In this blog I will be trying to get to the truth about what is really important in life, and to write satirically about what is not - all in my quest for The Stuff Reality is Made of.
I also write articles on Religion, History, Travel, Flying, Philosophy, Physics, Meta Physics, Natural History. Mathematics and Psychology.
You can also read my religious articles on our Christian website at www.whatafriend.co.za
A dialogue between Moses (1392 -
1272 B.C.) and Aristotle (384 - 322 B.C.) - from Transcripts of their debate.
Written by P.K.Odendaal - 16 Feb.
Logical proof system.
Moses :And what are your theories and observations ?
Aristotle:Man is the crown and centre piece of the universe and thus his
position must be in the middle. And what is more - anybody can see that the
stars,sun and moon moves around the earth.
Moses:Wow !! You invented Logic, which was used for the next 2 200
years, and you tell me that you made these important and wild statements without
the scientific and mathematical process of your own Logic. Your notions for the
centrality of earth will not cut the mustard in any intellectual argument being,
as you term it, an irrelevant conclusion.
Aristotle:No, the system is quite easy, although I did not apply it to my
'wild statements' as you allege. I did use one of my irrelevant conclusions to
prove that one. But the Logical process is like this :
start with an axiom and then prove subsequent logical conclusions, like in this
most simple one.
A : Two things that are equal to the
same are equal to each other. (Axiom)
B : Two sides of a triangle are things
that are equal to the same.
Z : It then follows logically that the
two sides of this triangle is equal to each other.
Moses :And what do you do, when people agree to the correctness of A and
B, and do not accept Z ?
Aristotle:Yes, they are of a special kind, and you will never prove anything
to them, as the axiom A is generally not provable in our own framework, neither
the conclusion drawn in Z, and that is why we call it an axiom and logic, but
still A is always true in our framework, having been proven to be so over many
millenia, like the axiom 1+1=2. Nobody has ever been able to prove that this is
true, and this is what the Atheists uses to unprove God. God is an axiom (in
this sense) and cannot be proven.
Moses:The next thing they wil ask , is: who made God.
Aristotle:That is, of course an even more absurd and unanswerable question. The
best thing to do with such is question, is to ask the person to unask the
question. There are things that we just cannot know while confined to Cubic
Land*. It will only be, when we move one day into the fourth and other
multidimensional spaces or domains, that we will access these spaces wherein in
will be provable.
As a very simple example I might cite
this : A car exists, but it will never know what a traffic jam is - a traffic
jam does not exist in the dimension/space/domain of the car.
Here is also an example of such a stubborn person : taken from a part of
the dialogue between Achilles and Tortoise by Douglas Hofstadter.
"Let's make that quite clear. I accept A and B. Suppose
I still refused to accept Z?"
"Then Logic would take you by the throat, and force you to do it!" Achilles triumphantly replied.
"Logic would tell you, 'You can't help yourself. Now that you've accepted A and B, you must accept Z!'
So you've no choice, you see" - a statement which is also debatable)
Moses:And have you used this system to prove that the earth resides in
the centre of the universe?
Aristotle:No, but I must admit, it was not so well developed and there were
not so many axioms, when I made those statements. But anyone can make a
delusions and enchantments of man.
Moses:This was not a mistake. It was a delusion, and knowing that you
were so clever, mankind believed that you were right for 2 200 years when it
was replaced by an even greater delusion called the Darwinian Delusion. In
fact, you and Darwin's delusions were more than that. It created such a
religious following with egoists such as St. Thomas of Aquinas, Carl Sagan and
Richard Dawkins, that it became an enchantment, enchanting even these mentioned
scholars, and everyone who listened to them.
(Note from the Scribe : I was
also enchanted by the delusion of Carl Sagan. Was it not for the grace of God
who exposed these enchantments to me, I would still have been enchanted. My
vindication of this came also from the tragic drama of his death where he
admitted to being an atheist.)
Aristotle:But I am not responsible for people's unbelief in God just for
publishing an unproved theory or statement - it is being done daily as the
headlines of the twenty first century media.
Moses:Of course you are responsible - why did you publish and teach such
hogwash ? You were the direct cause for this delusion, or don't you believe in
your own inventions of cause and effect. Some of the people you enchanted,
landed in everlasting damnation like Carl Sagan. Even on his deathbed (of
cancer) he maintained his inability to believe, saying, that even if he wished
to*, he cannot do it.
