Theory of everything? Metaphysics, God & evolution

Maybe we’re talking apples and oranges–more inclusivism. Children before the age of accountability, those who have mental incapacity, and those who have never heard (or understood) would be illustrations. Let me know what you think. Thanks. (we can go to another thread too:) :slight_smile:

https://randalrauser.com/2013/04/why-inclusivism-makes-sense/

I will agree that below the age of accountability they are saved, but they didn’t make the choice to sin, as we all do. As to the BC world, the Jews were looking forward that God would send a messiah to save them. They were saved by faith in that belief. I think people can be saved by belief that there is such a person even today–I am about to have to go to the hospital for blood work for tomorrows chemo, but somewhere I think in Romans Paul talks about this. I don’t think you can be saved by worshipping Moloch and sacrificing your babies, I don’t think you can be saved by worshipping Buddha or any other God. I just don’t see that in Scripture. My Sri Lankan friend left Hinduism because she knew Hindu’s taught there was no beginning to the universe. The fact that there was a beginning made her search for the true God. If she had died in that search, I believe she would have been saved. She had responded to the light she had been given. That is about as far as I can go on inclusivism. I don’t think the Ayatollah will make it to heaven.

I think this age of accountability idea is to some degree a symptom of legalism. It is a knee patch to fix up a legalistic system.

So no, I don’t buy it. AND, I don’t need it because I don’t believe in any Gnostic gospel of salvation by theological knowledge or mental works of believing the right things. I believe in gospel of salvation by the grace of God as taught by Jesus and Paul. Faith is simply the other side of that coin because we human beings always want to know what WE are supposed to do. We are supposed to have faith. That is what God asks of us. And what is faith? Some power that God gives us to save ourselves? Absolutely NOT! Is it belief or some other mental works? No way! It is a choice. As God tells us, “I set before you life and death, therefore choose life.” It is an acceptance of the responsibility of life to do as best as we are able what is good, helpful, and creative, rather than what is bad and destructive. It is an assurance that that life and goodness has value. And as James explains, faith without works is dead – nothing but empty words. But does any of this mean we are saved by any of these things described in these various ways by the word “faith?” No. We are saved by the grace of God. First and foremost this means there is no formula by which we can determine who is saved and who is damned. Only God can see such things clearly. Romans 10, faith doesn’t even ask such a question. Faith isn’t looking for the payoff. Faith is simply doing what is right for its own sake.

So what then can I say of children? I suppose I can say that they have a childlike faith quite naturally. But I am certainly not going to draw some line through their life and say this age or that is when we can start employing some legalistic system to judge them.

2 Likes

I agree that the idea of an age of accountability does not stand up to scrutiny, but it’s symptomatic of an incoherent construct of who goes to heaven and who not; it’s so confusing. I think God is a lot better than what we think–I agree… Randal Rauser’s “What’s So Confusing about Grace?” illustrates that well.

Okay. So, I’ve just watched this video. I was only going to watch a bit of it but I quickly got hooked. I acknowledge it is definitely a long one but - for me it was ground breaking on many levels. I was going to watch something on tv but just watched this instead.

For me, the video in different ways touches on a great deal of the issues I hope to discuss here - specifically, how there does indeed seem to be a connection to electromagnetic energy and the spirit realm. This guy, Adrian Lee, strangely - is a Christian paranormal investigator among other titles he might use. I didn’t know that was a thing. His perspective on being a Christian and the whole phenomena of the paranormal is very interesting, refreshing even. It’s risk level ‘watch and act’ stuff but still ‘proceed with caution’ type territory, and I’ll definitely be proceeding further.

