h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Interesting and logical thinking from jbird there

Noggin

You've obviously done some research here, and it does make some fascinating reading

You've expressed your thoughts in scientific terms and reached, in my view, hazy and non-specific conclusions, using phrases like: "as far as we can tell" and "our best understanding is"...

After reading your posting several times, I am not moved from my position that time and space are beyond our comprehension. Can you expand still further?

In answer to your last point...as improbable as it may sound, the Bible describes exactly how such an interface might look!

mich2ael

<>

I quote you solely to point out that there *always* comes a point where understanding breaks down.

My conclusions are neither hazy or non-specific. The singularity is a barrier to knowledge of what is beyond it. Space is a function of energy/cause and effect. Scientific knowledge, however, is always just our best to date (hence my "as far as we know" provisos). It can always change in the light of new evidence/new thinking.

And how might the interface look, according to the Bible?

Noggin

Noggin,

<>


Well, the Bible is a collection of history, poetry, inspired writings which culminate in the person of Jesus Christ.

The Bible attests that Creation happened at the command of God...he spoke and the universe came into being...there may have been a big bang... the Bible doesn't give much detail!

Man, who was supposed to be the pinnacle of God's creation, messed things up pretty much as soon as he arrived by going his own way, not God's. Not much has changed then!

The Old Testament contains loads of prophetic writings pointing to the Christ, who was born in very humble cicumstances, and was to be the Redeemer of fallen mankind.

At the age of approx 30, Christ began to preach: "Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is near". The kingdom of heaven, or kingdom of God, was the theme of his preaching and works. His teachings were radical and extraordinary. His works speak for themselves: "I do these things that you might believe".

His crucifixion and subsequent resurrection are central aspects of the bible's message. Just as the passover lamb was the annual sacrifice of the jews to atone for their sins, so Jesus is described as our Passover Lamb, who died to take away the sins of the world. Forgiveness of sins and eternal life are what's on offer here!

Christ also speaks of a world growing increasingly troubled as time reaches its conclusion!


Interestingly, in the book of Matthew chapter 5, Jesus says things like: "Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven...Blessed are the merciful for they will be shown mercy...Blessed are those who mourn for they will be comforted...Blessed are the meek for they will inherit the earth..."

My own experience of coming to believe in Christ reflects some of these sentiments. When I'd reached my late teens I had reached the end of myself...I was poor in spirit if anyone was...I was depressed, subject to phobias and unable to function. When I heard the good news of the kingdom of God I embraced it wholeheartedly...I decided to become a follower of Christ because I needed to! I still believe now 20 years later..and its not 'in spite of' evidence but rather 'because of' evidence I've witnessed and experienced since.

I must admit, reading through my posting it doesn't sound that convincing to me. There's an awful lot about God and faith that I don't understand, and a lot of what passes for christianity these days, I wouldn't want to sign up to. But I believe that what I have experienced is the grace and love of God. Of course its still a choice whether or not to believe; I continue to be convinced of the truth of the gospel of Christ.


If you do some research into this phenomenon I think you will soon discover that God is alive and active in our world today.

mich2ael

Hope this makes some sense!!

<>

What makes you think, Noggin, that God retired from the scene? From my point of view, God didn't retire - but however, God doesn't (usually) intervene, unless asked - and then works through other people, rather than directly reaching "down"... (In quote marks because I don't believe that God is "up there in the sky"... except metaphorically. )

Vicky

Aside from the normal spirit to reality interface problem, I think you've just introduced another here:

<<"If we assume that freewill is an (the only?) exception to determinism 'ab initio,'">>

What is this free will, that it is exempt from the laws of nature? Why have we not observed this?

Moreover, starting condition determinism is on slightly shaky grounds these days. I would believe in it if I could (cause and effect chain, not spirits or God), but it doesn't seem like much of an option.

Does the Judaic Creator God have free will?

--

Jez

Oooo, where to begin?

I'll start with Della. You'll realise that for me the question is a hypothetical one, and you'll also note that I used an "if... then... would be" argument form. The intention was to demonstrate that a non-intervenionist god is not, as you point out, what the overwhelming majority of theists require, and that therefore it's the problems associated with belief in an interventionist god that are really the issue, not the putative but ultimately unknowable role that he may, or may not, have played in creation.

Bouncy

The "if we assume..." form of argument is perfectly valid, provided that one remembers that if the premises are not accepted, the conclusions will not be accepted either (this is what I meant by "excavating" arguments - you have to go back a stage if there is a disagreement over the premises). I'm with you on free will (I've yet to hear a convincing argument for a form of free will that's exempt from cause and effect ); determinism is trickier, because the universe can be as deterministic as you please, and you still couldn't prove determinism, and therefore, conversely, indeterminism either. One of the reasons for this touches on Jez's question, too. A predicting machine can only predict on the assumption of determinism; and if this is true, then a predicting machine may not predict it's own future internal states, and therefore it's own future actions.

