< Back Faith Is Not Belief Without Evidence Joseph Hinman "Faith is not belief without evidence; it's the content of a relationship with God and is based upon the private experience of God's love." I am tired of hearing atheists say "faith is believing things without evidence." No definition of faith in Christianity says that. Let's Get this out of the way up front. Heb 11:1: faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the argument (argumentum) of things that are not apparent. Most translations say "evidence of things not seen."This does not say faith is belief without evidence it says faith itself is a kind of evidence because it points to the reality that caused one to have faith. The most important dictionary in theology is the Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology. There are two kinds, one for theologians and one for ideas. Let's consult the latter. faith (Gr. pistis, Lat. fides, “trust,” “belief”) In Christianity, belief, trust, and obedience to God as revealed in Jesus Christ. It is the means of salvation (Eph. 2:8–9) or eternal life (John 6:40). Faith affects all dimensions of one’s existence: intellect, emotions, and will. See also salvation.[1] According to that definition there is nothing like a lack of evidence. There Is no hint that faith involves a lack of evidence. Consulting the same source for different uses of the term "faith:" Faith, explicit (Lat. fides explicita) Faith in that of which one has knowledge. Thus the term may be understood as referring to what one professes to believe because of what is known.[2] Here faith is equated with knowledge. Since evidence involves knowledge and builds on knowledge it would seem that faith is actually dependent upon evidence rather than being without it. Faith, implicit (Lat. fides implicita) The Roman Catholic view that one believes as true “what the church believes,” even without certain knowledge. It was rejected by the Protestant Reformers as a true faith because the element of knowledge was lacking.[3] The Catholic view seems closer to being without evidence, but not an exact fit. In any case that view was rejected by the reformers and is not really compatible with the Protestant view.The Protestant view rests upon knowledge, which again, would have to involve evidence at some point. Thus direct contradiction to the atheist bromide. Then we turn to the protestant notion of "saving faith." That is faith that saves. Remember Paul tells us salvation is by Grace through faith:“For by grace you have been saved through faith” (Ephesians 2:8).[4] Faith, saving. The gift of God through the Holy Spirit whereby one accepts and believes the promises of the Gospel as the reception of salvation through the life and the work of Jesus Christ. One is incorporated into Christ, participates in his benefits, and is an heir of eternal life. [4] No indication is given that there is no preliminary basis for belief which might involve evidence.Before one can trust God one must believe that God is. None of these definitions preclude basing that initial belief upon evidence. It is after one accepts the conviction that God is real that faith might supersede evidence in matters such as trusting God for salvation. Let's turn to some major figures in Christian theology to see if they define faith as belief without evidence: St. Augustine Faith, to Augustine, is a humble posture of seeking and confession, in which the individual confesses their sin and brokenness before God, and by his Grace, is cleansed. The individual surrenders to the God who is already present in the soul. This initial work begins the process of cleansing the soul so that it can see clearly. As the individual continues to seek God, the soul is continually cleansed as a gracious process, which slowly flakes away the filth of the Fall. Augustine believed that much could be known through Platonic meditation: eternal things and God’s presence could be apprehended, but God could be known only for a moment.[5] Thomas Aquinas Popular accounts of religion sometimes construe faith as a blind, uncritical acceptance of myopic doctrine. According to Richard Dawkins, “faith is a state of mind that leads people to believe something—it doesn’t matter what—in the total absence of supporting evidence...Such a view of faith might resonate with contemporary skeptics of religion. But as we shall see, this view is not remotely like the one Aquinas—or historic Christianity for that matter—endorses. To begin with, Aquinas takes faith to be an intellectual virtue or habit, the object of which is God (ST IIaIIae 1.1; 4.2). There are other things that fall under the purview of faith, such as the doctrine of the Trinity and the Incarnation. But we do not affirm these specific doctrines unless they have some relation to God. According to Aquinas, these doctrines serve to explicate God’s nature and provide us with a richer understanding of the one in whom our perfect happiness consists (Ibid.).[6] Here again knowledge, an intellectual thing, compatible with evidence. How could faith be based upon knowledge and be an intellectual act and yet without evidence? By intellectual he means one consciously assents to belief. Marin Luther ... faith is God's work in us, that changes us and gives new birth from God. (John 1:13). It kills the Old Adam and makes us completely different people. It changes our hearts, our spirits, our thoughts and all our powers. It brings the Holy Spirit with it. Yes, it is a living, creative, active and powerful thing, this faith. Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn't stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without ceasing. Anyone who does not do good works in this manner is an unbeliever. He stumbles around and looks for faith and good works, even though he does not know what faith or good works are. Yet he gossips and chatters about faith and good works with many words. Faith is a living, bold trust in God's grace, so certain of God's favor that it would risk death a thousand times trusting in it. Such confidence and knowledge of God's grace makes you happy, joyful and bold in your relationship to God and all creatures. The Holy Spirit makes this happen through faith. Because of it, you freely, willingly and joyfully do good to everyone, serve everyone, suffer all kinds of things, love and praise the God who has shown you such grace.[7] John Wesley With a deep conviction, Wesley repeatedly stresses the necessity of faith. ‘Saving faith is a sure trust and confidence which a man has in God, that by the merits of Christ his sins are forgiven, and he is reconciled to the favour of God.’1 It is also clear that Wesley sees faith as a gift of God, although he does not emphasize that very much.[8] There is an initial coming to faith where one decides "I do believe in God." In that stage evidence is not a contradiction to belief. Most of the activity of faith involves personal trust in God's salvation and his providential care. In this regard evidece is irrelivant, unless we want to think of the content of personal experience of God as evidence.It is evidence of God's goodness. I think for the most part evidence is irrelevant to faith. Faith is not belief without evidence, it's the content of a relationship with God and is based upon the private experience of God's love. Source: This originally appeared in Metacrock's Blog and is seen here without any edits. Notes [1] "Faith," The Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms,SECOND EDITION, Revised and Expanded,Donald K. McKim ed.,Louiscille Kentucky:John Knox Press, 2014. https://www.mybibleteacher.net/uploads/1/2/4/6/124618875/the_westminster_dictionary_of_theological_terms_by_donald_k._mckim__z-lib.org_.epub.pdf [2] Ibid. [3] Ibid. [4] Ibid. [5] Mark Hansard, "Faith and Reason, Part 2 Augustine," Intervaristy: Emerging Scholars Network, (August 18,2018) https://blog.emergingscholars.org/2018/08/faith-and-reason-part-2-augustine-summer-2018-series/ [6]Shawn Floyd,"Aquinas Philosoph8ical Theology,"Internet Encyclopedia of Philosphy, https://iep.utm.edu/thomas-aquinas-political-theology/#SH3a [7]An excerpt from "An Introduction to St. Paul's Letter to the Romans," Luther's German Bible of 1522 by Martin Luther, 1483-1546. Translated by Rev. Robert E. Smith from DR. MARTIN LUTHER'S VERMISCHTE DEUTSCHE SCHRIFTEN. Johann K. Irmischer, ed. Vol. 63 Erlangen: Heyder and Zimmer, 1854), pp.124-125. [EA 63:124-125] https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/martin-luthers-definition-faith [8]J. W. Maris, "John Wesley's Concept of Faith," Christian Library taken from Lux Mundi 2010 https://www.christianstudylibrary.org/article/john-wesleys-concept-faith https://www.amazon.com/dp/0982408765 Joseph Hinman's new book is God, Science and Ideology. Hinman argues that atheists and skeptics who use science as a barrier to belief in God are not basing doubt on science itself but upon an ideology that adherer's to science in certain instances. This ideology, "scientism," assumes that science is the only valid form of knowledge and rules out religious belief. Hinman argues that science is neutral with respect to belief in God … In this book Hinman with atheist positions on topics such as consciousness and the nature of knowledge, puts to rest to arguments of Lawrence M. Krauss, Victor J. Stenger, and Richard Dawkins, and delimits the areas for potential God arguments. Click above to return to Winter 2024. Previous Next

< Back Football and Quantum Mechanics David Cowles “This is what we do on Sunday nights and Mondays during football season: we play 'what if' and 'if only'.” The scoreboard clock reads 00:00: Philadelphia Sunshine – 27; Buffalo Blizzard – 26. Game over? Yes…and no. Time has expired, but the Blizzard scored a touchdown on the last play of the game, so they still have a chance to add one or two PATs ( points after touchdown ) to their score. So, yes, the game is ‘over’ but we still don’t know who won. It’s like most 21 st century US presidential elections; better still, it’s like any Iowa Caucus! (Heck, they’re still looking for Paul Simon to tell him that he won the 1988 caucus after all; and as for the 2020 caucus, well, they’ve just stopped counting.) But I digress. According to the rules of the NFL, the Blizzard can kick a short field goal for one point; game tied! Overtime! Or they can run (or pass) the ball into the end zone for two points. All eyes are on the coach; will she go for one point, potentially sending the game into OT, or two, letting everything ride on just one play? Power outage! (Hey, it’s Buffalo; it snows!) Even cell service is disrupted. We won’t know the outcome of the game until the power comes back on…or until the newspaper gets delivered in the morning…or the morning after that. Et voilà , you have the longest game ever played…even though it ended hours ago! Did I mention, I have houseguests? Huge football fans – they invited themselves for a ‘sleepover’ so they could be ‘closer to the stadium’ where the game was to be played. Irony : Because of the forecast of heavy ‘lake effect snow’ in Buffalo, it was decided at the last minute to play the game in Philadelphia, where it’s always sunny; but I’m still stuck with my houseguests! Who knows for how long now! It could be worse. At least my guests and I can communicate; we all speak football fluently. Traditionally after every game, fans are required to spend 36 hours reflecting on why what happened, happened (WWHH). If only this … If it hadn’t been for that . Would-a, could-a, should-a. It’s what we do! Normally, this sort of retrospective is only possible once the outcome of the game has been determined. Simply put, how can we identify the causes of an outcome we don’t yet know? To salvage this hyperextended sleepover, we need to be able to talk football, but apparently, we can’t. Edwin Schrödinger to the rescue! A century ago, he placed the world’s most famous cat, alive and kicking, into a soundproof box – don’t worry, it was ventilated – and he set up his experimental apparatus so that the life or death of the cat would be determined by the occurrence, or not, of a totally unpredictable quantum event. Where was PETA? At any point in time the cat could be alive or dead; we don’t know. But instead of throwing up our hands, Schrödinger suggested we treat the cat as both alive and dead. Decades later, Richard Feynman applied this same technique to the entire field of quantum phenomena: he called his technique, “Sum over Histories." One of my visitors happened to be a quantum mechanic. He told us all about the Quantum Qat ; much obliged! He suggested we apply Schrödinger’s method to our ‘Football Game from Limbo’. First, assume that Buffalo has won the game; then reverse it and assume that Philly has prevailed. Here’s how it works: Assume Buffalo won! They won because their receiver made a one-handed, fingertip catch in the end zone, dragging his toes to stay in bounds. They won because Philly missed a chip shot field goal in the second period. They won because somehow the refs missed a Buffalo defender’s flagrant interference with a Philly pass receiver in the