The ARGUMENT from the GOD of the GAPS disfavors RELIGION

image

As a skeptic, I always find myself in awkward argumentative scenes with other religious people who usually come as conservative fundamentalists. Being objective and fair according to the sociological problem of understanding why various people do what they do has made me so. It has always been easy for a religious person to say “God did it” predominantly, when a phenomenon seems inexplicable. The invisible idea of the spirit world is usually attributed to the gigantic power behind probably, a disease that has never been encountered before. It took years for science to reveal the entirety of epilepsy which progressively liquidated the idea that victims with epileptic seizures were possesed by demons.

The argument from the God of the Gaps  has always been there. Theologians have used that as an ingredient to convince many into why they thought science was not adequate enough to answer certain questions. Regardless, this argument is gradually losing value in Atheistic-Theistic debates because theologians have now realised that not only is the Goddidit assertion baseless and implausible but that, it also limits God to gaps. Thus, the more science discovers, the less place God has in our cosmos.  At any rate, we can be blind to how the God of the gaps assertion shrinks God and then sift religion to find answers to the complicated questions. Thus, if religion answers everything that science finds difficulty in comprehending, putting the magnifying glass on it will get us closer to hidden clues and answers.

image

Unluckily, with this alternative comes mess. In religion itself, can be found gaps within which a Supernatural being (who already existed in that religion where the gap is located) cannot fill. Something different stands a high chance of changing the effects of those gaps. The argument from the God of gaps will only be tenable if the alternative presented above remains tenable. There is a positive correlation between these two theories of gap filling. One’s falsity may determine the other’s invalidation. Wondering on an example of a religious gap?

Diversified Body of Religions
Take the diversity in religious bodies as example. All sects of religion believe they worship the Greatest Real God, this wouldn’t have been a gap if all their religious practises were same. Its basically illogical for a Supernatural Power who created this highly complicated cosmos, order various followers to do various things within which most of the  time, an action in say, Religion A contradicts another in Religion B. Take the issue of marriage into consideration. Monogamy is right within Christianity. This way of marriage is not considered wrong in Islam though, but as many as 4 women could be attributed to an Islamic man only if he can cater for their needs. An introspection of christianity itself displays variants in practises and belief. Catholics are more poised to genuflect towards symbols artefacts usually called sacramentals than the Pentecostals.

image

Some churches (esp. the Deeper Life Bible churches) prohibit their women from wearing jewelleries as others  (usually Charismatic churches) make great use of practically every fashion style on sundays. The Trinity is still an issue of debate. Some believe God is manifested in 3 different ways (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) while others believe they are all the same person. But if they happen to be the same, another gap is created. It puts the sacrifice of God highly revered by christians worldwide into question. Did God sacrifice Himself to forgive Himself, Cleanse His already pure self and finally Resurrect Himself? In sacrifice one must lose to gain and if God had this Great power to sacrifice Himself and eventually regain Himself with a backup plan of resurrection, that will show no need for an initial sacrifice. He could have just forgiven humanity from the beginning. There seems to be a problem in here.

image

It simply pertains implausibility with the idea of a theistic God giving different orders at different times. Inconsistency is depicted in its greatest form. And I’m afraid to say, if only Truth reigns, then incompetence becomes a perfect match to the God pictured in here. Unless there is a  different explanation with plausibility, a great doubt emerges to create more gaps. These gaps as I said, definitely cannot be filled by a factor (Supernatural being) that already existed in the situation. Scientific Research and Methods explain great phenomena with objectivity. This is where Religion as a natural phenomena can be subjected to scientific scrutiny. Philosopher Dan Dennett‘s book ‘Breaking the Spell‘ presents reasons to why religion especially its evolution can be studied.

image

Achaab Daniel Abalansa
Facebook: Achaab_dan GH
Twitter: @AcHaaB_dAn
IG: achaab_dan_gh
Email: achaabdan@gmail.com

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “The ARGUMENT from the GOD of the GAPS disfavors RELIGION

  1. I meant to leave one or two thoughts in this space but I’m not in a good place right now. Thoughtful article and quite valid objections. I have some fears about you and I will tell you in time.

    Like

  2. Phew! Had a very hard time finding my way back to this space, hahaha.

    Last time I meant to say that I think you are half right: the God Of The Gaps argument doesn’t support religion. I think it’s in the fulness of knowledge that God is realized. When we realize the grand designs in nature- The Fibonacci sequence; when we evaluate the probability of protein molecules sequencing in a way that gives us building blocks and enzymes; when we discover the vast expanse of the universe; when we zoom a little closer to ourselves and realize the intricacy of metabolism: It is in this that we see intent and deliberate design. Could have gone on and on but I want to persuade you to at least consider that the real argument may not be in this. After all, we are looking at the same picture and yet our conclusions are in antiphase to each other.

    I want you to tell me what is the thing that is truest to yourself?

    Like

      1. I think you should say true reason rather. I say this because, there are reasons that may suffice for the time being but may not last in the test of time. What if you discovered you are wrong? What would you do?

        Like

      2. Of course, if there’s a new discovery to prove otherwise, many like myself will embrace that with joy. It’s not the same from the other sides who usually assert absolute truth. Be that as it may, there’s none now. And the best one can do now is to hope for something like that in the midst of no reason to believe something like that. And that’s possible for the religions because well yeah, hell yeah, they’ve got some faith on.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s