iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Paul Hunting

GET UPDATES FROM Paul Hunting

Does Science Validate the Book of Genesis?

Posted: 08/17/10 03:22 AM ET

No matter how much money it spends, science cannot find any true empirical evidence for even an infinitesimally small "fundamental particle of matter." Yet they refuse to accept the only truly logical conclusion: that there isn't one!

The irony is that the deeper they look and the more they smash matter apart looking for fools' gold, the closer they get to validating what the wise ones have known for thousands of years.

Since the 1950s, developments in the scientific metaphor known as string theory have been repeatedly mirroring the Biblical metaphor known as Genesis. The latest experiments of the Large Hadron Collider are now validating what the Bible has been telling us through metaphor since 8,000 B.E. (Before Einstein), namely that the fundamental particle of matter, from which we and everything else is formed, is best described as a "sound energy."

Once again science confirms the illusive Theory of Everything in a way that the warring factions don't wish to hear -- because it could finally reconcile science and scripture. If they had the humility to see it, the Large Hadron Collider could satisfy all points of view in the creationism debate and herald a new beginning to the equally illusive ideal of world peace.

Trouble is, they can't.

Neither faction seems willing to look behind the ancient symbols telling us of the black hole, the Big Bang, gravity, the space-time continuum, evolution, the four forces of nature, the purpose of God, the destiny of man...

Instead we have an insoluble dilemma: either we believe an explanation of the creation that defies our intelligence, reason, physical evidence and valid scientific process, or we reject the scripture. And if we reject scripture, we have another dilemma: do we also have to reject the very idea of God, or can we somehow rationalise or compartmentalise the cognitive dissonance?

This dilemma masks the real problem. Since the council of Nicea in 325 CE, our entire culture, whether we be religious, scientific or atheist, has been deeply programmed with one archaic interpretation of the Bible. The arbitrary decisions made way back then by a seemingly well-intentioned Constantine were subsequently forced upon us under threat of torture, death, genocide and excommunication -- hardly conducive to freedom of choice, thought, belief and action. Yet now we can enjoy these freedoms, the terror of heresy remains imprinted on our very DNA.

The arguments between science and religion and between different sects of Judaeo-Christianity itself are creating such clamour that few people bother to look more deeply within the scripture to divine the lost meaning.

It's not hard to understand why. The Bible is written in a very powerfully hypnotic, metaphoric language. It lures us into taking it literally, but when we do, we are blinded to the true Word of God that is the source of light behind the shadows.

The function of a metaphor (or poem, drama, literature, art, music, etc.) is to express something beyond words to bypass the logical, words-and-thought-oriented left-brain. Who hasn't struggled to communicate a profound personal experience, only to find that words fail?

As children we believed in Santa Claus. As adults we see him as a metaphor for the spirit of joy and giving. We let go of the fairy tale once it's served its purpose -- if we're wise enough.

If we have the wit to let go the old beliefs about the Bible and seek behind the shadows to the source of light itself, it becomes apparent that science and scripture are not mutually exclusive but entirely complementary. As humanity evolves, in perfectly appropriate ways, so does our awareness of the emerging truth of God's message. Both science and scripture are using the exact same vehicle to bridge the gap between the knowable and the unknowable -- metaphor and symbology. The allegory, poetry and dream-like symbology of scripture are exquisitely mirrored by, say, the mystical qualities of quantum physics and mathematical symbols like zero and infinity, which also have no real definition, and which also can beguile us to take them literally.

Where the Bible says all things came forth from a formless void, science says all matter came from a black hole. Where the Bible says the Word (waters, sound, name, voice) of God created all things, science says all matter is composed of vibrating strings of energy, like the sounds made by a violin. The latest news from the neo-light-speed hadron collisions seems to confirm string theory, the Gospel of John and also Genesis in that the energy patterns the collisions form translate into musical sounds!

Open yourself once more to the mystical message in the first so-called "day" of Genesis 1:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form; and void. And darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

After many years of deep study, contemplation, reflection and cross-referencing, here is what the symbols and metaphors are beginning to suggest to me. I'd love to know what they say to you:

In the beginning God created an image of Itself. It was the unmanifest essence of all life. God did not yet know what could be made manifest from Its creation. Its Spirit stirred the sound of God's voice and It uttered Its divine purpose -- 'Let me know who I really am': and the knowing began. And God saw Itself reflected in the positive energy; and divided the positive energy from the negative so Its spirit could flow. It gave the positive Its True Name and the negative It called Lucifer, the light bearer. And, as the dawn of knowing arose, it revealed the first pillar of light.

These new insights into the first "day" of Genesis awaken an ancient spiritual teaching that has been sleeping for many thousands of years. It's a portal to new understandings that transcend not only science but also religion.