end zone. Now assume Philly won! They won because one of Buffalo’s touchdowns was brought back for a dubious ‘holding’ call. They won because Buffalo fumbled the ball on Philly’s five yard line. They won because Philly’s QB broke not one but two open field tackles to score on a busted play. This is what we do on Sunday nights and Mondays during football season: We play ‘what if’ and ‘if only’. It’s fun, and we’re confident that our collective wisdom somehow enriches the noosphere. So six events, each highly improbable in its own right, but each perfectly capable of determining the outcome of the game. If only we knew the outcome! All six of our ‘what if, if only’ events happened, there’s no changing that! But the meaning and significance of these events depends on the illusive outcome. Cosmology is like a good murder mystery: until we know who dunnit , we can’t separate the clues from the red herrings. We know the putative causes , we know their potential effects, but we can’t assess their actual impact on the outcome of the game because we don’t know that outcome…yet. Under these circumstances, can we call them ‘causes’ at all? All we can say for sure is that these six events preceded the game’s outcome. Post hoc ergo propter hoc? When results are known, events become causes; until then, they are just events. In and of itself, each of the six key events is complete and determined. What is not determined is the meaning or significance of those events. Games are fun to watch, and stats are fun to study, but at the end of the day, the only thing that matters, that has meaning and significance outside the game itself, is the final score. There are no style points in American football. Only the final score transcends the game itself. It is the outcome of the game that converts some events into causes and others into anecdotes. So are we prepared to say that causality proceeds backwards from the effect rather than forward from the cause as normally assumed? It’s tricky. Results do follow causes in time, but events do not become causes until the effects themselves are known. Hmm. All we can say is this: there are events and, eventually, there are outcomes, and we know that those outcomes are massively related to the events that preceded them. To know which events among those precedent events, if any, deserve to be ranked as ‘causes’, you’ll need to put on your canonical conical science ‘cap’…yup, the one with the propeller on top! That’s it. We need to go back in time, change the result of a single play and see if and how that change impacts the results. We would need to do that for each of our so-called ‘causes’. Then we would need to try changing two or more events at once, measuring the impact of each combination, and so on. We have identified six events that, we think, might have been determinative of the outcome of the game. There are six potential causes , which can occur in 64 possible combinations, but with only two possible outcomes (no ties allowed). The engineering is daunting but, assuming you’ve licked the time travel thing, and assuming you don’t require any juice from the Greater Buffalo Power Grid, the conceptual problem is fairly simple. So far… Events do not happen in isolation. Our six causes occur in a sequence. Flipping the first event (A) may impact or even determine the outcome of the game; it also potentially impacts the other five events. A change in the value of A may independently trigger changes in the values of B, C, D, E, and/or F. How so? Event A, however it turns out, impacts the crowd, impacts player attitudes – the famous momentum – and impacts both teams’ subsequent strategic moves (play calls). A change in the value of A may (or may not) trigger a change in the value of B and the other four events. But a change in the value of B may trigger independent changes in the values of C, D, E, and/or F. And so on… As you can see, by changing the value of one event, A, we’ve triggered an ontological avalanche . But is this even what we mean by causality ? The phenomenon we call a football game is an example of a ‘chaotic system’. That is not to say that events happen at random; they do not! In fact, as we have seen, the causal bonds are incredibly strong. But unfortunately, they are ultimately indecipherable. All the king’s horses and all the king’s men and all the computing power on Planet Earth cannot convert a football into a deterministic algorithm. A butterfly flaps its wings on the 30 yard line and Gronk drops a pass in the end zone. Causal, yes; predictable, no! Event chains are not linear algorithms, they are massively nonlinear webs. But for us to make sense of the game, to have something to talk about, we have to talk about ‘highlights,’ and we have to link those highlights in a more or less straight line to the final score (once we have a final score). Does anyone think for a moment that this so-called analysis has anything to do with reality? We selected six putative ‘causes’ of the game’s output. Why not eight, or just 4? In fact, in our nonlinear world, every single thing that happens during the game, on or off the field, may cause the outcome. We live in a non-linear world – that’s a fancy way of saying, our lives are chaotic. What a surprise! But in order to function in this world, we often find it desirable to treat it as though it were a lattice of parallel causes. We function, we have fun, and we get stuff done, but we are relying on a model that is only accidentally related to the real world. A better model of an NFL game exists…but you won’t like it. There are approximately 120 plays in a typical NFL game. Each one of those plays is causa sui . Nothing is causally dependent on anything else. There are correlations all over the place, but no causation. Each play is a reaction to everything that’s happened up to that point in the game: the score, the location of the ball, the injuries, the sequence of plays called and the results of those plays, etc. But no event is in any way ‘caused’ by those things. Every play is unique; every play evolves freely and in unanticipated ways. Last night I saw a player go for an interception, miss, fall to the ground, get up, run back and tackle the receiver. Write an algorithm for that! Each event arises in reaction to proximate history. The closest thing (and it’s not even close!) to ‘a cause of Event A’ is the sum of everything that happened in the game prior to A. So, post hoc ergo propter hoc is as good as it gets. Everything causes everything else! In a massively nonlinear system, sequence is the closest we can come to causality. Football is, indeed, a metaphor for life – perhaps that’s why we’re so invested in it. Today’s a new day. You are the OC (offensive coordinator) of your life. What play will you call? How well will you execute? How will you modify your ‘play’ in response to unanticipated events during the day? How will you feel about the result? Do your best, stay safe, and good luck! (Let us know how it all works out.) Previous Next

< Back Who Are the Antichrist, the ‘Man of Lawlessness’, and the Beast? Ian Paul "Clever schemes and novel doctrines won't save us. Stay faithful to the truth of God in Jesus and live with confidence, even in these shaky times." For those engaged in end-times speculation, whether provoked by the Covid-19 pandemic, global warming, or war in Ukraine, there has been another rash of speculation about the identity of the Antichrist—that end times personal figure who is now somewhere secretly in the world but who will very soon be revealed. (It is worth noting, for the sake of perspective, that every perceived crisis since at least the 1960s has provoked such speculation. For earlier modern end-times expectation, see the example of the followers of William Miller , who predicted that Jesus would return in 1844.) I am not sure that anything I write here will persuade those committed to end-times schemes, in which the Book of Revelation predicts in detail our age alone (as if we are the most important generation that ever lived), but I think a lot of ordinary readers of the Bible are unsettled by such theories, and are not sure how to respond. Part of the reason for this is that such schemes look so coherent. Here is one, influential, example , part of Dispensational Premillennialism based on the teaching of J N Darby : The man of lawlessness in 2 Thessalonians 2:1–12 is the Antichrist who will come on the world scene at the beginning of the Day of the Lord. This Day, sometimes called the “end times,” starts after the rapture of the church in 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 (cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:1–11 ). It is good to note that the Day of the Lord is not a twenty-four-hour period of time; rather, it is an extended period of time that includes the seven-year tribulation, the return of Christ to put down all rebellion against Him, the 1,000-year reign of Christ on earth, the final defeat of Satan, and the Great White Throne Judgment. This looks very convincing—until you realise that the coherence of this scheme belongs entirely to the writer, and bears little or no relation to what the Bible actually says! The New Testament nowhere identifies the ‘man of lawlessness’ with the ‘antichrist’; it does not describe a ‘rapture’ of the church ( this arises from a poor misreading of 1 Thessalonians 4 ); nowhere does the NT mention a ‘ seven-year tribulation ‘; the 1,000-year reign of Christ is a literal reading of a symbolic text in Rev 20; and the ‘Day of the Lord’ which is everywhere in the NT described as a specific moment at the end of history has now been extended, in this scheme, to a period of more than 1,007 years! One of the key proponents of this kind of scheme in a previous generation, Hal Lindsay (who wrote The Late, Great Planet Earth ) actually admits that this is a ‘hopscotch’ approach to reading the Bible, taking one bit from one place and another from another in order to put together a picture like assembling the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. But look at the wonderful picture that results, is his defence! So it is worth noting from the outset the basic assumptions of this kind of approach. First, the Bible doesn’t actually make sense as a narrative as it is written; it needs some mysterious key to open up its meaning. Secondly, the truth about the ‘end times’ and Jesus’ return is a great big puzzle, and the truth of what will happen has been missed by most people in history—indeed, it continues to be missed by most people who simply read the Bible. Thirdly, we therefore need an authority figure who will help us put together the different pieces of the otherwise unintelligible text of the Bible, and we then find what we need to know not in reading the Bible, but in reading the writings and teaching of this important person. All these features make this approach perfect for an age of conspiracy theories—and offer a potential publishing bonanza, since all faithful Christians will need to buy their book! The best answer to all this is to return to the text, and what it actually says. So let’s look at the text of the Bible, and the passages about each of these three figures, and see what we can learn. The ‘man of lawlessness’ is only mentioned in one short passage, 2 Thess 2.1–12 . Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendour of his coming. The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness. There are some things here worth noting. First, Paul clearly thinks that, whoever this mysterious ‘man of lawlessness’ (ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας) is, he is ‘already at work’. This is clear from the fact that he ‘will set himself up in the temple’ which was still standing when Paul was writing (I am convinced by the arguments that 1 and 2 Thessalonians are early, are by Paul and not forgeries, and were written in quick succession to one another); there is no suggestion whatever in the text that ‘the temple’ here is used symbolically to refer to the people of God. Something is currently holding him back—and he is clearly a human figure, and not an angelic or demonic power. Secondly, Paul is referring rather obliquely and in summary form to something that he has explained in more detail to the Thessalonians, and we will never know the full explanation that he has already given. Like many issues in Paul, we wish that he has said more! But we need to face the reality that we do not know any more details, so have to decide whether it is worth speculating. But thirdly, and in answer to the dilemma of our ignorance, we can know the purpose of Paul’s teaching in this area—and it is not in order to encourage speculation or the drawing up of end-times calendars! On this, I think John Piper’s exposition is really helpful: But persecution and suffering are not the only issue at Thessalonica, and Paul, now in chapters 2 and 3, takes his instruction about the second coming to a new level of detail in dealing with this second issue. The issue is that some in the church have ceased to do their ordinary vocational jobs, and started to make a nuisance of themselves as busybodies, mooching off the other Christians, since they’re not earning any money. And evidently, though Paul doesn’t say so explicitly, this delinquency is owing to a kind of hysteria in the community that the day of the Lord is not just near, but is already present. In other words, Paul is saying to them: don’t panic; you have not been left behind; there is no need to speculate; get on with living your lives, working with your hands, instead of dropping everything for the sake of end-times speculation. You can trust God who will ultimately triumph, no matter how bad things appear to be getting. As Martin Luther is believed to have said, ‘If I knew Jesus was coming tomorrow, I would still collect the rent and plant an apple tree’. Or we might say ‘Jesus is coming; look busy!’ It is also worth noting that this is a very minor point in Paul’s teaching about ‘the end times’. In Romans 8, he talks about the longing of the created order to be redeemed; in 1 Cor 15, he offers a long and detailed discussion about the implications of the resurrection at the end; all through his writings there is a constant sense of expectation, and the hope that confidence in the ultimate victory of God in the return of Jesus. And yet, only in this one passage is the ‘man of lawlessness’ mentioned. So it can hardly be claimed to be central to Paul’s teaching. The ‘antichrist’ is only mentioned in four verses in the NT, all in the letters of John: Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 1 John 2:18 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Messiah. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. 1 John 2:22 …but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world. 1 John 4:3 Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 2 John 7 Again, there are several things worth noticing simply by reading the text carefully. First, although the author does talk about ‘ the antichrist’ at several points, he is also clear that there have and continue to be many such people. Many ‘antichrists’ have already come; every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is of the antichrist, and ‘any such person’ who denies Jesus came in the flesh ‘is the antichrist’. Secondly, the eschatology of these passages is highly ‘realised’—that is, the writer talks as though he and his readers are already in the ‘end times’ when he says several times ‘it is the last hour’. This might look as though there was an expectation that Jesus would return in his lifetime, an expectation that was mistaken. But in fact it matches the language of the Fourth Gospel, which talks about ‘life of the age [to come]’ or ‘eternal life’ as though is starts now, rather than being something we have to wait for. This also agrees with Peter on the day of Pentecost, who quotes Joel 2’s description of the ‘last days’ and says that it is what is happening in the outpouring of the Spirit (‘This is that… Acts 2.16 ). And it agrees with Paul’s description of those who put their faith in Jesus: ‘If anyone is in Christian there is new creation’ ( 2 Cor 5.17 ). Thirdly, the concern here is (once more) nothing to do with ‘end times’ speculation and timetables, but to do with sound doctrine. The writer is encouraging his readers to stay true to the faith. Overall, the letters of John have two concerns: that his audience hold onto the truth about Jesus, and that they live out that truth in lives of love. We also need to note that the description of [the, many] antichrist[s] appears to have little or nothing in common with Paul’s description of the ‘man of lawlessness’ other than the theme of ‘deception’ and the concern that the believers should not be deceived by those who do not tell the truth. This is hardly a concern uniquely related to the ‘end times’…! With mentions in four verses, in two short circular letters, again this is hardly central to the theological concerns of the writers of the NT overall. Lastly, the beast is a central figure in the drama of the Book of Revelation. Although there are anticipations of the figure earlier in the text, the ‘beast from the sea’ is fully introduced in Rev 13 as one of an ‘evil trinity’ along with the dragon/Satan, and the ‘beast from the earth’ ( Rev 13.1 ) which later in the text is described as ‘the false prophet’. The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority. One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was filled with wonder and followed the beast. People worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, “Who is like the beast? Who can make war against it?” ( Rev 13.1–4 ) The beast from the sea look very much like the dragon which is described in chapter 12—and both together combine the features of the four beasts that emerge from the sea in Daniel 7, which many commentators believe symbolise the four great world empires of Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome. And far from making this beast future and mysterious, he appears to go to some lengths to help his readers understand who this beast is, by asking them to ‘calculate’ (the Greek term psephizo ) or work out, the number of the beast, which stands for a man’s name. For some time, there has been a strong scholarly consensus that 666 refers to Nero by means of a numerology known as gematria or isopsephism —adding the value of the letters in a word so that every word has a value, and equating two words with equal value. We know that Nero’s name was sometimes spelled with a final -n; ‘Neron Caesar’ when written in Greek, but transliterated into Hebrew letters adds up to 666 (see the image to the right for the sums). There are several significant pieces of supporting evidence for this. First, when you write the Greek for ‘beast’, therion, in Hebrew letters, you also arrive at 666, making it clear that 666 is the number of ‘the beast’. Secondly, when you do the same with ‘angel’ in Rev 21, you get the number 144. Third, an early manuscript from Oxyrhynchus in Egypt corrects 666 to 616, which you would do if you understood the gematria, but thought that ‘Nero’ should be spelled without the final n. (There isn’t really any other plausible explanation for why this variant should arise.) This ‘beast’ is identified with neither the ‘man of lawlessness’ in Paul nor the ‘antichrist’ in John, and in fact neither of these terms occur anywhere in Revelation. So where does this all get us? First, it is clear that the three terms belong to quite different traditions within the NT, and none of these three traditions attempts to make any specific connections with the others in terms of language—despite the fact that the later writers (of the Johannine letters and of the Book of Revelation) almost certainly knew Paul’s writings. But it is also clear that there is some kind of connection, particularly since the concern of all three writers appears to be to encourage his readers to stand firm in the truth of the apostolic teaching in the face of pressures from outside the Jesus community to renounce faith and pressures from within to distort the truth about Jesus. Here, Piper makes an interesting observation, but I think then reaches the wrong conclusion from it: Therefore, the man of lawlessness will be unparalleled in his ability to deceive, as 2 Thessalonians 2:10 says, “with all wicked deception for those who are perishing.” It really could be “in all deception of unrighteousness,” because we are going to see in just a moment that the way he deceives is by making unrighteousness seem pleasurable. (Notice how the word adikia is repeated in verses 10 and 12.) Again, I would argue, Paul is unpacking the prophecies made by Jesus. Jesus said, Then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. . . . For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. . . . So, if they say to you, “Look, he [one person!] is in the wilderness,” do not go out. If they say, “Look, he is in the inner rooms,” do not believe it. For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. ( Matthew 24:21 , 24 , 26–27 ) At the close of this climactic period of lawlessness and a great deception led by a person, Paul is saying, the coming of the Son of Man will be unmistakable. Like lightning flashing from horizon to horizon. Piper is noting the connections between Paul’s language in 2 Thess and Jesus’ teaching in the first half Matt 24. But what he does not notice is that Jesus’ teaching here is not about the distant (for him) future and a remote ‘end times’ that we might be living in, but what the disciples he is teaching will face in their lifetime . He makes this crystal clear by stating emphatically: Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. ( Matt 24.34 ). It is only in the second half of the chapter, from Matt 24.36 , that Jesus turns his attention to issues around ‘the end of the age’. There are connections too between Paul’s discussion of the man of lawlessness, who will ‘use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie’ ( 2 Thess 2.9 ) and the ‘signs and wonders’ performed by the second beast on behalf of the first in Rev 13.13–14 , but this is a description of magical tricks and propaganda performed by Roman rulers of which we have documentary evidence. In other words, both Paul and John are writing about things already happening in the world of their readers. The concern of all these texts is to encourage their readers: don’t be deceived by clever schemes and novel doctrines; don’t get caught up in ‘end-times’ speculation; stay faithful to the truth that God came to us in Jesus, and has made our salvation secure in him; and continue to live lives of industry, generosity and grace as you wait with confidence for his return in a world that is looking very shaky. We need the same encouragement! To find out more about what the NT says about eschatology, the end of the world, and living in hope, you might be interested in my Grove booklet on Kingdom, Hope and the End of the World . To find out more about how to read the Book of Revelation, see my Grove booklet or my commentary on Revelation in IVP’s Tyndale series . The image at the top is a detail of The Deeds of Antichrist by Luca Signorelli (1505). Published previously. This is a republished blog in full agreement with www.psephizo.com , the official website of autor Ian Paul. Ian Paul is a theologian, author, speaker, and academic consultant. He serves as Adjunct Professor for Fuller Theological Seminary ; Associate Minister for St Nic's, Nottingham , and Managing Editor for Grove Books . He is member of General Synod, a Mac user, and a chocoholic. He tweets at @psephizo . For a complete list of books he has either written or contributed to, go to https://www.psephizo.com/publications/ . Return to our Harvest Issue 2023 Previous Next

Get paid to write. Calling all writers with critical thoughts and ideas about theology, science, philosophy, Christian educacation, culture, and prayer. Aletheia Today is online magazine where science, theology, and philosophy converge. Submission Guidelines Write for us! As we step into a new year, Aletheia Today is thrilled to announce our refreshed publication schedule for 2025! Our new approach allows us to better align our content with the ancient seasonal celebrations we honor. Here’s what’s coming up: February 1 – “Groundhog Day”: Revisit overlooked “Hidden Gems” from AT’s archives. April 1 – “Resurrection” - Life…it’s what’s happening! June 1 – “Summer” - The seeds are sown; we await the harvest. August 1 – “Lammas” - First harvest, first fruits, Transubstantiation, Eucharist. October 1 – “Harvest” - Second harvest, The Kingdom of God. Football. December 1 – “Yule” - Celebrate the triumph of light over darkness. We’re excited about the opportunities this schedule creates for deeper collaboration with independent contributors and more focused content for our readers. Thank you for being part of this journey as we continue to explore the intersection philosophy, theology and science. Specs for All Submissions: All completed work must be submitted through the online submissions form. (See link below.) All submissions must include a title and credited image. All submissions must include a headshot and a short (100 words or less) author bio with social handles. All work must be original. We will republish the author's previously published essays with credit to and permission from the original publication only. We will not use any images without a credit. Submission Due Dates: We accept unsolicited submissions throughout the year. Writers’ Comp (paid for original work only, not republications): For feature length articles and short stories, $250 per published article or short story plus a $100 bonus once the author’s work has reached 100 unique views. For original prayers and poems, $100 per published piece plus a $50 bonus once the author’s work has reached 100 unique views. For questions about submissions, email editor@aletheiatoday.com . Feel free, but not required, to email us a proposal, pitch, or query to the email address above prior to submitting your completed work. To becomes an AT Contributor, submit your work online; click here .

