Is every version of God a God-of-the-gaps?

[The Sum of Awe]

There's no reason to believe that any of those gods related to the things you listed were actually believed in. Egyptians and Greeks were amazing at science.

 

[outhouse]

There's no reason to believe that any of those gods related to the things you listed were actually believed in. Egyptians and Greeks were amazing at science.

And with todays modern science there is still a extremely high YEC belief rate.

As well as a huge percentage that believe apologetics over history.


Embarrassing numbers actually.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

And with todays modern science there is still a extremely high YEC belief rate.

As well as a huge percentage that believe apologetics over history.


Embarrassing numbers actually.

What are the exact percentages?

Please do not pull up those charts from google images that really are just there to shock you.

 

[Parsimony]

What are the exact percentages?

Please do not pull up those charts from google images that really are just there to shock you.

Public’s Views on Human Evolution

 

[SoulDaemon]

Public’s Views on Human Evolution

err...only the american?

 

[sojourner]

I've been thinking about this lately. The classical God-of-the-gaps concept is to use God as an explanation for gaps in our knowledge - things that science doesn't understand yet.

So, a thousand years ago, God was thought to be responsible for a lot of stuff:
- thunder and lightning
- earthquakes
- comets or other celestial events
- disease
- bad weather, drought, floods
etc.

All of these have since been explained by science. Now on to stuff that God is by many believed to be responsible for today:
- spontaneous remission of disease after prayer
- the Universe coming into existence
- creating mankind or at least "nudge" evolution now and then to produce us
- giving us "souls" - consciousness, moral/ethics, ability to think etc.
- listening to our prayers, and giving us the feeling that someone is watching/listening to us

In my opinion all these are either answered or answerable by science - medicine, physics, evolution, neuroscience, and psychology in the order of the points listed above.

Of course there is the question of what happens after death, but neuroscience has already shown that our souls are the direct result of our brains, and that our personality, our memories, our sensations, everything that make us what we are, is dependent of our physical bodies working. Life after death may be just as unreal as life before birth.

Any "miracle" performed by God, any divine intervention in the physical world (ie. God changing particles or energies in the Universe), may not be miraculous at all, but explainable by science now or in the future, like that tree that dripped with "the tears of Jesus" that turned out to be beetle poo.

I also think that any and every aspect of nature is within the domain of science to find out more about. Just because something is unexplained in 2014, does not mean it is inherently unexplainable.


So, is there anything God does, has done, or can do, that is truly divine (ie. inherently unexplainable by science today and forever), or are all suspected such interventions just of the God-of-the-gaps type - a simple explanation and an easy way out to explain stuff we do not yet understand?

And if God cannot affect the physical world, what reason is there to believe that it is real?

God-of-the-gaps is one way of looking at the world theologically -- but it's neither the only nor the best way.

God is the physical world. Wanna experience Divine power? Sit through an F5 tornado and be touched by the finger of God.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Public’s Views on Human Evolution

It doesn't seem to be a constant number, compared to other tests given. There are tests that estimate around 71% support evolution (NCSE), there are others that say 77% do (Walter B Murfin and David Beck), etc.

Beyond the fact that it isn't constant, you also need to consider that this is only American results (both mine and your examples), it's difficult to measure all over the world, the results would be even more scattered.

And beyond both those facts, this is creationism vs evolution in general, outhouse specified YEC's

 

[Enai de a lukal]

God-of-the-gaps is one way of looking at the world theologically -- but it's neither the only nor the best way.

God is the physical world. Wanna experience Divine power? Sit through an F5 tornado and be touched by the finger of God.

In which case the concept of God appears entirely superfluous. Hopefully there remains a third option for theistic truth-claims since this one is superfluous, and God of the gaps is vacuous.

 

[ruffen]

This is a difficult question to answer. Any given mystery might theoretically be solved in the future by science. Perhaps even the hard problem of consciousness can some day be addressed. We just do not know now.

