How Should We Study God?

I've been thinking lately, about this whole "Creation vs. Evolution" debate, and the broader animosity between Scientists and Theologians. I think we often feel the need to validate one to the other, Science to Theology or Theology to Science, as if we have been tasked with this, and as if we had the ability to accomplish such a validation.

I think there is an inherent flaw in the whole debate, however. Science is concerned with the quantifiable, that which can be recreated and studied. It is concerned with the study of the natural universe, and that is certainly a dauntingly huge subject to comprehend. Science, however, is by very definition unable to viably discuss the "supernatural", and this is a good thing.

See, the study of any God or Deity with the ability to create an entire universe, of which our planet is merely an atom orbiting a molecule inside of a speck floating in the vast expanse of space, would be far too large an undertaking for science. Creation is unquantifiable, and it can't be replicated. There is no possible point of reference to the power of a Creator, because all of creation is within the Creator's realm of possibility, and we can know nothing that is not in that realm of possibility, except for the preposterous things that we attempt to describe in big words to give us the illusion of understanding (string theory, anyone?). Even those things are within our imagination, which is a part of the brain, which is itself simply replicated cells replicating and multiplying and living and dying.

No, Science cannot, and should not, endeavor to understand our Creator, and neither should Theology attempt to finagle its way into the Scientific. Both sides, both groups of people, fancy themselves and their areas of expertise to be far more than they actually are. God, or whatever creative force you choose to believe in, seems to have made this distinction quite apparent, even going so far as to give us the words "Natural" and "Supernatural" to describe the two separate realms. Theology is concerned with the Supernatural, and should not attempt to impose the Supernatural upon the Natural (although living out the Supernatural will in the natural world, for the benefit of the world and the pleasure of the Supernatural, is certainly within the Theological discussion).

Instead, we've been given Art, which is not limited by rules or logic, but merely by available materials, talents, and imagination. As I wrote previously in response to a friendly discussion on Facebook, I think the realm of art, that which is for the most part immeasurable (and at certain times and from certain perspectives seemingly pointless) is a more proper realm to discuss the sum and substance of God. Our creative artistic ability and appreciation is the very meaning of being created "in the Image" of our Creator.

I think Art itself attests to it's necessity in the human experience. This is why so many stories de-humanize certain people groups or alien groups by taking away or severely limiting their ability or desire for the arts. Two examples I can think of are V for Vendetta and the newer Star Trek iterations. In V for Vendetta, V is fighting essentially for England's right to humanity, her people's right to the Arts and to disagreement and all of that which is part of the human experience. In the Star Trek series, the Borg are introduced as a "collective" in which people lose their identity for the benefit of the nearly invincible collective. The show constantly presents humanity and individuality as the one thing that defeats this otherwise overpowering force.

I believe that the Arts are our conduit to God, our best method of understanding our Creator. I believe there is an overlap into Theology, which is the best method for understanding our role and relationship with the Creator. I believe Science should be free from discussions about our Creator, and instead busy itself with this vast and beautiful creation.