Five Things Science Can’t Explain

Written by Darren Hewer

void
Watch now: How to fill the void and find purpose.

Science has contributed innumerable benefits to human life on planet Earth. We should be deeply grateful for the hard work of scientists who dedicate their lives to loyal study of this discipline and the advantages scientific advances grant us.

Due to its success, there is often a tendency to think that science can explain everything. However there are actually many things that science cannot prove. Here are five categories of truth that cannot be proven using the scientific method:

1) Existential Truth: Science cannot prove that you aren’t merely a brain in a jar being manipulated to think this is all actually happening. (Think of something like in “The Matrix”.) It also cannot prove that the world wasn’t created 5 minutes ago with the appearance of age (and with fake memories in your head, and half-digested food in your stomach, etc). However it’s still rational to believe that our memories are true and that the world is real.

2) Moral Truth: Science cannot prove that rape is evil. While it is possible to demonstrate, for example, that there are negative physical or psychological effects of rape, there is no scientific test that can prove it is evil. Science can describe how the natural world is, but moral truth carries an “oughtness” (how things should be) about it that goes beyond what merely is.

3) Logical Truth: Consider the statement “Science is the only way to really know truth.” How could you prove that statement by science? It is actually self-refuting because there is no scientific test you could use to prove that it is true! Science cannot prove logic to be true because it assumes and requires logic in order for it to work.

4) Historical Truth: Science cannot prove that Barack Obama won the 2008 United States presidential election. There is no scientific test we could perform to prove it. We could have an investigation if we wanted to confirm that he did actually win, but the method for proving historical truths is different from testing scientific truths since historical truths are by nature non-repeatable.

5) Experiential Truth: Science cannot prove that your spouse loves you. When asked why so-and-so loves you, you may cite precedent (times when their behavior demonstrates their love for you) but this is a particular type of historical truth. There is no scientific test that can confirm a lifetime of experience of knowing a person.

None of this is meant to criticize science! There’s nothing wrong with the scientific method for testing the kinds of things it was meant to test. However, it would be a mistake to expect it to be able to test everything. There are more intellectual tools available to us than just science, and as the old saying goes, when all you’ve got is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail!

For the kinds of truth listed above, science is not deficient in any way; it’s just not the right way to find those particular kinds of truth. To try to do so would be like trying to ascertain whether a banana is tasty by sticking it in your ear and listening to it; it’s simply the wrong method!

There is one other kind of truth that cannot be proven or disproven by science. That’s because it is comprised of all of the other kinds of truth mentioned above mixed together: Religious truth. It does have a certain amount of overlap with science, when religion makes explicit claims about scientific fact, and when science makes explicit claims about religion. But the overlap tends to be rather small; in any case, true science and true religion, because they both aim to describe reality, can never be in conflict. (Read “Science & Religion: Conflict or Coherence?” for more on this topic.)

Why then does science often seem so straightforward and uncontroversial, whereas religion can be so difficult and contentious?

It may have something to do with a fact hinted at earlier: Religious truth is multifaceted. It is comprised of science, logic, philosophy, history, ethics, and experience, all mixed together. It is, in a sense, a different kind of knowing, not ignorant the other kinds of truths, but requiring that they be studied together carefully.

Rigidly applying the same methodology used for studying mundane things would be deficient when considering divine things. This shouldn’t be too surprising, considering that if God truly does exist, God is in a different category from every created thing that we can grasp and study under a microscope: God, unlike every created thing, is in the “uncreated things” category. Science, and each of the other kinds of truths, will have something to say about God. But none of these individually can tell us everything. All are necessary, but no single approach by itself is sufficient.

If that is the case, where should a person start a serious investigation into religion amidst all the complexity? Where should a person begin?

In his suspenseful novel Five Sacred Crossings author and religious scholar Craig Hazen presents through his narrative five “sacred crossings,” or compelling reasons to consider Christianity first. This is merely an exceedingly short summary of what Hazen explains (and argues for) in much more detail in his book:

1) It is testable. Christianity does not make merely esoteric claims; it makes claims about logic, science, history, philosophy, and ultimately reality itself.

2) It paints a picture of the world that matches reality. It does not force a person to deny that our world is real. Rather it cohesively explains why things are the way they are.

3) It makes a non-compartmentalized life possible. The Christian faith does not require a person to live one way when thinking about “religious” things and a totally different way at all other times.

4) It presents salvation as a free gift. Every other religion in the world presents some sort of works-based way to re-connect with God. But at the heart of the Christian message is grace, not more demands to somehow work our way to God.

5) It has Jesus at the center. Jesus is the most compelling (and controversial) figure in history. Many other religions claim to respect him, but Christianity is founded upon his life, teaching, and identity. Why not begin by getting to know him?

One man who took on such a challenge was Dr Alister McGrath, who earned two doctorates at Oxford University, one in molecular biophysics, the other in theology. He described his spiritual and intellectual journey to the Christian faith in this way:

“At Oxford – to my surprise – I discovered Christianity. It was the intellectually most exhilarating and spiritually stimulating thing I could ever hope to describe – better than chemistry, a wonderful subject that I had thought to be the love of my life and my future career. I went on to gain a doctorate for research in molecular biophysics from Oxford, and found that immensely exciting and satisfying. But I knew I had found something better – like the pearl of great price that Jesus talks about in the Gospel, which is so beautiful and precious that it overshadows everything. It was intellectually satisfying, imaginatively engaging, and aesthetically exciting.” 1

How to find a clear purpose and meaning to life.

Further Reading:

A Scientist’s Search for Truth – Astrophysicist Hugh Ross describes his journey to faith.
The Uniqueness of Jesus – What made Jesus so special anyways?
What Does your Soul Crave? – Destiny? Intimacy? Meaning?
Contact us with Questions – Talk with someone confidentially via email.

1 Alister McGrath, The Future of Atheism: Alister McGrath & Daniel Dennett in Dialogue (London, England: Fortress Press, 2008), 27.

EmailPrint

284 Responses to “Five Things Science Can’t Explain”

  • Tom Tom says:

    Justin—
    And I thank you for thinking this through. Very few people really think carefully about these things.

    As for Hitler, let’s look at the situation from an absolute moral value as given by God: “You shall not murder.” So the question is, when is it OK to murder someone? If it is alright to sometimes murder someone, then there is no absolute value of morality. It reverts to subjectivity rather than objectivity. (Killing Hitler would not have been murder, but killing an evil person with just cause.) Another example: When is it OK to murder someone and then eat them? Jeffrey Dahmer thought it was OK. Some tribes in Papua think it’s OK. So does that make it OK? Of course not. You see, there must be an absolute standard by which to measure what is moral for there to BE morality at all. And therefore there has to be an absolute moral “giver”, and that can only be God, someone who is perfectly moral and never changes.

    I’m not familiar with the code of Hammurabi, but even if it was written before the 10 Commandments, it was written by a man and therefore isn’t necessarily an absolute standard of morality. For there to be a perfect standard of morality, it must be written by someone who is not subject to subjectivity or their own personal beliefs and standards. It must be written by an absolutely perfect and moral person; and only God fits that bill. Does that make sense Justin?

  • Justin says:

    Tom
    Thanks for the great response.I didn’t know there were different types of laws thanks for clearing that up. Morality is seeing right from wrong, but not everyone sees everything in black and white. What if you were part of the allied forces planning on assassinating Hitler in 1937. Either kill him or let countless others die. Either way someone would die because of your choices. Also the Code of Hammurabi was written a few hundred years before the Ten Commandments. You can ask how’d he do it without God. Morality can be formed without a God. A world without God wouldn’t look much different than Earth.

  • Justin says:

    Thanks for the great response. Morality is seeing right from wrong, but not everyone sees everything in black and white. What if you were part of the allied forces planning on assassinating Hitler in 1937. Either kill him or let countless others die. Either way someone would die because of your choices. Also the Code of Hammurabi was written a few hundred years before the Ten Commandments. You can ask how’d he do it without God.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Justin—
    Allow me respond to your second post:
    Jesus did, in fact, talk about what marriage is to be. Jesus stated in Matthew 19:4ff, ““Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh.”

    There are three types of laws described in the Bible: Moral laws, civil laws, and ceremonial laws. Eating of shrimp and wearing clothes of different fabrics fall under the latter categories and change over time and from culture to culture. For example, Koreans will often eat dog meat while Americans will not. The English drive on the left side while Americans drive on the right. The same goes for things such as the dancing and dating you mention. These are not moral laws but civil and/or ceremonial laws within different denominations. Moral laws on the other hand do not change. They are given by God and are universal. It is never right to lie, steal, or commit adultery. It is also carefully described in God’s Word that homosexuality is a sin. Again, morality cannot exist if it changes over time because there is no standard by which to judge something as moral or immoral. Morality is, in fact, just one of the proofs of a perfectly moral God who created all things. He set the standard (the 10 Commandments) by which we can judge morality.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Justin—
    Thanks for your comments. All opinions are welcome here. Let me ask you:

    What is your definition of morality? If the description contains knowing right from wrong, good from evil, then morality can only exist if there is an absolute standard by which to gauge morality. Otherwise, it is just one’s personal beliefs opposed to someone else’s and therefore there is no morality at all. While one person’s “opinion” of right and wrong may vary from another’s, the opinion itself doesn’t make something right or wrong. It either is or it isn’t.

