[read the disclaimer before proceeding]
The purpose of these pages is not to “disprove” any religions or to offend any individuals, but rather to fulfill a personal longing for the truth. In the process, however, I will be pleased if these pages can help steer potential victims away from a childishly literal interpretation of the Bible, and argue that this kind of interpretation is demonstrably harmful.
What follows is a logically and scientifically rigorous analysis of Genesis, the first book of the Bible. The verses are shown in bold text, and my questions and comments are shown in plain indented text. I will continually post additions to the comments, as well as rebuttals that I may find in other websites, usenet postings, or e-mails sent to me. I will then post my responses to the rebuttals, and the process will begin again. In time, I hope this will become an all-inclusive list of inconsistencies, fallacies, and contradictions found in Genesis. This will also include lists of responses and “solutions” to the contradictions from the perspectives of believers of literal and not-so-literal interpretations of Genesis.
Please click on any of the Genesis links in the sidebar to view the commentary for a certain chapter. As you can see, the commentary is still in its infancy, but is nevertheless ready for viewing and feedback.
I am indeed aware of the existence of the Skeptic’s Annotated Bible (a website with a similar purpose to these pages), and have the greatest admiration for the author’s comments. However, because of the sheer volume of the SAB, the comments seen there tend to be very brief and often require further elaboration. I have also found that, if I focus on Genesis alone, I can come up with a great deal more comments than the SAB contains, especially if I am going to include responses to the comments. Therefore, at least for Genesis, this will be a more complete list.
Keep in mind that these pages offer commentary that is based on a mostly literal (and sometimes super-literal) interpretation of Genesis. If a certain comment appears absolutely ridiculous, then it must originate from a ridiculously literal interpretation. The thing to remember is that there are individuals that actually adhere to, and swear by, such interpretations.
Ethics of Interpretation
The fact that one person’s interpretation of the Bible may be abhorrent to another already conflicts with the idea of the Bible being divinely inspired. It begs the question, “Couldn’t a god do a better job of writing a book, especially if the book is supposed to be the guidebook for our lives and our key to salvation?”
Christian bookstores are overflowing with “companion” guides that attempt to enlighten the reader as to the “true” interpretation of a certain verse, or the “real” reason a certain Biblical event took place. But why is any of this necessary if it is the Bible itself that we are supposed to believe, not some biased third-party supplement?
I suspect that most Christian responses to this commentary will be appeals to interpretation. But interpretation is inherently personal, and thus inadmissible as an argument.
Literal Interpretations
I doubt that a completely literal interpretation of Genesis is even conceivable, just because of the vagueness of the language used in the first few chapters. For example, “God created the heaven and the earth” is scientifically meaningless and can only be interpreted as a metaphor. It would seem that the Bible, especially Genesis, leaves a few too many things up to the imagination of the reader.
There are, however, many individuals who claim to take the entire Bible “word for word,” despite the mental acrobatics necessary for such a feat, and the absurdity of the claim itself. I am certain that comments from such individuals will also be included in this list, and will be the primary target of this analysis.
Semi-literal Interpretations
Others (in fact, a greater number than literalists) claim to take the Bible “word for word,” but only in certain places. Quite simply, this translates to: “There are some things in the Bible that even I can’t wrap my mind around.” One would think that this kind of interpretation would begin to raise questions and suspicions in the mind of the semi-literalist. Enter the patented Christian defense mechanism, “God works in mysterious ways” — a brilliantly crafted auto-response system that suppresses any further desire to question or reason things out. A similar form of the defense mechanism is, “You just have to believe.” In the mind of the believer, mysteries (at least religious ones) are meant to be unsolved, and the believer is left simply to bask in their insolubility. In fact, the greater the mystery, the better it is not to solve it. And the more absurd the verse, the more of a virtue it is to believe it (this is covered in great detail by Richard Dawkins in Viruses of the Mind).
An obvious question that arises against semi-literal interpretations is, on whose authority does one decide which verses to take literally, and which to take as metaphor? There is also, of course, an infinite number of degrees of semi-literal interpretation of the Bible, where some people may adhere literally to more verses than others, which only makes the above question all the more important.
Nonliteral Interpretations
Yes, there are indeed Christians that believe the Earth is older than 6,000 years. There are also Christians that go so far as saying that Genesis was not written by God, or not even inspired by God.
These kinds of interpretation would require blocking out entire chapters of the Bible and treating them as nothing but metaphor and bits of ancient wisdom. What, then, becomes left of the Bible? Why not simply take the extra step and consider “God” a metaphor as well?
In any case, it seems that a strictly literal (or as-close-to-literal) interpretation of Genesis would be fitting for this kind of analysis. This would minimize discrimination against anybody’s personal interpretation, and at the same time invite believers to examine such a literal interpretation and demonstrate how each verse breaks apart at the slightest application of reason.
Just realized Joe’s comment was from 2006. Uhduuuh. Sorry folks. Non-the-less, I’m not sold on reversiblity or Big Bang. Two cents on Genesis: Myths are identity validators, science really is only relevent if it supports the identity and/or the authority that benefits from it. Luckily to shore up the validity of the identity/authority it helps to include some actual facts and historical references. This being said, there is much to learn from The Bible with many clues to actual history. Many thought Troy was myth until they found it. This discovery did not validate the whole of the Illiad though…
This series of comments seems to have degenerated from the book of Genesis to a discussion of Christianity. Maybe it would be worth remembering that Genesis belongs to the Jews, the Christians, the Moslems, and the Mormons, and probably a few others. I consider the old testament to be a much rewritten history of ancient Semitic tribes. The outline of history is there, but the events may be a bit fuzzy.
Thanks for the discussion.
Advanced theologians rationalize. What one wrote literally is metaphoric.One writer states that the redactor implied that when he put the conflicting accounts together.Nay,no more than those today who ever try to harmonize them. Errantists and inerrantists both err here: faith doth that to people!
