Recent evidence I’ve collected about the existence and nature of a purposive God
2020|10|1-2
Recent evidence I’ve collected about the nature and existence of a purposive God
2020|10|1-2
Posted at theprodigalspecies.com on 2020|10|2
Also pasted into “DRAFT 1 of contribution 8, recent evidence about the existence and nature of God 2020|10|2.docx”:
Contributions I offer to for defending God’s kingdom, part 2
Contribution 8. Recent evidence I’ve collected about the existence and nature of God
Raymond E. Gangarosa, MD, MPH, MSEE
Friday, October 2, 2020
I have tentatively identified evidence of a purposive, intelligent God Who has acted on occasions that I have witnessed directly (1) to protect human civilization against the existential threat of Donald Trump and (2) to provide objective evidence of His existence.
So far, I seem to have identified three touchpoints that compare traditional views of God with the emerging picture that I can see from my vantage point of God’s workings:
- a word cloud experiment from authors writing the mission theosis literature
- the way God intervened to help select articles on the Dark Triad for me to send to Rachel Maddow
- a miracle involving library databases that can prove the existence of God intervening in the cybersphere
I will set up three scientific articles documenting these events by pasting dated excerpts from recent entries into a traditional format of (1) abstract, (2) background, (3) methods and materials, and (4) discussion. I will confine my current remarks to the abstracts.
To establish time-dated evidence of God’s existence and nature, I will post this draft manuscript on my website, The prodigal species, https://theprodigalspecies.com , in a password-protected blog entitled “Tentative proof — DO NOT CHANGE THIS FILE”. The password, chosen as an invitation to witness and participate rather than as a security barrier, will be “Proof of God”.
Observation 1. God has a far more powerful presence in the dynamic world than in the human realm of words.
Abstract.
Background.
I clipped these Wikipedia articles to my bookmarks and Evernote database:
theoisis and other theological terms 2020|9|28
Divinization (Christian) – Wikipedia
Theosis (Eastern Christian theology) – Wikipedia
The highlighted ones relating to different aspects of theosis seemed especially relevant, e.g., with a sequence involved in theosis and connections to patristic thinking. I’ll paste a To Do at the end of this notebook to come back
Methods and materials.
I printed out the summaries of articles I outlined on perichoresis and missional theosis so I could count how many points I wanted to make and plan my exposition.
I counted at least 49 points, not counting those in the article on Ubuntu and Trinitarianism that I will use for my remarks to minorities.
I see I can organize the points according to the 7-step developmental sequence:
0. niche. missional theosis = intent
1. past. perichoresis, indwelling
2. present. cruciformity, agape love
3. future. resonance, stabilization
4. irreversibility. reconciled diversity, justice
5. higher-level past. responsible and dedicated participation
6. higher-level present. servanthood, detoxification, echoes
7. higher-level future. Ubuntu
8. transformation. theosis = conforming the world to the heart of God, multicellularity, collective salvation
Configure a table arranged in that format to make all the relevant points from those articles.
step number | trinitarian perichoresis | radical monotheism | points | comments
I can reference the table as I present Trinitarianism my own way.
The table will provide documentation from traditional theological sources that support my position and free me to arrange my exposition to be compatible with the other contributions I present.
Analysis of 9 selected articles about Trinitarian doctrine obtained from two Web of Science searches for “missional theosis” and for “perichoresis”. Note how the second category, “radical, abstract monotheism” resembles fundamentalism, conservatism, libertarianism, Republicanism, and Trumpism — and a diseased human body heavily infected with a virus!
References:
1. Deetlefs, J. P. (2019). “Political implications of the Trinity: Two approaches.” Hts Teologiese Studies-Theological Studies 75(1).
2. Dietrich, S. (2018). “God’s Mission as a Call for Transforming Unity.” International Review of Mission 107(2): 378-390.
3. Kolimon, M. (2016). “Mutuality in mission.” Review & Expositor 113(1): 99-109.
4. Miller, L. (2018). “Christification of the Least: Potential for Christology and Discipleship.” Studies in World Christianity 24(3): 255-276.
5. Manganyi, J. S. and J. Buitendag (2017). “Perichoresis and Ubuntu within the African Christian context.” Hts Teologiese Studies-Theological Studies 73(3).
6. Klaasen, J. S. (2019). “Theology and development: Taking persona responsibility for community development.” Hts Teologiese Studies-Theological Studies 75(1).
7. Schweiker, W. (2016). “The Ethical Limits of Power: On the Perichoresis of Power.” Studies in Christian Ethics 29(1): 3-13.
8. Stamatovic, S. (2016). “The Meaning of Perichoresis.” Open Theology 2(1): 303-323.
9. Cotnoir, A. J. (2017). “Mutual indwelling [in perichoresis].” Faith and Philosophy 34(2): 123-151.
Discussion
Here’s why my literature survey worked to illustrate the difference between Trinitarian and absolute monotheism. Writers discussing mission theosis and perichoresis have a vision consistent with life’s scale invariant dynamics, and so they generate word clouds that contrast the two alternatives appropriately.
Here’s a critically important point. That word comparison exercise allows a direct comparison between my analytical method, which identifies God’s gold standard of how things actually work, and the word impressions that their perception generates. The quantitative nature of the analysis | the ability to use the basic result to make far more extensive inferences | and the potential for future research to catalyze unimaginably greater transformations | and the ability to test the quantitative model against the gold standard of God’s own reality, as a matter of elucidating the foundations of a science of theology are all completely outside the scope of the word cloud.
Thus, the deficiencies of the crude research I performed are very much to the point of showing that the new paradigm that I’ve advocated — using the clues that God has left in nature | life | and civilization for us to learn how life works || how to design our civilization || and how to discern His will — supersedes biblical literalism.
Observation 2. Still, God is unimaginably intelligent in processing language and thought at levels high above human capacities and agency.
Abstract.
Background.
Methods and materials.
From “coronavirus era notebook #7 2020|9|18 ff..docx”:
I added another reference to the previous list of 10 articles that I had compiled before — the unpublished manuscript that provided a literature search of Dark Leadership.
- Yüksel, B. C., et al. (2017). The Relationship between the Dark Triad Personality Traits and Leadership: A Literature Review, Bahçeşehir University: 1-23.
In so doing, I noticed that I had left this reference out of the reference Group labeled “The Dark Triad (and Tetrad)” in my main bibliographic database, “The prodigal species 6-2-2017 ff. – PARENT.enlp”. I immediately corrected that oversight by dragging this reference to that Group.
Incidentally, I attached the two additional references to my email to Rachel Maddow — which rounded the number of articles out to 13 — because they came up on my computer screen just below the file I was searching for, as if to recommend them, too. Those articles were
- Palmer, J. C., et al. (2020). “The Cascading Effects of CEO Dark Triad Personality on Subordinate Behavior and Firm Performance: A Multilevel Theoretical Model.” Group & Organization Management 45(2): 143-180.
- Schyns, B., et al. (2019). “Shady Strategic Behavior Recognizing Strategic Followership of Dark Triad Followers.” Academy of Management Perspectives 33(2): 234-249.
I initially got the impression that my computer was also calling attention to this article that appeared at the beginning of the list that I had resorted in alphabetical order, but then I discovered the sort program doesn’t take “the”, “a”, “an” into account. On the other hand, maybe all the forces that put Donald Trump’s malevolence into motion configured the titles in my bibliography made this article stand out like a sore thumb, starting with a “T” at the beginning of my alphabetized list.
- Michels, M., et al. (2020). “The ability to lie and its relations to the dark triad and general intelligence.” Personality and Individual Differences 166.
The dark triad of personality (D3) – psychopathy, machiavellianism, and narcissism – is commonly conceived to be related to manipulative and deceptive abilities and is often regarded as an exploitative behavioral strategy. Some authors argue that the effectiveness of this strategy is moderated by other variables, e.g. intelligence. In our study participants prepared three short stories about personal incidences: Two had to be true and one had to be non-factual. The subjects told their stories in a laboratory setting while being videotaped. The SRP-4, the MACH VI and the NARQ were used to measure the dark triad. General intelligence was assessed with the WAIS IV. Subsequently, raters judged which of the three stories was the non-factual one. In conclusion, participants’ lying ability was operationalized by the number of raters not succeeding to identify the non-factual story. We tested if (a) the D3 and (b) intelligence were correlated with lying ability, and (c) the D3-lying-ability-relation was moderated by intelligence. The results indicated that neither the dark triad nor general intelligence are meaningfully related to lying ability and that general intelligence does not moderate the D3-lying-ability-relation. Our results challenge the view that the D3-traits enable individuals to exploit their social environment effectively.
If these articles prove to be significant additions, despite my not having looked them over before sending them, then these observations would seem to indicate that God does operate in the realm of words as well as natural dynamics. It might then seem that computers could be a conduit and locus for miracles even more than what existed in biblical and medieval times. Think of all the steps that would have had to go into this “miracle” calling attention to these specific articles, including (most improbably of all) the naming of the articles, my selecting some on the basis of quick scans and suggestiveness of titles, and then the Holy Spirit’s mop-up operation that identified three articles that I had omitted. More than just the statistical patterns of letters, there are issues of God’s overarching intelligence in assessing the comparative relevance of those particular articles compared to the threat that Donald Trump poses to His kingdom. This could be smashingly convincing evidence of a supremely intelligent and purposive God, coordinating countless otherwise unrelated events. That hypothesis might be testable using statistical methods — in this particular case where God has every reason to involve Himself fully in human events, when all His kingdom is at risk.
