To continue with my diatribe on the science/religion conundrum that I started yesterday (see blow entry) I need to say that I think the most profound theology is being done in the physics departments. It is there that the mystery is disclosed and then deepened. Scientists at this point do not have the hubris to name the ultimate creator. By doing so, of course, we limit it to some transcendental yenta involved in everyones business. That puts the infinite on the same level as Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny. Well, not really the Bunny but definitely Santa who is defined in popular culture to children as an immortal transcendental being who" knows when you have been good or bad", etc. Ah for the days of pre-critical naïveté when we could believe all that stuff without question. I suppose that is what the story of Adam and Eve is really about. The time before doubt and skepticism. Before we had to create science and religion when we had everything and nothing. The question is is how many of us would want to go back to that in our adult form? Personally, I need the snake. What about you? Snake or no snake? I guess we have to define the snake. In my mind the snake in Genesis is not the incarnation of evil but the path to knowledge and by extension to humanity. When we became human our relationship with the infinite changed. Change the way you look at something and the thing changes. The infinite evolves with us. As we know more we know less.
posted by Anne Coe | 6:11 AM
3 Comments:
If it is true that the more we know, the less we actually know, then what good did our following the serpent's recommendations actually create? Didn't Cain kill Abel after the snake exerted its influence? Isn't that a rather big price, brother killing brother? I wonder at times if it is only our selfishness that leads us to think the world needs our unique individualism: the individualism that knowledge created. Once we are selfish, it is hard to imagine being unselfish. We get fond of ourselves. However, just as it has always been, it will continue to be: all our sacred uniqueness will vanish in time. Will we leave the world a better place? I am not even sure we know what that means. We influence others, but do we know the end result of that influence--the multigenerational effect of our action? Even with our individualism, as G. B Shaw wrote, who is capable of the absurdity of thinking they could stand themselves for an eternity.
I agree with the theology and physics, but must also say that I think there is incredible theology in anatomy and physiology as well as the genetics areas... (not necessarily as applied to Humans either)... It is just so phenomenal to see this collection of things produce a mammal, reptile or what have you... truly magnificent until the brain kicks in and starts "thinking" which somehow mucks up the magnificence of life...
This is the ultimate question is it not? To be or not be be. In this case to be fully human or not. Ancient literature is filled with this kind of choice. It is the essence of the Epic of Gilgamish and the Oddessy. They had choices, we do not. The thing now is to realize the infinte power in ourselves and to loose the worst of the ego. This is our path to immortality. Just be greatful you were not born a Greek warrior, whose only path to immortality lay in heroice in battle, ie killing or being killed usually both.
Post a Comment
<< Home