Genesis and the rest of the Bible is an unfortunate chapter in the annals of the human record.
The believers here should go back and read history, and recognize the unspeakable damage their superstition has wrought.
The Bible is a document full of horror and violence—a blood-soaked fantasy. Interpretation by whatever group of believers is apology and nothing else. It is below anyone to consider its content valid in any way.
The superstition of Christianity must be stamped out. It is a blight on our existence.
Perhaps this thread was meant to discuss Genesis and all its nonsense, but the real challenge is to eradicate Christianity from the face of the planet by any legal means at our disposal.
Genesis, the Bible, and Christianity is the evil we fight every day.
Another equally-plausible scenario goes:
Primitive mankind existed. (for whatever reason!)
A higher-order being came along and out of curiosity, interacted with them.
Not understanding what a higher-order being was, the humans bowed before him in reverence, and offered prayers.
Amazed, he discovered that he gained huge amounts of psychic energy and power from their devotions.
Realizing this, he set-out to create a belief system which would result in his being worshipped as fervently as possible.
He figured that his efforts at instilling awe and devotion would be more successful if he could persuade humans that he was their creator. -Or even better, the creator of the whole damn universe, and then some!
As the people of that time would not understand astronomy, nuclear physics, etc. the explanation had to be given in very simplistic -and therefore highly inaccurate- terms.
Everything went fine until some humans got a bit too inquisitive for their own good, and started making instruments with which they could see what the universe really was like. When this happened, he got very worried that his cover-story would be blown. He realized that if the Creation part of his story was ‘rumbled’ then the rest would pretty-soon be discredited too. Including that bit about his son being tortured to death for humanity’s sins, which had sure perked-up humanity’s religiousness at a time when it was showing signs of petering-out.
Ah, he said to himself, in a moment of enlightenment, ‘I have the answer to that one. Evangelicalism. You watch. Even five hundred years from now- when the humans have technology and spaceflight- their children will STILL be taught by the book-thumpers that the earth is at most 6000 years old, and what’s more, a substantial proportion will actually believe it.’
‘Hahahahahahah. What fools. I’m luuuurving every minute of it! And the best part is, what am I giving them in return? Nothing. NOTHING! Hell, I’ve not even shown them how to ascend to a higher plane of existence yet. But then, why would I? That would only mean competition at my own level. Stuff that idea.’
————–
Just a hypothesis, but equally plausible I reckon.
When I see such vehement arguments such as those already posted, I cannot help but wonder what experiences shaped these needs to ridicule, mock, and condemn eachother.
Even the more well reasoned arguments often seem to be one-sided, not lending much credibility to the rationality of the counter arguments.
I only have to spend an hour looking for my keys, wake up from a dream I though was real, or be honest with a truly inquisitive person, to be reminded how little of which I can be certain.
My contribution to this ‘debate’ is to say that (on either ‘side’) if you are so entirely certain as to mock redicule, and/or condemn, though you may think that you are fighting for the truth, I expect that you are probably fighting for something like respect, revenge, or relief from the pain of how you were at some time terribly treated.
For those jerks who are condemning, mocking, and/or rediculing everyone: It doesn’t make you more right, just more awful.
For those of you who are lashing out against the jerks of this world: In the long run, it tends to makes you one of them.
All of this is more evidence of a hypothesis that I am currently examining: you can’t make anyone believe anything since anyone already believes what they are going to believe. Whether I believe in the Bible, God, angels, etc. or not, I don’t have the power to perpetrate which way I believe onto others. I’ve seen where only certain types of events seem to persuade people to believe or not. I find that this goes both ways. I’ve heard people speak on behalf of becoming believers and those who came to disbelieve. None of this ‘believing’ is scientific, religious, provable or repeatable experimentally (even believing in certain scientific ideas known as theories and religious ideas known tenets of faith).
In the whole scheme of things, something more than our religion and science will need to occur: what I call an ‘Elijah event’ (where a simple prayer proved to the prophets of Baal that God existed by an actual demonstration). Some ‘event’ needs to happen that unequivocally demonstrates the Truth of the matter. Along with a lot of religious nonsense, many scientific ideas, especially in evolution, are fantasy. A few I’ve heard recently in scientific programs:
1. “We are the luckiest (species, planet, etc.)…” If I hear the word ‘luck’ in connection with science again, I’ll shoot the screen. I’ve heard this many times in programs developed by the BBC, Nova, scientists so called on the radio, etc. ad nauseum. It is scientifically sickening.
2. “Certain members of a species have the ability to consciously pass ideas on how to evolve to remote generations hence.” How have moths that use noise to disrupt attacking bats’ signals to get away have evolved from their ‘practicing and passing this down’ to their descendants? Yet I heard this very supposition and similar evolutionary ‘reasonings’ on several different radio and TV programs. Along with this goes the idea that conscious abilities come from life forms that wouldn’t have been able to conceive of them. For instance, the flight reaction: how does a slug know to escape? Is it because the molecules that it evolved from somehow ‘learned’ that if it doesn’t it would get eaten? How absurd for something that has ‘emerged’ from non-living matter to even develop a sense of anything let alone a reaction to consequences. How metaphysical. I might as well go back to alchemy and try to create a higher life form from a base one. Oh wait, I have to let time and chance to that.
3. “That everything has always been the way it is now.” We have no idea of all of the ramifications of our cosmic environmental factors. First, our theories pretty much only thought about the earth and sun influences. Then, we have to consider the other bodies in our system (asteroids, comets, meteors, the moon). Then, dark matter and energy, galactic influences as we’ve found they are not consistent outside of our heliosphere and who knows how many others. Yet, these are ignored to a great extent and certainly only called upon conveniently to support or disprove various ‘theories’. Science seems to conveniently ignore the vast flux our earth’s existence has been in. Who knows what kind of effect many of these actually have on C-14 dating, the earth’s spin, past temperature fluctuations, etc.