Mich2ael

What you say gives me no clue as to how an interface between the "spiritual" and the material could actually function.

For the rest, the historical accuracy and reliability of the gospels is highly questionable (Math and Jez are more knowleadgeable than me on this one, so I'm going to pass the buck).

Noggin

Noggin

<>

It ain't necessarily so...

mich2ael

Noggin

An interesting link: www.propheticvision.org.uk

<>

But that's exactly what's being described...

mich2ael

<>

Can you be a bit more precise as to where it's being described. I seem to have missed it.

Noggin

There is no valid, historically acceptable way to assess the relative reliability of any of the extant gospels.

None of them have any link with history in any verifiable way, apart from a few instances where they have it wrong, such as the idea that Herod could have been on the throne at the right time...

Jesus was probably a prophet of the Judaic god, or of one of the gods who are seen in Judaism as one god (there seem to be so many discrepencies in behaviour and expectations around in the various bits of the bible, I hesitate, from my polytheist perspective, to ascribe all of it to one deity). However, even he did not claim to be THE ONE AND ONLY son of god, but simply A son of god, which is something that all of the followers of various gods, including the Children of Israel all accept when they call their deity Father.

Jesus is said to have called his god the Aramaic equivalent of 'Daddy', if I remember correctly. And he called his followers his brothers, which, if you don't accept that he was an only child, means that all of them were the sons (and daughters) of god.

There were many other gospels and much more in the way of scripture, most of which was culled by the early church when it got big enough to want to centralise power. James and the early Judaic end of the church were effectively dispossessed by a section of the church which had been thoroughly influenced by the imperialism of the Roman Empire. All of that, and more, is commonly accepted by biblical scholars, and can be found with very little research. The Orthodox church and the Catholic church were already separate, and have different takes on history. No doubt the Coptic and other, now defunct churches, had their own versions of much of the then current NT and even now, there are various 'correct' versions around.

--

Does the Christian/Judaic god have free will?

--

Jez

Noggin

The message about Christ is exactly how the Eternal God has chosen to reveal himself to man, therefore this Jesus Christ is where you look to see this interface between the spiritual and the physical.

I think that gets across the point I'm making.

mich2ael

Jez

<>

Very little research could show this entire posting to be unfounded, with all due respect.

mich2ael

i.e....with even a small amount of research, your posting can be shown to be unfounded, Jez.

mich2ael

<>

Possibly, but it entirely misses the one that *I* was making

To clarify, even if what you say is true, the mode of operation of the interface has not been touched on. To do this would require some definition of what you mean by "spiritual" (and probably "physical" too).

The interfaces/interactions between physical objects are mediated by cause and effect (and include metarules such as conservation). In physics terms physical objects are energy, and their interactions are energy transforms.

But what is "spiritual"?

Noggin

Noggin

<><< metarules such as conservation>><>

Ok, we're starting to use a lot of words I don't entirely understand now!!

I think it is probably the case that I can't prove the existence of 'the spiritual dimension' by scientific methods. And it may also be the case that any 'spiritual experience' claimed by an individual may be explained away by scientific methods.

Many people, some of them reasonably intelligent(!), have come to the conclusion that the spiritual realm exists, through experience and circumstance, even though the notion seems to defy logic and rational thought.

Allow me to be slightly contentious for a mo...

I suppose, as a scientific thinker, you would be interested in Einstein's thoughts on the properties of time. The recent news articles about the man inventing a time machine have also been of interest and would appear to be taken seriously by the scientific establishment. I noticed that when trying to explain how such a machine could possibly work, he began talking about black holes and *parallel universes*.
I mention this because, if you take the subject of time travel seriously, then you might be obliged to take a step closer to my point of view that a spiritual realm exists.

By the way. did you check out that link.

mich2ael

Unfounded?

No.

But you are blinkered to anything which affects your religious position, whereas I am not even attacking it.

The bible, as it has come down to us, is not an historical document, it is a collection of faith-based articles. And that's fine.

It just happens that it is not my collection of faith-based articles, but so what? I am not using it in any way, as I have my own mythos.

--

Jez

The experimenters have not claimed to have invented a time machine. They do claim to have made photons travel faster than light.

The implications of this are quite interesting, and I await the peer-reviewed articles, rather than the sensational news-reports, with great interest.

--

Does the Christian god have free will?

--

Jez

Sorry about the long words. It boils down to "interactions between physical objects, which consist of energy, are quite well understood."

The same cannot be said for any putative interactions between energy and... what? Spirit?

And what Jez said

Noggin

Jez

<>

I am reluctant to enter into a debate with you because I sense, with all due respect, that you aren't sincerely seeking after truth by asking this question. I come to this conclusion by looking at some of your other conversations!

mich2ael