Disease and Theology
by
Charles Graves
How can we situate disease and its harmful, sometimes mortal, effects upon humans with our concept of the Creator of the universe as benevolent? This question seems relevant when we think of thousands of people who have died of Covid-19 virus, considering that probably most of them were religious believers?
Understanding he pandemic as part of the Great Creator’s planning certainly challenges us. Moreover, one of the by-products of the struggle against such a pandemic is that churches and temples have been closed to public liturgies, fearing Covid-19 contaminations. The Holy Communion by ZOOM can only be a ‘spiritual communion’ since actual passing around of the cup will further the transmission of the virus.
We should begin by saying that viruses are parts of God’s creation of living creatures. Are they aspects of ‘no-god’ elements? No, such a clarification would make them non-created and non-creating, which is certainly not applicable. But their effect is ‘no-god’ (which we have described above elsewhere several times) in that they are harmful rather than beneficial to humans. And also these viruses resemble people who live a ‘no-god’ existence, i.e,. they probably will be judged unfavorably at ‘the end of time’. So, let’s categorize viruses as temporary elements of the created universe which harm other elements of creation, and as enemies of mankind and other creatures. Their ‘purpose’ vis à vis the Creator is as nothing, but their purpose vis à vis creatures is significant historically – they are one reason why medicine or healing became a human profession. Certainly, viruses are closely linked to the growth of sciences and the medical profession. And the medical profession has ‘developed’ over the course of history largely because of such elements and viruses, bacteria, cancers etc. These often destructive elements within our existence have provoked a considerable spending of energy and usage of time to create and enlarge the sciences of biology, physiology etc. these domains being the ones negatively influenced by such viruses, bacteria etc.
Which would be the analogous areas in human life? We could mention wars -. Both those on the battlefields or those between or within families. These are obvious elements in the history of creaturely life which are considered as negative, harming lives and also typical as ‘no-god’ but, nevertheless, they exist ‘within life’ and not ’outside’ of it. Moreover ‘natural disasters’ such as fires, floods, earthquakes, hurricanes etc. also present huge problems to the created world and cannot be treated as ‘no-god’ since they are directly related to the Creation by a divinity directing the universe as we know it. Besides, controlled fires and flooding can be beneficial under certain circumstances rather than harmful.
Some more of these unfortunate elements in creaturely life would be racial discrimination, intolerance, oppression, exclusion etc.
Many of these unwanted aspects of history, however, can be combatted by creaturely efforts and such efforts will be judged ‘favorably’ at the ‘end of history’.
Thus, perhaps they are ‘allowed’ in the divinely-led historical process so that humans can overcome them and show human ingenuity in doing so. Is that their purpose? Perhaps the above is too obvious as an answer. That these elements are allowed in the world in order that humans might arise to the occasion and combat them. Is this the only answer to the riddle?
If religion is a conflict with ‘no-god’ then science and medicine are a conflict with ‘evil-god’. ‘Evil god’ could be a term for all elements of history which harm the Creation but which are an integral part of the Creation. They are an evil, but yet integral, part. The only ‘positive’ aspect of their existence is that the creatures must learn to control them. And, in so doing, Creation ‘develops’, showing maturity and stature. We grow and mature while combatting the ’evil-god’. The growth will be ‘judged positively’ at the end of time. The creature is ‘glorified’ in its ability to control ’evil-god’. The more ‘science’ grows, the more creaturely life is glorified and praised. It is ‘to our credit’ that through creaturely and human accomplishments (i.e. in medicine and technology of all sorts) we are able better to combat viruses, wars, disasters, racism, oppression, slavery etc. Humans in particular are called upon to meet the challenges of ‘evil-god’ and to produce vaccines, peace initiatives, disaster control, anti-racism, freedoms of all sorts, etc. In doing so, humanity takes pride in its successes.
Such self-congratulatory accolades are apparently elements within human existence beloved by the Divinity. Such a divine blessing upon science, medicine or technology, or the amelioration of society, must be true because the combatting of ‘evil-god’ continues and sometimes even prospers. All of our efforts in science, diplomacy and human rights combatting ‘evil-god’ seems to have this divine blessing rather than disdain, and therefore these efforts must be, in a philosophical sense, ‘necessary’ within history.
