Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory"
Gil Hardwick (gil@landmark.iinet.net.au)
Wed, 03 May 1995 02:43:16 GMT
In article <D7HBuq.1wM@crash.cts.com>, Robert Roosen (roosen@crash.cts.com) writes:
> That is why Moses got so angry about the golden calf. He knew it
>would be captured by stronger tribes and his group would go back into
>slavery.
> So when the big bang types talk about God, they are talking about
>an entity that was invented by humans for now outdated purposes.
Just so! But I must point out further that this is neither new.
The Australian Aboriginal custom too is not to call people by their
proper name, so invoking the name and taking power over the person to
whom it rightfully belonged. In the normal course of events they are
referred to by their appropriate kin term, else some usually humorous
nick-name.
In the Mosaic tradition, at one point the name of God was not to be
invoked at all, but treated as YHWH the unnamable. It was only with
the advent of the state, and subsequently the papal nexus, that God
was again invoked and, I must add, we ourselves began to be called
by our own proper names.
The first thing the bureaucrats and the priests did on arriving here
in Australia, in fact, was to name people and set up their registries
of all births, deaths and marriages. After that if you weren't named
in the register; if the State had not asserted its power over you, you
did not even exist according to them.
In Asia the Zen Patriarchs had similarly pursued this same non-idea of
"nothingness" (Japanese *mu*, Mandarin *wu*), to be realised rather
through strict discipline than taught by naming.
They were tough old bastards. The moment you let the name slip you
were just as likely to get a good whack on the head with their bamboo
strap, or your finger cut off with a flick of their sword.
Not to mention having to rise at 3:00 am mid-winter to fetch the water
from a well a mile away clad only in thongs and cotton pyjamas . . .
As we have observed here, the astrophysicists are treating "space" in
precisely the same characteristic manner of pursuing their discourse
_around about_ their central tenets instead of focussing ON them, and
asserting their own special enlightenment in not invoking the same
nothingness for the same reason.
They similarly bring in the heavies anxious to punish anyone coming
anywhere near to committing the heresy of naming . . .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He who refuses to qualify data is doomed to rant.
+61 97 53 3270
|