Physical Truth and Spiritual Truth Inseparable

Physical truth and spiritual truth are inseparable. Religion and science are connected. In Hinduism, science and religion go hand in … Continued

Physical truth and spiritual truth are inseparable. Religion and science are connected.

In Hinduism, science and religion go hand in hand. The relationship between Hinduism and science goes back to the Indus Valley civilization, as old as 2500 BCE. Vedic science appears to have included components of astronomy, biology, mathematics, chemistry, medicine, metallurgy, etc. The notion of atomic/molecular world was integrated into Vaiseshika school (between around 250 BCE to 100 CE) of Hindu philosophy. Yoga included some remarkable methods of breath/respiration control. Ancient sages were said to be acquainted with radar, microbiology, radioactivity, television, etc. Epic heroes of Hinduism flew first aircrafts. In Hinduism, there is theory of Seven Worlds, Doctrine of the Ages of the World, religious categories of Space in Veda, reference to quantum mechanics in scriptures, as well as mysteries of Vedic/Puranic aeronautics and Tantrik biochemistry, etc.

Because of ingrained respect for all forms of life and universe being a divine creation, Hinduism supports environmental protection. Nature is sacred and the divine is manifested through all its forms.

Written by

  • Chris Everett

    Canyon,I’m genuinely interested in knowing WHY you think you understand evolution, at least enough to conclude that it’s false. Have you ever read anything about evolution that was written by a real expert in the subject, such as Dawkins’ “The Selfish Gene” or “The Ancestor’s Tale”. Although these are books written for the layman they communicate the actual principles of evolution, backed by a substantial body of evidence. The material you are pointing us to is utterly comical in its ignorance of what evolution is, nevermind what science is.The basic principle of evolution can be illustrated thus:A population of animals is living contentedly in a fertile land and prospers. As with humans, offspring are physically different from their parents; differences which are largely genetic.Imagine now that the population splits, perhaps due to migration, perhaps due to the land itself splitting as a result of tectonic drift (ignore this last one if the idea of tectonic plates offends you). Imagine now that one sub-population winds up in a hot climate with little to eat but sparse vegetation, while the other sub-population winds up in a cold climate with plenty to eat, all of it meat. This is not implausible, and things like migrations and variations in climate and food sources ought to be easy to accept, at least for argument’s sake.As time goes on, members of the “hot” sub-population that do better against the heat, and can get to the food better, and can digest vegetables better, will, statistically, prosper better and have more offspring, even if only by the tinyest of margins. Since traits are passed genetically, these “does better in a hot climate” traits will be passed on, and over many generations the prevalence of these traits in the sub-population will increase. Perhaps it’s less fur. Perhaps it’s darker skin. Perhaps its being leaner. Perhaps it’s a longer digestive tract. Whatever.Likewise for the “cold” sub-population, except their genetic drift will favor adaptation to the particulars of their cold climate with abundant meat. More fur. More fat. Shorter digestive tracts. Sharper claws. Short bursts of speed. Whatever.Now, considering that the drifts of the two sub-populations are distinct, their physical characteristics will diverge. Theres nothing keeping them together anymore. All they share is their increasingly remote ancestry. In fact, the point may come when their reproductive systems have diverged so much that the delecate biochemistry of reproduction is disrupted and individuals from one sub-population, even if they were somehow put in contact with individuals from another sub-population, couldn’t bear offspring.This means they are now separate species. They have a shared past, but no prospect of a shared future. Like horses and donkeys. Like cro-magnons and neanderthals. Like chimps and gorillas. In fact, like EVERY pair of beings from different species. They share an ancestry, usually very distant, but evident in the genes. Corroborated by the increasingly abundant fossil evidence. Corroberated by the geological evidence. Corroberated by the radionuclear evidence. Corroborated by the astrophysical evidence. Etc.In closing, I would like to ask anyone who DOESN’T believe in evolution to justify how it WOULDN’T occur as a direct result of the self evident, everyday observation that children are different from their parents in ways that can be passed down to THEIR children; that these differences MAKE A DIFFERENCE, however small, when it comes to reproductive success (good looks, intelligence, humor, strength, social behavior, etc.); and that populations split apart from time to time with migrations, etc. To me, the burden is on those who deny evolution to explain what invisible hand keeps sub-populations genetically together when all the physical evidence shows them to be genetically apart.

  • Chris Everett

    Canyon,Just to be clear, the money you have directed us to is based on proving the following notion of evolution (copied verbatim from you link):”The universe came into being by itself by purely natural processes (known as evolution) so that no appeal to the supernatural is needed.”This is NOT evolution! Who ever thought it was?! Where is the honesty and integrity of these people? And THEY are the ones who stand for morality?!ARGGH!!!