    It’s basically the same with rules of logic. If rules of logic change over time, then there ARE NO rules of logic. There are only exceptions. A rule is a set standard by which to gauge other things. I grant you that “reasoning” might change, but without the absolute rules of logic, reasoning would be impossible.

  • Justin says:

    Some christians in a third world country might think it’s perfectly fine to burn nonbelievers alive, while christians in the US wouldnt do that. It’s not because God gives his morality to only those from a first world country. It’s because it’s all subjective and depends on culture’s opinion. (Most) Conservatives don’t think gay marriage should be legalized, because it’s against their ‘morality’. Even though Jesus said nothing about whether gay marriage is a-ok or not. They’d rather cherry pick in the Old Testament. Why don’t they stop eating shrimp or stop wearing clothes of different fabric? “Because gays aren’t natural” and soon after mumbles about the Rapture. Then there’s so many denominations with differing moral codes. Some don’t agree on some things like whether dancing, dating, etc. are moral. Morality changes with society.

  • Justin says:

    Morality differs from one person to another and is ever changing. Same with logic/reason. The Flynn effect is known as the average IQ increasing over time. Our reasoning skills are also strengthening over time. So logic isn’t concrete now but slowly solidifying.

  • Sharon says:

    good comments on this thread thank you for all who comments on this

  • Tom Tom says:

    Justin–
    How so? Please explain.

  • Justin says:

    Morality? Logic? These things are all forms of opinion. None are objective.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Well Subhendu, it comes down to this: I have a Bible that gives every evidence of being a supernatural book, created by an all-knowing, all-powerful being. Because of that evidence, I trust that it is from the mind of the One it speaks of–Almighty God and Jesus Christ who is an historical person who said he was God and proved it by his miracles and his death, burial, and resurrection.

    You on the other hand, have only thoughts and ideas about what “nature” is. When I refer to your “belief” system, I’m referring to what you believe to be true.

    Ultimately I don’t see any purpose in your beliefs and no rhyme or reason or conclusion to it all. To say there is no definable morality is to say we can all live in anarchy and however we want to live. Sorry, it simply doesn’t make any sense.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Ex Fundie—
    Thanks for joining in the conversation. I’d like to respond to each point.
    While I can appreciate your concerns for the accuracy of the Bible, from your comments it seems you have likely taken only what others have told you about it and not studied it out for yourself. First you should know that there is no evidence that the Bible (the 66 books considered the canon of scripture since the end of the first century A.D.) has been changed or reinterpreted. It is, in fact, the most authenticated ancient writing in the world. I’d be glad to give you sources to study if you’d like.

    Second, let me briefly addressthe statements you made specifically:
    You wrote:
    Why does an Inerrant Holy Book need to be continually revised with every new Scientific Discovery?
    Response: Please give me an example of any revision in the Bible due to some scientific discovery. Actually, the Bible is full of scientifically factual statements that were originally believed to be wrong until science developed to the point of verifying them. (#1 below is an example—prior to Columbus’s trip to the America’s, nearly everyone thought the earth was flat.) If you’re referring to your numbered statements, remember that the Bible has not been changed or even reinterpreted. For example:

    1. The earth has four corners and rest on pillars (the earth is flat). False.
    R: Although there are poetic and metaphoric references in the Bible as to the four corners of the earth, that is no different than the same expressions we use today. We often hear such statements as, “I’ll follow you to the ends of the earth.” That doesn’t mean the person believes the earth is flat and has supports. The Bible does state, “He stretches out the north over the empty place, and hangs the earth upon nothing.” (Job 26:7, written 3,500 years ago.) “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth.” (Isaiah 40:22, written about 700 B.C.)

    2. There is a firmament (canopy) above the earth. False
    R: Firmament was an old English word used by the King James translators to describe what modern English refers to as an expanse (as in Psalm 19:1—“The heavens are telling of the glory of God and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands.” Based on a comparison of several scriptures, there was in all likelihood an expanse or canopy of water vapor surrounding the earth prior to the flood, which was broken up at the time of the flood. That particular canopy no longer exists.

    3. The sun revolves around the earth.
    R: There is nothing in scripture that specifies this. While there are references to sunsets and sunrises and the movement of the sun across the sky, the identical terms are used by all of us today. That doesn’t mean we believe the suns revolves around the earth.

