Let's Talk God- In Scientific Terms, That Is
Let's talk god in scientific terms.
In other words, after reading a portion of A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking, there came upon me an irrefutable logic and math acceptance of the Unified Field Theory of the universe's beginnings, that is, without all the mechanics and wave rationalities devised by scientists, the universe simply functions in such a way that if it functioned in any other way, it would not be real, that is, we would not be around to think about it, which as an aside brings up the question, if the universe fell in the forest would anyone of us know about it. Thus, we are living on chance and chance alone within neither an illogical god nor human like god who is perfect in the way that if god were not perfect then nothing would exist.
We haven't gone far, have we? Science has given us an updated modern version of the story than the one Jehovah's Witness adheres to, though the scientist tells us we don't live in a universe that will fall back on itself because gravity and wave theory obey certain logic (g0d), although it's like anything else, not everyone agrees. have to harken back to in Biblical days. Even official Catholic Church doctrine has accepted the Big Bang Theory of Creation as that scientific truth that seems to assimilate the Biblical story of creation with the Big Bang, the only difference being the days are longer in the Big Bang. But since we're talking billions of years, or maybe just millions, we'll just have to wait awhile to see whether or not Jehovah's Witness or Niels Bohr has the last say.
So far science has not discovered why g0d has such a high-risk personality like ours, because if we're truly made, and I assume try to act, in His image then He has a large degree of destructive capabilities or on the other side of the equation, the benefit of the doubt, we create our truths to suit our own purposes, a regulated revenge factory we must have in our heads or just the eventual Big Bank theory of the great economic minds of the twentieth century. Like the development of weapons, the evolving economic social planning didn't begin in the twentieth century. let's face it, our worst qualities, such as the desire to enslave, dominate, control, conquer has brought us to where we are now, spread out like some vicious self-inflicted addiction we don't know what to do about nor do we want to.
Addiction is not all about drugs and such things but the realization you can't afford what you think you need and absolutely have to have.
No wonder there are those who want to harken back to the days of Eden, which were probably just a little too boring for the young couple and if the lion didn't eat the lamb back then, where would the Discovery Channel end up. The funny thing is some people consider those stories history, unlike our mundane tendency now to break every momentous moment down into quarks and anti-matter. See, I am learning something from Mr Hawkings.
I guess I just figure what good does it do to base our lives on what we don't know about. I actually do believe that it wasn't that way until the modern age. Whatever the pre-history relatives didn't see, they didn't try and reason out why they didn't see it. Since every interpretation of what primitive peoples observed about the world came from the so called "historical record" which was nothing more than the then current day "media" reporting, the priests of the Spanish Conquistadors hovering over the naked bodies of Native Americans, trying to ascertain, from His perspective, what in Hell was going on, literally and figuratively.
In the meanwhile, science tread on the head of the church, and came up with an ambivalent god rather than a wrathful one. Mother Nature became the wrathful one to this day we see fire and brimstone as a way god uses Mother Nature to vent His purposes, unless, of course, He has Chosen People to suit His purposes in some areas of the world
In the meantime, trying to forgive superstition for all the ills of modern society isn't enough since science keeps on providing us with just enough technology to entertain us as well as kill us.
Along came John, It doesn't take a weatherman or a visionary to see that even though we may live in an ever expanding universe or one that may collapse back on itself, we're not going to be around in either case to see the end because the earth is finite, it's resources are finite, and the more we reproduce, gobble up anything artificial, maim and kill one another, we are in for big trouble.
I don't know much about the Bible or Quantum Particle or Wave Theory but I know some about both. I can say I can learn from the Bible how modern, supposed civilized people think about themselves and the world around them. I can see their history and it's as ugly as they think it's pretty, though they don't think it's too pretty because in the end somebody or something is going to have to save us, it's money in the bank. We aren't supposed to save each other because the Bible doesn't tell us so. We aren't going to go back to the Ice Age because science says we're not.
WE should all be asking ourselves, especially those who don't mind whether or not g0d is suicidal, whether or not we want to continue going down the same repetitive road. Why can't we accept the fact we're animals, animals with a technology addiction, but worse yet, a weakness (in the gene pool?) for using technology to kill each other and ourselves.
Sent from Mail for Windows
Post a Comment