Re: "The only problem with scientific explanations is that a couple are close minded when it comes to the spiritual side of things."
One could also suggest that science is close-minded when it comes to the fantastical side of things because it doesn't provide any basis for belief in Leprechauns and fairies and yet some people still wish to believe in such things. In reality, science isn't being closed-minded about anything. Science is simply following a consistent system of logic which people often find too objective for their taste because it conflicts with what they want to believe.
Most people want to believe in spirituality but don't seem to display the same need when it comes to the Easter Bunny, Leprechauns, Santa Claus, mermaids. gremlins, zombies or gold, feathered whales. The fact is simply that there is insufficient objective evidence to suggest that any of these things are real. Science is consistent and yields consistent realities, whether they meet with desires or not. People are inconsistent and refuse to accept some of the findings of science when those findings violate their personal subjective desires.
When we find zero credible objective evidence to support the proclaimed existence of green, flying hippopotami, we tend to conclude that such beings do not exist. When we find zero objective supporting evidence for the proclaimed existence of duck-billed tiger-bears, we tend to accept that as sufficient to conclude that no such creature exists. When we find that science can offer no support to the idea of mermaids, unicorns, fire-breathing dragons, zombies, gremlins, centaurs, Leprechauns or rocks that taste like green-apple bubble gum, nearly everyone simply takes that in stride as adequate to conclude that no such rocks exist.
BUT... when it comes to "spirituality"... well then; that's when people instantly lose their footing on the credibility wagon, slip off their feet, and insist that science is being "closed-minded". And yet, no one can offer any more objective evidence to support the idea of spirits and/or spirituality than they can to suggest the natural existence of green-apple flavored, chewy rocks, mermaids, unicorns, gremlins, fire-breathing dragons, zombies, duck-billed tiger-bears, centaurs or hundreds of other mythical entities.
Science is incredibly open-minded. Provide objective evidence of spirits/spirituality for it to analyze and you'll receive the same kind of analysis offered to any other kind of objective evidence. It's people who simply won't accept anything but what they have already decided (and usually without a shred of anything but their own distorted, subjective interpretation of proclaimed experiences), that spirits must be real because they want them to be; who are actually demonstrating the most pervasive of close-minded attitudes.
You see science working for you every single minute of every single day. It always remains consistent. But let science disagree with you about something as subjective and personal as a belief in spirituality and suddenly, science is in error, close-minded, too feeble, flawed, mistaken, inadequate and/or misleading. Otherwise people just might have to admit to themselves that they are most likely the ones who are wrong.
Science demonstrated that vulcanology, not volcano gods, was the cause of volcanic eruptions and many rejected the finding because it interfered with their personal beliefs. Science demonstrated that the Earth was spherical and not flat and there are still people alive today who reject the finding because it conflicts with their personal subjective beliefs. Science demonstrated that the Earth is not only not the center of the universe, but not even the center of the solar system and people rejected the finding because they insisted that their personal subjective beliefs were more indicative of truth. Science showed that the Earth orbits the sun and not the other way around and people attacked the scientists behind the findings, insisting that science was wrong. Science provided evidence that there should be other planets orbiting other stars and those who subscribed to the findings of science were imprisoned and even burned at the stake for their "heresy". Science demonstrated that humans and all other creatures were the product of evolution rather than the result of a supernatural event and people still insist that it simply can't be so; yet every new bit of evidence continues to demonstrate that science is right. Science proved that the Earth has never undergone a global flood, is billions of years old and exists in a universe which existed for billions of years before the Earth, and people insisted that their personal subjective beliefs were superior to the findings of science.
And yet in every single example; science has been correct and the personal subjective opinions of people have been wrong -- every - single - time. So who is being closed-minded?
---
Re: "When I say that all things meet as according to the universe, it is a simple statement that says; when things are ment to meet..."
Meant to meet by whom? See the vast assumptions being applied? See how there is zero objective supporting evidence for those assumptions?
That's the same kind of assumption that lead to the conclusions of volcano gods, earthquake gods, rain gods, spirits causing disease, Earth being the center of the universe, spirituality, after-lives, gremlins, mermaids, geocentrism, etc., etc., etc.
