Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1

If we consider unguided natural processes as having led to the development of the natural world and

development of the human brain, then the precise mathematical correlation between them seems to be
unreasonable as usually we may say that the unreasonable effectiveness of Maths in Natural Sciences…
So, Einstein said, ‘The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible.’ So,
this correlation between the two… not just the complexity of the natural world out there, or the complexity
of the human brain but the correlation between the two… that asks for an explanation. So, Chance is
actually not an explanation, it is simply an admission of a cause that we don’t know.

So, actually atheism itself requires a lot of faith to explain how the world came about, but if you
start…4.10 the axiom, then we start with the overseeing intelligence and then we see the world as we
evolved, as it exists… we can explain the orderliness of the world, and what about its disorderliness? I
didn’t go into the specifics of the problem of evil, but I said that the very fact that we consider evil as
objectionable, the very fact that we assume that good things should happen to good people, that means that
we are assuming the existence of a law.

From natures perspective it is simply insentient. So, nature has no free will, it has no intension. So, the
very conception that good and evil is there presumes that there is some basis by which we are deciding
good and evil. So, it presumes the existence of free will, just like Newton was perplexed, was conflicted
rather that if science would explain everything that would mean that people could not be attributed… could
not be held as responsible for their actions. The Nazis could not be held responsible for the holocaust, but
all our relationships and all our system of justice will collapse if we assume that people were not
responsible for their actions. So, science does explain in a phenomenal way and the specific process that it
explains… they are open to investigation, but the point is, ‘Why do these processes work?’ Natures laws
are not themselves causal agents. They are explanation of correlation between cause and effect, after the
causes act.

So, scientific and the spiritual explanation are not necessarily contradictory, they can be complementary,
like say why is a car moving? There is a mechanical explanation and there is a personal explanation, or
why is a billiards ball going to a particular hole? That is because the ball hit at a particular angle or because
of an expert player hit the ball, both are parallel explanations.

So, science and God can both actually work together, and that is why a little of science can take us away
from God, but emerging in science can bring us back to God.

Thank You very much.

(Transcription by Sadananda Krishnaprema Prabhu)

Facebook

Read more
https://www.thespiritualscientist.com/2017/09/can-logically-prove-gods-existence-backward-forward-reas
oning/

Read more
https://www.thespiritualscientist.com/2017/09/can-logically-prove-gods-existence-backward-forward-reas
oning/