Predicting Our Future

The Future of Humanity

Making predictions is often difficult, especially about the future.

– Niels Bohr

We’ve never been very good at predicting the future, especially in the areas of technological innovation and human progress. Even the experts – the visionaries among us – have been far off the mark in seeing what’s coming down the road. Consider the following predictions that turned out to be less than insightful:

·         “Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons.” – Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949

·         “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” – Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

·         “640K ought to be enough for anybody.” – Bill Gates, 1981

·         “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.” – Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977

·         “Louis Pasteur’s theory of germs is ridiculous fiction.” – Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872

·         “This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.” – Western Union internal memo, 1876

·         “The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?” – David Sarnoff’s associates in response to his urgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s

·         “While theoretically and technically television may be feasible, commercially and financially it is an impossibility.” – LeeDeForest, inventor

·         “Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.” – Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895

·         “Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.” – Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre

·         “Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau.” – Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics, Yale University, 1929

·         “There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.” – Albert Einstein, 1932

·         “Everything that can be invented has been invented.” – Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899

Why such shortsightedness, even among experts in their respective fields?  I think that people get locked into the time in which they live, which makes it difficult for many to see how things could be in the future. Just look at science fiction, like that of Jules Verne, for example. Verne wrote about submarines, nuclear power, and space travel, and other wonders unbelievable during his time. Much of it, however, came to be. I look at current science fiction, like Star Wars and Star Trek, and I’m fairly confident that much of the far out technology, like interstellar travel and human teleportation, will come to pass. With the way technology is currently accelerating, I believe that humans – and eventually our descendants – will be able to do things that we currently can only dream of.

My Fitness Goals

For the next few months, I'll be reporting progress made toward reaching my personal fitness goals. I just turned 50, and I see high-level fitness as an extreme challenge. And I love a good challenge. My goal is to be in top shape by February. Currently, I weigh 225 at approximately 16% bodyfat. So, my goal is to get below 10% at around 205. The trick is to lose fat without sacrificing muscle. One has to lose fat slowly while lifting weights to maintain muscle. Losing about 1-2 lbs. a week is ideal.

I will be posting pictures and possibly videos to chronicle my progress. Please comment or ask questions. Just knowing that others may be monitoring my progress helps to motivate me.

Spirituality and Self-Improvement

How is Spirituality Related to Self-Improvement?

The deeper we look into nature, the more we recognize that it is full of life, and the more profoundly we know that all life is sacred and that we are united with all life that is in nature. Man can no longer live his life for himself alone. We realize that all life is valuable and that we are united to all this life. From this knowledge comes our spiritual relationship with the universe. – Albert Schweitzer

In a nutshell, consciousness makes us spiritual beings. So, it is within us to use our gift of self-reflection to examine our lives and to improve ourselves. That’s really special. As far as we know, we are the only species that can effectively engage in self-improvement. To me, then, improving ourselves through self-examination is the highest spiritual endeavor that we can engage in. This includes trying to better ourselves and to help others better themselves. Honing one’s spirituality is the result of developing one’s self and helping others to reach their goals. In brief, then, the highest spiritual calling is to build one’s character and to continually strive toward self-actualization. The lifelong process of learning how to become a truly good human being is the essence of spirituality.

Improving oneself – becoming a better human being – is a spiritual process. It begins with looking inside oneself and facing what’s there. People talk about the human soul. I see the soul as one’s character – that which comprises and defines you. So, soul building equates to character building. The human condition – all the suffering and difficulty in life – may be necessary in order to build one’s character, to make us better human beings.

Spirituality involves helping others, being kind and honest. What more could a spiritual person ask for in life than to be at ease with who they are, be satisfied with one’s life, and be content that one has done his best to be a good human being?  The true test of character is what you do when no one is watching, not even God. To me, the highest form of character is doing the right thing, not because God is watching and judging you, but simply because it is the right thing. That is the highest moral road that we can travel. In other words, doing good without the promise of reward or threat of punishment if you don’t, or doing good simply for its own sake, is the basis for a new, higher form of spirituality.

Does the American Dream Still Exist?

Does the American dream still exist?  Did it ever?  Americans once thought that anyone, from any walk of life, could find success, if they worked hard enough.  I believe that this possibility is becoming more difficult to achieve, mainly due to increasing economic inequality in this country.  Obviously, opportunity exists in America, but people of wealth have much more opportunity than do the poor.  Society should be doing more to make opportunity more equitable for everyone.  I realize that we can't equalize outcomes for individuals.  Some people simply work harder or are luckier than others.  However, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't at least try to equalize, as much as feasible, equality of opportunity.  To me, this is a matter of social justice.  Every human being deserves an equal opportunity to experience success, pursue happiness, and develop their full potential.

Check out this very informative video on why economic inequality is harmful to society:
http://inequality.org/richard-wilkinson-economic-inequality-harms-societies/

Why the Change in Tone Between the Old and New Testaments?

