From parts of the book “THE GOD THEORY”
by Bernard Haisch (published 2006)
The challenge for science is to free the tools, experiments, observations, and logic of the scientific method from the shackles of reductionist ideology, which cannot tolerate the concept of a real and primary, and therefore non-epiphenomenal, consciousness. The challenge is to think like a scientist without being trapped in the assumption of the present-day physical model of reality that matter is all there is and all there can be.
In the God Theory, consciousness is the primary stuff of reality. Consciousness is able to shape and direct matter. Consciousness, in fact, has created this universe—the planets and stars, the plants and animals, and you and me.
This is not accomplished by the kind of miraculous construction-out-of-nothing beloved by fundamentalists, but rather by an infinite intelligence dreaming up an infinite variety of laws and values for physical constants, and then letting those laws and values evolve into the stars and planets and life forms of an infinite number of universes.
The Big Bang and evolution are just tools whereby our particular universe and its conscious life forms become actualized, actualized in open-ended, novel, creative ways, not by detailed design.
[NOW WE SEE CLEARLY THE AUTHOR IS NOT LIKE MYSELF - A FUNDAMENTALIST - BUT AN EVOLUTION CREATIONIST; FOR HIM GOD USED THE SLOW, VERY SLOW, PROGRESS OF EVOLUTION TO BRING ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE ON THIS EARTH TODAY - Keith Hunt]
Through creation, an infinite consciousness provides a kind of a playground for itself. Having done that, it incarnates as individual beings—plants, animals, human beings, extraterrestrials— thereby experiencing diversity and enormous ranges of complexity. In this view, we are all little pieces of the same consciousness that has deliberately fragmented itself so that you can be you and I can be me. Why? The initiating consciousness creates your whole world for its own evolution, its own growth, and, perhaps, its own amusement. This is the essence of the God Theory.
[GOD WAS USING BITS AND PIECES, DELIBERATELY FRAGMENTED TO BRING ABOUT THROUGH EVOLUTION, WHAT YOU SEE AROUND YOU TODAY; AND AMONG OTHER THINGS, FOR THAT GOD BEING’S AMUSEMENT - Keith Hunt]
How does this happen? New discoveries in physics may now be pointing, for the first time in human history, toward a mechanism of creation in its most basic form.
INTO THE VOID
"God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light." This simple but profoundly elegant statement from Genesis has, for three millennia, revealed an insight into the mysterious nature of our material world. It portrays light as the first manifestation of creation. Great Gothic cathedrals—Chartres, Notre Dame, Cologne—were built to let light stream in through magnificent stained-glass windows, in which halos of light surround the countenances of saints. As faith gave way to scientific rationality in the era of Copernicus, Galileo, and Newton, however, there was no longer any getting around the apparently blatant contradictions between the newborn science and the ancient scripture.
[NO, TRUE SCIENCE AND THE BIBLE DO NOT CONTRADICT EACH OTHER - Keith Hunt]
Within the scriptures themselves, there are contradictions.
[NO! JESUS SAID “THE SCRIPTURES CANNOT BE BROKEN” - THEY DO NOT CONTRADICT EACH OTHER - THERE ARE NO VERSES IN THE BIBLE THAT CONTRADICT OTHER VERSES - Keith Hunt]
How can light have appeared on the first day of creation when the sun, the moon, and the stars—obvious sources of light in the sky—were not created until the fourth?
The sequence is wrong; it is out of order. Regardless of what astronomical unit of time—perhaps billions of years—you substitute for the allegorical "days" of Genesis, the chain of events is wrong at the most fundamental level. One could well imagine outspoken Wolfgang Pauli, a revered father of modern physics, blasting such a retrograde notion of creation with his legendary dismissal: "It's not even wrong!" By that he meant: It's beyond wrong.
