See the video review here

This post is a book review of Redefining God by Parth Atrey . The book presents a summary of how various religions, philosophers, and scientists have defined God. It concludes that the concept of God that the science (or at least the famous scientists like Einstein) has is the same as the earliest conception of God that some of the oldest religions of the world have. Hence the subtitle of the book–Coming Full Circle.

Atrey discusses at two broad concepts of God. The earliest conception of God is Big Guy in the Sky (BGITS). The BGITS God is a divine human-like person with supernatural powers, who is deeply interested in human affairs and regularly intervenes on the side of believers who pay proper respects and against the ones who don’t. BGITS usually controlled major natural entities and forces like the Sun, Moon, Wind, Thunder and Earth and caused all the major astronomical events like sunrise, solar eclipse, and rain.

From the earliest time, there was also a concept of God as the universal order underlying everything in nature. This was called Rta in Rig Veda, Maat from ancient Egypt, or Tao in China. In this definition, the underlying order is unchanging and does not need to be placated by rituals and worship. Here the focus is on understanding the universal laws and living your life according to such laws.

For the last two to three thousand years, the BGITS God has held sway and people have believed in them. This has been the age of belief. The definition of God became rigid. All Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, share the idea a savior God. Many other religions or branches within religions also developed strong BGITS gods in this period.These Gods are BGITS, but in addition, the Gods don’t accept the possibility of other BGITS gods. It requires total acceptance and does not welcome debate or question. The Gods and their prophets need to be fully accepted and they promise salvation.  For centuries, people have fought to protect their God and killed others who would not accept their truth. Blasphemy and heresy have been punished by death or torture.

With the dawn of the scientific era, the strangle-hold of belief has been shaken off. Philosophers like Spinoza, Bacon, Aquinas, came up with thoughts and questions which led us away from the BGITS God. We have gone back to a concept of God very similar to the Rta of Rig Veda.

So which one is it? Is God the underlying order in the universe which ensures that every part of the universe from the galaxies to a sub-atomic particle follow an unseen but a firm set of rules. Or is God a benevolent (or vengeful) BGITS who needs to be placated through devotion and unquestioning obedience. A God who intervenes on our behalf and makes things better for us.

When two alternate theories exist, there are two peaceful ways to proceed. One is to agree to disagree and let both views peacefully coexist. In this path, every religion and definition of God must accept that there may be other definitions of God, and believers of such other beliefs don’t deserve to die. The second way is to converge to a single theory using the scientific method. Beliefs can’t be reconciled. Usually the physically stronger “believer” prevails when two of them disagree?

Atrey goes through several observations which contradict the BGITS hypotheses. As science has progressed, most natural phenomena have been shown to follow unchanging natural laws, not some BGITS god. Also, a savior god poses a problem–if God is all merciful then why do bad things happen to really observant people. And also if God is enforcing the code, then how come people who openly flout God’s commandments continue to enjoy a good life. Atrey also shares writings of many philosophers and scientists who became disillusioned with BGITS. He also quotes several surveys where people reject the notion of BGITS while still saying that they believe in God.

He proposes a two-part concept of God. The first part is a definition of God similar to Rta in Rig Veda. A universal order in nature that controls everything. But the second part is a personal god which provides us with solace and comfort. Atrey insists that it is important that we believe that our personal god can only operate within the universal order. They can’t make miracles happen.

This concession of a personal god is recognition that definition of God is not just a matter of logic and rationality. People believe in God because it gives them comfort, peace of mind. To believe that there is a bigger power ensuring our well-being, delivering justice in the world even when it appears that the bad guys are winning, is essential for people to stay motivated and continue to do the right thing.

Atrey believes that this redefinition of God is the only way to peacefully coexist in today’s world. That it will avoid the conflict we see in the name of religion. It will also avoid the superstition and wasteful effort in pleasing Gods in the hope that they will miraculously make our lives better.

To finish the book review–it is a well-researched book. Anyone trained in the scientific method will find it useful as it makes logical arguments and comes with an extensive bibliography.

This is where I must add some of my own thinking. First, reading the book, two things are clear to me

1. Most of us who have been trained in the scientific method and have learned about the laws of physics can’t accept BGITS concept as our daily life experience does not conform to it
2. No matter how logical and rational you are, most of us need a personal source of strength to give a reason to live a good life and to get through the tough times.

Atrey’s personal God with no ability to do miracles is not fully satisfying. We all want to believe in a God with unlimited power to do what is right. People believe in a BGITS because we need someone to ensure that the rules by which we are playing the game will get us the goals that we want in life. Most people remember God most intensely when things are not going right and they want an intervention.

This is where I do believe that the personal God must have the power to ensure that the good will prevail and bad will perish. This personal God makes everything right and ensures that if we follow the rules the outcome will be as desired. This personal God is also mentioned in our ancient texts and is called AMRAK. Amrak is a god which ensures that if you follow the common-sense moral code and do the right things, all good things will happen to you. And this, good and moral conduct, is the only worship he needs. You do not require special priests to perform such a worship. And those not following the moral code, bad things will happen to them. Amrak is very powerful and omniscient. He has a log book and notes down everything you do. Your own thoughts, words, and actions determine what eventually happens to you. But since he does not want to upset the universal laws, he does not do any obvious miracles. Instead, he works through people, circumstances, natural world to deliver justice to you. If you cheat and steal, maybe Amrak delivers justice by giving you children who do not value money or hard work. If you are arrogant and mistreat people, Amrak delivers justice by making your friends cause you hurt by betraying you.

I believe in such a God! And those of you with a keen eye would notice that Amrak is Karma spelled backwards. Amrak ensures that the pious, the ones living the right life will be rewarded. And the only worship is to continue to live the right life!