Richard Lewontin (1929 – 2021)

_{Denyse O'Leary

July 5, 2021

Darwinism, Naturalism}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Evolutionary biologist, perhaps best known for:

“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.
Richard Lewontin, “Billions and Billions of Demons” at New York Review of Books (January 9, 1997), a review of Carl Sagan’s The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (Random House)

We shall see.

Comments

This figure came and performed miracles that only God could do.
And exactly how would you make this case? Note: I'm not challenging that those miracles occurred, I'm only interested in how the occurrence of those miracles indicate that God is the only one that could perform those miracles, or make them happen.William J Murray_{July 13, 2021
July
07
Jul
13
13
2021
08:54 AM
8
08
54
AM
PDT}

William J Murray, How I, some random dude, regard you has no relevance to your eternal destiny, nor do I personally feel compelled to characterize you in any certain way. It also doesn't matter what rationale you use albeit with 50 years of introspection and research. Similarly, we're pretty much all resigned to physical death, regardless of how rational or poetic we frame it, regardless of how long we've thought about it. It remains a certainty regardless of quantum mechanics, measurement, entanglement, hiding in a box with Schrödinger's cat, our philosophies, and so on. There's no naturalistic or idealistic way out. But there is a well-documented singular figure in history, who was amazingly prophesied to appear at a certain time and place with a specific mission "to finish the wrongdoing, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness . . ." And one of these prophecies indicates a period of time after which Messiah would appear, then be killed, and followed by the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, which most certainly occurred in 70 C.E. This figure came and performed miracles that only God could do. He clearly stated that he is the way, the truth, and the life, and that no one comes to the Father except through him. Again, the inevitability of death is independent of your perspective or mine. This and many other truths are not a form of exclusivity but of inclusivity. The wages of our sin is death, but the free gift of God to anyone who chooses it, is forgiveness and eternal life. -QQuerius_{July 13, 2021
July
07
Jul
13
13
2021
08:37 AM
8
08
37
AM
PDT}

BA77 @120, The evidence is what it is, it's up for the individual to decide how best to evaluate and interpret it. I can't help how you decide to see me.William J Murray_{July 13, 2021
July
07
Jul
13
13
2021
08:03 AM
8
08
03
AM
PDT}

WJM states: "The only aspect of any theistic model that this evidence might undermine is, as I said, the exclusivity aspect of those models." To put it simply, you are reading tea leaves, and acting as if the scientific evidence, ever so slightly, supports your worldview over Christianity. It doesn't. Not in the least! Moreover, the NDE evidence, from the links you yourself provided to me, (one from Greyson I believe), is far more antagonistic to your worldview than you imagine it to be. i.e. from your citations of foreign NDEs, I found no tunnels to a higher heavenly dimension, and no mention of encounters with almighty God, the Creator of heaven and earth.. For instance, this 'typical' Judeo Christian NDE testimony of encountering God while being deceased for a short while.,
"The only human emotion I could feel was pure, unrelenting, unconditional love. Take the unconditional love a mother has for a child and amplify it a thousand fold, then multiply exponentially. The result of your equation would be as a grain of sand is to all the beaches in the world. So, too, is the comparison between the love we experience on earth to what I felt during my experience. This love is so strong, that words like "love" make the description seem obscene. It was the most powerful and compelling feeling. But, it was so much more. I felt the presence of angels. I felt the presence of joyous souls, and they described to me a hundred lifetimes worth of knowledge about our divinity. Simultaneous to the deliverance of this knowledge, I knew I was in the presence of God. I never wanted to leave, never." - Judeo-Christian Near Death Experience Testimony https://www.iands.org/research/nde-research/nde-archives31/newest-accounts/736-never-wanted-to-leave-the-presence.html
Again, as I stated before, that is not a minor discrepancy between foreign NDEs and the NDEs found in Judeo-Christian cultures. i.e. Bugattis compared to Yugos!bornagain77_{July 13, 2021
July
07
Jul
13
13
2021
07:27 AM
7
07
27
AM
PDT}

Q @109, As I said, I realize that your views require that you see me in a certain light, IOW you must characterize me and what I do a certain way to "fit in" with your beliefs. There really isn't much I can do about that, except to say: that's fine. I don't take it personally (or at least I do my best not to!) We can still engage in civil discussion if you wish.William J Murray_{July 13, 2021
July
07
Jul
13
13
2021
07:04 AM
7
07
04
AM
PDT}

