Energy is God

[MusingMuso]

:-)

I can see that this is causing some fun.

"Love knows no laws" - neither did the waves of the Japanese Tsunami. Yahweh and Apollo were both known as the Creator, Destroyer, and represent both ends of the taking to pieces to put back together again in another form. This is expressed in Hindu deities also, a common theme. To say that God is Love turns people who have suffered disaster into atheists because it is apparent that He does not love them. Parents who have lost sons. Wives who have lost husbands.

But God as the Creative Force is much more profound.

Maxwell's equations . . . :-)

Whilst bicycling against the wind today I was thinking of another simile. Above, I have given three examples apparently demonstrating conscious circumstances and cause for faith. They can be criticised for being mere cherries on the cake of random events that simply coincide with a preconceived pattern of happenings. However, the circumstances were each of such low probability, I had dismissed that possibility, even though perhaps such low probabilities can fall within a spectrum of randomness. Effectively though, people with faith have identified a series or sequence of events that they have experienced that significantly exceed the threshold of background noise of randomness of events.

The simile that came to mind arose from Hartley and Shannon's work on information theory. This, being examination of pulses down a line is a sort of single dimension statistical mechanics leading to concepts of entropy as in a three dimensional gas. We inject noise into a line and see what the minimum size signal we can reliably recover. If we dismiss all voltages lower than a certain voltage, below which is the average voltage of the noise, then we can identify an intelligent signal of pulses coming through. That intelligent signal has an energy. . . .

That analogy of energy is that which surfers use to ride the wave, having had to predict successfully the pattern of positive suitability for poisitive out of the randomness of those arriving at the shore. Or the currents of wind that will carry a glider up to enormous heights, the pilot having to recognise the patterns of updraught.

For the purposes of exploration, imagine there is no intelligent signal: we will lower the voltage down till the peaks of random noise break through, and we will detect points of energy in the signal. If we mistake the positive peaks of that random signal for something intelligent, and amplify them, and attempt to predict any anti-randomness in the signal and harness their positivity in preference to the noise and the negative, it is still an energy of positive use, because the ordinary and the noise oscillations are thrown away. I accept that observation of events can be subject to such self deception, but if they are understood to be positive, then the resulting positivism can be self-producing and leading to the very thing we're trying to prove doesn't exist. If the positivism is amplified and multiplied by a significant proportion of population, the creative force happens.

Perhaps its in this way that systems choose a mechanism by which a creative force arises out of randomness, from the level of fundamental particles right the way through to deluded humans . . . who, because the force exists, even if it is only thought into being, :o aren't deluded at all.   ;D  8) because the thought has become real.

This is the energy, and magic, of God.

However another analogy comes from AM radio. The airwaves are full of electrical signals of which we are entirely unaware. Whilst Maxwell predicted them, none thought them visible until Hertz's famous experiments with a tuned spark gap. With Amplitude Modulated radio, a carrier wave is sent out, of which we are entirely unaware. It is an energy, to which a tuned circuit can be synchronised. If we vary the intensity of the electromagnetic vibrations according to an intelligent signal, pick up the vibrations with a tuned circuit and feed it to headphones, we won't hear anything because the negative values of the carrier signal cancel the positive.

It's only when we pluck out a whisker from a cat's cheek ;D and touch it upon a sensitive crystal, such as tellurium, that we can eliminate the negative and detect the positive. Better still, turn the negative to positive! It's in this way that the intelligent signal shines through upon a formerly invisible carrier. People without the cat's whisker can't beleive that this signal exists, whilst to those to whom the cat makes one available available, hear the radios station loud and clear.

(MM - sorry I'm being most cheeky :D in reference to cats . . . for younger readers a piece of bent wire was used in reality in a crystal set)

The point is that however one does not want to believe it's really happening, there is a creative force in nature which creates by processes of construction and destruction in which overall successive constructive forces have added together so as to allow us and all that we know to exist  . . . and which through consciousness of circumstances people with faith have found can make a positive contribution to our lives. The fact that the force can be thought into existence, and exist in reality even if only because we think it in the abstract, is shocking but, however, demonstrates the power of prayer together with patterns of positive behaviour set by knowledge of "God".

The fact that we have all had contact with organs and share a common interest would not have occurred without systems of reverence and instruction relating to that force causing buildings to be erected housing objects of common interest. The energy of creative force is at work . . .