Please sample a detailed analysis of these symbols in my eBook draft at www.myebook/original_heresy, or email me at paul@horsejoy.com and let me know how these ideas grab you.

You can find out more about my work and ideas at www.horsejoy.com.

 
 
 

Follow Paul Hunting on Twitter: www.twitter.com/original_heresy

No matter how much money it spends, science cannot find any true empirical evidence for even an infinitesimally small "fundamental particle of matter." Yet they refuse to accept the only truly logical...
No matter how much money it spends, science cannot find any true empirical evidence for even an infinitesimally small "fundamental particle of matter." Yet they refuse to accept the only truly logical...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 454
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
oldfuzz
...within my mind
07:44 PM on 08/25/2010
The question of whether science validates the book of Genesis is valid only for those who consider Genesis an historical report. There are actually two stories in Genesis: creation of earth and the beginnings of Judaism.

Is there any record of religious scholars stating that Genesis was historical fact prior to the scientific age? Could be, but I know none.

It has been the advances in science, early on by the religious trying to better understand God's creation, that prompted the pious to make inerrancy claims about Genesis.

As a story it is on a par with Avatar without the computer graphics.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andres64
Religion is a sectually transmitted disease.
11:38 PM on 08/24/2010
Does Science Validate the Book of Genesis? - No. Any other questions?
11:13 PM on 08/22/2010
Paul Hunting has offered us a deeply thought-provoking link between the metaphors of quantum physics and the metaphors of the Bible.
Thank you for connecting the "dots"!
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Paul Hunting
10:41 AM on 09/09/2010
Thanks Mr Kowalski. Watch this space - there's more coming!
Blessings, Paul Hunting
05:13 AM on 08/22/2010
The council of Nicea did what? You do know that The Da Vinci Code was fiction, right?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Terry Tillman
Scout, Recovered Businessman, Leadership Leader
07:44 PM on 08/20/2010
Hey Paul, I admire your courage in initiating this conversation that has so often led to polarization, positioning and againstness. I read your intention as one to go beyond that separation, and maybe to cooperation, understanding, acceptance--loving. True?

The paradox to me is that a resolution won't be realized through mental debate. It will be found by entering the unknowable, which then leads to a knowing. That is a "place" that resides not in the mind, but in the Spiritual Heart, a place of true knowing. And once there, it isn't something that can be talked about because it is beyond words. It can only be known as an experience which you and I will describe using different words but if you have had the same experience we will meet in a knowing, "Yes. I understand. It's like..." And then we use metaphor to describe imprecisely what we can't describe.

I believe you've said this. So, once again, I admire your effort to communicate with words that which is beyond words.

As my grandmother used to say, "Rise above it..." Maybe some will, and rise to the place of unity that can only be found in diversity--a higher context of loving and accepting all the content, including all the differences and disagreements. And then zero will become infinite. No Thing will be come All Things.

And that's my mental effort to go where the mind can't go...
01:13 AM on 08/21/2010
"... It will be found by entering the unknowable, which then leads to a knowing."

Is it just me or is that total gibberish. If something is unknowable you can't end up knowing it - even in your "Spiritual Heart' whatever that is. And it seems very convenient to me that something that appears to be gibberish is "beyond words" because that avoids the inconvenience of explaining what the heck you mean. As for "to describe imprecisely what we can't describe." that makes no sense. But perhaps this is all possible to someone whose mind can go "where the mind can't go" whatever that means.
03:49 PM on 08/22/2010
With respect, yes, 'it's just you' - and you're also in a very large community of people who see things this way! To me the paradox of the 'unknowable' is that it's what we already know but cannot know we know with the apparatus we are using to know it. As Terry wisely says you have to have the heart to go beyond the fears, doubts and false securities of the mind and emotions and actually look within.
03:53 PM on 08/22/2010
I understand what you're saying without really understanding. How do you suggest we take that first step into the unknowable?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Terry Tillman
Scout, Recovered Businessman, Leadership Leader
04:17 PM on 08/25/2010
Go out of your mind : )

How? Regular Spiritual Exercise is a good way. Look for only the good (God) in everyone and everything. Spend some time being grateful. Smile. Lose the facial hair so others can see you. Where did that come from???