[THE AUTHOR IS NOT A THEOLOGIAN. I HAVE DOUBT HE HAS DONE MUCH RESEARCH INTO THE BIBLE. THE SUN, MOON, AND STARS, WERE NOT CREATED ON THE FOURTH DAY; THEY HAD ALREADY BEEN THERE FOR….WELL, WHO KNOWS HOW LONG, WE ARE NOT TOLD. THE FENTON TRANSLATION GIVES THE ANSWER; HE GIVES THE HEBREW AS “HAD CREATED” - PAST TENSE. THE SUN, MOON, STARS, BECAME VISIBLE AS LIKE TODAY, EVEN BETTER THAT TODAY AS THERE WAS NO POLLUTION - Keith Hunt]
I was not particularly concerned about this scriptural discrepancy when I was eighteen years old and immersed in the spiritual life as a fledgling seminarian. The surprisingly modern position of my monk-teachers was that this was an ancient allegory whose purpose was to elucidate the workings and consequences of good and evil, not define the laws of physics. Such an enlightened attitude struck me as a welcome sign of progress since the dark days of Galileo's persecution for heresy. Besides, as important as light is, it comes and goes at the flick of a switch. It was surely matter that mattered. That is the stuff of which the stars, planets, and we ourselves are made—atomic matter, the stable stuff of the universe.
Is there any insight into the nature of matter in sacred scripture? Are there any tangible, quantifiable physical laws expressed there? I was not aware of any, and felt I had better things to explore than ancient mythology. In the context of modern astrophysics, the perceived shortcomings of Genesis were an absolute non-issue to me. Cosmology was explained by the Big Bang, the Hubble expansion, and the cosmic microwave background, not some implausible creation myth. One could, of course, generalize light to mean simply energy and thus claim a reference to the Big Bang. That seems like more of a stretch than a revelation to me, however. After all, God didn't say, "Let there be energy." That would have been different.
[CREATION MYTH, OR HAND-ME-DOWN TALES OF CREATION IS WHAT HE THINKS OF GENESIS 1 AND 2 - Keith Hunt]
The Loma Prieta earthquake, which badly damaged the building I worked in in Palo Alto and sent my colleagues scrambling under their desks amid a shower of objects, was a turning point in my life. The seismic waves of the quake happened to focus in the area surrounding the lab and seemingly solid buildings in that usually safe and tranquil section of Palo Alto undulated like ocean waves.
The Lockheed building was declared unsafe and my colleagues and I were shoehorned into a nearby building in a considerably less attractive part of town right next to the railroad tracks. My new temporary office was a large converted storage room with no windows. The thought of spending months working in this environment was rather depressing. I no longer rushed back to work after lunch and instead spent a lot of time walking around, sometimes strolling into a nearby bookstore.
One day as I was browsing through the shelves, I happened to pick up a book called The Other Bible, which is a collection of ancient scriptures that did not make it into the Bible as we know it today. Many ancient texts are part of what is called pseude-pigrapha, biblical-like texts that were not incorporated into the canonical Old Testament. In fact, some religious traditions include some of the pseudepigrapha in their accepted canon; there is not 100 percent agreement among different religious traditions as to exactly which writings belong in the Bible.
[OH YES THAT IS TRUE IN SOME PARTS OF CHRISTIANITY; BUT YOU CAN KNOW HOW THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT WERE “CANONIZED” - IF GOD EXISTS, AS HE SURELY DOES, HE HAS THE POWER TO GIVE US HIS INSPIRED WORD. THE CANON OF THE BIBLE IS FULLY EXPOUNDED UNDER “HOW WE GOT THE BIBLE” ON THIS WEBSITE - Keith Hunt]
As I opened it, I came across a startling passage in a text known as the Haggadah, a collection of legends within the Jewish Kabbalah. The text seemed to comment on the well-known opening line from the Genesis, "Let there be light," which to a scientist, makes little sense. As discussed previously, how can light be made on the first "day of creation," when the sun and the moon and the stars—the plainly obvious sources of light in the sky—were not brought into being until the fourth? As an astrophysicist, of course I dismissed the divine workweek cosmogony of Genesis, including God's overtime on day six. If you really wanted to force fit things you could always reinterpret days as eons, billions of years long if necessary. The problem with Genesis was more fundamental though: Things in the let-there-be-light department were fatally out of order.