On that - to be honest - a genuine fear of God (in a healthy way) was re-envoked in me watching this video. A realisation “ah goodness, I need to stop sinning and really be aware of the things of the spirit” - that level of bolt uprighted conviction. Admittedly, in my recent massive faith re-assessment I’d become very complacent about a lot of things to do with just a generally holy lifestyle and manner. This video kind of reoriented me back in the right direction and that is extremely helpful for me right now - so it has at least done that. I actually have a new working hypothesis for what I think ‘hell’ is after watching this and thinking further about your earlier comments @mitchellmckain

Anyway, enough jibber - I’ve pasted it in below. Would be very interested to hear people’s thoughts. Regardless, as a marker point on my spiritual journey - I just want this video up here so I can kind of come back to it:

I tried watching, but had to stop because so much of the physics is just wrong. But to some degree you can put this down to me being a physicist and thus a bit of a stickler on the precise way of saying things correctly. For example, it is quite correct that scientists can and have made matter from energy, but mostly this isn’t by converting light into matter but rather the energy of motion into matter/mass (though it is certainly possible to create matter/mass from light). In either case you create equal parts of matter and antimatter so there is no net increase in matter (the increase in mass equals the energy converted by E = m c^2). Saying this means you can make light sabers certainly isn’t correct. For another example, it is not correct to say that particles like electron don’t exist when you are not looking but only that they don’t have precise properties like position except as a result of measuring those properties. So we know that electrons are attached to an atom but are best described as a cloud around the nucleus rather than little balls moving around them in orbits.

On another note… I too have noticed many of the similarities between ghosts and UFOs. And thus I conclude it is most likely that these are subjective spiritual experiences, at most. I don’t go quite to the extreme as @Klax in claiming that interstellar travel is impossible but I certainly agree with him to the extent that the difficulties make this very highly unlikely.

1 Like

I started watching it and when I realized this guy claims to be a psychic, I pretty much lost interest. They are great at getting one to tell them information without that one knowing it. I remember a James Randi set of videos with psychics and he asked them to tell him about himself, and then sat stone silent, not interacting with them at all. They couldn’t tell him diddly.

1 Like

But it didn’t start that way. Whether one interprets Adam and Eve as a literal couple or an archetypal symbol for all of humanity, classical Christianity pictures a unified beginning for the human race, which explains our common plight. “All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.”

Interested to know who/what you’re reading. Just going off your summary, the points about the evolution of religious thought/religion seem misplaced in the evolutionary timeline. The “cognitive preference” for cause-effect reaches far back into the past. As I explain in A Primer on Culture:

Mental shortcuts called “schemata" are a basic feature of human cognition. Schemata relate new information to previously recognized patterns and processes. Thus, the mind perceives the world as structured information rather than a series of “arbitrary or unpredictable attributes.” Consider having to respond to every situation – no matter how routine – as a novel or random event. The mind would be overwhelmed rather quickly. Sometimes, schemata cause us to see the world as we think it should be rather than as it is, which is one reason we can’t always trust our perceptions. On the whole, however, schemata make us smarter by making our brains more efficient; information is retrieved rapidly and delivered in a ready-to-use form.

Other primates (possibly all mammals) have brains that rely on schemata. A basic question of evolution is: Why this species and not that one? So, if all primates possess a brain that works in roughly similar fashion, why did the brain size of hominins keep expanding, while other primates didn’t? According to the widely-accepted “social brain” hypothesis (Dunbar Grooming, Gossip, and the Evolution of Language, 1998), the increasingly complex social lives of hominins provided selective pressure for larger brains. This is the “social cohesion” you described:

I’m not sure what you mean by “ancient times,” but “reputation scoring” also applies to primates and pack animals and reaches back millions of years. There was a way to do it because animals do it. The problem is, every additional individual added to a group represents an exponential increase in the number of social interactions that must be tracked. Thus, sheer brainpower places an inherent limit on group sizes in the animal kingdom.

What you’re essentially describing is the evolution of morality – rules of right/wrong behavior – which is not the same as religion. What “supercharged” our use of schemata was the co-evolution of brain, language and morality. The use of words, concepts, and metaphors eventually allowed us to categorize cultural knowledge into abstract notions such as “good,” “evil,” and “gods.” Institutional knowledge such as “religion” would follow later, since beliefs are not institutionalized until they are ritualized and become part of the accepted social reality of a culture.