BA77 said:
I admit that manners-wise, I am often very rough around the edges,
I admit the same for myself. I don't take any of this personally; we're talking about some very emotionally charged issues. I understand and accept that there are going to be a lot of "rough edges" when these kinds of things are discussed. I think we can both agree on this: regardless of what my fate is, and though we may disagree on that, we agree that in your future, you will die and go to Heaven (if I understand your views correctly.) We can both rejoice about that.William J Murray_{July 13, 2021
July
07
Jul
13
13
2021
07:00 AM
7
07
00
AM
PDT}

BA77 said:
So you are not claiming any empirical evidence whatsoever that would differentiate your ‘idealistic relativism’ (which, as far as you know, you have developed far beyond anyone else), as being superior to Theism in general and to Judeo-Christian Theism in particular?
The empirical, scientific evidence I linked to clearly supports my IRT, and clearly does not support other quantum theory models that insist that the state of the observed is reconciled between observers. I don't know what various theistic models have to say about it. The only aspect of any theistic model that this evidence might undermine is, as I said, the exclusivity aspect of those models. This evidence correlates with the non-Christian NDE evidence. I'm sure there are arguments one could make that would explain that particular evidence in terms of a particular theism (for instance, the ground of being argument still stands unaffected,) but I haven't heard/read them yet, or if I have I either didn't understand it as such or I don't remember them.
What does your worldview, or any other worldview, possibly have to offer in comparison to Jesus’ victory over death? I mean really! How can you possibly guarantee me, or anyone else, eternal life, as Jesus has guaranteed us eternal life, through His victory over death?
First, I have no desire to pry you from your beliefs. That said, if you ask, I will answer your questions. I've read testimonial evidence of first-hand experiences that stretches back hundreds if not thousands of years from various cultures; the scientific evidence that began under William Crooks in the late 1800's/early 1900's and continues in several forms today, which represents a mountain of evidence that everyone is an eternal being and that our experiences here represent only a tiny segment of our larger experience as eternal beings. Did you know that after William Crookes investigation into the afterlife, several researchers/scientists duplicated or examined his investigations and came to the same conclusion: that the afterlife had been proven scientifically? Personally, I have visited with my dead wife several times. I personally know scores of people that have visited the dead in the afterlife, some on an continuing, consistent basis spanning decades. There is ongoing scientific research being conducted that has achieved technological communication with the dead on an ongoing basis. Teams of engineers, scientists, software developers, etc. are currently working with teams of the same in what we call the afterlife to make communication and interaction easier and available to everyone. The information we get from the "dead" and from those here that visit the afterlife is consistent: what we call "the afterlife" is really just life. Our lives here are something we decide to experience for various reasons. This is just another experiential "realm" in a functionally infinite diversity of experiential realms, some paradisaical, some normal, some not so great, some very different from our range of experiences here. I don't point to all that evidence to change your views, but you asked. I expect we will all continue to believe that which we find the most fulfilling and meaningful in our lives regardless of the evidence. I admit that I do this. The arguments I make about IRT are logic and evidence-based, but even if someone were to dismantle it by evidence and argument and I admit that they have, that will not change my personal beliefs one bit, because my personal beliefs afford me such satisfaction, fulfillment, joy and love that there is not even a chance I can be pried from them. I suspect you feel the same way about your beliefs, and I am nothing but happy for you that your beliefs provide that for you.William J Murray_{July 13, 2021
July
07
Jul
13
13
2021
06:44 AM
6
06
44
AM
PDT}

Jack BA77, you’re entirely too uptight. Relax, man. And while you’re at it, look at what you write and see if you can count all the stated and unstated assumptions you make while you browbeat WJM with your righteous anger. Maybe you should stick to the science quotes.
Jack relax man when you compare a Christian worldview with WJM view you need to read more books. Books not cartoon magazines.
I’m a “freelance” Christian who simply takes seriously what’s written in the Bible.
You are not Christian. "Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained". You need one of Apostles Descendants that received ordination in succession from Apostles .Sandy_{July 13, 2021
July
07
Jul
13
13
2021
02:08 AM
2
02
08
AM
PDT}

Jack @112,
Context
Satisfied? -QQuerius_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
06:47 PM
6
06
47
PM
PDT}

Jack states, "you’re entirely too uptight." No I'm not. Actually I'm pretty laid back. As to the assumptions I am making about WJM, It might interest you to know that WJM and I have been interacting for over a decade now, So a lot of what we may or may not say doesn't necessarily have to be explicitly spelled out. We have a pretty good handle on each others position. As to me calling WJM on his claim, i.e. 'browbeating' as you put it, I think that WJM, at the very least, implied much more than he had a right to imply as far as the science was concerned, though he did, (as he pointed out to me) walk it back,,,. Moreover, WJM is certainly not alone in my "browbeating". I honestly admit that I am often a stickler, even a pain in the rear-end, when (I think) someone is making claims that go contrary to the science in hand, or that go beyond the science in hand. In fact, I've called Bob O'H on making false scientific claims in this very thread. I call Darwinists on making false scientific claims all the time. Shoot, that is practically all I do when I interact with Darwinists, (like Seversky and Bob), since making false scientific claims is practically all they do. I've been doing it that way for years, and I really don't plan on changing. (at least as long as Darwinists keep making false scientific claims,,,, (which could continue for a long time) I admit that manners-wise, I am often very rough around the edges, but I guess that's the price you pay when you've been dealing with dogmatic Darwinists as long as I have been. Sorry you don't like it. but oh well,,,bornagain77_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
06:35 PM
6
06
35
PM
PDT}

BA77, you're entirely too uptight. Relax, man. And while you're at it, look at what you write and see if you can count all the stated and unstated assumptions you make while you browbeat WJM with your righteous anger. Maybe you should stick to the science quotes.Jack_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
05:30 PM
5
05
30
PM
PDT}

Querius: I’m curious about why you ask. ContextJack_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
02:33 PM
2
02
33
PM
PDT}

Jack @110, Sorry, I missed 103. No, I'm a "freelance" Christian who simply takes seriously what's written in the Bible. I'm curious about why you ask. -QQuerius_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
02:28 PM
2
02
28
PM
PDT}

Querius See @103Jack_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
01:19 PM
1
01
19
PM
PDT}

Bornagain77 @108, William J Murray confusing his wishful thinking with powerful historical facts that survived multiple genocides, powerful testimonies, provinanced faith (what I call "golden chains of trust"), life-changing wisdom, and profound personal experiences by labeling these as "exclusivity." He should try accusing a judge of exclusivity in a court of law or accusing a professor of exclusivity in marking a mid-term exam question wrong. I'm afraid it won't turn out well. In his celebrations about the results of the experiments in quantum mechanics that destroyed materialism and determinism, he's forgetting that the Originator of all information and its manifestations in the universe is also observing the universe and us with it. And there is purpose, mercy, and perfect justice in His actions.
In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. -John 1:1-5 (ESV)
We were made in His image, with free will, morality, and creativity. He gave His creation freedom. But a powerful created being, called Lucifer, chose to "be like God," infected humanity with rebellion against the Creator and is now, temporarily, the ruler of the earth and the originator of all evil and suffering. To provide a just and legal way out for humanity, the Creator wrapped Himself in a human body and allowed himself to be tortured to death on our behalf, offering us a choice. But William J Murray calls this choice "exclusivity" since he's chosen to reject the words of Jesus, God in the flesh, when Jesus said
“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." -John 14:6 (ESV)
-QQuerius_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
08:59 AM
8
08
59
AM
PDT}