[NO, THERE IS NO OUT-OF-ORDER IN GENESIS 1. THE AUTHOR IS JUST NOT A “BIBLE STUDY” MAN - HE HAS NOT SEARCHED TO SEE WHAT GENESIS 1 IS REALLY TEACHING - Keith HUNT]
The remarkable passage from the Haggadah addresses the very issue that seems so blatantly nonsensical in Genesis. As if to patiently explain to the foolish (like astrophysicists, I suppose) who may have missed the point, the Haggadah forthrightly states: "The light created at the very beginning is not the same as the light emitted by the Sun, the Moon, and the stars, which appeared only on the fourth day."
[INDEED SO - THE LIGHT OF THIS FIRST DAY WAS NOT THE SAME LIGHT AS THE FOURTH DAY - Keith Hunt]
It's almost as if the ancient author had anticipated this modern objection to the passage in Genesis: Well, of course you can't have the light coming before the sun, moon, and stars; it's ridiculous, and even I, writing this a zillion years ago and still a scientific ignoramus know that. Then it says: “But let me tell you, there's a different light.”
The passage continues: "The light of the first day was of a sort that would have enabled man to see the world at a glance from one end to the other. Anticipating the wickedness of the sinful generations of the deluge and the Tower of Babel, who were unworthy to enjoy the blessing of such light, God concealed it, but in the world to come it will appear to the pious in all its pristine glory."
This passage is nothing less than stunning. There is even an implication of hidden and potentially useful power. And as in the passage from Genesis, light is once again implicated as a key to the creation process itself. But could this possibly mean anything real and substantive? Could it be anything other than mere ancient allegory?
[INDEED IT IS NOT JUST MERE “ALLEGORY” - Keith Hunt]
THE BIG BANG
Mainstream science traces the history of the cosmos back to a Big Bang some fourteen billion years ago, a theory that is correct as far as it goes. The question not addressed by the theory, however, is what caused the Big Bang? Where did the primordial stuff of that explosion originate and when did time begin? There is no single widely accepted answer to these questions. Some scientists simply say that no one knows and admit that the questions lie beyond the scope of science. Others take a stronger position, claiming that these questions are actually devoid of meaning and as nonsensical as asking what a round square would look like, or how red would taste.
Ironically, however, by casting these questions beyond logic and the scope of science, science, in a sense, admits the possibility that the riddle of the origin of the universe requires that we look beyond the laws of science, at least as they are defined today. Of course, this route takes us directly into the realm of creation and religion—an approach that scientists, in general, abhor.
Assume, for the sake of argument, that the reference to light in the Haggadah is to some actual fact relevant to the creation of the universe in the Big Bang. What might that represent in modern scientific terms?
One possibility, of course, is the radiation-dominated era of the universe following the Big Bang. Modern computations show that, for the first 300,000 years after the Big Bang, the universe was devoid of stable matter, but filled with electromagnetic radiation.
[WELLLL……SOME SCIENCE WANT TO TELL YOU THAT IS SO, BUT IT WAS NOT NECESSARILY THAT WAY AT ALL - Keith Hunt]
Again for the sake of argument, assume that an ancient reference to light is equivalent to a modern reference to electromagnetic fields. After all, visible light is part of the electromagnetic spectrum, and the only difference between microwaves, infrared, visible light, ultraviolet, x-rays, and gamma-ray emissions is the wavelength, or equivalent energy, involved. All are a form of electromagnetic radiation; all can be said, in a generic sense, to be light.
At first glance, this is a plausible interpretation. Leaving aside questions of how such knowledge was revealed and to whom, it is natural to equate the light of Genesis with the electromagnetic radiation accompanying the primordial fireball of the Big Bang revealed by modern computations and astrophysical observations.
If you take the Haggadah passage literally, however, there is a problem. There is no possibility of "seeing the world at a glance from one end to the other," even in principle, since the primary astrophysical characteristic of the radiation-dominated era of the universe is opacity, exactly the opposite of end-to-end visibility. Cosmologist Joseph Silk, in The Big Bang, notes:
Of course, we cannot directly observe the primeval fireball, and in fact direct observation would have been impossible even by a hypothetical human observer, for the universe did not become transparent until after 300,000 years. Direct observation of the early universe could not be feasible until the density and temperature had fallen to the point at which matter could form and radiation could propagate freely. Before 300,000 years had elapsed, observing the early universe would have been like trying to peer into a dense fog.
