 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 4/26/2010 6:11 PM (GMT -6) |   | I’ve been enjoying Discovery Channel lately and am fascinated by their recent specials on the Hubble telescope and other specials on cosmology. After watching several specials that talked about the size of the universe—its ineffable enormity—I sat dazed. It’s a mystery you don’t contemplate by comprehending the whole, since the whole escapes our grasp, but by feeling your insignificance in comparison to what you can comprehend. I’m sure there’s an analogy there for understanding how it is divine mysteries function doxologically.
Anyhow, I was thinking about something that almost all astronomers agree upon, a point first brought into clarity by Hubble’s own discovery that the universe was expanding (the galaxies that make up the universe are all racing away from each other and one another) AND that they’re expanding at an ever increasing speed. So most experts on this program preferred to believe that the universe would expand until all galaxies and stars had crossed the point of no return, i.e., had escape any gravitational pull/influence from other galaxies, and so eventually would burn out. The end of the universe would be a slow and cold death. This is opposed to the view (possible as well) that the expansion would eventually cease on account of the universal draw of gravity and then begin to collapse in upon itself.
I’m wondering if there are any theological reasons for preferring one view over the other. As I thought about the first option (expanding into a cold wintery death), it seemed to lead to the heavenly bodies expanding into a kind of absolute absence of relationality among the galaxies. That is, you’d have galaxies spin off to distances from one another so great that no chain of gravitational influence would even exist, a true solitariness.
The second option, the Big Crunch, seems to leave us with better theological options. Dunno.
Of course, the ‘end’ (i.e., the Christian ‘end’) of the universe could come before either option confronts us. Enter…dark energy and anti-matter, that strange force that’s pushing the galaxies apart at ever greater speeds. What the heck is that? I honestly thought that dark matter was an evil at work. If evil is a misrelation that’s inherently solipsistic, that ultimately sees only itself and works against all relatedness, then might the ever expanding nature of the universe by the work of a dark power that’s seeking to do just what the first option describes...push everything into an absolute state of being unrelated. Of course, God would still relate all things in himself, but the created universe in terms of its own created capacities and contexts would be utterly unrelated—no ‘relatedness’ within the created order.
Hmmm.
Tom
KIXYTΘEMTA | | Back to Top | | |
 |
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 6:30 PM (GMT -6) | | | Enter the "Void" aspect of Creation, homie. I believe that what you are talking about is the "futility" built into Creation by the will of God.
The ultimate representation of the truth told in Ecclesiastes.
It forces the issue: God or No-thingness. One can either leap into the Positive Absurd (faith in the God-Human, Jesus...which ensures one of God's "covenant of eternality" with Creation) or into the negative Absurd (anything that doesn't transcend the meaninglessness of Void). This is JUST what SK says.
This is what Loder essentially says in "The Knight's Move": Creation in and of itself is "no-thing" and COMES TO no-thing. This fact removes any sense of self-sufficiency or inherent eternality whatsoever from Creation. Without any divine transformation, the ultimate destiny of the universe is ultimate silence and void. However, there's an interesting opportunity presented by this, and it actually turns out to be a gift of love from God. Why? Because once a person has ACCEPTED their essential no-thingness before God, then they are "emptied" enough to be filled with the Grace of God to do God's ETERNAL "works of Love." We are free to let go of the world of PERISHING things to live in Divine Presence, expressing the ETERNAL in the EXISTENTIAL...being IN the world, but definitely not OF it.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 4/26/2010 7:00:58 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 6:53 PM (GMT -6) | | | For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope (God) that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.
This "redemption of our bodies" part testifies to the SURE HOPE (grounded in the Risen Jesus) that Void, Entropy, and No-thingness will NOT have the last word! Holy Presence overwhelms the "no-thingness" of Creation to redeem and glorify human bodies...and through them, the REST of Creation.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 4/26/2010 6:58:50 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Daniel M
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2009
Total Posts : 263
| Posted 4/26/2010 9:22 PM (GMT -6) | | Hey Tom,
I'm actually in a mid-level Astro-physics class right now. I'm about 6 years older then all of my class mates, but I digress.
Tom said...
This is opposed to the view (possible as well) that the expansion would eventually cease on account of the universal draw of gravity and then begin to collapse in upon itself.
This is not possible, at least it's not considered possible anymore. We did the math maybe two weeks ago. Including all likely amounts of dark matter and visible matter in the universe, there simply isn't enough mass to pull the universe back together. Hubble began the research that lead to the idea that the universe is not only expanding, but it's expanding at an accelerating rate. The problem with this is that it means the universe is slightly older then the current model of 13.7 billion years. It would be closer to 15 billion. The discrepancy may see proportionality small but accuracy is important in models. So this suggests that some of our equations might be off.
