Soul Food for Thought

“What we consider the here and now, this world, it is actually just the material level that is comprehensible. The beyond is an infinite reality that is much bigger. Which this world is rooted in. In this way, our lives in this plane of existence are encompassed, surrounded, by the afterworld already. When planning I imagine that I have written my existence in this world on a sort of hard drive on the tangible (the brain), that I have also transferred this data onto the spiritual quantum field, then I could say that when I die, I do not lose this information, this consciousness. The body dies but the spiritual quantum field continues. In this way, I am immortal.”

-- Prof. Dr. Hans-Peter Dürr (1929-2014), quantum physicist

Those of you who have read my posts, my thoughts dealing with time, reality, and the afterlife, will recognize, hopefully, much of my thoughts in the opening quote, above, of noted quantum physicist Prof. Hans-Peter Dürr.  Our ideas on this are so similar I could have written this quote, utilizing many more words of course.  I think he considered his larger audience and "dumbed" his thought down a bit.  When I was taught to write papers for the "general audience," I was taught to do so at a second grade level, not that everyone was incapable of understanding above this level; it was simply to ensure everyone understood.  You don't address non-medical personnel about taking a "5 cc" dose of medication; you tell them to take "one teaspoon" of it.

Trying to keep an "out in left field" thought simple while also keeping the simplified explanation of it short, well, oft times its mixing oil and water.  I have proofread briefings of some very intelligent people, then called them up and asked if they would mind if I marked it up for them, to make it a bit clearer.  They're usual response upon seeing the revised product is that I took a meat ax to it.  It is much simpler when you are both capable and able to consider your audience, then you simply write to their general level of understanding.  One, everyone will appreciate being addressed to their level so they understand.  Two, everyone will stay awake because it remains interesting.  While writing for my blog, however, I'm casting a wide net around an unknown audience, so what might take Prof. Dürr a paragraph to say, might take me an entire post.  But, I digress... again; let me try to get back on point.

A noted Canadian neurosurgeon, Wilder Penfield (1891-1976), spent most of his career in groundbreaking research as a devoted surgeon.  It is said, "He devoted much thinking to the mystery of the mind, and continued until his death in 1976 to contemplate and question whether there is a scientific basis for the existence of the human soul."   Can you imagine spending your entire life contemplating the existence of the soul, and then actually dying to find out the answer?  Perhaps for Penfield, and those like him, there is so much subconscious residual memory of their time between lives, the time they spent as a disembodied soul, they find themselves subconsciously confused and, hence, trying to discover a way back.

I gleaned the following from the website, Conservapedia on the topic of "Atheism and the origin of the universe."  I present these as a general philosophy of atheist belief, by several prominent atheists.  The common belief is fairly obvious.

Atheist Stephen Hawking claims: "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing". Hawking further claims that the universe “popped into existence without violating the known laws of Nature".

Atheist Victor J. Stenger wrote: "Assuming the universe came from nothing, it is empty to begin with…"

The atheist philosopher Quinton Smith indicated “the most reasonable belief is that we came from nothing, by nothing, and for nothing."

Wayne Jackson wrote at the Christian Courier regarding Victor J. Stenger's hypothesis that the universe came from nothing:

"First, in defiance of one of the most elementary principles of logic, the atheist suggests that “something” (e.g., the Universe) came from “nothing;” that zero plus zero equals something greater than zero. 

Victor Stenger, an atheistic professor at the University of Hawaii, admits that “everyday experience and common sense” supports the concept that something cannot come from nothing. Nevertheless, he suggests that “common sense is often wrong, and our normal experiences are but a tiny fraction of reality”. If you want to be an atheist, you must put your “common sense” on the shelf!"

Science, not religion, is proving there is no such thing as "nothing."  The mere concept of nothing, defining nothing, giving a name to "nothing," all make "nothing" something.  There is no such thing as an absolute vacuum, void of everything.  Not trying to be a smartass, but a vacuum is chock full of nothing.   Let's consider each statement above.

Hawking state the universe will create itself from nothing due to the laws of gravity.  So, the universe used nothing and the laws of gravity in order to create itself, and did not violate the laws of nature in doing so.  Okay, Stephen admits and then ignores that nothing, gravity, and nature, by his own admission, existed for creation to have occurred?

Stenger ignores there is no such thing as nothing.

Smith indicates the existence of nothing by stating we came from it, by it, and for it.  What?

Jackson writes of Stenger as saying experience and common sense support the concept that something cannot come from nothing, and in this he speaks the truth if we acknowledge the contradiction that there is no such thing as absolute nothing.  He goes on to state a truth for the atheist:  "If you want to be an atheist, you must put your “common sense” on the shelf!"  On this, I think everyone can agree.

Now, let me get back to Prof. Dürr, a quantum physicist, a scientist.  As I have stated time and time again, science will continue to prove the existence of a higher power in the universe, a power which always was, is now, and forever shall be.  What we call this ultimate power is of little consequence to the truth that it exists.  Everything comes from it and everything, eventually, returns to it.

The English Burial Service adapts a portion of text from Genesis:  "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."  This is also adapted in the 1662 version of the Book of Common Prayer in the text of the burial service.  As you read the excerpt, try substituting "energy" or "the ultimate power" for words indicating God or Jesus:

"Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God of his great mercy to take unto himself the soul of our dear brother here departed, we therefore commit his body to the ground; earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust; in sure and certain hope of the Resurrection to eternal life, through our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall change our vile body, that it may be like unto his glorious body, according to the mighty working, whereby he is able to subdue all things to himself."

There should be no question that energy cannot be "nothing."  What we call the "soul" might exist simply because we gave it a name.  Science is discovering that we lose a tangible amount of weight upon death; the soul?  There is too much about after death experience, past life memory, and the soul, which we still don't know for science to be making any concrete statements concerning them.  

I think these atheists are correct, and people of faith should all agree with them and always be mindful of nothing.  The universe popped into existence without violating any existing laws.  The universe came from nothing as it was empty to begin with.  We came from nothing, by nothing, and for nothing.  If we accept there is no such thing as absolute nothing, then there is no "defiance of one of the most elementary principles of logic" in stating that nothing plus nothing must equals something greater than nothing.  And, finally, I hate to agree all the way down the list to the bitter end but, we must agree with the atheist to put our "common sense on the shelf" as the very existence of "God" demands it.  

People of faith need to stop arguing with atheists if they continue to insist on arguing our arguments for us.  

In conclusion, it seems whatever exists might morph into something else, but it will always be a part of the creative energy of the universe.  People of faith know this and, obviously, people of little or no faith try unsuccessfully to shelve it all the while proving what people of faith, well, take on faith.  

What we all need to stop doing is ignoring the undeniable fact that there is something greater than ourselves at work in the universe simply because we call it by different names.  It really matters very little what we call it.  I suppose what matters, for some, is how much respect we give it.  I prefer to give anything that can change life, as I know it, a healthy dose of respect.  

But, this is all just my humble opinion, and I could be wrong.  My faith tells me I'm not.

What do you think? 

Editor's Note

(Re: disclaimer cum "get out of jail free" card)

Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider another viewpoint. 

It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and while engaging in peaceful, constructive, discussion in an arena of mutual respect concerning the opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.

We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.

Pastor Tony spent 23 years with United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with an Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects in pharmaceutical research. Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, to wage his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteers as Chaplain Program Liaison, at a regional medical center.