Best wishes

David P

Dear David,

I should have medals....lots of medals, coming to think about it.  By the age of 13 I'd saved the lives of six people, (or at least postponed a few deaths);  two of which required considerable bravery and quite a lot of personal risk. Of the risky ones, the first involved paddling out into Morecambe Bay with two planks of driftwood tied to my feet by shoe-laces, and hoisting another boy out of quicksand, for which the bay is notorious. The second involved rescuing another who mistakenly believed that he had the skill and courage of a Sherpa, but then went into panic. I climbed 120ft or so without ropes and talked him down step-by-step.

By the age of 50, I'd saved a further four lives; the first having being involved in a road accident, the next two from drowning in a flood at Shrewsbury at 3am, (don't ask), and finally, a 14 year old Kosovan boy who had collapsed by the side of the road  in Norfolk, in the middle of the night, after trekking across most of Europe  suffering a knife wound and with a bullet lodged in his leg.

Now should I believe that I was sent by God in these situations, or that I was somehow responding to the sea of circumstances?

I think I prefer to believe that I just chanced upon some difficult situations and knew what to do and how to react. I'd also like to think that anyone else would have done the same things, or at least made an effort.

Other people do this sort of thing for a living, and I'm not aware that there was ever a spiritual dimension to any of it; though I think I may be forgiven just a little pride in the fact that (a) I didn't die, and (b), neither did anyone else.

The parable of the Good Samaritan is different. It's about crossing divides as much as it is about crossing roads; reaching out  and caring for those who are strangely foreign or in some way untouchable.

Only once have I ever found myself in a situation which, at the time, was very difficult to fathom; as if it were meant to be and over which I had no control. Actually, it goes way beyond that, because not only did I shrink away and actually try to avoid the situation, something made me go back.

To cut a long story shorter, Joe was a 15 year-old boy heading for disaster; surviving by his wits and laying his head wherever it landed; his single-father apparently unwilling or incapable of looking after him. Instead, he was very much the target of drug-dealers, pimps, users and peers who were quite happy to draw him into a seedy, criminal world; a not uncommon aspect of society to-day. When his father died quite suddenly, Joe went into care, and it wasn't long before we were enjoying the most innocent, rewarding, funny and creative of times; going to car rallies, go-karting, walking in the countryside, visiting cathedrals and a hundred other things. Not only that, my whole family eventually "adopted" him, and never batted an eyelid when he started to call me "Dad."

Four weeks after his 16th birthday, Joe tried to contact me, but I was 300 miles away. Unable to do so, he ran away from the care home after a spot of bother, went straight to the same people I had warned him about. He collapsed and died as a result of a very suspicious drugs overdose while I was listening to him on the telephone and trying to make sense of his call at 2.30am the following morning.

Perhaps this is a good place to quote your own words, David.

To say that God is Love turns people who have suffered disaster into atheists because it is apparent that He does not love them. Parents who have lost sons. (etc)

If we accept that people have free-will, make mistakes and often follow the wrong path, and if we accept that plate tectonics are a part of "just the way it is," then we must accept there to be chaos even within the boundaries of order and creation.

Indeed, if there was a God who stopped all mistakes, protected everyone from bad things or stopped the tsunami in its tracks, there would be no need for conscience, awareness, morality or even a sense of danger or the unexpected. The highly dubious alternative is to blame all disasters, mistakes and human tragedies as being the consequence of sin; original or otherwise.

Briefly going back to the tale of young Joe, and his untimely death, I vividly recall going around and telling everyone about it, with the usual comments. "Poor Joe"  "He didn't deserve it." "That's a tragedy" etc etc.

All of them were true, but nothing could prepare me for one reaction.

First there was a stunned silence, and then a pair of arms reached out to embrace me, and the words, "Oh no! I'm so sorry; you must be devastated."

If there is a God, he was right there at that moment, and the arms which embraced me may well have been his; caring, loving and healing the pain. At the time, it was tangible enough, and I didn't doubt the sincerity of it for one moment.

It's the same as the massive donation the people of the UK made to aid the victims of the Thailand Tsunami ; arms embracing people in their pain and grief, from half way around the world; the usual Thai smiles swept away for a short while.

It's very easy to believe that God is there when everything is seen to be positive, constructive and well ordered, but the world and the people who inhabit it simply do not fit into these categories; the ever present possibilities of natural disaster, human error, destruction and negative outcomes at least as probable, and all amounting to a type of chaos for which we have no answers and for which we can never prepare.


MM

[David Pinnegar]

Dear MM

We have both described events which score positively on "unlikely" and "constructive intervention" scales.

