Yet, the same limitations that prevent me from understanding the universe and God enable me to see my understanding is but a speck of the truth. In other words, what seems difficult to absorb or accept today may be veiled by the current limitations of my knowledge. If I were to my context from a greater perspective, perhaps some of those things that were hard to accept would make sense in a larger scheme of things.

That is not to say, however, that evil is good or excusable. I do not advocate that. If anything, I say that faith in God is reasonable because you acknowledge your own weaknesses and limitations in this life, and are looking for a purpose that transcends your own existence. You can call that a crutch if you like, but I’ll gladly take that criticism. I’ll also be happy to bear the criticism that I believe in a fairy tale. I also have faith that the truth will be my reward in the end, whatever it may be.

We are not the first generation to deal with these questions. Job went through similar questions on the question of God’s sovereignty and the problem of evil. I have also heard discussions on whether that which performs evil is really evil. For example, is a hand that kills good or evil? It is neither. It is only a hand that can perform either good or evil deeds. The real problem is not the hand, but the deed and the violation of a principle. I might also add that everyone has a sense of right and wrong. Therefore, that can be argued as an outrage based on some higher understanding of the way things should be. I doubt that anyone can satisfactorily explain every notion of right and wrong he or she harbors. One can say it’s a matter of nurture, but it also seems a matter of nature. Of course, I expect vigorous disagreement on that front.

I don’t think we clearly understand what evil is. Everyone dies. Nature takes its course as evidenced by the mass extinctions of the past. Things we label as bad happen as a matter of course. Earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, and fires are part of nature. These events are not tragic if you view them as part of natural order of things. On the other hand, our propensity to ignore the laws of nature and build expensive homes at sea level and on the sides of erogenous mountains might be considered tragic failures of judgment. The real tragedy is that have allowed our technological accomplishments to replace our ability to adapt and survive with a false sense of balance. By the way, I’m enough of a hypocrite that I am not going to abandon my technology. I hope you get my point though. We haven’t really even arrived at a good definition of good or evil.

I believe that God is infinitely better than I am, and I am a man who strives to do the right thing. Ocassionally, I slip and do things that would be considered an outrage. I have crossed ethical boundaries many times. Yet, I want to be good. I want to help those around me and show my concern for their needs. As bad as I can be, I have a desire to do good. If I can be benevolent, then I can believe in a being who is the ultimate template for that good. I cannot see God, but I have a sense of that person.

I understand that everything I’ve said can easily be dismissed. I expect it anyway. I have discussed these views with atheists for years. Some of them have been pretty smart. Others just like to rub their skepticism in your face. My world view accepts nonmaterial realities that cannot be explained by science. On the other hand, I see the value of science and I can accept that it may disprove many of my cherished notions. It hasn’t done that yet. Remember also that science allows for a measure of uncertainty. In other words, you might have to make a few educated guesses to arrive at a conclusion. Have a great weekend.

bgraham

This is getting almost philosophical.

Certainly one cannot rule out with absolute certainty, that there is some higher being somewhere. In a sense one could call the sum of all natural laws (physics, chemistry etc.) “God”. After all, these natural laws must have some sort of origin or cause.

But to assume a benevolant (?) God, who cares for my particular (and everybody eleses) well being (as proposed by christianity) is extremely unlikely, as we have plenty of evidence to the contrary, e.g. innocent people (children) sometimes suffer and die in the most horrible manner. If there was the alleged christian god (who is all-powerfull, remember) he should and would most certainly prevent it. Granted, we do not know everything, but we do know that much.

So Al Ross has got it right.

I was looking for the same article, about the human race splitting in two and ended up here. Like others, I started with the article about human beings nearly going extinct.

On another note, the trouble with the word theory is that it as several connotations. Unfortunately, a trip to the dictionary does not resolve the matter. If one is speaking in the scientific sense, however, a specific denotation applies. With regard to evolution, the word theory can only apply in the sense of how it happens, not that it happens. Evolution is a fact, and it’s at work every moment of our lives. The fact that our species came so close to extinction is no surprise. Most of the species that have ever existed are extinct. Nevertheless, extinction is not the only operative principle in evolution. All species adapt to their environments. Sometimes, the adaptation results in an advance to handle an environmental challenge. Other times, the result is a retreat because of more favorable conditions. In other words, it became easier to survive; therefore, the adaptation was no longer necessary. The question is not if this happens, but how it happens. Consequently, there is little unanimity in the scientific community on the exact nature of evolution, and this is where the word theory takes on the broader meaning again.

One thing I might point out is that Darwin’s works do not disprove God. In fact, that was never Darwin’s intent. They only make the case for evolution. I might also add that science and faith are not mutually exclusive. One does not have to abandon faith to be a scientist or shun objective research to pursue God. In fact, it isn’t even necessary to dichotomize the two. The truth, if we care to know about it, probably exists between the extremes. Perhaps all of us are so limited in our thinking that we haven’t even begun to imagine where the truth really is. I’m not saying that it hasn’t been revealed, but we are prone to miss the obvious.

As a side note it is very interesting where you land on the web when you are just clicking links. I was reading an article on CNN and ended up here.

Back to the article, does anyone know why the caption on this site is that the human race nearly split in two? I couldn’t find that explicitly in the article. Forget splitting in two, it seemed like we were about to go extinct.

peace be with you all.