Theology

I’m usually quite interested in the attempts of individuals to apply math to the Bible, and the Church Hopping blog has a fun little article about some people that are actually using interesting mathematical principles on the text of the Bible. Check it out.

UPDATE: Daniel from the Logos Blog has contacted me about a great post over on that site. As he said, “Thought you might be interested in today’s Logos Blog post looking at The Top 50 People in the Bible and using the IBM Many Eyes visualization. Cool thing is that anyone can play around with the charts and data…” Check it out here.

I don’t know how many of you are familiar with the TED conference, but if you don’t know anything about it I suggest checking out their website here. The yearly conference focuses on technology, entertainment, and design, and it defines its mission as “spreading ideas”. You can watch most of the conference talks on this website. There are some serious gems that you should watch. I suggest the following:

• Hans Rosling: Debunking third-world myths with the best stats you’ve ever seen
• Dan Dennet: Can we know our own minds?
• Richard Dawkins: The universe is queerer than we can suppose
• Majora Carter: Greening the ghetto

Also, I just watched the following presentation made by the Reverend Tom Honey. As the brief synopsis of the talk indicates, “It’s a classic problem in theology: How can the existence of evil be reconciled with a God who is supposed to be all-loving, all-knowing and all-powerful? Many Christian thinkers have attempted answers to this question. In the days following the thousands of personal tragedies recorded during the South Asian tsunami of 2004, Tom Honey pondered those answers and found them wanting. Instead, he penned his own, personal, and sometimes dramatic response to the tsunami. This is a courageous talk for a Church of England vicar to have given. It concludes that certain traditional concepts of God just won’t do … and calls for believers and nonbelievers alike to dig deeper in their quest for truth.”

I was extremely impressed with his thoughts. None of them were particularly new to me, but this talk does provide a good theological redux of the issues involved in the current debate over the problem of evil. It’s an extremely personal and honest appraisal of thought, and I enjoyed listening to it.

Yesterday I listened to a fantastic podcast from the NPR program Intelligence Squared U.S.. From the website, “Intelligence Squared U.S. brings Oxford-style debating to America - one motion, one moderator, three panelists for the motion and against.” The specific program I listened to examines the question, “Is America Too Damn Religious?”, which is a particularly fascinating question to me. The panelists present a scope of different opinions on this issue, and most of the comments are well thought out. Everyone is generally respectful, which is a trait I find important in this type of programming. The reflections are at times theological, political, and practical, which was an interesting mixture to listen to. The entire program can be found here. It’s possible to download a free MP3 version of the program on this page. For those of you with iTunes, you can also find an abbreviated version of the debate by looking for the Intelligence Squared U.S. podcast (which is also free). The entire debate runs about 1.5 hours (the abbreviated podcast is about 1 hour), but I think it’s worth it. For those familiar with the issues surrounding this debate I wouldn’t expect to find too much new information, but what I thought was interesting was the particular representation of viewpoints associated with the panelists.

There’s an interesting article over at ABC News explaining that the number of Americans buying into evolutionary theory has been in decline. The story attributes this surge of opinion to several sources, including “religious fundamentalism, inadequate science education, and partisan political maneuvering”. While I’m not currently interested in discussing the relevancy of these possibilities, the article also talks about the misuse of probability theory by creationists. Here’s a snippet of the argument:

A bit more specifically, the standard argument goes roughly as follows. A very long sequence of individually improbable mutations must occur in order for a species or a biological process to evolve. If we assume these are independent events, then the probability of all of them occurring and occurring in the right order is the product of their respective probabilities, which is always an extremely tiny number. Thus, for example, the probability of getting a 3, 2, 6, 2, and 5 when rolling a single die five times is 1/6 x 1/6 x 1/6 x 1/6 x 1/6 or 1/7,776 — one chance in 7,776.

Check out the above link to read the rest of the story.