[AGAIN THIS IS EVOLUTIONARY SCIENCE - Keith Hunt]
This contradiction between the "revealed" or spiritual, and the calculated or scientific optical, properties of the universe suggests that we are on the wrong track. Most scientists would probably attribute the contradiction to the mythical nature of the ancient legend.
Moreover, the end of the radiation era is in the remote past by almost fourteen billion years (depending upon the value of the Hubble constant), and its remnants are both minutely feeble and plainly visible to scientists today as the 2.7-degree cosmic microwave background, the telltale radio signal permeating the entire universe left over from the Big Bang.
On the other hand, perhaps this reference is to an entirely different universal light radiation that does not originate in the sun, the moon, or the stars, but rather in the electromagnetic zero-point field that may be involved in the origin of the properties of matter in a fundamental way. Perhaps there is an important clue here—an insight into the creation process itself.
I HAVE IN OTHER STUDIES GIVEN YOU HOW THE BIBLE ITSELF PUTS ALL THESE THINGS IN ORDER; BUT YOU HAVE TO SEARCH THE BIBLE TO FIND IT ALL - A LITTLE HERE AND A LITTLE THERE; THIS TRUTH HERE AND ANOTHER TRUTH THERE. I WILL STATE IT WITHOUT GOING INTO THE PORTION OF SCRIPTURES THAT TEACH IT; OTHER STUDIES ON THIS WEBSITE DO ALL OF THAT.
GENESIS 1:1 SAYS “IN THE BEGINNINGS” OR AS FENTON TRANSLATES THE HEBREW “BY PERIODS GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND EARTH.” IT DOES NOT SAY HOW AND WHEN GOD DID ALL THIS; COULD HAVE BEEN THOUSANDS OF YEARS, OR MILLIONS OF YEARS, BILLIONS OF YEARS. GOD DID CREATE THE EARTH, AND THE “SONS OF GOD” SANG FOR JOY, AS RECORDED IN THE BOOK OF JOB. ANGELS BY CREATION ARE SONS OF GOD, IN A SENSE. THE EARTH WAS NOT CREATED IN CHAOS, DISORDER AND/OR CONFUSION. THE EARTH WAS CREATED TO BE INHABITED. WE HAD THE DINOSAUR WORLD. THE COVERING CHERUB OF HEAVEN WAS WAS GIVEN AUTHORITY OF THIS EARTH, PROBABLY WITH SOME ANGELS TO HELP. THE COVERING CHERUB WANTED MORE, HE WANTED TO BE GOD, TO SIT ON GOD’S THRONE. HE REBELLED AND ONE THIRD OF THE ANGELS REBELLED WITH HIM. THERE WAS WAR IN HEAVEN. THE CHERUB BECAME SATAN THE DEVIL, AND THE REBELLIOUS ANGELS BECAME DEMONS. SATAN WAS THROWN OUT OF HEAVEN. JESUS SAID HE SAW SATAN FALL FROM HEAVEN.
THE WAR IN HEAVEN BROUGHT DESTRUCTION ON THE MOON AND EARTH. WE SEE THE MOON PITTED WITH SCARS; WE DO NOT EVER HEAR ON THE NEWS TODAY “WELL A HUGE ASTROID JUST HIT THE MOON TODAY.” BUT MANY SURE DID HIT IT IN THE PAST. WE HAVE EVIDENCE OF SOME METEORS HITTING THE EARTH, ONE VERY LARGE, WAS PROBABLY THE MAIN ONE THAT DESTROYED THE DINOSAUR AGE. THE EARTH BECAME ENCASED IN WATER, THE ENTIRE GLOBE. BLACKNESS WAS UNDER THE WATER; BLACKNESS WAS ABOVE THE WATER.
GOD’S SPIRIT THEN MOVED UPON THE WATERS. WE ARE NOT TOLD HOW LONG THE WATERS HAD COVERED THE EARTH. COULD HAVE BEEN LONG, COULD HAVE BEEN RELATIVELY SHORT.
