Discussion 1 to Meditation 716
Of Gods and Laws
by: Paul W. Sharkey
To add to this discussion (or any other,) please use the Contact form.
The idea that it takes some “person” to promulgate the laws which explain the behavior and unfolding of the universe and everything in it is the same fallacy as that of confusing principles and personalities.[1] Discovering and believing in the Laws that govern and guide the universe does not require believing in – or that there even be – a “person” (God or otherwise) to promulgate them. Indeed, not only does the example of “self-regulating-complex-systems” demonstrate this, it further illustrates and affirms that any such “persons” or entities, whatever they may be, are subject to rather than promulgators of such laws.
Even God cannot make the law of non-contradiction false (though many “believers,” seem to think so), nor make any other true law of nature or reason other than it is. Perhaps that is why some “believers” so vehemently reject evolution, just as they once rejected a heliocentric solar system or a (roughly) spherical Earth. They must reject the laws of nature in order to hang on to their particular and peculiar beliefs about a God that rules by fiat as described in their understanding of “sacred scripture” rather than see and appreciate the wonders and intricacies of the universe in which they actually live. The irony is that the “God” they claim to worship (Yahweh) of the “old and new testaments,” is considered to be an “advance” in religious thinking precisely because he was seen to be a God of Law (Torah) rather than of caprice.
If a law really is a law, then even the gods (God) are subject to it. Is a law a law because God says so, or does God say so because it is a law? The difference is that between personality and principle, between despotism or the rule of law.
Notes:
- See Meditation 719 - Principles or Personalities?