And if we speak in paradox and irony long enough to those who are trying to figure out what we're saying, eventually, maybe, they will go out of their mind : )
11:27 AM on 08/20/2010
The 1st verse of Genesis though concise as it is, is much more than what ordinary folks think if interpreted with Divine purpose in mind which I believe should align with scientific findings about Creation. The 'first' day was not a 24 hours day as calculated today, because God exists outside time as an eternal being; that 'first' day could have been millions of years for the earth and the Universe to take their form. The writer of that 1st verse had limited understanding of the passage of period it took for different forms of creature to be made on each 'day' and had to put it in context of a 24 hours day for the passage to have relevant meaning to its readers. As someone who believes in the Bible without any reservation, I believe recent scientific findings about creation in consonance with Biblical history should'nt be much of a surprise. The difference if any is in the interpretation of the number of 'days' it took for the earth and the creatures to be fully formed.
04:02 PM on 08/22/2010
I think you're right onto it - but there's an even more exciting piece here that few people have ever seemed to have spotted. Yes God is outside time - and so is The Creation - it has to be. Everything was created before time and evolution. All we're doing is precipitating down to the material level that which is, always was and always will be - aspects of God! Evolution began as time itself was brought forward. If you re-read Genesis 2, can you see what symbology tells of the 'big bang' or the beginning of the mists of time???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andres64
Religion is a sectually transmitted disease.
11:30 PM on 08/24/2010
Got any evidence to support the existence of this god of yours?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Anne Naylor
Celebrant, Weddings and Other Blessings
08:44 AM on 08/20/2010
Hi Paul,

From my point of view, it is too easy to get caught up in the discussions of right and wrong ways of interpretation, and miss the essence of a very real power that is unconditionally connecting us all. We are one humanity and we are sustained by a source that I understand as "love". But then in my experience, that source is intuited beyond the words of debate.

Quite a discussion here here nevertheless!

Blessings,
Anne
04:06 PM on 08/22/2010
As Rumi says, Out beyond ideas of wrong-doing and right-doing, there is a field. I'll meet you there. My horses graze and play in it. I added the last bit - but it fits - I'm sure he won't mind.
12:16 PM on 08/19/2010
I think that those who take the bible as metaphor rather than literal truth have a point.

It's like when I read Exodus 20-21, now I don't see a conglomeration of laws dealing with seemingly random aspects of the daily life of the Israelites, but rather a metaphor on dealing fairly with your fellow man. All that stuff about enslaving people from neighboring countries but not your own, and selling your daughter into slavery have no real meaning.

and how about Leviticus 14. I could read it as how you should deal with leprosy by means of ineffective spells and potions, but It's clearly a metaphor in how you should trust religion to know what's best for you when you're ill. Numbers 31 could be taken literally as how God arbitrarily decided that the Midianites needed to be slaughtered, but I think it's a metaphor for how you should treat anyone who doesn't agree with your religious views. I could take Deuteronomy 28 literally where it says I'll be forced to eat my children if I disobey God, but I think it's a metaphor for how God will inflict horrible suffering on those he considers "wicked." or something....

Oh, how I could go on! But I've about hit my word limit.
11:34 AM on 08/19/2010
Well, besides the fact that this article is completely wrong about science (the LHC has not confirmed string theory, not even close - nor has science done anything more than speculate that our Universe may be a black hole in another Universe) it is clearly slanted towards a belief in God and therefore not an impartial discussion on the subject. I found it hard to read the whole article because of the bias. So as long as we are being biased:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

Epicurus – Greek philosopher, BC 341-270
Athiests - winning since 300 BC
02:54 PM on 08/19/2010
Yes I am very biased. Not by beleif but by personal experience. As for your nice quote - in Genesis it says God gave man a free choice and warned us not to eat of 'good and evil'. We chose to do this anyway and we are swallowing the consequences to this day - all of us.
05:59 PM on 08/19/2010
The typical argument. God wanted man to have free will. Well let me ask you this: If God is omnipotent and omniscient as the Bible suggests then he knows the future - He knows exactly what is going to happen to everybody and created everybody - So what is the point of free will? Seems like an illusion to me. Why create Hitler? Why have death at all? Punishment of some sort? Perhaps he likes a good snuff film. Perhaps he likes to watch the excruciating pain of a tortuous death. I mean really, he could have made a much nicer Universe but instead choose the create this. Clearly he is not an omnibenevolent God as some claim. If anything, he is a psycho.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Exiled Scot InThe USA
06:11 PM on 08/19/2010
The reason that 'god' didn't want Adam and Eve to eat from the tree is etched in earlier religions long before christianity reared its ugly head. It was believed that if you ate from the tree of Knowledge you would attain godlike status as stated in Genesis itself. This mythical story is scattered throughout many earlier religions, like most things in the bible, the story is not unique in religious parlance.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Clay Farris Naff
Blogger, science journalist, & author
08:50 AM on 08/19/2010
It is never wise to mount an ignorant attack on science, unless you wish to appeal only to the ignorant. Your caricature of the search for the Higgs boson and other fundamental particles could hardly be more wrong. But then again your premise that a single interpretation of the Bible has prevailed since the Council of Nicea is also wildly wrong. Have you not heard of the Reformation? Does it not occur to you that there is a church in America today to suit every conceivable taste, interpretation, or philosophy?
02:58 PM on 08/19/2010
I'm not attacking anyone, let alone science. I love science. I thnk it is wonderful. I am totally conviced, however, the 'God Particle' is up there with the 'God Delusion'.
01:18 AM on 08/21/2010
You may be totally convinced but you are also totally wrong.
You seem to believe that the depth of your conviction is an indicator of epistemological value.
In this you are as sadly wrong as generations of deluded fanatics.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tone67
Read the whole story
08:16 AM on 08/19/2010
No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says: He is always convinced that it says what he means. --George Bernard Shaw