So, if you’re looking at an evolutionary timeline, the social pressures that resulted in our larger brains began millions of years ago. Erectus was the likely first speaker of words around 1 million years ago, but symbolism and modern language don’t appear until about 100,000 years ago. Abstract notions of “good” and “evil” necessarily precede any thoughts of a god enforcing those ideal standards of behavior, so morality logically comes first, followed by religion. This is basically what the archaeological record shows – symbolism at 100 kya, followed by evidence of spirituality after the Out of Africa migration. Using various lines of evidence, I place the Fall somewhere between those two events. Thus, the fact that humans invented magic, shamanism, idolatry, and many other religions after the Fall isn’t surprising. Humanity was left to its own devices.

Yes and no. You’ve realized the Bible isn’t a blow-by-blow, literal description of history, but that doesn’t mean it “does not concord with actual reality.” By definition, a metaphor can describe reality without being literally true.

If you’re looking for rock-solid certainty, you won’t find it. But I’ve gone on too long already …

2 Likes

Unified before sin? yes, afterwards NO! What about Cain and Abel? Tubal-cain, the instructor of every fabricator of evil? There were two lineages, those of Cain and those of Abel.

That’s all I’m saying. I’m sure you meant Cain and Seth’s lineages, but I’m not so sure those are “good” and “evil” lines of descent. I’ve heard that interpretation, but the cultural advances in Cain’s line aren’t evil – making tents, domesticating livestock, stringed instruments, metallurgy. I would call most of those things good or, at worst, neutral.

1 Like

embarrassed, yes, Cain and Seth . Spent too much time with Cain and Abel over the past 2 days in the did Noah’s flood kill all the humans thread.

2 Likes

With all due respect I think I can see where you are coming from, but really God gives us the Love of Jesus as evidence of God’s existence. I do not see how quantum physics can lead anyone to God.

If some one needs something physical as proof that God exists, then the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus will have to suffice. Quantum physics is part of the physical reality of our universe, but if there is no spiritual aspect of life and reality, then how could God exist. Love is that spiritual aspect of Reality and is more real than the physical, because it is Eternal Life.

I have indeed been thinking about this. I think whatever realities are in the spiritual realm, the state of our own spirit depends how and what we see and experience of it. A lot to reflect on in this thread

2 Likes

Haha, yeah …

You know, I’ve never thought about that … you’d think a cow or a giraffe would suffer greatly in pain with all the hooves coming out n all but perhaps not. Could there be an evolutionary reason why this is the case with human women?? I think so … but …

Yeees but … these were the first expressions of human religion. Personally, I feel it is very anachronistic to call these things “idolatry”. The very term implies some knowledge or awareness of the true God and a decision - at some point - to reject that and seek another way, does it not? I’m not convinced the one true God showed up to these early hominids and they said “Um, no thanks” and made idols instead. The whole idea of a “Fall” in the context of human evolution is - well I do hate to say it - but I mean … it’s a little bawkish yeah? I mean if we don’t believe in a personally created Adam and Eve as described in Genesis - is not the baby thrown out? And are not attempts to still ‘make a Fall fit’ within evolution like swimming around in the left over bath water?? Slap me down and prove me wrong by all means … please

I watched it, was good. I even took brief notes part way through as it got interesting. I feel these would not be unuseful to share here they are for the readers:

  • 200,000 years ago the first human skeletons pretty well exactly like modern humans today were found
  • For about 80,000 years it seems this ‘full’ homo sapiens in Africa were more or less doing the same as what the hominids before them were
  • About 120,000 years ago, something changed. The first human burial was found. Humans were also found buried with items such as crafted shells and it seems from wear marks, these shells were worn. This represents then the first time in human history when things of a symbolic and not utilitarian/survival nature were embraced. We don’t really know why then
  • Scholars make the argument that 120,000 years ago was when the first significant changes happened in hominids that started them towards being most like us modern humans in terms of how they thought. This really fully came about around 40,000 years ago, possibly due to some kind of genetic mutation. Interestingly, it is noted that modern humans left Africa around this time, as far back potentially as 60,000 years ago but more so around the 50-40kya mark.
  • Arguably, the presentation peters off after this into discussing cave art and how humans around 40kya may have drawn pictures as visual representations of shamanistic like practices (stabbing at a picture of a bison, presumably with a spear, presumably before going out to hunt) and theirs being a few images of what are called “impossible beings” - that is, beings that do not exist in the real word, which look very half human half animal (there was one creepy one that looked a lot like the typical picture of Satan as a goat man).