By the standards of those who require God to be an Intelligent _Being_ _"who"_ art in heaven, I am an atheist by regarding God to be a manifestation of a ?mechanical? force inherent in the universe which does some pretty peculiar and amazing things from which we are able to learn and which we are here in order to learn how to handle. This force is a God _"which"_ art in heaven.

We have two viewpoints, perhaps, which perhaps lead to the same thing.

Perhaps the events which I describe and others which I observe on a frequent basis, I might interpret as being the act of God which works in my life, whereas the events you describe you might interpret as being random and to which you apply the response of God in your life. The reality therefore is that whilst I might start with the predisposition to the idea of God leading to life created by God, you might start with a predisposition to coping with events randomly irrespective of God, but responding with the Love of God, you produce the idea of God leading to life created by God.

It is the capacity of the human to be conscious that enables the human to recognise the process of "God" being the process of "Creation" and "constructive results" and thereby distinguishes the human from the animals. There are humans not conscious of this who therefore behave like animals.

Perhaps in the succinctness of this summary, various rather longer perhaps more nebulous posts above might be better clarified.

This thread has particular validity, I beleive, in addressing fundamental issues:
mumbo-junbo of religion vs. "reason"
superstition vs. faith
and perhaps a good deal more relating to fundamental views of religious perspectives which are usefully questioned and rightfully discussed.

Perhaps what I am outlining in posts above is the way in which Christ invites us to have faith not merely in the response of God but in the events of God leading those who have Faith to have a certainty in their lives and in such way achieve an inner peace, an inner calmness, that is good for them and from which God-force can flow perhaps with greater fluidity. By attempting a description of the laying down of a mesh of interconnectedness moment by moment, micro-decision by micro-decision by each and every living and inanimate process driven by the "energy" of God - matter times circumstances squared, I have tried to apply a framework of rationality in which faith has reason living in a higher plane than superstition.

By reason of all people taking conscious decisions, those decisions result in circumstances that carry forward the consciousness of the decisions that created them.

Whilst the future may be obscure, because others have made decisions which involve you or your function in the future, if you are in the right place at the right time, those future circumstances will capture you in their butterfly net and within which you can fulfill the function required by the work of God, the work of the Creation Force.

It's in this way that the circumstances in which one finds oneself can be regarded as having been directed by the God-Force in one's life. Christianity thereby becomes for some a way of life. "When two or more meet together" . . . the power starts to be invoked.

It's very easy to believe that God is there when everything is seen to be positive, constructive and well ordered, but the world and the people who inhabit it simply do not fit into these categories; the ever present possibilities of natural disaster, human error, destruction and negative outcomes at least as probable, and all amounting to a type of chaos for which we have no answers and for which we can never prepare.

That chaos and all such disasters were inherent in the old religion: Apollo was the Destroyer as well as the Creator and likewise, he was the bringer of plague whilst being the father of the god of medicine - Asclepius - and Yahweh himself had similar bivalent attributes. Likewise relating to both, it was Taboo to utter the name of God - in the name is the difference which cause peoples to argue, but there is in reality only one - that Force of Creation.

Inherent in the Force of Creation is the destruction that is necessary in rearrangement for better creation.

One can view the function of Judas as a negative acting person, akin to anti-matter, bringing purposed destruction within the story to achieve the fulfillment of the action to better creation.

The Janacek opera "The Cunning Little Vixen" brings these themes to life. The Vixen is the herione with whom one is led to sympathise and yet her demise by the gamekeeper's shot is seen to be purely natural with the music rolling on after only the expression of a moment's pathos, and later the Gamekeeper who returns later in his cycle meets with the Vixen's children and the frog's grandchildren. It's in this way that the Creation Force pays little regard to the individual, and as Eric pointed out in another thread, http://www.organmatters.com/index.php/topic,1374.msg6523.html#msg6523 that it's the species which is immortal rather than the individual.

However, the point of the above is that Christ's second commandment, of love, is both comprehensible and comprehensive and effective in its consequences but his first is altogether more celebral and difficult to come to terms with.

It is likewise difficult to see a bicycle and contemplate that one can ride it supported in two dimensions but unstable and unsupported in the third. The bicycle is supported in the up and down dimension, and the forward backward dimension, but not left and right in directions that we can fall.

Without circumstances, or the thoughts that lead to them, the mind is as unstable as the bicycle at rest.

It requires a degree of faith in the power of an unseen momentum to be able to ride the bicycle and not fall off but when achieved it can carry one far.

