Hubble Deep Field Image

August 24, 2007 - 10:50am

My friend Milton posted this picture of the Hubble Deep Field Image the other day. The pretty little smudges are galaxies.


Click for larger image

In case you don’t know the story of this image, it represents a “keyhole” view of the universe. The Hubble Space Telescope focused on one small patch of the sky for about 10 days, pulling in ancient light from across the universe. This image is only a speck in our sky. It’s about the size of a dime when viewed from 75 feet away.

And this little speck is absolutely filled with galaxies. About 1500 can be counted using an enlarged image. 1500 galaxies in a single dot of our night sky.

The universe is so large that it causes my mind to reboot whenever I try to think about it. You can’t really think about the size of the universe in any accurate way, of course. It's far too big to understand. But here’s a way you could try to think about it:

Our solar system exists on a spiral arm of the Milky Way Galaxy. The Milky Way is about 100,000 light years across and contains between 200 billion and 400 billion stars. There is a star that is relatively close to us; Alpha Centauri is a mere 4.4 light years away. Given the size of our galaxy, we’re practically on top of each other.


Click for larger image

Voyager 1, launched in the late 1970s, has only recently left our solar system. The two Voyager spacecrafts are the fastest things humans have ever made. Currently they travel at a speed of about 1 million miles a day, which is pretty damn fast. Still, it took a good-sized chunk of your lifetime for the fastest thing we have to make it out of our own solar system.

The Voyager mission does not include traveling to Alpha Centauri, but if it did, it would take 70,000 years to get there at its current speed. So says a combination of Wikipedia and my calculator.

Chew on that for a moment. Our two stars, almost touching in the photo. Seventy Thousand Years.

When I consider the stars and the universe – or more accurately when I consider my inability to consider them – I experience a strange combination of physical, emotional, and spiritual reactions.

First I feel a kind of mild vertigo, the sort of thing that you would expect to feel if you suddenly found yourself in the middle of a shaky rope bridge over a deep canyon. Our world normally feels so big and solid to me, and my place in this world seems entrenched and well-established after 45 years of living. But suddenly, I am a speck of dust in an instant of time so brief that it can’t be measured. My feet feel light, as if I might float off our spinning planet any second. I want to throw myself on the ground and grab two fistfuls of grass for good measure.

My mind reels. Everything seems to be shrinking.

Then I feel a sorrowful panic. Christianity has already shrunk in my lifetime from being the shining center of all truth and purpose to something less than that. Even looking at things from the inside, even willing to give the benefit of every doubt, Christianity seems like a bumbling, prosaic movement which is, as often as not, violent, anti-intellectual, and xenophobic.

But I love Christianity so much. Or at least I love what it could be. I want to hug it. I want to throw my arms around the beautiful language of salvation and redemption. I want to curl up in the warmth of my faith community, the people I love so deeply in this world. Truly they are like family to me. I feel I could get drunk on our ancient symbols, myths and stories, the ones that speak in luscious tones vibrating through a million voices across the centuries.

So first vertigo, then panic, then longing. After that I generally calm down a bit. My tiny mind and delicate emotions cannot bear even my small thoughts of the universe for more than a few minutes. I relax. Sometimes a shrinking reality can be a comfort. My sins, the things that I have done wrong and the ways that I cannot be what I should be, also shrink. I feel I can forgive myself for them, small man that I am. Why the hell not? Look at the size of the universe!

This forgiveness is the Grace that Christians speak of. The main story of our faith tells us that we must be forgiven and can be. Funny how it takes science to bring that reality to my guts.

For some reason, this experience always ends with a crazy happiness that I cannot easily explain. I become giddy with the knowledge that ultimate reality is so far beyond our grasp. This lets me off the hook, to a certain extent. We’ll never know reality. We’ll never even map our solar system, you and I. We’re small people, but we have grasped the idea of existence. We know love, seek knowledge, and recognize goodness and evil.

Our saintly scientists, single-minded and incredibly committed to the search for truth, draw down amazing pictures from the ancient light in the sky. These pictures help me to know that it is okay to be nothing more or less than what we are.

