"Artificial" Apologetics for the Truth of the book of Revelation

[2PhiloVoid]

I read it but it's not clear to me how that relates to the subject matter of the video, which is downright silly in comparison, full of the usual evangelical nonsense.

I didn't say that the portion of the book I posted above had any direct relation to further explaining what Lennox had to say, now did I? No, I'm posting it simply as an extra piece of existential and hermeneutical thought, one that, like many of the diverse sources I've engaged through the years, simply enables me to EXPLORE God's Million Acre Woods.

However, what Lennox says, on another count, I do think carries some essential meaning, even if I wouldn't articulate it all myself in quite the way he has.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Right. That's why I think it's unfortunate that @2PhiloVoid is badly misreading Revelation. There really aren't any clues here as to to the future of artificial intelligence, because that's not what the book is really about.

Mr. Lennox is just using peoples interest in AI to try to shoehorn in a bit of evangelical religion. But this is what I mean by ignorance of higher criticism of the Bible. The Bible is not a magic code book that can decipher our futures in that manner.

I've just been WAITING for some "expert" like you to come along and show me the door, FD, especially when I've never, ever, ever, claimed that my own theology was Systematic, built on utter Logic, nor have I thiought any Christian is capable of fully bringing together an utterly Fanatastic and Coherent Metaphysics by which to "prove" the Bible. Not only this, but I find it rather odd that you and NH and other "interested" atheists think you'll just waltz on in and take down my theology when you can't even handle the Unsystematic, Existential amalgamation that I have at my disposal, let alone find the time to engage much of any of it.

As for my being "Evangelical," well now, you'll have to take that claim of yours up with my fellow Christians on the entire forum and ask them how many of them are willing to claim me for their own. And while you do that, I'll just sit here feeding hay to Pascal's A.A.S.S.

 

[FireDragon76]

I've just been WAITING for some "expert" like you to come along and show me the door, FD, especially when I've never, ever, ever, claimed that my own theology was Systematic, built on utter Logic, nor have I thiought any Christian is capable of fully bringing together an utterly Fanatastic and Coherent Metaphysics by which to "prove" the Bible. Not only this, but I find it rather odd that you and NH and other "interested" atheists think you'll just waltz on in and take down my theology when you can't even handle the Unsystematic, Existential amalgamation that I have at my disposal, let alone find the time to engage much of any of it.

As for my being "Evangelical," well now, you'll have to take that claim of yours up with my fellow Christians on the entire forum and ask them how many of them are willing to claim me for their own. And while you do that, I'll just sit here feeding hay to Pascal's A.A.S.S.

You have a grab bag of different concepts but I'm not sure you've actually sat down and looked at how they all interact together to potentially produce some problematic, even life-denying and inauthentic approaches to living in this world.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You have a grab bag of different concepts but I'm not sure you've actually sat down and looked at how they all interact together to potentially produce some problematic, even life-denying and inauthentic approaches to living in this world.

I've had 30+ years to research, think and pray over my own views on theology and eschatology, and as I've said before, you seem to keep implying that you just can't imagine that I've actually grappled with a number of theologies and their philosophical underpinnings.

Just like I don't know what you've specifically studied in systematic fashion, you may want to refrain from assuming that you can guess what I've studied, and whether I've done so in a systematic fashion or in a more aggregate manner.

This isn't to say that I haven't attempted to approach Eschatology in wholesale fashion over the years as do some of the more vibrant Dispensationalists, but my studies have led me to think that I might not be able to fashion a systematic, comprehensive conceptual canon or any kind of prophetic time-line from various Apocalyptic passages in Scripture, or extra-biblical literature, or even from a little of what can be found in some of the other World Religions.

No, I think all we can do is apply as many modes of Hermeneutical and Philosophical consideration that we can and then pray for the best.

As for just how "life-denying" or "inauthentic" my approach to living in this world is, everyone here is free to test my point of view if they wish, but I'm skeptical as to just how much of those tests will actually demonstrate deficiencies in my own theology VERSUS simply demonstrating circumstances in which something I have to say just happens to be a something that someone else 'dislikes' hearing.

If you or anyone else wants to place an accusation of Sartrean 'bad-faith' upon me, well then, have at it! I've never claimed to have all of the answers anyway, and if I don't, then the humanitarian thing to do, in my estimation, is to refer me to some additional authoritative sources by which I might grow in my thinking rather than simply telling me, with condescension, that I seem to be "oblivious" to some eschatological or other religious field of thought.

 

[FireDragon76]

I've had 30+ years to research, think and pray over my own views on theology and eschatology, and as I've said before, you seem to keep implying that you just can't imagine that I've actually grappled with a number of theologies and their philosophical underpinnings.

Just like I don't know what you've specifically studied in systematic fashion, you may want to refrain from assuming that you can guess what I've studied, and whether I've done so in a systematic fashion or in a more aggregate manner.

This isn't to say that I haven't attempted to approach Eschatology in wholesale fashion over the years as do some of the more vibrant Dispensationalists, but my studies have led me to think that I might not be able to fashion a systematic, comprehensive conceptual canon or any kind of prophetic time-line from various Apocalyptic passages in Scripture, or extra-biblical literature, or even from a little of what can be found in some of the other World Religions.

No, I think all we can do is apply as many modes of Hermeneutical and Philosophical consideration that we can and then pray for the best.

As for just how "life-denying" or "inauthentic" my approach to living in this world is, everyone here is free to test my point of view if they wish, but I'm skeptical as to just how much of those tests will actually demonstrate deficiencies in my own theology VERSUS simply demonstrating circumstances in which something I have to say just happens to be a something that someone else 'dislikes' hearing.

If you or anyone else wants to place an accusation of Sartrean 'bad-faith' upon me, well then, have at it! I've never claimed to have all of the answers anyway, and if I don't, then the humanitarian thing to do, in my estimation, is to refer me to some additional authoritative sources by which I might grow in my thinking rather than simply telling me, with condescension, that I seem to be "oblivious" to some eschatological or other religious field of thought.

Just be careful with eschatology. It is an area that is full of potential shipwrecks for otherwise decent people.

I am convinced alot of problems we have in the US are due to a substantial number in the US population essentially having an eschatology that is only different in degree and not kind, from Aum Shinrikyo. When you feel that the world situation is that dire and hopeless, productive and life-affirming engagement with the world is a luxury that is seemingly unaffordable.

As for Lennox's discussion on AI, and transhumanism.... I know there have been a minority of Christians that identify as transhumanists. This was especially common in Russia at one time. Tsiolkovsky, the father of modern rocketry and space flight, was influenced by Cosmism, which drew partly from Orthodox anthropology. Being an Eastern Christian anthropology, it was much more optimistic about human potential.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Just be careful with eschatology. It is an area that is full of potential shipwrecks for otherwise decent people.

I'm only too well aware of that already, FD! But thank you for your concern.

I am convinced alot of problems we have in the US are due to a substantial number in the US population essentially having an eschatology that is only different in degree and not kind, from Aum Shinrikyo. When you feel that the world situation is that dire and hopeless, productive and life-affirming engagement with the world is a luxury that is seemingly unaffordable.

Yes, a number of Christians in the U.S. population have resorted to a kind of bunker mentality as well as to "prepping," as if that would even ward off any major, overt anti-christian political changes that might occur at some future point in World History (or in distinction to those that have already been present in the world for quite some time). But such labels wouldn't describe me. No, Wu Wei would describe my own general outlook upon the future, but one specifically existing in reliance upon Christ as opposed to any other entity, whether religious or political.

As for Lennox's discussion on AI, and transhumanism.... I know there have been a minority of Christians that identify as transhumanists. This was especially common in Russia at one time. Tsiolkovsky, the father of modern rocketry and space flight, was influenced by Cosmism, which drew partly from Orthodox anthropology. Being an Eastern Christian anthropology, it was much more optimistic about human potential.

While I'm quite aware of various alternative outlooks which I could instead adopt, at the moment I find that something like what Lennox is speaking about is the view that I most gravitate toward, not because it makes me feel good but rather because it looks to me to be a semblance of the social truth that we all live in.

Of course, there's always the possibility that some really smart persons might come along and address my existential, spiritual and political concerns which make up the notions by which my view is constructed and thereby alleviate me of the nitty-gritty ugliness of those same concerns. However, no one has yet ventured to do so. And the more I think about it, the stranger that I find that whole dynamic to be; it even recursively plays into reinforcing my outlook because...it's what I'd predict would be the case: i.e. there is and will be a growing indifference to Christ.