  • Canyon Shearer

    Chris,Dumbing evolution down to stupidity doesn’t make it true.Your religion is dying, Dinky Dawkins is a joke amongst Creationists and Evolutionists alike, nobody listens to his dribble.Horses and Donkey’s can’t mate? Are you sure.I thoroughly see HOW evolution COULD happen. I just am a little confused on why there is no evidence of it. Charles Darwin started to try to prove his hypothesis, saying he would find millions of transitions. He grew weary and seriously doubted his religion when he found NO transitional fossils. If you know of one, don’t tell me, send it to the links above and collect some money.As for your variations:When I was ten, I could jump one foot in the air. When I was fifteen, I could jump two feet in the air. Now I can jump three feet in the air. By the time I’m 3,000 years old, I should be able to jump to the moon.That’s what you’re saying with your evolution religion. Unfotunately there is a limit.Sugar beats are where about 30% of our sugar comes from. In nature, they contain 7-10% sugar; they have been seriously and completely genetically engineered and now the highest concentrations contain 22% sugar, albeit the quality begins to diminish after 15% sugar.If evolution was true, we’d be able to create a 100% sugar beat, but variation is limited within the species, you can’t make a sugar beat turn into an apple, no matter how much you vary it. It produces after it’s own kind.This is the exact opposite of your beliefs, that say a sugar beat can someday become a wildebeest.You’ve gotta use science to look at this stuff, there is a limit to my jumping, there is a limit to variation. Evolution is a stupid religion.

  • Canyon Shearer

    Chris,Just because you don’t understand your religion, doesn’t mean other people do.Ignore my remark about the mule in my last post, I somehow misread your dumb article.Evolution can’t save you, only your namesake can wash you of your sins.

  • Chris Everett

    AGENTG,Good post. The Dali Lama is the only religious leader I am aware of who understands science. In fact his philosophy has always struck me as fundamentally scientific, and I like that he has said that when Buddhism and science disagree, it’s Buddhism that needs to change. Imagine that, a religion with learning, not dogma, at its core.Buddhism is scientific to the extent that it follows the philosophy of paying attention to the evidence and developing an explanatory model of it that is, in Einstein’s words, “as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Of course, Buddhism has a superstitious dimension to it as well, as evidenced in beliefs about reincarnation and karma, but to be fair it is alot harder to organize subjective experience (the realm of Buddhism) than objective experience (the realm of science). I don’t know too much about Hinduism – I’ve always assumed it is essentially “unreformed” Buddhism, i.e. it has Buddhist philosophy at its core, but it has become overburdened with accumulating superstitions and rituals (all those gods…!).That said, in my experience Buddhism is also a magnet for a type of person who wants to live superstitiously as long as the superstitions are warm and fuzzy.

  • Canyon Shearer

    This has been discussed ad nauseum.I am behind in some work and school. My points have been made.Have a nice day.In case you want to learn something, all of these are by peer reviewed scientists:See especially May 8 – June 19

  • Chris Everett

    Jesus is a poop-eating fairy

  • Terry

    Crossing donkeys and horses produces mules –

  • John Griffith (Bright)

    Canyon,When you say that there is no evidence for the process of biological evolution, it occurs to me to ask what YOU consider to be the supportive “evidence” that is missing?I looked at your blog, and it’s clear, based on the statements you present there, that you do not understand what biological evolution is and how it works.The best way to address your ignorance is for you to do some reading. You must, however, read what scientists, specifically evolutionists have written. Read anti-evolution texts if you must, but it should be clear to you that those types of texts are unreliable sources because we cannot trust them to tell it to us straight. This is as good a site as any to start learning about evolution: Here’s an easily understood definition of biological evolution: descent with modification. What do you find so incredible about that statement?

  • Canyon Shearer

    “We make ourselves enemies of God by cursing His name, the only blessed name in the world. No-one says “Buddha Dammit” or “Oh Mohammed!” because these names are already cursed, but in our hatred of God, when we blaspheme His name, we try to curse Him.”

  • Canyon Shearer (dim)

    John,Pay attention, we’ll discuss theology here, but your religion, having no deity other than “father time” will not be addressed by me anymore.

  • Are you KIDDING?!

    …”but your religion, having no deity other than “father time” will not be addressed by me anymore.”If you mean evolution, you never did address it. That’s your whole problem!

  • Canyon Shearer (DIM – Deo IMagio)

    “Are you kidding?!” Are you kidding?Just out of curiosity, do you consider yourself to be a good person?

  • Chris Everett

    Canyon,You have been asked a number of reasonable questions by a number of people about what your evidence is that evolution doesn’t exist, and how is it that variation is controlled to prevent speciation, but all you have done is respond with insane ramblings, distortions, and links to ultrafundamentalist websites.Now, I know that you can’t actually respond in a scientifically legitimate way to these questions, but it would be nice to at least hear something along the lines of “I believe what I believe. I don’t need any evidence, I’m not looking for any evidence, and I won’t entertain any evidence.” Instead, it’s just “Dinky Dawkins” and “father time” and such nonsense. (By the way, I’m aquainted with Dr. Dawkins and I can assure you he is highly regarded in the scientific community generally, and the evolutionary biology community specifically.) Such nastiness is, at a minimum, un-Christian.Please take John’s post to heart and expose yourself to some kind of information source from outside the insular religious community you are immersed in. I know you don’t realize it, but from my point of view, and clearly from the points of view of others here, you are tragically ignorant about actual science and your posts are spectacularly farcical. What harm could a little exposure to actual unfiltered, uncensored science do?P.S. People do make fun of Mohammad and Buddha. When they make fun of Mohammad they are killed. When they make fun of Buddha, he laughs.

