Graham, this is a very impressive post and I am honored that my thoughts on the beginning should have triggered this erudition. I will respond only briefly here as you have provided much information and interesting perspectives that I need to ponder. One thing is clear, you are a much more learned student of the question of beginnings than I am.
My interest has been primarily to come to grips with what science today teaches about the important issues here. Here is where our vast area agreement lies. I think we both see that what physicalists teach about ultimate reality is not the truth nor based on science. It is a belief system that in many ways contradicts the very science they are responsible for bringing forward. As we have found some important issues of disagreement, I want to come back to where we do agree.
A couple of initial comments about your post. First, I am far from a student of comparative religions and the various beliefs about beginnings, so I am grateful to you for pointing out some sources and ideas that are new to me. I am particularly intrigued by your references to Jonathan Black. Secret knowledge always raises questions of resurgence of gnosticism but that in itself would be interesting to me. From what you presented however, there seems much to contemplate.
One issue I’m very interested in is the idea of universal consciousness, the “mother-sea” of William James and the Jung-Pauli conjecture involving the “unus mundus.” Black’s thoughts may be of interest there.
You got into far more detail about the Genesis account than I did or am willing to do. I don’t really look for what is called “concordance,” that is the literal reading of Genesis or the Bible supposedly to support what current science teaches. Later I am hoping to get more into what is more theological reflections after I conclude the series on physicalism. I’m hoping we can continue this dialog on some of those issues.
You mention panentheism. That’s another topic, like universal consciousness, that I want to explore further. It seems to me that such an idea is not contrary to orthodox Christianity but maybe you can advise on that.
The last comment you made also prompts a response. You suggested I may be faulted with the same blindness caused by dogmatism that I suggested Einstein was related to his preference for a steady state universe even though his own theories proved that idea to be false. I cannot deny that I may be guilty as accused. I hope not. I believe in my soul (assuming I have one) that I am serious about these inquiries. I certainly approach these questions with presuppositions. I think we all do. You would agree, wouldn’t you? You may recall I did a lengthy post on the question of presuppositions vs. dogma in science. One contributes to science and is essential, the other hinders it. I believe, as I think you do, that today’s dogma about physicalism and exclusive Darwinism is too often on full display among the science community, especially among the evangelistic atheists.
I trust that you will keep me on my toes on that subject. That’s one of the great things about this interaction. Thank you!
