OMG ….. Where Are You?

I’ve never enjoyed the idea of preaching to the choir.  It often seems a “boast” of one’s skill or talent.  Though if the aim is for a crowd it’s a good place to start.  I’ve also heard practice makes perfect.

So, let’s see if I get it right this time.  And, if the choir brings a crowd that would be nice too.

Of course, the central question here will get different answers depending who you ask.  Even more stark is the contrast which emerges, pitting atheists against the choir.  And, while I wouldn’t presume to tell either of them if they’re wrong, or right, my heart has always been with the choir….  yet I’m already off point, aren’t I?

Therefore, lets just say these words are not about taking “sides.”  They don’t come from “a choir,” or from any “nonbeliever.”  These words are meant to ponder, nothing more.  If they mean to do anything it’s to cause “us” to think.

So again I ask, “where is God?”

The world we live in is full of many phenomena that defy explanation or reason.  God is surely one of them.  And, your inclination toward religion will certainly persuade the view. In fact, religion is cause for much of the phenomena we see, God notwithstanding.

There is the Turin Shroud.  I for one was fascinated by this for years.  There is also the Bible Code, which inspired an entire subculture within the Jewish faith.

Other phenomena we encounter is more scientific, such as the light barrier.  Quantum entanglement, and  Schrödinger’s catcan also be placed in this category.  Still, other examples remain more science-fiction, like the “alien abduction,” or UFO.

Depending on your world view you will to relate to each of these phenomena quite differently.  But whatever your inclination it is important to remember, that to learn you must first be objective.

Take the Bible Code, for example. Those inclined to Chaos Theory might believe a copy of “This Old House” could or should yield similar results.  On the other hand, it is compelling how so many specific names and birth dates of Jewish Rabbis, born thousands of years after the Old Testament, appear within its text.

Where some focus on the tendency for numbers and systems to arise in these situations, others focus on who embedded the code and why the information is there.  In either case there could be several reasons.  It takes a fair mind to consider them all.

If one believes that results in Bible Codes are random, I would remind that numbers remain the only known “universal language,” and one we have yet to fully define.  And, if someone were to ask who (as in, God, aliens, or humans from another time or place) could have encoded the Bible, I would say it is worth defining what “who” really means.

Seems it is often easier for us to accept the idea of “aliens,” or “random chaos,” rather than God, when it comes to explaining these things.  As though this were somehow “more” plausible given the nature of our world and the universe its in.  Chaos does seem abound at times.  Certainly alien life is also plausible – as we sit surrounded – billions of star systems among us (see Drake equation for estimates).  But, if we look at the universe and ask, “just what is going on,” what do we really know?  And if we are to find out, where should we begin?

Well, if we wish to know we should begin where we would with anything else.  We should begin with an open mind.

What does it mean to be “living” in the universe?  What are the different forms life may take?  As we’ve seen the argument for life beyond our planet, or “alien” life, is hard to ignore. However, more interesting I suggest is the idea we could, at this point, define what “alien” life should mean if we encountered it.

Is it possible “alien” life is out there, sure.  Is it also possible that “alien” life may take a form we do not recognize, or could not measure, or understand – Astrobiology seems to think so.  So, is it not also possible that “alien” life may be God, or some creation force similar in perspective?

If you concede the former, then again the answer here is yes.

Now does this mean that ”little green men” created life, probably not.  While some folks claim to have seen aliens or even fall prey to their late night abductions, I can’t say that I’ve shared this experience. No, the intent here is not to suggest that aliens are God, rather it is to suggest that God is alien.

“God is alien.” 

I’m sure that sentence is strange and disturbing for many to say.  However, the concept of God is “alien;” the power God is said to have is “awesome.”  God’s power is unlike us.  By definition therefore, God and his power are “alien.”

In fact, excluding the Biblical claim for Christ’s resurrection, and the Earth itself, it seems “God” is hardly terrestrial at all.  So it shouldn’t be a surprise if we don’t readily understand “the concept.” 

Of course, if God is a mystery or something we cannot understand how will we know if he is there?  The choir will tell you the universe itself is proof.  Others say that life is the result of random evolution, and that space is just an anomaly made of dust and gas.  Still, others point to community and the church.  But again, what do we really know? 

Let’s ask some questions.

What if life on Earth was seeded and evolution a built in mechanic of the process? What if the water in a comet is in some cases laden with the amino acids and proteins necessary for life, and it was a comet which originally brought life to Earth? What if something “alien” had placed those proteins in that comet and comets are just bouncing around thru space waiting to “spread their word?”

Furthermore, what if the “house of mirrors” we call our universe (constructed of a light horizon which is literally the universe’s past), is just scenery next to Earth’s “special place?”  What if the universe we see is a ruse, bending light, forecasting times gone by, just a meaningless spectacle?

Is it possible the universe is a distraction; something which begs our questions, but where perspective never gains “the answer?”

Think about it.  The nearest star to Earth, Proxima Centauri, is over 4 light years (ly) away. That is 26,453,249,163,839 miles from Earth (or, 26 trillion, 453 billion, 249 million, 164 thousand miles).  And get this, if you jumped in your car and tried to drive to that star (at 60mph) it would take you 50,329,622 years to get there (or 50 million, 330 thousand years). In other words, when you look at that star you are seeing what occurred 4.24 years ago.

Talk about perspective.  So where’s the distraction?  

Well, if you apply this perspective to the universe as a whole you quickly see there is a problem. The problem being, we have no idea what is going on. All we know, according to the best science and theory, is what has been going on.