  • Canyon Shearer

    Chris,This conversation on your religion is over. It’s been thoroughly and totally disproven.But the issue is that it’s not evolution versus creation.It is antigod verses God.It is nearly impossible to believe in evolution and actually be a Christian. If you are a particularly unlearned Christian, then belief in evolution is possible, but it should fade away quickly as you are immersed in the truth.I am a VERY scientific person. I have a very hard time believing anything on faith. Evolution requires blind faith, and that is one thing I cannot do.Not saying you believe on blind faith, but if you aren’t believing on blind faith, then you are brainwashed, or both. Your religion is notorious for its excellent brainwashing techniques. Combine that with a preexisting nature to reject God, and you have a very dangerous religion.You know nothing of Dinky, lest you would know that peer-reviewed scientists and ‘atheists’ consistently call him a religious nut for attacking Christianity and believing evolution on blind faith.If you died tonight, and the Bible is true, would you go to Heaven, or to Hell?

  • John Griffith (Bright)

    Canyon,What is this religion that you keep referring to? I’m not aware of anyone but Rajan Zed and yourself openly declaring their faith.Your evasion does you no credit. If you are a scientific person — whatever that is supposed to mean — then you should be ready and willing, even chomping at the bit to pony up and say, “This is where I stand and this is the empirical evidence that supports my position.” When you evade the issue and use ad hominem it weakens your argument rather than strengthening it.And so I ask you again, what do you find incredible about the statement: descent with modification?

  • Canyon Shearer

    Evolution is a religion, based on a blind faith. Religion in non-Christianity means, “What brings you together”, almost literally. In Christianity, it means literally, “of the Word”, it’s incredible that the same word means both things. Included in the both, not through linguistics, but through tradition, is belief in the origin, purpose, and destination of life.More importantly, the religion of evolution is based around the deity of father time, that if nothing has enough time, something will happen. It’s the antithesis of science and logic.If you won’t do research, of which there is more than enough to destroy your blind faith, then there is nothing I can do for you.If the Bible is true, are you on your way to Heaven, or to Hell?If evolution is true, I’m working on growing some wings to break the 2nd Commandment in bringing myself closer to godhood.I’m not talking about the intricacies of your religion though, because they’ve all been discussed, and nothing a lay-believer like you could bring will add to the conversation.

  • Terry

    The absolute genius of Darwin’s discovery of the evolutionary process before the incorporation of genetics (although it had been discovered) is all the more astounding for it’s intuitive brilliance. Since blending the field of genetics and evolutionary theory, Darwin’s idea of natural selection has been compounded by considerable complexity, but has at the same time been firmly established beyond any doubt whatsoever. Evolutionary process as a scientific truth is not debated in scientific circles, it’s safe to say. In fact, Darwin’s theories haven’t been seriously challenged in over 100 years, other than by deluded religionists. If one is challenging the findings of genetics and the re-constitution and re-combination of DNA as the signal agent of genetic change, one should by all means be adept at using an electron microscope in order to refute what has been found to be true by direct observation. You would think that if evolutionary theory had been debunked, scientists in droves would be throwing in the towel, admitting defeat, and fleeing to their church pews for atonement. So far, no sign of that happening. In the face of ever-mounting evidence for the reality and complexity of the evolutionary process, it’s hard to finding a doubting Thomas in the science crowd. There are of course books out there by ‘scientists’ refuting evolutionary theory – it seems as though Barnes and Noble always has a couple on the shelf. These works stand out by the very nature of their scarcity….and always by people who may be scientifically trained, but who prefer the salving mythology of religion over the cold science of unraveling the self-oranizing processes, principles and inherently cohesive forces of nature itself – processes well documented by evolutionary biologists on a frequent basis. Whether or not you believe in a creator God really has little or nothing to do with the reality of evolution as a primary force of nature. You may have a problem if you happen to be a biblical literalist, but then you wouldn’t be doing your own thinking if that were the case, now would you??As for death, I’m perfectly comfortable with the idea because it’s so …. well, inevitable. For what happens next, read the Tibetan Book of the Dead for some real possibilities….people with very negative attributes (and more importantly, negative thoughts) may go to not one hell, but either 6 or 12 hot or cold hells, all depending.To prevent this, following the Golden Rule and the principle of ahimsa (no harm) is paramount.

  • Canyon Shearer

    Chaplain Zed,We agree on Physical truth and Spiritual Truth being inseparable.Dr. Del Tackett said it best, I think, when he said, “In the end, true philosophy and true theology must align with one another.”Marsilio Ficino, a platonist, wrote in 1482, “True philosophy and true religion are in harmony with one another. Good, love, humanity, and immortality form the universe a hierarchy of beings from God down to prime matter, with humankind, the microcosm, as the center and bond of the universe.”Martin Luther said, “Our Lord has written the promise of resurrection, not in books alone, but in every leaf in springtime.”God shows us the magnificance of metamorphosis in the transfiguration of the caterpillar into the butterfly. The caterpillar goes from a gross little worm, confined by gravity to an earthly existance, to being transformed by God into a graceful butterfly, loosed from the law of gravity to achieve the heavens.In every way, philosophy alligns with theology, especially pointing at death and resurrection.But unfortunately today’s ‘science’ aligns with neither. But which science are we supposed to agree with? In 1950, the world was 1.1 Billion years old…50 years later it’s 4.6 Billion years old…in another 50 years, I suppose it will be 1.1 Trillion years old. In 492 the earth was flat, in 1492 the earth was round. The earth used to be the center of the universe. The appendix used to be vestigial.If science has taught us anything, it is that science cannot be trusted. Science makes mistakes, and having failed, redoubles it’s efforts to make even grander mistakes.But God has been God since before time, He doesn’t change, no matter what we believe about Him, truth stands.Religion and today’s science cannot combine, because today’s science is out to disprove God and raise man to godhood. Christianity, which is the religion Wilson was writing to, disproves man’s godhood and restores God to godhood.But the true issue is why science has devoted so much effort and time into disproving God. It is because the heart of man is desperately wicked and deceitful above all things. It is predisposed to hate God and rebel against Him, this is a genetic trait we have inherited from our oldest Grandfather, Adam.In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth and the fish and the foul and all the animals and man, and placed man in the Garden. And it was good. When God says something is good, He means it is perfect.Then along came Adam and Eve, who were not the first to sin (Lucifer was the first), but the were the first to sin on Earth. They committed many sins that day.First, Eve doubted God’s word, she did not believe, “I will surely die”, she broke the most important Commandment which says to Love God with all your heart mind and soul. Then she sought to be a god by eating the fruit, which meant she coveted power. Then she ate of the forbidden tree, which broke the commandment, “Don’t eat from that tree”.Then Adam and Eve hid their shame through their own handiwork, they sewed itchy fig leaves together and covered themselves and hid from God. This created a god to suit themselves, they knew God was sovereign and omniscient, but they thought they could hide from Him, it was a great insult. Then God asked (with great sarcasm in His voice), Where are you? And they said they were afraid because they were naked. This was a lie, they were afraid because they had transgressed God’s command. Finally, God asked Adam if he had eaten of the tree, and Adam blamed Eve. In attempting to justify himself, Adam insulted (blasphemed) God’s sovereignty.So in the Garden, which heresofar had been “good” (aka perfect), Adam and Eve broke the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 9th, and 10th commandment.God KILLED an animal (probably a lamb or sheep) and covered Adam and Eve’s shame. This death marked the fall from perfection, and death has run rampant on earth ever since. We live in a fallen creation, all because of sin.So if you have any sin, any at all, then you will not be allowed into Heaven, because the wages of sin is death. Heaven will be Paradise, but if sin is allowed to enter, then Heaven will be as fallen as Earth, and it won’t be Heaven or Paradise.God sacrificed Jesus Christ, the perfect Lamb of God, on a cross outside of Jerusalem to satisfy the debt of your sins.Repent of your wickedness and place your trust in Jesus Christ to save you, and you will be forgiven, so that when you die (150,000 people die every day, you very well could be #141,423), you will be allowed into Heaven, not on your merits, but on the merits of Him who died and rose-again.So I beg of you, shed your façade of fig leaf and put on the Lamb, lest justice befall you.

