science and mystery

Another random reflection from reading Heschel's "God in Search of Man".....

Heschel argues that God is beyond our knowledge (citing Job 36:26), which makes me wonder why are we supposed to search if it is beyond our reach...is it our calling to pursue an unattainable goal? Later, Heschel seems to confirm this by providing the statement “do not seek, nor search after what is hidden from you.” It appears that Heschel is taking the stance that we shouldn't look for answers through our faculties of reason and science (he uses the term nature), providing we must have faith in God and not faith in nature. In so doing, he considers the two irreconcilable - “for worship and ritual imply ability to address ourselves to God – an implication that cannot be integrated into a system of pure naturalism – and are only meaningful as a mystery we are convinced of, without being able to analyze it or to submit it to experiment.” (p.62-63).

Frankly, I disagree with Heschel's line of thought here. I know religion appears to ask of us to accept without questioning...but the reality is, to do so is to betray our human nature and the gift of reason we possess (and notably, other animals do not). Accepting without questioning, in all situations but particularly religious ones, have led to atrocities of all kinds throughout history. For whatever reason, and somewhat disappointedly, Heschel seems to react to science and reason as if it threatens his beliefs (and maybe they do, but depending on what the challenge is, it should be listened to and considered, because it contains the possibility of being right). I think Heschel's misstep here is to assume that knowledge of the world that we gain through reason and science somehow removes the mystery and wonder. Its a mistake that I think is made often, but I don't believe that the removal of the ignorance necessarily results in removal of the mystery and wonder.

I also think this line of thought from Heschel reveals another flaw (or at least I would designate it as a flaw). Science and reason through the years have shown us that many of our ideas about our natural world are flawed...from things such as the Earth being flat, to the Earth being the center of the universe, to nothing being smaller than the atom, etc. I believe most people of a reasonable disposition would note these improvements in our knowledge and the removal of the veil of ignorance it represents as a positive thing. Heschel (and much of a religion for that matter) seems to move in the opposite direction. Heschel seems to push for our understanding of the divine as the biblical man does...which does not just include faith in a benevolent super-being, but attributing to God specific acts of nature. Heschel, and he is not alone, seem to argue that our understanding of God and the divine was never more perfect (or more right) than it was 2,000, 3,000, 4,000 years ago. It seems odd...our knowledge and understanding in all other fields of study, be it not just physical science, but medicine, law, philosophy, and technology has evolved and grown over the years. Most would consider that a good thing. Yet, new thoughts on theology, thoughts that would have evolved from previous generations and takes into consideration the new knowledge we have acquired as a species over the years, are often treated with disdain and dismissed as heretical.

I believe it stems from being threatened, and people believing like Heschel, that removing the ignorance we have towards our world results in the removal of our awe and wonder at it. But is that really the case?