People. Human beings, strangely warped and trying to understand that. Trying to worship what cannot be known, trying to learn, trying to find our place in the Cosmos.

rlp

Learn about Voyager

 

Submitted by Jenny Valent on August 24, 2007 - 11:19am.

Yeah, wow...I used to spend a good chunk of my idle childhood moments trying to ponder the universe...it almost made me feel as if my head were exploding.

Infinitely small...and yet, go in the other direction, towards atoms and such (which look strangely like little solar systems) and we become infinitely huge...ours is an existence amidst infinity in all directions.

I think I could sit down with you and ponder infinity in utter futility for a whole evening - that'd be fun...

No point necessary :)

http://www.myspace.com/ashvajenny

Submitted by Larry Vaughan on August 24, 2007 - 11:53am.

Gordon,
I was getting a little too important for this universe today. If I allow it, I can become the center pretty quickly. Thanks for the gut check. Like you, I am currently holding onto terra firma. This is a wild ride, isn't it?

Submitted by Keith on August 24, 2007 - 12:14pm.

I've had a problem understanding the mind of God for this book I'm supposedly writing, and faith traditions had nothing for me--so I went back to the kind of seeking I can actually embrace. If I may put a plug in for the book I'm just finishing reading...

A BRIEFER HISTORY OF TIME, by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, is intended for people who don't have physics backgrounds. It's short, easy to read (as long as you slow down occasionally and try to get what he's saying), nicely illustrated, and will change the way almost anyone looks at the universe.

It's the easier, shorter, but more up-to-date version of A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME.

We now return you to the contemplation of mind-boggling immenseness, already in progress. Myself, I go directly to giddiness.

Submitted by Simian Farmer on August 24, 2007 - 12:36pm.

The immenseness of the universe is, truly, impossible to fathom with our wee human minds. Interestingly, I came across a link recently to a site that describes the relative scale of the universe, starting from our simple Earth - Moon system, and moving up to grander scales, eventually ending with our entire universe symbolised by a grand collection of sandboxes scattered across and through our planet Earth.

It's very nicely spelled out for the lay-person and provides a nice concept as to the vastness of the realm in which we reside. (And take up very little space.)

http://www.astrosurf.com/benschop/Scale.htm
______
Simon

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 24, 2007 - 2:13pm.

Einstein recognized the experience that you express here. He named it the third stage of religious understanding, beyond churchness, or the ancient pantheons of fortune. The knowledge that the universe is vast, and that we have a place in it.

That feeling of the reality of the universe being so big that we cannot hope to understand it is one of the things that kept me from ever joining a church.

Submitted by OldPoet on August 24, 2007 - 3:36pm.

Can you tell me more about that not joining thing? I have and always will join with others of some ilk who are believers in God, so I don't understand a lot of the "Why" in other people's reasons not to join.
My first reaction was to think that it was like saying that there is so much variety in the foodstuffs we can eat that I won't go to any restaurants.
Now that seems, at second look, to probably not be a good analogy, so what do you mean, if you want to expound?

(Since it is hard to "see" someone's tone or intention, let me be clear that I don't mean to be preachy or mean or any of the other negative things that could be miscontrued from my question.)

I's just wonderin'.

OldPoet
Submitted by Anonymous User on August 24, 2007 - 2:15pm.

Gordon, I am so confused right now. I know that Christianity is supposed to be a new life in Jesus. "I have come that you might have life, and have it ubundantley." But I am having such a hard time right now, I dont know what to think. I feel so miserable, I feel like I dont like myself, I dont like the way I am. I hate how whenever I talk to my friends all I do is whine and complain about being lonley and hating not having someone. I feel depressed ALL the time. Its been going on off and on for years, but its been even worse latley. I hate myself for always being a depressed and lonley but I litterally DONT know how to stop...

I feel selfish because God has given me so much abundance; of friends and family, but im still miserable inside. Why am I so selfish? Why dont i feel as though my life where abundant, even though I have been so blessed? Am I doing something wrong?

Maybe you can help. Im so lost right now.

Submitted by rlp on August 24, 2007 - 3:01pm.

Hi,

Why don't you send me an email and we'll knock a few emails back and forth, okay? Send it to hello@RealLivePreacher.com

I'll be watching for it.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 24, 2007 - 7:59pm.

I tried sending you an email, but I have a computer that is kinda screwy, if you dont get it, I will email next week from a computer that I know works.

Submitted by quasifictional on August 24, 2007 - 5:14pm.

Remembering the sky is one of the more beautiful parts of my life.

Submitted by textjunkie on August 24, 2007 - 5:51pm.

Of course, after this lovely post, which I totally empathize with, all I can hear are Monty Python songs in my head--

Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving
And revolving at nine hundred miles an hour,
That's orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it's reckoned,
A sun that is the source of all our power.
The sun and you and me and all the stars that we can see
Are moving at a million miles a day
In an outer spiral arm, at forty thousand miles an hour,
Of the galaxy we call the 'Milky Way'.
Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars.
It's a hundred thousand light years side to side.
It bulges in the middle, sixteen thousand light years thick,
But out by us, it's just three thousand light years wide.
We're thirty thousand light years from galactic central point.
We go 'round every two hundred million years,
And our galaxy is only one of millions of billions
In this amazing and expanding universe...

Etc. :) :)

But yeah--getting the universal picture does help keep things in perspective!! I get giggly about it too. :)

Submitted by rlp on August 24, 2007 - 8:31pm.

I absolutely LOVE that song, as sung by Eric Idle, of course. Got to have his accent. Honestly, when I watch "The Meaning of Life" I'll watch that song three or four times.

Submitted by mattman on August 27, 2007 - 9:36am.

so, can we have your liver then?

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 27, 2007 - 2:54pm.

Oh geez! You can't post that and leave out the last bit! :D

Our universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding,
In all of the directions it can whiz;
As fast as it can go, that's the speed of light, you know,
Twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest speed there is.
So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure,
How amazingly unlikely is your birth;
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space,
'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth!

Hehe. Classic.

-Amanda

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 24, 2007 - 8:16pm.

You're right, it is amazing, and feeling small is nice. I should look at the night sky more.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 24, 2007 - 9:07pm.

Hi Gordon,
I try to spend at least an hour outside each evening drinking in the stars. I drink deep. My cup is filled and overflowing. Each evening I praise God for "His worlds without end." I think every believer should spend time with the night sky. Thank you for your blog. Blessings and prayers. Pastortomo@clearviewcatv.com.

Submitted by rlp on August 24, 2007 - 10:16pm.

Wow, an hour to do anything you want? What kind of crazy fantasy life do you have? ;-)

Maybe after the kids leave home...

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 25, 2007 - 7:33am.

Good morning, Gordon -
My name is Tom Osenbach and I'm a United Methodist Pastor in York County, PA. I serve two churches in what we York County clergy call "good ol' Pennsyltucky."
I don't sleep a whole lot, although I wish I could. Night Sky and I have been friends for a long time. Night Sky helps me keep things in perspective. She's been a good friend and an incredible witness to God's awesome glory. Her anthems put me on my knees.
Just wanted to tell you how much comfort and company I find in your writing. I've been at this pastor thing for 27 years now - and it doesn't get any easier. It's comfort to know that my struggles are shared by others. Just knowing that you're not alone is good medicine.
Blessings,
Tom O

Submitted by Geodog on August 28, 2007 - 11:13pm.

Oh, the parent in me laughs with you (and I only have one).

Beautiful writing, rlp.

Submitted by atticus on August 24, 2007 - 10:33pm.

the shrinking sins, the forgiving ourselves because we are so small, this is a new and wonderful idea to me. (instead of getting so lost and sad in my smallness) and, oh, i think it CAN be known, at least in part, as evidenced by this essay. that connection to others, that vast emptiness that we all feel as we all read your words.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 24, 2007 - 11:49pm.

At the risk of being nominated anal killjoy of the week ... that closest star is actually PROXIMA Centauri ... it's probably part of the Alpha Centauri multiple star system, but is neither of the two stars (Alpha Centauri A nor Alpha Centauri B) actally called "Aplha Centauri". Sorry ... everyone can throw bricks at me now :-(

Which doesn't detract one whit, of course, from the senses of wonder and vertigo which you rightly describe!

