Well, what’s about postulating that we live in a simulation which is presently at 6000 years by internal clock, and so on and so forth up until upcoming second coming of Christ and simulation shutdown?
One shouldn’t believe in that kind of stuff if one rejects those beliefs in christian framework, because by postulating a specific mechanism (simulation) we only added to the conjunction, making it less likely to be true.
Well, of course one could hypothize that Christ was a space alien (as the Raelians do), or the avatar character of some bored kid running the simulation, etc.
All these hypotheses are largely undistinguishable from the traditional “magic” God. I’m not sure whether we should consider them in a conjunction or in a disjunction, but either way their combined probability mass isn’t going to be significant.
Hearing the Christian God referred to as “magic” reminds me of another apparent lexical gap in English. I think most theologians would be uncomfortably hesitant to call the purported miracles in their faith as the result of magic—although to my knowledge there is no better word to replace it.
I wish that our culture expressed the Divine Magic vs. Arcane Magic dichotomy that exists in Dungeons and Dragons.
Hearing the Christian God referred to as “magic” reminds me of another apparent lexical gap in English. I think most theologians would be uncomfortably hesitant to call the purported miracles in their faith as the result of magic—although to my knowledge there is no better word to replace it.
Well, I’ve used “magic” as a synonym of “supernatural”, which is a term that Christian theologians accept. Christian theologians tend to define “magic” as anything supernatural that doesn’t come from their god, that is “satanic”.
I wish that our culture expressed the Divine Magic vs. Arcane Magic dichotomy that exists in Dungeons and Dragons.
I suppose that Christians would be even more offended by having their belief system compared to a role playing game inspired by a mishmash of pre-Christian folklore. :D
Magic and supernatural might often work as synonyms, but I still think hearing God called “magic” is not generally accepted, even if “supernatural” is.
Your point is well taken about D&D—although I wasn’t proposing that we actually use the D&D system to describe the belief system. I was expressing regret that a similar dichotomy doesn’t exist within the language already.
Your point is well taken about D&D—although I wasn’t proposing that we actually use the D&D system to describe the belief system. I was expressing regret that a similar dichotomy doesn’t exist within the language already.
I suppose that’s because the concept of “arcane magic”, is largely a modern invention of the fantasy genre, where it is portrayed essentially as a fictional science and technology.
Historically, some forms of mysticism such as alchemy and astrology, or more generally “natural philosophy”, had some elements of what we could describe as “arcane magic”, and in fact they eventually evolved into the modern sciences of chemistry, astronomy and physics. However, what was traditionally regarded as “magic” or “sorcery” in Abrahamic religions, was always believed to involve some kind of deal with evil spirits or the devil.
Well, what’s about postulating that we live in a simulation which is presently at 6000 years by internal clock, and so on and so forth up until upcoming second coming of Christ and simulation shutdown?
One shouldn’t believe in that kind of stuff if one rejects those beliefs in christian framework, because by postulating a specific mechanism (simulation) we only added to the conjunction, making it less likely to be true.
Well, of course one could hypothize that Christ was a space alien (as the Raelians do), or the avatar character of some bored kid running the simulation, etc.
All these hypotheses are largely undistinguishable from the traditional “magic” God.
I’m not sure whether we should consider them in a conjunction or in a disjunction, but either way their combined probability mass isn’t going to be significant.
Hearing the Christian God referred to as “magic” reminds me of another apparent lexical gap in English. I think most theologians would be uncomfortably hesitant to call the purported miracles in their faith as the result of magic—although to my knowledge there is no better word to replace it.
I wish that our culture expressed the Divine Magic vs. Arcane Magic dichotomy that exists in Dungeons and Dragons.
Well, I’ve used “magic” as a synonym of “supernatural”, which is a term that Christian theologians accept.
Christian theologians tend to define “magic” as anything supernatural that doesn’t come from their god, that is “satanic”.
I suppose that Christians would be even more offended by having their belief system compared to a role playing game inspired by a mishmash of pre-Christian folklore. :D
Magic and supernatural might often work as synonyms, but I still think hearing God called “magic” is not generally accepted, even if “supernatural” is.
Your point is well taken about D&D—although I wasn’t proposing that we actually use the D&D system to describe the belief system. I was expressing regret that a similar dichotomy doesn’t exist within the language already.
I suppose that’s because the concept of “arcane magic”, is largely a modern invention of the fantasy genre, where it is portrayed essentially as a fictional science and technology.
Historically, some forms of mysticism such as alchemy and astrology, or more generally “natural philosophy”, had some elements of what we could describe as “arcane magic”, and in fact they eventually evolved into the modern sciences of chemistry, astronomy and physics.
However, what was traditionally regarded as “magic” or “sorcery” in Abrahamic religions, was always believed to involve some kind of deal with evil spirits or the devil.