    4. The universe is six to ten thousand years old.
    R: Your viewpoint here will depend on whether you are an evolutionist or a creationist. We can both look at the same evidence and come to varying conclusions. A great deal of hard evidence exists to suggest the earth is young. I can supply you with dozens of examples if you like. Let me give you just one: At the present rate at which the magnetic field of the earth is deteriorating, extrapolating backwards at the same rate shows that the magnetic field would be too strong to support life more than about 10,000 years ago. Scientific attempts to determine the age of the earth and universe are fraught with difficulties and contradictions. Dating methods assume uniformitarianism which is a huge assumption. I can supply you with dozens of examples here as well if you like.

    5. The earth was created in six, literal, twenty-four hour days. False. Massive evidence confirms Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection is true and that this superstition is impossible.
    R: Assuming that you’re trying to use Darwin’s studies of natural selection as evidence for molecules-to-man evolution, there is actually NOT A SINGLE shred of evidence that this is so. Natural selection, which we can observe today, is only small changes within a “kind” of animal, never one kind of animal evolving into another. One kind changing into another kind has NEVER been observed, nor is there any evidence of such every happening.

    6. There was a world wide flood. False Geologists have proven without any doubt that there is zero geological evidence to support this claim.
    R: Here again I can give you dozens of scientific evidences that perfectly fit the model of a world-wide flood and contradict the geological theories. If you would like some, let me know.

    7. There is a literal Hell under the earth holding billions of human souls. False Mathematics has proven this concept impossible.
    R: While the Bible at times refers to hell as being “below” or a person “descending” into hell, these terms are used descriptively to contrast that heaven is “above.” Being cast “downward” simply means that a person is sent forever from the presence of God.

    8. There is a literal Hell in another dimension. Unprovable.
    R: While it may be un-provable scientifically, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

    9. This is a classic case of Christians revising their interpretation of the Bible to maintain their “inerrant” beliefs. There is no mention in the Bible of another dimension. Hell is always “down” and Heaven is always “up”. The belief in Hell is ignorant, baseless, superstition.
    R: That is your opinion based on very little understanding of the Bible. The belief in evolution, that everything came from nothing, is “ignorant, baseless, and superstition” just as well.

    Obviously we cannot go back and forth with nine points at a time. I’ve tried to give you a brief response to each. If you’d like to continue the conversation, please limit your concerns and/or questions to one item at a time so that we can stay focused.

  • Subhendu Das says:

    For Tom on March 25, 2015 at 9:10 am

    “Much of what you wrote is confusing to me as it seems to contradict itself in places.”
    Please give me at least two statements from my comments which appeared contradicting to you.

    “I’m still looking for your succinct definition of “nature”. ”
    I have given definition of nature before, in one of my comments. They are on date – March 18, 2015 at 4:47 pm. You have to look at that comment, because it has a context also. But the definition is not unusual; whatever you think may be acceptable to me and to anyone else. Basically it is the collection of all the living and nonliving objects of the universe, their characteristics, and their interactive laws.

    “In your belief system, where do the rules of logic come from?
    In your belief system, where do the the rules of morality come from and are they absolute?”
    Laws of nature cannot be a belief system. They do not depend on logic. There is no morality in nature. Who can say apple is good and orange is bad? Who will agree that dog is good and cat is bad? Similarly why would I believe that Mr.X is good and Mr.Y is bad? Good and bad are created by money power, not by laws of nature. Money is false, because money is not an object of nature. Therefore you cannot believe in anything that central bank, the originator of money, says and does. Our religions are controlled by money power, therefore by central bank, and therefore religions cannot be trustworthy.

    “As for proof that God is the Creator of all things, including nature, His own Word tells us that…”
    How do you know that they are his own words? How does such a God talk? Who can hear such talks? Who verified it? There will be many such questions and you have to answer them in a convincing way to the entire universe.

    You wrote-
    “The heavens are telling of the glory of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands” (Psalm 19:1). “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they (people)are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).
    I completely agree with the above if you replace God by soul; with the meaning that individual soul is the creator of all individual objects. It is perfectly meaningful that way. The validity of the statements, and many other statements of Bible, becomes true automatically if you change the meaning of God to soul. That meaning is same as what Veda says – God is your soul. This also proves that Veda was known all over the world. They only describe the laws of nature.

  • Ex Fundie says:

    Why does an Inerrant Holy Book need to be continually revised with every new Scientific Discovery?

    If God the Creator reveals truth to Christians, why is that Christians have been forced to continually revise their interpretation of the Bible based not on revelation from God…but from discoveries made by Science?

    1. The earth has four corners and rest on pillars (the earth is flat). False.

    In the early 1500’s, Magellan and his crew proved without any doubt that the earth is not flat by sailing around the world.

