Falling Stars, Damnable Heresy, and the Spirit of Evolution

Renew America ^ | Sept. 19, 2013 | Linda Kimball

[spirited irish]

Ancient Book of Jasher:

There are 13 ancient history books that are mentioned and recommended by the Bible. The Ancient Book of Jasher is the only one of the 13 that still exists. It is referenced in Joshua 10:13; 2 Samuel 1:18; and 2 Timothy 3:8. This volume contains the entire 91 chapters plus a detailed analysis of the supposed discrepancies, cross-referenced historical accounts, and detailed charts for ease of use.

http://www.amazon.com/Ancient-Book-Jasher-Ken-Johnson/dp/148207138X

[betty boop]

“All the waves and particles that we can see and measure, literally, as in the Greek, ex-ist or ‘stand out from’ an underlying sea of potential that physicists have named the vacuum….just as waves undulate on the sea.” This ‘sea’ of proto-physicality is an “all pervasive, underlying field of potential…the vacuum.” (ibid, p. 172)

I haven't read Quantum Society by Danah Zohar and Ian Marshall; but it seems to me what they may be trying to do with this book is, as you say, to create "new mystical science of pantheist animism, psychology and sociology" based on "scientific evidence." (If it's "scientific," doncha know, it must be "good.")

Quantum fields are totally unvisualizable, and therefore inaccessible to description in language. To speculate about the activity of bosons and fermions in the production of minds, social systems, etc., seems a bit of an overreach. But I see what they're trying to get at: Everything in nature reduces to the material.

Of one thing I am pretty sure, however: Every physical thing in nature is produced out of the quantum level of nature. Evidently, Zohar and Marshall seem to believe that somehow pure materiality (e.g., bosons, fermions) just pops into existence out of nowhere and then organizes itself spontaneously; and the rest is taken care of by "evolution."

I find in Plato's creation myth (in the Timaeus) an idea that might be something like a quantum vacuum field — Chora.

Chora is an infinite "sea" of undifferentiated and unrealized pure potentiality. But Plato says the elements of this "sea," or "field," are "lazy," and don't want to enter the stream of existence at all. They would just like to sit there and do nothing. Thus, if Chora were left to its own devices, nothing would ever come into existence at all.

Enter the Demiurge. The Demiurge is not God. Yet Plato sees him as a sort of agent of the Unknown God "Beyond" the cosmos. It is his job to "persuade" Chora to accept formation and enter the stream of existence. He wishes to create existent things to the standard of beauty and goodness and justice and truth that characterizes his own nature.

And thus does the physical world constantly emerge, according to divine persuasion (i.e., not by divine fiat).

The point here is we have a sort of "proto-matter" that cannot materialize without the successful action of "persuasive" divine reason. The world is more than matter — it is shot through with divine spirit, divine Nous, which ultimately constitutes the organizational principles of a living cosmos and all the entities within it.

So it's a myth. :^) I happen to like myths — usually anyway. (Except for Darwin's.) They are enormously interesting to me; for as Eric Voegelin wrote, "Myth remains the legitimate language of movements of the soul."

Thus a legitimate myth is always "true" in a certain sense.

If a myth anticipates quantum mechanics from over 2,000 years in the past, I'd say that's pretty extraordinary.

Thank you so much, dear sister in Christ, for your splendid essay/post.

[betty boop]

"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" [— Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr] — "the more it changes, the more it's the same thing", usually translated as "the more things change, the more they stay the same."

That's just another way of saying, "There is no new thing under the sun."

(The wisdom of Ecclesiastes is totally amazing to me!)

Thank you so much for your kind words, dearest sister in Christ!

[hosepipe]

So it’s a myth. :^) I happen to like myths — usually anyway. (Except for Darwin’s.) They are enormously interesting to me; for as Eric Voegelin wrote, “Myth remains the legitimate language of movements of the soul.” Thus a legitimate myth is always “true” in a certain sense. If a myth anticipates quantum mechanics from over 2,000 years in the past, I’d say that’s pretty extraordinary.

