Why Akathleptos?

Why Akathleptos? Because it means Uncontainable. God is infinite. Hence, the whole universe cannot contain Him. The term also refers to the incomprehensibility of God. No man can know everything about God. We can know Him personally but not exhaustively, not even in Heaven.

Why Patmos? Because the church is increasingly marginalized and exiled from the culture.

Why Pen-Names? So the focus is on the words and not who wrote them. We prefer to let what we say stand on its own merit. There is precedent in church history for this - i.e., the elusive identity of Ambrosiaster who wrote in the 4th century A.D.

“Truth is so obscured nowadays, and lies so well established, that unless we love the truth we shall never recognize it." Blaise Pascal

Friday, July 28, 2017

The Cosmological Elephant In The Room

Secular cosmology dictates that on a large scale, the Universe must be relatively uniform (homogeneous and isotropic). There can be so "special" places in the Cosmos since the Big Bang must have homogeneously produced matter and everything uniformly evolved over eons of time by random chance. The problem is though that it turns out the Universe is not homogeneous on a large scale. Of course, secualists will go to any lengths to avoid the logical conclusion of the origin of the Universe.

William Lane Carig has an interesting article here entitled "Cosmology – A Religion for Atheists?"

In the award-winning movie A Theory of Everything Stephen Hawking introduces himself to his wife-to-be Jane by describing himself as a cosmologist. When Jane asks what that is, he replies “it’s a kind of religion for intelligent atheists.”

The remark is both provocative and revealing. Cosmology is obviously not literally a religion. It is a branch of astrophysics which studies the large-scale structure of the universe. Now if one is a naturalist, that is to say, someone who believes that all that exists is spacetime and its contents, then in a sense someone who studies the universe is studying the ultimate reality. This is the same project in which the theologian is engaged, except that for the theologian the ultimate reality is God, not the universe. The theologian has a wider, more encompassing view of reality than the naturalist, for he believes in a reality which transcends the universe. The universe is a subordinate reality which is created by God. For cosmologists who are theists—such as George Ellis, perhaps the world’s greatest living cosmologist, who is also portrayed in this movie—cosmology is therefore not a kind of religion, but the scientific study of a subordinate reality. But for the naturalist, it’s easy to see how cosmology could become quasi-religious.

Elsewhere, Craig points out that "The contingency implied by an absolute beginning ex nihilo points to a transcendent cause of the universe beyond space and time."

There is a related article here written by Jewish Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen entitled "What are the theological implications of modern cosmology?" As the article concludes, 

"There are, of course, mathematicians, physicists, astronomers, and cosmologists who choose not to believe in God today. For a variety of reasons, they choose instead to have faith that new natural laws will be discovered or that new evidence will appear and overturn the current model of an open, created universe. But for many in the scientific community, the evidence is persuasive. For many, modern cosmology offers permission to believe."

Finally, theologian John Macarthur correctly points out,

There is no such thing as the science of creation. There is no such thing. It does not exist. Why? Because there is no scientific way to explain creation. It was not a natural event or a series of natural events. It was a brief series of monumental super-natural events that cannot be explained by science. And so again I say, there is no such thing as the science of creation. All science is based on observation and no one observed creation. All science necessitates verification by repetition and creation cannot be repeated, and thus it cannot be verified.

Creation had no observers and cannot be repeated. It is not observable. It is not repeatable. It did not happen by any uniform, predictable, observable, repeatable, fixed, natural, laws. None of it happened according to any of those things. It is just the opposite of that. Creation was a series of supernatural instantaneous, inexplicable miracles...supernatural. That is why there is nowhere in the Genesis account any place where evolution is mentioned or even hinted at. There are no natural processes in creation. They are all supernatural. Evolution was not the means or a means by which God created, it was all supernatural and miraculous. There’s only one record of creation, Genesis 1 and 2. You can believe it or you can reject it, but that’s all there is. (emphasis is mine)

No comments:

Post a Comment