  • Canyon Shearer

    Chaplain Zed,We agree on Physical truth and Spiritual Truth being inseparable.Dr. Del Tackett said it best, I think, when he said, “In the end, true philosophy and true theology must align with one another.”Marsilio Ficino, a platonist, wrote in 1482, “True philosophy and true religion are in harmony with one another. Good, love, humanity, and immortality form the universe a hierarchy of beings from God down to prime matter, with humankind, the microcosm, as the center and bond of the universe.”Martin Luther said, “Our Lord has written the promise of resurrection, not in books alone, but in every leaf in springtime.”God shows us the magnificance of metamorphosis in the transfiguration of the caterpillar into the butterfly. The caterpillar goes from a gross little worm, confined by gravity to an earthly existance, to being transformed by God into a graceful butterfly, loosed from the law of gravity to achieve the heavens.In every way, philosophy alligns with theology, especially pointing at death and resurrection.But unfortunately today’s ‘science’ aligns with neither. But which science are we supposed to agree with? In 1950, the world was 1.1 Billion years old…50 years later it’s 4.6 Billion years old…in another 50 years, I suppose it will be 1.1 Trillion years old. In 492 the earth was flat, in 1492 the earth was round. The earth used to be the center of the universe. The appendix used to be vestigial.If science has taught us anything, it is that science cannot be trusted. Science makes mistakes, and having failed, redoubles it’s efforts to make even grander mistakes.But God has been God since before time, He doesn’t change, no matter what we believe about Him, truth stands.Religion and today’s science cannot combine, because today’s science is out to disprove God and raise man to godhood. Christianity, which is the religion Wilson was writing to, disproves man’s godhood and restores God to godhood.But the true issue is why science has devoted so much effort and time into disproving God. It is because the heart of man is desperately wicked and deceitful above all things. It is predisposed to hate God and rebel against Him, this is a genetic trait we have inherited from our oldest Grandfather, Adam.In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth and the fish and the foul and all the animals and man, and placed man in the Garden. And it was good. When God says something is good, He means it is perfect.Then along came Adam and Eve, who were not the first to sin (Lucifer was the first), but the were the first to sin on Earth. They committed many sins that day.First, Eve doubted God’s word, she did not believe, “I will surely die”, she broke the most important Commandment which says to Love God with all your heart mind and soul. Then she sought to be a god by eating the fruit, which meant she coveted power. Then she ate of the forbidden tree, which broke the commandment, “Don’t eat from that tree”.Then Adam and Eve hid their shame through their own handiwork, they sewed itchy fig leaves together and covered themselves and hid from God. This created a god to suit themselves, they knew God was sovereign and omniscient, but they thought they could hide from Him, it was a great insult. Then God asked (with great sarcasm in His voice), Where are you? And they said they were afraid because they were naked. This was a lie, they were afraid because they had transgressed God’s command. Finally, God asked Adam if he had eaten of the tree, and Adam blamed Eve. In attempting to justify himself, Adam insulted (blasphemed) God’s sovereignty.So in the Garden, which heresofar had been “good” (aka perfect), Adam and Eve broke the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 9th, and 10th commandment.God KILLED an animal (probably a lamb or sheep) and covered Adam and Eve’s shame. This death marked the fall from perfection, and death has run rampant on earth ever since. We live in a fallen creation, all because of sin.So if you have any sin, any at all, then you will not be allowed into Heaven, because the wages of sin is death. Heaven will be Paradise, but if sin is allowed to enter, then Heaven will be as fallen as Earth, and it won’t be Heaven or Paradise.God sacrificed Jesus Christ, the perfect Lamb of God, on a cross outside of Jerusalem to satisfy the debt of your sins.Repent of your wickedness and place your trust in Jesus Christ to save you, and you will be forgiven, so that when you die (150,000 people die every day, you very well could be #141,423), you will be allowed into Heaven, not on your merits, but on the merits of Him who died and rose-again.So I beg of you, shed your façade of fig leaf and put on the Lamb, lest justice befall you.

  • Canyon Shearer

    Chaplain Zed,We agree on Physical truth and Spiritual Truth being inseparable.Dr. Del Tackett said it best, I think, when he said, “In the end, true philosophy and true theology must align with one another.”Marsilio Ficino, a platonist, wrote in 1482, “True philosophy and true religion are in harmony with one another. Good, love, humanity, and immortality form the universe a hierarchy of beings from God down to prime matter, with humankind, the microcosm, as the center and bond of the universe.”Martin Luther said, “Our Lord has written the promise of resurrection, not in books alone, but in every leaf in springtime.”God shows us the magnificance of metamorphosis in the transfiguration of the caterpillar into the butterfly. The caterpillar goes from a gross little worm, confined by gravity to an earthly existance, to being transformed by God into a graceful butterfly, loosed from the law of gravity to achieve the heavens.In every way, philosophy alligns with theology, especially pointing at death and resurrection.But unfortunately today’s ‘science’ aligns with neither. But which science are we supposed to agree with? In 1950, the world was 1.1 Billion years old…50 years later it’s 4.6 Billion years old…in another 50 years, I suppose it will be 1.1 Trillion years old. In 492 the earth was flat, in 1492 the earth was round. The earth used to be the center of the universe. The appendix used to be vestigial.If science has taught us anything, it is that science cannot be trusted. Science makes mistakes, and having failed, redoubles it’s efforts to make even grander mistakes.But God has been God since before time, He doesn’t change, no matter what we believe about Him, truth stands.Religion and today’s science cannot combine, because today’s science is out to disprove God and raise man to godhood. Christianity, which is the religion Wilson was writing to, disproves man’s godhood and restores God to godhood.But the true issue is why science has devoted so much effort and time into disproving God. It is because the heart of man is desperately wicked and deceitful above all things. It is predisposed to hate God and rebel against Him, this is a genetic trait we have inherited from our oldest Grandfather, Adam.In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth and the fish and the foul and all the animals and man, and placed man in the Garden. And it was good. When God says something is good, He means it is perfect.Then along came Adam and Eve, who were not the first to sin (Lucifer was the first), but the were the first to sin on Earth. They committed many sins that day.First, Eve doubted God’s word, she did not believe, “I will surely die”, she broke the most important Commandment which says to Love God with all your heart mind and soul. Then she sought to be a god by eating the fruit, which meant she coveted power. Then she ate of the forbidden tree, which broke the commandment, “Don’t eat from that tree”.Then Adam and Eve hid their shame through their own handiwork, they sewed itchy fig leaves together and covered themselves and hid from God. This created a god to suit themselves, they knew God was sovereign and omniscient, but they thought they could hide from Him, it was a great insult. Then God asked (with great sarcasm in His voice), Where are you? And they said they were afraid because they were naked. This was a lie, they were afraid because they had transgressed God’s command. Finally, God asked Adam if he had eaten of the tree, and Adam blamed Eve. In attempting to justify himself, Adam insulted (blasphemed) God’s sovereignty.So in the Garden, which heresofar had been “good” (aka perfect), Adam and Eve broke the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 9th, and 10th commandment.God KILLED an animal (probably a lamb or sheep) and covered Adam and Eve’s shame. This death marked the fall from perfection, and death has run rampant on earth ever since. We live in a fallen creation, all because of sin.So if you have any sin, any at all, then you will not be allowed into Heaven, because the wages of sin is death. Heaven will be Paradise, but if sin is allowed to enter, then Heaven will be as fallen as Earth, and it won’t be Heaven or Paradise.God sacrificed Jesus Christ, the perfect Lamb of God, on a cross outside of Jerusalem to satisfy the debt of your sins.Repent of your wickedness and place your trust in Jesus Christ to save you, and you will be forgiven, so that when you die (150,000 people die every day, you very well could be #141,423), you will be allowed into Heaven, not on your merits, but on the merits of Him who died and rose-again.So I beg of you, shed your façade of fig leaf and put on the Lamb, lest justice befall you.

