"God of the Gaps"

One night this weekend, we were watching TV while playing a card game, and at one point we were watching the 700 club - which I guess is some Christian show. They started interviewing people who had experienced significant miracles. I was struck in a rather big way by the contrast and yet comparison between these people who were so convinced that God was the explanation for the unexplainable events in their lives and some of the stuff that I have read throughout my time as a history major (both in college and grad school) about the idea that God has been constructed as a way to explain the unexplainable. I was sitting at the kitchen table at my aunt and uncle's house, playing a game with them, suddenly struck in a very large way with the ways in which some of the things I had been mulling over were being addressed by this tv show. Long story short, I don't know how I feel about tv shows (or anything, for that matter) that consist of Christians attempting to convince the world of God's existence by using Him as an explanation for the unexplainable. Of course, He does explain the unexplainable. But if that becomes our entire rationale and basis for belief in God, I believe that there are major problems ahead. I definitely believe that miracles do happen and that some things cannot be explained. However, in light of history, I am very concerned about our adoption of the "God of the gaps" theory. One hundred years ago, there were many more things that science and medicine did not explain. God was the explanation for these things. With the advance of science, however, some of those things that God used to be the explanation for no longer require God. This is a problem if we assume that science will continue to advance. I started thinking - what is my belief in God based on? And what happens when those things come to have alternate, "scientific" explanations? Suddenly my God ceases to be necessary.

Of course, this assumes a number of things that I am not entirely comfortable assuming. First, it assumes that science is a valid explanation for natural phenomena. Second, it assumes that science could continue to advance (in theory, to a point where it explains everything). I do not believe that this will ever happen, given my belief in the inherent imperfections of humanity.

Leaving these reservations to the side, though, there may be something to be said about considering a scenario in which science offers explanations for pretty much everything. If science were to continue to advance to a place where it explained pretty much everything, would my faith have a basis? Of course, there are probably ways in which this is a relevant question for even today. After all, many scoff at miracles, and always have, attributing them to either an alternate scientific explanation or claiming that the person claiming them to be an instance of the miraculous is simply mistaken in some way or another. In this sort of world, where God is not considered necessary, what is my faith based on? Have I (and the world at large) divorced science from God to such an extent that as science advances, God is pushed out?

And, of course, this entire train of thought is somewhat superfluous, because, of course, God can never cease to exist. He cannot be pushed out. I am simply concerned about the state of some portions of Christianity that seem to need to defend their belief in God based solely on the miraculous. And perhaps I am completely off on some pointless rabbit trail. Even writing this, I'm wondering if there is any point to my rant. Sorry.

Derailed

haha.