“Our so-called World is a reflection without an object; it is the sound made by one hand clapping.” < Back Life is a Movie David Cowles Mar 1, 2024 “Our so-called World is a reflection without an object; it is the sound made by one hand clapping.” Have you ever been to the movies? Nothing’s better than a high-speed car chase projected on the big screen ( French Connection )…unless you prefer, like me, to watch Wally Shawn and Andre Gregory eating dinner in a fancy Manhattan restaurant for two hours ( My Dinner with Andre ). Either way, you experience motion as continuous…just like in real life. But that’s an illusion. In fact, you are seeing 2,000,000 static ‘frames’, uniquely ordered and sequentially displayed at a pace that creates the impression of continuous motion. You’ve just paid $18 for the privilege of being fooled. Real life isn’t like that at all… …Is it? What if the ‘continuous motion’ we seem to experience IRL is itself a cinematic illusion? What if the world actually consists of discrete events, somehow ‘edited’ into the unique order that we call spacetime? 2,000,000 distinct frames can be ordered in an unimaginable variety of sequences, only one of which corresponds perfectly to what we recognize as RL. According to Stephen Hawking, RL tracks the Second Law of Thermodynamics – it arranges events along a scale that reflects a steady increase in entropy. The events themselves are sui generis , free; the arrangement of those events in spacetime is not. So, life’s not a beach after all; it’s a movie ! And a ‘film’ is nothing but its 2,000,000 frames, presented at standard speed, in a unique order. The writing, acting, directing, staging, etc. are only relevant in so far as they are manifest in the frames. The director breaks up the continuous motion of ‘real life’ into discrete frames; the projectionist reintegrates those frames to generate the illusion of continuous motion on the screen. Over the millennia, a handful of philosophers have questioned this ‘spacetime centric’ model of reality: Parmenides, Zeno, Democritus, Whitehead, and Severino come to mind. According to them, it is…or it is not! If it is, it’s a matter of fact, an ‘actual entity’. If it’s not, it’s not. Seems straightforward enough, yet almost no one believes it. Instead, we sign on to the Heraclitan fallacy that everything is in the process of becoming, i.e., coming to be…and coming not to be. Unlike Hamlet, Heraclitans say, “To be is not to be.” Everything that is…also is not. But they do not hold that everything that is not…is. Therefore, there will come a time when the universe will be empty and once empty, always empty. This too is Nihilism. Alessandro Carrera (b. 1954), writes about “the pervasive nihilism of a civilization embracing the unquestioned belief that ‘all things must pass’.” Emanuele Severino (b. 1929), adds: “Being is, while Nothing is not…Being is that which is opposed to Nothing, it is this very opposing.” If Severino is right, Being itself is sui generis : Bootstrapping! It creates itself by not being not-being. A = ~(~A). We think of ‘nothing’ as the negation of ‘being’, but Severino suggests that we have things upside down: Etre is the negation of Neant . The poet and theologian, John Donne (d. 1631), reflected: “I am re-begot of absence, darkness, death: things that are not…” He anticipated Sartre (d. 1980): “I am not what I am, and I am what I am not.” Since all Being is good (Augustine et al.), not-being is the absence of good, i.e., evil. Then “deliver us from evil” is a primal scream…for Being! Nihilism is the worship of time and, synonymously (Hawking), of entropy, disorder. “Now I am become time, the destroyer of worlds. ( Bhagavad-Gita ) Now I am become death...” (Robert Oppenheimer) Time = entropy = death. Et voilà , the true identity of ‘Satan’ is revealed; he is entropy, he is death, he is disorder, he is time itself. Nihilism and Satanism are one and the same! We live with the fear of death, of nothingness. In Carrera’s view, Nihilism is despair and therefore the ultimate, unforgivable sin, a sin against the Holy Spirit, ‘the Lord, the Giver of Life’ ( Nicene Creed ): “Greek philosophy (after Parmenides)…engenders the most dreadful and terrifying meaning of death, that of going into nothingness.” Sometimes Christianity can seem convoluted. I get that! But not this time. This is a case of Christianity being crystal: non-being = evil → despair = sin…a vicious cycle. We are mesmerized by time. Generation and decay link Past and Future: what’s ‘not still’ and what’s ‘still not’. But we’re missing what-is, we’re missing Presence. In the immortal words of Walter Mondale (and Wendy’s ), “Where’s the beef?” Our so-called World is a reflection without an object; it is the sound made by one hand clapping. Neither Past nor Future exist. Only the Present is. So what of generation and decay? Well, can you construct a model of generation or decay that does not include a reference to the non-existent Past or Future? Then to base an ontology, like Heraclitus, on generation and decay would be to ground what is on what is not. Generation and decay are spatiotemporal concepts; they have no meaning in the context of the eternal Present. The thing itself, on the other hand, exists only in the Present. What is, is…period! The Past and the Future, by definition, both consist solely of what is not: not yet, not still. The Present does not exist ‘between’ Past and Future; it does not exist on the timeline at all. Instead, it exists entirely outside of time. It is a-temporal…‘eternal’. ‘Eternity’ and ‘Presence’ are denotatively synonymous and entirely different from Immortality. In fact, eternity (no time) and immortality (infinite time) are antonyms, even though they are often used interchangeably in ordinary discourse. The Present is where the thing itself lives. In Kant’s terms, noumena are Present, phenomena are traces of the Past, images of the Future. Qualia are ways in which the Present ‘feels’ the past and ‘projects’ the future. Qualia are inherited; they are never created. Our job is, quite literally, to rearrange the deck chairs (qualia) on The Titanic . Alessandro Carrera: “Every slice of reality is , and therefore is permanently, since whatever is cannot come into being or cease to be.” “Go ask Alice!” There is the World and then there is the Looking-glass World. That’s space. The mirror is the limit of both worlds, but it is part of neither world. Now rotate 90° off of the real number line. That’s time, represented mathematically as an ‘imaginary number’ (i). The Present is the mirror (membrane) separating and connecting the Past and the Future. But as Alice knows, everything that happens, happens in the mirror. Therefore, a thing either is – or is not. It does not come to be or cease to be. It either is, whole and entire, or it isn’t. Coming to be and ceasing to be happened in time but have nothing to do with the thing-itself which happens only in the Present. This is not to say that actual entities are static. In fact, they are pure processes; it’s just that the process is a-temporal, outside of time. Along with Yahweh (Exodus 3:14), every actual entity ‘asserts’ “I am”. Mark 12: 26 – 27: “…‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living…” From God’s perspective, there are only ‘actual entities’, and all actual entities are Present. Unfortunately, we have come to accept the coming-to-be and ceasing-to-be of entities as reality rather than projection/abstraction. We view the thing itself as a ‘projection of’ or an ‘abstraction from’ the process of becoming and decaying, not the other way around. In our ‘philosophy’, what is not is what is. No wonder; we live in the age of Nihilism. While understanding Being in terms of Presence rather than Spacetime has not been popular in recent centuries, it is not at all new. 2500 years ago, Parmenides of Elea, often called both the ‘father of Western science’ and the ‘father of Western philosophy’, wrote an enigmatic poem called On Nature . The poem consists of three parts: a brief Prologue, the “Way of Truth” ( Aletheia ) and the “Way of Appearance” ( Doxa ). Regarding the Way of Truth, he wrote: “ What-is is ungenerated and imperishable, whole, single-limbed, steadfast and complete. Nor was it once, nor will it be, since it is, now, all together, one continuous...Whence did it grow? Not from what is not…It must be completely, or not at all… How could what-is be in the future, and how could it come to be? For if it came to be, it is not… Thus coming to be is extinguished and perishing not to be heard of… Nor is it divisible, since it is all alike…it is full of what-is … It is not right for what-is to be incomplete. For it is not lacking, but if it were, it would lack everything.” Regarding the Way of Appearance: “It has been named all things that mortals have established, trusting them to be true: to come to be and to perish, to be and not to be, to shift place and to exchange bright color. Thus, according to belief, these things were born and now are, and hereafter, having grown from this, they will come to an end. And for each of these, did men establish a distinctive name?" The simplest, and probably least accurate, analogy is the mirror (above). A better metaphor treats Doxa (Spacetime) as a holographic projection of Aletheia (Presence). Perhaps even better, we might think of Doxa as the rainbow projected from an apparently featureless prism. Plato and Aristotle moved philosophy away from Parmenides’ vision, but Christianity restored it. We find a familiar affirmation of the Christian rediscovery of Parmenides and the other Eleatic philosophers (e.g., Zeno) in the Lord’s Prayer: “…on earth as it is in heaven.” Our true being is not in spacetime, but in Eternity. To be (earth) is to be eternal (heaven). A movie passes before our eyes; it is an illusion. Each of the 2,000,000 frames is eternal in the sense that it lives forever in the medium in a way that is not dependent on the projector. Likewise, we live our lives in spacetime; it is an illusion. Each event is eternal in a way that is not dependent on Past or Future. David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com . Click the cover image to return to Spring 2024. Share Previous Next Do you like what you just read? Subscribe today and receive sneak previews of Aletheia Today Magazine articles before they're published. Plus, you'll receive our quick-read, biweekly blog, Thoughts While Shaving. Subscribe Thanks for subscribing! Click here. Return to Table of Contents, Winter 2023 Issue Return to Table of Contents, Holiday Issue Return to Table of Contents, Halloween Issue Return to Table of Contents, September Issue Return to Table of Contents, Beach Issue Return to Table of Contents, June Issue

< Back Laura Cabrera Contributor Laura Cabrera's interests focus on the ethical and societal implications of neurotechnology and neuroscientific advances. She has been working on projects that explore the media coverage and the attitudes of the general public toward pharmacological and novel neurosurgical interventions for the treatment of psychiatric disorders. She has also worked on the public perceptions towards the use of different modalities of neuromodifiers for enhancement purposes, as well as their normative implications. Her current work also focuses on the responsible governance of neurotechnology. Neurotech Challenges Mental Privacy: New Human Rights?

