please give my writes a look see, on god and religions, as well as reality