Dear Saltpetre,

IF there is such a creator, and that's a big IF which theoretically science may one day discover, or not, then s/he could only have created our objective physical universe, including our bodies - but not me and you.

Let us imagine for example some mad scientist from another universe who created this universe in his cyclotron and watches it using equipment that humankind will only have in the 4567's century, such equipment that sees and controls everything here at once, past present and future, faster than our speed of light.

From a material point of view, such scientist is by far bigger, stronger, more knowledgeable and more intelligent than us, but from a spiritual point of view he is no more than any of us, but indeed equivalent to us.

Praying to such a scientist may therefore be a practical mundane occupation, but has no spiritual impact. One may possibly want to acknowledge such a scientist and say 'thank-you for this world', but Worshipping such a scientist would simply be idolatry.

Dear Yuyutsu,

Sorry, if I upset you. When you wrote

“So according to your understanding of 'existence', God exists?
Wouldn't that render Him an object?”,

I simply understood that you meant to say that what exists is necessarily an object. For this implication I offered a counter-example (you) who existed without being an object. This is simple logic, irrespective of what we mean by “exists” and “object”. And since we agree that you are not an object, and presumably also that you exist, this is a valid counter-example.

If you did not mean to say that what exists must be an object, then I misunderstood you, and I apologize.

As for God, I agree with you. I did not make any statement about Him, certainly not the ones you seem to attribute to me. I also apologize for calling you (and other persons and things) God’s creation, since I assumed, apparently wrongly, that you did not object to this Christian terminology. I would certainly not tell an atheist he/she was God’s creation because I would not expect him/her to understand, whatever, if any, would be his/her reaction.

Dear George,

There is nothing you should apologise for: I have no objections to Christian terminology and sometimes even use it myself. I consider Christianity a valid spiritual path and at times take part in Christian services myself. The fact that I have personally chosen a different path for myself does not negate the teachings of Jesus Christ.

The demise of Christianity in the modern world, I believe, is mainly a result of the introduction by some churches of impurity into the teachings of Jesus, who taught spiritual principles, rather than physical/biological science. Religion and science do not mix - or mix badly creating an impure substance which is neither.

Science tells us nothing about values and religion tells us nothing about the physical universe. It is wrong, I believe, to attempt reading the bible as a science text-book. It was written well before the scientific era by people who had no concept of chronology (which was introduced and arranged later, probably by Ezra). There is a Jewish principle stating: "There is no early or late in the Torah (Pentateuch)". When I read the bible without scientific glasses, what I see in Genesis chapter 1, is an important spiritual teaching, then reflected in the fourth of the ten-commandments, that even if one created the most wonderful things and could go on and on, one should carve out a regular time to rest, hence the first commandment in the bible is "Thou shalt not become a workaholic", place a cap on creation!

<<I simply understood that you meant to say that what exists is necessarily an object.>>

You understood correctly.

<<And since we agree that you are not an object, and presumably also that you exist, this is a valid counter-example.>>

My body exists and is an object - I just AM, but that has no objective meaning and cannot be verified scientifically.
So long as I subjectively identify myself with my body, I mistakenly believe that I exist.

Dear Yuyutsu,

>>I mistakenly believe that I exist.<<

OK, so my counter-example was not valid. This confirms that your understanding of what it means “to exist” is rather unusual, since most of the people trying to communicate with you - believers or unbelievers - assume you exist.

Dear George,

I am approaching a crisis of faith. I am beginning to doubt that Yuyutsu exists.

Dear George,

I don't deny the common feeling that we seem to exist, but this is, just as the earth seems to be flat, an illusion caused by the limitations of the human senses and mind.

You do not exist because nobody else can ever find your 'self', no scientific experiment can ever detect 'you' and nobody, not even time itself can touch 'you'. You once seemed to be a baby, later a child and now you seem to be an adult, yet all along you are exactly the same you.

No doubt that you ARE and I AM, but we do not exist.

If you think it through, this leads to the inevitable conclusion that what we truly are (as opposed to what we currently feel and may believe we are), is God!