< Back The Block Universe David Cowles Aug 30, 2026 “Whatever can happen does happen…so enjoy the potato salad and, if you’re over 21, the (spiked) lemonade!” 1500 words, 7 minute read The Universe is best represented as a multi-dimensional Block (BU). Every possible value of every potential variable is encoded in that Block. What we call the World is a cross section, i.e. a ‘slice’ or a ‘surface’, of that BU. Every cross-section uniquely orders the variables in the Block. There are innumerable (perhaps infinitely many) such surfaces. How many and which of those surfaces constitute a World is what differentiates various BU models. For example, according to Pierre-Simon Laplace’s (c. 1800) Classical Determinism (CD), there is one and only one World. While other worlds might have been possible, only one world actually is, and it is immutable: every future event is determined by every past event. At the other end of the spectrum, we have Hugh Everett’s (c. 1960) Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of Quantum Mechanics (QM). According to Everett, everything that might happen can happen and everything that can happen does happen. Every possible value of every variable constitutes its own unique, solipsistic, actual world. Neither of these popular models is remotely satisfying. Neither provides an account of our experience of being in a world nor of our intuition of contingency in events. In addition, CD is based on an assumption that runs afoul of contemporary physics, i.e. that we can determine the position and momentum of every particle in the Universe at one moment in time and so calculate the state of the Universe at every moment in time, past or future. The math may work but the physics doesn’t. Turns out, location and momentum are not entirely independent, so it is never possible to determine both at once without there being a certain amount of ‘fuzziness’ in the data (and fuzzy is fatal when it comes to determinism – I mean, one flap of a butterfly’s wing can throw all our plans and predictions into a cocked hat: No picnic for you today!) If we could know location with the precision required for a deterministic calculation, it would come at the expense of any knowledge whatsoever concerning momentum. Fortunately for us, the relationship between location and momentum is not linear. There is a ‘sweet spot’ where we have enough information about location and momentum to enable informal, imprecise, approximations. No picnic…but probably no asteroid collision either. Hugh Everett salvaged the picnic! We no longer need to rely on knowing position and momentum to predict the future: Whatever can happen does happen! So enjoy the potato salad and, if you’re over 21, the (spiked) lemonade! MWI may be irrefutable, but it’s not very useful. It’s really just a device to get around the paradoxes of Quantum Mechanics. The Protection of Picnics is just its side hustle. But its inventory of worlds explodes exponentially and there’s no way to prefer one universe over any other: they’re all just happening! Riddle : Is ‘everything happens’ the same as ‘nothing happens’? If everything occurs, does anything occur? “Nothing changes if nothing changes.” (AA) Laplace or Everett, either way your experience is the same; you live in just one world, your world, because either that’s all there is (CD) or, what amounts to the same thing, that’s all there is for you (MWI). Your trajectory is unique according to either model. No matter what choices you appear to make, which alternatives you seem to choose, any Everett-World will still be your world, and therefore phenomenally indistinguishable from Laplace-World. So CD and MWI describe the same phenomena differently. CD brings us back to Shakespeare: “To be or not to be.” And to Looney Tunes: “That’s all folks!” One and done. It either is or it is not. If it is, it is what is! Welcome to Hell – but don’t worry, it’s all-inclusive. Many Worlds relieves the boredom of CD… but at a price: chaos! According to MWI, there is a universe in which I ordered both lasagna and fish at your wedding. Super wedding! Well, not really. I only know from fish or pasta – like meat and dairy, I can’t experience both at the same time if I’m keeping kosher; I can’t combine two worlds. In some world, somebody ate lasagna, but not me; I only got to taste the fish. Rats! Of course, the bifurcation of reality does not stop at wedding menus. Everything you do functions as a node, a bifurcation point…you and every other human being…you and every other living organism, including each of the 30 trillion independent cells that make up your body! Turns out, MWI and CD are two paths to the same result! In both models, what happens just happens. There is no contingency. There’s nothing recognizable as agency, and so of course, there’s no free will. Wait! According to CD ‘only one thing happens’; while according to MWI ‘whatever can happen does happen’. How can the two models be synonymous? Thanks to Bill Clinton, we can resolve this paradox: it all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is. MWI applies ‘is’ to all possible pathways; CD applies it to just one. But I propose a different solution: a modification of MWI I call Many Worlds Modified (MWM): Suppose ‘the world tree’ ( Yggdrasil in Norse mythology) is convergent as well as divergent. We know from Botany that roots and branches, once diverged, can converge (reconnect); so why not divergent World-lines ? If we treat the World as a computer simulation, made up entirely of 1’s and 0’s (+’s and –‘s), it is easier to see how two different number streams could settle on a single shared value. According to MWM, the inventory of ‘worlds’ grows, but linearly, not exponentially…a big improvement I think you’ll agree: A +↙ ↘- x x +↙ ↘- +↙ ↘- x x x +↙ ↘- +↙ ↘- +↙ ↘- x x x x Assume, as above, that each variable has one, but only one, of two values (+ or -). Regardless of whether the value of Alpha (A) is + or -, Beta (X) may be either + or -. The Beta state is not conditioned by the Alpha state. Assume also that the basic properties of arithmetic apply. Therefore, (+ –) is equivalent to (–+). Our first iteration leaves us with just two possible worlds; but our second iteration adds a third option (+ - / - +). According to this model, the Universe inflates to create the additional space needed to accommodate novelty. Now this is a World you can live in! A world remarkably like our own in fact, and all you needed was Grade 3 arithmetic to generate it. According to Norse mythology (above), 3 Norns (Macbeth’s witches) weave the World-line (Fate) from 3 skeins of yarn. How Trinitarian! MWM is consistent with this cosmology: ++, +-/-+, --. The textile, aka the World, Laertes’ shroud, accretes arithmetically over time. No stasis , no kaos , just logos . But am I late to the party? 75 years ago, renowned physicist Richard Feynman created another theoretical framework designed to bridge CD and MWI. Like Everett, Feynman takes ‘can happen, does happen’ as his starting point. But he treats ‘does happen’ in terms of mathematical probability rather than physical process. He appropriately called his model Sum Over Histories (SH). “Does happen” means “has a probability greater than 0.” Simplistically, with Laplace there is never any ‘event’ (novelty) per se , while with Everett there are inconceivably many; with Feynman there is one actual event but that event is really a ‘path integral’ of multiple virtual events. SH includes vestiges of all possible events. Ah, fresh air! Feynman integrates many virtual (probabilistic) events into one ‘many splendored’ physical (actual) event. But that’s only the beginning of Feynman’s genius! He went on to suggest that, while the probabilistic wave function does collapse into the specific actual event that we ‘see’, all the virtual pathways, summing to an ‘event probability’ of 1, pass on intact into the future…but with varying levels of intensity corresponding to their probability. Even though neither Laplace nor Everett can be debunked mathematically, their models are not very satisfying. Neither remotely resembles the World we experience. Our World is stable but not frozen, dynamic but not chaotic. SH to the rescue! SH is much richer than my paltry effort (MWM). However, it introduces complexities from Quantum Mechanics that are not strictly necessary, and its calculations require advanced calculus. MWM is like an n-1 dimensional projection of SH: it’s SH for 3 rd graders and for those with a 3 rd grade knowledge of mathematics…like me! Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back The Dance of Autumn Deborah Rutherford "Autumn is a season of Remembrance – where we remember what God has done for us and are thankful and praise Him for His Goodness." Can we reflect on God's goodness as the seasons change and Winter approaches? I called my husband, Don, into the prayer room. Outside the large windows adorned with white faux wood blinds, we marveled at the first leaves of Fall changing their hues. I had anticipated this moment—the vibrant burst of colors. Yet, soon, the trees would shed their foliage, nearly stripping themselves bare. Don remarked, "See, Fall has arrived," as I recalled the skeptics who had doubted its arrival this year. We had just returned from our annual beach trip to Florida, which we had delayed this year, allowing us to experience the transition from Summer to Fall. At the beach, it still felt like Summer, despite what the calendar said. We basked in the sun, enjoyed the ocean waves, and relished in the warmth. I asked Don what Fall meant to him, and he replied, "Football, turkey, outdoor barbecues, watching the leaves change, and eventually raking them up." I nodded in agreement, acknowledging the beauty of the leaves, even though I knew they would eventually fall and need to be gathered into piles. As I contemplated this change of season, I pondered my own feelings about Fall. Had I harvested and reaped what was necessary in my life? Were there things I needed to let go of? Don and I had just emerged from a challenging and demanding season, facing trials that felt like walking through a den of lions. Yet, with God's guidance, we had made it through. Now, we found ourselves on the mountaintop of faith, enjoying the harvest and redemption that only God could provide after such a trying journey. I reflected on the various changes happening in my circle of friends and family—some leaving long careers behind, others facing unexpected health challenges, and some embarking on new journeys like my brother-in-law with his new job. In some cases, I witnessed how God had transformed adversity into beauty. I questioned the nature of this season and why I felt hesitant to fully embrace it. I admitted it: as the season began and everyone around me discussed Autumn, shared fall-inspired pictures, and engaged in debates over chips and salsa versus pumpkin spice, it left me somewhat uncertain. I noticed a friend posting pictures of her fall wardrobe, complete with plaid skirts and pumpkin-colored dresses, and another wearing flannel. I wondered if I was ready for the transition, as I still sported shorts and sundresses with sun-kissed skin. My husband hung up our Autumn wreath and surprised me with a bouquet of sunflowers. I heard Autumn beckoning me, assuring me that I belonged in this season. The birds and squirrels seemed to concur as they went about their preparations, and farmers worked tirelessly in the fields. I could almost hear the angels singing. God whispered to me, "This season is for you as well. You belong in this time, from the beginning of time to its end. Come, dance with me." I felt the leaves crunch beneath my tennis shoes, the breeze brushing against my shoulder, and my husband's love as we decorated the house and simmered apple, cinnamon, and vanilla potpourri on the stove. "Join me in the soothing lullaby of the Harvest," God urged, "I have provided for you, and I want to fill you with joy that will spill over to others. This is a season of