mrgoodwraith: Transcendence, or the lack thereof

W. Randy Hoffman (

mrgoodwraith) wrote,
@ 2008-05-08 16:02:00

Transcendence, or the lack thereof
After being amazed by the supercharged volcano-thunderstorm pictures that

filkertom linked to yesterday, I showed them to Mom. And then I made another of those tactical errors that I just have to ruthlessly train myself to avoid: I showed her some of the latest Hubble pictures of interacting galaxies. I'm paraphrasing here, but this is the gist of the conversation:

Mom: "Wow. It's amazing to me that galaxies stay together at all."

Me: "Well, it's the gravity of their dark-matter halos that keeps them from flying apart."

Mom: "Isn't it enough to say that the Lord holds them in His hand?"

Me: "Well, sure, but I always want to acknowledge the methods He's using to do that. Not doing so is a good way to make oneself and one's faith look foolish. I remember that Jack Chick tract that said, 'Protons all have positive charge! Everybody knows that like charges REPEL each other. Why don't atomic nuclei just EXPLODE?! Because GOD keeps them together!!' Which is true, but He's using the strong nuclear force to do it. Statements like that are equivalent to, 'Why don't we float right off the Earth? Because GOD STICKS OUR FEET TO THE GROUND!'"

Mom: "Maybe this 'strong nuclear force' hadn't been discovered when that tract was written."

Me: "Mom, that tract dated from, like, 1972. The strong force was well-known by then."

Mom: "Embarrassed by a tract." (shakes her head) "It's really too bad that you're so concerned with avoiding the disdain of an unbelieving world."

Me: "..." [searching helplessly for a response that will not touch off thirty minutes of my mother expressing her deep concern for my spiritual health, testimony, and immortal soul]

Mom: "I'm just looking forward to being in Heaven, when we'll perfectly understand all these things."

My mother is an absolute old-school saint. She will go way beyond the call of duty to help anyone, including perfect strangers. But for her, Life, the Universe, and Everything are utterly meaningless apart from Jesus Christ. I admire her faith and the way it inspires her and motivates her to do endless series of good things, but it makes her mentally inflexible about any number of issues, and it also means that any discussion about science or nature will inevitably fall into the profound gravity well of "What wonders hath God wrought!" Once inside the divine event horizon, no train of thought, no matter how strongly propelled, can reach escape velocity.

(This is an example in microcosm of why a faith that seeks no deeper understanding, that does not look for non-obvious structures underlying the order of the world around us, is not a good way to discover the atomic model or the geodesic dome. I guess what I'm trying to say, among other things, is that "creation science" -- as I have experienced it -- fails to advance our understanding of either science or creation. But please don't ever, ever tell my Mom, should you meet her, that I have uttered that kind of heresy!)

By contrast, I like to think that my faith can accommodate a moderately predictable natural universe with a rich history; a universe that God lovingly crafted (over cosmologic time) but is not necessarily constantly exerting supernatural forces to preserve. I also like to think that, even if my faith were to boil away into just one more myth among many, I could still find reasons to appreciate the universe and my role in it.

So what if a galaxy is "just" a galaxy? It's still sublimely beautiful.

(Post a new comment)

robin_june
2008-05-08 09:20 pm UTC (link)

I am a Christian and also a scientist.

Jesus may have healed the woman with the hemorrhage while His back was turned, but it's taken us this long to realize why she was bleeding (fibroids) and how to heal it ourselves, with, (of all things,) the artificial hormones in birth control pills ("Heaven Forfend!")

You are welcome, if you so choose, to quote these.

Those of us who try to understand the "how" of creation can further God's purposes on this earth, rather than leaving them undone until He has to get down here and do it Himself!

