The Science of God
Yes, folks, it seems we will soon be treated to scientific evidence of the existence of God. You may think that I, a former Sunday School teacher and youth group leader who still holds to his faith, would be thrilled by this, but I am not. No, I can barely stomach the possibility that anyone might claim to have proven the existence of God—a feat that is tantamount to claiming to be the Rabbi Ben Levi of the Longfellow poem.
I learned this quite by accident, in fact. In peering through my Sitemeter data, I found that someone had visited (quite randomly with the "Next Blog" button) my site from a blog maintained by a man who has co-authored a book on Intelligent Design (we won't get into that issue here). I left a comment, and a discussion emerged via email. In a recent reply, Jim informed me of his intention to publish in the near future an article that provides scientific proof of God's existence.
I await it with great anticipation. In the meantime, I asked him which God's existence he can prove.
I learned this quite by accident, in fact. In peering through my Sitemeter data, I found that someone had visited (quite randomly with the "Next Blog" button) my site from a blog maintained by a man who has co-authored a book on Intelligent Design (we won't get into that issue here). I left a comment, and a discussion emerged via email. In a recent reply, Jim informed me of his intention to publish in the near future an article that provides scientific proof of God's existence.
I await it with great anticipation. In the meantime, I asked him which God's existence he can prove.
Ignited by Andrew Purvis at 9:54 PM
9 Comments:
This site is relatively new, but I felt I had to create it as a place for my more controversial posts so that I could keep my original blog, Caveat Venter, a little more civil. That has been around since early this year.
So, you're saying this article may provide proof not borrowed from Thomas Aquinas? And, it could just as easily be about Zeus as it could be about YHWH?
Hmmmmmm. Curiousity prevails.
I said this blog was flame bait!!!!! I deliberatiely distort a persepctive and get nothing?
Gah!
Actually, I was going to put the link in on a later post, but I wanted to work out the whole issue of excerpt propriety and all that first. I might try to get people's hackles up here, but email is still not automatically public fodder.
I have read neither, but my list is a little blocked up with other texts for the next couple of years. What are they about?
There is a possibility that someday the existence of God maybe scientifically proven, but it would then contradict with the definition of "faith" since "faith" is the belief in something that "we cannot see" according to the Bible's own definition. If the existence of God can be scientifically proven, it might convince people to believe in God, but then that belief is ultimately generated from their belief in the validity of science, instead of the religious faith in God.
But anyways, my comment was originally planned to tell you about some connecitons to the Funes the Memorious story in Borges. I was reading this poem "Terence, this is stupid stuff" for my AP Lit class and it refers to the story of Mithridates VI of Pontus. As I looked it up, the wiki article also points out that Mithridates VI of Pontus is famous for his incredible memory and that it provided inspiration for the Borges story later. I don't remember whether or not this king is directly alluded in the short story itself.
Leon, it's good to hear from you. Your on-topic comment reads almost like the Oolon Caloophid argument against the existence of God by using the Babel Fish (Douglas Adams). There will be more on this, but a couple more things need to shake out first.
I had never heard the story of Mithridates VI, and no direct reference is made to him, though perhaps part of the numbering system Funes creates might suggest it. I have seen one biography that makes passing reference to a tragic tale of Borges' friend named Funes, and the biographer suggested that Funes had developed quite a capacity for memory. Sadly, I was too busy with work to delve into the details, and it may well be that it is yet one of many apocryphal tales of Borges' life.
Kassi, I suspect that both may be well written, and the foundationsof each are intriguing. However, as I noted before, it is unlikely I will get to them any year soon. I am developing articles about Yevgeny Zamyatin's We and Henry James' The Sacred Fount right now, though I doubt either will be done before the middle of next year. On top of that, I have my teaching schedule and am reading James' The Bostonians (I've gotten on a Henry James kick lately).
Throw all of that in with what is becoming my annual reading of Foucault's Pendulum and a reading list that contains a few other novels I am considering for future courses, and I haven't the inclination to let anything that doesn't promise to knock me onto my ass jump the queue.
If my first argument sounds like I was arguing against the existence of God, it might be because of my ineptitude of communication and can be considered my vain attempt at philosophical sophistication. Religion and Science had come into confrontations and reconciliations throughout history. The renowned mathematican and philosopher Rene Descartes(one who said "cogito ergo sum"--I think, therefore I am), is reportedly had had mental conflicts between the two realms. On the other hand, there are also famous figures who had shown a great capacity at reconciling the two realms. Isaac Newton, one of the greatest scientists in history, had said "Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done." Unfortunately, it was reported that he did try to find Bible codes(to scientifically prove God's existence), but he was unable to. My personal view on this matter is that faith is more important than the scientific proofs. From my Christian point of view, science is just a means to discover and justify the God's making of the universe, just like what I heard before "mathematics is God's alphabete for creating the universe".
I had not intended to suggest, Leon, that your specific language soundedlike an attempt to disprove the existence of God, only that it's structure reflected that of one humorist's character's attempts to disprove God.
Post a Comment
<< Home