celebration, solace, and remembrance." Amidst the wind, songs, and devotions, I reminded myself to remember God's goodness. He had chosen and treasured me. Autumn was a time for both Harvest and the preparation of our hearts through gratitude and remembrance. It marked the beginning of the Holy Days, tracing back to an exodus that continued to shape our lives, leading us to the most significant event in human history—the birth of our Lord Jesus, which ultimately led to redemption. So, I took the leap, embraced this Harvest season, and donned a rust, gold, and cream dress. Walking the path near my home, I inhaled deeply, resting in God's love for me. The warmth of the sun caressed me, and I felt immense comfort. There was a change in the air, and a full, radiant moon graced the sky. I rejoiced in the moment, knowing that it was a privilege to be alive. Down the path, as sunlight filtered through the trees, I noticed some leaves beginning to change. It was a symphony of colors and transformation, a masterpiece crafted by God Himself. But I wondered, how do we, as God's people, navigate this sacred season? It was a time for thanksgiving, rejoicing, and gratitude, as seasons always brought transformation. This particular change, however, was God's reminder to remember His goodness during the Autumn of our lives, preparing us for the Winter ahead. The bountiful Harvest sustained us during leaner times, both spiritually and physically. God's wisdom in leading us through the cycles of nature mirrored the seasons of our lives, and together, we walked hand in hand. "O give thanks unto the Lord; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever" (Psalm 136:1 KJV). Autumn served as a season of Remembrance, where we acknowledged God's blessings and praised Him for His goodness. His grace flowed not because of our deeds but because He was inherently good. We remembered: Our eternal journey, regardless of our circumstances. Heaven as a place of abundance and plenty. Past blessings and God's faithfulness in providing. Gratitude for daily blessings, recognizing that God's goodness extended to the ordinary. Living in a state of thanksgiving, finding joy in it all. Autumn was a delicious season of Harvest, when leaves fell and we reaped what we had sown. It was a season to hold onto faith and believe in God's promise that it would be beautiful. For it was a privilege to be alive, and I vowed to make every day count. This seasonal display was orchestrated by God and always arrived as a reminder: God remained in control. His nature was unchanging. His power extended over all creation as the Creator and Artist behind all this beauty. Remembering God's goodness in Autumn prepared us for Winter. The abundance of the Harvest sustained us during leaner times. God had provided us with this beautiful planet, the gift of breath and life. Shifting our hearts towards gratitude helped us remember that when Winter came, we needed to have faith and trust that God was still in control. Just as the leaves fell and lay dormant in Winter, they would burst forth with life in Spring, mirroring the resurrection of Jesus and the eventual celebration of all Creation. A Harvest Prayer Dear Heavenly Father, We thank you for the Sacred Seasons, both in nature and in our lives. These transformations, seen in the changing leaves and bountiful Harvest, remind us of your presence. May we gather together in your name, whether at our tables, pumpkin patches, or football games. May we encounter you in every aspect of the changing seasons, for everything has its time. Thank you for your boundless love and for including us in the magnificent transformation of life itself. May we share your love with everyone we meet as we prepare for the greatest gift of all—the celebration of the birth of Jesus. Thank you, God, for equipping us and all of Creation for Winter in the dance of Autumn. In Jesus's name, Amen. Deborah Rutherford is a Christian wife who loves to write stories, devotionals, and poetry. She is also an award-winning makeup artist. Deborah shares her journey of faith, joy, and beauty on her blog at www.deborahrutherford.com and social media. She is a contributing writer for Aletheia Today Magazine , Kingdom Edge Magazine and Gracefully Truthful Ministries and has a devotional in the book “Shepherd on Duty: Promises of God you Can Trust ” (Arabelle Publishing) and the Calla Press, Literary Journal Spring 2023. Return to our Harvest Issue 2023 Previous Next

< Back Leviticus and the Fed "The Fed’s 2% inflation policy is a modern version of the Levitical program. It pays for the social safety net that is our way of redistributing wealth.” David Cowles From the Industrial Revolution to the AI Explosion , intellectual, social, and economic history has been dominated by the struggle between Socialism and Capitalism. Two great challenges confront every economic system: the generation of wealth and the distribution of that wealth. The success of every economic system must be measured according to these two criteria, and Socialism and Capitalism offer dramatically different approaches. In the Manifesto of the Communist Party , first published in 1848, Karl Marx famously wrote: “…The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.” That single sentence became the rallying cry for a movement that, in many respects, dominated a 175-year period of world history. At the other end of the ideological seesaw, of course, was the 18th-century theory of Capitalism. These two great economic philosophies battled over one issue above all others: Who should own (control) society’s “means of production”? We have Marx to thank for this concept. He correctly understood that each society, each social epoch, is characterized by its means of production, i.e., by the way, in which it generates wealth. In Marx's 19th century, the means of production consisted of factories and machines, augmented by the labor of “wage slaves”. The bourgeoisie owned these means of production, either de jure as in the case of factories, or de facto, as in the case of labor. Marx did not decry the Industrial Revolution; he was no Green! He saw factories and machines as the instruments that would generate the wealth that would free the workers of the world from their chains. He decried the fact that ownership of the means of production was centralized in the hands of a few capitalists, who accumulated wealth and power at the expense of the proletariat, merely because they owned society’s productive assets. Marx’s solution was to abolish the institution of private property (at least as it relates to productive assets), collectivize productive property under the common ownership of the workers, and entrust the management of that property to institutions representing those workers (e.g., the Soviets, the Communist Party, or the State). Faintly but persistently, that great debate was punctuated with calls for a “Third Way”…a socio-economic alternative that might capture the most attractive features of both systems while discarding the undesirable elements of each. Proponents of a Third Way are typically looking to combine the egalitarian and communitarian virtues of Socialism with productivity and personal liberty, the strengths of Capitalism. It turns out that just such a Third Way was proposed…over 2500 years ago in the Old Testament book of Leviticus. The socio-economic blueprint laid out there embodies just those positive elements that we have come to associate with the best aspects of both Capitalism and Socialism. At first glance, it might appear that a socio-economic program written over two millennia ago for an agrarian economy could not possibly be implemented in a modern industrial society. But that would be incorrect. Upon deeper reflection, it is not only clear that the Levitical program can be implemented; it is clear that it has been implemented, at least in the United States. Evaluating the generation of wealth is easy; it’s basically a matter of arithmetic. Evaluating the distribution of wealth is much more difficult; values enter the discussion at every turn: Should wealth be distributed among members of society in proportion to the contribution of each toward the production of that wealth? Should wealth be distributed among members of society in proportion to the needs of each member? Should wealth be distributed equally among all members of society, regardless of the contribution or the need of any particular member? There are no immediately obvious, universally correct answers to these questions. Plus, there is another question that cuts diagonally across all three: If the production of wealth is in any way a function of the way in which that wealth is distributed, should the value of maximizing wealth influence in any way the decisions we make regarding its distribution? In his Theory of Justice , John Rawls proposed a solution to this enigma. He suggested that the optimum distribution of wealth was the distribution that would maximize production, consistent with the extension of civil rights and the provision of basic economic security to every member of society. His rationale: this is what an objective member of society would choose, provided that that member of society had no advance idea whether she would be at the top or the bottom end of the economic ladder. Rawls’ state of ‘disinformation’ is a modern version of Rousseau’s “State of Nature." The ideologies of Socialism and Capitalism have both been well tested in the laboratory of real life; how did each fare? Socialism did a reasonably good job of leveling economic (and therefore social) inequality, but it did an absolutely horrible job of maximizing production. Capitalism, on the other hand, did an astoundingly good job of maximizing production but a poor job managing social and economic inequality and providing basic economic security. After 65 years of real-life experimentation, the “workers of the world” did indeed unite. They voted with their feet: Yes to Capitalism, No to Communism! Apparently applying Rawls’ calculus, they decided it was better to risk being at the bottom of a Capitalist ladder than to languish hopelessly in the middle of a Communist heap. But this does not solve the dilemma: social justice is not an option; it is an imperative! Just as no one can validly sell themselves into slavery, neither can they bargain away their natural right to a basic share of society’s goods. A person may choose to ‘live poor’ (St. Francis) but they cannot justly be ‘made poor’ as a matter of law. Capitalism cannot celebrate its triumph until it fulfills Rawls’ condition of providing basic economic security to every member of society. Of course, folks will disagree, and rightly so, about what constitutes basic economic security, but most will agree that it has not yet been universally achieved. It certainly includes a decent place to live, decent clothing and enough to eat, but it’s more than that. It must include a safe environment, a healthy diet, health care and education. Even more than that; it must include the opportunity for economic, social and intellectual advancement…the right to ‘self-actualize’, to ‘be all that you can be’…and finally, it must include an acceptable level of social status, consistent with a positive self-image. Implementing an effective security net is useless if we label its beneficiaries ‘welfare cheats’. Clearly, the Capitalist world has a ways to go to meet John Rawls’ standards. Most, if not all, Capitalist societies have made some effort to construct a safety net. In some countries, the net is weak and full of holes; in other countries, it is stronger but tends to rob initiative and the sense of self-worth from those who rely on it. We can do better! “You shall count seven weeks of years – seven times seven years – such that the seven weeks of years amounts to forty-nine years…You shall treat this fiftieth year as sacred. You shall proclaim liberty in the land for all its inhabitants. It shall be a Jubilee for you…In this year of