Years ago, my three-year-old son felt sorry for God because even though he was everywhere, no one could see him. He no doubt imagined a kindly, forlorn old man with a beard trying desperately to get everyone's attention. Then he spun around in a big eureka moment and said, "I know! Why doesn't God wear a hat?" (I imagined a sea of derbies!)
As a child I accepted the quality of invisibility, but struggled with omnipresence. How could God be everywhere? Even with my magical thinking, this was a stunning feat. Over and over again I was told "It's a mystery." Ultimately I accepted it on faith because what choice did I have? But mysteries don't always stay mysteries, do they?
Over the course of time I devoured many a book on quantum physics, and though I know the debate between scientists and religious believers is as contentious as ever, I understand that contention less and less. The more I read about the quantum potential of waves, the bi-location of particles, the energetic fabric of the universe, and the subjective quality of time and space, the more clearly I see God in it all. The more I take in, the more I understand how the Supreme Intelligence can (and must) manifest everywhere and in everything. The more I learn, the more I see that we are made of (and live within) this divine super-substance, whether we call it the unified field, consciousness, or God.
Way before Einstein's insights and equations, religion was all about light. Religious iconography depicted light in the figurative sense while mystics experienced light in literal terms. Our depictions of heaven, God, angels and archangels, saints and visionaries show them moving out of, into, or emanating light. In some cases, their translucent bodies are made of light. According to Genesis 1:3 God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. Light streams from God's fingers into Adam's. Moses encountered a burning bush. Christ's glorified body rose from the dead in blinding light. Deities of all religions are depicted bathed in light. Union or "at-one-ment" with God is called enlightenment. From physical, mental, spiritual and scientific perspectives, we are centrally and inarguably creatures of light. No evidence of incompatibility between religion and science there.
This weekend I read a book called BIOCENTRISM, by Dr. Robert Lanza with Bob Berman. It's a powerful book that argues its unique scientific viewpoint convincingly. And while I long thought the connections between quantum physics and God were strong, I find the connections between Biocentrism and God even stronger. One line (among many) in this book took my breath away. "If one could travel at lightspeed," it says, "one would find oneself everywhere in the universe at once." Sound familiar? Omnipresence at the speed of light. This is a convergence of religion and science if ever there was one.
Biocentrism is the first scientific model to consider consciousness as the source of life and not the reverse. In other words, the world is perfect for us not by some random spin of the universal roulette wheel, but because it was created by our collective awareness in the first place. Consciousness came first. Spiritual minds will further interpret that to mean God's consciousness came first, followed by ours, his creatures. Although to be clear, that's an interpretation, not the science. But it's not far afield. The idea that we create our individual and collective realities is not a new idea in mystical circles. As a scientific model, however, it is very new. Biocentrism is a stunning worldview to arrive at a time that demands greater personal and collective accountability and empowerment from all of us. If we can only seize control of our minds, we can create paradise, right? Heaven, as they say, is not a destination but a state of mind.
Many religious conservatives want scientists to look at their work through the lens of God. But that's not their job. Scientists can't operate from any bias whatsoever or it isn't science. It must emerge from concepts, theories, painstaking work, repetition, and if they're lucky, inspiration. But science is only one of many lenses. There are others more ancient and though mystifying, equally true. Scientific proof may lag centuries behind a mystical occurrence, but that doesn't make the occurrence less authentic or the science less useful. I see a world where science and spirituality collaborate, and in that partnership our awareness accelerates, allowing even greater truths to be made evident. Such a partnership is ideal, because no matter what lens you're using, nothing about our mysterious existence could possibly be mundane. Any way you look at it, it's sacred.