Mankind was certainly ‘proud of itself’ when it rather speedily developed vaccines against Ebola and Covid-19 or remedies for AIDS. The same can be said for peace initiatives of the United Nations and their successes, Red Cross interventions to save lives, or psychiatry in treating sick individuals.
The conflict with ’evil-god’ has been going on, it seems, forever but also has been creating phenomena for which humanity is grateful such as health, peace, education, useful technology etc.
But does all of these so-called advantages relative to ‘evil-god’ existence compensate for the myriads of deaths which ‘evil-god’ has caused throughout the ages? In particular the 500,000 plus deaths from Covid-19 in the USA in 2020-21 or millions of deaths from the same virus globally in the same era?
For those who (needlessly, some say) because of Covid-19 or other such diseases have passed away, can we ‘blame God’? For those left behind, they might ‘blame God’ for the death of their loved-ones but it doesn’t return the loved ones to them. So, the most practical answer to this conundrum is to say ‘we know certain reasons why ‘evil-god’ exists within history and we are satisfied with remembering that’.
If not, how can we change the Created world’? We can only work diligently to improve our combat with ’evil-god’. Perhaps this is our role, rather than blaming the divinity, which probably won’t help us anyway, since we are not on his/her Executive Committee and have no way of following our blame with some kind of obliging his/her resignation.
However, another possible solution would be to place ourselves on the side of ‘no-god’ and spend our time blaming ourselves for having ’believed in god’, But then, we would not have any of the comforting beliefs contained in religion to help us in our combat with ‘evil-god’. Rejecting ‘no-god’ while believing in various aspects of ’evil-god’ is more logical than believing in ‘no-god’ and congruently combatting ‘evil-god’. Some atheists might say, however, that our combat against ‘evil-god’ might be sharpened and more effective if we didn’t believe in god. Anyway, both atheists and believers might agree that one of the main human activities is the struggle against ‘evil-god’ and that is a hopeful sign in itself if universal history in essence is concerned mainly that justice and happiness prevail.
Charles Graves
Understanding he pandemic as part of the Great Creator’s planning certainly challenges us. Moreover, one of the by-products of the struggle against such a pandemic is that churches and temples have been closed to public liturgies, fearing Covid-19 contaminations. The Holy Communion by ZOOM can only be a ‘spiritual communion’ since actual passing around of the cup will further the transmission of the virus.
We should begin by saying that viruses are parts of God’s creation of living creatures. Are they aspects of ‘no-god’ elements? No, such a clarification would make them non-created and non-creating, which is certainly not applicable. But their effect is ‘no-god’ (which we have described above elsewhere several times) in that they are harmful rather than beneficial to humans. And also these viruses resemble people who live a ‘no-god’ existence, i.e,. they probably will be judged unfavorably at ‘the end of time’. So, let’s categorize viruses as temporary elements of the created universe which harm other elements of creation, and as enemies of mankind and other creatures. Their ‘purpose’ vis à vis the Creator is as nothing, but their purpose vis à vis creatures is significant historically – they are one reason why medicine or healing became a human profession. Certainly, viruses are closely linked to the growth of sciences and the medical profession. And the medical profession has ‘developed’ over the course of history largely because of such elements and viruses, bacteria, cancers etc. These often destructive elements within our existence have provoked a considerable spending of energy and usage of time to create and enlarge the sciences of biology, physiology etc. these domains being the ones negatively influenced by such viruses, bacteria etc.
Which would be the analogous areas in human life? We could mention wars -. Both those on the battlefields or those between or within families. These are obvious elements in the history of creaturely life which are considered as negative, harming lives and also typical as ‘no-god’ but, nevertheless, they exist ‘within life’ and not ’outside’ of it. Moreover ‘natural disasters’ such as fires, floods, earthquakes, hurricanes etc. also present huge problems to the created world and cannot be treated as ‘no-god’ since they are directly related to the Creation by a divinity directing the universe as we know it. Besides, controlled fires and flooding can be beneficial under certain circumstances rather than harmful.