  • Chris Everett

    Clearly the author doesn’t know what science even is. It seems that to him, science is the presence, in “holy” scripture, of physical and historical assertions. Nevermind that the passages need to be cherry picked and extrapolated beyond any natural implications in order to match them to legitimate scientific facts.Canyon Shearer is even worse. Not only does he not understand what science is, but he’s against the whole enterprise of learning itself, believing that the incremental process of investigation and model refinement are arguements AGAINST science! He prefers the comfort of absolute ignorance!This is the most insane On Faith article I have read. No offense but the author is a lunatic. If that sounds harsh I can only say that if lunatics exist, what keeps him out of their number?

  • Canyon Shearer

    Define aBiogenesis.

  • Are you KIDDING?!

    I don’t think the author OR Canyon Shearer have any idea what science really is. Canyon Shearer certainly indicates it more with the statement:”Dr. Del Tackett said it best, I think, when he said, “In the end, true philosophy and true theology must align with one another.””What does this have to do with science though? Philosophy is NOT science. “But unfortunately today’s ‘science’ aligns with neither. But which science are we supposed to agree with?”It’s not supposed to, else it is not science. Furthermore, science is NOT about agreement. The science that has advanced us to the place where we are has not done so by mere consensus, it has done so with proofs. Science is not a popularity contest.”But the true issue is why science has devoted so much effort and time into disproving God.”There is no evidence of this being the goal of science. The only shred of truth in this statement is inadvertent…part of the scientific method involves scientists advancing hypotheses and other scientists trying to disprove them.It is sad to see the way the educational system of this country has failed Canyon so badly. “If science has taught us anything, it is that science cannot be trusted. Science makes mistakes, and having failed, redoubles it’s efforts to make even grander mistakes.”This is so comical because it is so cleear that science has actually taught you NOTHING. When a scientist disproves another, the disproven hypothesis is abandoned. Mistakes are corrected all the time. That is how scientists become famous…by proving other ones wrong. Overturning the apple cart.Then as always, there’s the theological ridiculousness of Canyon…”First, Eve doubted God’s word, she did not believe, “I will surely die”, she broke the most important Commandment which says to Love God with all your heart mind and soul.””So in the Garden, which heresofar had been “good” (aka perfect), Adam and Eve broke the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 9th, and 10th commandment.”Uh…the Ten Commandments weren’t around in the garden of Eden. But then I guess facts and critical thinking aren’t really your strong point. Intelligent design is garbage, using the Bible as a text book for anything other than theology is blasphemous, and religous arguments against science NEVER hold water.Oh, and I am a Christian…so don’t give me that “you’re an athiest” crap.

  • JoeT

    Canyon: I don’t have blind faith in evolution. I am persuaded by the current weight of the evidence and analysis thereof by credible scientists using the scientific method over a century with consistency, and the consistency of the theory with the observable behavior of viruses, DNA, bacteria, etc. You pretend that you are basing your conclusion on science, but it is your faith taught conclusion that is driving you to accept as decent science the utter nonsense put up by the creation museum folks that has been thoroughly rebutted by credible scientists, including, for example, irreducible complexity, which persuades folks on christian TV who aren’t told that the argument is BS, but no one else, and isn’t how science works in any event (a possible problem with a theory doesn’t disprove it in the absence of more, and certainly does not prove the opposite). You probably believe the 6000 year old earth stuff too.

  • John Griffith (Bright)

    Canyon,Your response is what is called a non-sequitor. My post stands and I await your response.

  • Are you KIDDING?!

    Yes, Canyon, that is EXACTLY what I am talking about. ABSURD!

