GospelJohn
Registered Senior Member
Even before Charles Darwin’s book was published on the theory of natural selection, people who believe only what can be proved denied the existence of God. This is understandable and it seems that no one on the theistic side of the issue has been able to supply the desired proof (AKA Scientific Method requirements) that God does indeed exist.
The challenge, from my perspective, is that theists cite the Bible or other holy books as all the proof needed that God is real. Scientists look more to testable theories and repeatable results, which the Bible has not provided to everyone’s satisfaction. But what about looking to nature itself for the testing and trends that may help provide factual data?
A common fact demonstrated in nature is that the traits (DNA) that help a species to survive and even thrive continue on through successful generations. Those traits that don’t promote survival are weaned out as the stronger of the species dominates the weaker. So the first thing we can look to is that mankind’s "vast majority" belief in a higher power has existed virtually since we first appeared on this planet. But there is a much more compelling argument found in nature than simply showing that a belief in some form of God has survived as long as our species. Oddly enough, this argument has to do with lying.
Let’s look at the lies that nature created to ensure the survival of several species. A common lie is perceived size when a predator comes around. Birds puff up their feathers to appear larger and tougher to their opponents, and the puffer fish inflates to several times its original size to the same end. But what about nature’s lie regarding camouflage? Many species use their surroundings so they aren’t seen at all by those that might threaten their existence. The common trait is that the species are well aware that these are “lies” to be used to survive but not to be believed as fact.
That brings us back to the “lie” of the existence of God. Believing in a higher power or God has been a part of every relatively successful society going back as long as historic documents can record such. But why does nature carry on with this particular lie to promote the species? Believing in God has quite likely resulted in our warring nature to evolve from "rape and pillage" to "build and restore." Surely nothing in nature says that we should have stopped murdering or enslaving the vanquished and confiscating their assets for the survival of our species, but our warring ways over many thousands of years have become gentler. But no matter how helpful believing in God might be for mankind's survival, we come back to the question of whether or not the theists have it right.
There is no doubt that a belief in a God does not make us weaker or we could easily surmise that atheists would outnumber theists by now. Over thousands of years, most theists have helped to expand a kinder, gentler approach to how we deal with others, and that results in more of us surviving despite our warring ways. To be clear, that's not to suggest that atheists cause more wars than theists, but rather nature itself promotes a food and survival chain. The most interesting part of this dilemma is that nature’s seeming persistence that "God is real" helps us survive even if it is a lie. That is such a unique concept in all of nature that it is worth a deeper look.
With every tool (lie) that nature provides to help a species’ survival, the species itself knows the tool for what it is and is not fooled by what it appears to be. This would not be true of our belief in a higher power. If God’s existence is really a lie, homo-sapiens would be the only known occasion where natural selection promoted a lie that appears to help our survival but where the species itself is fooled in the process. The alternative could well be that a belief in God is not a lie, but nature ensuring our survival with intuitive knowledge of a truth that transcends our ability to employ the Scientific Method.
We are perhaps only a scientific discovery away from being able to prove that thoughts can travel without wires or radio wave modulation, which could lead to proving that consciousness can exist without corporeal form. Given that Science couldn’t prove heavier-than-air flight was possible a little more than 100 years ago, it seems we have a long way to go in proving the facts behind all the mysteries of the universe. Please keep in mind that doesn’t mean such unexplained mysteries aren’t already true.
The challenge, from my perspective, is that theists cite the Bible or other holy books as all the proof needed that God is real. Scientists look more to testable theories and repeatable results, which the Bible has not provided to everyone’s satisfaction. But what about looking to nature itself for the testing and trends that may help provide factual data?
A common fact demonstrated in nature is that the traits (DNA) that help a species to survive and even thrive continue on through successful generations. Those traits that don’t promote survival are weaned out as the stronger of the species dominates the weaker. So the first thing we can look to is that mankind’s "vast majority" belief in a higher power has existed virtually since we first appeared on this planet. But there is a much more compelling argument found in nature than simply showing that a belief in some form of God has survived as long as our species. Oddly enough, this argument has to do with lying.
Let’s look at the lies that nature created to ensure the survival of several species. A common lie is perceived size when a predator comes around. Birds puff up their feathers to appear larger and tougher to their opponents, and the puffer fish inflates to several times its original size to the same end. But what about nature’s lie regarding camouflage? Many species use their surroundings so they aren’t seen at all by those that might threaten their existence. The common trait is that the species are well aware that these are “lies” to be used to survive but not to be believed as fact.
That brings us back to the “lie” of the existence of God. Believing in a higher power or God has been a part of every relatively successful society going back as long as historic documents can record such. But why does nature carry on with this particular lie to promote the species? Believing in God has quite likely resulted in our warring nature to evolve from "rape and pillage" to "build and restore." Surely nothing in nature says that we should have stopped murdering or enslaving the vanquished and confiscating their assets for the survival of our species, but our warring ways over many thousands of years have become gentler. But no matter how helpful believing in God might be for mankind's survival, we come back to the question of whether or not the theists have it right.
There is no doubt that a belief in a God does not make us weaker or we could easily surmise that atheists would outnumber theists by now. Over thousands of years, most theists have helped to expand a kinder, gentler approach to how we deal with others, and that results in more of us surviving despite our warring ways. To be clear, that's not to suggest that atheists cause more wars than theists, but rather nature itself promotes a food and survival chain. The most interesting part of this dilemma is that nature’s seeming persistence that "God is real" helps us survive even if it is a lie. That is such a unique concept in all of nature that it is worth a deeper look.
With every tool (lie) that nature provides to help a species’ survival, the species itself knows the tool for what it is and is not fooled by what it appears to be. This would not be true of our belief in a higher power. If God’s existence is really a lie, homo-sapiens would be the only known occasion where natural selection promoted a lie that appears to help our survival but where the species itself is fooled in the process. The alternative could well be that a belief in God is not a lie, but nature ensuring our survival with intuitive knowledge of a truth that transcends our ability to employ the Scientific Method.
We are perhaps only a scientific discovery away from being able to prove that thoughts can travel without wires or radio wave modulation, which could lead to proving that consciousness can exist without corporeal form. Given that Science couldn’t prove heavier-than-air flight was possible a little more than 100 years ago, it seems we have a long way to go in proving the facts behind all the mysteries of the universe. Please keep in mind that doesn’t mean such unexplained mysteries aren’t already true.