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	mrgoodwraith 2008-05-08 09:30 pm UTC (link)
	Thank you, yes, those are great points. I hope I still remember them when the issue next arises (because I don't intend to revisit it anytime soon :-) ). (Reply to this)(Parent)

	catsittingstill 2008-05-08 09:59 pm UTC (link)
	So what if a galaxy is "just" a galaxy? It's still sublimely beautiful. Yes. (Reply to this)

	batyatoon 2008-05-08 10:58 pm UTC (link)
	Mom: "Isn't it enough to say that the Lord holds them in His hand?" Well, enough for what exactly? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	mrgoodwraith 2008-05-09 01:39 am UTC (link)
	It's "enough" as in, it's a "sufficient explanation for our needs," to her way of thinking; no need to "grope around" for any "unnecessarily complex" scientific treatment. For her, God's attosecond-by-attosecond presence and power is all that's required for the universe to endure and function. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	filkertom 2008-05-08 11:05 pm UTC (link)
	Sorry -- I didn't mean to add to your parental-unit angst. If it's any consolation, I still get that kinda stuff from my mom, although she's learned to ease off some. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	mrgoodwraith 2008-05-09 01:42 am UTC (link)
	No need to apologize -- it's not as if you had deviously planned to complicate my evening with yer slick natcherl pitchers. :-) (Reply to this)(Parent)

	adelheid_p 2008-05-08 11:06 pm UTC (link)
	I'd like to think that a divine being that wants us to be more like him/her would also want us understand the ways in which he/she engineered the universe. This is part of my problem with Biblical literalists --What if a divine being's days were billions of years long? (Reply to this)(Thread)

mrgoodwraith
2008-05-09 01:50 am UTC (link)

Agreed on both points. Most of the "absolute Biblical literalists" I've known oppose evolutionary cosmology, not because they're dissatisfied with the science, but because they feel as though departing from a literal interpretation of Genesis would inevitably lead to departing from a literal interpretation of Exodus and the rest of the Bible's moral law and instruction, which in turn would inevitably lead to the collapse of American civilization. While I'm not as averse to "slippery slope" arguments as some people -- because I think some greased grades have been slid down in the past --, this particular one I consider a load of dingo's kidneys.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	adelheid_p 2008-05-09 02:28 am UTC (link)
	I know that you're not part of this group but the "slippery slope" argument would hold more water if these same people followed the dietary restrictions and other guidance set out in the Old Testament as well. Dingo's kidneys indeed! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	filkerdave 2008-05-09 07:50 am UTC (link)
	Surely the Bible says that Man was created in the image of the Divine, so that we CAN seek to understand the How and the Why? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	peteralway 2008-05-09 01:24 am UTC (link)
	Such a tiny universe she wants to occupy: http://members.aol.com/satrnpres1/astronomy/babylon.gif It makes me claustrophobic just thinking about it. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	mrgoodwraith 2008-05-09 01:54 am UTC (link)
	No, I don't think she wants to occupy a teensy Babylonian cosmos. She's quite comfortable with a universe of immense size and complexity, because God is worrying about it so she doesn't have to. Then again, if we were living in the 1600s, she probably would have been very pleased by Galileo's recantation. (Reply to this)(Parent)

khaosworks
2008-05-09 01:31 am UTC (link)

Oh, you're not alone. I think it was Francis Bacon who said that God gave us two books: Science to explain the how of the universe and the Bible to explain the why.

I wrote this back in high school:

"If you think that the world around you is a simple mechanism hand waved into existence, then you condemn your Creator as being without imagination. Isn't it more awe-inspiring and wondrous to imagine that the Universe began with a huge out rush of energies, exploding outward at unimaginable speeds, space and time coming in being, turning non-existence into existence as it expanded, the laws of physics that would continue to govern all time evermore crystallizing with each passing moment... and all beginning with the words, 'Let there be light'?"

