Stephen Hawking ~ A Loss All Around

Greetings Dear Reader,

On Pi Day of 2018 we have lost one of the brilliant minds of our time.  His work to understand and explain the cosmos has given us much to value and discuss.  Most of his conclusions followed a path of reason and logic that gave us confidence in his explanations of the cosmos.  I often feel dumb when I read his books and have to re-read some passages to keep up with him.

I am saddened at his loss and further saddened that there will be those who follow my faith who use is passing to take shots at him.  He made it clear that he did not believe in God:  “We are each free to believe what we want, and it’s my view that the simplest explanation is; there is no god. No one created our universe, and no one directs our fate.”

If you have read even a little of what I write you know that I both respect science and believe in God.  I do not want to indulge in attacks on Mr. Hawking.  What I do wish to do is celebrate a mind that asked us to think of the universe more deeply.  As Christ followers we should read his books and wrestle with his thoughts.  I know that they cause me to wonder more deeply at the amazing nature of creation. 

I know that there is a place where true science and my faith meet in harmony.  One need not believe in God for the Father to gift one with great powers of the mind and discovery.  I will not throw away truth for any reason.  I will also not throw away reason.  My faith is reasonable and I must continue to learn so that I can perhaps see where honest research can reveal God more clearly.  God does require faith.

The mind of Stephen Hawking was a gift to all of us.  He challenged us to look deeper into the cosmos and see its wonders.  He elevated us to a new level of understanding and gave us a path to pursue that will expand for decades to come.  He focused on the final frontier and challenged us all to explore it further.

I will miss the learning I did from Mr. Hawking.  I will also continue to respect science whilst holding onto my faith.  Since one cannot prove that there is no God, to say that one believes there is not one is an act of faith.  I agree that one is free to believe what one wishes.  I choose to believe and continue to look for an honest way to harmonize that with all things.  Farewell Stephen Hawking.  You will be missed.

Wishing you joy in the journey,

Aramis Thorn

Mat 13:52 So Jesus said to them, "That is why every writer who has become a disciple of Christ’s rule of the universe is like a home owner. He liberally hands out new and old things from his great treasure store.”

(͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It Was an Accident ~ Closing Thoughts

Greetings Dear Reader,

I am not a scientist.  I try to understand as much science as I can and I am thankful for the minds who create so much that makes our lives better.  The church has not always given the scientific community all the respect it deserves.

Still, I cannot believe, and it takes belief, that all of the cosmos is a series of happy accidents.  I am not saying that all of the discoveries and the science are wrong.  They just have not answered enough of my questions. 

For me also there is the logic of it all.  It is not logical that the universe has no designer.  It is not logical that there is no purpose.  I find in the vast path from the beginning to now too many assumptions for the absence of a Designer to require anything but faith.  If I have to have faith for one or the other I will choose that there is a Designer.

I will also continue to call for honesty on both sides.  Until we really speak without posturing and insults we cannot find truth.  Until we embrace humility in admitting that there are so many things we still do not know we cannot be honest about our conclusions and the faith required to hold them.   The difference for me is that an accidental universe requires nothing of us and my Designer requires that I have faith.

Wishing you joy in the journey,

Aramis Thorn

Mat 13:52 So Jesus said to them, "That is why every writer who has become a disciple of Christ’s rule of the universe is like a home owner. He liberally hands out new and old things from his great treasure store.”

(͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It Was an Accident ~ A Matter of Method

Greetings Dear Reader,

I am sure we all remember learning the scientific method in primary school.  I am also sure that we have not thought about it much since.  Beyond that is a very important scientific practice of peer review.  This method of vetting work, when applied honestly, allows for validation and criticism that can move honest knowledge and understanding forward.

The scientists who wish to put forth positions that are not solid avoid peer review or find ways to manipulate the process.  One of the things that we need to understand about scientific peer review is that it is meant to be a neutral process.  It is required that our methods and conclusions be vetted as plausible by those who understand the science.

When it comes to intelligent design there is peer-reviewed literature.  This is a set of peer-reviewed scientific publications published in scientific journals, conference proceedings, or academic anthologies.  The point is that if we are going to be honest we need to let the scientific community see our work and critique it.  By “our” I do not mean to imply that I contribute to this work in any way.

If we do honest work and allow the world to vet it then we have the advantage of learning where our errors are, what we are getting right, and seeing the new questions that arise.  When we put forth honest work and we are accurate the truth stands on its own.  When we get real feedback from others we can better refine our position.

There will be detractors who deny our position no matter how clear the evidence.  Then again, we have been guilty of the same thing.  If we do not believe that our work can stand on its own then we need to hold back on presenting it until it can.  If we are certain that it will then the work will speak for itself.

It is our primary obligation to speak the truth in love.  It is my obligation to vet what I say through honest filters.  It is necessary that I also keep my priorities in line.  My obedience to love even those who hate what I believe must come before my desire to disagree.

