tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post540956216638327850..comments2024-03-22T06:31:42.929-05:00Comments on Wry Thoughts About Religion: Outer Space, Religion, and the BibleUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-38985872072539468222022-05-08T10:27:39.164-05:002022-05-08T10:27:39.164-05:00Hi Gene,
I think that people do experience "n...Hi Gene,<br />I think that people do experience "nothing" in various specific ways. "nothing" is the absence of everything. And we can experience absence or lack. For example, silence is the absence of sound and we do experience silence; absolute darkness is the absence of light and we do experience darkness. Following the death of a loved one, we experience their absence or the lack of their presence.<br /> Cordially, Charlie Charles Hedrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11285420936166236724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-89525869665978879992022-05-06T12:38:45.304-05:002022-05-06T12:38:45.304-05:00Hi Charlie,
Do you have an opinion about what the...Hi Charlie,<br /><br />Do you have an opinion about what the chances are that 3000 years from now someone will be writing a blog and conclude that "the modern scientific view" of the cosmos was "seriously flawed if not completely incorrect?" <br /><br />Also, do you have a source and interpretation for the phrase "edge of the universe." To my way of thinking there is no way to experience those words. If there is nothing on the other side of the edge, humans cannot experience "nothing," and if there's something on the other side of the edge, then its only a relative edge, but humans have no way of experiencing what it would be. <br /><br />Gene Stecher<br />Chambersburg, PAAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-37172772911400439732022-05-05T14:29:16.098-05:002022-05-05T14:29:16.098-05:00Good Afternoon Bill,
Thank you for weighing in on ...Good Afternoon Bill,<br />Thank you for weighing in on the issue.<br />I would describe the modern scientific view of the cosmos as limited. It is a narrative created around what can be known of the cosmos. But I would not describe it as seriously flawed.The standard that I am using to compare the two is What Is. The Biblical narrative measured against what can be seen of the cosmos is seriously flawed, if not completely incorrect. <br /> Why am I not able to "measure both cosmologies using the same metric"? The bible may be arguing for "who" created the cosmos, but it is also describing What Is and its description is seriously flawed when compared to What is.<br />Cordially,<br />Charlie<br />Charles Hedrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11285420936166236724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-73339960956343650112022-05-05T08:35:20.239-05:002022-05-05T08:35:20.239-05:00You have written another interesting essay that st...You have written another interesting essay that stimulates thought. I’m not sure I can agree with everything, though.<br />Your assessment of the biblical concept of the cosmos as seriously flawed, disqualifying it as a reliable resource seems to assume our modern scientific concept of the cosmos as a less flawed, more reliable concept.<br />We can only designate a concept as unreliable or flawed if we evaluate it according to some standard. Your critique of the ancient biblical cosmology considers it less logically convincing than modern scientific cosmology. I submit that we cannot measure both cosmologies using the same metric, because the two cosmologies were crafted to achieve entirely, even opposing, understandings.<br />Premodern cosmology starts with a story of how things came to be in order to answer the question of *why* they came to be, whereas scientific cosmology starts with the existence of things as a given, in order to craft a story answering the question of *how* they came to be.<br />Since they function to accomplish very different purposes in human awareness, I’m not sure we can conclude that the cosmology assumed by biblical writers is flawed relative to our modern one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-47972741292558249132022-05-02T11:03:47.601-05:002022-05-02T11:03:47.601-05:00Hi Charlie, thanks for making correction. I agree...Hi Charlie, thanks for making correction. I agree with you that Bible has limitations. Yet science itself has limits. We are ignorant of many things in universe. Science is trying to expand our knowledge, day after day. Our view of Bible has changed much with the centuries, but it still bears witness to almighty God. <br />Thanks<br />Paul RizzutoPAULYRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13958421646805026598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-26437028308786949512022-05-02T07:12:43.358-05:002022-05-02T07:12:43.358-05:00Lack of information on my part. Thanks for the cor...Lack of information on my part. Thanks for the correction. See my adjustment to the blog essay.<br />CharlieCharles Hedrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11285420936166236724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-31271127374928425462022-05-02T06:37:47.905-05:002022-05-02T06:37:47.905-05:00Thanks for the recommendation, Bob! I have not see...Thanks for the recommendation, Bob! I have not seen the film yet, but will check it out<br />CharlieCharles Hedrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11285420936166236724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-47070216433201351112022-05-01T14:11:47.560-05:002022-05-01T14:11:47.560-05:00As always, thanks, Charlie! Thinking about space, ...As always, thanks, Charlie! Thinking about space, I'm a fan of the movie, Interstellar, which is based on the premise that earth becomes uninhabitable, forcing humankind to seek a way to emigrate to somewhere, anywhere out there in space, where a new home might be found. A story with deep humanity, great special effects, and haunting music. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_(film)Bob Fowlernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-40881625924569359202022-05-01T12:38:09.380-05:002022-05-01T12:38:09.380-05:00Charles, age of cosmos is 13.77 billion years, htt...Charles, age of cosmos is 13.77 billion years, https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-resources/age-of-the-universe/ ; age of planet Earth is 4.54 billion years, https://www.nationalgeographic.org/topics/resource-library-age-earth/?q=&page=1&per_page=25 . "Outer space" existed long before our planet. How can you say they "came into existence simultaneously?" PAULYRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13958421646805026598noreply@blogger.com