While driving home from Bethel Park today I saw two somewhat “interesting”, if not troubling, sites:

1. On a church marquee I saw the following: “Roadmap to heaven: turn right and go straight.” There are so many ways to disagree with this assertion that I don’t even know where to start. So I won’t. I relate it merely for your possible amusement.

2. I saw a PA license plate with the specialized message “GCC GRAD”, which I’m assuming stood for “Grove City College Graduate”. Grove City College, my undergraduate alma mater, is a fairly right-wing Christian school. The car which the license plate was attached to was a large SUV. Inconsistent? Sheesh…

It happens to be the case that there are two different verses in the Old Testament which provide for an approximation of π. In the NIV translation both I Kings 7:23 and II Chronicles 4:2 give the following measurements for a tank which would be enclosed in the “First” Temple:

He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it.

Taking these measurements along with the ratio for π given as circumference over diameter we have a coarse approximation for π of 3. While not astounding in accuracy, I’m always excited to see how subtle tidbits of mathematics invade even religious scripture. In other words, sometimes math is beautifully inescapable.

In you’re interested in learning more about these two verses I suggest reading an article called “On the Rabbinical Exegesis of an Enhanced Biblical Value of π” written by Shlomo Edward G. Belaga. An online version of the article can be found here. The article surmises that the Biblical narrative lends itself to a much more accurate approximation of π. It’s worth a look if you’re intrigued by such ideas.

While on a walk in the nearby forest I came across a lamb grazing in an open pasture. The lamb was home in this place. The sun beat down on the late autumn day as the animal trod graciously along the earth, frequently stopping to taste the fragrant grass beneath it. Wanting to learn more, in the way of my training, I took a step forward. Cautiously at first, I approached the lamb.

As I was equipped with a scale and a ruler, I took the lamb’s measurements. I observed its feeding methods and took note how it traveled along the yielding ground. I examined its wool, wondering the temperature the lamb underneath would be kept in the wintertime. I scrutinized its sound against other tones cataloged in my mind.

Having expended my options I took the lamb away with me to a lab, in order to continue experimentation. Wanting to capture its true nature in order to extend my findings to all who would study lambs after me, I painlessly took its life. Dissecting the lamb I noticed its organs and how its digestive system worked. I noted the distinction of its physiology to that of other animals. I cross-sectioned and test tubed and electrified and poked and prodded along in my studies.

Until in the end, as I gazed around me, I realized that the lamb was gone. Having taken it away with me, in the way of my training, I had taken the lamb to a place it did not want to travel. If I could relive that autumn walk, equipped with a scale and a ruler, I simply would have stopped to watch the lamb, for in the end I would have known it in a greater fullness.

I want to take a moment to say that I haven’t been writing nearly as much as I’ve been thinking. Unfortunately (or fortunately, if I’m caught in the right mood), I’ve started my spring class at Carnegie Mellon. I’m not sad about the content of the course or anything, but it was a great break over Christmas to not have class. And by break I mean that I was still working a full-time job, as well as partaking in general day to day life. (Break! Ha!) I literally have about five extensive posts in various states of completeness, but for the time being you’re just going to have to listen to me talk off the top of my head.

So I’m excited for several reasons.

1. Next Thursday, February 9 Pittsburgh Theological Seminary is hosting a “Conversation about the Emerging Church”, which will be centered around a visit by Dr. John Franke of Biblical Seminary. He, along with Stanly Grenz, is the author of the book entitled Beyond Foundationalism. If you are interested in reading a theology which is so utterly freeing and wonderful that it nearly made me cry, you should read this book. The idea of the book, as the name implies, is to get beyond the Christian foundationalism that has been present for the last several hundred years. If you’d like a short definition of foundationalism, I would quickly define it as the belief that all beliefs are ultimately set upon an unalterable foundation, without which everything crumbles. In Christian terms I would phrase this concept as either “Esse” or “dogma”, but not exactly either.

I have been so utterly obsessed with “Esse” over the past several years that this book has been life changing. The authors have actually been willing to engage this issue! Who would have thought? While reading the book I had several illuminating moments realizing that I am not alone in my thinking. I promised a while back to go on a tirade about the concept of “Esse” on this website, but now that I realize that there are individuals out there who are not only yelling bloody murder, but who are attempting to construct a theology beyond the bounds of the last 500 years while still engaging it. I need to take a moment to listen before assuming a level of pride that I can’t really back up.

So I’m really looking forward to hanging out with Dr. Franke, and for sitting as the Three Nails representative on a panel with both Dr. Franke and other members of the Pittsburgh “emerging” church. That panel will be happening Thursday afternoon at 4:30pm. If you would like information regarding all the festivities that will be taking place during Dr. Franke’s visit, check out this website.

2. Later this month I’m speaking at a retreat for high school student leaders of the Metro Pittsburgh Campus Life chapter. Simultaneously I’m ecstatic and terrified. I haven’t spoken to this many folks in this way for a few years, and I must admit that sometimes I believe myself to be too much of a heretic to be a helpful guide to young people. But ultimately here’s what I have to say about that: We are all heretics. I’ll leave it at that for now. As long as I can present myself with honesty, and with an understanding that I do not know the answers (and very rarely know the right questions), this opportunity should be fruitful for all present.

If anyone is interested in this, I want to ask you a favor. If you have a minute, and can think of a piece of advice that you wish your current self could give to your high school self, write me a comment to this post about it. I don’t really care if you’re a Christian or not. I don’t care if you’re comment is even really spiritual or not. But if you have something to say, I’d like to hear it.

Take it easy friends. I would forward to throwing more material your way soon.

If you have a stray hour here or there I highly suggest checking out my multimedia link for “The Elegant Universe”. It’s a 3 hour (broken into smaller segments) PBS adaptation of Brian Greene’s book of the same name. It surveys 20th century physics into the present, showing how the developments and subsequent mismatches of relativity and quantum mechanics are potentially bridged by string theory. The program is extremely accessible and informative. Even if you don’t consider yourself scientific I would recommend this one. I’ve said for a long time that if you wanted to follow the zeitgeist of the 20th century that all you had to do was follow the theories of the physicists (my hypothesis for the 21st is that we’ll be following the theories of the biologists). In other words, watching the program will bring you more than just a physics tutorial. As least I hope it does.

In this vein…

Once upon a time a man was branded as a heretic by the church for claiming that the earth was not the center of the universe. You may have heard of this man at some point in your life travels. It turns out he was right. Well, he was least slightly more right than the presently accepted truth. He posited that the sun was the center of the universe. Now we know that this is in fact not the case. Not only is the sun moving along with every other star in our galaxy, but our galaxy is also moving. Every galaxy is moving. To and fro the heavens move. What I’m getting at is that we’re never finished with discovering the beautiful and complex facts about existence. We shouldn’t be surprised when the popular understanding of reality is shaken beyond recognition. Nor should we be worried.

Even as I write this post scholars at the forefront of physics question whether our universe is unique or whether it is just one of an infinite number of universes. Does that possibility bother you? Think about it. An infinite number of universes. Well, I don’t think it should bother you. In fact, my belief is that it should comfort you. As we discover the deeper complexities of our universe I see more and more only the hands of God.

Similarly, I feel the same way about the so-called emerging worldviews. I embrace postmodernity. I embrace relativism. Not without question, but I do embrace them. New perspectives bring both greater clarity and greater confusion. It’s the job of those who care to help work out which is which. Will postmodernity or relativism destroy Christian or any other religious belief? Of course not. And if you believe that it will then you are naïve.

Look at relativity and quantum mechanics. They are two branches of physics that smart people have been trying to unite for the past half century. Alone, each tells us unique facts. But when these facts try to mesh together in the current spheres of thought there are inconsistencies. Does this mean that the two oppose one another? I don’t think it does. On one levels there is definite disagreement. But I believe with no doubt that there is a larger canvas through which the two fit in harmony. It is beyond right and wrong.

Why can’t we get past right and wrong? Why can’t we let go of trying to control everything we do? It is so utterly binding. There is always, I am convinced, one step farther down the line that explains the currently unanswerable. And at the end of this line I do believe that God stands with a smile.

I’m not sure what to do with this website ultimately. I feel tripolar about it. First, I have all these random “state-of-the-union in-Ian’s-life” stuff, comprised of dreams and musings and incoherent nonsense. Some of the posts in this category are probably better off somewhere else, but I know that there’s probably someone out there that likes to read them.

Next I have the logic and math stuff, which I’m currently pursuing educationally. I love this stuff, but when I post about it I realize that just about no one is going to read it or understand it (unless they expressly came here to check out what I’m doing at Carnegie Mellon, which is a possibility). I do recommend that even if you don’t have any desire to learn anything about math/logic that you try to read one or two papers/posts anyway. Some of the ideas behind the papers are easily grasped and philosophically extensive. It’s good stuff, and wherever I end up in life I’ll always respect these disciplines.

Lastly, I have all this theology stuff everywhere, which is something I’m passionate about. But the people who are coming here to read about logic/math are probably not at all interested in reading about Christian concepts of absolute truth in the postmodern age. Alas, for now they’ll just have to sift through the muck, although from a philosophical and cultural point of view some of the theology writings and website links are extremely informative even for thos who hold no faith.

So there it is. My tripolar nature. And I don’t apologize about it. It’s just not externally consistent. I hesitate to split this up into three separate blogs, but I may have to do it. Any suggestions from anyone out there?

Last night Em and I went to see Bruce Springsteen. It was unexpected that we were able to go, but at the last minute we received free tickets from my aunt and uncle. It’s a long story, but it was gracious of them to give us the tickets. Bruce himself sounded fantastic. The man is truly talented, and has kept the ability to speak both accurately and truthfully to and for his generation.

During the show he played a song from his new album Devils and Dust called “Jesus Was an Only Son”. Bruce gave an intro to this song talking about parenthood, and how much he would sacrifice to give to his children. The song, he said, was a reflection on the fact that Jesus was a son. He was the one and only son of his father and mother. And Joseph and Mary walked with Jesus in His life, and at many points probably walked for Him. In the end, though, Jesus had His own destiny, and His parents couldn’t shield Him from that. Bruce talked about how our choices in life are measured with and against our sacrifices, and about how Jesus was no exception.

There’s a verse in the song that goes like this:

“In the garden at Gethsemane
He prayed for the life he’d never live,
He beseeched his Heavenly Father to remove
The cup of death from his lips”

After this verse Bruce reflected on what Jesus may have been thinking in that moment. I’ll be paraphrasing here, but I’ll put what he approximately said in quotes.

“He was probably thinking about this sweet little bar down in Galilee that has fantastic weather this time of year. And how he could own it, and Mary Magdeline would tend bar (audience laughed here). And they would have lots of kids, and at the end of every day would watch the sun go down. And dream about the next day, and the next day, and the next day, and the next day, and the next day, and the next day, and the next day, and the next day…”

Now, I’ve never seen the “Last Temptation of Christ”, and I don’t pretend that we have any accurate info about Jesus’ romantic feelings (using that phrase almost seems heretical, doesn’t it?), but I just had to wonder. Jesus knew His destiny, and He knew what He had to do. But that moment in Gethsemane. Thank God for that moment in Gethsemane… In that moment I can just see and feel His humanity. There was so much He would not experience here on Earth during life. He wouldn’t get married or have children of His own. He wouldn’t build His family a house with the skills He learned from His dad. He wouldn’t grow old together with His friends. And maybe, just maybe, that’s part of what He was thinking in that Garden hours before His death.

I rarely think about this level of His sacrifice. In fact, when I think about this, I almost feel like I’m making Jesus too human. But I’m sure He was entirely human to His best friends, yet entirely more. And He should be entirely human to me as well. So thank you Bruce for saying it in a way I’d never thought of before.