…linking intellect and intuition…
Who We Are What We Are

Big Bang vs. God

Big Bang vs. God
Science and religion have long disagreed as to the origin of the Universe.  Science says it’s the result of a Big Bang.  Religion says it’s the work of God.  Each one says the other is full of it.  And just like the classic Japanese monster movie, King Kong versus Godzilla, the two of them have been going at it tooth and nail for years, or fang and claw to keep the metaphor in tact.  Through the application of higher consciousness, however, a rapprochement may now actually be possible.  You see, the problem is not so much in the concepts involved, but in the words being used.
On the positive side, both agree that whatever happened took place a long time ago.  And they also agree that though their theory is the right one, there’s still a lot they don’t know about the process.  Science, for example,  says that even though they can figure out everything that happened after some infinitely minute period of time at the very beginning, there’s still that very beginning they can’t account for.  Religion simply says, “Who can account for God?” which is really the same thing.
The problem stems from the fact that they are looking for the answer in different directions.   Religion looks inward, relying on a faith that defies description and that needs no verification other than the sacred word.  There was a time, in fact, when this sacred word trumped what was evident right before your eyes.  Why else would Galileo be threatened with excommunication for preaching that Earth orbited around the sun?
Science, on the other hand, looks outward.  Every theory it proposes, every possibility it brings to the table must be proved in a series of measurable, reproducible, unbiased tests.   As a result, today’s prevailing scientific paradigm has trained us to believe that our individual internal experiences are subjective and cannot be relied on.  They are, we are told, merely the result of our personal interpretations of what is outside and objective.  By contrast, the external is absolute, real, and most importantly, true for everyone, if we would only get ourselves out of the way.
This concentration of science in the outer world would not be a problem, except for a built-in assumption, on the part of many practitioners of science, that the inner reality does not even exist.  However, denying non-physical existence is no more intelligent than the religious fanatic who swears that only God is real and the material world is illusion.  Each is wrong because each is only looking at half the picture.
Meanwhile, quantum physics has recognized the fact that when you get down into the smaller realms, the questions a researcher asks, about the path of a particle or wave for example, will produce different results depending on the answer the researcher is expecting to find.  In other words, we cannot get completely out of the way because we are a part of the process itself.  And that, dear consciousness researcher, is where the ultimate answer lies, the place where outer and inner meet… in our very own consciousness, our very own ‘I’.
What if Consciousness, itself, were the absolute Ground of Being?  What if the feeling of ‘I’ at the very core of our existence were the origin of all there is?  What if “out there” and “in here” are each only half the picture?  Then both science and religion would be speaking truth, their only flaw being in their denial of the other.  What if?
peace……………………….ag

Science and religion have long disagreed as to the origin of the Universe.  Science says it’s the result of a Big Bang.  Religion says it’s the work of God.  Each one says the other is full of it.  And just like the classic Japanese monster movie, King Kong versus Godzilla, the two of them have been going at it tooth and nail for years, or fang and claw to keep the metaphor in tact.  Through the application of higher consciousness, however, a rapprochement may now actually be possible. You see, the problem is not so much in the concepts involved, but in the words being used.

On the positive side, both agree that whatever happened took place a long time ago.  And they also agree that though their theory is the right one, there’s still a lot they don’t know about the process.  Science, for example,  says that even though they can figure out everything that happened after some infinitely minute period of time at the very beginning, there’s still that very beginning they can’t account for.  Religion simply says, “Who can account for God?” which is really the same thing.

The problem stems from the fact that they are looking for the answer in different directions.   Religion looks inward, relying on a faith that defies description and that needs no verification other than the sacred word.  There was a time, in fact, when this sacred word trumped what was evident right before your eyes.  Why else would Galileo be threatened with excommunication for preaching that Earth orbited around the sun?

Science, on the other hand, looks outward.  Every theory it proposes, every possibility it brings to the table must be proved in a series of measurable, reproducible, unbiased tests.   As a result, today’s prevailing scientific paradigm has trained us to believe that our individual internal experiences are subjective and cannot be relied on.  They are, we are told, merely the result of our personal interpretations of what is outside and objective.  By contrast, the external is absolute, real, and most importantly, true for everyone, if we would only get ourselves out of the way.

This concentration of science in the outer world would not be a problem, except for a built-in assumption, on the part of many practitioners of science, that the inner reality does not even exist. However, denying non-physical existence is no more intelligent than the religious fanatic who swears that only God is real and the material world is illusion.

Meanwhile, quantum physics has recognized the fact that when you get down into the smaller realms, the questions a researcher asks, about the path of a particle or the nature of a wave for example, will produce different results depending on the answer the researcher is expecting to find.  In other words, we cannot get completely out of the way because we are a part of the process itself.  And that, dear reader, is where the ultimate answer lies, the place where outer and inner meet… in our very own consciousness, our very own ‘I’.

Think of it.   Consciousness itself, the ‘I’ experience, as the absolute Ground of Being, the origin of it all.  The unknowable God of religion and the unreachable Grand Unification Theory of science meeting at the inexplicable origin of experience.  Outward pointing science giving form and measurement. Inward pointing religion giving meaning and purpose. Both, together, defining reality.  No wonder science and religion can’t agree.   Each is only looking at half the picture.

peace……………………….ag

* * *

Experience the new consciousness for yourself at GamesofConsciousness.com