Letter 10: Who Is God?

I ended the previous letter by stating that the root of the argument between science and religion is not really the question “Is there a God?” but rather, “Who is God?” (though I doubt science will ever admit that). I also stated that I don’t blame science for not believing in the Gods of religion.

 

Science may have holes in their theories, but with respect to being organized and unified, they are quite impressive. Their standards and systems are well-orchestrated worldwide.

 

Religion, on the other hand, ends up being the very thing on their side of the argument that doesn’t add up. They offer details about God like he is all-knowing, he is all-powerful, he is unchanging from all eternity to all eternity. Religion claims “He is perfect,” yet they themselves are the near epitome of imperfection, or at least disorganization.

 

Now, I know I am being hard on religion, but I am trying to make a point. When I can go to a website like ‘religioustolerance.org’ and read:

 

“According to David Barrett et al, editors of the "World Christian Encyclopedia: A comparative survey of churches and religions - AD 30 to 2200," there are 19 major world religions which are subdivided into a total of 270 large religious groups, and many smaller ones. 34,000 separate Christian groups have been identified in the world. "Over half of them are independent churches that are not interested in linking with the big denominations."

 

Let’s just say that it is easier to believe that a single cell organism formed by chance than it is to believe that a perfect and unchangeable God is responsible for all of that.

 

So, where does this leave us then? If we hit a dead end on both sides of the argument, do we just give up? I meet people all the time who have done just that and who don’t know (or won’t admit) that they have done such, but they prove it when they say ridiculous thing like “truth is relative” or “many paths lead to God.”

 

If God really is “whatever I believe him to be in my heart,” which I’ve heard far too many times, then science is right. He doesn’t exist, but is rather just a self-help concept. However, I suppose this brings me at last to the statement that I started these letters off with: “The pieces of the puzzle are finally available to put the picture together.” Thus, it is finally time that I put them together.

 

To do this, I will continue adding to the Matrix Theory, and in so doing, I first need to expound upon its four assumptions.

 

Assumption 1 is that there is a God. Okay, but who is He and what is He like? Part of Assumption 2 is that He is our father, but this is something that the different tenants of religion do not agree on. Thus, before we go too far, let’s see what religion does agree on with respect to God. Here is what I can find:

 

-He is omnipotent (all-powerful)

 

-He is omniscient (all-knowing)

 

-He is omnipresent (able to be simultaneously aware of all things at all times)

 

-He is eternal (always has existed and always will exist)

 

-He is perfect (a summary of the above 4 points)

 

-He created all things in the universe including this Earth

 

-He has ultimate command over the universe and Earth

 

-He dwells somewhere above the Earth (in the Heavens or some higher realm of    existence)

 

-He is the author of all that is good

 

-He is perfectly loving

 

-He is perfectly just and honest

 

-He wants us to do good

 

-He is aware of us and everything that we do, say, think, and feel

 

-He wants us to move up from where we are now and eventually be where he is forever

 

-The way that we live our lives will determine (He being the judge) if we will get that chance to live with Him after death.

 

That is the extent of what I find religion agrees on, and it offers a fairly good idea of what God is like. However, it offers nothing about who He is. A common answer is that He is our father, which amongst the various thoughts out there makes the most sense to me. When I consider the points listed above, I can’t help but ask myself, “Why would someone like God, who is infinitely more capable than me, have any interest at all in me, let-alone full interest such that He is aware of my every move, word, thought, and feeling? Why would He care what I do with my life? Why does He want me to eventually live with Him?”

 

The only thing that I can conclude is that I am important to Him, and I have no idea why that would be the case except that I am very close to Him, like a son. In other words, if He is acting like a father, then why not be a father?

 

Some religions do not accept that God is our father, yet they share in the beliefs listed above regarding Him. I would ask, “What does it matter if God is our literal father or someone who is acting that way?” The only thing that makes a surrogate parent different from a real parent is how good of a parent they are, and given that everyone in religion agrees that God is perfect, then would it not stand to reason that He is also a perfect parent, be it by birth right or adoption? And why would I care how I acquired his undivided attention and unconditional love? Such becomes irrelevant and I am consequently labeling God as our father in my theory and thereby declaring who He is.

 

That is enough for now. In the next letter, I will continue expanding the assumptions of the Matrix Theory and moving towards completing the picture.

 

Until next time,

 

Joshua

Reviews

[eatmills]

The one big difference between religion and science is disclosure. Science will present the facts for interpretation whereas religion does not offer full disclosure, has misinformed and has kept secrets. Both science and religion are based on faith except that science is based on faith of theoretical numbers and measurement.

I enjoy your food for thought. It is very tasty.

[Kreative Kana]

Yes, I never thought of that. God is our Father. He is loving and kind. I love it how you personalized God. In the Bible, The Lord's Prayer begins with: "Our Father, in Heaven..." Thank you for sharing this.

[Meat of Dog]

Interesting; I’ve also noticed other than the actions of god there isn’t much mention of his personality or how he came to be or why he cares about us. What’s the point? I wouldn’t dismiss it so quickly to find the reason why because that is integral (though I do understand that is a big job). I would not try to prove it, as that is improbable, but it will enhance your belief system to have a personal opinion, it has done wonders to mine. Cheers!


Suggestions:

“(Though I highly doubt that Science will ever admit that).” Parenthesis are not needed here as the punctuation of the previous sentence set this one up to be a sentence of its own.

[bOhEmIa (mahim)]

Real food for thought.

[hatsXIV]

you should read "Where the Conflict Really Lies"

it deals with a lot of the stuff you're talking about. i.e. the interface of science, naturalism, evolution, and christian religion.

[CHRIS ANDES]

well I also got confused about the all of these, yet one thing is for sure whether to believe in God or not, everyone has choices to do what's right or wrong ..
..it doesn't matter on what to believe in as long as you live life to the fullest.
..I believe that the truth about all of these is unreachable by human mind..since it's already innate in the mind and we're just unaware of it.
=]

[Coyote Poetry]

I have been lucky. I been to 40 plus countries and tastes most of the world religion. I will never understand how one God got twisted into so many faiths. Most are base on the same need and desire. I like your thoughts on a topic with no ending. Faith and belief is a topic that can cause war and dislike. Thank you.
Coyote

[Little Birdie]

You have difficult thoughts for my mind to progress, but you explain them well so I actually enjoy this very much.

[Richard Layne]

this segment seems to bring more questions than answers. i can't share your assumptions.

[Team_Jaward_Gale]

nice interesting and discriptive

[Wandering Violet]

A fascinating and in-depth piece, well written and reseached. Good work!