The function of the positive consequences of unlikely events within a construct of faith is likewise. Recognising the spirit (idea) of God (life force, creation force) and its interaction with our lives in the product of matter with circumstances as a momentum, the product of mass with velocity, is that momentum that carries us far on the velocipede of faith which is both cause and effect of Christ's first commandment.

In walking on the water, Jesus is saying to us that by reason of his first commandment, the human consciousness can find a momentum even without the support of a seen dimension. Finding that faith is as difficult as learning to ride the bicycle, and those that don't try cannot understand how it is possible.

Am I an atheist by regarding "God" as the product of the mechanical forces of the universe?

Best wishes

David P

[KB7DQH]

It's in this way that the Creation Force pays little regard to the individual, and as Eric pointed out in another thread, http://www.organmatters.com/index.php/topic,1374.msg6523.html#msg6523 that it's the species which is immortal rather than the individual.

UUUhhhh....  ???  :-[ :o

I am not sure how you were able to make your argument above based on what I had quoted.  I read it a bit differently. Especially when one considers what the Apostle Paul wrote in his first letter to the Corinthians...  The individual plays a HUGE part in the whole scheme... and emphasizes the importance of Jesus' "second commandment".

Am I an atheist by regarding "God" as the product of the mechanical forces of the universe?

A musical analogy... "the product of the mechanical forces of the universe" could be thought of as... wait for it... an Organ!  The Father, Son, Holy Spirit, the "Three-in-One" as "composer" and "Man" as the organist... So I suppose I am making the argument that "God" created, and controls, "the product of the mechanical forces of the universe"... 

Eric
KB7DQH

[David Pinnegar]

It's in this way that the Creation Force pays little regard to the individual, and as Eric pointed out in another thread, http://www.organmatters.com/index.php/topic,1374.msg6523.html#msg6523 that it's the species which is immortal rather than the individual.

UUUhhhh....  ???  :-[ :o

I am not sure how you were able to make your argument above based on what I had quoted. 

Dear Eric

Actually this argument is a bit of a sideshow to the main thrust . . . but for the record your post quoted:

Mankind is, in principle, an immortal species. Unlike the mere animals, our so-called "death" is not the end for what we have developed to become our own higher form of life: insofar as we rely on those specifically creative, voluntary powers lacking among the beasts. We are to be defined properly by the true meaning which is embodied, not in our deaths, but in the proper further consequence of our mortal existence during and beyond our life-span, an existence whose meaning is that by which we may justly hope that our coming and passing shall lift our species to a still higher quality of existence, all done in our given power as an intentionally creative being, an accomplishment made in the course of the passing of each new generation to rise to an intended higher mission than that before.

and in fact, putting our own pleasures second to that which we build for our future generations first, we are loving our neighbours of the future time as ourselves. This is a thought that the consumers of the last generation had far from their minds. In answer to energy profligacy their attitude was simply "Why should I care: oil won't run out in my lifetime".

But this thread is not about issues of life after death and immortality: it is the faith and the energy which drives our current lives, and the interconnectedness of circumstances that makes the whole thing work . . .

By attempting a description of the laying down of a mesh of interconnectedness moment by moment, micro-decision by micro-decision by each and every living and inanimate process driven by the "energy" of God - matter times circumstances squared, I have tried to apply a framework of rationality in which faith has reason living in a higher plane than superstition.

By reason of all people taking conscious decisions, those decisions result in circumstances that carry forward the consciousness of the decisions that created them.

Whilst the future may be obscure, because others have made decisions which involve you or your function in the future, if you are in the right place at the right time, those future circumstances will capture you in their butterfly net and within which you can fulfill the function required by the work of God, the work of the Creation Force.

It's in this way that the circumstances in which one finds oneself can be regarded as having been directed by the God-Force in one's life. Christianity thereby becomes for some a way of life. "When two or more meet together" . . . the power starts to be invoked.

. . .

Christ's second commandment, of love, is both comprehensible and comprehensive and effective in its consequences but his first is altogether more celebral and difficult to come to terms with.

It is likewise difficult to see a bicycle and contemplate that one can ride it supported in two dimensions but unstable and unsupported in the third. The bicycle is supported in the up and down dimension, and the forward backward dimension, but not left and right in directions that we can fall.

Without circumstances, or the thoughts that lead to them, the mind is as unstable as the bicycle at rest.

It requires a degree of faith in the power of an unseen momentum to be able to ride the bicycle and not fall off but when achieved it can carry one far.