12:17For ye know how that afterward, when he (people such as Cain, Esau, Ahitophel
and Judas) would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no
place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.)
Aristotle:It was not my intention to do this. But while we are at it, why did
you select these three very different people with very divergent viewpoints to
drive this at me ?
Moses:Because they were all bulldogs (serious components of an
ideology) for your cause, for different egoististical reasons and motives,
although each one barked up the wrong tree. I will leave out Thomas Huxley,
Darwin's bulldog, as he conforms in many ways to Richard Dawkins's venomous
attacking proclivity on God and all Christians and everything religious.
However all had one thing in common - they meddled with things that were too
far above their intellect. At least two of them never even got to the starting
blocks of wisdom *.
Pro 1:7The fear of the LORD is the beginning of
knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.)
Aristotle:I have heard of these gentlemen, but tell me more of them.
folly of St.Thomas of Aquinas.
Moses:I will start with St. Thomas of Aquinas. He was in the midst of
the Averoes debate and had to find a scapegoat, or shall I say a Judas Goat to
enter mainstream Cathholic Theology. He was very successful in introducing the
Aristotelian method of enquiry and reply and rational thought into Catholic
Doctrine. You know that method made famous by your teacher, Socrates, called
the Socratic Method.
He argued that there can be only one
universal truth, and if the Bible was true and the your statements were true, then
they should say the same, and he spent a large part of this life trying to reconcile
these two. Of course, you know now, after reading Gallileo, who by the way, was
also a victim of servere persecution because he did not believe in your false
philosophy. Giordano Bruno was even burned at the stake (1600 A.D.) for his
opposition to your false philosophies.
How could he reconcile or synthesize two
such diamterically opposite theories as the Bible and your teachings were.
Serves him right that he was rejected by that church for some time because of
this, but more because of the fact that he introduced rational thought who was
not a strongpoint of the Inquisition, they neede no excuses or alibis to
torture and burn people. In fact, it is quite an eye opener that his tutor,
Albertas Magnus, called him a dumb ox, relieving me of some unsavoury comments
If we digress momentarily, while he lies
at the stake (I mean, waiting for my criticism) , we may ask a very pertinent
question. He was an admirer of Augustine of Hippo (354-430 A.D.) and he read
his confessions. Did he not understand the enchantment Augustine suffered for
many years, from listening to the carnal and rational arguments of the
Manicheans, until he met the one true God ?
it as it may, I have respect for him and it is clear he did it in good faith.
What baffles me however, is that he became a Saint (whatever that honourable
position may benefit him, contrary to scripture) and is now a patron saint for
many people. As I understand it, you must just ask the Virgin Mary something in
his name*, and it will be granted you - what an abomination ?
is said to be patron saint of academics,
against storms, against lightning, apologists, book sellers, Catholic
academies, Catholic schools, Catholic universities, chastity, colleges,
learning, lightning, pencil makers, philosophers, publishers, scholars,
schools, storms, students, theologians, universities, University of Vigo. If
you have problems with any of these, you might want to talk to him or go and
see him - what a farce.
A man is judged by his own words** so just
hear some of his last words : On 6
December 1273 he experienced a divine revelation which so enraptured him that
he abandoned the Summa, saying that it and his other writing were so much
straw in the wind compared to the reality of the divine glory. He died four
months later while en route to the Council of Lyons, overweight and with his
health broken by overwork.
At last he has met our
Saviour Jesus Christ, but there are many of these who miss the chance.
16:23And in that day ye shall
ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the
Father in my name, he will give it you.)
Luk 19:22And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou
speculation and arrogance of Carl Sagan.
Aristotle:And what makes Carl Sagan so special, that you mention him ?
Moses:That makes for an even easier reply. He was the first one (in his
book Cosmos) to do away totally of the concept of a Creator, by cooking up a
philosophy, delusion and enchantment on the basis of publishing a totally
fictional work and making it sound technical by giving it some legitimity from
his Grand posiiton at NASA.
He thought that he could prove that
there was no intelligent design in the creation of the universe. He then set
out to try and explain how everything works, and although some of his
explanations were feasible, most were fictional and guesswork.
He was under the enchantment thta if he
could explain how everything works, he could eliminate God from the equation,
but the real point is : Can anyone on earth make anything that has the
properties, as the inanimate things which were created, has.
make it even more simplistic, so that those super scientists can also
understand it: An apple falls by gravity - yes we all know that, but can you
make gravity, can you make an apple and can you force it to obey the gravity
you made !!!!
question I wish to ask are not new - they are as old as Job. All these
questions* were asked by God when he took Job to task for being so clever.
Posterity will also laugh at his
uncooked theories, same as they do at yours.
(*Job 38:1Then the LORD
answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, v:2Who is this that darkeneth counsel by
words without knowledge? v:3Gird up now
thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. v:4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations
of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. v:5Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou
knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? v:6Whereupon are the foundations thereof
fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; v:7When the morning stars sang together, and all
the sons of God shouted for joy? v:8Or who
shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out
of the womb? v:9When I made the cloud
the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it, v:10And brake up for it my decreed place,
and set bars and doors, v:11And said,
Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be
stayed? v:12Hast thou commanded the
morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place; v:13That it might take hold of the ends of the
earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? v:14It is turned as clay to the seal; and
they stand as a garment. v:15And from
the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken. v:16Hast thou entered into the springs of the
sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth? v:17Have the gates of death been opened unto
thee? or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death? v:18Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth?
declare if thou knowest it all. v:19Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for
darkness, where is the place thereof, v:20That thou shouldest take it to the bound
thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof? v:21Knowest thou it, because thou wast
then born? or because the number of thy days is great? v:22Hast thou entered into the treasures of the
snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, v:23Which I have reserved against the time of
trouble, against the day of battle and war? v:24By what way is the light parted, which
scattereth the east wind upon the earth? v:25Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way
for the lightning of thunder; v:26To
cause it to rain on the earth, where no man is; on the
wilderness, wherein there is no man; v:27To satisfy the desolate and waste ground;
and to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth? v:28Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten
the drops of dew? v:29Out of whose womb
came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it? v:30The waters are hid as with a stone,
and the face of the deep is frozen. v:31Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of
Orion? v:32Canst thou bring forth
Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons? v:33Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst
thou set the dominion thereof in the earth? v:34Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds,
that abundance of waters may cover thee? v:35Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we
are? v:36Who hath put wisdom in
the inward parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart? v:37Who can number the clouds in wisdom? or who
can stay the bottles of heaven, v:38When the dust groweth into hardness, and the clods cleave fast together?
v:39Wilt thou hunt the prey for the
lion? or fill the appetite of the young lions, v:40When they couch in their dens, and
abide in the covert to lie in wait? v:41Who provideth for the raven his food? when his young ones cry unto God,
they wander for lack of meat.)
Aristotle:But I thought that everyone recognised the large contribution I made
to the Scientific method, Physics, Motion, Causality (cause and effect), Optics,
Logic, Metaphysics, Biology and Medicine and the Classification of all living
mean the challenge you set for posterity - to prove you wrong ? I think the
main point is, yes, they all know your speculations quite well, and it took
them 2 200 years to prove you wrong on almost all of those counts.
To come back to Carl Sagan. He was
trying to advance science (and get a large grant in the process for his
research effort), but it was all egoistically inspired, hoping that he would
one day be known as a scientific prophet who forecasted the end of the world by
mankind itself with war and nuclear bombs. Why all this trouble ? He could just
have read the Revelation of John, a
vision he was shown 2 000 years ago - and I bet you, he did not work for NASA.
Dawkins joins the forces of Satan.
Aristotle:So was Dawkins right ? He so ardently advocated Atheism, even buying
poster space on buses in London, to make it full of Atheist slogans, and
publishing a book - The God Delusion.
Moses:This is the worst kind of delusion that one can suffer from. He
was a Christian, who turned to the so called rationality of Science, then to
the seduction of the Christians and then to the prosecution of the Saints. This
is the same technique Satan uses, because he is such a venomous and jealous
enemy of God, which perfectly fits Hawkins's motives. One cannot have respect
for someone who goes out to deceive the inhabitants of the world with no other
motive than to do damage to his biggest enemy - God. He is no more an atheist
than the Satan is an atheist*.
2:19Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also
believe, and tremble.)
Aristotle:I think I understand a little bit better, although I must admit that
religion and faith cannot be understood on a rational basis.