4. “That enough time and chance could develop into what we have now.” Yeah, right. What is the actual scientifically verifiable outcome of lightning and primordial soup? Poison, oxidated amino acids, all of the wrong components for life and a still dead planet. No amount of electricity, H, O, N and C will create life. Amino acids don’t create life just by their mere existence no matter how many of them you have. That is the story of Frankenstein, not science.
Unfortunately, either no one religiously qualifies currently as an Elijah to call down fire or no one can halt the scientific arguments to help to actually advance and enlighten the masses. Have scientific institutions overall done any better that the religious ones of the previous age? We still have war, the need for abortion, diseases created by technology, ignorance, bigotry (just because one grants descendants of Africa ‘rights’ doesn’t mean they don’t prejudice others based on beliefs and not facts, ie I don’t say anything bad about race, but what about all of the other prejudices?), conspiracies, contrived poverty, etc., etc.
I am no more impressed with science overall as an institution than I was with the religious ones a couple of centuries ago. Some one please send a third alternative.
I am the most recent comment…so that must mean I am right!!! LOL! Just kidding folks!
I have dutifully read each of these comments with as pure & as open a mind as I can. Ihave tried not to dismiss anything other then the blatant empty “you suck” type comments, which from either side lend no credence to any type of discussion & I have to to a couple conclusions.
First to define terms. The best definition of religion I have heard is that it is the “learning” aspect of what you believe in…whether this be theology or nuclear physics. It is the church/classroom; bible/text book; etc. aspect of our belief system. Spirituality on the other hand is the practical application of what we have “learned” into our daily lives. Essentially the walk to the talk.
When you are discussing religion in general & Christianity specifically, it doesn’t matter if you believe in creationism, the big bang, fairies, angels, the validity of the bible, the Easter bunny, Santa, or whatever. It doesn’t matter if you think the bible is a book of stories or that religious people are blind sheep, etc. At the core of ALL of that, it doesn’t really matter…as it is all semantics. It is not up to a believer (one either side) to make someone else believe, nor is it their right to judge, as the “humans” on either side of the table are both flawed, imperfect & do not have the qualifications to be the final judge.
When it comes down to it, there is ONLY ONE core thing that matters. What will you do with Jesus on the cross & who do you say HE is? Once you have heard the message of salvation through Jesus Christ alone, it it what you do with it that matters. That’s it! That is the core of Christianity. Say what you want to say…believe what you want to believe, but decide & accept the consequences of the choice made. Eternity will prove the victors in the end.
Just some thoughts.
Here’s a good one — when did Christ dying on the cross of calvary, that of god, make Jesus god instead of god?
It clearly stated that man was created in the image of god and was god’s children with no less aptitude than an angel but, somehow Jesus became the only child of god. These are not the contradictions but, the evidence that Christ died for sins that are akin to evil men believing themselves to be heir to a throne more high than any other. The bible clearly warns against this.
Another good point to ponder is that the bible itself was a good book, it has been tampered with by men that obviously lusted power and manipulate people with the document like its a weapon. We see this kind of crap everyday on every venue. Churches have become institutions for berating people, chasting children into the throws of evil, whom haven’t even learned how to wipe their own butts yet, and manipulate women as if every female on the planet are whores. The inevitable social sucking up when they’re called out on it is “we don’t do that.” I’ve gone to church and seen it with my own two eyes. It’s always the other churches doing it because their priest, decon; etc. sucks.
I am at a loss.
Jesus didn’t die for my sins, the stretch marks I have on my ass are because of everyone taking advantage of my kindness but, I am just being bitter about getting screwed when I should just forgive them so they can get back to screwing everyone else without me interrupting the process. So much for god and law — wait that sounds like the devil’s work doesn’t it. I think the church has been overrun; funny, that was also prophecied in the bible as well — wasn’t it?
Hmmm…
Take care and beware strangers with the BBD (bigger, better deal). I am not trusting my identity, life, or soul to any man that god killed — I’ll take my own chances. Feels as though my life expectancy just jumped ten years.
Take care, and keep it real man!
Here’s another doozy, as I noticed comments on creationalism.
If there is a god albeit, it is obviously an idiot for creating man, wouldn’t it be able to create creatures capable of evolution.
Darwin is right about evolution but, man was probably created.
The chicken came before the egg too, what the hell laid the egg otherwise.
If a glass is half way topped off with water is it half empty or half full. The answer is people are full of shit. The glass is totally full, half with water and the other half that of air — god that was so easy!
Alternate dimensions really exist but, sadly they reside in the imaginations of idiots with nothing really interesting to say.
Can you bend time and space, only if your believe real hard. NOW FOCUS dammit — focus.
Wow that rant felt really good. I feel clean inside now!
Thank you everyone.
Last one — here we go…
Lucifer is the devil, no duh, in the end of days/armaggeddon he is sent to hell banished for eternity as the story goes in the old testament.
Lucifer is to be punished in hell then destroyed, well so much for eternity. I guess god was just trying to get the devil’s hopes up. Anyway, the devil/Lucifer is to be punished, tormented, and destroyed by the destroyerer or Death also referred to as Satan. My point is this: why the hell do so many “christians” call Lucifer Satan and vice versa. The devil has to be screwing with them because there’s no way in hell that god would be so inbred as to send Lucifer off to hell to punish himself. I can see priests smacking themselves with rosary beads right now.
I guess god’s “cross” eyed (get it — cross, nevermind), has short stubby fingers, and one big tooth. People really ought to find a damn hobby.
Christians should give in and go see a movie on sundays, something that isn’t porno — and check that sacriment for lead or arsenic cause I’m thinking the wine is tainted.
I have read every comment on this side and i got a few thoughts to put forward.
