John D. Brey
Well-Known Member
We're not talking about the science of the virgin birth, but the virgin birth of science.
Which is an astounding ancillary to the fact that we're thus associating the birth of science with the birth of God. All the billions of years of prior history have been the gestation of God. Or perhaps the development of his body. But the modern scientific endeavor, verging on the birth of AI, is no longer the gestation of God (or the development of his body), but the actual birth --- the arrival --- of the mind of God.
John
Which is an astounding ancillary to the fact that we're thus associating the birth of science with the birth of God. All the billions of years of prior history have been the gestation of God. Or perhaps the development of his body. But the modern scientific endeavor, verging on the birth of AI, is no longer the gestation of God (or the development of his body), but the actual birth --- the arrival --- of the mind of God.
The universe could so easily have remained lifeless and simple----just physics and chemistry, just scattered dust of the cosmic explosion that gave birth to time and space. The fact that it did not----the fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved out of literally nothing----is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice. And even that is not the end of the matter. Not only did evolution happen: it eventually led to beings capable of comprehending the process, and even of comprehending the process by which they comprehend it.
Richard Dawkins, The Ancestor's Tale, p. 613.
Richard Dawkins, The Ancestor's Tale, p. 613.
John
Last edited: