> Kenneth Boyd:
[CLIP]
> >[The Raving Christian Right EndMeme is flaring up: one monitor of its 
> >'speed' has outright stated that he only sees one barrier between the 
> >current situation and the Eze 38/39 Gog War. 
> 
> snip
> 
> I don't understand what this Gog war is... (?)
> 
> Also please explain Endmeme--- like Endgame?
Close enough.  I lifted the term off of one of the Memetics pages.
> The meme of the christain right endmeme sounds interesting-- did you
> engineer it?
Hardly ;)  Its most recent burst of evolution dates from around 1860 to 
the present.  A summary of it circa 1970 [and a biased summary of its 
competition in other branches of Christianity] is in Dwight Pentecost's 
book, "Things to Come".  Some of the more technical derivations to 
support the preferred timing conclusion about the Rapture [another 
component of the Raving Christian Right EndMeme] are definitely flawed.
In secular terms, the Rapture [among many other things] results in the 
'chosen' going immediately Transhuman [and immediately missing--one of 
the Transhuman traits is flight/teleportation, combined with some control 
over relative materiality.].  Serious Transhumanists, while they may not 
believe in this, know very well that this effect is necessary.  Many of 
the things listed under "Anders' Transhumanist Page" are intended to 
duplicate minor effects of this version of Transhumanity.
> The fact that it is picking up speed and there is only one barrier
> between us and the final chapter is also an interesting meme.
The 'speedometer page' is The Rapture Index.  [If you are memetically 
allergic to Christianity, this WILL trip it off!]  The maintainer of this 
page definitely is an applied memetic engineer.  [He's an electronics 
engineer, as well....]
The 'one barrier' comment is halfway objective, if one actually assumes a 
reasonable translation map for nations in Ezekiel 38/39 [cf. Dwight 
Pentecost's book, above.]  What this is supposed to mean is:
     It is very hard to find any nation explicitly in favor of Israel.
[Yes, the Raving Christian Right EndMeme is Israelocentric and 
Judaeocentric.  Extremely.]  Ideally, the only nation explicitly in favor 
of Israel should be Jordan.
     The following must be actively hostile:
     All other Arab nations in border-border contact.
     Russia [NOT the U.S.S.R.!  Only the part containing Moscow is required.]
     The last condition did not hold as of 9/30/96.
> reminds me of
> 
> Nuclear Holocaust
> Global Warming
> ... others.
Oh, fun :b  Later stages of the Christian Right EndMeme [it has to fill 
seven years of history, it needs multiple stages] provide direct support 
for effects compatible with Nuclear Holocaust.  [Will anything less 'burn 
up all of the trees and grass' easily?]
The Ozone Hole going hyper also has fairly direct support [4th vial/bowl, 
depending on your preferred translation....]
[CLIP]
> >While there is a proper use of the word 'supernatural', it usually [in 
> >form-without-power religions] connotes "we want to know as little about 
> >it as possible.  Frankly, knowing it exists is knowing too much."
> 
> But people who are religious don't have an appreciation for the
> supernatural, they have an appreciation for the mystery. (I am not
> tossing that word around... there is a very big difference between the
> two. Check out the original greek)
I checked it out a decade ago.  It's necessary to understand 
Christianity's competition in the 1st century AD.  So the competition 
has adapted by mimicry?
> They hopefully also have enough common sense to avoid religious leaders
> and institutions that abuse power.
No power, no power to abuse.
> >Please keep in mind: there is usually a bias to consider repeatable 
> >phenomena as 'natural'.  This strikes me as an ineffective criterion.  If 
> >'supernatural' is a real domain [I haven't decided yet], I will outright 
> >assume it is susceptible to science as well.
> 
> I would think that anything that is suseptible to science as wholly
> natural.
We have a domain definition problem here.
     1) There are no obvious instances of 'supernatural', even in 
principle.  Colloquially, it subsumes most phenomena of the domain 
'spiritual', whatever THAT is.  Formally, it can be defined as 
nonexistent.  Let's use the colloquial sense here--otherwise, the above 
statement is trivial.
     2) Using as metadomains physical/energy, mental/emotional, and 
spiritual [boundaries VERY fuzzy, and possibly referring to high-level 
abstractions rather than implementation], there is no amazingly obvious 
reason why science should work in the first two domains, and suddenly go 
useless in the third.  Under the previous definition, that means that I 
see no reason why science cannot give results about supernatural/spiritual 
phenomena, assuming they exist.  [I'm convinced, but scope problems are 
fairly severe.]  Or, for that matter, interactions between the various 
levels [such as cytokines and their rather direct relaying of mood 
effects on the immune system; this demonstrates a physical/mental 
interface in the body.]
> Somewhere in your post you mentioned that religion requires miracles.
> And that science can narrow the scope of what is considered to be a
> miracle.
> 
> Which miracles are you referring to specifically?
> 
> What do you mean by miracle?
At this point, the terminology will be clearer if we define 
'supernatural' out of existence.  I will temporarily do so.
My working definition of miracle IS a momentary violation of natural law, 
whose consequences are immediately integrated into reality by natural law.
Since the spiritual domain is the only domain even claimed to generate 
such violations, and furthermore subject to very major memetic blocks 
against scientific investigation, it is quite plausible that there are 
natural laws that explain a number of such phenomena.  If we do 
not know what these natural laws are, and the Christian Right EndMeme 
finds someone to play the role of AntiChrist, that role will be 
able to use phenomena covered by these natural laws to fake miracles, as 
required by his role [he has to create an entire religion!]
> This is how I define a miracle:
> 
> A miracle is not just some weird occurance that no-one can explain. If
> they were, Houdini and David Copperfield would have their own religions.
No one claims that they are violating natural law, just exploiting it in 
an inexplicable fashion.
> A miracle is a huge statement that states, simply, the world view of the
> religion. It is a pure statement that reflects the many facets of the
> given religion's ideology.
See above.
[CLIP]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/   Kenneth Boyd
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////