SV: creation of human kind

[Chris Beetle]

At 04:52 PM 12/23/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Erik Hoogcarspel:
>
>This is open for discussion. There are quite a few philosophers of science
>who think science does disprove the existence of God. Wasn't it Laplace who
>said 'I don't need this hypothesis'?
>And why do you think Nietzsche declared God dead? I know even theologians
>who think the belief in the existence of God is outdated.
>_____
>
>Dear Erik,
>
>Which science has been able to prove the non-existence of God ? Which
>science has actually been able to define God ? Have you heard of
>Yajnavalkya Smriti ? Yajnavalkya in his dialogue with his wife Maitreyi
>describes Aatman(Brahma(God)) as Net Neti. (Not this, Not this). It(God) is
>an experience, not an object of perception that can be known.
>
>Ashish

God is beyond the power of the our senses to perceive as quite rightly
pointed out.  However, in different scriptures and in different traditions,
God promises to reveal Himself to those who qualify themselves in certain ways.

One example is in Bhagavad-gita 18.55, where Lord Krishna states that He
(God) can be known by devotion (bhaktya mam abhijanati).  He also states
that He reveals Himself to those who are always engaged (satata-yuktanam) in
His devotional service with love (bhajatam priti purvakam) (Bg. 10.10-11).

One could take such processes recommended in whatever scripture or tradition
he has faith and apply them practically in his life.  In this way, one may
become a recipient of God's revelation.  Then God would not be a theoretical
principle anymore but a practical reality.  In this way one could prove the
reality of God for oneself.  This methodology in itself may also be termed a
science because he deals with a certain theory, practical activity, and
results confirming the theory, as do other sciences.

Best wishes,

Chris Beetle