About consciousness, the fact that general anesthetic, alcohol, and other chemicals can temporarily remove your consciousness, indicates that it is a result from functions in the brain and not magic or as mysterious as many would like it to be.

 

[chinu]

And if God cannot affect the physical world, what reason is there to believe that it is real?

In the beganing YOU created a game for yourself to play, but before stepping into that game there was a question in YOUR mind.

Q: How can such a game give true enjoyment until you may forget you are the creator of this game ? Thus.. you turned this game into an illusionary game, Which means that you will forget everything, your power, your rank, your place, your status, after jumping into that game.

But again an another new question got arrised, Q: As You will forget everthing about yourself after jumping into that game, than who will pull you out when you will get tired after playing a lot ? Thus, by giving all of yours powers you created a CLONE of yourself and gave him the duty to pull you out.

Now, asked that clone; Sir, how will i come to know that you are really tired of this game ? YOU said; when i'll cry and beg in front of you to take me out of this game like as you have created me, rather than i created you.

And finally by saying this YOU jumped into that game.

GOD is that CLONE

Any question ?

 

[ruffen]

Any question ?

Yes.

 

[chinu]

yes.

.....

 

[BSM1]

Quite right. And even if someone does not use the God of the Gaps to fill in the holes in their physics, they may still use the God of the Gaps to fill in holes in their metaphysics. But is that not still a God of the Gaps?

But aren't most gaps in the metaphysical simply gaps between the what we know (the physical) and what we believe (the metaphysical)? Maybe those that use the 'God of Gaps' in this case have maybe reached the height of their knowing or just simply ignorant.

 

[sojourner]

In which case the concept of God appears entirely superfluous. Hopefully there remains a third option for theistic truth-claims since this one is superfluous, and God of the gaps is vacuous.

Nope. Not superfluous. God embodied in the cosmos, but is more than the cosmos.

 

[ruffen]

Nope. Not superfluous. God embodied in the cosmos, but is more than the cosmos.

How do you know this, if God does not interfere or affect the physical world?

And if God does interfere og affect the physical world, how do you know that it is God's work and not just a gap in your knowledge about nature that has a natural explanation even though that explanation may be unknown at this time?

 

[sojourner]

How do you know this, if God does not interfere or affect the physical world?

And if God does interfere og affect the physical world, how do you know that it is God's work and not just a gap in your knowledge about nature that has a natural explanation even though that explanation may be unknown at this time?

It doesn't have anything to do with apprehending God in any kind of cognitive, empirical way. It has everything to do with assigning meaning to life, and to fostering an understanding of self in relation to the world around us.

 

[ruffen]

It doesn't have anything to do with apprehending God in any kind of cognitive, empirical way. It has everything to do with assigning meaning to life, and to fostering an understanding of self in relation to the world around us.

So, you have no actual empirical reason to believe God exists, you just need it for your own psychological reasons? That doesn't really add any credibility to the idea that God somehow objectively exists in reality.

 

[sojourner]

So, you have no actual empirical reason to believe God exists, you just need it for your own psychological reasons? That doesn't really add any credibility to the idea that God somehow objectively exists in reality.

I'm not sure God exists "objectively," since there is no objective, empirical evidence to which we can point. What we do have is subjective experience and shared experience.

And no, I wouldn't say that God is necessary for my own psychological reasons. First of all, psychologically, I don't "need" God. Second, my experience of God is spiritual, not psychological.

God is not something I've "invented" to fill a need; God has simply always been within, to be discovered, and has always existed within my relationships. God is neither a security blanket, a panacea, nor an imaginary friend. God is purpose, meaning and challenge.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

Nope. Not superfluous. God embodied in the cosmos, but is more than the cosmos.

So what else? If we take away the universe, what of God is left over?

 

[outhouse]

If we take away the universe, what of God is left over?

Just take away people, not the universe.


All God's magically vanishes at that point.