this, AND, "cannot" come to fruition. Even if they come to fruition, they end themselves.
I've been thinking a lot about "computational theology" or "mathematical theology" as a field, and I think the questions they ask & try to answer are "what CAN exist. What CANNOT exist. What would need to change about the world to allow X to exist, if it currently cannot"
cool fact: when a caterpillar morphs into a butterfly, its atoms get totally scrambled within the cocoon... yet the butterfly remembers lessons from its caterpillar phase
AND, now that I think about it - I don't agree with the depictions above of life and death (but maybe we're talking about different things). As I see reality, the pretzel/lizard matter doesn't get erased. You're constantly consuming atoms that become newly "yours" and shedding ones that become part of other beings. You're not a thing; you're a process. So what makes you stop being you (= die) is less a change in matter, and more an interruption to the vital processes (= solids, liquids, gasses flowing in, out, around). At that point, your cells all get simultaneously released to join the bodies of (or "processes that we perceive as distinct bodies of") bacteria, fungi, insects, worms.
yeah! the "lizard" persists even though all of its cells are constantly changing. So we can say there is no lizard, but the matter is "currently lizarding". And the longevity of that process is determined by whether it aligns or conflicts with all the other processes that exist in reality around it
And here is where I get excited because metaphysics intersects with theology, when we think about: the lizard is NOT an eternal process, it can die/stop. Are there things that are eternal processes? The answer is yes: "change" is an eternal process. You can't kill change. Death is an eternal process, can't kill the possibility of ceasing. I think theology is the study of eternal processes, and "computational theology" is the modern equivalent (it is what is all the rage now, including by the person who discovered that earlier link you posted, about the caterpiller's memories persisting even as the entire organism dissolves. That was from Michael Levin's work. He doesn't describe his work as theology because that's a kind of stigmatized thing in science, but I think that is what it is)
This jives with what my own church (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) believes about hell and heaven. We believe that acceptance into heaven is less about if we did enough good things in life and more about if we are willing/able to live in the presence of God. If we don't desire that, then he won't force it on us.
We see being "damned to hell" more in the sense of how a river can be literally dammed up and the flow can be stopped. Our progression ceases, we can't move towards something better, because we have rejected the power that lets us do so. Like how the pretzel simply can't fix itself because it has lost so thouroughly the pattern it needs to follow.
I love the Culturist's explanation on hell. He says that there is no evil, only a lack of good. Dante and CS Lewis understood this.
At the lowest level of hell, it's cold. There's no movement. Satan is chewing on Brutus and Judas because they were traitors - they committed the worst sin of betrayal against those they love.
And in Narnia, the White Witch brings eternal winter without Christmas.
even hells gates are open
the locked dark fortress
open---
for if you can see the torment
then threads connect your heart to their suffering;
and one day, love will unlock
and healing waters flow
whooooa. i love it. also can 100% relate — this perfectly describes all of my bad trips and panic attacks — yearning unattainable
when you put it like that i might be down with the hell thing, like yeah of course certain things shouldn't come to fruition
this, AND, "cannot" come to fruition. Even if they come to fruition, they end themselves.
I've been thinking a lot about "computational theology" or "mathematical theology" as a field, and I think the questions they ask & try to answer are "what CAN exist. What CANNOT exist. What would need to change about the world to allow X to exist, if it currently cannot"
cool fact: when a caterpillar morphs into a butterfly, its atoms get totally scrambled within the cocoon... yet the butterfly remembers lessons from its caterpillar phase
https://www.iflscience.com/do-butterflies-remember-being-caterpillars-72943#
AND, now that I think about it - I don't agree with the depictions above of life and death (but maybe we're talking about different things). As I see reality, the pretzel/lizard matter doesn't get erased. You're constantly consuming atoms that become newly "yours" and shedding ones that become part of other beings. You're not a thing; you're a process. So what makes you stop being you (= die) is less a change in matter, and more an interruption to the vital processes (= solids, liquids, gasses flowing in, out, around). At that point, your cells all get simultaneously released to join the bodies of (or "processes that we perceive as distinct bodies of") bacteria, fungi, insects, worms.
yeah! the "lizard" persists even though all of its cells are constantly changing. So we can say there is no lizard, but the matter is "currently lizarding". And the longevity of that process is determined by whether it aligns or conflicts with all the other processes that exist in reality around it
And here is where I get excited because metaphysics intersects with theology, when we think about: the lizard is NOT an eternal process, it can die/stop. Are there things that are eternal processes? The answer is yes: "change" is an eternal process. You can't kill change. Death is an eternal process, can't kill the possibility of ceasing. I think theology is the study of eternal processes, and "computational theology" is the modern equivalent (it is what is all the rage now, including by the person who discovered that earlier link you posted, about the caterpiller's memories persisting even as the entire organism dissolves. That was from Michael Levin's work. He doesn't describe his work as theology because that's a kind of stigmatized thing in science, but I think that is what it is)
This jives with what my own church (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) believes about hell and heaven. We believe that acceptance into heaven is less about if we did enough good things in life and more about if we are willing/able to live in the presence of God. If we don't desire that, then he won't force it on us.
We see being "damned to hell" more in the sense of how a river can be literally dammed up and the flow can be stopped. Our progression ceases, we can't move towards something better, because we have rejected the power that lets us do so. Like how the pretzel simply can't fix itself because it has lost so thouroughly the pattern it needs to follow.
You consistently have the best essays on this platform and I am in awe. Brilliant explanation!
Though logarithmic, and perhaps apophenic, the image in the thumbnail has always looked like an eye to me
I love the Culturist's explanation on hell. He says that there is no evil, only a lack of good. Dante and CS Lewis understood this.
At the lowest level of hell, it's cold. There's no movement. Satan is chewing on Brutus and Judas because they were traitors - they committed the worst sin of betrayal against those they love.
And in Narnia, the White Witch brings eternal winter without Christmas.
Here's are the relevant blogs:
https://www.theculturist.io/p/cs-lewiss-lesson-about-evil
https://www.theculturist.io/p/the-hidden-meaning-of-narnias-endless