kent lee's blog & ramble

So fühle ich mich heutzutage im Bezug auf meiner Theologie. In Bezug auf meinem vorherigen Blog-Stück, muss ich sagen, es ist schwer, diese abgespaltenen Richtungen zusammen zu bringen. Ich finde, in diesem Tiel meiner Glaubensreise, dass ich ganz underschiedliche Richtungen abstimmen muss: meine neue Emerging-Theologie-Richtung und/oder moderne evangelische Richtung, meinen aalten evangelikalen Glauben, und die charismatische Richtung meines Glaubens. Im Moment scheint es, wie Öl und Wasser zu mischen. Ich schreibe heute über einen gewissen Schwerpunkt: die Theologie des Todes und der Hölle.   Universalismus kann ich nicht akzeptieren - nicht ganz. Aber die Theologie der exklusiven Errettung von Menschen finde ich problematisch - wo die Mehrheit der Mesnchen zur Hölle gehen müssen. Hier in Kürze hat es mit dem Charakter Gottes zu tun, zum Beispiel, wie könnte er Seelen ewiglich und endlos bestrafen für einen beschränken Satz von Sünden? Wie ist das kon...

In the 11th century, organized Christianity split into East and West, mostly for political and cultural reasons that were a bit silly. In the 16th century, Protestantism split off, though Luther's intention was not to split organizationally from the Catholic Church - merely to reform it from within. Since then Protetestantism has split into countless denominations. Two big splits followed by many smaller fractures. From the latter 1800s to the 1920s another major split took place over time, mostly within Protestantism, across various denominations: the liberal / conservative split. One one side, the liberals or modernists, and on the other side, evangelicals and fundamentalists. I question whether this kind of split was wise or was totally necessary, and I think both sides were to blame. To some degree this was in response to modern science - geology in the 1820s showing us that the earth was very old, and later evolutionary biology, showing us that species arose from simpler ...

Rene Descartes proclaimed "cogito ergo sum" - meaning that in his epistemology, the starting point - to validating truth, the existence of the self, and the existence of the external world and external truth - is oneself, one's own thoughts. One's self-awareness serves as the basis for deducing other truths, and in his philosophy, even for deducing the existence of God. A few problems quickly become apparent to the modern social scientist here. First, his method of deducing God's existence is forced and unnatural; it is probably not the path than anyone else would naturally and intuitively take to apprehending the existence of God. Second, his subjective approach, starting with one's own thoughts as a foundation for other truths, is tenuous, given what we know in modern psychology about cognitive biases, false intuitions, and decision making that is subject to all kinds of subconscious influences. So do we reactively take a totally opposite approach, as an em...

If you said the word 'multiverse' 10 years ago, people would think you're talking about a new form of poetry. Now it's part of our vocabulary, thanks to string theory. Unless something new happens in string theory, apparently the number of theoretically possible universes that might come into existence is huge. I don't know if most of them would last very long - I'll leave that question to the physicists, as I'm no physicist, just a language educator and linguist and lay theologian. So according to the theory, the number of possible universes would be 10 500 (10^500, if the superscripts don't display properly). The name of that number would be 100 quinquasexagintacentillion (ten to the 165th power, times 100) (or 100 tresoctogintillion in the traditional European system). Unless new discoveries or adjustments are made to the theory, then the theory, according to physicists, may imply an eternal inflation. Universes keep popping in and out of existe...