I read an article in the May issue of Discover magazine entitled The Biocentric Universe.
It was about, “A radical new view of reality: Life creates time, space, and the cosmos itself.”
First of all I don’t believe that is a new idea, for the God of life who created all life created everything else.
But In the article I found many statements which made little of some of the other theories such as the spring theory and those of many universes.
It also made use of quantum physics and quantum mechanics which has caused some scientist to believe that there is a supreme mind or being involved in the creation of the universe.
Being a believer in Intelligent Design I found much of the article to be very interesting. One such part mentioned the idea that the universe started and came to be what it is today strictly by chance which mathematically is impossible.
Also mentioned were the several seemingly impossible things going on in the subatomic world like particles appearing out of nowhere and disappearing and the fact that observing a particle will cause it to react to being observed and that being in one place that will cause its twin to react in the same way even if miles apart.
Though the article did not deal with the idea of a supreme life bringing all we can see and witness into being I found that the article did that without mentioning it. That is typical of much of science not willing to give God credit for anything I thought.
Yes, I do believe that life created life and everything else, do you?
If so, why so? If not, why not?
:)Peace and kindness,:)
Fred

Hello Arcura!
I like your post very much. You seem to be very intelligent, which is a rarity on these forums.

I do think, that much science that you mention, as the creation of virtual particles (by quantum fluctuations, Casimir effect), quantum wave collapse, entanglement of photons, etc, all these things actually can work with a God!

Science, does not necessarily have to contradict the existence of a God, but science might be the picture of how he created this world. Perhaps, has he found some ways of creating the world much quicker, than details one by one?

If I would be God, I would rather create these vacuum fields, include symmetry breakings, than building piece by piece.

Warm greetings,
Mary.

That is sort of New Age stuff but better
The two best teachers on it are
David Sereda
Harmonic Codes
YouTube - david sereda harmonic codes

And

Gregg Braden
Fractal Time
YouTube - greg braden fractal time

MaryJS,
Thanks much for your thots in that.
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

But In the article I found many statements which made little of some of the other theories such as the spring theory and those of many universes.

---

What is spring theory, Fred, I have not heard that one, Is there a giant spring at the centre of the universe?:)

All these theories tell us one thing, the imagination of man is unlimited and in this we reflect a little bit of the Glory of the God who made us

I think these theories are what some have said they mean... God is preparing to start a new thing in a new dispensation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

But In the article I found many statements which made little of some of the other theories such as the spring theory and those of many universes.

---

Fred from a Christian perspective how could we not make little of the multiverse theory. Are we expected to believe that Jesus Christ died, perhaps just a little bit differently in multiple universes just a little different to our own. Surely this mocks the oneness of God.

Scripture tells us that Jesus Christ was the lamb slain before the beginning of the world, it did not say worlds. So If Jesus Christ exists only in this vast universe, there can be no multiverse, no place to escape to.

Believe what you want but don't expect God to fall into line with theory

It is a fact that there are other universes and who said that if they had people they had an Adam and Eve that fell into temptation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

It is a fact that there are other universes

---

Where do you get your facts from? Surely you speak of dementions which are all part of this universe

I guess but whatever you want to call it or how ever they want to categorize it the universe is way bigger than we can comprehend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

I guess but whatever you want to call it or how ever they want to categorize it the universe is way bigger than we can comprehend.

---

No it is important that you separate theory from fact, you made a statement that it is a fact there are multiple universes, this is an unsubstantiated theory. It is also postulated there are eleven dimensions you know length, breadth, thickness, time, etc

However what we know is basically confined to the first three and when you put them together you get the space in the middle which is four

paraclete,
You are right.
In astronomy and cosmology there are a great many theories. It seems that there are almost as many as facts that have been proven.
Of course that is also the case with many other sciences.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

No it is important that you seperate theory from fact, you made a statement that it is a fact there are multiple universes, this is an unsubstantiated theory. It is also postulated there are eleven dimentions you know length, breadth, thickness, time, etc

However what we know is basicly confined to the first three and when you put them together you get the space in the middle which is four

---

My point is there is way mpre out there than what we have discovered and no telling what is out there,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

My point is there is way mpre out there than what we have discovered and no telling what is out there,

---

That is very different to saying that something like multiple universes is an absolute fact:rolleyes:

I'm not a scientist and I thought they did say there were universes more than ours maybe I am thinking of galaxies??
I'll call it unexplored territories or whatever it was that Star Trek called it

I think the idea of a supreme being existing because of the improbability of random chance having brought the universe into existence is certainly feasible. But at best that gets you to deism and nothing more. Like Christopher Hitchens says, if we concede deism, the theists still have all their work ahead of them (e.g. to say god exists hardly gives anyone any reason to say the god of the bible is the real one, as opposed to Thor, or Poseidon or any number of other deities man has invented over the years).

N0help4u,
Yes, other universes, dimensions, phases of existence, intergalactic strings, the God particles, black matter, and more are all theories.
Fred

To add briefly to what I said, in all the debates between the best and most brilliant atheists and most talented and intelligent theists, the direction (evidence) seems to always wind up pointing to deism- a supreme impersonal force in the universe that does not intervene in human affairs. That's honestly how I see it and I view these debates with an open mind and coming from a Lutheran background.

cadillac59,
I am convinced that there is indeed a supreme intelligence who in responsible for all that is seen and unseen in the universe including all the various universal physics laws.
Also that some religions are extremely worthwhile while some radical members therein are not.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Radical depends on what you mean by radical
My guess is I would be considered radical and I don't see God as some pie in the sky that is distant. I know he is right with me and reveals things to me everyday.