Its unfortunate the universal speed limit is so restricting, as special relativityinsists. Then maybe we could move about, at least see what is going on with our nearest neighbor, Proxima Centauri. Even so, 128,000 miles per second would be nowhere near fast enough to travel (much) beyond Proxima Centauri.  And, forget exploring the universe.  It would take over 100,000 years just to cross our own galaxy at that rate; infinite mass and the time paradox aside.

And so it seems we are stuck right here in our corner of the cosmos, on an outer arm of the Milky Way.

But then, maybe there’s nothing to see out there, except thru our telescopes.  As I said, it could just be a ruse. Maybe we should accept we will never really know what the universe means. Either that, or we must redefine our understanding of physics.  And even then, what would redefining our understanding of physics advise us?

To project such ideas (inter-dimensional travel, warping space, parallel universes, etc.) is really just to guess, even when done by today’s greatest minds.

Given the existing theories as to how or when the universe may have been created,  science is nowhere near having determined from “what.”  Certainly physicists offer some of the best ideas as to the energies and forces required herein, but were suddenly an existing theory proven most experts will admit this would only present more, far greater, questions.  In other words, none existing theories can say what lies beyond “a singularity,” or (in the case of M-theory) within what form a template “membranes” should exist – let alone how to factor “an infinity” relative to 11 dimensional space.

Thus, when we make these sorts of guesses it does seem to put us back at the doorstep of a potential “creative force,” or God.  Does it not?

Once again we must ask, “how does something come from nothing?”  The “immortal question” which has, so far, always emerged.

Still, science would like us to believe we know what is happening in the far reaches of our galaxy at this very moment.  And who can blame them?  It’s an easy trap to fall into.  But remember, none of what we see in the universe is really happening, or at least very little of it. What we see has already happened.

For instance, many probably think as they hear astronomers speak we know what is happening in Andromeda, our nearest galaxy. But how could we? Andromeda is 2.5 million ly from Earth. What does that mean in miles? Try 14,696,240,000,000,000,000,000 (or 1.46962495 x 1019).  I don’t even know how to put a number like that into words. But if I tried I’d say it means, “we have no idea what is happening in Andromeda today.” We only know what did happen, two and half million years ago.

Using the “The Origin of Species” as our reference (modern biology’s reason for man’s existence) man was likely still on all fours when the light we see from Andromeda began its journey toward Earth.  For a better idea of what this looks like click here.

Given all this, one has to wonder if the galaxies around us even still exist?  Could it be they were nothing more than a prelude to this one…. yes, no…… maybe?

Odd as it sounds, we have no way to tell.

And what about this, if as astronomy suggests our universe is 13.8 billion years old, then what is true about light beyond the timeline which gives us that measurement (as it pertains to the Observable Universe”)? In other words, we have no way of knowing what exists (in the form of measurable light) beyond a radius from our planet’s own position of 13.8 billion ly.

Again, the subtleties defy us. How can we see and measure beyond what light has had time to reach us here on Earth?  And, if we did what would it tell us?

It really is amazing …. when you think about it.  The universe is so big, and our understanding of it so small.  Do you think there might be room for “Intelligent Design” out there, somewhere …..  in all that …… vastness? 

Here it is important to remember, that relatively speaking man is a species only moments from creation. And, as such we watch television programs and read books, many of which suggest we have a “near complete” understanding of the ether and forces that surround us. We examine a fossil record “likely” recording few of Earth’s “total” inhabitants, of which maybe 5% is in good condition.  And, should believe we’ve “figured it out?” 

What about subuction?   What about the Cambrian explosion?  I submit we may know very little about life on our own planet, let alone what it means to be “living in the universe.”

Maybe the Large Hadron Collider can change that.  It has been online since October 2008, and though this science does take time there have been no substantial discoveries yet.  (Edit: A suspcious particle reaction was measured by scientists at the LHC in July 2012, early rumors suggest it could be the elusive Higgs Boson).

So my friends, fellow atheists and theists alike, while we wait on the LHC or some other discovery let’s practice humility. There is so much we do not know. 

For this reason our faith in man is a good thing.  We must believe we can find the answers.  We will endure thoughts of God and question our existence. But as we do it is important not to fall into traps that would cause us only to emphasize already held notions. For as we explore, it seems sometimes it is our faith in man which matters most, and what we find only reinforces “personal beliefs” about what the world is and what it means to be in it. 

Thankfully many are searching. 

As we do, our searches will lead us through many heavens.  There is much to behold.  We will explore numbers and quantum particles.  We will explore each other and our souls.  We explore in search of purpose.  And maybe, if the search yields nothing else, then our purpose becomes the pursuit and our “truth” realized in it’s quest.

But whatever the case, we should remain inspired and try to stay objective.  God’s signature may be out there. It could even be here within our midst.  Though wherever we find it, and whenever we find it, we might also expect that before it awaits a few words – a brief entry which gathered all those numbers we explore, and our personal beliefs – a message which points back at ourselves and told:

 .

“It is better to understand the universe within us than to understand one which is out of reach.”

.

For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love – Carl Sagan

 

Advertisements

57 responses to “OMG ….. Where Are You?

