Genesis and Physical Science -- a Programmer's Attempt at Exegesis

First of all, let me give credit where credit is due. Back when I was a teenager, I read a short story by Isaac Asimov called “Darwinian Poolroom” which I thought did a nice job of reconciling physical science and the way Genesis describes the creation of the world. If anyone’s interested, it’s in Buy Jupiter, a collection of his short stories. That was the inspiration for what I’m about to set out before you.

I am by no means a Biblical literalist or a 6-day creationist, but I know many Christians are. I’ve also found myself wrestling with this issue over the years and I think I’ve finally got it pinned down into a form which makes sense to me. Since we’ve got a couple of threads running which touch on 6-Day Creationism right now, I thought this would be an appropriate time to put this out there and see what people think. I apologize if this comes across as blasphemous to anyone. It’s just a rather fallible human being’s attempt to understand the Divine, and it’s about as subject to error as you can get.

I’m a programmer by profession. As such, I’ve been involved in some rather large projects although, of course, none have them have been anywhere near as big as the creation of the universe. When I’m tackling a large project, I’ll usually break it up into manageable steps. I carefully build each step, being aware of what it will have to interact with, test it as much as it can be tested, then let it rest. I then go on to the next step, building it carefully, connecting it to the previous steps and making provisions for it to be connected to future steps. Some of the programs I’ve built have been designed to run independently, or, as I tell my users, “Hit Enter, go and get a cup of coffee, and when you come back it should be done.” I also usually work from simplest to most complex and from most essential to least essential, adding frills and frivols during the last step. I should also add that I don’t necessarily code these steps in the order they’ll actually take place, but in the order which makes most logical sense to me.

So, this is the way I have reconciled Genesis and physical science within myself. Picture God as The Great Programmer, if you will. In the beginning, the earth was without form and void. No code written, just a blank slate to begin creating on. God said, “Let there be light’ and there was light.” God worked out the logistics for light,and possibly orbital mechanics, not to mention quantum physics – complex but essential – and set them in place. Morning came and evening came, the first day. Picture this running through all six days, each day or step being crafted and examined until finally, upon the sixth day, “God saw all that he had made and it was very good.” Could this be the first recorded case of Programmer’s High? “Thus heaven and earth were completed with all their might throng. On the sixth day God completed all the work he had been doing.” Final connections in place and checked, and we are ready to run. “And on the seventh day, he ceased from all his work. God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on that day he ceased from all the work he had set himself to do.” On the seventh day, God hit Enter.

CJ

I don’t see where you’ve “reconciled” anything.

Your post speculates about how God created the universe according to Genesis, but of course Genesis does not even raise the question of how God did it. The point is not the empirical or mechanical facts of method, but the metaphysical (i.e., mythical) fact that he did it.

I will never understand why any religious person would want to claim factual evidence for his/her faith because as far as I’m concerned faith is transcendental and therefore not only doesn’t need factual evidence. Moreover, if faith in the modern age has deteriorated to the point where factual evidence is seen as essential, that signals the death of faith, an abandonment of its essence – if religion engages in a debate with science (eg., by looking for ways to reconcile these two ways of knowing), religion can only lose.

(This remark is not intended to be anti-religious in any sense.)

When did He debug? Oh wait–He didn’t. :eek:

You have to bear in mind that the Christian god is supposedly omnipotent and omniscient. Therefore he wouldn’t need to break things down into smaller pieces. Everything is just a small piece to him.

Nice, CJ. Did you note that you incidentally dispose of the philosophical Problem of Evil as well?

I don’t know programming, but I do recall one of the Laws cynically written to describe it:

“No matter how tight your code is, you cannot prevent some idiot from #$@#%@ing it up.”
:slight_smile:

I certainly hope that He didn’t do this on a Windows platform. I’d hate to be around when it crashes… :smiley:

Zev Steinhardt

what happens if a star has a page fault?

Evil: God forgot to install Norton Anti-Virus, and the budding Creation was infected.

It makes about as much sense as any other explanation.

And then Satan created advertising, and suddenly pop-up ads infested God’s computer. Even after clicking numerous Xs, they still came up. “I’m sick of it all!” He screamed. But instead of unplugging the damn thing and losing all his work before saving, he called on Jesus, who said “calm down, Dad!” and troubleshooted. “Cool!” God said before returning to “The Sims.”

Yes folks, I DO spend too much time on the computer.

Never had to install SAP, then?

//Universe (v3.4.53)
#include <gravity.h>
#include <strong_f.h>
#include <weak_f.h>
#include <electromagnitism.h>
#include <energy.h>
//#include <inteligent_life> /*changed this to a self constructing subroutine, previous versions turned out badly */

void
main(bool B_Bang, bool &light) {
if(B_Bang) {
if(&light) {
Existance() }
}
return 0
}

damnit! all my formatting was lost. Damn vb…

Do you see GIGO Guy Montag? :smiley:

I keep my mind open, but if we had the OP scenario, that does not exclude other programers, bugs, and what what we have in front of us right now IMHO:

Abandonware.

Ever hear of novae? :slight_smile:

Nope, I can’t say that I know what GIGO is, GIGObuster

Hmmm…

public class theVoid{
// No member variables, because this is, after all, the void.
public static void illuminate(Universe uVerse){
// Don’t know. This is why I’m not God.
}
}

public class Universe extends theVoid{
private String command;
public Universe(){
// Again, who am I, God?
}
public static void main(String args){
Universe uni=new Universe();
theVoid.illuminate(uni);
}
}

Oh, the hell with it, I suck at being God. It doesn’t help that “void” is a reserved word either.

:sigh: I guess I am getting old! :stuck_out_tongue:

For old time programers it means: if you program it wrong, you will get wrong results: Garbage In, Garbage Out.

No, no, no. That’s not what GIGO means. It means your results are as good as your raw data, assuming that your algorithm is correct.

I’m not entirely at home in the Christian literature, but isn’t there a Book that starts (must be spoken with a strong NY Jewish accent) …
In da beginning was da Void…
;j

Do’h! Brain fart on my part GIGObuster… I’ve heard the expression before, I simply didn’t make the connection. BTW, old programmers are often the best ones: they know how to write code on a simple text editor without all the frills of the IDEs most yuppies use today (I’m not an old programmer, but I try to think like one)

Science: reverse engineering the universe.