    2. There is a firmament (canopy) above the earth. False

    Astronomers such as Copernicus and Galileo proved this superstition false.

    3. The sun revolves around the earth. False.

    Astronomers such as Copernicus and Galileo proved this superstition false.

    4. The universe is six to ten thousand years old. False.

    Scientists can demonstrate with clear evidence that the universe is billions of years old.

    5. The earth was created in six, literal, twenty-four hour days. False.

    Massive evidence confirms Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection is true and that this superstition is impossible.

    6. There was a world wide flood. False

    Geologists have proven without any doubt that there is zero geological evidence to support this claim.

    7. There is a literal Hell under the earth holding billions of human souls. False

    Mathematics has proven this concept impossible.

    8. There is a literal Hell in another dimension. Unprovable.

    This is a classic case of Christians revising their interpretation of the Bible to maintain their “inerrant” beliefs. There is no mention in the Bible of another dimension. Hell is always “down” and Heaven is always “up”. The belief in Hell is ignorant, baseless, superstition.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Subhendu–

    Much of what you wrote is confusing to me as it seems to contradict itself in places. However, I’m still looking for your succinct definition of “nature”.

    In your belief system, where do the rules of logic come from?
    In your belief system, where do the the rules of morality come from and are they absolute?

    As for proof that God is the Creator of all things, including nature, His own Word tells us that–“The heavens are telling of the glory of God;
    And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands” (Psalm 19:1). “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they (people)are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).

  • Subhendu Das says:

    For Tom on March 24, 2015 at 9:48 am

    What is your definition of change? Were you Muslim before and now you are a Christian? Definitely not. So you did not change. By change, I do not mean you have to convert. A possible meaning maybe, you are not happy with the answers, your religion gives to your questions. Not everybody questions also. If you assume those who question as 100, then see how many are unsatisfied. If they are 10, then 10% has changed. If you want, you may propose another definition. Change means unhappiness, lacking truth, keeping ignorant, relies on faith etc.

    But we are seeking truth, not faith or belief system. We are looking for answers to our questions. And I proposed a framework – (1) laws of nature are the only truth (2) Nature demonstrates the laws (3) Truth is unique and universal. I have given examples to illustrate: (a) Gravity (b) Reincarnation. I have discussed all of them, including the definition of nature, in past comments in your blog.

    And the way to know such truth, that is, to see how nature demonstrates, is to become Galileo – read, research, think, and meditate. RT TV news ends its program – Question more. BBC news starts their program – to really know what is happening in your world, you have to know the whole world. To me the whole world is nature.

    I have never said – changed their mind about “nature” being “god”. Nature is not God.

    Most popular definition is that
    (A) God is the creator of the universe.
    Nature has not given any proof of that statement. If you know any demonstrations or proof of (A) then please let me know. The other definition is that
    (B) God is all powerful. Can do anything it wants and you want.
    Nature gives proof of definition (B).

    Reincarnation examples, yogic power examples, and destiny examples show that there is no God like in (A). On the other hand all of the demonstrations from nature prove that every individual object is created by its own individual soul, validating definition (B). Your soul is your god and it has all the power you want. The free book on Soul Theory at https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/ gives a validation of (B).

    It is not my theory. It is the theory in Veda. Veda is not based on faith or belief system. Veda defines the laws of nature. Veda was known all over the world at some point in time in our history of the world. There is ample proof of that. Modern Hinduism is not based on Veda and is as frustrating as all other religions. It has become a money making business. Veda is not created by any human being. It is already there in nature, because it represents only the laws of nature. If you acquire yogic power (demonic power) you will be able to see Veda. The word Veda means knowledge.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Subhendu–

    You wrote, “Can you find anyone who will change his mind? No, never.”
    You are incorrect. I can find millions of people who have changed their minds, starting with me. Those millions are every born again believer in Jesus Christ. At some point in their lives, they changed their mind regarding their own sinfulness and realized they could never “earn” heaven. Or they changed their mind about “nature” being “god” or about reincarnation and about all their other false, unfounded beliefs, and turned to faith and trust in Jesus Christ.

    Let me ask you something–What is your definition of “nature”, and would you please give me one example of a “law of nature”?

  • Subhendu Das says:

    For Tom on March 23, 2015 at 2:19 pm

    “There is little I can say that will change your mind.” – Of course that is correct. And it is correct for everybody, including you. Can you find anyone who will change his mind? No, never.