  1. Interesting commentary and one which has traveled around the world since there was a world, I suppose. The crux lies in the confusion and tangling up of “religion” with “God” and other ‘gods’ and psychobabble. It’s very common to mankind, to wonder,guess and pontificate over things we don’t understand. I would guess the vase majority of us do just that. But when seeing clearly, it’s all very easy to understand. Once we seek and smack dab into the middle of the truth, we can choose to see or to close our eyes. The truth isn’t religion, or gods or mystics in the universe or secret codes. But the Living Son of God who can, will and does answer the most important questions.

    • Yes, people get confused with those terms, religion, God, gods, and much of it is psychobabble today, and contortion of semantics, and much of it is engineered to confuse the audience.

      But after a journey starting at atheism, my mind trod through facts, history, science and logic to the inevitable conclusion from evidence that God is real, the real world is as the Bible describes it.

      • Yes my journey also started “indifferent” … to the evidence. My faith is challenged daily but, like you, I’ve seen the world’s splendor and find truth in the word.

  2. Yes … the aim of this piece was to bring into question some of the assumptions necessary for a “western paradigm,” that depends on certain “axioms” of evolution & astronomy in order to maintain an atheistic view. When taken for granted these “axioms” are then used to refute “intelligent design” by somehow reinforcing beliefs an “infinite universal template,” having been established by an “infinite intelligence” or other “conscious creative force,” is an idea which is either shortsighted or naïve.

    However when fully considered, the uncertainties which remain in sciences relevant to this argument seem to suggest the opposite; or it at least they imply no grounds for asserting atheism as fact. Atheism therefore in this light can be understood to be “paradigm,” as much as anything else; and the idea it has some basis for disproving God, or “intelligent design,” is therefore a notion exceedingly more shortsighted and naïve than a view which genuinely accepts “intelligent design” as possible, given the available information.

    Nevertheless, while many atheists argue Occam’s razor or the need for “creationists” to prove a negative in this matter, faith or evidence of God must enter the equation for them if they are to give up a “godless/evolution” world view (or, “the paradigm). Which, for them, leaves no place for conversation on the topic without use of demonstrable data, and for “creationists,” no choice in lieu of faith, but to point out the data’s contradictory evidence; IE – we now have a conversation atheists can relate to.

    Though I would argue in return, with regard to Occam’s razor, “then, why anything at all?”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

    Of course the idea of faith, as you mentioned, is important here, and something I have personally experienced. Though, it is not something one can quantify for anyone not willing to listen, as well as it is subject to emotion and/or life experience. Its true life experiences do provide the most profound evidence for causing a “non believer” to reevaluate their “paradigm,” provided they understand how paradigm performs here. However, any new awareness brought on by such experiences are in the end only as profound, and considered, as the individual experiencing them; and are therefore not in control of others.

    As such, the piece focuses purely on available data which can be proven, and suggests regardless of one’s world view, that while God may be difficult to prove, a “godless evolution” (or atheism) is nowhere near been proven either. And, given this is the case, one must ask, “if a person selectively sifts evidence in order to reinforce a “paradigm,” why would someone consciously select a “paradigm” which is absent of God?”

  3. Very well-put. Can you believe I have never thought of the Universe that way– as a “house of mirrors” reflecting the past, and likely containing things we cannot even see yet because the light is still traveling to reach us? You have given me lots of great food god thought. I also have always believed that if there is a God or other life in the Universe, who’s to say we could sense it with one or any combination of our 5 human, earthly senses? ET life probably has senses that we as humans don’t possess, and it could be that we’re in each others’ midsts but we simply have no capacity to sense– see, hear, etc.– each other in any way.

      • That’s so funny …. and kind of “awesome” (wonder if “he/she” was correcting you) =P

        I think you are absolutely correct though to say, dimensionally speaking, an “infinite” intelligence could be within our midst and we would never know. I have been meaning to edit this piece to include more information about that very notion;.

        IE – infinity as a concept has very similar properties to zero when quantified. Its true nature in fact can be considered “zero, having value,” as opposed to the integer zero, which is mathematically “zero, equaling none.” As such, infinity can never be compared to any other number. Consider:

        If I am infinity and you are a finite object (or quantity) and you try to raise your power to match mine, you would take one step closer to me. However, I will always take one step back rendering your gained value to zero. As such, a finite quantity can never have “true value,” next to infinity, and a finite object (which the “observable universe” appears to be) sitting within infinity (or, “infinite template”) would always have a value of zero, where the value of infinity next to that finite object would always be “1.”

        If you consider the universe in such a way, one quickly understands how the “observable universe” may not be so big at all; and how something “infinite in nature” could be at (and when) all points within a finite object (or “experience”) simultaneously. Furthermore, attempts to measure something “infinite in nature” would result in the same situation I describe above IE – it would “step away” with every measurement.

        And so, as you said, it could be in our midst and we would never know; much like a boat on top of a lake, unaware of all that lies beneath =]

        Anyway, thanks for sharing. I will keep checking in on you. Really enjoy your writing and the things you have to say.

      • Ahhh, I love your discourse on infinity here. You have a great mind, my friend. Your statements about numbers as the universal language and your use thereof remind me of a book I’ve been meaning to read for years now. I heard the authors speak about it on “The Paranormal Podcast.” It’s called “11:11 The Time Prompt Phenomenon” by Marie D. Jones and Larry Flaxman. They cover the ideas that the Universe can essentially be condensed down to a sort of “morse code” of mathematic equations, and that God, in fact, may be a number. (I should bump this one up on my reading list….)

  4. Having read the commentary, I will make a few observations which may not be in any specific order. Before I respond however, I have a question or two that I would like you to consider;

    I would want you to tell me what you mean by god and intelligent design among other things. And while at it, i would also be happy if you can give evidence for the existence of a god so defined and also examples for intelligent design.

    And now my response….

    To the question of whether there is a god. I don’t think there is evidence for the existence of one, so I would not say there is anything that would suggest he/she or it exists. As you say you have not been visited or abducted by aliens, neither have I so I can’t say whether they exist or they don’t.

    On intelligent design, is there any reason to think life forms were designed?

    On the beginning of life, as you have mentioned, evolution explains how life has progressed on earth from simple to complex organisms whereas bio-genesis is concerned primarily with how life began.

    To posit god as an explanation for anything doesn’t answer any of our important questions of why and how. Or does it?

    I don’t know how much you have studied the history of the bible, it’s authors and their audience to know that most if not all the stories written there are written after the fact. Two, that it is misrepresentation of facts, is full of absurdities and inconsistencies?

    All knowledge begins with doubt and so it is well to doubt what science has shown us, but if I may, between what we know through science and what is written in the so called holy books, which would you rather we use? Which of the two attempts successfully to explain our realities as we observe them? Why do you doubt man’s ability to understand what goes on around here without reference to gods or supernatural deities?

    Why would we abolish reason and instead opt for faith? What does faith explain? How does faith help us in understanding the universe and whatever else is in it?

    Atheism is not a paradigm. It is lack of belief in gods. It has nothing to do with evolution. I do not want to get into the discussion on evolution here since as you said in the beginning of the post you are singing to the choir and I am sure that choir is not atheist choir, I on the other hand wouldn’t want to bang my head against a stone wall. I, however, encourage you to consider the evidence for evolution.

    You may call the advances made by cosmologists and astrophysicists guesses which mean nothing, but I would point it out again that they give us a far much better information than all the religious books put together.

    O. Makagutu

    • Troymo,
      You asked for my thoughts, I have to say I share Makagutu’s position. The only I thing I’d point out, which he implied but didn’t say outright, is that I have the impression you’re approaching thought from the wrong angle. You’re starting with conclusions and trying to fill in answers. That’s almost always a defective method. You have to start with questions and then collect evidence which will prove, disprove, support or nullify your hypotheses. By doing it the way you’re doing it, you’re left mostly with unverifiable speculation.

    • I do not refute advances in physics or astronomy, nor do I refute evolution, or make any claims of fact with regard to any of the known religions. As well, my stating that “guesses made in physics mean nothing,” was simply a way of pointing out that when guesses are made about the nature of things beyond the known laws and forces, the role infinity might play in this remains “unknown;” and therefore our ability to rule out an “infinite template,” or “infinite intelligence,” which may have been cause for some “intelligent design,” and how this may or may not play a role, also cannot be understood; therefore these are all guesses just the same.

      That said I do not disagree with you that guesses made by physicists seem to offer much better rational than anything offered as “literal” by any of the worlds religions. However, at this point, there is no way of knowing if such rational by physicists could indeed point to “intelligent design,” or otherwise.

      Actually, I find it interesting that anyone would read this article and determine I have made any conclusion whatsoever; at least regarding the evidence, or that I placed any conclusion before the facts (such as pinkagendist suggests); since all I have done is point to questions which remain, and therefore the theoretical “possibilities.” Additionally, I think I was pretty careful to avoid drawing any “real” conclusions, accept to say that evidence has not yet disproven the existence of God; and that given this the “possibility for God” or “intelligent design” remains “paradigm,” same as “atheism.”

      I also think it is fascinating that so many atheists struggle with the notion their belief system is “paradigm,” since that is essentially what paradigm is; a “belief system.”

      Consider –

      Paradigm: Relationship of ideas to one another: in philosophy and science, a generally accepted model of how ideas relate to one another, forming a conceptual framework within which scientific research is carried out. A mold, standard; ideal, paragon, touchstone.

      Ironically enough, (relative to this article) it is therefore atheism which places a conclusion before results, since it professes a belief that God does not exist where evidence has yet to refute it; rather than a mere belief in the evidence itself; being that God is something which has not been proven.

      So, it is to the contrary which I point out “intelligent design” is “possible,” while allowing the evidence to remain as is; without drawing further conclusion. Furthermore, I suggest it may never be proven one way or the other, given the nature of infinity and that an “intelligence” existing with in an “infinity” may be beyond measuring from within 3 dimensional space.

      As far as the many “absurdities of religion,” my referencing religion in this piece was only meant to point out questions raised by religion and how these impact people’s view of the world, and consequently their “paradigm;” ridiculous or otherwise (since not all religious wisdoms or insights can fairly be stated as “absurdity”). And, as far as the question, “how do I define intelligent design,” again I have not asserted “intelligent design” as “fact.” In this regard the article has only asked a philosophical question: “is it possible there may be room for intelligent design,” given the evidence.

      If you wish to know what I personally regard as what “may” act as evidence for the “possibility” of “intelligent design,” again I refer only to “potentials,” and assert any such view as “paradigm.” That said, I believe any of the following “universal complexities,” as either phenomena or concepts, can be considered “lending credibility” to the notion “intelligent design” is “possible” – DNA, Fibonacci, Light barrier, Quantum Entanglement, Infinity, The Laws & Forces, The Big Bang, M-theory, etc.

      If you are interested in further exploring the nature of infinity or quantum entanglement and how I believe it “may” relate to this conversation or the “possibility” of “intelligent design” I encourage you to read my exchange with “thegreatantagonizer;” beginning with my first comment –

      http://thegreatantagonizer.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/hard-questions-for-the-religious/comment-page-1/

      (Please keep in mind when reading this discussion – same as with my article – I draw no conclusions with regard to any of the “unknowns;” only that they remain “unknown;” and that whatever many regard as “proving or disproving” God is “paradigm”).

      As far as my use of the word “choir,” let me just add that I used this word as a metaphor in order to express how these conversations become limited and boring if gone unchallenged; and therefore I welcome your thoughts or any attempts to prove, disprove, or otherwise hypothesize, the many unknown quantities therein; all which is frankly a matter of philosophy and/or “paradigm.” As such, you will never risk banging your “head against the wall” where I’m concerned.

      Nevertheless, I believe it can be said that atheism is “paradigm.” And this (aside from my asserting people should keep an open mind as to “what is possible”) is the only thing I believe people should take away from my article.

      So, does “faith” or belief in “the possibility of intelligent design” further our discussion as to the origin of the universe? Well, I would say no, unless by refusing to acknowledge it this results in some ambiguous outcome being overlooked for what it actually means; thereby hindering man’s understanding of all “potentials” and how they fit together, depending on the situation. Therefore, in this regard, I would think such things should not be thought of as “hindering” or “un-hindering” a result, but rather a means to fully considering (all the) implications of any set data group.

      As such, it is not the advances in, or current understanding of, physics and evolution that I question but rather the insights people take away from them when forming their world view. IE – I believe people should consider all possibilities equally when factoring the “unknowns,” and avoid asserting anything as “fact” when discussing them; especially as it pertains to “paradigm” (most of all); since doing so limits full consideration of all “potentials.” You will also note I did say “in order to understand something one must first be objective;” so I do agree that knowledge begins with doubt, and would only emphasize with regard to the “unknowns” one should not (necessarily) rule out “intelligent design,” in place of “a Godless anomaly,” if neither result has been proven.

      Therefore I think it is important to point out the role of “paradigm” in these matters, as it lends foundation for “facts,” possibly promoting a conclusion before the results, and may cause people to argue unnecessarily against competing viewpoints which have only done the same; and in pointing this out I am not necessarily referring to “YOU.”

      To be more accurate, I think my pointing this out is more applicable to those like Richard Dawkins; who in my opinion often use evidence to exercise some scorned belief in opposition to God; as though in response to some “lie” which has been imposed upon them in their youth. It is my opinion, in fact, one is better equipped to offer fair analysis of these questions when approaching them from the other side; having been raised indifferent to God or the creation of the universe, and therefore brings no “axe to grind” in its argument.

      Simply put – “Atheism” and “belief in God” are both “paradigm.”

      And if ANYTHING places results before conclusions, I would think it is THAT 🙂

      • That’s a much clearer explanation. One I see more merit in. The only caveat I would make is you probably don’t believe a pink unicorn with a blonde wig created the universe and that is my criticism of religion. I’m for Onus Probandi. Let’s presume non-existence until existence can be proven.

      • Great argument. If you find the time check out that conversation I referenced above with “thegreatantagonizer,” where I use Schrödinger’s cat to demonstrate how “pink unicorns in blonde wigs” currently exist as an equal potential within infinity.

        Thanks for sharing… LOVE IT!

      • Good response I must admit, however, I would like to point out that atheism doesn’t put a conclusion ahead of the evidence. It is a lack of belief in the existence of gods, since the nature of god is unknowable, then we can only say we live as if god doesn’t exist but should it/he/she show with verifiable evidence that it exists we will revise the stand.

      • Yes, I use these definitions in regard to “non believers” –

        Atheism: the doctrine or belief that there is no God.

        Agnostic: a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience. (though I think “atheism-light” would be the same as this description of “agnostic,” having removed the words “as God” from its definition).

        And so anything I’ve written should be considered accordingly 🙂

  5. I’m not a bible scholar by any means but I do have a few things to say about the above 🙂

    First, I believe that the God I serve and love has provided us with His written word. It is a story from beginning to end about Him.

    Second, the bible shows God’s mathematical mind at work. I love the book of Job. If you think about what you are reading things will start to jump off of the page to you. There are other books within the bible that speak of things we didn’t really know about until recently. A few examples of these are:

    1. The earth free-floats in space. (Job 26:7). Not all that long ago we believed that the earth was flat…it was also once believed that the earth was balanced on the shoulders of “a god”.

    2. Creation is made up of particles not seen by our eyes. (Hebrews 11:3).

    3. Oceans have springs at the bottom. (Job 38:16) It wasn’t until 1973 that the Mid Atlantic Ridge project FAMOUS observed deep sea springs. In 1979 the submersible Alvin explored and photographed hot springs on the East Pacific Rise south of the Gulf of California. Deep sea springs weren’t something that we really knew about until then.

    4. Blood is necessary for life. (Leviticus 17:11;14) All the way up until the 19th century was the practice of “bloodletting”. It is debated that George Washington was a victim of phlebotomy “bloodletting” after dying just 24 hours after his doctor drained about 9 pints of his blood…his cure for laryngitis.

    5. Life is created according to “it’s kind” (Gen 1:24). It is scientifically observable that there are horizontal genetic boundaries beyond which life cannot vary. You cannot breed an Elephant with a mouse. There are natural limits to biblical change.

