the singularity of being and nothingness
Philosophy
Miracles Considered, Conclusion
Jun 17th
In my previous post, I briefly discussed some problems which I believe to be inherent to popular conceptions of the miraculous. As outlined, this understanding is based upon the correlation of the miraculous to human ignorance, e.g., that which is miraculous is that which is beyond the [current] knowledge of human persons. The crux of my discussion, then, was that such an understanding of the miraculous is ultimately destructive, for as human knowledge increases, so will that which can be categorized as "miraculous" decrease proporitionally.
One of the examples which I used to illustrate this point was that of the controversy within many strands of religious thought concerning the seeming incongruence of evolutionary theory and biblical interpretation. Interestingly enough, as I was preparing for this follow-up post, I ran across an article describing the opening of a brand new "Creationism Museum" right here in Kentucky. The brainchild of the infamous Answers in Genesis Project, "Creationism Museum" exists purely to show that "science actually confirms biblical history."
Now of course, this post is not specifically made for the purpose of defining "biblical history," or of addressing the nature of modernistic conceptions of historicity and its self-justified equation of "truth" with the same. However, this More >
When Traveling Through Time, Don't Forget Yourself
Jun 17th
As anyone who reads this blog with any regularity (in spite of the inexcusable irregularity of my posts..) will know, I love subjects like cosmology, physics, quantum mechanics, etc. While I do not profess to have a working knowledge of any of these subjects (I really, really suck at math–there goes my dream of being a famous quantum physicist), I have read a fair amount of literature concerning them and have spent considerable time contemplating the relationship of discoveries in cosmology and physics to the task and meaning of theology.
This post is not about that kind of contemplation.
Rather, I really just want to talk about the issues that would, in my understanding, make time-travel incredibly difficult to conceive, much less actuate. Random, huh?
The classic conundrum of speculations about time-travel has been exhausted in literature, art, film, music, etc. Probably the most famous example is the movie Back to the Future. In this movie, Marty McFly is hurtled 30 years in the past while attempting to escape from terrorists (perhaps this could be a new Bush Administration policy). While still trying to understand what has occurred, Marty accidentally interferes with the first meeting of his then-teenage parents. Made to More >
A Self-Legitimating Argument Against the Existence of God
Mar 28th
Several weeks ago, I posted some reflections about Hugh Ross' apologetic of theism based upon cosmological discoveries of the recent decade. In short, Ross argues that there is objective, ascertainable evidence in the cosmos that legitimizes belief in not only God, but more specifically the "God of the Bible." I argued that Ross approaches the discussion with illegitimate categories, as professing belief in naturalistic proof for divinity, IMO, plays directly into the materialist conceptions of origins against which Ross is attempting to argue.
Upon finishing this book, I ran across a submission from Victor J. Stenger entitled "God: The Failed Hypothesis." In this work, Stenger argues that, contra Ross, evidence within the cosmos leads to the inevitable conclusion that God does not, in fact, exist. To develop this thesis, Stenger looks for evidence in creation, asserting that the universe looks exactly like it would were one to eliminate "God" from the discussion of origins. Later in the book, he even dons the philosopher's hat and suggests that considerations of the universality and variability of human morality; the problem of evil; and the materialism of the human person specifically deny the existence of God.
Overall, I had a fairly difficult time taking More >
Hugh Ross, Universal Statistics, and the Hegemony of Design
Jan 31st
On the heels of reading Greenes Fabric of the Comos, I decided to turn my attentions to a more theistically-oriented discussion of cosmology. Per my habit, I spent the last weeks worth of lunch hours sitting in Barnes & Noble, reading on a new book (for free, of course!).
For my selection, I decided upon Hugh Ross Creator and the Cosmos. Written many years ago, Ross released a third revised edition in 2001. However, as is typical with scientific literature, even content written within the last 5 years shows its dating with a vengeance.
Yawn…okay, enough with the uninteresting introduction. In a nutshell, Ross seeks to provide an apology for the standard model, big bang cosmology. As an aside, this is thoroughly fascinating, for hints within the same work indicate that he is concomitantly and vehemently opposed to standard views of evolutionary biology. Back to the discussion: Ross purpose in donning the apologists hat for the big bang, interestingly enough, is to prove that the picture of the universes origins provided by big bang cosmology lays out an inescapable conclusion of theism. However, Ross goes even farther, and tries to suggest that big bang cosmology requires the identification of the More >
On Materialist Conceptions of Origins, With Considerations of Human Language
Dec 15th
About 2 weeks ago, while checking out the portfolio of a random web design firm, I ran across the website of an organization that was offering a free DVD which they claimed provided proof that evolution is wrong and that creationism is right. Unable to resist, I quickly surrendered my email and mailing address, and within 2 weeks (wow, what service!) I received my free DVD. Brimming over with excitement, I quickly abandoned my evening with family and popped it in the DVD player. I cranked the speakers to 11, grabbed a stiff glass of Diet Coke (on the rocks), and curled into my oversized leather couch, my eyes and ears prepared for outstanding revelations.
It turned out, to my immediate dismay, that this DVD was of a lecture series delivered by Kent Hovind, better known as Dr. Dino. For those who are familiar with Hovinds arguments, I need say little more. For those who are unfamiliar, imagine arguing with someone whose main line of debate is mischaracterizations, over-generalizations, and deflection through cheesy jokes, insults, and terrible clip-art-ridden power-point shows. Enough said.
As I watched and listened to the 129 minutes of Mr. Hovinds lecture, some things became immediately clear: More >
On Materialist Conceptions of Origins, with Considerations of Human Language
Dec 3rd
About 2 weeks ago, while checking out the portfolio of a random web design firm, I ran across the website of an organization that was offering a free DVD which they claimed provided â??proofâ?? that evolution is wrong and that creationism is right. Unable to resist, I quickly surrendered my email and mailing address, and within 2 weeks (wow, what service!) I received my free DVD. Brimming over with excitement, I quickly abandoned my evening with family and popped it in the DVD player. I cranked the speakers to 11, grabbed a stiff glass of Diet Coke (on the rocks), and curled into my oversized leather couch, my eyes and ears prepared for outstanding revelations.
It turned out, to my immediate dismay, that this DVD was of a lecture series delivered by Kent Hovind, better known as â??Dr. Dino.â?? For those who are familiar with Hovindâ??s â??arguments,â?? I need say little more. For those who are unfamiliar, imagine arguing with someone whose main line of debate is mischaracterizations, over-generalizations, and deflection through cheesy jokes, insults, and terrible clip-art-ridden power-point shows. Enough said.
As I watched and listened to the 129 minutes of Mr. Hovindâ??s lecture, some things became immediately clear:
1.) He offered More >
