The Creation of the Universe
Fri, 01/25/2008 - 17:31 — admin
The law of cause and effect is a universally accepted principle. Whenever there is some perceivable effect, it can be concluded that there is a cause for it. Even Hume would be willing to admit this.23
Everything has a cause, and by and large, science is dedicated to finding out the cause of everything. If the scientists are able to accept that there is a cause for everything in the universe, is it not logical that, as the next step, they should come to accept that the universe itself is caused?
MICHAEL: It would seem to me that they should.
TEACHER: More and more they are forced to, since overwhelming evidence pointing to a beginning moment of creation for the universe is being compiled by physicists and astronomers. At present, all of Theories which ignore the idea of a master plan, or consciously controlled cosmos, have their beginning in an already-existing mass of material particles. They have a very difficult time when asked to explain where those particles came from. The molecular evolutionists, for example, stammer and stutter when asked where the ingredients of their primal soup came from. Similarly, those who propose the creation of the universe through a “big bang” have difficulty in ignoring the fact that the ingredients of the explosion must have existed prior to the explosion itself. Despite the fact that many scientists adamantly insist that evolution or accidental generation caused the universe, if you corner them and ask them for explanations about the existence of the fundamental circumstances or environment in which their theories begin, a point of creation of some type must be admitted. Material scientists are very uncomfortable indeed about admitting any sort of creation, since wherever there is creation, there must also exist a creator. Such an admission spells instant doom for their theories, of course.
MICHAEL: And your proposal is that the factual existence of such a creator is obvious?
TEACHER: Not only is it obvious, but it is scientifically more verifiable than the existence of the atom, which is the fundamental principle upon which modern physics and chemistry are based.
No scientist has ever seen an atom, but the abundant evidence pointing to its existence is so strong that you will not find a scientist anywhere who denies its reality. The evidence pointing to the existence of a creator of the universe or a causal agent is even more overwhelming. It is so staggering that it is indeed wondrous that this principle is not universally accepted.
So far we have come to conclude that:
Nature is governed by particular laws and that these laws were brought into being by a lawmaker, or controller of nature.
There exists a harmonizer or designer responsible for the order of the universe.
There is a cause or creative principle responsible for the beginning and existence of the universe.
If a person engages in the process of bhakti yoga and yet continues to engage in activities that are detrimental to spiritual progress, his spiritual progress will be very slow. This does not mean that a person must be completely free of all bad habits before he can even begin the process of bhakti yoga. For example, in the Philippines, one teacher saved many young people who were addicted to heroin and other drugs by teaching them the process of bhakti yoga. It took some time before they could completely give up all drugs; but eventually they did.The Creation of the Universe
Science of Identity Foundation – Siddhaswarupananda
The law of cause and effect is a universally accepted principle. Whenever there is some perceivable effect, it can be concluded that there is a cause for it. Even Hume would be willing to admit this.23
Everything has a cause, and by and large, science is dedicated to finding out the cause of everything. If the scientists are able to accept that there is a cause for everything in the universe, is it not logical that, as the next step, they should come to accept that the universe itself is caused?
MICHAEL: It would seem to me that they should.
TEACHER: More and more they are forced to, since overwhelming evidence pointing to a beginning moment of creation for the universe is being compiled by physicists and astronomers. At present, all of Theories which ignore the idea of a master plan, or consciously controlled cosmos, have their beginning in an already-existing mass of material particles. They have a very difficult time when asked to explain where those particles came from. The molecular evolutionists, for example, stammer and stutter when asked where the ingredients of their primal soup came from. Similarly, those who propose the creation of the universe through a “big bang” have difficulty in ignoring the fact that the ingredients of the explosion must have existed prior to the explosion itself. Despite the fact that many scientists adamantly insist that evolution or accidental generation caused the universe, if you corner them and ask them for explanations about the existence of the fundamental circumstances or environment in which their theories begin, a point of creation of some type must be admitted. Material scientists are very uncomfortable indeed about admitting any sort of creation, since wherever there is creation, there must also exist a creator. Such an admission spells instant doom for their theories, of course.
MICHAEL: And your proposal is that the factual existence of such a creator is obvious?
TEACHER: Not only is it obvious, but it is scientifically more verifiable than the existence of the atom, which is the fundamental principle upon which modern physics and chemistry are based.
No scientist has ever seen an atom, but the abundant evidence pointing to its existence is so strong that you will not find a scientist anywhere who denies its reality. The evidence pointing to the existence of a creator of the universe or a causal agent is even more overwhelming. It is so staggering that it is indeed wondrous that this principle is not universally accepted.
So far we have come to conclude that:
Nature is governed by particular laws and that these laws were brought into being by a lawmaker, or controller of nature.
There exists a harmonizer or designer responsible for the order of the universe.
There is a cause or creative principle responsible for the beginning and existence of the universe.