Adam's Telescope

Ekklesian

Ekklesian

Well-known member
Doctor
Elect
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
7,210
Reaction score
1,579
Points
113
Location
Western Hemisphere
Why didn't he have one?

Could it be that the heavens were intended to be viewed from Earth with the unaided eye? That their message is best discernible from this observatory with natural human vision? I'm not trying to say there's anything wrong with looking closer, or from a different vantage point. I think we're invited to do so. To identify a genuine Da Vinci, one looks at the 'canvas' the brushstrokes and the pigments used, but the message of the artist can only be read when viewed holistically.

Could the same be said of the Heavens?
 
Ekklesian said:
Why didn't he have one?

Could it be that the heavens were intended to be viewed from Earth with the unaided eye? That their message is best discernible from this observatory with natural human vision? I'm not trying to say there's anything wrong with looking closer, or from a different vantage point. I think we're invited to do so. To identify a genuine Da Vinci, one looks at the 'canvas' the brushstrokes and the pigments used, but the message of the artist can only be read when viewed holistically.

Could the same be said of the Heavens?
Click to expand...
No light pollution back then….
 
But is there meaning in the stars? If Adam asked, why all the stars? What do you think the answer would be?
 
In other words, can purpose be seen in the structure of the universe, in the same way that purpose can be seen in the structure of a chair?
 
Ekklesian said:
In other words, can purpose be seen in the structure of the universe, in the same way that purpose can be seen in the structure of a chair?
Click to expand...
Of course there’s structure in the universe. Haven’t you heard of the watchmaker analogy by William Paley?
 
DoctorDuck said:
Of course there’s structure in the universe.
Click to expand...
I didn't ask if there was structure in the universe. I asked, can purpose be seen in the structure of the universe?

DoctorDuck said:
Haven’t you heard of the watchmaker analogy by William Paley?
Click to expand...
Yes, I have, but I didn't know the name of the guy till just now.

I have no doubt that the subject came up, but if it was Adam that asked, Why all the stars, the answer would have been, a more amplified version of Gen. 1:14, 15: for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years, and to give light upon the earth.

So there is meaning in the stars, as viewed with the unaided eye.

Even secular astronomers find meaning in the stars. Astrononmers have observed what they describe as an expansion of the universe, but the expansion is equal no matter which direction one looks. If the universe is a spherical, that would mean they're viewing the phenomenon from its center, which would imply a favored location, and further imply a will and purpose that placed it there. But if the universe is flat and curved in on itself, then it would have no center from which to view, and then the expansion would look the same no matter from where one is viewing it. So secular astronomers, postulate a flat universe for the one that has no center or edge to explain their observations, because that would mean unguided, random chance. The other would mean we occupy a favored location, which would suggest purpose, which implies guidance by an intelligent will.

My point is not to argue for centrality, but to point out that whether or not they realize it, people are looking to the stars for meaning.
 
Ekklesian said:
I didn't ask if there was structure in the universe. I asked, can purpose be seen in the structure of the universe?
Click to expand...
Doesn’t one necessitate the other?
Ekklesian said:
Yes, I have, but I didn't know the name of the guy till just now.
Click to expand...
I learned this in a philosophy class. He’s not the only guy to come up with this theory, but other philosophers came up with different versions and names for their theories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top