    “The examples given are NOT well verified or corroborated.” – This is also very correct. But you should correct them or show why and how they are false. Pick up any one example, which you like, and prove that it is false. I will help you, if you need. Isn’t that your responsibility? As you said – you can know the truth and truth will set you free – therefore you should prove that the examples are false and publish them in the same peer reviewed literature. That will be a great contribution to the society and the scientific community. Galileo spent his life time to prove that earth goes round the sun and he was jailed. But he was correct. It took a life time for a professor to collect and verify these examples. You should try the same way too, to establish their falsity.

    Or you may just visit the boy and his family of the NBC channel news at http://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/boy-says-he-remembers-past-life-hollywood-agent-n327506, and show them why it is false. Your logic will be news for NBC and we will all hear your logic and world will listen to you.

    Laws of nature do not depend on you and me. It is unique and universal for all time and for all space. We can only interpret differently, we can say true or false, but the fact remains constant. Nature demonstrates them over and over again so that we try to understand them. I have proposed a technology to detect it; it is in the book. If we implement then it can be verified directly. It is of course a demonic technology.

    I think this can be the end of this chain. At one time I mentioned about reincarnation in Bible. I will start another chain for that soon.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Subhendu–
    There is little I can say that will change your mind. The examples given are NOT well verified or corroborated. What’s more, demonic influences are just as likely and biblical what is going on. Satan is the great deceiver and desires people to turn away from God and his Word and toward the falsehoods of his evil intentions. At the end of your life, what good will the falsehoods of reincarnation be? What purpose will that serve you? How will your sins ever be forgiven? What a hopeless belief system. God’s Word says “It is appointed for a man to die once and then the judgment.” You are not prepared for that judgment Subhendu. Your only hope is to turn from your sins and to trust Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. “You can know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (Jesus)

  • Subhendu Das says:

    For Tom, on March 10, 2015 at 8:24 pm

    “I’m not seeing any specific, verifiable documentation for the claims being made.” – References for verifiable documents are in the book; find them and check them out if you are interested in knowing the truth. I have already mentioned that there are more than 150 references. One professor have considered all possible alternatives and proved their falsity. The specific example I mentioned is in my book and has happened in an US hospital to a perfectly normal Christian family. It has a reference also. Search carefully again at https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/

    A demon could easily have had her say, “In a previous life my eye was damaged in a car accident on such and such a day and time.” But your wife did not say that when she was a baby. It was also not verified from hospital records. Your wife’s case is a perfect example of reincarnation but it is not verifiable because she was not a Jatiswar and her family did not hire a demon also.

    But you can hire a demon now, they are called Psychiatrist, specializing in past life regression (PLR) therapy mentioned in my book. They will help your wife to clearly see all the details of her past life. In fact I will ask all persons to visit such demons to know their past life via PLR. It will be very helpful in our life.

    An interesting case was presented by NBC channel last week in national news in USA. Where documents said, in past life the person died at age 59, but the boy insisted he died at 61. More research verified that the boy was correct. Here is the URL: http://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/boy-says-he-remembers-past-life-hollywood-agent-n327506

  • Tom Tom says:

    Subhendu–

    I’m not seeing any specific, verifiable documentation for the claims being made. What’s more, there is another completely viable possibility: The book’s statement, “Nature produces some kind of babies or kids who are called Jatiswars, in Sanskrit. Jatiswars are kids, between ages 2 to 6, who remember their past lives. These are very rare kids, probably one in 10,000 or even in million. You will find them mostly in countries where the environments are suitable for them.” Do these 1 in a million kids come from “environments” that include backgrounds in witchcraft, voodoo, spiritism, fortune telling, or any other occult manifestations? If so, it’s likely that if any of these events are actually true, they are the result of satanic/demonic activity in the families. It would be extremely easy for a demon to cause a child to have thoughts and voice things that are historically accurate given their particular birth defect. For example, my wife was born with a lazy eye. A demon could easily have had her say, “In a previous life my eye was damaged in a car accident on such and such a day and time.” Would that mean that’s the cause of my wife’s lazy eye? It is just too easy to read into these things anything you want to make of them.

    My Bible tells me that God created all things in six literal days about 6,500 years ago. It tells me he created man and woman in his image. It says God breathed the breath of life into them. It says nothing about reincarnation. It says it is appointed for a man to die once and then comes the judgment. It says that a person’s spirit will spend all eternity either in heaven or hell. What’s more, Jesus Christ verified these things. Jesus lived a perfect life, gave himself for our sins, died on a cross, was buried, and rose again the third day to prove he was telling the truth about himself. He said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but by me.” I’m believing Jesus and you need to also.

  • Subhendu Das says:

    For Tom on March 19, 2015 at 9:02 am.

    You are correct; indeed I mentioned all the items in your list. But I have also said (a) they are the laws of nature, (b) nature demonstrates examples of their proofs, and (c) I have collected from public literature some examples in the book.

    I am sure they are in the book. But how do you find them in a 300 page book? I do not have the answer to that. If you can tell me how, then I will write another version of the book in your way. The items in your list are not isolated statements, they are interlinked. The book has more than 150 research references.

    Take the first item in your list – “These objects are created by their individual soul.” There are many examples in the book to support the statement. Entire concept behind the book is based on the above statements. However let me pickup one example from the book at https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/category/e-ch5-reincarnation/5a-proof-of-reincarnation/ – Birth Defect Cases.

    A baby is born with physical marks of bullet wounds in the chest and back. Doctors, nurses, parents all recognize the marks and agrees. When the boy learns to speak around age 2-3, he says: (a) His name was N in previous life and he lived in town T. (b) He was killed on date D by a gunshot wound at chest. Such kids are called Jatiswar in Sanskrit.

    The researchers go to the hospital in town T and verify that a man named N died in that hospital on date D due to a gunshot wound. The researchers examine the photos of the autopsy record and verify the exact match with the wounds of the baby.

    This example shows that the soul of the baby created the baby’s body, exactly the way he ended his past life. Scholars have examined thousands of such Jatiswar kids all over the world, professionally documented them, and published them in peer reviewed professional journals. This is a very convincing proof that our soul reincarnates and also creates the body exactly the way the soul wants.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Subhendu–
    You keep making statements but give no evidence or reasons for believing those statements. What is your evidence that:
    “These objects are created by their individual soul.”
    “that soul has created your body.”
    “the entire universe is also filled with souls.”
    “Each object has a different soul.”
    “the universe is also filled with a root physical material.”
    etc. etc. etc.
    Your “Soul Theory” book is also filled with many statements but no viable evidence for those statements to be true. Frankly Subhendu I don’t see how we can have a conversation about things which have no basis for reality, fact, or substantiation of any kind. While I’m sure you believe these things in your own mind, that doesn’t make any of it viable or true.

    People with these kinds of ideas are specifically spoken of in God’s Word, the Bible. And I quote: “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
    Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.”

    This is precisely what you are doing Subhendu—worshipping the creation rather than the Creator.

  • Subhendu Das says:

    For Tom on March 18, 2015, at 12:42 pm

    All living and non-living things in the universe are objects of nature. These objects are created by their individual soul. Nature demonstrates that you and I are created by our individual souls. That is, you have a soul, and that soul has created your body. I have another soul, and it has created me. This is true for all objects of nature. And surprisingly the nature demonstrates this fact also. We just have to learn to observe nature carefully.

    But this is not a complete definition of nature. It has another characteristic. The environment of earth is filled with oxygen molecule. Anywhere in earth you poke the atmosphere with a very fine pin, you will find an oxygen molecule there. These oxygen molecules are different but they are all same also. They are same in the sense that they have same characteristics.

    In the same way the entire universe is also filled with souls. Anywhere you poke, you will find a soul. This soul is called the root cause. For, these souls created all the objects of the universe. Each object has a different soul. But all these souls have the same characteristics, just like oxygen, but they are also not same molecule.

    Besides soul, the universe is also filled with a root physical material. This material cannot be decomposed to any other finer material. But all objects are created out of this root material. Thus two definitions of nature are used synonymously, and you select one of them based on the context. Definition A: Nature = root cause (soul) + root material. Definition B: Nature = living objects + Nonliving objects.

    Definition A is eternal. Definition B has a fixed life time. That is, you and I live only for a finite time. After we die our bodies obey definition A. That is, we go back to root material and root cause. But we reincarnate – nature proves that too.

    Nature demonstrates all these as its laws. The book on Soul Theory describes these demonstrations by nature.

    The book also shows that everything in our society is false. Which means – mathematics, physics, economics, philosophies, religions (including Hinduism of modern time, but not Vedas) are all false and wrong. Our society does not allow us to know the truth. The reason is also very simple – money is false – because money is not an object of nature. Using something that is false you cannot create anything that is true. Thus your second law of thermodynamics is false – see the book.