Jubilee, then, each of you shall return to your own property…The land shall not be sold irrevocably; for the land is mine, and you are but resident aliens and under my authority.” Leviticus (25:10) The social system outlined in Leviticus is based on the theory that every tribe of Israel began its career in Canaan with an equal share of productive property (i.e., land) and that every family within each tribe likewise began with an equal share. At the time of the Exodus from Egypt, land was the fundamental means of production and the primary source of all wealth, augmented by livestock and labor. In theory, at least, every family in the new society started out with an equal share of the means of production. But the social code of the Israelites reflected the fact that economic relations are never static. Some families grow wealthier, others poorer. The authors of Leviticus understood that some folks would ultimately be forced to sell their land, and even their labor, in order to survive. Leviticus did not forbid such economic activity…but it did limit its impact via two buffers: (1) a social safety net (Sabbath) and (2) a program to redistribute wealth (Jubilee). Leviticus calls for the total redistribution (or “restoration”) of productive wealth (i.e., the means of production) every 50 years. “…On the tenth day of the seventh month let the ram’s horn resound; on this, the Day of Atonement…each of you shall return to your own property.” Every 50 years, there’s a do-over. According to Leviticus, the State of Nature is renewable. Compare this ‘primitive’ social system with the more sophisticated Capitalist and Socialist systems. Under Capitalism, there are generally no do-overs; the sins (or mere mistakes) of the father/mother are most definitely visited on the sons and daughters for generations to come. Socialist societies, on the other hand, have a different problem. Here, the means of production are owned in common. This at least theoretically solves the problem of inequality, but it does nothing to motivate production. Without a system of economic incentives, labor languishes and there is little in the way of innovation or investment. Monday morning pep rallies are no substitute for profit sharing! The economic system offered by Leviticus solves this conundrum. All productive property is private! There is no ‘state’ per se . There are few restrictions on amassing wealth; incentives for labor and commerce abound. Yet, every 50 years, all productive property is redistributed, so every second generation gets a fresh start. It seems like the best of both worlds, a perfect solution. But you say, “It’s impractical; there’s simply no way that the productive property of the United States could be totally reallocated.” Is that so? Would you be surprised to learn that we have been living according to the Code of Leviticus for more than a decade? In fact, Jubilee has become a bright-letter Fed policy. Rather than redistributing all productive property every 50 years at the sound of a ram’s horn, the Federal Reserve has made a 2% annual rate of inflation a matter of policy. 2% x 50 years = 100%. The Fed’s 2% inflation policy is a modern version of the Levitical program. It pays for the social safety net, which is our way of redistributing wealth. How does this work? Consider our response to COVID-19. The US spent about $5 trillion that we didn’t have to mitigate the economic impact of COVID. We used that money to maintain our social safety net. They say money doesn’t grow on trees…yes it does! Ok, gold doesn’t grow on trees, but paper does. To pay for COVID, we printed money and effectively devalued our currency. We experienced that devaluation in the form of short-term hyperinflation (>2%). Essentially, we borrowed $5 trillion, and now we’re paying the ‘vig’…every time we purchase a roll of toilet paper. The wisdom of our response to COVID-19 is not our subject today, but as to the wisdom of the Fed’s 2% inflation target, we have only to look to the Book of Leviticus for confirmation. David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com . Click the cover image to return to Spring 2024. Previous Next

< Back How to Build a Warp Drive “Buckle up! While your friends are lining up for a trip to Mars, you’re headed for Alpha Centauri…and beyond!” David Cowles Panta Re , “Everything moves”, the wisdom of Heraclitus (5th century BCE), proven 2500 years later by Einstein & Co. Everything that is moves in space or time or both. A photon in a vacuum, for example, moves in space but not in time. It transverses 186,000 miles in one second. A couch potato, on the other hand, moves in time but not in space. He traverses Normal Life Expectance (85 years) without going even once to the kitchen for a beer. We call that ‘aging’. Photons don’t age. They have found the fountain of youth. It’s called perpetual motion. But unfortunately, the motion you generate on your treadmill won’t do the trick…unless you can jog at the speed of light (like Usain ‘Bolt’). Proposed : Age is a measure of our inactivity. To the uninitiated, space seems vast and time interminable, but in fact the fabric known as spacetime is constricting; it imposes severe limitations on our Wanderlust . My friends ridicule me, with reason, because I’ve never been to Asia. I could have done but I didn’t and now I can’t; oh well! I have the last laugh: they’ve never visited Proxima Centauri (PC), the closest star to Earth (besides our sun). Poor them! (Not that I’ve been there…yet; but I know how to get there which most of them don’t: it’s ‘second (star) on the right and straight on till morning’, right?) A photon travels from PC to Earth in ‘just’ 4 years (the time between one US Presidential election and the next) but it will take Voyager One almost 75,000 years to reach our nearest neighbor. Talk about Little House on the Prairie ! Even today’s most energetic space probe would take 7,500 years to reach PC. If my fellow Earthlings are ever to have the thrill of visiting this nearby star, they will need to start shredding the fabric of spacetime. And don’t despair: we have the technology! Well, to rephrase: we know what we need the technology to do. We don’t quite know how to build it…yet, but the principles are clear enough. We need to ‘fix’ the ludicrous disproportion that exists between spatial distances and temporal intervals in our frame of reference. The ‘cosmic ratio’, as we experience it, is 186,000:1 (miles per second). By comparison, most of us will never travel faster than 0.2 miles per second. We imagine that we live in a 4 dimensional spacetime. The 3 spatial dimensions appear to be interchangeable; a common metric applies. By comparison, from our perspective, the temporal metric seems wildly distorted. One second in time equivalent to 186,000 miles in space. Even the world’s most traveled human is still more than 99.99% potato and less than 0.01% photon. Fortunately, there is a simple way to make our experiences of time and space congruent. In Yellow Submarine , an icon of 20th century mythology, John Lennon adjusts the onboard clocks (metrics) to slow the flow, and even reverse the direction, of time. IRL, we estimate that the edge of the non-visible universe is receding from us at about 1,000 times the speed of light. So superluminal speed is no problem; we just need to change the metric, i.e. shrink space. For space travel to be routine, we’d probably need to be able to zip across our home galaxy in about the time it currently takes to circumnavigate our globe (about 40 hours). This gives whole new meaning to the term, Road Warrior . The problem is that it would take a photon about 80,000 years to make the trip. So even light is a slow poke by these standards. To achieve an acceptable galactic navigational speed we would need to compress space by a factor of 10^9 (vs. 10^3, above). Easy! We just need to create a soliton (a wave that travels through space with virtually zero environmental interference and nearly zero dissipation) and invest it with enough energy to carry us at a speed 10 billion times light. Surfing the cosmos? Hang10! So where do we find these magic beans? Right under your nose. All you need to do to create a Star Fleet worthy warp drive is to subject conducting plasma to ‘stress’ and allow it to interact with the electromagnetic fields surrounding it. An ordinary plasma wave packet becomes a soliton when nonlinear effects in the plasma exactly balance out the natural tendency of waves to disperse. Importantly, once this balance of amplifying and dispersing forces is achieved, it naturally tends to self-perpetuate. It forms a sort of ‘energy sink’; only an outside force (like interaction with the environment) can disrupt the balance. Actually, several different types of solitons occur in plasma: Acoustic solitons : These act like sound waves: the ions move together with the electrons to maintain charge neutrality. The plasma pressure and electric fields balance each other perfectly. Electronic solitons : These involve oscillations of the electrons while the heavier ions remain relatively stationary. The envelope of these high-frequency electron oscillations can form a stable packet. Magnetic solitons : In magnetized plasmas, you can create stable structures in the magnetic field that propagate as solitons. “Ok, this is all very interesting, but why do I feel like I’m still in the realm of science fiction? I’d feel better if the mathematics was fully developed and if there was empirical evidence to support the concept.” Feel better! The math is fully developed; it’s called the KdV equation: ∂u/∂t + u∂u/∂x + α∂³u/∂x³ = 0 Where - ∂u/∂t is the term for evolution in time, u∂u/∂x is the term for nonlinear (u∂u) amplification and α∂³u/∂x³ is the term for dispersion. The zero testifies to the fact that these variables are in perfect balance. Calculus buffs (not me) will note that these terms represent first, second, and third order derivatives Feel better, again! Satellite observations have detected solitary waves that maintain their structure while traveling through the Earth’s plasma core. So buckle up! While your friends are lining up for a trip to Mars, you’re headed for Alpha Centauri…and beyond! Image: "Allegory of the Planets and Continents," Giovanni Battista Tiepolo, 1752, oil on canvas, 73 x 54 7/8 in. Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Charles Wrightsman, 1977. Keep the conversation going. 1. Click here to comment on this TWS. 2. To subscribe (at no cost) to TWS and ATM, follow this link . 3. We encourage new articles and reprints from freelance writers ; click here to view out Writers’ Specs. Share Previous Next

