|
I don't have the need to prove the existence of God scientifically. I believe in love, and you can't prove it scientifically. I suppose that it could be explained in terms of stimulus-response-survival-of-the-fittest type of terms, essentially explaining it away. But I believe love is a whole lot more than that. That its nature is something entirely different. You really couldn't convince me otherwise.
I think that scientific method is a very narrow window to see the world. I guess my dog sees the world through a similar window. He believes in what he can see, hear, taste, touch, smell. Only he doesn't know how to use microscopes and telescopes, though his hearing and smell are far more advanced. Maybe he can hear voices in the wind that I cannot. It's fun to think that anyway.
I've been reading Uncle Tom's Cabin. Some people call it racist. Others find it beautiful. But if I took the book and analyzed it purely scientifically, what percentages of the page is white, and what percent is black. Break it down to it's base carbon particles. Ran the pieces through test tubes, etc, ad nauseum... I'd be missing the point. I could get alot of information. Proof of it's weight and dimensions and wood pulp grade. (I'm actually reading it from a Kindle, but work with me here)
If I handled it like the author intended, within the book are emotions and ideas and culture and poetry. It could change my opinion, my world view, my life.
And that's how I read the universe.
Somewhere I grew out of my need to prove God to people who don't really want to believe in Him anyway. Smarter people have written books to address the issues of faith and reason. I'd rather my life be evidence of the God I love, by the choices I make, the people I help, the life I lead.
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything in this forum. I've read your thoughts. Now you've read mine. Carry on.
|