    6. Our bodies are made from dust from the ground (Gen 2:7; 3:19). A few of these are caesium and titanium (which have no function) others are- Sulfur, Sodium, Magnesium, Iron, Flourine, Zinc, Silicon, Copper, Iodine, Boron, Selnium, Nickel, Manganese, Cobalt and Vanadium.

    7. Light can be divided (Job 38:24). In 1672, Newton published his first scientific paper on light and color. Fellow scientist Hooke and Huygens disagreed that light consists of the motions of small particle rather than waves. Newton paper Opticks appeared in 1704 and proved that light is thin sheets of color and proving the diffraction of light.

    8. The first three verses of Genesis accurately express all known aspects of creation (Gen 1:1-3). General theory of relativity is the geometric theory of gravitation published by Albert Einstein in 1916. With this he explains that gravity is a geometric property of space and time, which is directly related to to the energy and momentum of matter. Science therefore explains the universe in terms of time, space, matter and energy. Read Gen 1:13- Beginning = time. Heavens= space, Earth= Matter, Light= Energy.

    9. Black holes and dark matter (Matt 25:30; Jude 1:13; Isaiah 50:3)- Modified Newtonian Dynamics theory which is modification of Newton’s Law of Gravity used to try to explain (that human error thing again) the galaxy rotation problem. According to Newton’s law objects that are farther out will have lower velocities than those closer in. Scientist now HYPOTHESIZE that the flatness of the rotation of the galaxies is caused by matter outside of the galaxy’s VISIBLE disc. The reasoning now is that there must be a halo of invisible dark matter. (Ie black holes.)

    10. Einstein’s Universe- (static universe). In 1917 Einstein proposed a model that space was neither expanding or contracting. He stated that the universe is “closed”. In Job 9:8; Isaiah 42:5; Zechariah 12:1 and Jeremiah 51:15. God continually declares that the Heavens are expanding. In 1929 Hubble showed that there were in fact distant galaxies that were moving away from the earth.

    OK. I HAVE to go to class now.

    The question really isn’t “Where is God?” The question should be “Where ISN’T God?”. And just so you know the answer to that is: God is everywhere.

    • Yes, I believe what you say is implicated throughout the article without ever stating anything as “fact;” for the purpose that stating such things as “fact” causes atheists to immediately refuse the conversation. Therefore it was my hope the article may draw from all types of people and their beliefs, and in doing so their different views and knowledge could be reflected on together, in one place.

      I appreciate your thoughts. It will be interesting to see what the (suggested) discovery of the “Higgs” adds to our conversation. Thank you for sharing 🙂

  6. Thanks for visiting and following my blog.

    I find your article and comments of others interesting. I know where God is in my life. I have a relationship with Him. I’m not as well versed as you all are. All I can do is tell someone about my relationship with Him. As Holy Spirit once said to me, “all you have to do is put it out there and I’ll take care of the rest”. Is not and never has been my place to convince anyone about God. I live so they will see Him in my life and my want that for themselves.

    If this is your assignment continue on because this is what you are graced for.

    Blessings

    • Yes, it was through others and community that I finally saw insights which appeared missing through religious writings and the sciences. My faith has always been a struggle, however it is because of these things that it remains and so my nature compels me to reexamine the world and find other examples which also “imply” it; rereading the bible and science literature for deeper meanings and evidence, as well as hearing from people like you and the others here in my post.

      Thank you for sharing.

  7. Your intellectual approach to grasping reality is respectable and well-founded. I find it fascinating to consider your various musings. Your illustration of infinity (in a comment) reminded me of Alice trying to cross the chess board. Yes, infinity is something alien to the finite. But while I understand your rationale for describing God as “alien”, there is a reason the Bible teaches that humans are created in his image. Even though we are separate from and different from God, God is not so “alien” that he cannot be known to us. Our alienation from God is not the result of God being alien, but the result of our sinful nature. It is admitting to that sinful nature that atheists hate. They wince at the idea of being held accountable to the Almighty. After they take a look at their known universe — regardless of how brilliant and astute they are — they place themselves at the apex of reality, negating the sin issue. Bottom line, while God may be intellectually appreciated, he can only be known spiritually. Atheists have simply closed their spiritual eyes.

  8. Very interesting indeed… kind of makes you feel small and humble. It is unfortunate, though, that neither science nor religion can offer full answers. And I fully agree that we need to keep searching, although it becomes a personal thing.

  9. Bible and Science even History perfectly match. Keep searching. God Himself said that He can be found by those who earnestly seek Him.

    Thanks for liking my blog. 🙂

  10. Very interesting thought. You seem to push both sides of the argument but still try to push for the fact that god is real. Now me being an atheist I would not mind if over time, man kind found out that god is real and we can prove it with facts. Now I know that makes me seem like an agnostic but let me explain why I prefer the name atheist. An to clarify I do not believe in any god that is described in any bible. Though if god one day decided to show his/her itself to me I would ask why are you so lazy and then go on about my day. Because I personally do not worry about why I am her. I am just glad to be here. There are just so many things that could have happen for me not to exist. An one might counter that with I was a part of god’s plan an I should thank him. An I would if it was out of love but I do not believe that was the case. So if there is a god I feel that god is actually just a by product of or minds or we are in the matrix.

    Let me first explain why I mean god is in our heads. People who believe, like I use to, feel when something good happens in our favor that we were not expecting came from god. It is a feeling that one can not fully describe and we as humans tend to think it was I hire power. I feel it is just a way for our brains to comprehend things. And one thing we as humans still have a problem comprehending is our brains. It is still such a mystery that it is possible that our brains conjured up what we see as god. An I could back this up with science but I will stick to my gut instinct for now.

    The other possibility could be that we are in a matrix like program. That advanced beings made and just let us roam free. Which would mean we could just be a very technical lab experiment or something was bored and wanted something to happen. Either way we are here and we should try and make the best of it. An to make the best of things I do not need to believe in a god. An even if there is a god I do not need to worship or accepts it. Cause any god that is really that interested in what I do is lazy and incompetent.

    (sorry for any part that does not makes sence)

    • Na … it all makes sense. To be honest I spend a lot of time on your side of the fence (which is why I push both sides of the argument). I just think it is worth keeping in mind there is no way to “know” what we are “really” dealing with when it comes to these things. I respect your position that in the end “it doesn’t really matter” to how you choose to live your life; Matrix or not, infinite or not; but for “machines,” or “God,” or “who knows what,” the template may seem irrelevant if we don’t understand its “meaning.” And so, ascribing “benevolence” (or lack thereof) or “meaning” (or lack thereof) in this equation becomes a relative matter; of one’s sense of self, and the universe in which “they” live.

      Which brings us back to “paradigm.” It is my opinion as long as people understand how paradigm effects their belief system and they are honest about it, then they should be able to acknowledge, if even just slightly, that an “infinite intelligence” may exist in a form we cannot perceive. At the very least we should try and remember the “meaning of human existence” so far remains unknown, even when we find religion, culture, teachers, or text books telling us otherwise.

  11. Hi. Thanks for becoming a follower of my blog. I can see you like to write, and I’m glad there are lots of folks out there who enjoy a good discussion. I guess as I’ve gotten older my attention span has gotten shorter, but I’m glad you’re thinking, which makes you a cut above the herd. Cheers.

  12. Troymo, very nice engagement. I thank you for the opportunity to learn from you. I am endlessly amused that we continuously fail to believe what hasn’t been proved and when a new discovery is made, those overshadowed by the discovery will mount a strong defense against any proof offered with the discovery. Our wonderful universe reveals its secrets to us when we dare to ask and then seek the headspring of the subtle hints we are given. I believe today, God is or is not as we can best describe the evidence for or against. My belief is good enough for me. Atheists and agnostics can certainly live freely among the believers. It’s only when one tries to change the mind of the other that the issue returns to the demand for proof that one shall refute to the other. Millennia from now, our knowledge of the universe will place today’s greatest minds in the same category as those in the past that proposed a new concept and then felt the scorn of all the non-believers. Our future will know what we currently do not and yet man will still live in relative ignorance of all that our existence could know and wants to know. To me that is the most beautiful part of having a mind and a life we wish to share through discovery. It’s like those men and women that climbed aboard a small ship to sail across the ocean to the eastern shore of America. They gave up all they knew in life for the relative unknown that waited for them. Their decision was based on the uninformed promises of others and a dream of something different, perhaps better. Instead of remaining in the crowd of comfortable commonality, they sailed into history with nothing more than determination to conquer the unknown with the confidence of their beliefs. Maybe proof and facts are merely the result of exploring the unknown and is never a requirement to embark on any adventure into knowledge of our spiritual and physical existence. In my own research, I never start with a predetermined outcome. God is or is not depends on one’s journey in the ageless process of mankind’s search for knowledge and truth. I believe and still want to know more. In my greatest pain and in my harshest moments, my faith in God is strongest. I turn to God, not away. My life has been the more wonderful because of faith, not in spite of it. No matter where one stands on the subject, I would encourage them to continue their journey and disregard no one. We cannot know when that one person will take us to the next level with their own discovery.

  13. Great blog.

    I think since the time of the scientific revolution some people have thought we were on the brink of figuring it all out.

    Lets say something happened in our galaxy that might cause our dramatically effect the course of our earths or our solar systems orbit. (I don’t know what could happen like that really I’m just speculating something could) Would we see the light before we would feel the effects of the gravity? Using google I get the sense that gravity forces travel at the speed of light. So we would be feeling the pull of something that might not have been there for a long time.

    I wonder not just about what is beyond our sense (outside the observable universe) but the fact that we only have 5 senses. Are there things in the sphere of the observable universe that we have no senses to detect?

    For example What would we know about the universe if we did not have vision? Lets say we got around by echolocation. I imagine we would know very little about astronomy. But echolocation might be sufficient for evolutionary purposes even though losing sight would be devastating for gaining other scientific knowledge.

    Now if that is the case about one of our senses what other “things” might be out there that we do not have senses to detect? We tend to think gravity and light sort of go hand in hand. If something has mass, it effects light and it seems curious that they both travel at the same speed. But then we see dark matter. This seems to have gravitational effects but does not interact with light. Are there things that might not have gravitational effects but interacts with light? And more importantly, might there be “things” that do neither? That is they do neither have gravitational effects nor do they interact with light. We would never know about them even if they were all around us because the 5 senses we have are sufficient for evolutionary purposes. Just like light might be all around us if we used echolocation and didn’t have vision.

    • Oh and one other thing. I find it interesting, and mildly amusing, that all the maps still put the sun in the middle of the observable universe even though earth is the center of the observable universe. 🙂

      • Yes, you have the right approach for sure. It’s amazing how much people can take for granted with these things – buying into their “available” paradigms,” etc.

        As Marx said, “each age asks itself only the questions it can answer,” implying mankind tends to be selective with their “experience” – the questions they choose to ask, or the ones they (for whatever reason) fear too.

        I think your echolocation example is a great way of showing just how limited our “experience” and “perceptions” may be. I often use the light spectrum to show this. Though I’d say favorite demonstration is without a doubt “Flatland” 🙂

  14. That was excellent. I am always amazed, that atheists think so poorly of themselves. Why they would prefer to believe that their great, great, great, great,……grandfather was a monkey, than acknowledge themselves to be God’s most exquisite creation, smacks of, at the very least, a servere case of self-loathing or, at the very most, insanity. Thank you for following my blog.

    • Yes, I absolutely agree, atheists can be remarkable with their (sometimes) self ascribed “omnipotence” on these matters; as though they could possibly define what lies beyond the “stat squish” within a singularity, or fathom “infinity” relative to a finite/multidimensional template – as though, somehow what we’ve so far measured is absolute, and “their paradigm” definitive – as though, such a limited measurement could define “life in the universe” (deity or otherwise).

      I appreciate your comments. You might also enjoy these articles as well; exploring the way “paradigm” tends to predispose and determine people’s view in these matters.

      https://troymo.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/arguing-with-atheists/

      https://troymo.wordpress.com/2014/02/03/naked-emperors/

      Thank you for sharing 🙂

      • Thank you for the links. I will read them tonight. Yes, through some twisted mental acrobatics, atheists view themselves as gods, thereby vanquishing the need to acknowledge the existence of the one true God. Again, a severe form of insanity.

  15. Wow, great point about remaining objective when exploring spiritual paths, God. I am on my own, more we learn for me faith in the unknown is the hardest concept as I am sure it is for many. But if you are a true believer, then we just know that God exist. Thank you for stopping by my blog and I look forward to following yours. My gratitude is yours!

  16. Very interesting article. Thank you for following my blog, doing so has brought me here to read this article. My world view or perspective comes from a Christian one. Therefore all I read and see is filtered through this perspective. Recently I believe I have been challenged to try to look at things with an understanding that this perspective may not give me an adequate understanding of other cultures and religious beliefs. I think that God has been asking me to be open, like you were talking about so to encourage dialogue. Not stop it before it even has a chance to begin. How do I know that God exisits? Because He is a God who is alive and one who has helped me through many difficult moments in my life. For me, knowing God is with me is not because of religion, which is made up of a lot of man made ideals, but because I have a personal relationship with Him. This relationship is on going and one that has been proven to me through the years to be true. God had rescued me over and over again. In fact God has been the one constant in my life who is always there for me and had never let me down. Thanks again for this article.

    • Yes, it is true faith is a matter of revelation – whatever the evidence, regardless of what others may think or say – it is a personal experience, and can only be as profound as someone is ready to explore it.

      I also try and make a point of seeing things thru the eyes of others. In fact, this article is the reflection of a very long journey; exploring personal identity, and worldly temptation, thru to physics, psychology, religion, and inevitably faith.

      In the end, I am always left filtering the world by my own perspective. However, I find it is very worthy to try and experience our world thru alternate paradigms; to at least stop and consider them, and the insight it brings (sometimes, even the more scary ones).

      You might enjoy a different piece I wrote which attempts to explore “perspective,” the way you mentioned.

      https://troymo.wordpress.com/2014/02/03/naked-emperors/

      Thank you for sharing 🙂

  17. Troymo,

    I commend your willingness to preach outside of the choir. I, too venture off into the misunderstood quadrants of religious and philosophical perspectives. I’s amazing how much energy and passion is expended on God’s existence. We think we have all the answers. All I can say is if someone truly sees God, it is impossible to convince them otherwise. The attempt will be futile. However, if someone has yet to see God, it is possible for his heart and will to respond to Him.

  18. very interesting article…my husband and I have recently listened to Sid Roth (It’s Supernatural) interviewing Tom Horn about various things . . . one of which . . . aliens – amazing what was discussed, and then I stumble upon here? I think not, I believe nothing is coincidence

    Thanks for stopping by my blog, too. Bless you!

    • Yes, this piece is an attempt to acknowledge “uncertainties” which (ironically) unite either side of the issue – where our perspectives do not agree, we can at least acknowledge the evidence – and any determination made therein (on either side), beyond this, would be the result of theory, or “paradigm.”

      Thanks for sharing!

  19. Existence being enormous and evanescent, responsibility for it must, seems to me, lie somewhere. One can name that source God or Fred as pleases you. Such a source must be bigger and smarter as we see things, than we can now comprehend. Therefore, understanding what we can of His product is productive, complaining about it, isn’t.

    As we resent any rule outside our own will, we prefer that Creator not exist, since acknowledging Him as such confers authority over us upon Him. He, having designed us, has provided for that; we follow His rules willy-nilly in birth and death and by choice or refusal in life. Observably, life is friendlier between those if we follow what seem His rules while we live as well. But there we seem to have a choice, the more intelligent on one side, the candidates for a Darwin Award on the other. God, or Fred must laugh a lot …

    Which is how it looks to me. I suppose that fits sufficiently well as to avoid philosophical indigestion …

    • Well said … how can anyone presume (his/her) purpose or meaning, or ascribe benevolence (as we see fit) to (God/Prime Mover/Creator), according to their (own) “relative” paradigm; while making such claims as “certain” (given the available evidence)?

      The idea anyone would be so bold (or ignorant) – to assume “certainty” in these matters (and their origin) – suggests a mind “predetermined,” and one more ignorant than of those they hope to refute.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s