WJM, asks "Where did I say anything about it not being “compatible” with theistic worldviews?" So you are not claiming any empirical evidence whatsoever that would differentiate your 'idealistic relativism' (which, as far as you know, you have developed far beyond anyone else), as being superior to Theism in general and to Judeo-Christian Theism in particular? Then I am sorry for taking your following comment here as anything more than unwarranted hype and bravado of your own 'relativistic idealism' worldview.
(WJM referenced the Wigner's friend Experiment and then he stated) But, guess what theory predicts this result? Yep. My Idealism Reality Theory, which puts each observer at the center of their own experiential reality tapping into informational potential.
So if not experimental evidence, exactly what is suppose to persuade anyone that your worldview is superior to Theism in general or Christianity in particular? At least I, as a Christian, can point to the resurrection, i.e. Jesus' victory over sin and death, so as to differentiate Christianity as being vastly superior to your worldview, or to any other worldview. What does your worldview, or any other worldview, possibly have to offer in comparison to Jesus' victory over death? I mean really! How can you possibly guarantee me, or anyone else, eternal life, as Jesus has guaranteed us eternal life, through His victory over death? The comparisons are not even close!
Shroud of Turin: From discovery of Photographic Negative, to 3D Information, to Hologram https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-TL4QOCiis John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. Music: Dolly Parton - He's Alive https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DQfthEHVc4
bornagain77_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
06:50 AM
6
06
50
AM
PDT}

What WJM said:
WJM claimed that “I have yet to see that anyone has explored the idea (of idealism) to the degree I have”.
What BA77 said in response:
Yet that is simply not true.
What is "not true," BA77? I said "I have yet to see..." I didn't say it hadn't happened. In fact, I said later in that same comment: Not saying it hasn’t happened, but if it is out there, I’m not aware of it. It is entirely true that I have not as yet seen it, and was unaware of it. How would BA77 know otherwise? BA77 then goes off on some weird tangent as if I ever claimed to be published, cited or recognized in the field of idealism theory. I did not make any such claim.
For instance, the Wigner’s friend experiment, that WJM is fond of citing, is certainly not exclusive to his form of ‘relativistic idealism’, but the experiment is also, (certainly), compatible with all Theistic worldviews which hold that God holds each of us, individually, accountable.
Uh ... what are you talking about? This is what I said about the evidence I linked to:
This doesn’t support the “branching multiverse” or the “observer collapse” theory, because in both cases those involved would be able to reconcile their observations with each other.
Where did I say anything about it not being "compatible" with theistic worldviews?William J Murray_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
04:03 AM
4
04
03
AM
PDT}

WJM states,
It’s easy to point the finger at the materialists/physicalists/atheists, but what about the Christian exclusivists, like BA77 and others that simply ignore the clear evidence against Christian afterlife exclusivity, or the evidence I linked to above that disproves the idea (the generally accepted one, anyway) of an “objective reality?”
Apparently WJM has taken his belief that we each can construct our own 'alternate realities', (i.e. relativistic idealism), way too far. WJM claimed that "I have yet to see that anyone has explored the idea (of idealism) to the degree I have". Yet that is simply not true. WJM's name is nowhere to be found on the list of prominent contemporary philosophers who have explored and defended Idealism. Apparenly, WJM needs to inform the editors of wikipedia of just how important, profound, and unique his insights into Idealism are.
Idealism Excerpt: There are various philosophers working in contemporary Western philosophy of mind who have recently defended an idealist stance. These include: Nicholas Rescher Howard Robinson John McDowell — Mind and World (1996) Vittorio Hösle — Objective Idealism, Ethics and Politics (1998) John Leslie — Infinite Minds: A Philosophical Cosmology (2002). John Foster — A World for Us (2008), coming from a traditional Christian theological perspective. Timothy Sprigge — A Defense of Absolute Idealism (1984). David Pearce — Non-Materialist Physicalism: An experimentally testable conjecture (2014) Bernardo Kastrup — The Idea of the World (2018) Donald D. Hoffman — The Case Against Reality (2019) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism#Contemporary_idealists
The truth is that WJM ideas are not all that unique and that he 'borrows' experimental evidence from quantum mechanics and tries to claim that it exclusively supports his 'relativistic idealism'. Yet the experimental evidence is compatible with all theistic worldviews which hold the Mind of God to be the source and foundation of all of reality, and the experimental evidence is certainly not exclusive to WJM 'relativistic idealism' For instance, the Wigner's friend experiment, that WJM is fond of citing, is certainly not exclusive to his form of 'relativistic idealism', but the experiment is also, (certainly), compatible with all Theistic worldviews which hold that God holds each of us, individually, accountable.
Romans 14:12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.
Moreover, I have yet to see any researcher in quantum mechanics, such as Anton Zeilinger, ever cite WJM's postulations and conjectures about 'relativistic Idealism' as an inspiration for any of the experiments that they have conducted. If I am wrong, WJM is free to show me exactly where any experimentalist has ever cited him as an inspiration for any of his experiments.bornagain77_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
02:48 AM
2
02
48
AM
PDT}

