Did an Outside Entity Create the Universe?

 

Robert Lanza, M.D. Scientist, theoretician and author, ‘Biocentrism’ 

“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? … When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” –Job 38:4,7

Was there a creator?

As a child I found myself playing on the center of God’s stage. From some hidden celestial vantage point, so I thought, I was being scrutinized and watched by the Supreme Creator, perhaps almost as narrowly as I, as a medical student with a microscope, would one day scrutinize the cells growing in a Petri dish. But that was long ago, before I had seen micrographs of DNA, or the tracks of matter and antimatter created in a bubble chamber by the collision of high-energy particles. But as I became engaged upon the task of squeezing 300 years of scientific achievement into a few convolutions of brain tissue, it became increasingly clear — in my new sophistication — that there was no need for a creator.

After four decades of scientific study, I have learned that there are natural explanations for the evolution of the stars, planets and even life. There are hundreds of textbooks and scientific journals that describe in detail how hadrons and leptons assemble into atoms and molecules, and how they in turn assemble into ants, musicians and football players. As a scientist, I was taught that an outside creator isn’t needed to complete this mechanical explanation of life and the universe.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

A Reasonable Argument for God’s Existence

Logic and reality could not meet always.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Where Do Spirituality and Activism Meet?

Huffington Post By Alison Rose Levy*

Somewhere the underlying curiosity and the investigative spirit — shared by the journalist, the scientist and the seeker — meet.

“I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious,” Albert Einstein wrote to a friend, I learned from Arnold Mindell, Ph.D., a Jungian analyst. As a journalist, I can say exactly the same thing. So in this contribution to the Ervin Laszlo Forum on Science & Spirituality, I’ll share the questions I am curious about, and invite your answers — and your questions.

The reason I do this is because I’ve noticed an irony, which is that when the scientist or the journalist finds answers, the answers must remain open, serving as doorways to further questions that naturally arise in their wake. Without this openness to further questions, these answers, whether scientific findings, reports on slices of reality, or certitudes about how things work, may over time crystallize, become opaque, and begin to function as obstacles, blocking further inquiry into the essence of ever-evolving change in the now.

How Evolution Gets Used and Abused in the Science-Religion Debate

Some Eastern philosophers say that Science could reach up to 5th level and from there real spiritual world starts. According to this science has difficulty to be there where enlightened persons can be.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Mathematics and the Religious Impulse

Huffington Post By Karl Giberson, Ph.D

The most trivial part of the relationship between science and religion, and yet one that generates lots of debate, is the simple question of compatibility: Can they co-exist? I have written a bit about this, but I have to confess that this question is boring. Establishing that two things can exist at the same time is not an engaging enterprise, because it leaves unanswered the question of whether either of those things should exist at all. Pornography, as we know, is compatible with unbridled free enterprise (yawn). But should either, or both, of those things exist? Now that is a real question.

The End of Times: Do Scientists and Fundamentalists Concur?

Now be careful. Do not do any sin.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The Real Issue: Reconciling Science With Experience

Huffington Post

By Swami Kriyananda*

The real issue lies not between religion and science but between belief and experience. Both disciplines ought to be understood in the light of man’s search for permanent truths. Both, however — and to some extent surprisingly so — have relied too heavily on dogmas and dogmatism. In science, revolutionary scientific ideas are often laughed out of court by “the old guard” — to be accepted in time, however, after old dogmas have been replaced by new discoveries — becoming in their turn, of course, new scientific dogmas.

In one respect the difference between science and religion is noteworthy: Scientific circles have yet to form bodies of hoary elders whose self-appointed role is to dictate absolutely what shall and shall not be accepted as the right beliefs. The pressure of accepted opinion, however, is almost as strong in science as in religion, and acts with as much authority as any church.

Is There a God or Is There Nothingness? New Scientific Paradigm

Huffington Post

By Robert Lanza, MD *

The answer to such deep questions has traditionally been the province of religion, which excels at it. Every thinking person knows an insuperable mystery lies at the final square of the game board. So when we run out of explanations and causes that precede the previous cause, we say “God did it.” In all directions, the current scientific paradigm leads to insoluble enigmas, to ideas that are ultimately irrational. But since World Wars I and II there has been an unprecedented burst of discovery. Although still unbalanced by this sudden growth, our worldview will soon catch up with the facts, and the old physico-chemical paradigm will be replaced with a new biologically-based one that can address some of the core questions asked in every religion.

Reconciling Science and Religion: How Did These Great Minds Do It?

Some saints say that science could have knowledge up to fifth level and only after that real spiritual world starts. That could be the reason that still lots of things still remain mystery for science.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Are Eastern Religions More Science-Friendly?

There are lots of things that could prove that science is quite behind than Eastern philosophy. Just one example: astronomy was developed thousands year ago and our common sense tells us that size of different planets, their distances, their movement are very necessary for this science. However our modern science came to have these information not so long. Then how astronomy could explain and forecast correctly?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

How Science Can Solve the Puzzle of God

Huffington Post

By Clay Farris Naff*

“God offers to every mind its choice between truth and repose. Take which you please — you can never have both.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson

Nearly 500 years after science and religion parted company over Galileo’s demeaning challenge to a church invested in geocentricity, we have come to a moment when reunification may be possible — on scientific grounds. But before we go on, you must make the choice Emerson presents.

If repose, turn back.

You will find far greater comfort in the myths of the traditional religions, or the newly minted ones of the New Age mystics, than in anything that science has to offer. But Emerson was right: What you will not find there is much that conforms to reality as science has illuminated it. This problem goes way beyond the pathetic attempts of “Creation Science” to make the Grand Canyon fit into the Noah’s flood tale. There is a fundamental error in any religious narrative that portrays the world as designed by an all-powerful, all-knowing, and beneficent God. The world just ain’t built that way.

Religion and Science: Finding Their Kindred Spirits

It could be better if science and religion could go together but it could not. They have their own ethic and limitations.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost