Divine intervention is no solution

By George Nyabuga

As apparently highly religious people, Kenyans are constantly reminded to pray; that God will solve their problems. Indeed, leaders and ordinary people are increasingly and unquestionably turning to prayer, pleading with the all-powerful Supreme Being to intercede for us in our attempts to find solutions for our political, social and economic problems. Never mind, of course, that most of the problems are of our own making.

Whilst I have no problem with people’s religious beliefs, it beggars belief that such simplistic solutions should be sought for the serious earthly problems facing this country. Although considered paganish, the dictum that God helps those who help themselves makes great sense to Kenyans seeking and working hard to find practical solutions to real problems. Now consider the views of the head of the Church of England, the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams. Although a highly ‘pious’ man, he expresses pragmatic views on the role of God, and what He can or cannot do. Even though specifically referring to the need to protect the environment, Williams’s view that God will not intervene to prevent humanity from wreaking disastrous damage to ourselves and the world rings true for many of us who would like us to seize the opportunity to utilise whatever faculties and opportunities the omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, benevolent Supreme Being has bequeathed us. Williams posited "… to suggest that God might intervene to protect us from the corporate folly of our practices is as unchristian and unbiblical as to suggest that He protects us from the results of our individual folly or sin." Speaking at York Minster in UK on Wednesday, Williams further acknowledged that "God’s faithfulness stands, assuring us that even in the most appalling disaster, love will not let us go — but it will not be a safety net that guarantees a happy ending in this world."

Immoral opinions

As an expert on Christianity and religion, assuming that he got the position due to competency in religious matters or theology, he stands in good stead to lecture and advise us on God however immoral and impious some of his opinions may seem. Accordingly, Williams’s pragmatic approach is fundamental to dealing with some serious global issues, and undoubtedly supports the notion that God would help whoever helps himsef/herself. Such somewhat controversial views coming from a man of the cloth would almost be unheard of in the country due to what I would consider imaginary fears occupying those unwilling to ‘offend’ in the name of upholding religious doctrine however dogmatic that may be. Of course, Williams is not infallible, and his views or errors are definitely corrigible and of course challengeable.

However, to claim divine intervention may help abate the maladies afflicting Kenya is to engage in meaningless activity. Such irreligious sentiments may be considered blasphemous but the truth be told, we cannot continue to pray in the face of impeding catastrophes of our own making. To acquiescence to such views of divine intervention or keep quiet when expressed would be a demonstration of how terrified we are of scepticism, and that we are indeed culpable of upholding religious dogma even when we are rational human beings.

Are we not ready to criticise religious views for fear of being branded agnostic or atheistic? In a country where religious fervour seems to permeate every facet of society, it would indeed be injurious to the feelings of the many existing and would-be believers. I am not a reprobate for questioning such religious zeal exalted by some in high office who would rather we did not doubt their intentions for seeking to use those positions to put forth their own beliefs to us. In short, I cannot countenance the possibility there is a higher being whose intervention we can seek to solve problems created by ourselves without, at the very least, taking a proactive approach to the resolution of the same.

I am still holding to my idea that God will attempt to help us if we try to help ourselves first, if at all I buy into the idea that there is a God in the first place.

Pleasant falsehoods

I dare enunciate that the idea that divine intervention is one of those pleasant falsehoods, which we seem to repeat until they seem to pass into commonplace but which all palpable experience refutes. This may be considered heretic but it should stir some thought into how we should put into greater use the faculties God has bestowed upon us to do whatever is necessary to deliver ourselves from the troubles we currently find ourselves in. I further propose we completely extirpate the notion that God will heed our cry for intervention when we continue to engage in corruption, murder, plunder and other political, social and economic wrongs. I may be a devil’s advocate but it is commonplace to hear people parroting popular opinions because they have never been controverted. Talk of divine intervention should in effect be extirpated from any serious society seeking practical solutions to real problems.

I have argued before that it is important to engage in an enlightenment process in the country, similar to the experience in Europe (the 18th century movement that stressed the importance of reason and replacement of religion and superstition with science and rationality), and question the dogmatic religious beliefs and especially the capacity of religion and prayer to provide us with answers and remedies for maladies created by ourselves.

I still hold these views.

The writer ([e-mail]) is a lecturer, and media consultant