|page 6 of 21
|For this reason, we must discard scientific explanations for the origin of life and of your true self as misleading. The problem with scientific explanations is that they only consider the outward, physical, bodily form of life. This consideration presumes that the body in itself and by itself, originates life in the body. A good example of this misleading approach would be like trying to explain the function of your body from the clothing you wear. An even better example of this approach is if you were to state that your body developed from the outer garments. This is a very good example of what the upside-down position (one in which we all live) is all about. Unfortunately, this is how modern science tends to explain the origin of all life. The misleading nature of scientific explanations, as seen from the above examples, is obvious without further comment.
2. The Religious Approach.
The second approach that many people adopt in this respect is the so-called Biblical or religious approach. Religious approach claims that life was created from one Absolute Source of life - God, who is uncreated and who is life, in Himself and by Himself. This view contends that God created the entire Creation and human beings, either from out of nothing or "by the words of His mouth." The process of this supposed creation is described in the first chapter of Genesis, the first book of the Holy Bible. Creation supposedly occurred several thousand years ago and was accomplished by God literally in six earthly days, as measured by physical units of time on planet Earth. Simple as that. No evolution, no evolvement, no nothing.
This explanation contains some grains of truth, reflected in the statement that God is Absolute Source of life, He/She, Who is uncreated and Who is life Himself/Herself and by Himself/ Herself. The problem with this explanation, however, is that it fails to explain why the Creator would create such imperfect creatures as human beings are, with nothing but troubles and problems, and why God, who is the Most High, would want to create alI of the abominal, dangerous, harmful, deadly and poisonous creatures which we encounter everyday on this planet?
This approach also fails to explain obvious discrepancies that exist between one's understanding of the literal, Biblical description of the process of creation in six earthly days, several thousand years ago, and convincing scientific proof that human life has been in existence on this planet for several million years.
Therefore, this approach has to be rejected as misleading, despite the fact that it agrees with our statement that non-life cannot originate any life, and that life must originate from some kind of uncreated source of life. This uncreated Source of life is always without beginning and end. It creates for various reasons, all other forms of life by its own will and desire.
Once again, however, this approach fails to properly explain why this Source (which people call God, and which we shall call the Most High) decides to produce other forms of life? What is the purpose of such a production?
This approach also violates the principle that God can create things and beings from either nothing, or "by the words of His mouth." Once again, from nothing nothing can originate. As far as creation "by the words of His mouth is concerned," no one properly understands what God's words mean and contain.
From the preceding comments, one can see that the explanation of the origin of life and your origin advanced by traditional religions are equally disappointing and as misleading as the scientific ones.
Has it ever occurred to you that there might be a third explanation, one entirely different and apart from the other two? Could it be that both scientific and religious approaches are very wrong and that things happen in an entirely different manner than we have been told they did? Yes, there is... Let us call this third approach or explanation the spiritual method.
||page 6 of 21