Dear Peter Sellick,

You wrote, "It is an item of faith for natural scientists that the world had its origins and processes within the bounds of natural cause and effect."

It is not an item of faith for the scientific view of the origins of the world. There is scientific evidence from astronomic observations, rates of decay of radioactive substances, fossils etc.

It is an item of faith for the religious view of the origins of the universe. Faith and the creation stories promoted by faith are the product of people who do not have the benefit of or the knowledge of science. They cloak their ignorance by accusing scientists of operating on the same kind of ignorance. The first sentence of your article exposes your ignorance. May you examine the evidence and be enlightened.

Dear David F.,

«It is an item of faith for the religious view of the origins of the universe.»

I rather describe such behaviour as faithlessness: why would a religious person care to know the origins of this universe in the first place? Such a person is not truly interested in God - they may say the are, yet they still like to play around in the mud of this world, they still secretly have faith in this world, believing it can bring them lasting happiness, believing it to be true (and God to be false)!

Dear Yuyutsu,

You asked, "Dear David F.,

"why would a religious person care to know the origins of this universe in the first place?"

Because the religious person may not be brain dead and wishes to know more than what is taught within his or her religion. Your religion may have cut you off from a desire for knowledge. The desire for knowledge does not always conflict with a religious attitude.

Quotes from Hillel, the elder.

"What you yourself hate, don't do to your neighbor. This is the whole law; the rest is commentary. Go and study."

“That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn."

"The shy man will not learn; the impatient man should not teach."

"Say not: “When I have free time I shall study”, for you may perhaps never have any free time."

Hillel did not limit learning to Torah or any particular area, and I don't see why I or anyone else should do so.

Einstein said, “I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions ..."

Believers in God can maintain that learning more about the universe is learning more about God.

Dear David,

«The desire for knowledge does not always conflict with a religious attitude.»

A desire for worldly knowledge beyond what is required to serve God and do His calling (as is the impractical desire to know the origins of the universe), competes over one's attention. Not the actual knowledge of course, only the desire to obtain it.

One cannot serve two masters simultaneously.

Alternately yes, and indeed most of us are neither completely religious nor completely irreligious - our attention keeps wavering and alternating between God and the world.

«Einstein said, “I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions ..."»

If noticing the harmony helps one to concentrate on God, then that is good... until they notice some disharmony, some ugliness and cruelty, which as we know, exists too: would Einstein turn away from God at that point?

«Believers in God can maintain that learning more about the universe is learning more about God.»

True, I concede. I have not seen that possibility. They would be naively mistaken, but that situation is possible and it is this child-like intention which counts.

Again, what would happen to them when they discover the ugly and cruel aspects of the universe? Will they conclude that God too is ugly and cruel?

Dear Yuyutsu,

Unfortunately you remind me of a man I used to work with. He had been an officer in the navy and asked me, "What is your need to know?" when I asked a question not confined to my immediate task. Some of the military are concerned with secrecy so they wish to confine a person's knowledge to that of their immediate task. Some religionists such as St. Thomas consider curiosity a vice. They believe one should confine one's questioning to that which is useful in the pursuit of one's faith. I believe curiosity is a virtue, and any attempt to limit human curiosity is a tyranny on the human mind. To say to a human, "You must not question in certain areas" is to cripple that human. I wish to be a free person. One characteristic of a free person is the mind of that person is free to go where it will and investigate where it will. The type of religion that will limit that capacity is crippling and, I believe, evil.

Dear David,

I oppose any form of external constraints on what one may or may not investigate.

As one matures, becomes disappointed of what the world can offer and wants God badly enough, their curiosity will drop by itself, effortlessly. There will be no sense of loss of freedom, it is like when a girl grows up, gets more interested in peers and forgets about all her companion dolls that till then were so precious to her.