Imagine for a moment that there is a god. A being exists that is powerful enough to have created the universe, and that cares what happens within it.
Now, consider the following:
This god understood that for mankind to develop its full potential without the need for constant handholding, humans would have to have certain built-in thinking shortcuts. (This god has things to do, after all.) They would have to be able to operate with incomplete information, so this god gave them confirmation bias and an assumption of agency so that they could feel sure about their decisions and move forward even if their ideas weren’t fully justified. For group cohesion and mutual defense, people had tribal tendencies built-in. To facilitate the spread of knowledge, they easily accept the opinions of their group. On and on the list goes, yet this god knew that all of these tendencies also contained a trap. If unchecked, they could produce and propagate errors that might escalate into violence, ignorance, waste and destruction.
For this reason, this god also set in place qualities that could be used to counter the ill effects of the built-in shortcuts. Humans were given the powers of reason. They could examine evidence and change their minds. They were given curiosity and a desire to learn. They could build thinking tools that amplified their ideas in the same way that levers and wheels amplified their muscles. They have love and compassion, empathy and a sense of wonder. In this way, mankind, and each human individually, could shape itself into the image of god.
This god knows itself and does not need to be worshiped or praised like an insecure child. It would prefer that people might even deny its existence rather than assert something they could not defend. For this reason, everything was made in a way that deliberately hid god’s true nature. Instead, this god only cares that creation might become all that it can be. This, alone, is the test.
Could life develop into a curious and creative force? Could it transcend the harsh and cruel environment of the primitive past and make something vibrant and wonderful? Could civilization learn to prize knowledge and truth over mere beliefs and faith? Would people develop an ethic based on compassion, wisdom, beauty and love welling up from within rather than on retribution and punishment meted out by external rulers and institutions?
They had the tools. This god created this world in a way that humans might arise, but it mostly left them to their own devices. (Maybe entirely—it is impossible to tell.) It checked up on them from time to time to see if they were ready to join it on the next level. As civilizations began to develop, the god could see thousands of religions arising—nearly every one of which misjudged the true nature of god. Nearly every one of them amplified and exploited the error-prone thinking shortcuts and blocked the really valuable tools that had been given. This was expected. Such thinking is a sign that the individuals and their cultures were not yet ready. The god rejected these beings and was willing to wait because it knew that with maturity it was easily possible to transcend such roadblocks.
What if god is returning—coming back to check in again? Who will inherit the kingdom of god? What if god prizes the desire for truth beyond even the acknowledgement of its own existence? What if god holds ethics based on compassion and reason above blind obedience? What if god rewards or elevates a person based on how they think, rather than what they think?
Who will inherit the kingdom of god? The atheists, that’s who. The agnostics, the humanists—these are the ones that have followed the holy path. Who places knowledge, wisdom, science, compassion, love, caring, beauty, art, freedom and truth above all else? Who desires knowing over believing? Who prefers goodness over conformity? Who would sacrifice their reputations, their comfort, for the right to ask questions? To such as these, god calls. “Well done my good and faithful servants.”
If you’re still religious…Oops!
Notes:
The title is based on a private joke of mine that Atheists are those who follow the Great God Athei. I know—it’s not a very good joke, but it does amuse me from time to time. The rest of this piece is a thought experiment designed to explore two problems with traditional beliefs.
First, how can people believe in gods with characteristics that clearly oppose the evidence we see around us? How can they believe in the old fables when science has shown us so much? How do they explain logical conundrums like the hiddenness of god, or the problem of evil? How can they believe in absolute morality in a random and uncaring universe? How can they assign gender to a being that, as far as anyone knows, has no genitals? In response to these questions, I decided to ask what kind of god might possibly exist based on what we know of the world.
Second, I’m often asked, “What if you’re wrong?” As I’ve covered extensively in my series on Pascal’s Wager, any competing god claims render the challenge impossible to resolve. I wanted my hypothetical god to also pose a challenge to Pascal. What if god rewards reason and not faith?
How did I do? Did I successfully describe a god that is not easily refuted from science or logic? What did I miss?
Final note: If you are one of those dull-witted literalists or a humorless internet troll, please note that this is a thought experiment and not a statement of faith. Nothing I’ve written should be construed as an actual belief. Besides, if the Great God Athei actually did exist, atheists would be compelled to deny it on principle. It is what god would want.