---

WoW,, Eric Voegelin and Joseph Campbell on the same page..
Will wonders ever cease?....

Who’s next Willie Wonka and G. Gordon Liddy?..

Being amazified has an almost spiritual quality to it don’t it?..

[betty boop]

Comparative mythology???

Jeepers, I don't think I'd be much interested in that.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your insightful essay-post, dear spirited irish!

Truly it is very difficult for many to discern what a thing "is."

Trying to get the usual crevo posters to define "what is life v. non-life/death in nature" was a huge undertaking. It was easy for them to describe living things but they struggled to define what life "is."

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so very much for sharing your insights, dearest sister in Christ!

The unspoken suggestion oftentimes is that the vacuum is nothing. But it is not nothing. It is a continuum of at least space/time dimensionality.

Space/time does not pre-exist. It is created as the universe expands. The universe doesn't expand "into" anything.

Ditto for the singularity of the big bang. It is not nothing either. It is zero dimensions, a mathematical point, but not nothing.

God created all that there is ex nihilo - no dimensions at all. No thing. No mathematical point.

[hosepipe]

Trying to get the usual crevo posters to define “what is life v. non-life/death in nature” was a huge undertaking. It was easy for them to describe living things but they struggled to define what life “is.”

---

To me; describing “LIFE” is like trying to place the fragrance of a sound,,, inhale the odors of “light”... caress the ambrosia of beauty... or capture the balmy nectar of love...

Once you’re quantified it, you’ve put to much salt in the stew..
Its not ruined but it is distasteful... no amount of pepper will help

[spirited irish]

“The unspoken suggestion oftentimes is that the vacuum is nothing. But it is not nothing. It is a continuum...”

Spirited: The great masters such as De Vinci understood this principle. In practice it means that in order to accurately render the physical “thing” it is necessary to study and render just as accurately the “negative space” (continuum) around and giving shape to the “thing.”

With respect to Christian tradition, totality consists of the seen (physical things) and unseen (spiritual; negative space). Additionally, there are 3 heavens. The first or lower heaven consists of the space around and up to the moon. This heaven is the realm of fallen angels and demons. The second heaven is what we call deep space. The 3rd Heaven or Paradise is outside of the first two and is where the immortal souls of God’s children await the day of resurrection when all things are renewed.

I believe that our earth and the first two heavens are the “things” and the continuum or “negative space” around and giving shape to the “thing” is not the 3rd Heaven itself but an inter-dimensional space or corridor between the first two heavens and the third. C.S. Lewis explored this theme in the Magician’s Nephew, the second of his highly acclaimed Chronicles of Narnia. The Magician represents the mystical speculations of New Physics ‘scientists’ btw.

If Lewis is correct, then the inter-dimensional corridor is the Void, the object of mystical speculation, meditation, astral travel, and empowerment (the Western Magic Way or magic science) from the time of Hermes Trismegistus.

As all things are created and sustained by the Triune God, the worship of created stuff (i.e., the Void) constitutes apostasy and idolatry.

[YHAOS]

" describing “LIFE” is like trying to place the fragrance of a sound,,, inhale the odors of “light”... caress the ambrosia of beauty... or capture the balmy nectar of love..."

Well said, my poetic FRiend.

[betty boop]

Once you’re quantified it, you’ve put to much salt in the stew.. Its not ruined but it is distasteful... no amount of pepper will help.

So lovely, dear brother in Christ!

Thats how I tend to feel about "comparative mythology," e.g., of the Campbell school. But I digress. :^)

YHAOS is so right: You are a poet!

HUGS!

[Alamo-Girl]

All that may be true, but when a person sets out to study life as a scientist, a biologist, surely he ought to want to know what life "is." Strangely though, seeking an answer to that question seems to be more important to the physicists and mathematicians.

[Alamo-Girl]

Those are very interesting views, dear spirited irish, thank you for sharing them!