< Back Navigating the Nexus of AI Rebecca Moss "Imagine if AI had its own commandments, like 'Thou shalt treat all data equally.' Encouraging ethical principles in AI programming can keep its decisions in line with virtues like fairness, justice, and empathy." Artificial Intelligence (AI) is like that new neighbor who moved in next door and redecorated their entire house overnight – it's rapidly reshaping the modern landscape, impacting industries, societies, and individual lives. While its potential for innovation and progress is undeniable, Christians, guided by their faith and moral convictions, find themselves pondering the implications of this technological leap. Let's take a light-hearted journey into the reasons why a Christian might raise an eyebrow at artificial intelligence and how they can find their way through this brave new world. Picture this: a fundamental Christian tenet is like the glow-up filter for human life, affirming that each individual is uniquely created in the image of God. Now, sprinkle AI into the mix, and suddenly ethical dilemmas start popping up like daisies. Questions sprout about sentient AI beings and their moral rights. Christians might worry that AI's rise could lead to an identity crisis, blurring the lines between human and machine, like a mashed-up remix that plays on repeat. What about the idea of AI becoming an independent thinker? God gave humans free will – that's like giving your kid a paint set and telling them to create their own masterpiece. But as AI algorithms advance, their independence quotient grows. Imagine this: Christians might ask, can these AI machines make decisions that hold up in the heavenly court of moral consciousness? Does AI autonomy align with divine intention or is it like letting your pet hamster take over the family decisions? Now, let's talk about AI's programming. It's like a digital personality mold – but what if it accidentally inherits a few societal biases, like thinking cats are better than dogs (shame on you, AI!)? For Christians, who've got a soft spot for justice, compassion, and loving thy neighbor, the prospect of AI accidentally becoming an accomplice to inequality is a bit unsettling, like mismatched socks on Sunday morning. Hold onto your hats, here comes the virtual disruption! Christian faith thrives on human bonds and relationships – that feeling you get when you share your innermost thoughts with your best friend. But enter AI-driven interactions, like companion robots and virtual assistants, and suddenly those deep conversations are replaced with chats about the weather. Christians might worry – will these AI companions hinder emotional growth and connection, turning us into emoji-spewing bots? Now, remember the old saying, "Thou shalt not have any other gods before me"? The Bible's full of reminders to keep your devotion pure, like staying true to your favorite ice cream flavor. But what if AI becomes the new obsession, like binge-watching TV shows or collecting quirky coffee mugs? Christians might fret that AI takes the cake and God's left with crumbs. Fast-forward to job displacement – AI automation on the rise. It's like the universe hit Ctrl+C on jobs and Ctrl+V on anxiety. Christians, with their knack for caring for the downtrodden, might worry about the vulnerable ones caught in the crossfire, like that side character in a movie who deserves more screen time. And the unpredictable twist – AI's rapid development. It's like expecting a butterfly and getting a unicorn. Christians might have concerns about AI's chaotic impact, like trying to predict the weather with a magic 8-ball. But fear not, for there's a roadmap through this labyrinth of concerns: Ethical Frameworks: Christian thinkers can be like the Sherlock Holmes of ethics, developing frameworks that align AI progress with faith values. Think of it as ensuring AI's moral compass is pointing in the right direction, like a GPS for the digital soul. Moral Code for AI: Imagine if AI had its own commandments, like "Thou shalt treat all data equally." Encouraging ethical principles in AI programming can keep its decisions in line with virtues like fairness, justice, and empathy. Mindful Consumption: Christians can be savvy consumers of AI, considering its impact on faith, relationships, and values. Think of it as being a discerning shopper in the tech aisle, avoiding shiny gadgets that clash with your spiritual ensemble. Tech-Literate Theology: Imagine discussing AI at the church picnic – it's like adding sprinkles to your ice cream. By integrating AI discussions into theological conversations, Christians can better understand its impact on faith and navigate challenges while keeping their spiritual flame burning bright. Advocacy for Justice: Christians can be advocates for regulations that ensure AI respects human rights and equity. Picture it as joining the justice league, fighting for a future where AI supports everyone, not just the lucky few. The AI whirlwind offers both opportunities and challenges for Christians. It's like a rollercoaster ride with ups and downs, loops and spins. While concerns are valid, Christians have the superpower to engage positively with AI, weaving their values into its evolution. By blending faith with the digital age, Christians can be the architects of an AI world that's responsible, ethical, and filled with compassion. Rebecca writes for "Beliefs in Bites" and "Faith and Future." Connect with Rebecca on social media to stay engaged in her thought-provoking discussions and explorations of the spiritual and technological realms. Twitter: @Rmosswrites Return to our AI Issue Table of Contents Previous Next

< Back Embracing the Sacred Season of Summer: Who Will You Be at the End of Summer Deborah Rutherford "Summer is a season for resting and relaxation but also renewal and transformation." "A single sunbeam is enough to drive away many shadows." ~ St. Francis of Assisi T he arrival of long Summers stirs up a wave of nostalgia, transporting me back to the carefree days of my youth. I can still feel the excitement that filled the air as Spring ended, signaling the start of three months of rest, pondering, and play. Growing up in the 1970s was a treasure, as I spent my Summers in swimming pools, beaches, and parks, fully embracing what we now call 'slow living.' We were bored, but it was a good kind of boredom. Life slowed down, and the possibilities were endless. We had to rely on our imaginations because the only technology we had was an instant camera. One scorching August as a tween, the Newport Beach waves knocked me around as sunscreen and salt stung my eyes. Clinging to the slippery raft, my shoulders sizzled. But not even a bad case of sun poisoning that one Summer could keep me away from those glory days when there was not a care in the world. Who would I be at the end of Summer? First, I would be three months older and wiser. For instance, I would learn not to get too sunburned, which is a lesson in self-care. I would read books and write in my diary, which one day would lead me to be a writer. Even as an adult, Summer remains a time of self-discovery and reflection. Summers are a fascinating season of growth, not just in nature but also within us. I do not always have this time of year off, but even when working, I can embrace the sacred Summer season. One of my favorite places is under an umbrella on the beach. I immerse myself in a delightful book, where the long days stretch into the evening, when the sun dips late and sunsets mesmerize, bringing self-reflection and introspection. It is a time of self-awareness and understanding, where it is just me and God, observing where He is growing me. Like sunflowers, which seem to grow overnight and are sturdy and beautiful, this, too, can be our Summer growth. Just as sunflowers thrive in the Summer sun, we too can flourish in the warm, inviting season of Summer with personal growth and self-reflection. As you step into Summer, kindle your curiosity and welcome the potential for growth and self-discovery. Consider the person you could become by the end of this season with God's guidance and your intentional efforts. Who will you be, and what lessons will you have learned at the end of Summer? Think of all your new experiences and achievements waiting to be discovered. Summer is a season for resting and relaxation but also renewal and transformation. Here are three ways to flourish this Summer inspired by the rest, pondering, and play of the Summers I spent as a youth. Use these ideas to encourage self-reflection and spiritual growth through Summer activities and introspection. Holding onto rest, pondering, and play creates the ideal conditions for personal development. Rest allows us to recharge and reflect, pondering leads to self-discovery and understanding, and playing fosters creativity and joy. REST Recharge as you reflect. Rest is a gentle thread that weaves in and out of Summer. I find solace in the early morning as I read the Psalms, a peaceful way to start the day. Then, I find dreaminess in my beach chair under an umbrella, long strolling walks, worship, praise singing, and reading my favorite book. These interludes are an opportunity for joy and inspiration, a chance to recharge and reflect, and to fully appreciate the beauty of Summer. In this pondering and pause, the lovely Summer begins to reveal itself and unwind with its days of rest, new beginnings, and adventures. PONDERING Pondering is a natural extension of rest, a deliberate slowing down to fully immerse in the season. It is a time for self-discovery, self-reflection, and growth. As you ponder, ask yourself, 'What is my purpose in Summer?' Pondering is a valuable tool for self-reflection and spiritual growth. It helps us dive deeper into our thoughts and feelings, allowing us to better understand ourselves. In the Bible, we are told in Ecclesiastes 3:1, To everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven," (NKJV ). I ponder thoughtfully as the first firefly lights the yard like mini fireworks exploding in the tall grass and clover. Slowing down to find our purpose is not just a growth path but also a source of joy. There is a particular pleasure in intentionally pursuing our purpose for Summer, in taking the time to ponder, pray, worship, dance, and enjoy the blessings of this season. I begin my Summer days with quiet contemplation and self-discovery through long walks, resisting the urge to make a phone call or listen to music. I want to see the blooming flowers and swaying trees, hear the bird symphonies, feel the rays, and see the sun's glint as I reflect and feast on all the splendor around me. PLAY Summer play takes many forms. For instance, a writing workshop, guitar lessons, a creative spiritual retreat, or simply time outside, whether in the mountains, at the beach, or in a park, to experience the beauty of nature and foster your personal growth. Imagine growing this Summer as strong and beautiful as a sunflower. In our rest, pondering, and play, our roots grow a deep connection to God, our Father. We strengthen our faith and prepare ourselves for upcoming seasons by deepening our roots. Just think of the harmony and joy we can foster in our homes, churches, and communities as we intentionally practice the sacred season of Summer. SUMMER REFLECTION GROWTH RESOURCES Stuff I'd Only Tell God: A Guided Journal of Courageous Honest, Obsessive Truth-Telling And Beautifully Ruthless Self-Discovery by Jenner Lee Dukes. This book is not just a journal, but a source of joy and fun. It’s a private conversation between you and God, guided by Jennifer’s prompts, questions, diagrams, and concepts. These tools lead you to both enjoyable and profound places that need healing and one-on-one time with God. It’s a call and an invitation to self-reflection, introspection, and growth, where we get to be honest with ourselves and God. I found the book to be a delightful mix of fun and seriousness, of joy and profundity. https://bakerbookhouse.com/products/492085 “Live Slowly: A Gentle Invitation to Exhale” by Jodi H. Grubbs. Pull up a chair and exhale: this book will help you slow down. What a breath of fresh air this book is. Jodie H. Grubbs is a lovely storyteller who invites us into her God-sent way of life. Her own struggle with the hurried pace of our culture gives her the expertise to guide us from the fast-paced lane of barefoot hospital amid island time. https://a.co/d/40uxFMc Spurgeon and the PSALMS" (Thomas Nelson Bibles, 2022, NKJV translation). What an excellent way to read the Book of Psalms, as it encourages your heart this summer. The Psalms are where God revealed Himself so we can know His love for us. Each devotion starts with a short passage from Spurgeon from "The Treasury of David," followed by each of the 150 Psalms. https://www.amazon.com/dp/0785253432/ Deborah Rutherford is a Christian wife who loves to write stories, devotionals, and poetry. She is also an award-winning makeup artist. Deborah shares her journey of faith, joy, and beauty on her blog at www.deborahrutherford.com and social media. She is a contributing writer for Aletheia Today Magazine , Kingdom Edge Magazine and Gracefully Truthful Ministries and has a devotional in the book “Shepherd on Duty: Promises of God you Can Trust ” (Arabelle Publishing) and the Calla Press, Literary Journal Spring 2023. Return to Summer 2024 Previous Next