Why Is There Such a Split Between the Old and New Testaments?  Was God Wrong, or Did He Just Change His Tone?

In the Old Testament God seems very unpleasant at times. In fact, God is described as “a jealous God, filled with vengeance and wrath.”  In numerous passages in the Old Testament God commands the Israelites, His chosen people, to slay their enemies, their enemies’ wives, children, and livestock.

This is what the Lord of Heaven’s Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely

destroy the entire Amalekite nation – men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys. (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NLT)

According to numerous passages in the Old Testament, God must be obsessed with making war and killing all those that oppose Him.

“I have wiped out many nations, devastating their fortress walls and towers. Their cities are now deserted; their streets are in silent ruin. There are no survivors to even tell what happened.”  (Zephaniah 3:6 NLT)

Some passages show that God is concerned more with killing than in preserving life. The following passage demonstrates a total disregard for human and animal life.

“I will sweep away everything in all your land,” says the Lord. “I will sweep away both people and animals alike. Even the birds of the air and the fish in the sea will die. I will reduce the wicked to heaps of rubble, along with the rest of humanity,” says the Lord. (Zephaniah 1:2-3 NLT)

God aids his people in making war against all enemies, which seems to consist of about all other nations at that time.

When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are about to enter and occupy, He will clear away many nations ahead of you: the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. These seven nations are all more powerful than you. When the Lord your God hands these nations over to you and you conquer them, you must completely destroy them. Make no treaties with them and show them no mercy. (Deuteronomy 7:1-2 NLT)

One can pick and choose certain passages, but what about the most remembered and quoted stories in the Old Testament. There’s the story of the great flood where God wipes out nearly all life on earth. Then there’s the story where God directs Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac. Fortunately, Isaac’s life was spared at the last moment. How about the incredible story of Lot and his family?  God completely obliterates two cities, Sodom and Gomorrah, just to kill the homosexuals living there. So much for God’s tolerance. But before Lot was allowed to escape, it was okay for him to offer up his two virgin daughters to appease the sexual desires of an unruly mob of men. After Lot escapes, his God turns his wife to salt simply for trying to get a look at the fire from the sky, and a drunken Lot ends up having sex with both his daughters, but not at the same time. I guess a threesome would have been a bit over the top. And this was the guy that God spared. God also commands us to stone people to death for rather mild offenses. He says that children who talk back to their parents can be stoned to death. Other punishments include an eye for an eye.

In the New Testament, however, all of a sudden God turns into a loving, merciful God. “Love thy neighbor.”  “Love thy enemy.”  “Turn the other cheek.”  These directives clearly indicate a doctrine of nonviolence, even toward one’s enemies, which is in stark contrast to the God of the Old Testament. Other passages espouse God’s deep love and compassion for humanity.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16 KJV)

In the New Testament we see that salvation becomes open to the gentiles and not reserved solely for the Jews. Of course, the New Testament is based on the teachings of Christ and the origins of Christianity. Christ went against the Jewish leaders of his day by giving us a new vision of God, our relationship with Him, and our treatment of our fellow man. And in presenting such a radically new philosophy, Christ set the stage for a new religion – one that would change the world forever.

The question still remains, however. Why the extreme shift in tone?  Was it time for a new religion?  Did the writers of the books of the Old Testament misinterpret what God was telling or inspiring them to write down?  Perhaps the new writers of the New Testament books were younger and more hip. Whatever the reasons, it sounds like the grumpy, old God needed a big-time makeover. I must say that I like the new, gentler God depicted in the New Testament, and, apparently, so do a lot of people. I just expect God to be a bit more consistent.

Faith Over Deeds?

How Can Faith Be More Important Than Good Deeds?

A man’s ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. – Albert Einstein

This question gets to the heart of the purpose of religion. What is the real purpose of religion?  Is it to help people to develop into better human beings, or is it to manipulate peoples’ behavior so a select few can control the masses. I can’t believe that simply believing in God could be more important than being good to humanity. I mean, what more could God ask of a person than to be a good human being?  I find it difficult to accept that an omnipotent being would be in need of praise. This is a human trait. We thrive on praise, because it strokes our ego and boosts our self-esteem. I can’t believe that God would be in need of a self-esteem boost.

So, for me, the purpose of religion should be to encourage people to lead better lives, to treat others better, and to do things that make the world better in some way. But that’s not what we see with the world’s religions. Most religions place much more emphasis on worship and developing a personal relationship with God – whatever that means – and much less emphasis on one’s personal development. In other words, leading a good life is less important than worshiping God. What good has worship ever done for the world?  Why is leading a good life not enough for God?  I think it all goes back to competing religions vying for the masses. For a religion, a cult, or a movement to gain strength, it needs, more than anything else, followers. That’s why most religions have always had a strong missionary component. All new people they encountered were potential converts. What audacity!  Converting natural spiritual peoples to an unnatural religion, and telling them that they are lost without God.