Tom said...
That is, you’d have galaxies spin off to distances from one another so great that no chain of gravitational influence would even exist, a true solitariness.
There will always be a gravitational relationship between all objects that exist, however small. But the information of that relationship would never, never become known to us, because eventually galaxies are going to be moving away from us faster than the speed of light, at which point we will no longer be able to receive information from them, and do the math to figure out that relationship. The relationship would exist, but it would be beyond or current limitations to calculate. It's not quite accurate to say nothing can move faster than the speed of light, more accurately it is information cannot travel faster than the speed of light.
Oh, and the force that pushes galaxies apart is "dark energy". We really don't know what it is. It is the "expansion" of space in between galaxies. The analogy my professor used was like a loaf of raisin bread. Before the dough is cooked the raisins are close to each other, but when the dough is baked, it rises, and "expands", moving the raisins further apart. The analogy is not perfect, of course, because the dough has an edge, and we're not sure if the universe does.
We also did the math for calculating the age of the universe, crazy mind-blowing stuff. God did a bang-up job  Post Edited (Daniel M) : 4/26/2010 9:49:31 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:02 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
How does the concept of 'void' push the galaxies apart?
Don't get caught up on the "void" Loderian terminology I'm using. Really think about the "futility" aspect. Doesn't the way we know KNOW the universe is GOING to ultimate silence and no-thingess...smack of a inbred "futility" in the universe?
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 4/26/2010 10:05:43 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Daniel M
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2009
Total Posts : 263
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:10 PM (GMT -6) | | Hey Tom,
Yea, long, slow freeze it is. But entropy is still a few, if not hundreds, of billions of years away.
I'll try to answer the questions, but I am by no means a astro-physicist
Question 1:
I think this has to do with the movement of the galaxies. We would all be moving, more or less uniformly, away from the locus of the big bang. From what I understand of the development of Atoms, it was an almost equal (but not quite, otherwise things would be very different) distribution of hydrogen and helium when the atomic era began roughly 300,000 years after the big bang. This implies that matter wasn't being pushed away from the big bang. Otherwise the cosmic background radiation would look as though it were being "pushed" away from a central location. The problem is that the universe is larger than the distance we can see. We can't see objects more than 13.7 billion light years away. I'm not even sure we can see objects that far away, I have a feeling our observable field is slightly smaller.
We don't know what the totality of the universe looks like, we can only see within our little bubble. But from within our observable area, there is no uniform movement that would suggest a singular "push" away from something. By all accounts we cannot say that there is a center to the universe.
Question 2:
No one knows. Dark energy is an utter mystery. No one understands it. Gravity counteracts it within the constraints of our galaxy, solar system, and planet. So we can't experience it. But Hubble's observations, and subsequent research shows that space is expanding between galaxies. It's not just that they are moving apart like two baseballs thrown in opposite directions. It's as if the stuff that's between the galaxies is growing. We don't know why or how. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:13 PM (GMT -6) | | Daniel:
Yea, long, slow freeze it is. But entropy is still a few, if not hundreds, of billions of years away.
True, but doesn't this inevitability of human extinction make existential nihilism pretty rational sans God?
Existential nihilism
Existential nihilism is the belief that life has no intrinsic meaning or value. It can stem from scientific analysis showing that only the physical laws contributed to our existence. With respect to the universe, a single human or even the entire human species is insignificant, without purpose and is not likely to change in the totality of existence. Quite simply, nihilists in this respect believe that the only purpose in life is to live it.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Daniel M
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2009
Total Posts : 263
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:17 PM (GMT -6) | | Hey One Love,
I think existential nihilism is pretty rational sans God regardless of one's cosmological leanings. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:21 PM (GMT -6) | | Daniel:
I think existential nihilism is pretty rational sans God regardless of one's cosmological leanings.
I hear ya. At the same time, you would think what we know about how the universe WILL end would sink into the minds of people who actually try to accomplish something MEANINGFUL through their actions. I think that lots of secular humanists are future oriented, thinking of significant expanse of human life into the universe. But it all comes to a big fat zero at the end. So what's the point, ya know?
Basically, it boggles my mind how a person could believe what modern science says about the universe... and try to assert that humanity is not utterly insignificant and meaningless, coming to absolutely nothing.
Living in self-deceit (living in ultimately groundless concepts of meaning) may make a person feel better about their situation, but it still IS their situation: despair.
That "quiet desperation" that Thoreau talked about...
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 4/26/2010 10:26:48 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:30 PM (GMT -6) | | Give you an example. Let's say I'm a atheist and nihilist. I accept the inevitability of the "Big Freeze" at the end of everything. I have cancer. And I'm currently depressed.
What is some psychological professional gonna tell me to get me to believe that life is really worth living? Really. What possible line of HOPE could any person or group of people give to me? I could, by some miraculous means, give myself "immortality", come to rule the entire world and, by whatever means, extend the human existence to the ends of the universe...and it would STILL come to an absolute ZERO in the end. Meaningless. And that would just be the truth.
THAT is the "futility" of this created universe...sans God.
Now, what if you are a Christian (faith in the Risen Jesus) and hesychast (seeing the Uncreated Light of God). You accept the inevitability of the "Big Freeze" at the end of everything. You have cancer. You're currently depressed.
Is there any source of HOPE that you have available to you?
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 4/26/2010 10:59:33 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Daniel M
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2009
Total Posts : 263
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:40 PM (GMT -6) | | Hey One Love,
I think most atheists would cite some sort of philosophic pragmatism. They will believe whatever makes them happy regardless of the coherence of those beliefs and regardless if they lead to contradictory world views. Because for the philosophic pragmatist, reason itself is thrown out the window. They would probably refer to William James for the deflation of reason.
I'm inclined to agree with you. Sartre would probably agree too, he would call it "bad faith". But his solution isn't really a solution at all.
I'm inclined to think that a renewed heaven and earth implies alterations to the physical cosmos. I have no idea what these would look like, or how they would be established. But I'm disinclined to think that the New Jerusalem will be established on a planet that will be scorched by a red giant in roughly 5 billion years. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Daniel M
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2009
Total Posts : 263
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:49 PM (GMT -6) | | One Love: But these would be some of the same atheists that would REQUIRE REASON to do any kind of denunciation of religious faith..and getting mad at theists for not using ENOUGH REASON to become atheists. How absurd is that?
It's a viscous circle. It's part of the reason why I've given up on trying to do any sort of "apologetics". I'm honestly not sure how to talk to those types of individuals about religious faith. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:51 PM (GMT -6) | | | Yo. Tell me you can't see "Pascal's Wager" here. I mean, given the way the universe works, you're screwed anyways. You MIGHT AS WELL reach out for a Creator. What do you really have to lose?
Pascal's Wager (or Pascal's Gambit) is a suggestion posed by the French philosopher Blaise Pascal that even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, a person should wager as though God exists, because living life accordingly has everything to gain, and nothing to lose.
And you know what? I think God MADE it this way. God included this "futility" in Creation...in hope...
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 4/26/2010 11:03:53 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 10:55 PM (GMT -6) | | Daniel:
It's a viscous circle. It's part of the reason why I've given up on trying to do any sort of "apologetics". I'm honestly not sure how to talk to those types of individuals about religious faith.
At this point, if I were to talk to anyone like that, I'd GENUINELY ask them:
"Why should anyone--including you--think you or anyone special to you are in any way significant if you (along with all human existence) are ultimately meaningless and insignificant to the universe?"
I'd really want to them to logically ground their own sense of significance...in something REAL.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 4/26/2010 10:58:17 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 11:05 PM (GMT -6) | | I think God made the universe this way, in hope, to "force the issue" for the created to seek the Uncreated Creator.
Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for
“‘In him we live and move and have our being’;
as even some of your own poets have said,
“‘For we are indeed his offspring.’
Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”
-------------------------------------------------
For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope (God) that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 4/26/2010 11:11:16 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/26/2010 11:17 PM (GMT -6) | | This is part of why, I think, the BODILY resurrection is so crucial to Christian faith. The Resurrected Flesh of Christ the Logos is the CONFIRMATION of God's "covenant of eternality" with Creation. By faith, we know that Creation will last as long as Christ's Resurrected Flesh does...and THAT's for the remainder of eternity.
The Resurrected Flesh of the God the Son is the ASSURANCE of God's tranfigurative and transformative intentions for humanity (and the universe indwelled by humanity).
Without that assurance, even IF we believed in a Creator, we couldn't be sure he wouldn't just shut the lights off on us...or LET us go into ultimate no-thingless. But since an UNCREATED DIVINE PERSON has INCORRUPTIBLE, GLORIFIED HUMAN FLESH, we CAN be sure by faith that our Creator won't do such a thing. There's far too much "personal investment" for that. 
That's why Christians can look the "Big Freeze" (and the utter reality of death it represents) in the face...and laugh. Death has no sting, the Grave has no victory.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 4/26/2010 11:23:07 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
| 42 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 12:58 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|