Submitted by rlp on August 25, 2007 - 8:44am.

You thought about not writing this, right? But it was killing you. The facts, you know, gotta get them right.

lol

This actually brings up a rather interesting subject, one that I face a lot as a writer. You are obviously something of a specialist. Probably just a regular person who has invested a lot of time in astronomy. I, on the other hand, write things. I write about so many things that I can't really be an expert on any of them. So I take the best knowledge out there that I read and go with it.

But inevitably, common knowledge (wikipedia, articles, magazines, etc.) will let you down. Then the person who is the specialist sees what you wrote and it's technically incorrect. And it just....hurts....to let that....false thing.....be out there. Ouch. I get you. I feel that pain myself when it comes to New Testament stuff, which is an area that I do have some specialized knowledge in.

The last time this happened to me (apart from this comment): I wrote an article for Christian Century (this one was in their magazine). I used the phrase "Dark Ages" in a quick, one-paragraph run through history. The point of the paragraph was that a lot of time passed,not so much perfect accuracy. I mean, it was Western Civilization in one paragraph - you know, whaddya want from me? Anyway, some guy wrote a letter to the editor, totally outraged because that phrase is, according to him, no longer used by historians and scholars.

I guess I didn't get the dark ages memo or something.

;-)

Seriously though, I'm glad to know this. So thanks for letting me know. I like learning new stuff. I'm going to Google it and read up a little.

Submitted by rlp on August 25, 2007 - 11:55am.

You know what I just realized? I didn't say that Alpha Centauri is the closest star. Just that it is close to us. Heh.

But I'll admit that I thought it was the closest, and could just as easily have written it that way.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 25, 2007 - 9:37am.

Thank you for this post. I am preaching a "cosmic" sermon this week in which I am going to try to paint some big pictures. Reading this post has been helpful, and I'll likely quote you a bit!
- Andy B.
entertherainbow.blogspot.com

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 25, 2007 - 3:34pm.

It seems the more I delve into things, the less I believe. It's not that I don't want to believe, because I do desperately want to,its just that I can't. At least not all the "stuff" that that I used to regurgitate as gospel. Creeds and dogma, ritual orthodoxy. Lately however, I have come to understand that all of it is just some vain attempt to understand what cannot be understood. We must reify God in order to get our minds around God. What does it really mean to know God however? That we love our neighbors as ourselves. Heck, love our enemies even. Have compassion for the widows and orphans. Do justice, love mercy and walk humbly. Orthopraxy is far more important I believe, than orthodoxy. Beside, what many of us consider to be "correct belief" now, was once considered heresy by the church.

Submitted by DSpitko on August 26, 2007 - 7:56am.

Reading your post gave me reassurance. You are not alone. My continuing faith journey has been/is quite similar to yours. Once I rejected blind faith and started asking serious questions, as you wrote, “The more I delved into things, the less I believed.” For what it is worth, I finally asked myself THEE question, "Do I believe in God?" I concluded that I did. I believe she/he/it is the embodiment of the universe and the marvelous complexity of a single-celled amoeba. I believe she/he/it is present every moment someone commits a selfless act. Accepting that, I have found wisdom and direction in the teachings of all the great world religions that preach God-centeredness over self-centeredness ~ including the teachings of the one named Jesus of Nazareth … and I joyfully need not worry about concepts such as a virgin birth or transubstantiation.

Dave

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 26, 2007 - 3:50pm.

Dave, as you say, you "joyfully need not worry about concepts such as a virgin birth or transubstantiation" because Christian theology has always been incorrect in its interpretation of the Hebrew God YHVH and in its characterisation of the Hebrew Jesus of Nazareth.

The New Testament writers claimed that Jesus of Nazareth was a perfectly normal human who exemplified and enacted the values and principles required of creatures by their Creator and that he was 'anointed' with plenipotentiary powers to speak and act in the name of God.

Having created mankind in his own image, God is not likely to find the necessity of becoming the image of himself. To do so would be an admission that it was he who had failed in his work of Creation.