Q said:
I hope you think about this seriously.
I've thought about these things seriously for over 50 years because my experiences since I was 8 yrs old demanded I think about these things seriously. I realize that because your perspective involves multi-layered existential exclusivity, there are things you categorically cannot believe about me and my experiences, and nothing I say could possibly convince you, BA77, KF et al otherwise. Because of your beliefs, you necessarily must consider me in a certain light; you (and those like you) must characterize me, my efforts and my experiences in your mind in a certain way to satisfy the existential necessities of your ontological commitments. And that's fine; it just puts parameters up about the kinds of conversations I can have with people like you, BA77, KF, et al; it can never be a mutual exchange or exploration of these kinds of ideas because of the exclusivity conditions of your ontology. You will always be trying to convince others their differing views and experiences are defective or deceptive in some way, and you will always be promoting your own perspective because you see it as the difference between what "eternal destination" I (or anyone) will find myself in after this life.William J Murray_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
02:38 AM
2
02
38
AM
PDT}

At 95 Bob states, "I can well believe that your level of comprehension is so low you think the metaphor is gibberish." Bob, well I do hope, (despite my apparently extremely low level of comprehension of what you are actually trying to say), that you charitably find it within yourself to stick with me anyway. At least long enough so that one day I might be as wise as you are and be able to comprehend how it is not completely and utterly insane to believe, like you do, that the human body, "composed of trillions of microscopic interactive components", can be an accident.
"It is not enough to say that design is a more likely scenario to explain a world full of well-designed things. It strikes me as urgent to insist that you not allow your mind to surrender the absolute clarity that all complex and magnificent things were made that way. Once you allow the intellect to consider that an elaborate organism with trillions of microscopic interactive components can be an accident… you have essentially “lost your mind.” - Jay Homnick - 2005 American Spectator One Body - animation - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDMLq6eqEM4 The Designed Body: Irreducible Complexity on Steroids = Exquisite Engineering - Steve Laufmann - March 8, 2017 Excerpt: The series by Dr. Glicksman discusses 40 interrelated chemical and physiological parameters that the human body must carefully balance to sustain life. The body deploys amazing, interconnected solutions to manage them. The parameters are: (1) oxygen, (2) carbon dioxide, (3) hydrogen ion, (4) water, (5) sodium, (6) potassium, (7) glucose, (8) calcium, (9) iron, (10) ammonia, (11) albumin transport, (12) proteins, (13) insulin, (14) glucagon, (15) thyroid hormone, (16) cortisol, (17) testosterone, (18) estrogen, (19) aldosterone, (20) parathormone, (21) digestive enzymes, (22) bile, (23) red blood cells, (24) white blood cells, (25) platelets, (26) clotting factors, (27) anti-clotting factors, (28) complement, (29) antibodies, (30) temperature, (31) heart rate, (32) respiratory rate, (33) blood pressure, (34) lung volume, (35) airway velocity, (36) cardiac output, (37) liver function, (38) kidney function, (39) hypothalamic function, (40) nerve impulse velocity.,,, For the human body, though, the whole is much more than the sum of its parts. This is exactly what we see with all complex engineered systems. In fact, this is a defining characteristic of engineered systems. With humans, the whole is also quite remarkable in its own right. It’s almost as if the body was designed specifically to enable the mind: thought, language, love, nobility, self-sacrifice, art, creativity, industry, and my favorite enigma (for Darwinists): music. The human body enables these things, but does not determine them. As near as we can tell, no combination of the body’s substrate — information, machinery, or operations — alone can achieve these things. Yet it’s exactly these things that make human life worth living. These are essential to our human experience. Human life involves so much more than merely being alive. This simple observation flies in the face of Darwinian expectations. How can bottom-up, random processes possibly achieve such exquisitely engineered outcomes — outcomes that deliver a life experience well beyond the chemistry and physics of the body? http://evolutionnews.org/2017/03/designed-body-engineered-system-displaying-irreducible-complexity-steroids/
Verses:
Psalm 139:13-14 For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well. Romans 1:22-25 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
bornagain77_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
01:39 AM
1
01
39
AM
PDT}

Querius, Are you aligned/attached/committed to any particular Christian church/organization?Jack_{July 12, 2021
July
07
Jul
12
12
2021
12:05 AM
12
12
05
AM
PDT}

Jack, Yes, when it's relevant to the direction of the thread (which has been drifting a bit). In my posts, I was primarily responding to William J Murray's post where he asserted:
It’s easy to point the finger at the materialists/physicalists/atheists, but what about the Christian exclusivists, like BA77 and others that simply ignore the clear evidence against Christian afterlife exclusivity, or the evidence I linked to above that disproves the idea (the generally accepted one, anyway) of an “objective reality?”
As a Christian, I'd want to be able to demonstrate that I'm not "ignoring" anything, but have rational support--the four pillars of my faith including reasonable evidence for my faith--and that it's not some some of "leap in the dark" based on nothing. -QQuerius_{July 11, 2021
July
07
Jul
11
11
2021
08:53 PM
8
08
53
PM
PDT}

Are we allowed to discuss the Bible, Christian theology and apologetics (pro and con) in this thread?Jack_{July 11, 2021
July
07
Jul
11
11
2021
07:17 PM
7
07
17
PM
PDT}

William J Murray @98, I'm happy that you're happy, but I'm also concerned about what I think you believe. In Idealism, you think there might be hope for a relativistic personal reality (or some nuance of that general idea). The Bible, in fact, provides a few hints that what we perceive as reality is not the true reality. It seems like we're in an artificial reality in which people reveal themselves for what they truly are. How we use our free will in this artificial reality determines our ultimate destiny. Unfortunately, we've all failed by almost any standard, have become estranged from our Creator, and will end up in the garbage dump called "the lake of fire." This lake of fire was originally prepared for Lucifer and his angels, who currently rule this world and who have caused and continue to cause profound human suffering and death, and who are also killing our planet. To escape this "second death," God created a way out that I've described. While Idealism is strongly suggested by quantum mechanics, we're not the only sentient entities interacting in this artificial environment. I hope you think about this seriously. -QQuerius_{July 11, 2021
July
07
Jul
11
11
2021
06:39 PM
6
06
39
PM
PDT}

Jack, That’s a very astute and important question! Here’s what Jesus taught:
Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ – Matthew 7:21-23 (ESV)
In context with Christianity, what I mean by “spiritually valid” is based on the actual teachings of Jesus as recorded by the people directly involved with him. I would summarize his teachings like this: Jesus taught his followers that no one can follow religious rules perfectly nor can they do nearly enough good deeds to earn forgiveness for past misdeeds. He taught them that they should turn away from being selfish, self-righteous, and immoral. Instead of trying to justify their past, they should ask God to forgive them. Jesus taught that he came to save people from being judged by God and that his death on the cross would be the payment for all their wrongdoing. As a result of putting their trust in him alone and being grateful, his authentic followers will grow to become people who are gentle, generous, humble, loving, and forgiving. Thus, when you see attitudes and behaviors that significantly differ from this description, you can know that you’re not seeing authentic Christianity, but a religion like any other religion or no religion at all. I would also add that there are many counterfeits to authentic Christianity. In general, they try to focus people on religious rituals, new revelations, political power, or a religious celebrity. Con artists introduce additional requirements, promote strange teachings, or try to use Christianity to make themselves wealthy. Jesus warned his followers that many such false teachers would appear. Hope this helps. -QQuerius_{July 11, 2021
July
07
Jul
11
11
2021
06:08 PM
6
06
08
PM
PDT}

Q said:
So, let me strongly assure you that my trust and that of Bornagain77 and several others here is not merely an opinion or a cultural norm or sitting through formalistic, boring religious events.
I'm sure you know that I've never implied otherwise. Nor do I believe otherwise. As I have said before, there is no doubt in my mind that you and BA77, et al, will arrive at the very destination you seek, and that knowledge only adds to my joy and happiness.William J Murray_{July 11, 2021
July
07
Jul
11
11
2021
01:44 PM
1
01
44
PM
PDT}

Querius: spiritually valid What do you mean by that?Jack_{July 11, 2021
July
07
Jul
11
11
2021
01:30 PM
1
01
30
PM
PDT}