Wishing you joy in the journey,

Aramis Thorn

Mat 13:52 So Jesus said to them, "That is why every writer who has become a disciple of Christ’s rule of the universe is like a home owner. He liberally hands out new and old things from his great treasure store.”

(͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It Was an Accident ~ A Matter of Maths (Part 2)

Greetings Dear Reader,

One of the things that those who propose the existence of an Intelligent Designer must do is be honest at every turn.  We cannot rely on old data from a time when the authority of our texts was widely accepted.  This history is littered with those who bashed science instead of honestly walking beside scientists and learning from them.  We instead created a fortress mentality and did not give research the respect it deserves.  The enmity shown those who accept intelligent design as a possibility is partly deserved.

As I read the literature that we have produced to support intelligent design and creation it saddens me that in some cases we have produced outright falsehood and sold it to the masses to delude them.  It also causes our detractors to question the credibility of those who produce honest research and thinking on the subject. We need to own our failures and move forward with honesty understanding that we will have to earn the right to be heard. 

This leads me to the second part of my thoughts on maths and evolution.  We need to stop saying that it is mathematically impossible.  Remember that I believe in intelligent design.  I think that the infinite regression required to get to the beginning of things without a prime mover is statistically improbable.  That does not mean I can say it is impossible.  Since we cannot imperially prove that we are correct we must allow for the honest investigation of all possibilities. 

Since all that we have comes down to faith it must be that we allow honest open discussion of every theory.  When we do then we leave those among our detractors with one less weapon against us.  We fulfill our prime directive to love them no matter what.  This is perhaps one of the finest ways to put forth truth that is not measurable or provable.

Wishing you joy in the journey,

Aramis Thorn

Mat 13:52 So Jesus said to them, "That is why every writer who has become a disciple of Christ’s rule of the universe is like a home owner. He liberally hands out new and old things from his great treasure store.”

(͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It Was an Accident ~ A Matter of Maths (Part 1)

Greetings Dear Reader,

One of my favorite leisure pursuits can be an excellent video game.  Perhaps your use of technology is limited to social media on your phone or you are still busy taking care of your digital pet.  I wonder if we realize just how much computer coding has infiltrated our lives.  Even my toaster has a circuit board now.

I would ask honestly what the probability would be mathematically that that the coding for any great piece of computer technology could design itself.  Recently a story burned across the internet that a Facebook AI experiment had developed its own language and was subsequently shut down.  My Son and I had a very concerned conversation about this.  There are stories out there that support the report and stories that deny it.  I do not know the truth.

What I do know is that the AI was the result of coding done by human designers.  That they gave it the power to create does not eliminate them as the prime cause of the eventual result.  I am not making a moral implication here nor am I weighing in on the future of AI.  I am pondering if the possibility of that code creating its own language without it first being created is probable.

Those who deny that intelligent design has scientific validity as a study will say that “Maybe the code can write itself because it can tap into a deep well of probabilities, from quantum coherence & entanglement up to self-organized criticality and universality”. (Nigel Anthony Reading) 

The first thing I note about this is the teleological nature of the statement.  Second is that it gives purpose to that which is unintelligent.  A single strand of DNA is over a terabyte of data just to map it.  In that the DNA is the entire code to build whatever that DNA is meant to build.

What is the probability that all that code writes itself?  I am not being disrespectful but the “deep well of probability” sounds mystical rather than scientific.  The probability well is dependent on too many approximations to be, well, probable.  It is possible but if we are going to be honest then it is only that in the way that anything is possible. 

When we consider maths we know that there are areas that require explanation and investigation.  Which explanation is simpler scientifically?  Was the code designed or did it write itself?  The next time you watch a movie that involves CGI of any kind look at the number of people it takes to do the computer work.  Ask yourself if that could be done without some kind of intelligence behind it.  I am not asking you to leap to a world dropped into existence by the hand of God.  I am asking you to be honest that intelligent design could be more than religion with science words.

Wishing you joy in the journey,

Aramis Thorn

Mat 13:52 So Jesus said to them, "That is why every writer who has become a disciple of Christ’s rule of the universe is like a home owner. He liberally hands out new and old things from his great treasure store.”

(͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It Was an Accident ~ A Matter of Honesty

Greetings Dear Reader,

To be able to tell the world about a discovery one must have a reputation for integrity.  Throughout the centuries many who share my faith have abandoned integrity for ease of argument and to maintain control.  In my opinion, when they made these choices they stopped sharing my faith.

As I read the literature on both sides of the discussion I see there is a great deal to bypass that is bluster and insult.  I realize that there is a great deal at stake here.  I understand that there is all of existence under discussion. 