    I will talk about Bible later, one subject at a time. I prefer to keep all exchanges as short as I can. But the book talks about reincarnation in Bible. Take a look at the free book here – https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/

  • Sharon says:

    thank you for this posting this is good

  • Tom Tom says:

    Gary–
    Once again you prove that you’re really not interested in answers to your questions but only fuel for your derision and unbelief. I shall remember that the next time you ask a question. (Matthew 7:6)

  • gary says:

    Whether it was a ghost (Samuel) or a demon, this passage shows that the authors of the OT believed in ghosts, goblins, and ghouls; entities which do not exist; entities which are superstitions; proving the Bible as an unreliable source of facts and view of reality.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Subhendu Das—
    While we can observe certain laws by their effects, the creator of those laws is not nature itself. That is because nature is a created thing. Nature had a beginning at the time of God’s creation of all things. You originally wrote, “Only the laws of nature must be the Truth. Therefore Truth must be unique and universal.” That’s a nice statement, but it is begging the question. You are using your own blanket statement, “Only the law of nature must be the Truth” to prove the laws of nature are the truth.

    According to your statement, all non-living and living things can think. Please tell me how you know that a rock can think. What’s more, even if a rock DID think, how would we know what it was or that it was thinking? What would be the purpose of it thinking in the first place? I find it curious that you would title your book “Soul Theory” considering that by definition a theory is an unproven hypothesis. If you can’t prove it, how do you know it to be true?

    By stating that the universe, what you call nature, has existed eternally defies the second law of thermodynamics; thus you are denying laws of nature by stating your belief about nature. That law basically is that all things eventually use up their energy and become insert. Since that law must pertain to everything in the universe, the universe by default had to have had a beginning—something that started it all. Since nothing can come from nothing, there had to be a creator—I.e., God.

    By the way, you didn’t respond to my refutation of your statement that the Bible once contained statements about reincarnation being true.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Gary–
    Mediums, spiritualists, card readers, witches, warlocks and the like (those who are not charlatans) are now and have always been either demon possessed or demon controlled. While it is not possible for the dead to be summoned from their eternal abode, demonic manifestations can and do imitate the “dearly departed.”

  • Subhendu Das says:

    For Tom, March 13, 2015, at 2:40 pm –
    You wrote – “The question is who determines what the absolute truth is?”. I did not say who determines, I said nature “demonstrates” its law. Just like existence of Gravity is a law of nature. And nature demonstrates that; and humans observe them.

    You asked – “Can nature think?” Of course it can. Humans, animals, trees, plants are all part of nature, and they can think. All non-living objects, like water, electronic instruments, also can think. There are many demonstration of that, discussed in the book on Soul Theory at https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/

    You also asked – “And wouldn’t truth have been true BEFORE there WAS any nature?” Clearly it requires a definition of nature. The book shows that nature (or universe)demonstrates its existence for eternity. Universe has only two kinds of objects (1) the root cause – called soul and (2)root material – called nature (you may name it anything you want). All objects of the universe are created from these two root objects. Nature demonstrates that also.

  • gary says:

    I have a question for you, Tom. In the Bible, the powers of witches, wizards, and mediums are described as real. Saul sought out a medium because he obviously believed that mediums could contact the dead. He desperately wanted to speak to the dead prophet Samuel. According to the Bible, the witch of Indor had the power to call up the dead prophet as Saul requested.

    Do you believe that if I wanted to speak to someone who is dead today that I could find a medium or witch who would have this power?

  • gary says:

    There is no credible evidence to believe that your magic-based belief system is true, Tom. So my reaction to your threats of eternal torture in your god’s divine torture chamber is no different than my reaction would be to the threats of an uneducated witch doctor, chanting hokus pokus, shaking his tom toms, and poking needles into a doll that looks like me.

    It is superstitious magic. It is ignorance. It isn’t real.

  • Tom Tom says:

    Subhendu Das—
    You make some interesting statements and I’d like to ask you some questions regarding them:

    I agree that absolute truth is absolutely true regardless of where in the universe you may be. The question is who determines what the absolute truth is? You say it is “nature” but what is your definition of nature? Can “nature” think, reason, and come to conclusions? No. And wouldn’t truth have been true BEFORE there WAS any nature? Wouldn’t it make sense that whoever created nature in the first place would be the absolute truth giver?

    As for your statements regarding the Bible, there are more than 24,000 partial and complete manuscripts of the New Testament and over 86,000 quotations from the early church fathers and several thousand Lectionaries (church-service books containing Scripture quotations used in the early centuries of Christianity). There are Old Testament manuscripts as old as 150 B.C. and the Dead Sea Scrolls corroborate the manuscripts that were being used for the first several hundred years of the church. In NONE of these manuscripts are there any suggestions that reincarnation is true. Therefore, why do you believe there were originally references to reincarnation in the Bible?

  • Tom Tom says:

    And my final comment Gary–

    If you do not repent and trust in the ONLY way to be right with God on the day you die, Jesus Christ, you will have all eternity to think about your mockings and foolish denials of the God who gave you life and sustains it every moment of every day. You won’t be able to deny him then, but it will be eternally too late.

Leave a Reply