[hosepipe]

Thats how I tend to feel about “comparative mythology,” e.g., of the Campbell school. )

---

True.. Joe Campbell went out of his way to rename “lies” as myth..
Seems he had distaste for the word lie.... and he didn’t trust the word truth..

Must’ve bought into the “you have your truth, I have mine” bull sperm..
He urinates all over the word truth... pity..
Because he seemed pretty smart otherwise..

Like of lazy as well, anything “religious” or even “spiritual”.. was viewed thru mythical glasses..
Much like many “scientists” do.. maybe from the same root cause..

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools..
Truth-phobic is quite a comical state to be in...
Amuses me no end... Jesus had no requirement to be smart..
I respect that... even fools could be accepted..

If not; I would be totally undone.. and unqualified for salvation..
One day many/maybe most religious people may be very glad of that..

[BroJoeK]

spirited irish: [Thomas] "Paine advocated a New Pantheist spirituality grounded in natural science in opposition to the Christian consensus held by the Founders.
As a result they rejected Paine.
He became an outcast...
Over and against America’s Christian foundations Paine proposed pantheism, or collectivism-—statism."

FRiend, you've been hammering & hammering at Thomas Paine this whole thread -- as if Paine were a snake in the Garden, or a Judas amongst apostles.
Paine was not those, indeed is not even listed as a major Founding Father.
But Paine provided valuable service during the entire Revolution period, and when it was over George Washington recommended, and Congress approved $3,000 in compensation -- an amount equivalent to $3,000,000 today.
The states of New York and Pennsylvania also rewarded Paine handsomely.
So Paine was far from "outcast".

Yes, Paine did tangle with some other Founders, notably Pennsylvania's Robert Morris -- who Paine accused of financial shenanigans.
So in 1779 Paine was expelled from his Congressional Foreign Affairs committee post, but continued to serve the Revolution in Europe, by arranging for foreign grants & loans.

In 1792, while in Great Britain, Paine was accused of libel & sedition, to which he responded:

"If, to expose the fraud and imposition of monarchy ... to promote universal peace, civilization, and commerce, and to break the chains of political superstition, and raise degraded man to his proper rank; if these things be libellous ... let the name of libeller be engraved on my tomb."[41]"

Paine had gone to France in support of the French Revolution, but soon got into trouble with various authorities there, coming within a hairs-breadth of losing his own head during the terror of 1794.
During his imprisonment US officials in France were, ahem, slow to come to his rescue, and Paine blamed Washington for that, publically attacking Washington in 1796.

Paine supported France and Napoleon against Britain, until he figured out that Napoleon was not what he hoped.
In 1802 Paine's friend, President Thomas Jefferson invited him to return to the United States, where Paine lived in New York until his death, at age 72, in 1809.

Paine's religious beliefs were a little extreme for his time, but not completely so.
Where most of our Founders can be called Christian-Deists, or deistic-Christians, Paine was a Deist first, holding only the Quakers in very high regard.
He put no stock in creeds & doctrines.

Paine certainly did run afoul of leaders in the Second Great Awakening after 1800, and his views on Indian cultures seem at odds with his other beliefs:

"Paine's utopianism combined civic republicanism, belief in the inevitably of scientific and social progress and commitment to free markets and liberty generally.
The multiple sources of Paine's political theory all pointed to a society based on the common good and individualism."

Those do not equate to socialism or statism.

Among Paine's most notable admirers was a young Abraham Lincoln, a fact which makes me wonder if those who attack Paine so vigorously are also subtly attacking Lincoln himself?

[BroJoeK]

tacticalogic defining "conservative": "It always means opposed to change, preserving traditional systems and values. "

In America the term "conservative" means specifically a commitment to traditional understandings of the US Constitution and limited government.
Today that would require major, even wrenching, changes.
In a sense, then, that makes a true conservative something of a "radical."

So the point is not "change versus no-change", but rather, "which direction of change".

[BroJoeK]

spirited irish quoting: "“The irony is devastating.
The main purpose of Darwinism was to drive every last trace of an incredible God from biology.
But the theory replaces God with an even more incredible deity – omnipotent chance....” "

But anyone with even the smallest religious inclinations can easily see in your "omnipotent chance" the Hand of God.

So evolution theory, like all of science is simply a natural explanation for natural processes.
It requires you personally to see God's work in nature.

[BroJoeK]

betty boop: "I have not refused to answer any question that BroJoeK has put to me.
I LOVE it when people ask me questions!
I wish more people would do it!!!"

In every post to you I've included at least one question, and often several, none of which you've answered directly.

So, why not go back and look?
Post my questions and your direct answers?

betty boop: "FWIW, I am not anti-science.
I am not anti-evolution. (I do believe in evolution.
I just think that evolution of the Darwinian type is pretty lame.
In fact, I have some doubt that it is science at all.)"

Then of course you are anti-science, by very definition of the term.
You loathe and despise the basic idea of science: natural explanations for natural processes.
Instead, you fervently wish to impose on science something it absolutely is not -- a super-natural dimension.

Nothing wrong with super-natural, it's just as real as natural, but it's outside the realm of science, whether you Ms boop like that or not.

So what exactly is your problem?

[BroJoeK]

betty boop: "Dear BroJoeK, I gather you hold in contempt spirited irish's concerns, that she is a religious wing-nut who has worked to gather about herself a crowd of like-minded 'sycophants.' "

Then, as usual, you misunderstand.
In fact, I have merely returned to sender the contempt spirited irish holds for me and science in general.
I have no problem with spirited irish's (or your) religious beliefs, so long as you-all don't spread lies and false accusations about others who see things differently.

betty boop: "Linda Kimball's "Falling Stars, Damnable Heresy, and the Spirit of Evolution" article has not been removed to the Religion Forum."

According to spirited herself she's been, in effect, shunned from Religion.
And she wants to accuse your humble correspondent of taking part in that.
So as in everything else, it becomes yet another excuse for making false accusations.

betty boop: "it is a real puzzle to me that you seem at the same time to want to undermine the very cultural foundation of American order: Which is that we are a people under God, from whom we have received fundamental, unalienable rights that no State of whatever form may infringe or deny.
The people do not exist for the State; the State exists for the people; and its mandate is very narrow."

And so, Ms boop, like spirited irish, you also use disagreements as excuse enough to make ridiculous false accusations?
Why? Are you likewise addicted to false accusations?
What -- do your hands tremble if you can't make frequent false accusations?
Do you have no concerns about whether your words have any connections to the truth?

So what is it with you?
Why can't or won't you stop yourself?

betty boop: "You allege you have never seen anyone around FR beat up on a Christian.
Jeepers, guy — you've been here about 9 years now, and you can say that with a straight face?"

Without exception, all the aggressors on this topic, all of the false-accusers, all the distorters of fact, all the mockers that I've seen come from your side, lady.
They claim to be Christians, and they claim that anybody disagreeing with them is not a real Christian.

Those of us here defending science do our best to keep discussions at the level of science, facts & reason, without descending into the name-calling arena.
But of course, we're only human, and can sometimes fail...

betty boop: "In any case, I do hope you and yours had a wonderful Thanksgiving!"

Thanks
;-)

[BroJoeK]

BroJoeK post #1,289, words in ' ' quotes from YHAOS: "I've never seen a thread or poster on FR whose purpose was 'to attack and disparage Christianity'."

betty boop: "You allege you have never seen anyone around FR beat up on a Christian."

metmom: "Kind of breath taking, isn't it?
I continue to be amazed what people will say with a straight face."

I'm amazed that:

1. First, you distorted my words, which themselves were quoted from YHAOS.
   And those words specifically refer to Christianity, not to everyone who claims to be a Christian.

2. Second, that you would pretend with a straight face my words are anything other than totally accurate.