1. Those who believe in science and say there is no God contradict themselves in that if man can EVOLVE, then at the present he is limited somehow. He cant claim to know all that is knowable. He must await a state when his own evolution is perfect with no more possibility for further evolution, then and only then can he make claims of the inexistency of God.
2.To say God is not, means we have every form of knowledge possible. Yet no human being or groups of human beings to date claims to have such knowledge. Take all the human beings who have ever walked on this earth, sum up their knowlege, it will not amount to much. So if man posseses 80 percent of THE SUM TOTAL OF KNOWLEDGE, then there is the other 80 percent beyond him. If he has not found God in his 20 Percent, how can he say God does not exist ? How can GOd not exist in the other 80 percent ? HOw can GOd exist in the other 80 percent?
the best answer i think is to confess ignorance. So to say God does not exist when we do not have all of knowledge at our disposal is at best to be a fool. Any man who makes such claim should be heralded as god, since he’s got the faculties of omnipresence, omnipotence, omniscience.
3. If we believe that man is not perfect, then we must believe too that knowledge is imperfect and incomplete so to rely on any scientific theory or hypothesis or law will be folly since it carries within its framework the signature of man’s imperfection.(you may argue same for religion)
4.Science has its methods, so does religion, you see with your eyes, taste with your mouth, hear with your ears. How do you explain the color GREEN to a man born blind? how do you explain the beauty of classical music to a man born deaf? just because he cannot experience it, does it mean it is disney land? he may argue and argue and argue, but you know the reality of the thing. You have the faculty that permits you to experience this realities, he hasnt got it. so in the matter of GOd, the faculty needed is FAITH, he who approaches GOd, MUST BELIEVE that HE IS. just as you cannot smell a football game so you cannot use your brain to experience GOd. GOd and all other biblical realities open up to you through your heart, by the instrumentality of your faith and not your brainpower…If you refuse to eat food, you will have no experience of the food, you can even say food does not exist, just because you have no experience of it. If you donot BELIEVE, using you heart, then GOd and the bible will be meaningless and mythological or allegorical.
5. There are many things you cannot prove. you cannot prove LOVE that ya mama loves you, it does not exists in atoms and electrons, you cannot prove your very existence, you cannot prove that you are the very person you were yesterday. But there is good reason to believe you LOVE your wife and that you are not just planning to murder her. Stop trying to use the argument of scientific proof.coz there are always AXIOMS, things we BELIEVE to be true for the proof to be valid. SO to with GOD, it is AXIOMATIC TO believe that HE IS (sorry for the repetition). i challenge you to show me any scientific proof void of axioms.
6.Either GOD IS or HE is NOT. there is no other alternative, i am very sorry for those looking for a third.You either believe GOd is or you dont. and trust me it shows up in your daily life. pls dont be dismayed by all what passes for christianity, all these power hungry, lusty preachers and exploitative gospel…. it is not the real thing. It is empty, man’s invention
7. The real thing is found within the pages of the bible… take it or leave it, but at least read the whole book to get an opinion for yourself, dont depend on what others say or how they intepret it. READ THE BOOK with YOUR OWN EYES.
8. Jesus was a historical figure, He existed. by the claims he made of himself either he is what he claims or he is not. How you relate to his claims about himself reveals a great deal about you….
9.He existed, he changes lives, he has changed and transformed mine, I find Him daily to be all what he claims to be. Taste him with your heart, not your head. Go in Faith, not with reasoning…
10. sorry for all grammatical and syntatic errors. (even my logic can be flawed but GOD IS..JESUS TRANSFORMS…HELL is REAL.HEAVEN is real.)
I have read some ill thought out comments here. Christians posting here are Christians because their parents were Christians. It’s that simple. What they believe is simply a matter of origin of birth and what their parents/country/culture believes. They just follow the crowd/sheep. Had these Christians been born to parents in Iran, they would be Sunnies or Shiites and Allah would be their God and they might be blowing themselves up for Allah. If born in India they would be Hindu and possibly Vishnu, Brahma, Siva and so forth would be worshiped. Had they lived at the time of Zeus or Poseidon or Neptune they would be proselytizing for those gods, just as they are doing for “JZeus” today. But, they would always think they were special fellows and they would point their finger’s at all the other people who did not believe in their God and tell them that they were wrong and going to Hades, Hell, be reincarnated as pigs or whatever.
Isn’t it funny that religious people can always spot the nonsense in other religions but when it comes to their own it is not nonsense but truth. Other holy books are tripe but their holy book is the word of a God. Christians are atheists to all the other gods for the same reasons that atheists are. Atheists just go one God further and when they find no evidence for the Christian God and see the same fantastical stories in religions that predated Christianity and how the Christians stole those stories and many pagan celebrations and beliefs and subsequently incorporated them into their Christian dogma they find it easy to spot the lie.
I am very concerned about people indoctrinated into any belief system before they have acquired critical thinking tools. All religions do this. Why? Because they know that if religion waits until a person is in their twenties when they have acquired some measure of critical thinking and don’t believe everything adults tell them, like a helpless two year old does, many if not most would never believe the fantastical stories that the poor helpless child’s mind is stamped with. As you can see from the posts on this site, the Christian meme complex is hard at work protecting itself from those who would expose it for the fraud it is. It is very hard to dislodge the Christian meme complex once it has dug into a person’s mind. This is not due to the truth of it’s propositions but because by the time a person actually gets old enough to have developed some level of skepticism (Which a child does not have)they have already been indoctrinated and part of that indoctrination was to be skeptical of all those who would say, your dogma is not true. Also, by now, doubt is a sin which can literally cause you to be damned and since the Christian deity can literally know your every thought all doubt must be quashed immediately or risk hell fire and damnation. It’s a perfect scam loaded with guilt for thinking, fear of thinking, and fear of ostracism by friends and family if one would even suggest to them that the whole thing is a sham. All religions do this but few have been as successful at mind control as Islam and Christianity. Once you get in (and you had no choice)it is nearly impossible to have the courage to get out, so people perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to authenticate their holy books nonsense by arguing in circles about its interpretation and the ancient bronze age thinking found within its dusty pages. The earth is not flat! That should be enough to tip off any one with any measure of critical thinking beyond that of a five year old, if religion had not gotten to them first.
Well that was interesting reading. There is only one way to interpret the Bible. And that is by the bible. As 2 peter sez. GOD also spoke in parables. So some say parabolic language. But the bible sez that a parable is a earthly story with a heavenly meaning. What do that mean. Well and Example. Jesus is called a lamb of god. the earthly story is he is the lamb the heavenly meaning is that the lamb is jesus. Real tough huh. So when you really get this stuff. God talkes to you by his word when you read it. And info that doesnt seem to be there is. LIKE a study of genesis 5 and 11 you find out that the flood happened in GOD years 6023 and when we line that up with our calender that is 4990 bc. and MAY 21 2011 is Judgement day
GOD Bless
The Bible is very very symbolic. So what could it mean? My searching into spiritual matters I suppose stemmed from questioning the Bible and I soon realised of its symbolism mixed in with myth. I looked into other religions and after a few short out of body experiences I looked to a more logical interpretation.Most religions and spiritual belief hint or blatently point to the interconnectedness of everything.
The answer for me was all about awareness. Your basic awareness stays the same in every situation. Everything else changes.
To me everthing stems from a Oneness say a singularity in scientific terms.
This Oneness is the only reality. Awareness is an effect that is a constant ( and in this state at a peacefull perfect state (GOD?))
In this singularity oneness awareness is able to create using imagination and dream realities are created like the effect of simple fractal equations.
Awareness can focus on the reality of oneness or it can focus on the imagined creations.
Awareness gets fragmented in the imagined creations into an infinite number of possiblities.
So you now have 2 states – Awareness of the Oneness and Awareness in imagined possibilities.
So In the imagined possibilities infinite dimentions and worlds can be manifested like fractal variations
Our universe is a holographic illusion that we all help sustain in our imaginative awareness.
We have wrapped our true being in multi layers of illusion that got to a point that the illusion became like a program and was sustained by strong emotions espeacially fear.
This is Duality that is symbolised in a lot of religion and you can understand a bit of the bible and why it is contradictory and its myths and some psychic events and alternate states of mind.
There is a book that was channeled by a pschologist called A course in miracles. A huge complex book that basicly repeats the statement that we live in an illusion and our true being is this singularity and if we work on our awareness we will change our perception to a better dream.
Its core statement at the begining is:
“Nothing real is threatened nothing unreal exists”.
It is very logical but evidense is experiential and more in line with quantum physics and the observor effect.
I am still trying to get my head round this but it makes a lot of sense to me. Other religions show versions of this theory and the paths to realisiation of your truth.
It is like the Big bang theory but with consciousness being a precurser to the 3d universe we experience.
Of course you still can ask how did it start?
Like entropy the true stae of being is trying to get its illusionary dreams back to their simple true form.
Cheers
Graeme
This list of posts seems to go off track and misses the whole point in many cases .
the opening statement says ” In the beginning God created the heaven(s) and the earth , ”
I look at this statement and consider its claim . When , Who , The Action , What resulted .
This is the process of reason which can be used to ensure the validity of a statement that appears to be missed by most .
The beginning of time would be close to the singularity of the big bang as time is relative until this moment when the laws of physics become bent and warped to keep it simple , using maths we can calculate this . God is the Who in this statement ,in this context it is an entity which later in the text is directly compared with the image of man although divine . The action was to create the result which was the heaven and earth , which in the case of the earth came into existence many millennia after the big bang , which in its self would suggest the whole statement is inaccurate , the existence of a man like being also impossible as the evolutionary development of such a being before even the earth’s existence would be impossible , in fact it was the power of gravity which triggered the big bang , a non conscious energy constant not a bearded old man who is real interested in who I may or may not be sleeping with . This makes the whole statement not a metaphor as some may suggest but a complete unsupportable non truth , its false , a lie , not real , catch my drift .
With 48+ years of practicing chemistry (synthetic and quantum chemistry in a physical organic mode) I’m astonished that nobody on either side has acknowledged that neither science nor the Bible can certainly say anything other than a modeled reality, or a critical reality can be discussed at all. We’ll never unaided be able to say anything with perfect (as in logical positivist terms) knowledge. Thanks to Heisenbergs indeterminacy principle. For those who doubt that this is what he really meant read “Neils Bohr’s Times”, Pais (authentic authorized biographer of Bohr and Einstein) We get a modeled reality in Hawken’s terms–a sharp contradiction from his positivism stance in “The Grand Design”. We note that positivism states “Philosophy is dead” “No meta physical statements have any meaning, so are useless” Yet he commits philosophy in his choice of quantum formulations to use, making just this choice because it tends to show what he wants. (See Penrose’s scathing critic of the book and its conclusions. Then he makes the mother of all metaphysical statements. This has been properly called “Philosophical skullduggery.” The pres. of the Royal Society has publicly stated “We can safely ignore Stephen here.” So over eager scientists and some Christians are eager to jump favorably to what science says or to what religion says. It is necessary to be careful in our examination of each. BTW I am a Christian since June 6, 1942. Any body out there willing to tell me what happened to convince me on that day (Hint: I was born in 1937)
The post just before mine is similar to what Frank J. Tipler “The Physics of Christianity” has concluded. BTW a mathematical analysis of the “Achieved singularity indicates 3 solutions, one existing within time and space. His critics are, of course, are savage voluminous in mockery and insulting. However there is one thing they fail to do. If you want to investigate this think about the Shelock Holmes story “Silver Blaze” Connon-Doyl
Enjoy! KRF
Dr. Fountain,
I wholeheartedly agree with you that we cannot possibly know anything with complete certainty. I don’t think I make this claim anywhere in my article. In fact, I’m not making any claims at all. It’s the Bible that claims to have absolute knowledge of the world! It’s you who claims to have privileged information about the universe by believing in Christianity.
