Monday, February 21, 2011

Does Nature Prove God: Excerpts from C.S. Lewis’ book The Problem of Pain

For a time, I believed that nature and science scream out evidence of God’s existence. My sister read the Tao of Physics and we had long discussions about nature and God. Just look around at sublime nature! The order within chaos of the earth among the stars blows my mind. Just looking at the Grand Canyon or the Swiss Alps or the ocean seemed proof that God exists. After much thought and reading, I am now calling that belief into question.  

Let’s look at the reality of nature – not an idealized version. The spectacle of the universe and nature is not so sublime as it is terrifying! With the consistency of death, pain and suffering among animals and humans just to survive, with black holes, and with the utter emptiness of the universe around us, all evidence points to a very dismal reality. Is God nature and revealed by nature? In the Problem of Pain, C.S. Lewis writes: “The spectacle of the universe as revealed by experience can never have been the ground of religion: it must always have been something in spite of which religion, acquired from a different source, was held” (p. 13). Could it be possible that the revelation of God comes from outside of nature and science?     

Also, where did we get the idea that life on earth should be good, peaceful, and sustainable? Our very sun that gives us life is a ticking time bomb. Death beckons us at every corner. Where does our sense of outrage and injustice at suffering come from? I see children, animals, and innocent people suffering every day. I feel rage at the injustice in our world. But, where did that sense of injustice come from?

C.S. Lewis writes: “In a sense, [a righteous Lord] creates, rather than solves, the problem of pain, for pain would be no problem unless, side by side with our daily experience of this painful world, we had received what we think a good assurance that ultimate reality is righteous and loving” (p. 21). A small part of me believes in a just and righteous God. And if there is a God, I can’t believe in one that is proven by or synonymous with nature and science. At the same time, I want an answer to the suffering I see, because it seems wrong to me. I wonder, though, if the suffering in our world is enough to make one stop believing in God.  

Sometimes, during my depressed times, I mourn the suffering in the world. During these moments, all the world seems to be calling out in a composite suffering and it breaks my heart. C.S. Lewis makes another profound point. He writes: “…search all time and all space and you will not find that composite pain in anyone’s consciousness. There is no such thing as a sum of suffering, for no one suffers it” (p. 103). The greatest amount of suffering in the world is the suffering of one person at a time. This is no small amount and I mourn any amount experienced by others (and myself!). I actively work to end suffering. At the same time, there is comfort in putting suffering into perspective.

I have heard of the Jewish concepts of “Ein Sof” (the Deity prior to self-manifestation in the spiritual realm) and “Seder Hishtalshelus” (a concept similar to the Great Chain of Being - a chain-like process connecting the spiritual realm to the physical realm). These are interesting and new ideas to me. If there is a God, perhaps God is outside of nature, connected to us and intervening in our lives. But, if God is not nature or proven by nature, then where is the evidence of God’s existence? To this, I don’t have an answer.  

2 comments:

  1. You make many interesting points, Caroline! I like that you mention animal suffering. I recently read a philosopher who points out that the problem of animal suffering seems to pose a much greater problem for Judeo-Christian-Islamic theists than that of human suffering. He writes:

    "The continuous, incalculable suffering of animals is also an important though largely neglected element in the traditional theological 'problem of evil' ─ the problem of reconciling the existence of evil with the existence of a benevolent, omnipotent god. The suffering of animals is particularly challenging because it is not amenable to the familiar palliative explanations of human suffering. Animals are assumed not to have free will and thus to be unable either to choose evil or deserve to suffer it. Neither are they assumed to have immortal souls; hence there can be no expectation that they will be compensated for their suffering in a celestial afterlife. Nor do they appear to be conspicuously elevated or ennobled by the final suffering they endure in a predator’s jaws. Theologians have had enough trouble explaining to their human flocks why a loving god permits them to suffer; but their labors will not be over even if they are finally able to justify the ways of God to man. For God must answer to animals as well."

    Relatedly, I think the so-called "problem of Hell" is also a pretty daunting problem for those who believe in the traditional eternal-torture-chamber picture of hell. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_Hell Assuming that the all-powerful God had foreknowledge that his creation would result in countless souls being tortured eternally, surely he would not create it if he were loving, merciful, and good. Something has to give, it seems. Either hell isn't a prison of eternal torture, God isn't omniscient (and so didn't realize what he was creating), God isn't omnipotent (and so was powerless to stop himself from creating this world (?)), or God isn't good/loving/merciful. More food for thought... :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Steve,

    Thanks for the food for thought! I will check out the "Problem of Hell" on wiki. Your comments add to the discussion of a complicated issue.

    I was sent this by email and thought it could add to the conversation:

    "Caroline, Glad you started a blog! About religion/God...I think you should read The Case for God by Karen Armstrong. Basically, she argues that the truth of God--God's existence--becomes evident only through our struggle to understand it/him/her. I really liked the book."

    ReplyDelete