Theological Science: The Nature of Things and Their Positive and Negative Qualities, II
If you read Ch. 3 of Genesis, Moses will tell you that knowledge of good and evil could not be fully known by Adam and Eve, who were the first humans who sought to become go
ds by knowing all of the wisdom of God. Today, we understand this teaching of Moses today better because all laws of Nature and all moral laws cannot be fully known by us. The first modern writing on this teaching of Moses was made by Bishop Nicholas of Cusa. In his first book, On Learned Ignorance, Cusa tells us, in Bk. I, Ch.4, that knowledge cannot achieve the maximum. So, his book shows that we can learn what we cannot know.
Since man’s knowledge cannot become maximum, Moses was telling us in the Book of Genesis that God’s creation has no end. So, when Moses said that God rested on the 7th day, Moses is telling us that God finished the first six phases of the creation and that God rested by beginning the next phase.
Many religions, especially religious fundamentalism, have misinterpreted this teaching of Moses. However, this misinterpretation has caused psychological problems in people who rationalize materialism and atheism. So, in this blog, I show that materialism and atheism are unwanted negatives of the human mind and are as dangerous as the dirty nuclear-radiating thing that was made by warring men. I described this dirty thing in yesterday’s blog.
If one becomes a theological scientist, that person will learn that the human mind is a thing that measures things and becomes images of the things that God created, as Paul said at Rom. 1:30. So, when a person seeks knowledge of God’s created things, the human mind becomes harmonious with the things God created.
Now, if a person has turned from spiritualism to materialism and from theism to atheism, the mind of this person is being filled daily with images of things that are negatives and are not harmonious with the natural things that God created. These negatives are not positive things that God created. The criminal mind is an example of a disharmonious mind.
ds by knowing all of the wisdom of God. Today, we understand this teaching of Moses today better because all laws of Nature and all moral laws cannot be fully known by us. The first modern writing on this teaching of Moses was made by Bishop Nicholas of Cusa. In his first book, On Learned Ignorance, Cusa tells us, in Bk. I, Ch.4, that knowledge cannot achieve the maximum. So, his book shows that we can learn what we cannot know.Since man’s knowledge cannot become maximum, Moses was telling us in the Book of Genesis that God’s creation has no end. So, when Moses said that God rested on the 7th day, Moses is telling us that God finished the first six phases of the creation and that God rested by beginning the next phase.
Many religions, especially religious fundamentalism, have misinterpreted this teaching of Moses. However, this misinterpretation has caused psychological problems in people who rationalize materialism and atheism. So, in this blog, I show that materialism and atheism are unwanted negatives of the human mind and are as dangerous as the dirty nuclear-radiating thing that was made by warring men. I described this dirty thing in yesterday’s blog.
If one becomes a theological scientist, that person will learn that the human mind is a thing that measures things and becomes images of the things that God created, as Paul said at Rom. 1:30. So, when a person seeks knowledge of God’s created things, the human mind becomes harmonious with the things God created.
Now, if a person has turned from spiritualism to materialism and from theism to atheism, the mind of this person is being filled daily with images of things that are negatives and are not harmonious with the natural things that God created. These negatives are not positive things that God created. The criminal mind is an example of a disharmonious mind.
posted by George Shollenberger @ 11:06 AM
5 Comments:
At 4:24 PM,
Anonymous said…
One thing that makes me doubt the Bible is that King Solomon sought heavenly wisdom....yet he never invested that "vast" amounts of tithe money into scientific R&D, the same money that reportedly made him richer than all the other kings around the land of Canaan. Furthermore, it was ridiculous how he built such a huge temple (archeology anyone!?) and then told people to sacrifice their rams and animals in it. This is not the signs of a wise man, but more the signs of a pagan! How can you take his words as wise when he says "Atheists are fools"?
I'll let you know that Solomon had a major PR campaign going, and that is why the people he governed thought he was such a wise king. Really though, with all of that wisdom and all of that wealth, then why didn't the semetic Jewish peoples of that region invent stuff? There is even a command by God in Genesis for mankind to have dominion over the forces of nature, i.e to engage in scientific enquiry and to apply that understanding (once again, I'm putting my own spin on something that is far to vague to have any real meaning, but of course it is a good spin on garbage).
At 10:26 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
response to quantum_flux,
I have never read the Bible as a student of the Bible. My Bible has a great Index to the Books of the Old and New Testaments. As a scientist, I use the Bible as a history, reference, science, and moral book only. I use the Bible only to seek proven truths. Since the Bible contains no proofs, I use the Bible, as I use the writings of any other people.
