Explaining the Incomprehensible

There is a subtle difference between “God was Created” and “God was Created3”. The former begs the question “by whom?”, whereas the latter doesnt/shouldnt. It is like the difference between “the biggest number” (which is time-space related) and “infinity” (which is lack-of-time-and-space or LTS related). In theory, we can multiply the biggest number by 2, but we cant do the same with infinity (by definition). Like infinity, Creation3 implies/provides some kind of a closure/explanation about the incomprehensible.

Artificial Life Fantasy

Regarding the recent hoopla about creation of partially synthetic bacterial cell, I agree with the scientists who praised Dr. Venter’s project but characterized the experiment in less revolutionary terms. They noted that only the genome was synthetic; the recipient cell was equipped by nature and billions of years of evolution to make sense of the genes and turn them on.

Though I consider myself to be science-oriented, I acknowledge limitations of science and prefer stepping beyond the boxes of both religion and science. While some may characterize Dr. Venter’s experiment as “the latest step toward making life from scratch”, I don’t. And while some may think science will some day help to create artificial life, I don’t. In line with the theory of biogenesis (which states that life can only come from preexisting life), I hold that life cannot be generated from purely inanimate objects.

In my view, science and its tools are limited to the time-space realm, but life (including freewill, instincts, and thoughts) pertains to a realm that is beyond time-space—and is as such beyond the reaches of science and its tools. Thoughts or emotions for instance, cannot be created per se by science and its tools; rather, they can only be influenced by them. Chemicals and drugs merely manipulate preexisting thoughts or emotions—they do not conceive, originate, or invent them from scratch.