Pale Blue Dot

I use the title with apology to Mr. Sagan.

It’s been a little while since I last posted, and I apologize for that. I’ve been out of town a lot recently. I still have more traveling that I have to do, so my posting may be irregular until I get settled down again. (I encourage those of you who manually check blogs to learn how to use an RSS Reader- it makes things much easier and saves an incredible amount of time.)

I came across an interesting thought while reading a post on rhetoric sans pareil, Ubiquitous Che’s blog. (Sorry Che, I don’t plan to respond to every one of your posts, but they do get me thinking).

For those of you who don’t remember or are new readers, Ubiquitous Che is a “bright,” or an atheist who, instead of attacking theism, aims to promote the positives and beauty a naturalistic worldview.

In the post, Che makes a culinary analogy: he compares religion to a primitive dish, and natural science to a gourmet meal. People who cling to religion are only eating fast food, and cannot grasp the taste of a fine meal without trying it.

He makes it his goal to prepare an elegant meal to showcase the Bright worldview, and then posts a video of Carl Sagan. For those of you who aren’t familiar with PBS stars from the eighties, Carl Sagan was a very famous astronomer and skeptic of religion. He wrote the book Contact, which was later made into a movie. Here is the video Che posted:

First of all, I just want to make sure people understand, religion and science are not enemies. Theists should not treat science as a threat to be destroyed, and it is very, very important for theists to remember that, whatever part of science is currently in the scope of religion, be it evolution or abiogenesis or whatever, if science is correct on the issue it is part of God’s marvelous creation and deserves to be treated as such. I don’t claim to know all the ways of the Almighty, and certainly won’t tell Him how I think He should have done something.

What’s funny is, I see no incompatibility with this video and theism. On the contrary, this video actually superbly illustrates an oft-overlooked facet of theism: God is immense and powerful. His being is larger than we can ever know in this earthly shell. He is bigger than us. To Him, we are insignificant, we are nothing.

Except that, to Him, we are something. Although we are nothing more than a speck of dust, He loves us, and sent His son to die for us. The Creator and Lord of the Universe, sent His only Son to die, so that a pale blue dot would not have to suffer for its own crimes.

Frederick William Faber, a British hymn writer in the 1800s, wrote these words:

Great God! our lowliness take heart to play
Beneath the shadow of Thy state;
The only comfort of our littleness
Is that Thou art so great.

As Carl said in the video, astronomy is a humbling experience. “Humbling” is the perfect word to describe this. We need to remember that we are not as great as we sometimes think we are, and all of our doings, all of our accomplishments, all of our failures, all of our daily rituals, all of our trials, all of our problems, all of our worries, take place on a pale blue dot, a mere speck suspended in the presence of the Lord of the Universe.

But this Lord of the Universe, this God, will take care of the dot.

4 Responses to “Pale Blue Dot”

  1. This is a good post and serves as a reminder to us. The beauty of science, nature, and the world around us reminds us of the Lord that created it all. When I look at the universe I am constantly reminded of the vastness of His wonderful creation. He will take care of us, as a part of His creation.

  2. Hey man.

    Sorry Che, I don’t plan to respond to every one of your posts, but they do get me thinking.

    No worries. I’m actually a little bit flattered that you’re keeping tabs on me.

    I’d just like to contrast this:

    Except that, to Him, we are something. Although we are nothing more than a speck of dust, He loves us, and sent His son to die for us. The Creator and Lord of the Universe, sent His only Son to die, so that a pale blue dot would not have to suffer for its own crimes.

    With this:

    Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some priviledged position in the universe are challenged by this pont of pale light… There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world.

    The overall message of the clip was that we are not priveledged – our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. That we’re on our own, and there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

    To me, this is a strongly atheistic – perhaps even antitheistic – message. There is no God coming to save us from the consequences of our own actions, there is nowhere we can run to if we render our planet unlivable. Our planet is the sole stage on which all our lives will play out. It is a delicate, fragile, and minute stage. It is heartbreakingly fragile and precious – hence the need to take care of it, and each other, all the more.

    To try and show that this video is making an argument that God is out there, loves us, and is looking after us is the exact antithesis of what this clip is actually trying to communicate.

  3. Che,

    Good point. I certainly wasn’t trying to make this video out to be an argument for theism. I know Carl Sagan was an atheist (or at least a strong skeptic), and to make this an argument for theism would be to twist the words, as you pointed out above.

    My original intent was to contrast the video with the Christian worldview. An atheist and a Christian might respond very differently to the grainy photo taken by Voyager I. An atheist would probably have Carl Sagan’s reaction, that this humbling photograph shows that we live on a small, fragile speck alone, with no place to go and no one to save us. A Christian would have a very similar reaction. A Christian would also be humbled by this lonely picture, but also know something else. For some reason, this tiny dot is of immense importance to the Creator of the Universe. This is not meant to cause an upwelling of pride, but instead causes a profound humbleness, that Someone so big values so much something so small.

    If there are no objections, I may edit the post to better reflect my original intent. If I do, I’ll make a note of it in the post.

  4. That’s just way too courteous. :D

    I have no further objections to anything – now that you’ve clarified it, I can see where you were coming from, and I should have taken a moment’s pause to think about it a bit more and give you the benefit of the doubt.

    I don’t even see any need to edit the original post – the comments speak for themselves. But if you want to edit it, I have no complaints. Do as you will.

Leave a Reply