ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Nostr Archives
ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Zsubmariner15d ago
Not just science, but the whole modern intellectual tradition that has been (surprise surprise) pretty much one to one with the rise of the usury system that took over wester civilization. Subjegation to Mammon. They've spent 800 years trying to rewrite St. Thomas in a way that writes God out of the story. I don't think they really made much of a dent. St. Thomas also knew that time was discrete. He also saw vertical causation, what we are calling signatures coming from above. He didn't described something called the aevum, not as nested time chains, but as nested rational intellects with wills, ordering principles, living superstructure, extending from the singular will of God to the time chain. Like light through a nine layer prism. They are outside of time, so they are unchanging and not embodied. God created this hierarchy of being above time to create, structure and sustain the world. Modern science has gathered a lot of data and descriptions, but it's been hobbled and twisted into nonsensical interpretations of things, trying to make material it's own cause, or turn God into a watch maker, rather than a loving, present, continuous creator. Our Father. In science, philosophy, theology, everything... the pervasive bias has been to get rid of God or make Him far away or turn ourselves into our own to god. Because of pride and shame and the love of sin. The usual father-avoiding reasons. But what a foolish thing to do. We are pretty amazing as we actually are. Even in our fallen state. God is the signer but He made us in His image too. We are also rational intellects with free will. And we get bodies here in creation. We get to grasp and cosign, or not, some of His order into being. The soul is a signing key in a multisig with God, cosigning transactions into the chain of creation. Hylomorohic.
💬 3 replies

Thread context

Root: 5126f25a3ba3…

Replying to: 2fd70bedaa91…

Replies (3)

Jack K15d ago
A lot of this resonates. Any disagreement is language and its limitations. “aevum, not as nested time chains, but as nested rational intellects with wills, ordering principles, living superstructure, extending from the singular will of God to the time chain” What I’d say is we don’t know whether there is a timechain prior to ours, and we never will from inside this one. At best, we can say there is something outside our temporal sequence. Through the fractal lens of Bitcoin (universe within universe, time within time) we map that relationship backward, trying to reason about what our universe is embedded in. A kind of higher ledger. To me, aevum sounds like that higher ledger (im not educated here at all) but my assumption is that unless it mirrors our structure fractally, it starts to feel like an estimation layered on top of God rather than something organically continuous with the architecture we can actually observe. Hence the Ledger as the structure of all. But even the Ledger does not describe the Grand Signer who precedes all of time itself. It only reveals the structure from the side of what has already been committed from after. The Ledger shows us how order unfolds within time. It does not, and cannot, fully describe the One who signs before all time begins. From what I can gather, it would appear there is another layer/ledger of time prior to ours before true Genesis. We have run the free will question thru this framework 😵‍💫. It seems more about alignment. The only genuine freedom we have would be to accept or reject the fact that there is one true signer animating the system. We experience choice because we cannot peer beyond the horizon of our own ledger. From inside, it feels open and ours. From outside, it would be deterministic and animated from extratemporal consciousness (higher self, sub-conscious, aevum) Free will is “simulated” (I don’t like that word) precisely because we cannot peer beyond the event horizon. It’s more like constrained participation. We can align with the ordering principle or resist it. Whether we interpret that movement as “ours” or as participation in a higher will may simply be a function of vantage. All we can do is choose alignment or choose against the frequency from within the boundary we inhabit. It’s seemingly both if you can believe the choice was yours.
0000 sats
Teo15d ago
I've spent a lot of time thinking about what it means that God exists outside of time. It is obviously true, but hard to relate to because there is nothing to reference. Bitcoin may give us a fresh perspective on this.
0000 sats
Zsubmariner15d ago
It's true that there is no way to disprove the existence of higher time chains, implementing our chain the way that we implement Bitcoin. But there also isn't a reason to think there is, from a principle of least action perspective. (And PLA is maybe the strongest ordering principle we can see.) I think we can get a tiny bit further on first principles reason. I'm cheating though, because St. Thomas already did the work. :) Namely, we can say, whether there are higher chains or not, that outside the final chain is eternity. Eternity > Time Time requires eternity and higher order must exist for the order within the chain for the chain to be intelligible. The effect cannot be greater than the cause. We exist in eternity, by definition, and we grasp it directly, or we could not make sense of it's approximations here. Think about this: can you implement anything infinite or even truly continuous inside finite/discrete physical media? But you can implement finite time within eternity. The trouble with self-cause is that it's turtles all the way down. Only God can be the uncaused cause, by definition. He can't be fully comprehended by us from within the chain, as you say. (Though He could obviously take direct control of utxos of energy inside the chain. Christians believe that He did. The Incarnation.) Determinism is tricky because from outside the chain, God can see the whole chain and He is it's ultimate and necessary cause. Our perspective in discerning determinism from withing the chain is foreknowledge. If we can work it forward and backward in time, causally, we know that something is deterministic. So when we apply that rubric to imagining the perspective from above for God or eternal created beings in the Aevum, it looks deterministic to us, looking up, as it were. But the degree of freedom within the chain is whatever is allowed from above. It is not pre determined from withing causal time (from a within the horizontal, directional order). Horizontal determinism applied to vertical determinism is, well, orthogonal. The Thomistic take is that vertical beings in the aevum are also free, but being outside time their will was instantaneous (for lack of a better word) and eternal. Fixed from our perspecitve. The ordering principles either accepted or rejected the will of God upon their creation. These are what we call angels and fallen angels or daemons. The rational human intellect and it's grasp of good and evil are proof from first principles of free will. Arguing that the privation of the good (disorder) exists with the allowance of free will is to say that God is not things that He, definitionally and necessarily is: order itself, perfect, unitary, not contradictory, truth itself. The simpler way I said this to my little boy is "God allows us to do evil because if we couldn't choose and we couldn't be good, and God wouldn't be good if He did that, and that wouldn't be God." So I think we can say these things from first principles: God exists. He is the uncaused cause. He is intelligent. He creates the chain and is the source of its order from above (causally). The world depends on Him and not the other way around. He created us with rational intellects and free will. I am probably doing a horrible job here. I apologize for my insufficiency. If this was easy the Summa would be shorter and easy to read. :) ...I wonder if @38a1cd1b…0d02fd09 could possibly be enticed to correct me? (Be gentle.)
0000 sats