Posted by Bob on 9/25/2007, 6:20 am, in reply to "Re: Scientifically discovered God" However, the gist that I got of it was that the author was using the premisses of atheism, and concluding that those premisses, honestly analyzed, point toward, at the least, some sort of generic creator. I've done a lot of reading on this, and am compiling cites in a document that I tentatively call "The God Axiom," some parts of which I have posted here. While I cannot fully support the thesis in this post, it basically relies upon certain observations that cannot be explained by physics, and indeed, seem to be forbidden by physics as it currently stands. Among these observations are life from nonlife, sentience from nonsentience, and an overarching orderliness of all observed phenomena. The observed universe is one of perceptions, not the dry formulae of science. Colors as we perceive them are not the formulaic wavelength and amplitude of optics, for example. Bridging the gap from photons to "red," for example, suggests a fundamental property of reality that science cannot deal with, unless it somehow tries to find a way to incorporate the reality of perception. That such a thing cannot be done may be an irremediable limitation of science. But axioms are best proved by rejecting them, and then observing that the necessary conclusions which follow that rejection are untenable.
72.243.26.154
Like you, I found the translation to be wanting.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread