Milton’s Satan, Byron the fallen angel with the foot of Cain (permanent resentment), Dostoevsky’s Ivan (“everything is permitted”) and Nietzsche’s “God is dead” and the “transvaluation values,” Foucault’s prisons as misguided power trips (punishment is only about the corrupt superego’s control): there is nothing new under the sun.
Transhumanism will end up where all other creations of man end up. The amplification of what the human side of us "feels" is better. On the surface we will feel that we are breaking through the barriers of the natural world that hold us back. The realities will rear their ugly heads and prove once again that God is right, and we are wrong. AI can never be anything more than humans stuffing computers full of their conceptual ideologies and then letting those computers grind on from there. Computers created by man will never achieve the same human sentiency that God created for man. Transhumans may end up being a superior military weapon, but will the "program" side of them enhance in any way their ability to love and understand their relationship to God?
The only constants I know are the true and living Christ, His true and living Church, His true and living doctrine, and His true and living Prophet. The rest is the stage setting, but not the play. Hi-Ho.
It seems to me that classical pagans, at least the Greeks and the Romans, had some concept of objective truth and that you could come to know it. Thus, when Truth itself came onto the scene their eyes were primed to be open to seeing it. When Christianity spread then, they were able to take the truths or the goods of other pagan cultures, baptize them, and redirect them to THE Truth. Where modernity started to falter, I think, has been the casting off of the objective for the subjective, particularly in the Christian sphere and then spread from there.
Ironically, I think objective truth can absorb a lot of our subjectivities, at least in some capacity, but our subjectivities can't always square with objectivity and that makes us miserable.
Driving the need to define morality on our own (human) terms is the consequence of biting into that lovely juicy apple: we continue to choke on the fruit of the tree. The problem is that we also need to breath, and that requires Ruach in our nostrils, else we revert to damp dust. So, blind and deaf, we fashion AI-dols, grant them agency, and cast ourselves at their plastic feet. Which works, until a stone uncut by the hand of man targets those toes of iron and clay and the whole abominable structure is ground to dust and blown away.
God told Jeremiah the time would come when man's mind does NOT remember the Lord:
Jeremiah 3:16 And it shall come to pass, when ye be multiplied and increased in the land, in those days, saith the Lord, they shall say no more, The ark of the covenant of the Lord: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it; neither shall that be done any more.
Perhaps the insatiable instinct of humanity for curiosity has a life span of only a human life and at this time it’s chic to live that life span to the full with disregard to what went before or what comes after .
Ever looking to living at the extremes believing it to be the norm. From this era’s perspective It’s almost as if those contrasts are experiencing living itself and the moving from one to the other is progress itself. Humanity it seems is incapable of standing in the position of truth & beauty while simultaneously knowing where it’s going.
Balancing that uncertainty principle IS the truth & beauty and within the uncertainty in that principle there will always be a degree of Unknowing and that bit of “unknowing” THATS THE CALLING OF FAITH my friends.😉
Would you consider putting these letters into booklet form, so that we could have a hard copy to refer back to?
Currently listening to Dominion by Tom Holland about how the west became Christian. Nothing to do with this post. But it is good.
Milton’s Satan, Byron the fallen angel with the foot of Cain (permanent resentment), Dostoevsky’s Ivan (“everything is permitted”) and Nietzsche’s “God is dead” and the “transvaluation values,” Foucault’s prisons as misguided power trips (punishment is only about the corrupt superego’s control): there is nothing new under the sun.
Transhumanism will end up where all other creations of man end up. The amplification of what the human side of us "feels" is better. On the surface we will feel that we are breaking through the barriers of the natural world that hold us back. The realities will rear their ugly heads and prove once again that God is right, and we are wrong. AI can never be anything more than humans stuffing computers full of their conceptual ideologies and then letting those computers grind on from there. Computers created by man will never achieve the same human sentiency that God created for man. Transhumans may end up being a superior military weapon, but will the "program" side of them enhance in any way their ability to love and understand their relationship to God?
The only constants I know are the true and living Christ, His true and living Church, His true and living doctrine, and His true and living Prophet. The rest is the stage setting, but not the play. Hi-Ho.
It seems to me that classical pagans, at least the Greeks and the Romans, had some concept of objective truth and that you could come to know it. Thus, when Truth itself came onto the scene their eyes were primed to be open to seeing it. When Christianity spread then, they were able to take the truths or the goods of other pagan cultures, baptize them, and redirect them to THE Truth. Where modernity started to falter, I think, has been the casting off of the objective for the subjective, particularly in the Christian sphere and then spread from there.
Ironically, I think objective truth can absorb a lot of our subjectivities, at least in some capacity, but our subjectivities can't always square with objectivity and that makes us miserable.
Driving the need to define morality on our own (human) terms is the consequence of biting into that lovely juicy apple: we continue to choke on the fruit of the tree. The problem is that we also need to breath, and that requires Ruach in our nostrils, else we revert to damp dust. So, blind and deaf, we fashion AI-dols, grant them agency, and cast ourselves at their plastic feet. Which works, until a stone uncut by the hand of man targets those toes of iron and clay and the whole abominable structure is ground to dust and blown away.
As Lewis proposes, it’s not that other (non-Christian) religions are wrong but they are incomplete (some much more than others - my addition).
God told Jeremiah the time would come when man's mind does NOT remember the Lord:
Jeremiah 3:16 And it shall come to pass, when ye be multiplied and increased in the land, in those days, saith the Lord, they shall say no more, The ark of the covenant of the Lord: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it; neither shall that be done any more.
Perhaps the insatiable instinct of humanity for curiosity has a life span of only a human life and at this time it’s chic to live that life span to the full with disregard to what went before or what comes after .
Ever looking to living at the extremes believing it to be the norm. From this era’s perspective It’s almost as if those contrasts are experiencing living itself and the moving from one to the other is progress itself. Humanity it seems is incapable of standing in the position of truth & beauty while simultaneously knowing where it’s going.
Balancing that uncertainty principle IS the truth & beauty and within the uncertainty in that principle there will always be a degree of Unknowing and that bit of “unknowing” THATS THE CALLING OF FAITH my friends.😉
There’s always unknowing