IF YOU HAD BEEN IN A BOAT DURING THAT TIME, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NOTHING TO SEE, IT WAS UTTER BLACKNESS. GOD USES LIGHT, WHITE, IN THE SCRIPTURES TO REPRESENT HOLINESS, RIGHTEOUSNESS; BLACK WOULD REPRESENT THE VERY OPPOSITE.
GOD SAID, “LET THERE BE LIGHT.” IT WAS NOT THE LIGHT OF THE FOURTH DAY; IT WAS A LIGHT WHERE BLACKNESS WAS GONE, SOMETHING LIKE BEING IN A FOG; YOU’D NOW BE ABLE TO SEE VERY CLEARLY THE WATERS BELOW YOU AND YOUR BOAT, IF YOU’D BEEN THERE IN A BOAT.
THERE WOULD NOW BE A DIFFERENCE OF LIGHT BETWEEN THE NIGHT AND THE DAY.
END OF THE FIRST DAY.
SECOND DAY: GOD CONTINUED TO MAKE THE WATERS OVER THE EARTH SEPARATE FROM THE FOGGY WATERS ABOVE THE EARTH. BUT STILL NOT CLEAR ENOUGH TO SEE THE SUN OR MOON OR STARS.
THIRD DAY: GOD BROUGHT FORTH THE LANDS FROM BELOW THE WATER, AND MADE THE LANDS AND SEAS LIKE AS TODAY.
FOURTH DAY: GOD BROUGHT FORTH THE HEAVENS AS WE HAVE THEM TODAY; LIGHT AS TODAY DURING THER DAY, AND LIGHT AS TODAY DURING THE NIGHT. WE ARE NOW ON AN EARTH RESTORED AS BASICALLY LIKE THE DINOSAUR EARTH.
FIFTH DAY: GOD MADE ALL THE CREATURES THAT ARE IN THE SEAS.
SIXTH DAY: GOD MADE ALL THE LAND CREATURES AND HE MADE ADAM AND EVE.
GOD DID ALL THIS IN SIX LITERAL DAYS. AS WE SEE FROM THE BIBLE, GOD ONLY HAS TO SPEAK AND IT IS DONE!
SO MAKING THE UNIVERSE COULD HAVE BEEN DONE IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS. SPEAKING “LET THERE BE A BILLION GALAXIES OVER THERE” AND “A BILLION GALAXIES HERE” ETC. GOD COULD PUT “AGE” INTO SOME OF THEM, SO SOME STARS WERE READY TO EXPLODE AND DIE, SOME READY TO BE BORN. THEN HE COULD HAVE SAID, “LET THEM ALL EXPAND AND LET THE UNIVERSE BE EVER GROWING.”
IT IS FUTILE TO SPECULATE HOW GOD ORIGINALLY CREATED THE UNIVERSE AND LAWS WITHIN IT. IT IS ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT AS THE BIBLE TEACHES, OUT OF NOTHING CAME THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE…… WELL AS WE COUNT “PHYSICAL” - AS WE SEE WHAT TO US IS PHYSICAL, FOR SCIENCE NOW KNOWS THERE IS NO REAL PHYSICAL, EVERYTHING IS ATOMS OR SMALLER YET THAN ATOMS; SO “PHYSICAL” IS A RELATIVE TERM WE USE IN OUR LIVING ON THIS EARTH AND PART OF THE UNIVERSE.
THIS ALSO EXPLAINS HOW GOD CAN MAKE HIMSELF INTO WHAT TO US IS FLESH AND BONE [HE NEEDS NO BLOOD BEING ETERNAL], AND BE TOUCHED AND EAT A MEAL, AND APPEAR AND DISAPPEAR AT WILL, AS JESUS DID WITH HIS DISCIPLES AFTER HIS RESURRECTION BACK TO ETERNAL IMMORTAL LIFE.
AS STATED BEFORE, THE AUTHOR OF THIS BOOK “THE GOD THEORY” DOES NOT BELIEVE IN THE LITERAL READING OF GENESIS ONE. HE IS NOT A FUNDAMENTALIST; HE IS AN EVOLUTIONIST THEORY OF GOD MAN, AS ARE MANY OTHERS WHO CLAIM TO BELIEVE IN A CREATOR GOD.