Some people are prone to attributing daily events in their lives to God’s will.
‘It is God’s will that I fell sick last week. I must have done something wrong.’
‘God helped us today by keeping the rain out during our picnic. Notice how it started raining as soon as we were back home.’
‘God, if only I am successful in the upcoming interview, I promise you an abhisheka.’
All of these statements make it seem as though there is an entity who is controlling the weather, listening to our prayers and influencing these events like a puppet master. But this permits athiests and skeptics to raise uncomfortable questions. How does one explain inconsistencies? What if two people, equally devout, pray for the same promotion? And how important are we that the weather of an entire region, on which millions of creatures are impacted by, be relagated to our little picnic?
The philosopher Spinoza was a devout person, but he defined God as the ‘fixed and unchangeable order of nature’. He held God responsible for the angles of every triangle magically adding up to 180 degrees. His God was manifest in the natural laws of Physics and Mathematics. He stated that God’s law is to all creatures in the world, the laws of circles are to all circles.
Spinoza’s God wasn’t the enforcer of natural order, but natural order itself. In that case, to do God’s will is to merely understand the laws of nature and to live our lives in sync with them.
Isn’t such a definition of God also compatible with atheism?