Some more of these unfortunate elements in creaturely life would be racial discrimination, intolerance, oppression, exclusion etc.
Many of these unwanted aspects of history, however, can be combatted by creaturely efforts and such efforts will be judged ‘favorably’ at the ‘end of history’.
Thus, perhaps they are ‘allowed’ in the divinely-led historical process so that humans can overcome them and show human ingenuity in doing so. Is that their purpose? Perhaps the above is too obvious as an answer. That these elements are allowed in the world in order that humans might arise to the occasion and combat them. Is this the only answer to the riddle?
If religion is a conflict with ‘no-god’ then science and medicine are a conflict with ‘evil-god’. ‘Evil god’ could be a term for all elements of history which harm the Creation but which are an integral part of the Creation. They are an evil, but yet integral, part. The only ‘positive’ aspect of their existence is that the creatures must learn to control them. And, in so doing, Creation ‘develops’, showing maturity and stature. We grow and mature while combatting the ’evil-god’. The growth will be ‘judged positively’ at the end of time. The creature is ‘glorified’ in its ability to control ’evil-god’. The more ‘science’ grows, the more creaturely life is glorified and praised. It is ‘to our credit’ that through creaturely and human accomplishments (i.e. in medicine and technology of all sorts) we are able better to combat viruses, wars, disasters, racism, oppression, slavery etc. Humans in particular are called upon to meet the challenges of ‘evil-god’ and to produce vaccines, peace initiatives, disaster control, anti-racism, freedoms of all sorts, etc. In doing so, humanity takes pride in its successes.
Such self-congratulatory accolades are apparently elements within human existence beloved by the Divinity. Such a divine blessing upon science, medicine or technology, or the amelioration of society, must be true because the combatting of ‘evil-god’ continues and sometimes even prospers. All of our efforts in science, diplomacy and human rights combatting ‘evil-god’ seems to have this divine blessing rather than disdain, and therefore these efforts must be, in a philosophical sense, ‘necessary’ within history.
Mankind was certainly ‘proud of itself’ when it rather speedily developed vaccines against Ebola and Covid-19 or remedies for AIDS. The same can be said for peace initiatives of the United Nations and their successes, Red Cross interventions to save lives, or psychiatry in treating sick individuals.
The conflict with ’evil-god’ has been going on, it seems, forever but also has been creating phenomena for which humanity is grateful such as health, peace, education, useful technology etc.
But does all of these so-called advantages relative to ‘evil-god’ existence compensate for the myriads of deaths which ‘evil-god’ has caused throughout the ages? In particular the 500,000 plus deaths from Covid-19 in the USA in 2020-21 or millions of deaths from the same virus globally in the same era?
For those who (needlessly, some say) because of Covid-19 or other such diseases have passed away, can we ‘blame God’? For those left behind, they might ‘blame God’ for the death of their loved-ones but it doesn’t return the loved ones to them. So, the most practical answer to this conundrum is to say ‘we know certain reasons why ‘evil-god’ exists within history and we are satisfied with remembering that’.
If not, how can we change the Created world’? We can only work diligently to improve our combat with ’evil-god’. Perhaps this is our role, rather than blaming the divinity, which probably won’t help us anyway, since we are not on his/her Executive Committee and have no way of following our blame with some kind of obliging his/her resignation.
However, another possible solution would be to place ourselves on the side of ‘no-god’ and spend our time blaming ourselves for having ’believed in god’, But then, we would not have any of the comforting beliefs contained in religion to help us in our combat with ‘evil-god’. Rejecting ‘no-god’ while believing in various aspects of ’evil-god’ is more logical than believing in ‘no-god’ and congruently combatting ‘evil-god’. Some atheists might say, however, that our combat against ‘evil-god’ might be sharpened and more effective if we didn’t believe in god. Anyway, both atheists and believers might agree that one of the main human activities is the struggle against ‘evil-god’ and that is a hopeful sign in itself if universal history in essence is concerned mainly that justice and happiness prevail.
Charles Graves
Photograph: ‘rock painting’ in Australia photographed by Graeme Churchard, Bristol (UK)