The function of the positive consequences of unlikely events within a construct of faith is likewise. Recognising the spirit (idea) of God (life force, creation force) and its interaction with our lives in the product of matter with circumstances as a momentum, the product of mass with velocity, is that momentum that carries us far on the velocipede of faith which is both cause and effect of Christ's first commandment.

In walking on the water, Jesus is saying to us that by reason of his first commandment, the human consciousness can find a momentum even without the support of a seen dimension. Finding that faith is as difficult as learning to ride the bicycle, and those that don't try cannot understand how it is possible.

Best wishes

David P

[MusingMuso]

Dear MM

We have both described events which score positively on "unlikely" and "constructive intervention" scales.

By the standards of those who require God to be an Intelligent _Being_ _"who"_ art in heaven, I am an atheist by regarding God to be a manifestation of a ?mechanical? force inherent in the universe which does some pretty peculiar and amazing things from which we are able to learn and which we are here in order to learn how to handle. This force is a God _"which"_ art in heaven.

We have two viewpoints, perhaps, which perhaps lead to the same thing.

Perhaps the events which I describe and others which I observe on a frequent basis, I might interpret as being the act of God which works in my life, whereas the events you describe you might interpret as being random and to which you apply the response of God in your life. The reality therefore is that whilst I might start with the predisposition to the idea of God leading to life created by God, you might start with a predisposition to coping with events randomly irrespective of God, but responding with the Love of God, you produce the idea of God leading to life created by God.

It is the capacity of the human to be conscious that enables the human to recognise the process of "God" being the process of "Creation" and "constructive results" and thereby distinguishes the human from the animals. There are humans not conscious of this who therefore behave like animals.

Perhaps in the succinctness of this summary, various rather longer perhaps more nebulous posts above might be better clarified.

This thread has particular validity, I beleive, in addressing fundamental issues:
mumbo-junbo of religion vs. "reason"
superstition vs. faith
and perhaps a good deal more relating to fundamental views of religious perspectives which are usefully questioned and rightfully discussed.

Perhaps what I am outlining in posts above is the way in which Christ invites us to have faith not merely in the response of God but in the events of God leading those who have Faith to have a certainty in their lives and in such way achieve an inner peace, an inner calmness, that is good for them and from which God-force can flow perhaps with greater fluidity. By attempting a description of the laying down of a mesh of interconnectedness moment by moment, micro-decision by micro-decision by each and every living and inanimate process driven by the "energy" of God - matter times circumstances squared, I have tried to apply a framework of rationality in which faith has reason living in a higher plane than superstition.

By reason of all people taking conscious decisions, those decisions result in circumstances that carry forward the consciousness of the decisions that created them.

Whilst the future may be obscure, because others have made decisions which involve you or your function in the future, if you are in the right place at the right time, those future circumstances will capture you in their butterfly net and within which you can fulfill the function required by the work of God, the work of the Creation Force.

It's in this way that the circumstances in which one finds oneself can be regarded as having been directed by the God-Force in one's life. Christianity thereby becomes for some a way of life. "When two or more meet together" . . . the power starts to be invoked.

It's very easy to believe that God is there when everything is seen to be positive, constructive and well ordered, but the world and the people who inhabit it simply do not fit into these categories; the ever present possibilities of natural disaster, human error, destruction and negative outcomes at least as probable, and all amounting to a type of chaos for which we have no answers and for which we can never prepare.

That chaos and all such disasters were inherent in the old religion: Apollo was the Destroyer as well as the Creator and likewise, he was the bringer of plague whilst being the father of the god of medicine - Asclepius - and Yahweh himself had similar bivalent attributes. Likewise relating to both, it was Taboo to utter the name of God - in the name is the difference which cause peoples to argue, but there is in reality only one - that Force of Creation.

Inherent in the Force of Creation is the destruction that is necessary in rearrangement for better creation.

One can view the function of Judas as a negative acting person, akin to anti-matter, bringing purposed destruction within the story to achieve the fulfillment of the action to better creation.

The Janacek opera "The Cunning Little Vixen" brings these themes to life. The Vixen is the herione with whom one is led to sympathise and yet her demise by the gamekeeper's shot is seen to be purely natural with the music rolling on after only the expression of a moment's pathos, and later the Gamekeeper who returns later in his cycle meets with the Vixen's children and the frog's grandchildren. It's in this way that the Creation Force pays little regard to the individual, and as Eric pointed out in another thread, http://www.organmatters.com/index.php/topic,1374.msg6523.html#msg6523 that it's the species which is immortal rather than the individual.

