Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 25:8-9

8 And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them.

9 According to all that I shew thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it.

Now we see what the offering of riches and valuables is for: to make a tabernacle for the Lord “that he may dwell among them.” If the people were willing to consecrate their very best to God, if they would show great attention in following his building instructions exactly, if they would dedicate their time and labor to building the place, then they would be able to create a sacred place where He could reside. I believe that more important than the valuables, the attention, and the effort, is the sacrifice. What would make this place worthy of God would not be the minerals or man-hours, it would be the heart and will that had been poured into it, prioritizing this cause above all other alternatives. That was what would make this place an acceptable receptacle for the Lord’s presence.

Or, at least, it would make it acceptable for the Lord’s purifying spirit to come and sanctify the place, and then that purification would be what made the place an acceptable receptacle for the Lord’s presence. See Exodus 40:34.

It is the same with our hearts also. When we perform our acts of faith, it is the faith that matters far more than the act itself. It is not what we sacrifice, but that we sacrifice. And the offerings of time and effort that we make to the Lord do not make us worthy of His name, but it does invite His spirit to come and sanctify our hearts so that then we are worthy of His name.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 25:3-7

3 And this is the offering which ye shall take of them; gold, and silver, and brass,

4 And blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and goats’ hair,

5 And rams’ skins dyed red, and badgers’ skins, and shittim wood,

6 Oil for the light, spices for anointing oil, and for sweet incense,

7 Onyx stones, and stones to be set in the ephod, and in the breastplate.

God had just offered the Israelites the opportunity to make an optional offering, and today we learn it was to be an offering of all the valuables of the world. Precious metals, stones, cloths, animal skins, wood, oil, and spices. Some of these things are precious for symbolic reasons, such as gold which is a pure metal and does not mix with other alloys. Some are precious for aesthetic reasons, such as spices that pleased the senses. Some are precious for their rarity, such as purple cloth, which was a notoriously difficult color to get dye for.

The people are being asked to give that which is rare, functional, beautiful, and symbolic. Of course, in many cases the value of these things is arbitrary. Whatever man decides to assign his greatest value to, those are the same things that he must be willing to part with. Gold is not required because it has great value to God, but because it has great value to man.

And why must man be willing to part with the things of greatest value? Because that is how we show what our highest ideal is. If we don’t give the most to God, then He isn’t actually our highest ideal. If, for example, we retain the best for our own selves instead, then there is nothing more important to us than the self, which precludes any genuine worship of God. Sacrifice of our greatest riches is a necessity for us to engage in worship of the almighty, just as sacrifice of His own Beloved Son was a necessity for God to engage in condescension to us.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 25:1-2

1 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring me an offering: of every man that giveth it willingly with his heart ye shall take my offering.

The Lord is now going to describe a different sort of offering. Sacrifices for purification and worship are mandatory for every faithful household, but the sacrifices being described here are entirely optional. The Israelite who makes this sacrifice is to give “it willingly with his heart.” And if the man can not offer it willingly, the Lord describes no punishment or penalty for him abstaining from the opportunity.

There is in our morality a basic set of laws that we are all expected to abide by. Fundamental things that we are all expected to do and not do. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, help your neighbor, be kind to one another, etc. So long as we follow these rules we are “good citizens” and “decent people.” We are living the way that society expects of us. But there is also a higher level of elective good works. Things like making a serious sacrifice to help someone in need, being willing to die for the greater good, and speaking the truth even when it harms us. We don’t necessarily have to do these things to be “decent people,” but we are considered heroes when we elect to do them anyway.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Reality Based Upon a Lie

A reality based upon a lie can only end in obliteration
For a lie is the inversion of reality

Posted on by Abe Austin

What We Are, Fundamentally- Where We Begin

Presupposition)

I have already discussed the physical-materialist view of determinism, and also the contrasting-premise-but-identical-conclusion view of fundamental chaos. I wish to say something more about that fundamental chaos view, which asserts that since the building blocks of reality—and of our own persons—are subject to random quantum mechanics, every system and decision that is built upon those transient parts must also be random and nondeliberate.

For a moment, let us assume that this theory is correct. Let us assume that all of our choices and behaviors are based upon their material composition, and that the root of that material composition is random and unpredictable.

Even then, this view presupposes that we all begin at the material. It assumes that there is nothing that comes before the random fluctuations of the quantum mechanic layer.

Back to the Metaphysical)

But who is to say what might come before the random? If you were to fall asleep in a thousand theaters, and in each one suddenly wake up in the middle of the second act of a play, the first line of dialogue that you heard would always appear to be random. But none of them actually would be random, they would be the continued thrust of all the unseen moments that came before.

From the metaphysical view, where the material world begins is the same as suddenly gaining consciousness in the middle of the play. Who is to say that there is not an imperceptible spirit whose invisible choices travel through the spiritual realm and then continue their thrust into the material world via quantum mechanics? And the quantum mechanics only seem random because we cannot see all the parts of the play that came before.

If we ever are certain that we have found the true root of the material, that still does not mean we have necessarily found the root of being. Indeed, the more our understanding of the material leads us to conclusions that defy our basic perceptions, such as humanity being all preprogrammed or humanity being all chaotic, the more it seems apparent that the material is not telling us the entire story. The more we know of the physical world the more it seems incapable of aligning with reality by itself. It continually and increasingly becomes apparent that there is something immaterial at play as well.

With that, I will end my examination on these matters for now, though I won’t be surprised if I return to them at some later date.

Posted on by Abe Austin

What We Are, Fundamentally- Chaotic Nature

Competing Nihilism)

I have already criticized the logic of the determinist in my previous posts. Today I will continue by introducing an alternative view that emerges from the same physical-materialist foundation, but which comes to an opposite conclusion.

The determinist, as already discussed, concludes that there is no free will or metaphysical reality because they assume that the environment, stimulus, and reaction are all part of a biochemical closed loop. Because every aspect is controlled, all behaviors are entirely predictable, if only one could measure all of the participating factors.

However there is another argument that also concludes that there is no free will, but by arguing that our material nature is nothing put pure, unpredictable chaos. This notion is based on the observation that our most fundamental components—protons, electrons, leptons, and quarks—seem to be subject to random quantum mechanics. If the lowest level of our material trembles between random states of reality, then how can we claim that everything built up from them, including ourselves, could act in a way that is deliberate, conscious, and chosen?

Both these viewpoints go to great lengths to deny the reality of human choice, but by totally opposite means. On the one hand humans are rigid, fixed machines that only act and react according to predictable programming, on the other hand humans are unpredictable, wild, and chaotic, whose behaviors have nothing to do with thought or reason.

Consistent Inconsistency)

As with determinism, this chaotic view once again defies our basic experience. Perhaps the chaotic view seems to provide a solution for why our behaviors are not totally ordered, but it raises an even bigger problem for why our behaviors aren’t totally chaotic either. Sometimes we do keep to plans, we do hold to our word, and we do follow through. And sometimes we maintain that reliability our whole lives long. How do we have these consistent streaks if at our beginnings is nothing but chaotic noise?

Our own experience balks at the idea that we are either totally predetermined or totally chaotic. These arguments sound intelligent because they take a long time to explain, but they are each childish in their lack of nuance. Their complexity does not bring life into sharper understanding, they try to flatten it into an over-simplistic single dimension.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools- Romans 1:22

Posted on by Abe Austin

What We Are, Fundamentally- The Result of Determinism

Determinism Again)

Yesterday I spoke of the physical-materialist theory of determinism, which maintains that all of our behaviors and “choices” are actually predetermined programming. The stimuli to our senses come from an environment that we cannot control, and our reactions to those stimuli are dictated by the preset mapping of the synapses within our brains.

Input + Function = Output, and because the Input and the Function are controlled, so is the Output.

Free will and control are only illusions that arise from the fact that the environment and the brain mapping are so complex that we cannot predict the outcomes before they occur. But just because we mortals can’t predict those outcomes, doesn’t mean that they aren’t predestined. The things that we do are simply the things that we were always going to do.

Moral License)

If this theory is true, though, then I cannot be responsible for anything that I do. I might feel as though I make my own choices, that I wrestle between decisions, but that’s simply my computer-brain evaluating between two programmed priorities, until it finally settles on the option that its biological algorithms were pre-weighted towards. I was always going to come to the conclusion that I was going to come to, and I am no more responsible for coming to that conclusion than a domino is guilty of falling when pushed.

Thus, if I decide to kill another person, there was no alternative to that outcome. There was no option for me to have chosen otherwise. I might have chosen differently if I had been born to a different environment, or if I had a different composition of the brain, but the function and the parameters were already set, and so I simply had to give the only possible output: murder.

And if I were to go around proselyting for this worldview, and the logic of it were to incite a person to decide there was no morality and that he truly was permitted to do anything and none of it would be his fault, and if he were to then go out and planted bombs that killed hundreds of innocent schoolchildren, well it couldn’t be helped because his mind was already such as to take the input of my words and derive those predestined conclusions. And it couldn’t be helped that I inspired him to do those things, because I was also predestined to make those arguments. And though it may appear to the outside world that I had influence and he had choice, even though everything in our natural perception and experience screams at us that such is the case, it would all be a lie and an illusion. The creation of that terrible, bloody would have been necessary and unavoidable.

Common Sense)

The horrifying conclusions of determinism are reason enough to reject it, but even more important than the unacceptable nature of its ends is the fact that it defies so much of our common sense that we have to conclude it isn’t true. Like I said in the last paragraph, everything in our natural perception and reason tells us that we actually do choose what we do, and that the evil are guilty, and that people can decide whether to live as good or evil.

Determinism asks for an even greater level of blind faith than any system of religious morality. It not only asks us to trust its claims, but to do so against all of our perception and reason. It asks us to deny the apparent and obvious reality to accept an unprovable and theoretical one. Everything natural and instinctive about us protests that is a lie, and that would explain why its ends are so horrific and destructive. A reality based upon a lie can only end in obliteration, for a lie is the inversion of reality.

Posted on by Abe Austin

What We Are, Fundamentally- Deterministic Machines

The Materialist Position)

I have previously criticized the materialist position, which is that only the material exists and is real. In the physical-materialist view there is no metaphysical reality, such as soul or spirit or transcendence. Debates between the material and the immaterial viewpoints are often based on interpretations of the human experience. The materialist must maintain that even the things that are typically not associated with matter have their origins within it. For the materialist view to be correct all thoughts, feelings, convictions, hopes, and anguish must have an explanation in atoms and protons and minerals.

Many critics of materialism have pointed out the horrifying conclusions that follow when we strip morality and emotion of their spiritual origins. I would like to emphasize a few of these points, observations that have only been briefly mentioned elsewhere, but which deserve the special attention that I will bring to them with this series. I will start today by defining one of the core beliefs of materialism, and tomorrow I will make my critique of it.

Deterministic Machines)

The theory that describes how a person can make choices under a physical-materialist worldview is called determinism, which asserts that there actually is no choice at all. In a physical-materialist view, humans possess no free will. They are nothing more than deterministic machines, and all that they “choose” to do is actually predetermined by their chemical construction and environment.

Each one of us is born with certain synapses and pathways already formed in our brains. That is the programming that determines what behavior we will exhibit in response to certain inputs. The inputs come from the environment that we live in. If the temperature is cold, our brain interprets that fact and executes whatever reaction is programmed as a response.

Since the environment is out of our control, and since the initial state of our brains is formed before we are born, we have no control over what inputs and reactions will come into and out of us. It has all been predetermined, and we are simply reactive beings, constrained to behave in a way that is outside of our own control.

Even if we change our programming, we only do so in predetermined ways. So if a child is pre-programmed to touch a hot stove, and is burned, and then remaps his brain to not do that anymore, he does that remapping as a pre-programmed reaction to feeling pain. Thus, even the changing of one’s mind is predictable.

And we predetermined machines are perfectly capable to interacting with one another by hooking up our cognitive inputs and outputs to form a larger machine. What you say to me you are predetermined to say, and how I respond I am predetermined to respond, and the same for you, and then the same for for me, back-and-forth, until one of us terminates the conversation because we are predetermined at that point to do so. And what each of us takes away from that conversation will be exactly what we are predetermined to take away.

Commentary)

This model may sound very strange, very different from how we perceive our day-to-day experiences, but it is the only logical conclusion once one decides that only the material is real. So long as there is nothing but matter, choice and free will can only be an illusion, a perception that is ironically pre-programmed into us, just like everything else.

Tomorrow I will discuss the absolute license this theory gives to all immoral and unethical behavior. In short, if everything we do is predetermined, if we have no choice over our own actions, then we are not responsible for any evil that we might do. There is no blame for even the most horrific of crimes, because the people that did those things only did so because they were predetermined to do so. Come back next time where I will discuss this even further.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Equal vs Enough

It is less important to be equal than to be enough.

That isn’t to say that there isn’t a value to equality. Rooting out unfair disadvantages and gross discrimination have their place, but every virtue is bounded by others and each can be taken too far.

Perfect equality is not always the ideal and is not always possible. When a baby is first born, it should receive more care than its older brothers and sisters. The wise should receive more attention than the foolish. The innocent should have more liberty than the guilty.

Even the natural universe follows the pareto principle, in which an uneven distribution is evident, and the minority possess the majority of the resources. In the ant colony there is only one queen and tens of thousands of workers. Only 1% of all mosquito eggs will reach adulthood and reproduce. Ours is the only planet out of thousands studied to have all the correct conditions to support life. The universe is not equal.

So, while it is again worthy to root out flagrant and malicious inequality, one has to have a nuanced appreciation for the fact that absolute equality is impossible. The unbridled pursuit of it can only yield frustration and counter-productivity. Every historical example of absolute and mandated equality has ended in disaster.

In the long run, “is it enough” is a more reasonable consideration than “is it equal.” As mentioned before, the older brother may not receive equal care to his infant sister, but we can ask “is he receiving enough?” Are his physical and emotional needs being adequately met? If it is not enough, he should receive more. If it is enough, then it is enough. Are enough ants born as queen to keep their species alive? If not, they will go extinct. If it is enough, then is it enough.

Over the course of our lives we will never be perfectly equal to all others. In some ways we will always have less, and in some ways we will always have more. But do we have enough? Can we make do with our disadvantages? Can God make up for what we lack? If we can find our way to enough, then it is enough.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 24:16-18

16 And the glory of the Lord abode upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day he called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud.

17 And the sight of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel.

18 And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount: and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.

The presence of the Lord descended upon the mountain, but Moses did not go up into it straightaway. He waited for the Lord to call him up, which did not occur until the seventh day. This immediately calls to mind the six days of creation, and the seventh day of rest. The reason for this parallel is not explained.

Perhaps that seventh day coincided with the Jewish sabbath, and the Lord was waiting for that sacred day to call Moses apart from the world. Perhaps the cloud on the mountain was purifying the place before the Lord’s arrival, recreating that part of the earth over six days just like it had taken six days to perform the original creation. Perhaps Moses required the six days to properly prepare his own soul for the meeting. Whatever the reason, we see a pattern of waiting a full measure for the time to be right.

This idea of sacred things taking a full measure to complete is also present in Moses then being up in the mountain for forty days and forty nights. If waiting seven days to ascend calls to mind the Genesis story of creation, then staying up in the mountain for forty days calls to mind Noah shut up in the ark while it rained for forty days and forty nights.

Both the initial conception of the earth and the flood are creation stories. Initial creation and recreation after the first had gone astray. They are symbols of beginning and resetting, of making everything new. Perhaps that was the Lord’s intent with these numbers, to suggest that His communion with Moses would usher forth a new beginning for Israel and all the world, a recreation of laws and principles that had been lost.