The New Testament was written to prove that Jesus of Nazareth was the man appointed by God to rule the world in righeousness. It was not written to promote the post-apostolic doctrines imposed on scripture by the Graeco-Roman church fathers, nor was it written to prove that Jesus was in any sense equal to God, except as it pleased God to make him so.

When the scriptures fell into Greek, and subsequently Latin, hands, the teachings underwent a change in accordance with the predilections of those particular nationalities. Because their minds were set in the key of a different structure, they projected into the scriptures their own prevailing national religions.

Doctrines such as the "Miraculous Incarnation and the "Trinity" were crystallised by the disputes among early Gentile church fathers who looked into the Pool of Narcissus (the scriptures), saw themselves imaged there, and then projected this, their own image, upon the world through the medium of ecclesiastical councils called by Roman Emperors from 325AD onwards. Christendom bears the image, not of the mind of Jesus and the character of the Supreme Being, but of early Gentile theology.

Submitted by DSpitko on August 27, 2007 - 8:20am.

Obviously, you and I are largely in the same camp – particularly regarding the purpose and impact of the Councils of the 4th and 5th centuries. But I respectfully quibble with you on one of your points. While I agree that the earliest writings of the Jesus movement do not project Jesus as divine, it appears to me that by the time the Gospel of John was written (and the remainder of the New Testament that was written after that) the process of the divinity of Jesus was well on its way. I have read that by that time the followers of Jesus were being pushed out of Judaism because of, among other more subtle reasons, its willingness to accept gentiles into its movement. There was a need on the part of the followers of Jesus to separate themselves from Judaism. What better way than to declare Jesus divine. Also, what great marketing ~ pledge fidleity to the divine Christ or be damned to hell forever.

Dave

Submitted by Anonymous User on September 1, 2007 - 9:54pm.

Concerning this statement made above:

"The New Testament writers claimed that Jesus of Nazareth was a perfectly normal human who exemplified and enacted the values and principles required of creatures by their Creator and that he was 'anointed' with plenipotentiary powers to speak and act in the name of God."

Actually, John wrote, "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist." (I Jn. 1:7)

If you can overcome Kirk Cameron and Hollywood-driven notions of a red-eyed, demon-spawn image of The Antichrist, check out I, II, and III John and see what the only NT writer to use the word antichrist had to say about them. They were already around (I Jn. 2:18), they came from within the body of believers (vs. 19), and they denied that Jesus was the Christ (vs. 22) which, last I recall, Peter confessed was Jesus, the Son of God.

So make the choice: normal human appointed by God, or the Son of God. They can't both be true.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 25, 2007 - 3:35pm.

Throw in all the stuff about Mother Theresa and her 50 years of doubting, and I too "feel a sorrowful panic."

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 25, 2007 - 7:16pm.

Hey Gordon, I'm sure you already know this, but for the benefit of other readers of this thread: the Biblical scholar Thomas L. Kugel's very readable, non-scholarly book The Great Poems of the Bible begins with a thumbnail sketch of the worldview of the Hebrew Bible -- "One thing that is strikingly different in the biblical way of seeing [...] has to do with the whole nature of the self that is found in the Bible and the way in which that self fits into the larger world. A human being just is very small, and God, as the opening line of [Psalm 104] asserts, is "very big."

That said, though, I think we Westerners ought to concede that the Hindu/Buddhist imagination was much closer to the mark with its uncountable worlds and unfathomable stretches of time.

- Dave

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 26, 2007 - 5:12pm.

I've seen many photo's of the universe as seen through the eyes of the Hubble telescope. Time and space being what it is..everything measured in light-years, time warp, and all that makes me think that at some point the Hubble is looking us and how we may have appeared when first being formed. I have no doubt that our Creator had and continues to have a hand in all this. This was no accident.......

Jim

Submitted by artsygeek on August 26, 2007 - 8:06pm.

I remember doing a book group at the Friends Meeting I used to attend (and which I'm still a member of). It was my turn to pick the reading selection and I chose the last few paragraphs of one of Carl Sagan's books, with the shot of earth from Voyager, and the romanticizing about that "Pale Blue Dot."
--
"The writer is either a practicing recluse or a delinquent,
guilt-ridden one; or both. Usually both. "
Susan Sontag

Submitted by goatmeal on August 26, 2007 - 9:17pm.

I find the age of the universe to be a compelling way of convincing me that God is in fact longsuffering.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 27, 2007 - 1:34am.

I was surprised no one posted this: (Mary said it first of course, but I like this translation that comes from a song)
"When I consider the works of your fingers, the moon and the stars, the heavens above, Just what is man that you stay mindful of him? Just lower than angels with glory above."
I think you just did your own Magnificat above.
Amelia

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 27, 2007 - 7:19am.

this brought tears to my eyes. because I don't know that I've ever actually been able to quell the "sorrowful panic" in my breast long enough to open my mind more than the tiniest crack to what I could grasp about the size of the universe. The image of grabbing onto tufts of grass really helped through it, kind of like a kid burying their face into their dad's pant leg and then slowly opening one eye. In addition to deep wonder, this post gave me a that tingly feeling in my feet that I get on the top of the Empire State Building.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 27, 2007 - 12:29pm.

A good book I'm reading at the moment on this very subject is "The Luminous Dusk" by Dale C. Allison Jr. Allison suggests that it wasn't the Enlightenment that so secularized the West (in other words, science didn't dissuade us from believing in a creator), but rather our withdrawal from nature (air conditioned offices, storm-proof houses, television and other virtual experiences, etc.) has insulated us from awe.

In the past, he writes, "our feelings about God were roughly congruent with our feelings about nature. Often terrified and helpless before the one, we often felt terrified and helpless before the other. But increasing physical security, our withdrawl from storms and from 'Nature, red in tooth and claw,' has altered our feelings about the world, thereby altering our feelings about ourselves and, in line with that, our feelings about God."

While technology certainly elicits a fair amount of awe (and, if you want to think about weapons, a fair amount of horror), especially in young people, its referent, alas, is human beings -- not a Creator with a capital "C."

Peace,

Stephen

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 27, 2007 - 4:06pm.

Wow. Interesting thought. Makes a lot of sense (she says from her air-conditioned, fluorescent lit office...)

-Amanda

Submitted by rlp on August 27, 2007 - 4:27pm.

Yeah, that is an interesting thought. I do worry about the depth of our dependence on technology. I'm using the term broadly - a spear is technology, so is a gun, so is a house, and so on.

The more technology we gain, the more we lose the ability to live without it. That makes us VERY vulnerable, here in the first world.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 27, 2007 - 8:56pm.

I hope I am not too late in posting this. I started reading this Saturday and only finished today. But I have a question that hopefully you will see and respond to...

I vacillate often between believing in God, and believing in the concept of "the power of positive thinking". For instance, how much of what believers think is divine intervention in their lives is just enough positive certainty to attract the kind of results that they desire.

My question is, considering how huge the universe is, why would a God who is big enough to create something so huge be interested in Earth, and the little people that inhabit it? Is He big enough to manage my daily life, and the lives of every other human on Earth, and maybe every other sentient being in the universe? Why would we think that our daily existence matters to Someone that huge?

And what if God didn't actually create the whole universe, but rather tampered with the evolutionary process here on Earth to create a group of humans that He could call His own people? Genesis certainly alludes to other humans being on the earth at the same time as Adam & Eve. Would that make Him less than we think Him to be?

I don't know where I'm actually going with this... do you understand the question I'm TRYING to ask? I hope so.

Reina

Submitted by rlp on August 28, 2007 - 10:00pm.

I'll knock a couple of these back to you.

Why would a God so big care? I don't know. He, She, or It is God. I guess one way of thinking about God is abandoning human perspectives. The idea of size and linear time and all of that wouldn't apply to this kind of being.

Why would we think we matter? On this one I'll simply say that every people group that has ever existed has myths that include some sort of divine being that is interested in us - in one way or another. Seems to be hard wired into us. That's worth considering. It's also worth considering that most humans are not nearly as educated as you and I. Myth is a fantastic way to communicate meaning across many barriers. I take myths very seriously. They are like the dreams of humanity.

