In my book Scientific Liberalism I address the question of the origin of god from a scientific perspective. The scientific approach to this question is one that seeks to understand the state of the early intellect of humanity and its analytical processes based on the limited availability of data derived from quantitative and qualitative analysis. Under this paradigm the question begs an answer to at different question - how did the creation become the creator?
In my book I introduce a concept called Phimatics (fee-matics). Phimatics is a contraction of the the first syllable of philosophy, and the last two syllables of mathematics. Phimatics is a technique that permits one to take logical sequences of a philosophical argument and reduce it to a mathematical expression. This unique technique provides a visual presentation that demonstrates the logical processes of a verbal argument.
The following is an extract from my book scientific Liberalism on the Phimatic expression of how the creation became the creator. This Phimatic expression only identifies the intellectual process that culminated in the conclusion of god as we have come to know it throughout human history. Later in this post I shall give a brief scientific discourse as to the scientific possibility of god as theology hopes it to be.
How Creator became the Creator
If we were to move back in time we would reach a point where theology intersected with science. That place is creation (not past tense).
There are three properties consistent with the scientific term “Creation” and theological term “creator”. These properties are:
- Omnipotence – (all powerful)
- Omnipresence – (all present)
- Omniscience - (all knowledge)
The symbol for these properties is OOO (three O’s) Which we reduce to O3. The difference between Science and Theology is:
- Theology define creation as an effect needing a cause
- Science perceives creation as a cause generating an effect - the universe
This difference is the crux of the debate between theological and scientific cosmology.
- Theological Cosmology: a static event that occurred over a period of six literal days.
- Scientific cosmology: Creation is a continuing cause that shaped and perennially reshapes the universe (from its birth, through its lifespan, and to its death).
- In a later chapter we will offer a unique and alternate legitimacy for scientific cosmology. Presently we shall examine the intellectual ramifications that led to the evolution of theological cosmological doctrine. Theology defined creation as an effect needing a cause. To identify the cause theology asks the question “Who?” Who caused the universe? The conclusion to the question was “god”. This conclusion required a definition of the character or characteristics of god. The only characterization of god by himself is said to be written with the hand of god is in the Ten Commandments (note the words with bold letters).
Deuteronomy 5
9Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, 10And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments. 11Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. 12Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.
This text shows the quintessential difference between science and theology. Without a scintilla of evidence theology personified and evolved a god with O3 human characteristics and emotions. This personification reduced O3 to an emotional and egotistical entity with human properties such as sexual identity, phobias, ego, ambition, vanity, vengeance etc. The arbitrary personification defined a creator (O3p) with an irrevocable identity difference from O3.
- O3 = Creation
- O3p = Creator
The possibility of the Creator-God Concept is a possibility but not in a theological construct. The issue is a best highly speculative and the science is only beginning to provide some evidence that if humanity is to survive the dissipating or pulsating cataclysmic death of the universe, we will have to come up with some godlike construct.
A scientific approach to the possibility of a god-construct presupposes another universe that is perhaps still dying (dissipation of its energy) and that early in the history of that universe one or more technologically advanced civilizations (Type 3 or higher) mastered the technology of dark matter so that they had the competence to destabilize it in such a way that it exploded into what is the big bang reality of our universe.
After thirteen or so billion years of cooling that civilization moved from its dying universe into our present universe. The creating civilization would have evolved in another universe. It is impossible to conceive of such an advanced civilization, with the historical knowledge of its originating universe would be jealous or interfere with the evolutionary processes of this universe. Furthermore such a civilization would not be an individual.
If present calculations of the universe's demise are feasible then our own immortal survival will depend on us becoming gods so as to replicate the deeds of what we perceive as the "gods". These questions are beyond our present knowledge base. That is why Scientific Liberalism neither confirms nor deny the possibility of a god construct. What Scientific Liberalism challenges is present theological paradigms that simply personifies unknown causes to derive an irrational hypothesis.
No comments:
Post a Comment