Open my eyes, that I may behold wonderous things out of your law.
Psalm 119:18
Picture this: a child nurtured in a cocoon of love and protection, with parents serving as their guiding stars. This child, enveloped in familial warmth, learns to trust and rely on their parents for comfort and understanding of the world. In religious households, this sense of comfort often extends to a higher power, viewed as a celestial super-parent. As we age, our quest for this comforting presence persists, leading many to seek solace in a divine entity. This shift from parental dependence to spiritual reliance is not only normal but deeply rooted in our quest for support in a world filled with uncertainties.
Yet, life isn’t always sheltered from harsh realities. When confronted with experiences that challenge their belief in a divine plan, individuals face cognitive dissonance. It’s akin to a child watching the news for the first time and grappling with the existence of evil in a world governed by a loving deity. To ease this discomfort, many resort to rationalizations, often encapsulated in the notion that “God works in mysterious ways.”
As life unfolds, these moments of conflict can lead to a faith crisis. Here, confirmation bias plays a pivotal role, as individuals tend to favor information that aligns with their beliefs while discounting contradicting evidence. This journey through the crucible of doubt leaves individuals transformed. Some emerge with fortified beliefs, adept at reconciling contradictions. Others remain scarred, perpetually questioning or choosing to ignore discordant realities. A third group emerges, reevaluating their beliefs in the absence of concrete answers.
But what of those raised with a critical worldview, for whom the “mysterious ways” rationale falls short? They seek tangible evidence to form their conclusions.
In the Beginning was the Word
Let’s clarify a common misconception: the theory of evolution is not an unalterable law but the best scientific explanation for life’s adaptation over time. It’s vital to understand that evolution doesn’t address the origins of life. This is where abiogenesis steps in, hypothesizing life’s emergence from non-life, independent of evolutionary processes. Science’s inability to fully explain life’s beginnings doesn’t invalidate its explanations of life’s progression, much like our partial understanding of a car’s mechanics doesn’t prevent us from refueling it.
Abiogenesis is the hypothesized process through which life arises from non-life, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with evolution (other than once abiogenesis occurs, the idea is that it will continue to change via evolutionary processes). Although there are some hypotheses out there on how this occurs (some have been tested – like the primordial soup, warm universe, and others concept), there still isn’t a large enough consensus on any of these yet. However, since science can explain change but not everything, it feels like some religious adherents are rejecting everything just because it’s not complete.
Intelligent design often serves as a cornerstone argument for believers. It posits that life’s complexity necessitates a designer. Yet, embracing evolution or understanding abiogenesis doesn’t negate the possibility of a divine creator. Perhaps, the creator set these processes in motion as part of a grander plan. The analogy goes something like this – if you walk along and find a very complex “machine” (watch or whatnot), you assume that because of the item’s inherent complexity, something or someone must have designed it and that it couldn’t have arisen spontaneously out from nothingness. Therefore, since life is exceedingly complex (and works), the “only” explanation is that it was designed.
Take the 2012 movie Prometheus. In it humans discover a race of super ancient energy beings called the engineers who built and designed life (including the xenomorph that causes peoples chest to explode). If such a discovery were made (today, in real-life), it would not eliminate the religious quest for understanding; it would simply shift the focus to the origins of these ‘engineers.’ Both science and religion would continue their pursuit, albeit through different lenses: empirical evidence for one, divine explanation for the other.
So, what are your thoughts? Does our expanding understanding of the universe enhance our lives? Can science and religion find common ground in exploring the beginnings of existence?
Does God Exist? 