I definitely do not think it began within the above timeline. I’d be thinking it began somewhere out in the Midianite desert, personally, and was really taken on by the Semetic Egyptian prince Moses, who had the know how to bring cultural knowledge of the time into a new religion … but that’s just my theory. If people think Adam & Eve we’re not literal … do they really have another choice besides this?? Being harsh here, but at the moment I’m really not convinced Abraham was as a real person as he is made out to be in Genesis … maybe but …

I guess there are similarities of this nature between the Abraham narrative and the gospels talking about Jesus, as you say. Why God is presented as ‘doing it this way way’ is something that perplexes me … but it is what it is I guess. I sometimes feel for all those people in history who were disregarded I’m not having the light. It makes me anxious to not rest on my laurels

Me no unnerstan? I mean I think I get the general idea but … what is “Gish”? Ha :slight_smile:

What does it take for you? It has lost so much meaning for me at the moment. I get stuck sometimes on how the Old Testament clearly has a pro Israelite bias in parts - eg making Abraham out to be some super hero figure who could defeat the Babylonian army, making Israel’s enemies origin stories show those nation groups as depraved (eg how Moab and Ammon both came about as the result of an incestous relationship between Lot and his daughters, I mean - really?) and so on. The bible says not to give false testimony … yet I feel these things are false testimony. Or are we to believe them as actual events? I’m not talking about Adam & Eve here - I’m talking about Lot sleeping with his daughters being the origin story of two nations Israel hated … are we to believe that? Similarly, are we to believe as fact that the ancient Babylonians on Shinar built a tower (conveniently that were like the towers around in Babylon when the Israelite captives were there) and to think that the Tower of Babel story is not a concealed (or not so concealed) insult to the Babylonian captures? I can’t get past the false testimony hypocrisy. Stingly harsh, yes. But please - someone, show me otherwise. Cause otherwise people are believing a book that literally says “don’t give false testimony” and then believing that the Spirit of God inspired people to write down - false testimony. This has to be the case unless you believe those stories I mentioned are factual, historical truth - which has some significantly eye brow raising elements to it. And please, the whole “but those things were written to show us things - general principles - about God” argument does not hold here. It’s pro Israelite bias, no deep lessons about the character of God in that, is there??
Rant done. Sigh, sadness :pensive: Please forgive me God but show me …

Deep stuff. It’s this and one of the pictures (ghost in stairwell) and one of the stories (Ghost calling himself Peter Peter) in that video that has brought me to a new way of thinking about what I think hell/the afterlife is …

I agree

I agree, science and a bit of faith kinda like you suggest, what I consider that inner sense of truth we have in us to get us there

I agree yes … but what I am trying to communicate is that I believe there is a cross over between the scientific and the metaphysical that hasn’t yet been really understood … and that once this is understood better, a lot of what was previously believed will go and a lot of other new beliefs will arise. Not unlike, perhaps, how evolution has revolutionised how we have had to try and understand the Bible - I mean look at BioLogos, the whole operation is in response to scientific findings (evolution) that challenged previously held metaphysical understandings. I personally believe at some point - somehow, certain aspects of the supernatural are going to scientifically be captured and quantified in a stronger way than they are now and that, like evolutionary understanding that slowly emerged, was challenged hardcore but which has stood the test of everything thrown against it … will bear out as true.
It’s after we reach that stage in the public consciousness - I’d hazard a rough guess that this will happen in the mid to late 2040s, maybe early 2050s, that things are going to get really interesting. Christianity I believe ought to try and get ahead of the curve this time now … this thread is an attempt in that direction. Maybe I’m a lone voice on this, I don’t know.

