About Science and the Bible

The science of the Bible conveyed in Breshit is transcendence in the meaning that the cosmological realm, all existence in fact, is creation ex nihilo. Without this Gd is not Gd. The burden of scientific demonstration does not fall upon the Bible at all. As a demonstration of creation ex nihilo the Bible is quite explicit. (E. g., see the comments of S. R. Hirsh.) As for science in this matter, the sole consideration for the truth of it is creation ex nihilo. If it fails to satisfy science it is not for the Bible to prove it is science. Rather it is the burden of science to prove creation ex nihilo is false. It is to disprove transcendence is transcendence of existence qua existence in the ultimate sense found in Descartes’ Principles.

Were the matter otherwise (and this point is a variation on the theme of the first chapters by Rashi), the making of a people, that is, a teaching what human purpose is would also have no substance. This amounts to saying human purpose is not divined by men (and certainly not by science). In the case of Israel, this is surely so. Again, this is only to say the only aspect of any rational comment upon Breshit by science must confine itself to transcendence, therein to creation ex nihilo.

But exactly Descartes' teaching or the mathesis universalis, in fact science simply, is there is only existence. Transcendence of it, here to say nothing of creation ex nihilo, is closed in the nature of Being. This is the teaching of science to this hour. As for creation ex nihilo, there can be no such thing for transcendence of existence is itself beyond the Truth of Existence, i.e., the Truth of Enlightenment. It is for this reason I have said science is the most profound and perfect atheism ever conceived or imagined.  But Descartes was compelled to conceive, actually to invent transcendent Thought, Pure Intellect. He used the ens rationis called Second Intention to do this. This ens is the cogito, but also it is symbol. This deepens Descartes’ already near-impenetrable atheism. I will comment on this aspect next time.

RJL

Printer-Friendly Version