My Amazon.com Comments on Richard Dawkins' Book on "The God Delusion"

Dawkins did a great job of presenting the current scientific position of atheism. Click. His book can guide the debates between believers and nonbelievers. It is nice to hear Dawkins say that his mind is open if God’s existence is proven. His book is thus timely because my first scientific proof of God’s existence did arrive at Internet book stores this summer. Click. A scientific proof of God’s existence was possible earlier because the ‘scientific method’ was found during the Renaissance. However, at that time, Science and Theology were becoming two distinct fields of thought.

Unfortunately, this separation silenced the flow of significant scientific thoughts about God beginning with Abraham. This flow passes through personalities such as Moses, Plato, Jesus Christ, Constantine, Nicholas of Cusa, Leibniz, Cantor, and Cassirer. It is obvious that Dawkins missed this flow. Because of this separation, the theory of God was transformed from a scientific subject into an irrational mystery. Fortunately, this separation and mystery were overcome when competent English translations of the work of Nicholas of Cusa appeared in 1979 by Dr. Jasper Hopkins of the University of Minnesota. After 25 years of research, my scientific proof of God emerged from this flow of scientific thoughts. But, Dawkins was correct to say that a proof of God would reveal a very different view of the world. A new and very different life for humans can be expected.

A scientific proof of God transforms the fields of science and theology into a single field of thought. A single symbolic language thus unifies them. All people must change. For instance, religions must think scientifically. And, science must think godly. In more detail, Dawkins must accept God as a multiplicity of unified symbols. The religious Trinity is thus changed to a scientific Trinity so that God is connected to the universe rationally and logically. Dawkins must also recognize that God and the universe (1) are one, (2) have no beginning, and (3) have no end. Finally, Dawkins must accept Michael Behe’s concept of irreducible complexity because no atom of the universe is free. Thus, no atom can be useful on its own.