Science and Spiritual Reality | General Discussion Topics | Forum

Please consider registering
sp_LogInOut Log In
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Forum Options

Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Science and Spiritual Reality
August 26, 2019
7:13 pm
New Member
Level 0
Forum Posts: 1
Member Since:
August 26, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline





I did not speak in secret, in a land of darkness;

I did not say . . . Seek me in chaos.

--(Isaiah 5:19 D.S.V.)



There are two possible schools of thought pertaining to the evaluation of the Universe that we live in. One school of thought is embodied in the philosophy known as Solipsism. This philosophy expounds that all external reality is relative to the perception of the individual, or, in other words, all reality is subjective and cannot be described by objective analysis. As an example, Solipsism is the belief that everything that individuals perceive is a projection of the thoughts of their mind. Taken to its fullest implications, Solipsism means that if you think strongly that an object that you perceive does not really exist, then you will cease to perceive it and it will thus disappear. On the other hand, if you think strongly enough that an object does exist, then you will perceive it and it will thus exist. Understandably, the ardent adherents of this school of thought soon lost what sanity they had.



  When we lead from ignorance, we can come to no conclusions. When we say, “Anything can happen, and anything can be, because we know so little that we have no right to say ‘This is’ or ‘This isn’t,’” then all reasoning comes to a halt right there. We can eliminate nothing; we can assert nothing. All we can do is put words and thoughts together on the basis of intuition or faith or revelation and, unfortunately, no two people seem to share the same intuition or faith or revelation.

     What we must do is place rules and set limits, however arbitrary these may seem to be. We then discover what we can say within these rules and limits. The scientific view of the Universe is such as to admit only those phenomena that can, in one way or another, be observed in a fashion accessible to all, and to admit those generalizations (which we call laws of nature) that can be induced from those observations.1


     Most importantly, Einstein presumed that all the laws of nature must be entirely equivalent in all conceivable systems of reference, differing only by uniform velocities.   Without an ether, reasoned Einstein, there is no real physical basis for absolute spatial positions or orientations; all, therefore, must be relative to the observer. At the same time, all observers must see the many laws of nature in an identical way.2


     Science deals only with phenomena that can be reproduced; observations that, under certain fixed conditions, can be made by anybody of normal intelligence; observation upon which reasonable men can agree.3


In opposition to Solipsism is the school of thought that objective interpretation of the universe we live in is possible. Since the validity of Solipsism would mean that it would be impossible to make logical sense out of what we are aware of, we will assume that Solipsism is invalid. Bearing this in mind, I propose the following axiom, which we may call the Axiom of Interdependency:


If a “spiritual universe” exists, there likewise must also exist laws or principles common to both such a “spiritual universe” and to the physical universe, in order for us to be able to perceive any manifestation of such a “spiritual universe.”


Notice that this axiom in no way assumes the existence of a spiritual universe. The reason why seeking objective proof of the existence of a spiritual universe is futile will be dealt with in later chapters.


What this axiom does say is that if a spiritual universe exists that does not have laws or principles in common with our physical universe, then we cannot be aware of it and thus it would be of no concern to us. However, if a spiritual universe exists such that we are aware of some of its manifestations, then it will have laws or principles in common with our physical universe. Thus, for any postulated assertion of a spiritual reality, there should be corresponding evidence of that reality reflected in our physical universe.   Conversely, it should be possible to formulate a framework of characteristics of the physical universe that will indicate the nature of the corresponding spiritual reality.   Practically speaking, this axiom means that it is possible to construct a logical theory encompassing virtually every field of science that will explain the purpose behind everything known to man.  

September 9, 2019
5:32 pm
Level 0
Forum Posts: 19
Member Since:
July 4, 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

As Ronald Reagan used to say:

“Sometimes when I'm faced with an atheist, I am tempted to invite him to the greatest gourmet dinner that one could ever serve, and when we have finished eating that magnificent dinner, to ask him if he believes there's a cook.”


I'm curious if you are writing a book and posting here to see what kind of debate will spring up?

Or do you get an opportunity to get in front of real people for a spirited, non-inflamatory dialog?

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles
Most Users Ever Online: 376
Currently Online: Humaine
Guest(s) 44
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
greeney2: 10396
bionic: 9870
Lashmar: 5289
tigger: 4577
rath: 4297
DIss0n80r: 4162
sandra: 3859
frrostedman: 3815
Wing-Zero: 3279
Tairaa: 2842
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 2
Members: 25780
Moderators: 0
Admins: 2
Forum Stats:
Groups: 8
Forums: 31
Topics: 9873
Posts: 126485
Newest Members:
Don Portnoy, John Greenewald, letty shawn, Jacob, Bridge City13, Finn Knetes, William C. Lane, Broghen Anders, jisco43, Rina Jakkierston
Administrators: John Greenewald: 697, blackvault: 1777