All I’m trying to do is expose the claims made by the Bible (a book brimming with absolutist commandments and logically positive statements) for the Bronze-age ignorance that they are.
I don’t dispute that your experience in science is vast, and you’re probably one of the many Christians who doesn’t interpret the Bible literally. But the mere fact that you are a Christian implies that you have a kind of “certainty” that Christianity is true. How do you reconcile your certainty about Christianity with your philosophical conviction that nothing is truly knowable?
As for “modeled reality,” science provides a model of reality based on observations of the world. The Bible, on the other hand, provides a model of reality based on the bizarre ramblings of ancient middle-Eastern barbarians (whose model of reality was based on fear, greed, and war).
I have read some of Tipler’s work, and can see why it’s widely regarded as pseudoscience. Even if we suppose that the “omega point” theory has some validity, why would it imply that Christianity is the one true religion (and not any of the thousands of other religions that have come and gone)?
To me, it seems like Tipler (and perhaps you) are one of those people who have a great passion for science, but simply don’t have the desire or willpower to break free of their pre-scientific indoctrination. So they begin weaving these intricate Rube Goldberg contraptions of logic that sound profound, and might even use the language of science, but are really just as vacuous as the religions they’re based on.
I would love to know what precisely turned you towards Christianity on the date you mentioned. (the Battle of Midway?)
In answer to your message: The Bible says no such thing. In a rather obtuse, word-poor, language it tells us about relationships. These are the only absolutes in the Bible. Of course they are terribly important! In the Bible God gives us the responsibility to maintain, and nourish relationships to each other, and to Him. This is what the garden scene (regardless of its many intellectual problems) means. If you want ancient cosmology Job has a better qualitative description (in the language of his milieu) of some of what we know. Many verses make it clear that we do not get absolute and privileged information through believing in Christianity. In fact there is a beautiful qualitative, non-mathematical of the Heisenberg Indeterminacy principle. (This is actually what it was in spite of Bohr!) It is Deuteronomy 29:29. There are others that indicate very limited knowledge of the world is available even to believers.
I don’t believe you understand logical positivism from your statement about the Bible. Positivism began in the late 19th century, Ernst Mach was an early father, A.J. Ayers another. It involves two things. First, the only irrefutable facts of nature are expressed by differences in pointer readings on a scale. Second conclusions from these pointer readings are valid only if they have mathematical relationships to each other. Ancillary points they made are: All philosophical statements are meaningless and should be avoided in scientific discourse. No metaphysical statements should be made. They’ve had a real tough time living up to this. Stephen Hawking in his new book, “The Grand Design”, avows himself a positivist. Yet commits philosophy by postulating a modeled reality (Very Plato-like!), and compounds his (positivistic) heresy by making the mother of all metaphysical statements. (God is not necessary…). Seems like to me ignorance is not limited to the Bronze age!
BTW: Recently the Pres. Of the Royal Society has stated Baron Rees of Ludlow,President of the Royal Society,the UK’s most prestigious scientific body,the Master of Trinity College,Cambridge,and the Astronomer Royal,says ‘we shouldn’t attach any weight to what Hawking says about God.’
(URL: http://protectthepope.com/?p=1406)
About what I can know: I can basically know who I can trust because of their relationship to me. Humans are as faulty as I am in this area, so I need to be very careful who I take into a trusting relationship. I think I can trust Jesus Christ because of what His story tells me about Himself. 1. He came to earth to reconcile me to a being that has every reason to be angry with me for my own failures. I believe I need redemption—a word that misses most atheists. Redemption involves something like defense in court.
Here’s a scenario that I’d like to write a play about—something done by a narrator, like in “Our Town.” Regardless of what you think about the Bible and Christianity it’s the story of Christian belief. A narrator sits on a single chair and begins, “I was awakened from my drugged stupor in an alley by the police sirens. In my foggy brain I said, “They must have found the old beggar I killed for his cash for my drugs. I started to run, but a young guy caught me.” So I was in a cell awaiting trial. The other inmates said I had a real hanging judge who particularly tried to protect poor people. A would probably get the death penalty.
Into the cell walks the public defender, he says I should plead guilty and ask for mercy. I defiantly say “No way! I’ll get out of this my own way.” The inmates inform me that this defender guy knows my judge—in fact he’s the judges son! At the trial I do plead guilty. The judge says, “The penalty is death.”
My lawyer speaks saying, ”Judge, your honor, I’d like you to pardon this young man.” The Judge says, “Counselor, I want to see you in chambers.” The lawyer goes behind the dais and is in there for a long time. I’m really scared about what’s going on. Finally, the door opens, my lawyer staggers out, beaten, and bleeding. Walking with a limp he comes over to me, and the bailiff says, “All rise for the verdict.”
I stand by my lawyer, shaking with anxiety. If this judge would let that happen to his son I had no chance at life at all. The Judge says, “Your crime deserves death. However, that has been paid for. You are free.” I’m so startled I can’t believe it. The bailiff comes over and uncuffs me. I’m so happy to have those cuffs off! I hear the judge say, “Court adjourned!” He gets up to leave, when my battered attorney says, One more thing, Father.” The judge says softly, “What is it son?” The attorney says, “I want to adopt him.” The judge says, “Yes, my son. He’s yours.”
Take it or leave it. This is the Christian story! We have a defense attorney who never loses a judgment case. I can trust him with myself. I don’t know this as a fact of science or in a logical positivist way, but as something I’ve experienced all my life. I can’t prove my love for my wife that way either. Bunches of flowers don’t work either. I’ve got to dwell with her in trust to show it.
As for modeled reality and science, Science has two kinds of philosophies, modeled reality that Hawking used to escape the fact that positivism was deserting him in his book. The kind of positivism he employs is one that he, himself describes as “top down” thing. If we can construct a theory from instances we already know, particularly by mathematical means the theory ought to be true.
By contrast, bottom up thinkers, exampled by Polkinghorne has the aphorisms 1. What actually occurs trumps all theory and planning. 2. What evidence can you show that it might be true? I’m a bottom up thinker because it fits most well with my experimentalist background. To me, this idea is the foundation of science, as history of science shows. Theories depend on the viewpoints you bring to the phenomenon. An aphorism that I occasionally get after successful execution of G03W—a quantum program—is “Kinetics=fact Mechanism= fiction”. The OT writer had experience as the grist for their writings. Included in their experiences were gods who demanded sacrifice of their first born boy babies. One odorous practice in the early Canaanite society was to ceremonially roll their sons down a chute into a blazing furnace in the valley of Hinnom. Certainly this was child abuse. What would you give as a penalty for such people?
The early Bible years were awfully tough on women and children. The stated biblical reason for God’s judgement was that man (as a species) had become evil. Case closed, they were evil.
As for Tipler: Why have you not read all of Tiplers work? I watched the process of his conversion carefully. Upon publication of his “Physics of Immortality” I saw an interview (I think I remember it was on CBS.) in which the interview asked Dr. Tipler, “So have you become a Christian?” Tipler visibly bristled at this and replied, “No I haven’t.” The interviewer asked, “Why not?” Tipler’s brusque reply was, “Because the resurrection of Christ has not yet been properly attested to.” This is also stated in his first book, somewhere around p 330 I think. His second book indicates that he has become a Christian and it attests to the resurrection of Christ. Sounds to me as though he acquired additional evidence. How’d that happen?
Just to make it clear to you I don’t believe, nor do I accept everything in his book as attestation. The story to this point reminds me of Ludwig Boltzmann and his development of statistical mechanics. Recall that in his era the very existence of atoms was very controversial, so much so that it could cost someone his academic job to promote belief in them. The actual “sanctification” of atomic theory was accomplished by an obscure little guy in the Swiss post office named Albert. The omega theory may be just like that.
On certain occasions science eats its young. Tipler makes it clear in the last part of his second book, if you bothered to read that far, that he is presenting conjecture, but the conjecture is of a particularly valuable sort. In fact he has Karl Popper’s ideas about verification (testability) and falsification of theories well in hand in his books. What he presents in both books is the ability for verification and/or falsification of theories of the universe and theology about God and Jesus Christ. What many do not take into account among his critics is that Popper clearly states that verifications of a theory must rest on the outcomes of a risky experiment. A risky experiment is one that puts the entire theory at risk, depending on a + or – outcome. He presents entirely risky experiments, in many of his presentations, which could be verifiable by performing what he describes, including finding the body of Christ, or finding the particle tracks in the rocks around the tomb. This latter risky experiment has an additional risk to it in that finding those kinds of tracks in rocks known to be from the tomb area would verify the mechanism Tipler postulates for how Christ got out of the tomb
You seem to have a great deal of ignorance about Tipler, probably because you’ve not bothered to look up anything about him. The Omega point is not due to him, but to Beckenstein, who is widely lauded in Susskin’s book on black hole science. Both men were students of Wheeler (the original black hole guy). I might remark that these originators of the grist of the theories are not vilified, but Tipler is. His critics seem to be quite savage, even brutal in mockery. They all seem to miss one essential thing in criticizing his work. I’ve found it, but I wonder if you’re sufficiently open minded to see what is missing in all their critique. I’ll give you clues: 1. Sherlock Holmes, Arthur Conan Doyle, “ Silver Blaze”. 2: It’s something about what Tipler is. 3. It has nothing to do with what he has written. Find what it is and I’ll discuss it with you. I do believe heavily in “discovery learning”.
About me: I became Christian on June 6, 1942 at age five in a blue berry patch on my Granpa Dagley’s farm near Beaverton Mich. We were there because of WW2. I remember the Pearl Harbor announcement on Dec. 7, and shortly thereafter one drive the 127 miles to the coast and watch Nazi U-boats sink our tankers. We only had “flimsy aircraft carriers” in the Pacific, and the mind set was that with our battle fleet sunk in the mud at Pearl the entire west coast was open. We came to the farm so my dad could look for work in Flint. Willow Run was close. Everybody over five feet tall was very frightened, this made an impression on me. I was a rather “bad boy child” full of curiosity and much inclined to mischief. I gave my parents many bad turns and was appropriately corrected. Nobody was confident the war would turn out right for us, and on that day my mom talked to me about Jesus. I knew right away I had issues with my own badness so I accepted the offer of Jesus to forgive my sins. I was a different boy, but not very perfect after that.
I became a scientist after our move to Wheaton, Ill. In late 1945, where I first studied stars, reading most of the astronomy books at Wheaton College library. I gave up on astronomy when my homemade reflecting telescope would not work. I’d tried using Dad’s Old Fashioned root beer bottle bottoms to grind my reflecting mirror. A consolation prize was trip to the organic chemistry prof at age 10 when he showed me what should have happened in a Tollens test in a very clean test tube. I saw myself in the silver plating out on its side walls. I’ve been captured ever since.
My ability to connect my budding science with my faith began sometime earlier than the experience above. It was quite experimental. First, was Midway. Before Midway we’d all prayed for some kind of victory that would show the country might win. We did not know of the victory at Midway for some time after it, though we knew right away about Doolittle’s raid. It seemed to me that the news was a direct answer to everybody’s prayers. (There are no atheists in foxholes made a big impression on me too. My second grade teacher’s husband was a Marine shot in the head at Tenaru ridge on Guadalcanal. He could show us his scars. This made a big impression.) It seemed like every time we seriously prayed for something it happened, particularly when people’s lives were involved. My observation at that time was that God was a very experimental God who wanted to know what was important to us.
In college at Wheaton I was the poor guy who had to work. Fortunately there were always jobs for me. Often I had to pray for one, but they always seemed to turn up. I sort of got the idea that God did love me, and had something good for me. I prayed frivolous prayers too. One humorous one was in quantitive analysis where I prayed for help to get my titration endpoints right. That did not happen, and I got low grades for that set of experiments that in quant because I systematically over stepped. It got no better in Phys. Chem. because I was always screwing up the kinetics experiments in my project due to over stepped end points. It turned out, when I took my physical for my first summer job as a graduate to work at Campbell Soup company as a quality control temp to titrate tomato puree, that I was partially color blind to the shades of red of the indicator end point, thus it looked hopeless. They hired me anyway because an issue came up about the entire quality control system. I was given the task of making a method to check it. My answer was to do the determinations with an electrical titration. My work that summer showed them that their titration method was no darn good due to the protein content which made the end points anywhere it liked. My conclusion personally was that the failure in quant prepared me to look at what I actually was good at, that was inventing pathways to get at data.
In grad school this trait stood me well. I was introduced to quantum theory in a remedial p-Chem class because I failed the diagnosis test for P-Chem. It turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to me. I was enchanted with barrier tunneling of particles. Roughly, their ability to extend their wave functions beyond a non-infinite energy barrier. The prof. showed us what that meant in a dynamic way. He pointed out that the walls of the classroom were merely energy barriers, and that there was a probability that you could walk right through one. He’d walk over to a wall, and bump his torso into it and say, “Well, not this time, but I’ll be able to walk right through it one try sometime in the future when my wave function will penetrate that far.” This was quite dynamic to me because I saw how really extra ordinary common things really are. Then I became acquainted with the two slit experiment, where a quantum particle could be in two places at one time. At that time the Aspect experiment had not yet occurred, but the EPR thought experiment was well known.
I was convinced by these physical indications, that there was something extraordinary going on in the universe. It still makes sense to me that it might be a Who that is doing extraordinary things in the universe, so we ought to expect extraordinary things when we see those things. I’m not the only scientist who thinks this way at all. Take a look at John Polkinghorne’s writing. I wonder why very few people go after him, as they have with Tipler?
I’ve continued reading thee literature assiduously on these subjects, and have realized that many science people have a systematic bias about any of this material being connected with a Creator God. BTW, have you investigated what Einstein said about Bohr and his (Now standard doctrine) about quantum theory? “Subtle Is the Lord God….” By Pais the authorized biographer may give you a clue. It isn’t the famous “God does not play dice with the universe.”
In conclusion, I’ve never seen any reason to break away from a pre-scientific indoctrination. My personal faith has always served me stoutly in hard times. God allowed me to meet my wife, then an RN student. Forty five years later it was greatly confirmed to me ( I actually knew this long ago.) that she was exactly the one I needed. I’ve suffered a very serious heart attack, wherein I needed a valve replacement, and a blood clot, that everyone missed, dug out of my atrium. The combination gave me what is called a fatal tachycardia. I coded twice on the surgeon’s table. It seems to me that God still has given me time to do things. I’ve recently had a research paper published in Can. J. Chem. That will change minds about the alpha-effect.
It’s like Polycarp aid before his martyrdom “Eighty-six years I have served Christ, and He never did me any wrong. How can I blaspheme my King who saved me?” I’ve got 11 more years to go, but my feelings are the same.
To Marin UK. Please explain to me how quantum gravity can affect two membrane universes, each containing properties unique to itself including unique time, unique space etc. With you explanation please include how we have a right to even talk about these membranes coming “close” to each other. It seems to me that there either must be a space unique to between unique membranes, what ever that may mean, in order for quantum gravity to have a field (Yes it does require one.)to work in since gravitons are Bosons.
I have obviously missed something in Hawking’s new book. Would you tell me what I missed?
Genesis 1 through Genesis 2:3 were written by an author who used the word Elohim (plural; God, gods, objects of worship), translated as God in the King James Version. The author of Genesis 2:4–25 used the term Yahweh-Elohim, translated in the KJV as the LORD God. In the first account, the Elohim make man and woman in their image, after making the animals: Gen 1:26 And God [Elohim] said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…1:27 So God [Elohim] created man in his own image, in the image of God [Elohim] created he him; male and female created he them.
In the second account, Yahweh-Elohim creates man before the animals: 2:7 And the LORD God [Yahweh-Elohim] formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
But there was a problem: 2:18 And the LORD God [Yahweh-Elohim] said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet [mate] for him.
So did Yahweh-Elohim make a mate for Adam out of the dust? No!
2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God [Yahweh-Elohim] formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet [mate] for him.[!]
The author neglects to tell us exactly how Yahweh-Elohim and Adam determined that the beasts and the birds weren’t suitable mates, but apparently, after a lot of trial and error, Yahweh-Elohim comes up with a solution:
2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
Adam and Eve allegedly weren’t ashamed, but the author of this nonsense should have been, and we should be ashamed if we believe it. How can myths like this be considered the inerrant word of an omnipotent, omniscient god?
The Bible is full of contradictions, errors and absurdities. Here is another example from Genesis:
1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
1:7 And God made the firmament and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
“The Firmament (Heaven)
God spends one-sixth of his entire creative effort (the second day) working on a solid firmament. This strange structure, which God calls heaven, is intended to separate the higher waters from the lower waters.”
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/gen/1.html
Biblical cosmology is the same as that of Babylon:
http://www.narrowgate-rmartin.com/theo10_classnotes/priestly_cosmology.htm
Spare yourself the mental anguish of trying to reconcile the Bible with facts. There’s no need for cognitive dissonance or doublethink. Thomas Edison got it right—”Religion is all bunk.”