I have very little time myself for the 'god of gaps' version of religion: we'll inoke a deity when our science / philosophy isn't good enough to explain something. Ugh.rysmiel replied:
Can you please stop being tempted to quote things and actually quote some of them already? This is getting far too tantalizing!
Anyway, Karen Armstrong on the same subject:
"We can learn that God does not exist in any simplistic sense... or that the very word "God" is only a symbol of a reality that ineffably transcends it. The mystical agnosticism could help us."
(A History of God, 1993)
I don't like ineffably transcends very much, but I like what she's getting at.
The thing I dislike about this value of deity is how easily it slips into declaring certain things unknowable, the province only of deity, and how easily that in turn slips into a way of slapping down uppity types who want to explore those limits. [ "Eppuor si muove" ] Believing in a God that exists in spaces above and beyond the scope of humaworn reason doesn't work for me becuase it seems excessively early to say human reason's hit such limits.
I think this is interesting enough to be worthy of its own thread.