144.  System of the World. Part Two

 

We were discussing the Materialistic Theory 

The trouble with string theory is its lack of data. However, if we disregard this problem and discuss it just as a possibility, still there are at least three problems with Materialistic Theory: 

(a). How did the universe come into existence? Scientists did not follow Sherlock Holmes dictum, because they did not consider all the possibilities. They should have considered the possibility of a Creator, and then refuted it, if they could. It cannot be refuted. The philosopher Bertrand Russell, in a debate with a bishop, conceded that he cannot disprove the existence of God.

(b). Where did string/brans come from? You see the scientist believe that universe was created out of nothing. But their nothing is not really nothing (an absolute vacuum, where nothing is present). The nothing of scientists is full of positive energy and an equal amount of negative energy, cancelling each other.

Thus we are led to the next question, where did all these particles, fields and energy come from? If there were precursors of them, where did they come from? And so on.  At some point the process has to start from absolutely nothing.

 

 That brings us to the point where we started. Can this huge, infinite universe or for that matter anything start from nothing? Prove it. Create one particle in an absolute vacuum.

 

(3). How do you explain miracles, answering of prayers, foretelling the future, and the existence of the spirits of dead persons who once inhabited earth, without a God. I have dealt with these phenomena, in great detail, in my eleven blogs; 102-112 in part three. If I narrate them here again, it will be needless repetition.

However, who, except God (or His deputies) could transform sandy soil into candy (blog 104)?

Who, except God ( or His deputies ) could answer the prayer of Mr Shevani’s to meet the greatest Qalander of present time, or for that matter Giri Bala’s prayer to learn the way to live without food or drink (blog 111)? Who, except God (or His deputies) would have inspired Swami Vivekananda to tell Mr Dickenson, 43 years in advance, that his guru will give him a silver cup? Who, except God (or His deputies) could provide proof of life after death, in the form of spirit of Bimla Kumari haunting a house in Cuttack, India?

 

A logician will say, where did this Creator come from?

The answer is that this mote does not know. This is an unanswerable question.  Our small mind is not capable of answering this question, just as a cow cannot learn to read.

 This mote has offered his arguments (blog 113). I will repeat them in an abbreviated form for purpose of continuity:

 

1. God can be conceptualized as energy, or something even more subtle than energy, with a supermind.  Human brain is an example. It is made, mainly, of nerve cells, created and fed by our daily food. These cells have the power to think, feel, and create movements and store as memory. These cells communicate with each other instantaneously, at the speed of light. If our brain, a collection of billions of cells, made of atoms, and atoms made of subatomic particles, such as electrons and protons and neutrons, can have thoughts of pain, pleasure, compassion, jealousy, and anger, why not God, a collection of pure energy, have a mind?

               2. How can such supermind arise, out of sheer nothing? The answer is that the same process of evolution, which caused the atoms to combine with each other and make chemicals such as amino acids, which led to the formation of a cell, and then to man, in 3-4 thousand million years( blog 99), could have created God ( I shudder at my own temerity ) in a limitless amount of time.  It may have happened with the same two engines of mutation and natural selection. There is no logical or biological reason for evolution to stop at a certain point. If not mutation, then deliberate experimentation, by the supermind, on the leptons and quarks, to continue its improvement.

 

Religious theory. God created this universe. He runs it. He is responsible for all the happenings in the world and universe, because everything happens by His divine will. I have discussed this theory in great detail in four blogs; 134-137. There is no need to repeat it. But, let me reiterate the points against it. 

Now, let us discuss the arguments against the Religious theory: 

1. It does not explain evil

2. It does not explain injustice

3. Makes God, indifferent, cruel and unjust

4. Why is God hidden?

5. If everything is preordained by God, then what is the purpose of creation?

6. It flies against our daily experience of events happening due to free will.

7. Does not explain the cruelty of predator animals to prey.

8. All human effort is completely useless.

Each of the above mentioned points are examined in detail in blogs 135-137. 

This theory is not valid

 

To be continued.