William J Murray @91,
I think it’s clear we all ignore some evidence, and/or sort it conveniently to our beliefs. Some of us are just willing to admit it.
Yes, we all do this to an extent. Sometimes rejection of a conclusion is due to preconceptions, scientific consensus, fear of ridicule, ulterior motives, ideological poisoning, and many other reasons. I'm sure that's why a frustrated Max Planck once stated, "Science progresses one funeral at a time." Similarly, people who think of themselves as Christians base their belief on different reasons, not all of which are spiritually valid. For example, it's been said that the life, teachings, death, and apparent resurrection of Yeshua of Nazareth was reinterpreted by the Greeks as a philosophy, the Romans as a system, Europeans as a culture, and Americans as a business. As a Christian, my faith rests on four pillars: 1. Peace and Joy. A seemingly inexplicable and profound peace, joy, and love that fills and overflows my life daily. Based on the assurance that my sins have been forgiven by my accepting Jesus as my Lord and Savior, this joy is maintained by the Holy Spirit embracing my spirit. The underlying joy is there even during times of duress. I'd also include the encouragement of occasional miraculous outcomes or events (a few of which I personally witnessed), but these exist in memory and fade in day-to-day life. I also recognize this same peace and joy in other authentic Christians, who are loving, trustworthy, and generous. I’m honored to embrace them as my brothers and sisters in the faith, regardless of their race, gender, ethnicity, politics, or personal background. 2. The Word of God. I’ve found deep wisdom, guidance, encouragement, revelation, and maturity that comes from studying the Word of God: asking questions, making observations, deriving trustworthy principles, and then finding them engraved onto my life by the working of the Holy Spirit, often through suffering. This interaction with the Word has profoundly shaped my character. 3. History. There are golden “chains of trust,” including eye-witness testimony, profoundly changed lives, personal sacrifice, and faithfulness even to martyrdom that trace paths through everything nasty that the world can throw at it—severe persecution, religious corruption, and innumerable charlatans. The links in these chains of trust extend back from me through generations of faithful men and women to the wonderful, miraculous events in the early church, and then to Jesus Christ himself, the Son of God who revealed himself by his repeatedly doing things that only God can do. As some of my brother and sister believers in India have expressed it, Jesus is the one and only Avatar of God. Thus, the events around the life of Jesus had enormous impact on the world, and there are a number of surviving historical references including hostile corroboration preserved both in the Babylonian and the Jerusalem Talmud. 4. Fulfilled Prophecies. A multitude of improbable prophecies regarding the Messiah were fulfilled by Jesus, including where he would be born (Bethlehem), that he would be killed and how he would die (they pierced my hands and my feet), and that his death would be soon followed by the complete destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (which happened 40 years later in 70 C.E.). Additional prophecies tell us that Israel would improbably be formed again from the diaspora, that Jesus will return at an unexpected time to gather us to him, followed by great natural disasters—global warming, an asteroid strike on the ocean, etc.—and the judgment of those angels and people who are wickedly hostile to God, who will "destroy those who destroy the earth" as is stated in the book of Revelation. There’s nothing here on earth that compares with the attraction of God’s immense love and purpose--that God experienced torture and physical death for our forgiveness if we're willing to accept his gift of eternal life! So, let me strongly assure you that my trust and that of Bornagain77 and several others here is not merely an opinion or a cultural norm or sitting through formalistic, boring religious events. -QQuerius_{July 11, 2021
July
07
Jul
11
11
2021
12:46 PM
12
12
46
PM
PDT}

ba77 @ 86 - yes, I can well believe that your level of comprehension is so low you think the metaphor is gibberish.Bob O'H_{July 11, 2021
July
07
Jul
11
11
2021
09:57 AM
9
09
57
AM
PDT}

BA77, By "my" I mean the one I'm espousing here. I don't claim to have invented idealism, but I have yet to see that anyone has explored the idea to the degree I have in terms of relating it to multiple lines of evidence, working out a model of information and experience, and the development of practical, experimental methods and techniques. Not saying it hasn't happened, but if it is out there, I'm not aware of it.William J Murray_{July 11, 2021
July
07
Jul
11
11
2021
09:12 AM
9
09
12
AM
PDT}

1 2 3 … 5 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply