Friday, February 13, 2015
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Friday, January 23, 2015
The question I pose is this: Since only two of these three propositions can be true, which two of the three propositions more clearly permeate scripture through-and-through? Which two of these three more accurately reflect the nature and character of an infinitely wise, infinitely just and infinitely good God? Proposition #1 implies that God is unlimited in his love, sincerely desiring the salvation of all mankind. This is an overwhelming theme of scripture. Proposition #2 implies that God is unlimited in power, able to accomplish whatever he desires. This is also an exceedingly strong biblical theme. Proposition #3, however, seems weak in relation to the other two, and open to various interpretations, and is found in texts that often contain parable, hyperbole, metaphor and symbolism.
In order for proposition #3 to be true at the expense of either propositions #1 or #2, the biblical warrant for everlasting punishment would need to be much stronger than the biblical theme of God’s unlimited love and God’s omnipotence. And that, I think, is a case that is not easy to make.
(There is no word in the New Testament that actually means "timeless" or "forever". The concept of a timeless eternity is a philosophical idea that intrigued Augustine and especially Thomas Aquinas and found its way into their writings, which in turn became the standard interpretation of orthodoxy. The words that are translated "eternal" in these New Testament scriptures are the Greek words aion and aionios, which mean "age" or "lasting an indeterminate time" - from which we get the English word "eon", which has a beginning and an end. There is no word in the New Testament that means a timeless eternity).
Friday, December 19, 2014
Sunday, August 10, 2014
Lanza believes that quantum theory holds the key to understanding consciousness and he spends a great deal of time reporting on the results of quantum particle experiments. He never manages to connect the dots, however, between these experiments and his general premise, instead making broad assumptions that one is necessarily correlated with the other simply because he wishes it to be so.
The one area of the book which holds promise is his treatment of the anthropic principle and a specific reference to physicist John (of "black hole" fame) Wheeler's concept of a "participatory universe". But even here Lanza fails to use this to his advantage.
Wheeler has stated that " every item of the physical world has at bottom—a very deep bottom, in most instances—an immaterial source and explanation; that which we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes–no questions and the registering of equipment-evoked responses; in short, that all things physical are information-theoretic in origin and that this is a participatory universe."
Yet this remarkable comment by a giant among scientists, which fully supports Lanza's thesis, appears nowhere in his chapter on the anthropic principle. This kind of sloppy, colloquial approach quickly diminishes the book's authority.
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
Provide preventive care and teach healthy lifestyle choices
- Identify and treat common medical conditions
- Assess the urgency of your medical problems and direct you to the best place for that care
- Make referrals to medical specialists when necessary
By appropriately redefining the primary care provider terminology, patients throughout Texas can have easier access to their chosen PCP, avoiding unnecessary constraints in their health care needs and ultimately improving the common goal of centering patient care as priority. Nurse Practitioners are and will continue to be PCPs and should be fully integrated into health care delivery.