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	mrgoodwraith 2008-05-09 01:55 am UTC (link)
	Thank you! That's wonderful! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Silly Earthers sodyera 2008-05-09 12:56 pm UTC (link)
	Scientific explanations of interstellar phenomena will get so much easier once the scientists realise there are more than just two magnetic poles. In fact, there are five: positive, negative, neutral, variable and what my people called Jalabpr'e: the "breaking" pole that allows protons and electrons to be unzipped from their hosts, but only if you hit 'em just right. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	Re: Silly Earthers mrgoodwraith 2008-05-09 01:02 pm UTC (link)
	snerk :-) (Reply to this)(Parent)

ldwheeler
2008-05-09 04:00 pm UTC (link)

As I age, I find that my answers to "either-or" questions about God tend to all gravitate toward "Yes." *smiles*

To expand, I believe in a God "in whom we live, and move, and have our being," as one of the ancients (don't know who) wrote and which St. Paul endorsed on his Mars Hill discourse. So I would certainly affirm that it is God, ultimately, who creates and maintains, as you and the sadly late Doug Adams put it, "Life, the Universe and Everything," in which I would include reality itself. But I would also affirm that He does so largely by setting up the framework of natural laws, of cosmology -- by creating and maintaining a universe by means of complex, intricate mechanisms and dynamics that we call physics and biochemistry and genetics. * One of the most affecting and touching filk songs for me, kinda appropos of the topic, is "Spiral Dance." * So I can appreciate that God is the first cause, creator, maintainer, sustainer, etc. of the cosmos -- while also appreciating the methodology and mechanisms and dynamics by which he does so.

Of course, I don't think your mom denies the validity or veracity of much scientific discovery. (Except, I would presume, evolutionary research.) Rather, from your descriptions, it seems like she just considers it irrelevant for a Christian believer, at least insofar as it affects one's spirituality ... and it seems like she thinks that to do much considering on the mechanisms of creation is to run the risk of bypassing or disregarding the creator. I can certainly understand her perspective (assuming I'm presenting it with any degree of veracity) -- and as you know, I've met your mom and enjoyed her company and likewise consider her a kind woman of God -- but I certainly would disagree with her there. I think seeking to understand is or can be an act of worship, as

catsittingstill noted in "The Word of God."

Turns out, you and your mom aren't really that far apart -- you can both appreciate the beauty and grandeur of how the universe works, but you're appreciating it on two levels while she's content to appreciate it on one. You can still find common ground, though, and at this stage, maybe that's where best to focus. (Just my scattered thoughts.)

Hope all's well! Looking forward to July ...

(Reply to this)(Thread)

ldwheeler
2008-05-09 04:08 pm UTC (link)

Regarding the Jack Chick tract bit, a helpful response might be that, when we try to discuss any field -- whether nuclear physics or political philosophy or, heh, changing a tire -- while in conversation about spiritual matters, it's important that we know what we're talking about and represent it correctly. If we can't be trusted to get basic, observable and documented phenomena right in a trustworthy manner, how can we be trusted on deeper and more spiritual matters?

Not sure that will help, but it's one starting point.

Ah, Jack Chick. My favorite was the one clearly influenced by Superfly, Shaft and films of that ilk, with a fierce black gang leader named, heh, Leroy Brown with the required Devout Grandmother that visits him in the pen to inform him that "Leroy, Jesus is God Almighty." I don't impugn Chick's motives, but the judgment and execution ... oh, my.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	filkferengi 2008-05-14 09:06 pm UTC (link)
	Have you ever read any of Jan Karon's Mitford books? They're quite delightful; your mom might enjoy them too. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	mrgoodwraith 2008-05-16 01:26 pm UTC (link)
	Nope, haven't read any of those. I'll keep my eye out for them -- thanks for the suggestion! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	filkferengi 2008-05-16 01:53 pm UTC (link)
	They're warm, wonderful books set in North Carolina about the adventures of an Episcopalian priest who grew up in Mississippi. There're lots of fun, colorful characters with living faith. I'm on a bit of a binge at the moment [until 3:30 this morning, actually]. :) (Reply to this)(Parent)

Mini Sitemap:

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…