I wonder if these events weren’t either seen ahead of time by a timeless God or else directed through His inspiration. Alternatively, I often wonder if I was killed in my car crash and this is my control period when I work out how much better I could have done with my life had I been fully inspired by the Holy Spirit — as a matter of learning the regret with which I should view my afterlife over all time!
These observations are complementary to my comparison between the natural dynamics of my analytical model and the word cloud pictures of theologians with expansive visions of mission theosis. The dynamics of life outdo words, but God is fully conversant in our words, too. Those two observations bracket the meaningfulness of the Bible in its own time and in ours. God can’t supervise every word, and a lot of the words are filler or even hypocrisy detectors, but He can inspire, guide, and direct actions. After all, He directed me through the sequence of steps I described above.
Observation 3. Tentative evidence suggests that God can manifest profound miracles in computer networks.
Abstract.
Background.
Methods and materials.
From “coronavirus era notebook #8 2020|9|30 ff..docx”:
2020|9|28 email from Friend#2
Ray, great talking here’s some links:
Pelosi Prepares Democrats For Rare Possibility The House May Decide The Election:https://www.npr.org/2020/09/28/917730388/pelosi-prepares-democrats-for-rare-possibility-the-house-may-decide-the-election?sc=18&f=1001
Book by Dora Apel: Calling Memory into Place
Henryk Skolimowski: The Participatory Mind
The Gospel of Rama Krishna is a classic:
Friend#2
2020|10|1
Note: Midway through writing this note, I learned that Donald and Melania Trump acquired coronavirus infection from Hope Hicks.
Add references to my bibliography by
Henryk Skolimowski
See below the account of what happened with the Web of Science database.
I thought God was punishing me for not responding right away to an opportunity to gather citations relevant to my case — in this case by removing those references from a major scientific bibliographic database.
I thought of notifying the organization that manages the Web of Science database, as a matter of establishing proof of God’s existence. This event could uncover unequivocal evidence of a miracle. The administrators of the bibliographic database would have unambiguous proof that the references had been in the collection and then would see just one remained. How could they explain the selective disappearance of that data?
Thus, so far, I seem to have identified three touchpoints that compare traditional views of God with the emerging picture that I can see from my vantage point of God’s workings:
- the word cloud experiment from authors writing the mission theosis literature.
- the way God intervened to help select articles on the Dark Triad for me to send to Rachel Maddow
- a miracle involving library databases that can prove the existence of God intervening in the cybersphere
I pasted this list temporarily at the very top of this file above the title page, as a reference for writing up contribution 8 that I hope can help advance the kingdom of God, perhaps after the Trump administration.
Who should I share this event with?
- Friend#2
- ???
This observation doesn’t belong in my 7 contributions manuscript because it would compromise their credibility.
Now that Donald Trump, his wife, and close members of his entourage have acquired COVID-19, these dynamics are now in God’s hands. There will be a lull in events when everyone sees what happens.
Questions:
Have I been misinterpreting how God works, thinking I need to seek peace in my social networks and document how to make this kind of transition? I have felt
Have I been too complacent, not taking the existential risks of Donald Trump seriously? If so, my excursion today helping my mother get out of the house and buy light bulbs would be seen as an inexcusable dereliction of duty.
Have I been relying too much on the model I’ve constructed of how life works, not getting the word out to people who could have acted on them?
PASTE NEXT — DUMMY STOP
COME BACK TO THIS ENTRY
2020|10|1
The Web of Science has an easily located and identified “Contact us” button at the following websites:
Graphical user interface, application Description automatically generated
Graphical user interface, application Description automatically generated
2020|10|1 comment sent through the “Contact us” button on the Web of Science web page
All but one of 50-60 references by Henryk Skolimowski vanished from the Web of Science the morning of September 29, 2020 and still can’t be accessed via author search. Please tell me when data are restored and what happened! I can give more details.
I checked a box next to the directions:
Please check this box to receive emails from Clarivate Analytics. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Here is the full email I prepared:
Subject: mysterious disappearance from the Web of Science database of all but one citation by Henryk Skolimowski!
Dear sir/madam
Around midnight of September 28, 2020, using the Firefox browser and a MacBook Pro computer, I searched the Web of Science hosted by the Emory University library DiscoverE system for
Skolimowski, Henryk
in the Author field
As I recall, my search returned between 50 to 60 results. After receiving those search results, I did not download the references that were displayed on my screen at the time but instead went on to other tasks, figuring I would capture those results in the morning when I would be fresher and have more time.