Why Are There So Many Interpretations Among Religions Concerning Passages in the Bible or Other Religious Texts, Even Among Different Denominations Within The Same Religion?

You would think that the word of God, a perfect being, would be fairly easy to interpret. So, why all the debate?  It seems almost like the ones who wrote the Bible, or God, if you believe it is the inspired word of God, deliberately made it arcane and confusing. After all, hundreds of Biblical contradictions have been documented. The huge number of contradictions, combined with vagueness and mystery, has left the Bible and its themes open to broad interpretations, and groups have always been very good at picking specific verses to support their positions while ignoring those that oppose them. Even groups within the same religion interpret scripture very differently on both mundane and serious matters, such as . . .

·         How followers should dress

·         How to keep one’s hair

·         What to eat or not eat

·         The role of women in the church and in marriage

·         Procedures for baptism

·         What it means to be “saved,” and once saved, can one backslide?

·         How to discipline children

·         The use of birth control

·         Rules concerning divorce and remarriage

·         Who’s going to get to heaven

·         If and when the rapture will occur

·         Homosexuality

The danger is that people actually base their lives on how they interpret certain Biblical passages. People can justify some really weird behavior (a la serpent handlers) when they think their behavior is sanctioned by the Bible, and actually, God. With the broad range of Biblical interpretations, how can we know which groups or religions may be correct?  Obviously, only one religion can be correct. It’s much more likely, though, that they all have it wrong.

Why is God Silent?

Why Can’t God Simply Reveal Himself to Us?  Wouldn’t That Clear Up a Lot of Confusion Real Fast?

What’s God’s purpose with all the secrecy and silence?  For God to love us so much he doesn’t seem to want much to do with us. I can understand that, since I often grow tired of being around other people myself. But, we’re talking about God here, a perfect being, who supposedly created us, imperfect beings. If a personal God exists, I can’t imagine how he could simply sit quietly on the sidelines while we humans flounder about. We have had to figure things out for ourselves, without any help from God. God’s only alleged communication with us, the Bible, hasn’t been much help either. Aside from a few simplistic moral dictums, the Bible has provided us very little information on how to improve the human condition. Fortunately science has accomplished that for us, but it has taken millennia and humanity’s greatest minds. You would think that if God didn’t plan on talking or interacting with us, He could have at least given us some written words on how the universe works, that the earth actually revolves around the sun, or instructions on to build a microwave oven or something. Well, I guess we have the Bible code, if you believe there are hidden messages embedded in the Bible. Not only has God not helped in our development, religion has actually opposed almost every scientific advancement throughout history.

I feel that if a personal God exists, He would have greater contact with us. Could it be that God either can’t or won’t interact with us?  If He can’t, that means that God is not omnipotent, but this doesn’t fit with the picture that most people have about God. If He won’t, that means that God might not care as much about us as we would like to think. I go back to the concept of God held by Deists, who believe that God created everything – put everything in motion – but has not intervened in human affairs. But, once again, most followers can’t accept this non-personal God. People desperately want a hands-on God, but that’s not what we have. To me, the fact that God does not communicate or interact with us is strong evidence that a personal God, like the one depicted in Christianity, probably does not exist.

The Word of God?

Why Should Postmodern, Technically-Advanced Humans Place So Much Faith in What Primitive, Ignorant People Wrote Down Over 2,000 Years Ago?

The less you know, the more you believe. – Bono

Back when the books of the Bible were being written, only a select few could even write, and all of them were male. So, is it any wonder that everything in the Bible is slanted toward male dominance?  Even God is male. I’ve always found it odd to assign gender to God. Why couldn’t God be female and give birth to the universe?  To me, this is further evidence that the men writing the Bible naturally made God a man, in their own image, not the other way around. Did these guys write down what God told them to write, what someone else told them to write, or did they simply write their own opinions and interpretations of things?  I’m trying to visualize the process of these scribes writing down what God wanted them to write. Did they actually hear the voice of God?  Did God speak to them in their dreams?  I have little faith in humans trying to interpret the word of God and getting it right. All we know for sure is that human hands actually wrote the words. In this whole process, isn’t it likely that imperfect humans could have misinterpreted something or even left out important details?

The Bible was translated several times, and each translation increased the odds that mistakes occurred. In Greek, for example, many words have several translations, and the correct meaning is totally dependent on the context. Often what appears to be the right word is not exactly the right word. And who can ignore the fact that there were many more books, like the Dead Sea Scrolls, that, for whatever reasons, didn’t make it into the final version of the Bible. Why were they omitted?  Who had the final call as to which books made it in and which books did not. What was the litmus test that determined in or out?  Were the authors of the omitted books also inspired by God like the ones that made it in?  And how in the world could humans making these judgments possibly determine which books were really inspired by God (if any) and which ones were not?  This whole process smacks of political deals and ideological clashes.