  • Rajan Zed

    I would agree that the metaphysics of the non-Abrahamic faiths, namely Hinduism and Buddhism, can be understood to be both pre-cursors to modern science, and also to contain ultimate revelations about the nature of reality that science will very likely discover and prove by a strict scientific methodology – some day. Of course this is speculation, but the seeds of similarity can be found in both the Vedas and Sutras as you point out. Science and quantum physics currently reaches an Thus, no independent, self-existing objects can actually be found, as all things exist co-dependently and simultaneusly for all time – cause and effect being infinitely interactive. Ergo, if this is true at the quantum level, it must also be true at the macro-level of Newton’s universe (despite appearances to the contrary). And this is what both Hinduism and Buddhism also say – all is One. So in this forever interdependent spirit, we must indeed take better care of both the planet and one another. The illusion of independence gives folks the idea that responsibility is not universal in this regard – but only the responsibility of select individuals, societies and cultures. Similarly, the illusion of individual salvation and sense of religious superiority that goes with this philosophy is anathema to the proper care of all life forms, including the planet that sustains life in all it’s multiplicity. Religion often gives people the false and arrogant sense that their responbility and destiny lies elsewhere (divine spheres?)when nothing could be further from the truth.

  • Canyon Shearer

    Here is an opportunity for you to make an easy $270,000 from three legitimate websites:intelligentdesignversusevolution.com/arguments.htmlEvolution is a dying religion. I suggest you jump ship before it’s too late. I did.

  • Terry

    Please excuse the mis-named post just above …

  • Are you KIDDING?!

    Chris Everett,How strange, I was just reading about Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District last night. Fascinating. I would have liked the transcript.This is yet ANOTHER example of how the Creationist/ID groups just cannot win a court case. The ruling in this case wasa strong enough that the judge specified that it was just a polished and reworded version of the same information that had not held up in all the similar cases before it.I think the scariest thing about Creationism/ID is that it is not about education AT ALL! It is merely ONE weapon in the arsenal of the Fundamental Christians’ attempt to destroy the Constitution and establish a theocracy. Infiltrating the cirriculum would allow them to begin indoctrination of our children.All arguments for it (ID) are weak, and involve no science. They rely entirely on debate “tricks”, emotional appeals and the ignorance of their followers.Poor, ignorant and blind followers (like poor Canyon) above are just pawns. They would not benefit from a theocracy, they would become the victims of the very monster they help to create.

  • Are you KIDDING?!

    Ah, yes! Those sites are hilarious! Don’t offer your own evidence of your own point. Attempt to prove your point by indicating the apathy of others toward your idiocy!Nice tactic!

  • Canyon Shearer

    “Are you Kidding?!?”, can I borrow a few thousand dollars? You must have collected by now?

  • Are you KIDDING?!

    The whole point is that NO ONE will ever collect it. The propostion is just absurd.In fact, anyone who could SCIENTIFICALLY disprove evolution would be famous! Why doesn’t he spend his money on that, IF he is right about the whole creationism thing?Disproving an established theory would be a scientists DREAM!

  • AgentG

    As someone with Hindu roots, I respectfully submit that the author’s statements do not appear scientifically credible. In fact, such liduicrous and unfounded statements provide anyone aiming to ridicule and debase Hindusim with the perfect ammunition. While the author may have noble intentions and may genuinely believe what he is writing, there is no proof, either literal, historical or physical, for his assertions. Neither is their any genuine attempt to discover or research these topics in a scientific manner. In the end, he is doing his own religion and culture a great disservice with such proud-chested statements.I believe such attitudes ultimately derive from a deep insecurity in view of the vastly advanced state of development in the Western world. In fact, every purported ancient achievement is described not in terms of its natural legacy, but is precisely mapped against Western science. Instead of reflect on why so much has been lost, and what cultural traits hinder progress, investment in the future, and scientific advancement in Hindu cultures, this Hindu leader can only make ridiculous statements of the glory of their ancient culture. What about analysing the last 1,000 years with some degree of honesty and sincerity?Contrast the author’s approach with that of the Dalai Lama, who in view of scientific results contrary to Buddhist doctrine, is eager and willing to adapt Buddhism to reflect establish facts.

  • AgentG

    As someone with Hindu roots, I respectfully submit that the author’s statements do not appear scientifically credible. In fact, such liduicrous and unfounded statements provide anyone aiming to ridicule and debase Hindusim with the perfect ammunition. While the author may have noble intentions and may genuinely believe what he is writing, there is no proof, either literal, historical or physical, for his assertions. Neither is their any genuine attempt to discover or research these topics in a scientific manner. In the end, he is doing his own religion and culture a great disservice with such proud-chested statements.I believe such attitudes ultimately derive from a deep insecurity in view of the vastly advanced state of development in the Western world. In fact, every purported ancient achievement is described not in terms of its natural legacy, but is precisely mapped against Western science. Instead of reflect on why so much has been lost, and what cultural traits hinder progress, investment in the future, and scientific advancement in Hindu cultures, this Hindu leader can only make ridiculous statements of the glory of their ancient culture. What about analysing the last 1,000 years with some degree of honesty and sincerity?Contrast the author’s approach with that of the Dalai Lama, who in view of scientific results contrary to Buddhist doctrine, is eager and willing to adapt Buddhism to reflect establish facts.

  • Viejita del oeste

    I’m beginning to think that Canyon Shearer is in reality a 9-year-old student at an fundamentalist elementary school with too much time on his or her hands.