I performed exactly the same search the next day to find only one reference by that exact same author on the Web of Science! I have repeated that search on other occasions, always getting the same result. It seems astounding that all those records would just disappear! One thing I haven’t done is reboot my computer, for fear of losing diagnostic data that might be useful to you in tracking down the cause of this anomalous event, but I have not noticed any.
I searched the Firefox history for “Skolimowski” and found a table that looked like this:
Graphical user interface, application Description automatically generated
I copied the selection shown above and got the following results. For data quality assurance, I have pasted the findings twice, with the first one listed being the most recent.
0 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect Result List: AU Skolimowski: EBSCOhost Result List: AU Skolimowski, Henryk: EBSCOhost Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Skolimowski, Henryk Emory University Libraries – Skolimowski, Henryk Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski
0 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect Result List: AU Skolimowski: EBSCOhost Result List: AU Skolimowski, Henryk: EBSCOhost Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Skolimowski, Henryk Emory University Libraries – Skolimowski, Henryk Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski
I obtained the author’s name from a recommendation by Friend#2, that he sent shortly before my search. On more than one previous occasion, Friend#2 had sent email messages recommending Skolimowski’s work, but I don’t remember previously having performed a bibliographic search. The name is so difficult to spell and type that I have always copied and pasted it every single time. All occurrences of “Skolimowski” in my searches and in this incident report were pasted from the one occurrence of the name in Friend#2’s email.
This is an important author, who should be included in your bibliographic database. Here are the 8 citations for Henryk Skolimowski that were obtained in
Skolimowski, H. (1974). “Rejoinder: Methodology and marxism.” Studies in Comparative Communism 7(3): 304-310.
Skolimowski, H. (1970). “Logos and praxis.” Studies in Comparative Communism 3(2): 25-30.
Skolimowski, H. (1982). Journal of Social and Biological Structures 5(3): 290-294.
Skolimowski, H. (1971). “Open Marxism and its consequences.” Studies in Comparative Communism 4(1): 23-28.
Skolimowski, H. (1971). “Are there no consequences of open Marxism?” Studies in Comparative Communism 4(1): 48-56.
Skolimowski, H. (1984). “10. Eco-ethics as the foundation of conservation.” The Environmentalist 4: 45-51.
Skolimowski, H. (1976). “Technology assessment in a sharp social focus.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 8(4): 421-425.
Skolimowski, H. (1983). Journal of Social and Biological Structures 6(1): 97.
By contrast, here is the one and only result obtained by searching the Web of Science this afternoon for “Skolimowski, Henryk”:
And here is the hyperlinked information from that one record:
PROBLEMY EKOROZWOJU Volume: 3 Issue: 2 Pages: 153-153 Published: 2008
Henryk Skolimowski is an extremely important author to include in the Web of Science database, who writes about participatory eco-ethics. Some kind of sudden event must have wiped out all his citations sometime during a period of less than 25 hours. If this was an isolated event somehow involving just this one author’s references, it might take some time to discover the omission. An act of sabotage, possibly from within your firewalls, could have erased this author and possibly also others like him. On the other hand, could this omission have resulted from a partial system failure?
I would appreciate your letting me know when you get these references restored to your system, so I can export those citations to my EndNote bibliography. Also, I have a specific reason, not relevant to this discussion, for hearing what you find was the cause of this sudden and perplexing data omission. Accordingly, I would appreciate if you could give me a call to report your findings.
Here is my contact information:
Raymond E. Gangarosa, MD, MPH, MSEE
home/office: 470-545-4584; cell/text 678-491-4943
Thank you.
Best wishes,
Ray Gangarosa
P.S.
I just noticed that I didn’t capture all the records in my Firefox search, so I have pasted them again below:
Graphical user interface Description automatically generated
Below, the last paste is the most recent, as is more typical:
8 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect 8 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect Search Science Search Science 8 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect 0 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect Result List: AU Skolimowski: EBSCOhost Result List: AU Skolimowski, Henryk: EBSCOhost Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Skolimowski, Henryk Emory University Libraries – Skolimowski, Henryk Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski
8 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect 8 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect Search Science Search Science 8 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect 0 Search Results – Authors(Skolimowski, Henryk) – ScienceDirect Result List: AU Skolimowski: EBSCOhost Result List: AU Skolimowski, Henryk: EBSCOhost Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski Emory University Libraries – Skolimowski, Henryk Emory University Libraries – Skolimowski, Henryk Emory University Libraries – Henryk Skolimowski
Discussion.