Skip to main content

God of the Gaps

By Carl S ~

If you read anything about the history of science and philosophy, you'll be exposed to “God of the Gaps.” In the past and even now, whenever there wasn't a scientific explanation, the fill-in was that the answer had something to do with “God.” End of story. This attitude is often expressed in reactions such as “God only knows,” and “God has his reasons; works in mysterious ways.” The truth of evolution is interpreted by the Catholic Church as the means God has chosen to create. Now, any time evidence is discovered that confirms natural explanations, it's typically met at first with denial or outright rejection. It's normal to be skeptical. Even when these confirmations become obvious over time, we still find people, like creationists, who insist “God” is the explanation. In place of natural selection via chance and adaptations, these humans substitute human selection, which is one good explanation of how “human nature” operates. (It's interesting: those who poo-poo evolution for its gaps in the fossil record have no problem with their own gaps of lacking evidence for “God.”)

Suppose someone has been born blind, and cannot see objects or colors. Now, objects you can touch, feel their texture and density, their relationships in space. But what of color? How does one explain red, blue, yellow, green, etc., or their thousands of varieties of tints and combinations, to one born blind? Any explanations are poor substitutes for the real colors. This is how “God of the gaps” works. Adults, who don't want to answer serious questions posed by their children, invoke that God. This is a great disservice to the kids. It's teaching them to substitute beliefs for evidence, to be blind on purpose, to not even try to understand what “color” is. It's teaching them not to ask, that to be blind on purpose isn't such a bad thing. It's like being in the 1956 movie, “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.”

Maturing is a natural thing, an adaptation to the real world, but religious dogmatic training discourages people from becoming intellectually mature. Indeed, remaining a gullible child is encouraged by Christianity. It's no wonder that children taught to not see or to deny what's in front of their own eyes grow to adulthood with gaps in their experiences essential for their well-being. Inherited “blindness” has been the “normal” in their environments. Discovering the real world is as confusing and mind-blowing as the feelings a person would have when exposed to sight.

In the stages of human understanding and moral development, when children and teens are curious, questioning, and seeking their individuality, religious people substitute their God of the Gaps instead of the evidence, the logical explanations, for serious and satisfying explanations they need at those stages. Those who are doing the filling-in-gaps-with-God are themselves educated to be blind traditionalists.

There was a crime story on television not long ago. Whether it was fiction or true, I don’t remember, but it sounds likely true. A man deliberately substitutes something like dough for the caulking used to seal the gaps in a rowboat's construction. His objective is to have the occupant of that boat drown due to a melting away of that fake caulking in the middle of a lake. The trick works, and the man on board drowns. Isn't this a metaphor for the intellectual and psychological danger possible any time “God” is used to fill in the gaps and substituted for the real?

One attends art appreciation lectures to gain appreciation of all the hitherto unnoticed backgrounds in paintings: all those purposeful brushstrokes, subtleties, blends of colors ,the intentions and philosophy of the artist, etc., that make them masterpieces. The same can be said for music appreciation, with its mixtures of symphonic instruments producing “the sound,” the rhythms. Religions fail to educate us in mortal life appreciation, but blindly go about filling in gaps with “God.” Our eyes are open.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

I can fix ignorance; I can't fix stupid!

By Bob O ~ I 'm an atheist and a 52-year veteran of public education. I need not tell anyone the problems associated with having to "duck" the "Which church do you belong to?" with my students and their parents. Once told by a parent that they would rather have a queer for their sons' teacher than an atheist! Spent HOURS going to the restroom right when prayers were performed: before assemblies, sports banquets, "Christmas Programs", awards assemblies, etc... Told everyone that I had a bladder problem. And "yes" it was a copout to many of you, but the old adage (yes, it's religious) accept what you can't change, change that which you can and accept the strength to know the difference! No need arguing that which you will never change. Enough of that. What I'd like to impart is my simple family chemistry. My wife is a Baptist - raised in a Baptist Orphanage (whole stories there) and is a believer. She did not know my religi