God, Allah, god(s), Whatever

[James E. White]

This section could just as easily be called "first cause" or "infinite regression" because that is the question that "God" has been presumably "created" to answer. You can somehow detect yourself and you can believe by touch and observation that there is a "universe" around you whether it be a chair you're sitting in, a house, a city, a state, a country, a world, or something grander that you see in the night sky. The question is: Where did the universe come from? A. Has it "always" existed? Or, B. Was there "nothing" then the "universe" started or was started? If it's B then, B.1. Where did the materials come from to make it? Or, B.2. Where did the whatever/whoever(?) that "started" it come from? . . . If it's A or B then where did the GARGANTUAN amount of energy that we see evidence of come from? . . .

It is, at least with currently understood physics, impossible to work backwards and arrive at a definitive "first cause." The questions, as seen above always have an "and before that?" that can be asked in an "infinite regress." Some thinkers postulate that "time" started with "the universe" but that really doesn't get us anywhere either because "started" itself implies a "before" which would be impossible without "time." (And we're still left with that "universe" stuff from "nothing" issue.)

"God" (capital G, or "Allah"¹) with omnipotent powers was clearly "invented" to (sort of) solve the infinite regress because ? ? ?, well . . . , just because, according to some, you had to stop going backward at "God" and not ask more questions. My mother made it clear to me very early on, when I was bold enough to ask at age 7 or 8, that the question "and before that?" should never be asked (of anyone) lest it bring me, or even my whole family, into ill repute. Even before my question to Mom I had decided that "worship" of anyone or anything was about the weirdest and most useless thing you could do unless there was definitive proof you got something in return that wasn't just a result of "luck" or deserved and owed earnings. But "worship" clearly wasn't an essential requirement for either.

(In a few minutes, in the "Religion" or "Bible..." forums, you'll see how this brings us to World Peace – or at the very least, to the end of religious strife.)

But ages, many many millennia, before "God" there were spirits and non-monotheistic "gods" (little g) as people projected their own ability to (dimly at first) think onto whatever they saw around them. Tree spirits and sky spirits, etc. But some thinkers were soon somewhat more astute than others and began to call themselves shamans and the like and convince (by arts, not magic or an actual "in" with the spirits) those struggling with how to get something out of those "spirits" they ascribed to the trees and the sky, etc. It didn't take much convincing because occurrences, such as finding deer for food, were pretty random anyway so a shaman that baited a spot in the woods and directed you near there could up your odds of success pretty convincingly. Shamans that learned about poisons, of course, could clearly "demonstrate" that they could cast deadly spells through their spirit contacts.

Then, even more astutely (perhaps, or greedily?) some figured out the shamans (or whatever) were really fakers and perhaps with a few gifts and a promise not to disclose the secret arts of the baiting (or whatever) became "government" leaders "blessed" by the fakers. There are other pathways to the same end of two "elite" classes, the leaders and the shamans (also now often ascribed "priests"). As "God" is purported to be, the shamans were also "omniscient." It's no secret "God" "does" this through parents and the unintentional "guilty" behavior and expressions of their guilty children. The shamans often didn't have the advantage of "parents" (disclosures to "Santa Clause") but they did also have an astute understanding of human motivations (them being human themselves).

"We're all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further" said Richard Dawkins². It doesn't hurt that our no-god knowledge makes us atheists considerably less manipulatable by human powers that be. But we all do believe, if you want to define it as such, the little-g god in (almost) each and everyone that understands that good behavior toward each other is beneficial to all and us included. For me, when I think of some things that I could do, a little "voice" in my head (I call it conscience) alerts me that that path leads to anarchy where ultimately only might makes "right." Even the mightiest humans rarely want anarchy where "to avoid being killed by you, I'll kill you first³" is the asinine rule (substitute what you will for "kill").

¹ Other names are used too. I'll stick with "God" or god to represent them all.
² The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. Highly recommended reading.
³ Also known as "Do unto others before they do unto you."