I see a lot of folks continue to drop by this little blog of mine, even though I have not been respectful enough of their visits to post more often.
I am grateful.
As some of you may know, some time ago I found that I needed to spend some time writing about topics that are too personal for this space.
I believe there will be a time, perhaps soon, that I will have the time and energy to devote proper attention to the topics I have chewed on here.
So, out of a slight case of guilt, I thought I would drop a note here about a few thoughts that seem fine to write about.
The central issue of faith is the existence of God.
Some folks point to the suffering in the world and mark that as proof that either there is no God, or He is apathetic. I don't agree.
Other folks point to the evidence in the world, and the universe, which seems to show that scripture is wrong, and claim that is proof there is no God. I don't agree with that either.
Now, please don't get me wrong. I love science, and I believe the indusptible evidence that are offered, and even most of the theories that spring from such sleuthing.
But there are curious things about the world that science cannot solve.
For example, there has never been any definitive proof that God doesn't exist. I know, I know. How can one prove something doesn't exist when there isn't any concrete evidence it does?
Well, we can set aside all the anecdotal evidence, since science basis itself on the premise that all things are measureable and repeatable, and therefore, available for experimentation.
But... there is the odd fact that every leap forward that science takes, and some of them have been on leaps which have squared, and cubed previous knowledge, there is always a gap that just falls short of explanation. Always.
OK. Perhaps that is sophistry. That I am still arguing from a negative, not a positive. Though I believe that the gaps are intentional, thereby requiring a leap of faith and not the mancales provided by chains of logic.
How about this...
Why is there beauty?
Perhaps we can argue that beauty flows from perfect design, you know, the old adage that form follows function and perfect funtions is by nature beautiful.
But even saying that the grace found in the run of a cheetah, or the stately movement of whales and flocks of birds, does not address the fact that we appreciate beauty.
There does not seem to be any evolutionary advantage for appreciating beauty.
Now, I'm not trying to argue that there isn't evidence for evolution. I am saying that the lift we feel when we see a rainbow, the awe we experience in the presence of a might water fall, the joy that steals over use when we pluck a rose, smell its fragrance, and note its unfolding patterns of color, provides no advantage to propagating our species. In fact the reverse is true.
Might not the pauses we take in appreciating beauty have put us at risk in times past?
So... I just thinking...
Faith and logic are two different things. They need not be exclusive of each other. But that does not mean we can dismiss each other either.
I've never seen a dog enthralled at the sight of a sunset.