Please - people reading, jump in and help the process. I really am hoping by the end of this thread there will be some interesting conclusions …

Pretty amazing. Kind of what I’m getting at. Add whatever ghosts and aliens are into that mix - or supernatural phenomena whatever label you want to put on it - and I reckon we’re getting at something.

Could you link in some articles or something relatable/understandable for the non scientifically trained (maybe a YouTube video or similar) about these concepts - Einstein’s theory written in 5 dimensions etc? Thanks in advance :pray:

That’s funny… I have the opposite impression. As a history it seems unique to me because it casts the Israelites in such a bad light – a people who always did everything wrong and was constantly getting in so much trouble with God that God called down disasters upon them.

Only if you are careful to note that the cross over is in one direction. The scientific results have implications for our understanding of reality to be sure. But science follows strict rules which makes our beliefs about reality irrelevant to its findings.

This is not so well known because it was never made very popular. It was pretty much ignored at the time because 5 dimensions was considered nonsense until much later. The best I can do is give you the name under which you can look this up: Kaluza Klein theory. This comes from the names of two Swedish scientists who discovered this. When I google this I get a Wikipedia article and some videos… so you can give them a try, I suppose.

1 Like

A theory of everything seems hopelessly ambitious. Theories are a kind of rational model which if correct can help us make predictions and improve our understanding. But if we truly had a theory of everything what need would there be to make predictions? It would be very hard to test since you’d always have to wonder if a failure would only rule out a portion of the theory and a success might similarly be only local with no relevant feedback on the theory as a whole.

I agree with Pascal about he end point of rationality being to demonstrate the limits of rationality. What would be the purpose of a theory of everything?

1 Like

Indeed!

Well a theory of everything in science would basically be a theoretical framework for our speculations so that we would at least be able to draw a clearer line between those things we imagine which are fantasy only and those which we can aim for even if they ultimately remain beyond our technical reach.

1 Like

Never heard of the “Gish Gallop”? It’s a debate tactic named for the YEC apologist Duane Gish, who would throw out so many wrong ideas that his opponents couldn’t possibly refute them all. On that basis, Gish would then claim victory. Lol.

Narrower hips (bipedalism) and larger heads (big brains) = OUCH! People in an agrarian culture surely would observe that human women suffer much more pain in childbirth than any other animal. Us city folk are ignorant.

I could pick another word for it, but idolatry is simply the worship of idols. Knowledge of the true God isn’t a prerequisite for idolatry to occur. These “Venus” fertility figurines (below) are found all over Europe after the “cognitive revolution.” They remind me of the household idols that Rachel hid under her saddle in Gen. 31.
Venus fertility figure

“No thanks.” Haha. That’s funny. You’ll have to tell me what “bawkish” means, though I get the drift.

In any case, I agree that God didn’t reveal himself to early humans or give them a list of commandments to break. The process that I’m describing is the same that every individual throughout history has experienced. Everyone who has ever lived was born ignorant of sin, yet all of us acquire the “knowledge of good and evil” and become guilty before God. How? By God revealing himself to us, or giving us a command? Nope. We became sinners by ignoring our consciences and choosing to do evil. If relationship with God or knowledge of his commands is a prerequisite for “sin” to occur, then everyone who lacks those things cannot be a “sinner” and has no need for forgiveness or for Christ.

In essence, early humans were like children, which is a metaphor that Genesis itself supplies. Like children, prior to 100,000 years ago early humans lacked the language skills and metaphoric thought necessary for mature morality, which is rooted in our capacity to symbolize and generalize to a categorical abstraction. Cognitive neuroscientist Peter Tse explains, “The birth of symbolic thought gave rise to the possibility of true morality and immorality, of good and evil. Once acts became symbolized, they could now stand for, and be instances of, abstract classes of action such as good, evil, right, or wrong.”

Thus, the Fall is essentially the dawn of true morality and, with it, conscience. Once people started to violate that conscience, they were rendered guilty before God. The same thing happened to all of us. I don’t know about you, but God didn’t show up in my bedroom and reveal himself to me as a child, yet still I somehow wound up a guilty sinner. How? By violating my own conscience, as flawed as it might be.

Paul describes the same in Romans 1-2.

1 Like