However, the point of the above is that Christ's second commandment, of love, is both comprehensible and comprehensive and effective in its consequences but his first is altogether more celebral and difficult to come to terms with.

It is likewise difficult to see a bicycle and contemplate that one can ride it supported in two dimensions but unstable and unsupported in the third. The bicycle is supported in the up and down dimension, and the forward backward dimension, but not left and right in directions that we can fall.

Without circumstances, or the thoughts that lead to them, the mind is as unstable as the bicycle at rest.

It requires a degree of faith in the power of an unseen momentum to be able to ride the bicycle and not fall off but when achieved it can carry one far.

The function of the positive consequences of unlikely events within a construct of faith is likewise. Recognising the spirit (idea) of God (life force, creation force) and its interaction with our lives in the product of matter with circumstances as a momentum, the product of mass with velocity, is that momentum that carries us far on the velocipede of faith which is both cause and effect of Christ's first commandment.

In walking on the water, Jesus is saying to us that by reason of his first commandment, the human consciousness can find a momentum even without the support of a seen dimension. Finding that faith is as difficult as learning to ride the bicycle, and those that don't try cannot understand how it is possible.

Am I an atheist by regarding "God" as the product of the mechanical forces of the universe?

Best wishes

David P

Dear David,


In some ways, I have a certain respect for those brave souls who toe the fundamentalist line; usually at odds with society and the vagaries of changing fashion. Theirs is an enviable world of certainty, where obstacles to faith are simply rubbished or eliminated altogether; any alternative viewpoint immediately branded heresy.

Therefore, to answer your last question first, expounding the idea of God being created as aconsequence of creation itself, would mean that you would be branded a heretic: possibly even burned at the stake had you lived 400 years ago.

I think we all share a particular problem, in that the Bible, (as a collection of writings), was spliced together in such a way as to create a time-line sequence of events, commencing with the God who created heaven & earth, a Messiah who brought  promise of salvation and the fulfilment of prophecy, the subsequent struggles to establish the church and the speculative ventures into theological clairvoyance and the last day of judgement.

I don't find any of that surprising, just as I don't find it difficult to understand the limited perspectives of a flat earth, a total lack of knowledge about undiscovered continents and a sense of awe at what lies above, beyond and in a mythical heaven.

That sort of belief, (based on very restricted knowledge and a lack of reliable and replicable evidence), has caused major fault-lines to develop across the ensuing centuries, and the person who states that the earth revolves around the sun, that the earth is round, that the universe commenced with an inconceivable "big bang" or that 95% of matter is "dark matter," will immediately find themselves at odds with those who choose to believe in the cosy certainties of the Bible; no matter how dubious the evidence and no matter how great the gulf between science and religion.

Unfortunately, if science has delivered one essential truth, it is the fact that instead of believing a couple of dozen impossible things before breakfast, we now have to believe hundreds. Just as the Biblical scribes were great story-tellers, so too are cosmologists to-day. Unfortunately, the handbook to the cosmos is still in the writing, and the task of completing it may never end. It is for this reason that I simply do not accept the "Alpha & Omega" of a beginning and end "to all things", and as a consequence, I will probably steadfastly refuse to recite the words of the creeds to my dying day. I can only comment personally, for what I may believe is vastly outweighed by the things I cannot believe, and I'm sure I am not alone. I think that makes me a heretic too, even though I would be the first to acknowledge that something fairly exotic carries the responsibility for creation.


The Bible is far more than a religious discourse, for within the pages, you will find everything: law, politics, vivid accounts of epic struggles, tribal lineage, the proclaimed faith and destiny of specific people as well as a lot of common sense. I would actually question whether we, as modern individuals, can ever hope to understand the writing style and much of the implied relevance to life to-day.


I feel that even the attempt to rationalise or explain the creation and/or the creator, is either  doomed to certain failure or tantamount  to blasphemy; limiting even the idea of God to our own, miserable perceptions.

Joined up thinking will always  confound and confuse, because even the best science struggles to accurately gather information, so there can never be a "rational" approach to religion. The danger we face in trying to piece together "the idea" of God as a piece of scriptural and Biblical continuity which is compatible with science, is that the individual pieces of the jig-saw will only fit together with the aid of a large hammer, and even if we could create a broadly acceptable melange , it would be no better, (and possibly  no worse), than that  achieved by those who first cobbled the Bible together into a single tome.

Isaac Newton or William Blake?

The conflicts between belief and faith are nothing new, and it is all part of the working chaos with which we are surrounded at all times .

Best,

MM