I never read the Old Testament on Solomon. I only know what you are saying aboutt him. It sounds like Solomon could not reason well. But I expect to find bad reasoning during his time. The lines of reasoning during the ancient period is very different from our modern lines of reasoning. But, the difference between the ancient period and the modern period is almost like night and day.
I give the symbol 'wisdom' only to God. Thus, like other humans, Solomon was not wise. The Old Testament was made over 1200 years. So, interpreting the Old Testament is a difficult taskt.
Always, the clerics of any religion impede scientific and technology progress. But, remember that progress was also impeded by the sratic sciences. The development of static sciences had to wait for the development of dynamic sciences.
However, I studied the New Testament and the teachings of Jesus Christ. I conclude that his teachings are of a divine origin. So, I follow his teachings closely.
I believe that God did not inspire the Bible. So, th Ten Commandments are suggestions of Moses not commands of God.
In Genesdis 1:28, Moses says that man will have dominon over all living things. I happen to agree with this hypothesis of Moses because man seems to be the only creative living thing. For example, I kill the weeds before they kill the beautiful grass that surrounds my home.
I suggest that scientists use the Bible as an ancient science book only. I am trying to unify science and theology. But, my scientific talkes with religions have not been successful because power still rules over truths in the field of religion. In the future, religious fundamentalism might recognize its teaching errors.
George
At 3:22 AM,
Anonymous said…
Well, it would be unwise to assume that homo-sapiens are the only species that can develope tools....neanderthals did, as in discoveries from recent news that I['ve read. I do believe that all living beings possess intelligence on varying scales, and there could be some yet undiscovered alien species that is far more intelligent than homo sapiens....perhaps with the abilities to put guys like Stephen Hawking to shame on an IQ test.
I don't quite see how the Gospels of Jesus are any more divine than Genesis or Exodus, or anymore divine than polytheism or pantheism. Although, for that latter one, I would state that the Gospels of Jesus are less divine than pantheistic naturalism.
I believe that a revelation of divinity (truth) can only come from the study of God, which I define as being "nature" in a sort of pantheistic fashion (although, as an atheist whom believes that truth comes from the study of nature, I don't believe in miracles or the afterlife)
In any case, it doesn't make much sense for me to go around claiming to be a pantheist though, except for the fact that some people try to annoy atheists for disbelieving God, so sometimes I'll equate God=Nature.
At 5:57 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
response to quantum-flux.
QF: Well, it would be unwise to assume that homo-sapiens are the only species that can develop tools....neanderthals did, as in discoveries from recent news that I['ve read. I do believe that all living beings possess intelligence on varying scales, and there could be some yet undiscovered alien species that is far more intelligent than homo sapiens....perhaps with the abilities to put guys like Stephen Hawking to shame on an IQ test.
George: At this time I say that all living things (and nonliving) come from God. But, I say that humans are different from the lower animals. The difference is that humans can build sign and symbolic languages. The symbolic languages can increase knowledge about God and the universe. The lower animals can build only sign languages.
I believe that some humans can beome more intelligent than other humans. But, I do not believe that humans have different intellectual races. Instead, I agree with the founders of the USA, who say that ‘all men are created equal.’
QF: I don't quite see how the Gospels of Jesus are any more divine than Genesis or Exodus, or anymore divine than polytheism or pantheism. Although, for that latter one, I would state that the Gospels of Jesus are less divine than pantheistic naturalism.
George: The ability to write about a new idea long before the idea enters into the field of science and is confirmed by science is my measure of a divine thought.
QF: I believe that a revelation of divinity (truth) can only come from the study of God, which I define as being "nature" in a sort of pantheistic fashion (although, as an atheist whom believes that truth comes from the study of nature, I don't believe in miracles or the afterlife)
George: I don’t believe in revelations. I believe that the study of God produces divine thoughts. The only miracle I recognize is God’s creation of things out of no things. Certainly I agree in after life. Otherwise, I could not say that God and man are eternal partners.
QF: In any case, it doesn't make much sense for me to go around claiming to be a pantheist though, except for the fact that some people try to annoy atheists for disbelieving God, so sometimes I'll equate God=Nature.
George: I don’t believe that anyone has ever defined Nature and proved it. To me, God created things and unified them with an intelligent dsign.
George
At 11:13 PM,
Anonymous said…
Nature is the physical laws that govern the universe. Causality, continuity, probabilities, and conservation. A repeated experiment always gives the same approximate results if the controls are all the same, and if that weren't the case then there would be no such thing as science and we'd still be living in the superstition of the dark ages when the pope and God had absolute authority.
Post a Comment
<< Home