Tuesday, May 05, 2015

A conversation at the station

I had just finished my pint of milk when a man approached me on my bench in Geneva airport train station.
- 'Can I ask you a question?,' he asked.
- 'Sure', I replied.
He held forward a leaflet and pointed at the three lines at the bottom.
- 'Do you think the future will be better, equal or worse than today?'
- 'Better,' I chose, which instantly made me feel better, too.
- 'You're a positive man.'
- 'Maybe so. And what about you, what do you think?'
The man took a seat next to me. This was going to take a while.
- 'I, too, believe that the future will be better. Because', he said, now pointing at the lines at the top of the page, 'God has promised to end all suffering. Do you think God can make the world better?'
- 'Well, I think there are many people who are inspired by their faith in God to do great things for the world,' I said, to stay on the positive side of the coin.
- 'So you believe in God?'
- 'No.'
- 'But if you look at the world, the ingenuity of life, don't you think there must have been a Creator who designed it all?'
- 'To the contrary, sir.'
I remembered having had this same conversation in college one day, and continued:
- 'For me the ingenuity of nature is a reason not to belief in the creation story.'
- 'Then how has it all come about?'
- 'By chance, to a large extent. Would we do it all over again, it would turn out quite different, I think.'
- 'You think that we humans are here by chance. So life is useless then?'
- 'Good question. But useless to whom? To me, my family and some others, my life can be quite useful, I think. The planet, nature, the universe, I doubt they care much.'
- 'Well, I believe the Bible tells the truth. I see that you're a scientific man,' he said, pointing at the book on my lap. 'You've heard about the big bang, I presume?'
I knodded. This could be an interesting question: what if we could do the big bang over again, could the laws of nature turn out different? If not, why not? What if there does exist a theory of everything, that can be captured in "one simple, elegant equation" that is the source code of the universe. Then, fundamentally, the world may be a lot simpler than it looks and it becomes imaginable that some other being wrote that line of code to create this self-learning artificially intelligent app called universe that brought forth the stars, the planets and life as we know it. Would parallel universes, other apps, be the logical next step? I'm afraid I get sidetracked.
- 'Of course,' the man continued, 'God did not create the world in six days, that is impossible. One shouldn't take the creation story so literally. Those six days were in fact six very long periods of time.  He pulled out a purple leaflet. 'Can I offer you this article? It's written by renowned scientists who explain why the Bible tells the truth. You know, science is proving the Bible right, through archeological studies and all.'
That's a bold strategy: throwing in scientists to convince a science oriented person of those things  in the Bible that science did not find evidence for.
- 'The Bible,' he said, 'answers the three key questions: who am I, where do I come from, and where do I go.'
The first I thought was the most interesting to throw back.
- 'Well, If I may ask, who are you?' I asked.
- 'Me? I believe that God created man in his own image. I am a human being, a son of my father, a grandson of my grandfather, and so on, all the way back to the first man and woman who God created.'
- 'Yes, that's where you come from, but who are you?' I tried again.
- 'I'm a man, the son of....' and so on, he repeated.
This wouldn't go anywhere, but the idea that man was created in God's own image I found a comforting thought. It could mean that nothing human is strange to God; that he, too, is a mixed bag of paradoxes.
- 'My faith in God gives my life a purpose,' the man said.
- 'That's great,' I replied, 'because those who do not have a religion have to find their own purpose, which is not always easy.'
- 'Why do you need a purpose if you don't believe?'
- 'Don't you need a reason to come out of bed every morning? To go to work, study, find meaning in the things you do?'
- 'You go to school and to work because you need to live, of course.'
That static, constrained view on every day life surprised me. I don't believe that that is why he came to this train station on a Thursday night to talk about God and the Bible to strangers like me.
- 'You know,' said the man, 'the world as it is, with all its misery, is not what God had had in mind. No, what God had envisaged was a lush garden where humans would live eternally. And look what we've made of it! Something went terribly wrong in the beginning. And now we're exploiting our natural resources and so on.'
I told him that that is what I was working on: sustainable use of natural resources. That in my view this habit of exploitation is not inevitable. There are ways to use natural resources sustainably. He said he was aware of some initiative here and there, but could not imagine these ever getting the scale needed to improve the fate of life on earth.
- 'Isn't that why Jesus drove the traders from the temple?' I asked, entering into his world of biblical stories. He was surprised:
- 'Ah, you do know something about the Bible!'
Then he started to explain in details of that story: that Jesus had driven the traders from the temple because they exploited the poor worshippers who came from too afar by selling them animals for sacrificial offering for high prices because their road was too long to bring their own.
I though it was an excellent parable to teach that the market place should never be the ultimate end and requires bounds to deliver both private and social value. The man had just explained that I shouldn't take the Bible too literally on the creation story, but now I was taking heed of that suggestion he refused my extended hand. I tried to build another bridge.
- 'You know, your vision of a lush garden and eternal life is not so different from mine. The very goal of sustainable development, which is where I find purpose, is a healthy planet that is tended by humanity in a way that it can sustain a life in dignity and good health for all members of current and future generations. The lush garden is the emerald planet; eternal life is that of the species rather than the individual (until the next big asteroid comes around or the sun runs out of fuel etc.). The Bible is a wise book, if you don't take it too literally. As for me, I choose to believe that humans, who, as you say, are God's own image, are capable of bringing closer that vision. I like a Antoine De Saint-ExupĂ©ry quote that's in the book in my lap, which says: "As for the future, your task is not to foresee but to enable it." That's why to your first question I replied the future will be better.'
It was time to catch my bus to Grenoble. I told the man that I'd enjoyed talking to him and that, in the end, we have more in common than I thought. Nonetheless, the divide is too fundamental to bridge in one conversation. In his philosophy the vision can only become reality in the afterlife, not on earth, and thus depends on the suffering on earth to continue. And so there is little point in trying to solve the wrongs in the world through human law and governance; the best we can do is to find comfort by submitting to God. In my view, there is no afterlife and the only place the vision could become reality is on earth. Therefore, I have no choice but to be optimistic.
The copy of The Watchtower, which the man hesitantly offered as we parted, I suggested he keep.

No comments:

Post a Comment