  • Christopher W. Chase

    The fact is that very few commenters here are either willing or able to engage in intelligent, on-topic conversation. This is a thread on Hinduism and Science, and the nature of physical/spiritual truth. If you don’t know enough about Hinduism’s relationship with Science to make an on-topic post, you probably shouldn’t be posting in this blog. Many fine scholarly studies on Hinduism and Science exist. Someone should read them.

  • JoeT

    On a lighter note (esp for you, Canyon) geneticists recently discovered as a result of gene mapping that human males have more DNA in common with chimpanzee males than they do with human females. this suggests that we should be careful dismisssing evolution. I quipped with a famous HIV specialist I know (who knew of the results I quoted) that they could have saved all the money spent on this study and just asked women.

  • Mad Love

    Canyon, are/were you a student at Liberty University?

  • dr t clifford

    beed stastics that show importance and high corrolation in spirituality and physical being on growth and positive transformation . can you suggest resources?

  • Gerry

    Friends, this boy Canyon Shearer is such a joke that I can understand your readiness to keep up the discussion with him, just for the sake of entertainment. Unfortunately, however, there are enough morons around who are voters and who, for lack of basic education, might be impressed by this dangerous nonsense. People burned “witches” because they were impressed by similar nonsense and equally lacking the smallest elements of education and thinking. (Martin Luther was a great friend of witch burning!)Nobody takes this drivel seriously. He has never read a single page of Daniel Dennett, because he wouldn’t understand it. Instead, he picks up the aggressive superstition of his fellow ignorants and screams it into what he thinks is a discussion. Religion and science cannot merge. They can only try to find some common elements in the social field (Golden rule), but not in the search for truth and evidence. Religious minds who try to understand honest, modest, falsifiable scientific thinking will have to maintain their split brain (open thinking vs. fancy faiths) for generations to come – or dismiss the “revelation” religions. Nature offers and more and more reveals all that is necessary to live a “spiritual” life of awe, love, respect, accountability and stewardship towards this nature, OF WHICH WE ARE A PART – even Canyon Shearer. (Species have disappeared for lack of adaptation, lol!).

  • Chris Everett

    Canyon is obviously in pain. He clings to his fundamentalism as a palliative against his pain. The trajedy is that his fundamentalism is the source of his pain.Let go, Canyon, let go.

  • Nate

    Aaarrgh. Why do you guys acknowledge Canyon? He’s a retard. Reading your posts is very educational, thanks.

  • Norrie Hoyt

    Chris Everett, A couple of days ago you wrote:”Of course, Buddhism has a superstitious dimension to it as well, as evidenced in beliefs about reincarnation and karma…”Virtually everything has a superstitious dimension to it, including science, if you look carefully enough at it.Question:If a belief is thought to be a superstition, and is called that, but is later proven to be correct, was it ever really a superstition?I think it’s too early to conclude that Buddhist cosmological beliefs, such as in reincarnation and the operation of karma through successive lives, are superstitions.See “Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation” and subsequent writings by Ian Stevenson, M.D., late of the University of Virginia Medical School.You can read Skeptical Investigations’ take on Dr. Stevenson and his work at:I’m agnostic about reincarnation and the operation of karma, and not yet ready to dismiss them as supersttions.I enjoy your posts and generally agree with them.Best wishes.

  • Mad Love

    My Karma ran over my Dogma.

  • Rationalist

    Reverend Rajan Zed. Thank you for writing this nice article. spiritualism and Physical existence with its eon forms are inseparable. It is an elementary knowledge that all matters are nothing but accumulation of pure energies. And this pure energy- how they being aggregated and being solidified and the transformed it in to a visibly mass- object-can be manipulated and further can be transmuted to new forms and with added characteristics in structural Biological growth.

  • Rationalist

    Reverend Rajan Zed. Thank you for writing this nice article. spiritualism and Physical existence with its eon forms are inseparable. It is an elementary knowledge that all matters are nothing but accumulation of pure energies. And this pure energy- how they being aggregated and being solidified and the transformed it in to a visibly mass- object-can be manipulated and further can be transmuted to new forms and with added characteristics in structural Biological growth.

  • Terry

    Rationalist – I recommend you read ‘Wholeness and the Implicate Order’ by David Bohm. A noted contemporary era physicist, he expands beyond Sheldrake’s hypothesis. Then of course there isIn an ultimate sense, even the most profound theories of quantum mechanics are a human-created system for understanding the ‘why and wherefore’ of the material universe – pure samsara, according to Buddhism. All very good in a relative sense, but very remote from a direct apprehension of one’s own Mind. Best, Terry

  • E.Ponsonby-Smallpiece

    I have to say it was wonderful to see Canyon Shearer challenged and revealed as a brainwashed nincompoop.

  • Wottalot of Malarky

    Rajan Zed;

  • Benaam

    This is misguiding. In Hinduism there are so many Gods e.g. idols, rats, birds and trees. For example they worship RATS. May be you rember about plague in 1994. Is that scientic reason that Hindus worship rats etc?