Great article, however i believe the first day of Genesis actually means what it says, its would be difficult to relate it to the big bang theory if you try to interpret it to mean something else.
03:02 PM on 08/19/2010
Thanks - a ray of light in the dark storm of protest. Yes Genesis day one means what it says - but does it say what it means? In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. End of.
All the rest is commentary. What does 'heaven and earth' really mean? We have to start thinking beyond the obvious, non?
11:29 AM on 08/20/2010
A bit off topic -- how I dislike that -- have you explored the kabalistic views of genesis? "Beyond the obvious" oui; but it must start with the obvious.
01:19 AM on 08/21/2010
the point is not to relate the book of genesis to big bang theory
that is an ex post facto attempt to legitimize superstition and legend
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZenGardner
Cogito ergo atheus. 6.875
07:53 AM on 08/19/2010
The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never worshipped [sic] anything but himself. - Sir Richard Francis Burton
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:44 AM on 08/19/2010
Excellent quote, ZG
03:04 PM on 08/19/2010
Amen to that, brother.
photo
mydoghasfleas
Don't pursue happiness -- create it.
07:38 AM on 08/19/2010
Once again: It is only the bible literalists that have a problem with science. (And that includes scientists who dismiss the bible because they take it literally.)

The rest of us who clearly see it as metaphor, don't have a conflict.
03:05 PM on 08/19/2010
Indeed, but a metaphor of what?
01:21 AM on 08/21/2010
You have to be joking
Ironically it is those who see it as a metaphor who have the most conflict.
Not surprisingly because once you see it as a metaphor it can mean anything you want.
And guess what?
that means you are going to disagree with others who see it differently
ergo conflict.
10:40 PM on 08/22/2010
If it's a metaphor for a process we can check out empirically, then conflict ceases. I think Genesis can be validated experientially through certain forms of meditation.
02:32 PM on 08/24/2010
petey, it is a metaphor for psychological stuff, e.g. Adam and Eve are about the end of the 'pure' subjectivity of the infant and the recognition of the objectivity of the other and the world, resulting in alienation (i.e., the first 'other' is mom, and I will always have love-hate about her, part conscious, part unconscious). Mom kicks us out of the 'awareness' of infancy into the 'consciousness' of the adult, and many never leave the nest (awareness = selfish nose-picking).

If it is 'spiritual', 'psyche'. and 'matter', then Biblical metaphor is the psychological wisdom, soul, the mediator-between, of the ancients. Yup, folks don't know their own, or other's psyches very well, so the result is confusion.

By the way, re 'nose-picking', you had a one-liner last week that was so good that LOL didn't do it justice.
What is the abbreviation for getting snot on the screen?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:35 AM on 08/19/2010
The believers keep touting faith, so why are you guys trying this hard to make science validate your faith? If your buybull is full of allegories and not to be taken literally, then why bring science into it? Science is not in business of validating superstitions and myths
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZenGardner
Cogito ergo atheus. 6.875
07:51 AM on 08/19/2010
This whole topic has become so cliché, rather boring really.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:48 AM on 08/19/2010
I know, wished we have more science in the religion and science discussion
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tone67
Read the whole story
08:22 AM on 08/19/2010
You said
Science is not in business of validating superstitions and myths

Pope John Paul II said.

Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes.
Pope John Paul II
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:44 AM on 08/19/2010
John Paul II was a scientist? Who knew?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZenGardner
Cogito ergo atheus. 6.875
12:28 PM on 08/19/2010
Funny, he also said, "Stupidity is also a gift of God, but one mustn't misuse it."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StillMadMatt
Offending the right people is its own virtue.
05:56 AM on 08/19/2010
Give me a break.Oh Flying Spaghetti Monster please shake Your Meatballs in the face of these naysayers.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZenGardner
Cogito ergo atheus. 6.875
07:50 AM on 08/19/2010
Nay.