As far as evolution goes, I sort of like the idea. It makes God a little more like a farmer. Plant some stuff and see how it turns out. That kind of thinking puts a ding in the whole idea of benevolence though. Evolution is HARSH. No mercy, no quarter. Fittest survive. Period. So I don't know about that, but that seems to be the way it is happening.

I have an idea that even our ideas of good and evil and pain and suffering might be so irrelevant and so off target that I try not to base my thinking about God too much on that.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 29, 2007 - 11:31am.

Reina asks,
"And what if God didn't actually create the whole universe, but rather tampered with the evolutionary process here on Earth to create a group of humans that He could call His own people? Genesis certainly alludes to other humans being on the earth at the same time as Adam & Eve. Would that make Him less than we think Him to be?"

I may be getting this entirely wrong, but I seem to remember my Hebrew Bible professor suggesting an alternate translation for Genesis. He suggests that it can be read, "In a beginning, when God began creating, the earth was a formless void." When looked at this way, there may have been several "begginings", also, the earth may have been "preexistent." I'm not sure if my recollection is accurate, perhaps RLP could shed some light on this.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 28, 2007 - 10:17am.

Reina:

I understand your struggle. I don't know that anyone ever quite arrives at the top of the mountain and says, "Aha, now I KNOW this is true." We're all kind of working our way up switchbacks, slipping now and again on the scree, getting our feet tangled in the underbrush.

About the only thing I can offer is that, while I'm all for the power of positive thinking, human thinking didn't bring the universe into being since it predates us by a few billion years. So one must ask, as Dave does above, the most essential question at some point in his or her life: Do I believe in God (or, if need be, a Creator)? The issues of divine intervention, immaculate conception, transubstantiation, infant baptism and all other things -- while interesting and important topics for theological discussions -- really pale when one looks up at the stars or at a vast sweep of mountains tearing open the bellies of a line of thunderclouds.

Start there, if you can, pondering that one question. And ponder it, not in an office or library or church, even, but in the woods, or beside a still stream, or sailing the skies in a hot air balloon. I venture that you may be surprised at the answer.

Peace.

Stephen

Submitted by Anonymous User (not verified) on August 28, 2007 - 9:59pm.

I deleted the 27,000 word comment that was left here. (Yes, I counted it in Word) I deleted it because the person who left it isn't emotionally well. That much was obvious. And because hijacking someone's blog like that is considered to be very rude in blog culture.

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 29, 2007 - 9:51am.

Thank you so much for your replies. It will take some time to consider. I am desperately trying to believe in God, and then my rational brain kicks in and calls me a fool. Thank you.
Reina

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 29, 2007 - 11:16am.

Reina,
A rational mind can only survey creation with all of its intricate complexities and interdependence and conclude; "There is a God."

I know the analogy is over simplistic, but, imagine walking down a path and discovering a watch. You would examine it and conclude, "something must have made this, all these parts could not have come together by accident." To believe that even the simplest one celled amoeba's DNA came together as a result of some cosmic accident, would be similar to believing there could be an explosion in a print shop and that all the letters could settled in the order of the Websters Dictionary. Realizing that that this amoeba exists in a world with countless more complex organisms, and that the earth is neither too close or too far from the sun, has water and just the right atmosphere, etc, etc... you would have to further conclude that other explosions occurred and all the books ever written came to be by accident, and then were cataloged in a library by accident as well.

It is indeed a fool who says in his heart, "there is no God."

The rest as Stephen says is less certain, but important to ponder as we attempt to understand our relationship with the creator.

Bob

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 30, 2007 - 3:40am.

Complain if you're offended: I've borrowed your illustration for a quote from your blog, at my blog. Good thoughts on a deep subject, from a deep image.

http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/preacher-looks-again-did-hubble-kill-god/

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 30, 2007 - 3:42am.

Didn't mean to make it anonymous, either.
Best, Ed Darrell

Submitted by Anonymous User on August 30, 2007 - 11:48am.

How strange. I just used this same image to begin a sermon on Worship. Your thoughts are profound. Thanks for sharing.