Printable View
From the fall in Gen. 3, we find in Romans 8, "All creation anticipates the day when it will join God's children in glorious freedom from death and decay" (v.21).
The entropy law is the 2nd law of thermodynamics. History really starts in the Garden of Eden.
The second law of thermodynamics concerns closed systems and entropy. Decay is unrelated to either concept.
The decay spoken of is entropy of the creation, the closed system of the universe, for outside it is the uncreated always existing God.
Nevertheless, the decay mentioned in Romans 8 is unrelated to the entropy predicted by the second law.
Not at all. It's the same.
Not quite. When Paul talks of decay, he is referring to biological processes such as aging and decomposition. When a physicist talks of entropy, they are referring to the uniformity of a system. The two are not the same.
As an aside, the existance of the Sun precludes any increase in Earth's entropy.
Paul is also talking of the uniformity of a system. They are the same. The sun does not change this fact.
Justification? Given that Paul would have had no knowledge of Boltzmann's or Fermi-Dirac's statistical laws, I find it hard to believe that Paul had a grasp of entropy several millenia before the theory was even considered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
Actually, it does. The Sun is constantly giving the Earth energy. This input decreases entropy. Indeed, this input is why complex biological life can form.Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
It goes to show you how advanced the Bible is millennia before.
That it would, if you could demonstrate that Paul is indeed talking of the same thing the phyicist is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
It has already been demonstrated above and you could not show otherwise. More detail today does not change that fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
On the contrary, throughout this thread you have only ever asserted your claim, rather than demonstrate it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
Unless, of course, "It's the same" counts as a demonstration in your parts.
Actually it was demonstrated, since entropy involves decay, not non-decay.
*sigh*Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
You have mere asserted that what Paul refers to by 'decay' is the same as what the entropic physicist refers to by 'decay'. You have demonstrate no such equality, and indeed no such equality exists: Paul is referring to a rise in societal immorality, not a cessation of a statistical law.
Entropy does claim an end to statistical law. Paul is not talking about th a rise in societal immorality, but that all things decay, which is not the same thing as mentioning the exponential progression of conscience. Physically things decay, but that does not decay the exponential progression of conscience we observe.
Entropy is simply a measure of uniformity. It doesn't claim anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
How do you know?Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
Perhaps, but that doesn't tell us what he means by 'decay', be it moralistic or physical.Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
The dissipation of entropy however uniform is the decay Paul is referring to. There is none other.
Since Paul is referring to all things returning to dust, morality is not pointed out, but the decay of the physical body. Resurrection is a new body directly given by God. Resurrection is not a resurrection of morality, but our very being. For example, Christians have resurrection life already so that when resurrection comes at the last trumpet, we don't all of a sudden become morally enhanced. Not at all.
Try to understand that when you read the Bible without the Holy Spirit you do so with a darkened mind and unregenerated spirit that is without God's life, so you always read it wrongly. You can say you read the Bible with a hostility in your heart to read it as not originally intended.
What makes you think this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
Dust returns to dust. What would make you think otherwise?
You didn't answer my question. What makes you think Paul is referring to entropy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
It's not that Paul is thinking specifically of our more complicated understanding of entropy today 2 millennia removed, but that entropy agrees in principle with what Paul is saying about decay. Since you could not show otherwise, accept that it is so.
If Paul had no idea about modern entropic theories, then what gives you the authority to retroactively insert pseudo-scientific notions into the New Testament? I do believe the last words of the Bible forbid such a thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
Since I am a man of logic, I will do no such thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchwork
There is not retroactive insertion. What Paul said agrees with entropy and does not violate it. In other words, science agrees with God's Word.
People can say they are men of logic, but they remain illogical while rejecting Christ despite the 4SPFG and MFA which remain unchallenged.