Some naturalists see the scientists who promote intelligent design as lesser and undeserving of common respect in the scientific community.  “The theory of intelligent design is not based upon ignorance or religion but instead upon recent scientific discoveries and upon standard methods of scientific reasoning in which our uniform experience of cause and effect guides our inferences about what happened in the past.” (Stephen C. Meyer)

Earth seen from Saturn

In the same manner as Christ follower need to own the lies they used in the past to manipulate and control what others think, those who oppose intelligent design need to have honesty in reviewing the work of scientists who see the case for intelligent design.  The entire process must be one of integrity and respect among equals.  When either side tries to bully the other they weaken their own position.

As for us “common folk” we must honestly look at both sides.  When I think through these things I ponder all the information.  I consider everything that is said and the way in which it is said.  I have much more respect for Ben Stein in his approach than I do Richard Dawkins. 

The truth is that I must honestly listen to everything that is said.  That does not mean that I put anything at risk.  I am compelled to seek God with all that I am.  He wishes me to use my mind and be honest.  When I encounter the lies I ask why.  When I see insults and rejection I look for the motivation.  Honest science does not need to squelch differing investigation.  Honest belief does not either.

Wishing you joy in the journey,

Aramis Thorn

Mat 13:52 So Jesus said to them, "That is why every writer who has become a disciple of Christ’s rule of the universe is like a home owner. He liberally hands out new and old things from his great treasure store.”

(͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It Was an Accident ~ A Matter of Purpose

Greetings Dear Reader,

I will not even begin to attempt to answer the question of why we are here.  Even my best theological answers based on years of study still do not ultimately answer the why of it all.  I think I know enough to answer for my own needs but they ultimate why of it eludes me if I am honest. 

Still when those who deny intelligent design in teleological areas speak, they often assume that if there is a designer “x” purpose would be un-served or flawed.  If we do not know the objective of the designer we are in no position to say that the design is flawed.  We cannot honestly critique the design because it does not fit our purpose or thinking.  If I am not the designer then I cannot honestly say, without it being communicated to me by the designer, that I know the purpose.

I think that the assumption that our purpose is the same as the intended purpose of a designer of the universe is arrogant and flawed.  I also think that if we honestly read the literature of those who insist that the initiation of everything is a series of cosmic accidents, we find that they use teleological language to describe the activity of unintelligent actions.

We give a purpose to what has happened no matter what we believe.  Whether it is giving credit to an intentional designer or that “genes emerged and were grabbed by evolution to perform a new task” (Ignacio Mareso) we give intent to actions.  We assume that there is a purpose imposed on actions. 

When faced with choosing whether the amazing cosmos is subject to the intent of an Intelligent Designer or the intent of an evolutionary process the answer seems simple to me.  A Designer with intent is much more reasonable to me than the intent of a process.  The latter leaves too many questions that require faith I do not have.

Wishing you joy in the journey,

Aramis Thorn

Mat 13:52 So Jesus said to them, "That is why every writer who has become a disciple of Christ’s rule of the universe is like a home owner. He liberally hands out new and old things from his great treasure store.”

(͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It Was an Accident ~ Opening Thoughts

Greetings Dear Reader,

Recently I was privileged to have a very level headed and intelligent discussion with a friend and colleague about the nature of the universe.  I think about this much more often than I talk about it.  Please remember a few things as your peruse this Dear Reader:  I do believe in intelligent design and an Intelligent Designer.  I do value and validate honest science.  I believe that the two can exist in harmony without contradiction.  I am certain that at times people of faith are dishonest in order to hold onto something that they fear they do not have an answer to or can explain.

Our discussion triggered my desire to update my knowledge and understanding of the newest science concerning our universe.  Parried with that have been several media events that posed the same topics and captured my interest.  Since I wish to be sure that I have a reason for the things I believe I want to understand what others are thinking as well.  As I wrote some weeks earlier I do not think that one can explicitly prove the existence of a Designer without said Designer weighing in on the matter.  He does not because he requires faith.

This is not a copout.  I am not doing to simply say that you have to have faith because we cannot explain something.   That is not honest and complete.  We cannot prove or disprove the existence of God.  My aforementioned friend did not like the word faith because it carries import that he does not like.  In discussions about science we still cannot get away from the term “believe.”   Everything, if we hold true requires a measure of belief. 

We use terms like the “preponderance of evidence” or “the current thinking” to say that we have faith that this or that thing is true.  I understand the need to avoid the word faith but it is still faith.  It is still belief.  I think this is a very seminal understanding that we must embrace when we ponder the existence of the universe.  We believe…something.

I am going to walk through some things that I am considering relative to this set of questions.  I am in awe of the things we are discovering in our cosmos.  I find that it all is beautiful, amazing, and worthy of study.  I also find it confounding that others can look at it and be convinced that it is all an accident.  Shall we journey together on this for a bit Dear Reader?

Wishing you joy in the journey,

Aramis Thorn

Mat 13:52 So Jesus said to them, "That is why every writer who has become a disciple of Christ’s rule of the universe is like a home owner. He liberally hands out new and old things from his great treasure store.”

(͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)