I was approached by the head of research for SC Johnson and asked which area I would like to work in. I chose fragrances because they are so subjective and I wanted to take my modeling into an area that involved as little math as possible.
The project concerned Plug-Ins: the air freshener that plugs into an electrical outlet and works for 45 days. Consumers complained the product only worked for 21 days. The reason had to do with adaptation and habituation.
When you encounter a new smell and stay in its presence, the strength of that odor disappears after about 20 minutes. This is called adaptation. Habituation is the inability to experience an odor at all after repeated contact for approximately 21 days.
For example, imagine you came over my house and my wife was cooking cinnamon buns. Odor molecules from my house and the cinnamon buns would go up your nose and trigger your olfactory nerve. Two signals would be sent to your brain because of the smells and you would experience both smells.
However, at the same time, odor molecules from my house and the cinnamon buns would go up my nose and trigger my olfactory nerve. Two signals would be sent to my brain, but I would only experience the cinnamon smell. My brain would block the smell of my house. Why does this happen? What is the model for the brain and nose connection?
Brain-Nose Model
Every resource I read said our sense of smell evolved for two reasons: find a mate and detect a predator. However, this evolutionary model doesn’t explain why humans experience adaptation and habituation. I needed a better model.
During this time I had been reading “Mere Christianity” every month. There are 33 chapters and I’d read at least one chapter each day. I was also reading my Bible every year. I had been doing both of these things for two years. Basically, I was applying the four problem solving principles I had used throughout my career to these two books and both books seemed to make more sense as I got better at applying the principles.
At this point, I decided to put the Bible to the test. If our brain and nose connection was created by God, then He would be the perfect person to look to for an explanation. I did a study on the root words for each one of our senses. I also found there are two fragrances mentioned in the Bible. Both of them are mentioned in Exodus.
Taking all of this information together, it appeared the Bible says our sense of smell is closely tied to emotion, memory, and location. It took over a dozen models to come to the following conclusion.
The first time a person experiences a smell, the profile of the smell is filed away with the emotion that was being experience AND the location it was experienced. When the person came back to the location and experienced the smell, the profile was compared to the fragrance profile that was filed away in the memory bank for that location. If the profile matched, the brain lessened the impact that the person was allowed to experience and over time it would disappear completely. If the profile didn’t match exactly, the profile was updated and the person was allowed to experience the smell.
Two more points. First, the emotion was also updated. If the emotion was consistent, then the tie to this emotion became stronger. If the emotion was different, the tie to the emotion became weaker. Second, during the first five or so encounters, the brain was learning the fragrance and it would actually appear to get stronger. This is because the brain was getting a more focused experience. Once this learning period ended, the fragrance would appear to decrease.
The final model was able to not only explain what was happening in peoples’ houses, it also explained some of the strange things that consumers told us they did with the Plug-Ins to make them last longer. The model also identified why we weren’t able to replicate the success of our best Plug-In and how to modify the test method to make it more predictive of sales and less costly.
The Ultimate Model
It was at this point that I decided to completely focus on the biggest modeling challenge that existed: God.
I accepted Jesus as Lord in 1981. For the first ten years, I read just about everything I could get my hands on to understand Christianity. I got heavily involved in my local church. No one seemed to be able to explain Christianity, but I just figured I was too new. Then I read "Mere Christianity" by CS Lewis. Suddenly I realized we were supposed to be able to understand what we believe. We were supposed to know the WHY. It became more obvious that people did not know the WHY behind what they believed to the same extent as they did in other areas of their lives. I also notice that this book written in the 1940's was different than the books written since then: "Mere Christianity" DIDN'T say God and the meaning of life is a mystery. He tried to explain the WHY in an objective manner.
As you've seen my professional job was to understand how people thought, communicated, measured, and valued their experiences, expectations, and desires. EVERYONE has a model for EVERYTHING...whether they are aware of it or not is a different story. I found myself applying this perspective when I talked to people from all walks of life about their beliefs. I found out very quickly that people did not know the WHY, lived with contradictions, and focused on thinking less over time when it came to their beliefs...yet they still had a model for their beliefs. The problem is their model is flawed.
About the same time, I began reading through my Bible cover-to-cover every year and reading "Mere Christianity" cover-to-cover every month. After about three years of this, I found the CAUSE of the problem: everyone's faith was based on tradition...on man-made theology. When I asked a person how the Bible supported a specific belief that they stated, this reliance on man-made theology became apparent in three ways.
1. Misinterpretation - People would quote the Bible verse wrong
2. Misunderstanding - People would draw a wrong conclusion from the Bible verse
3. Projection - People would project events and intents that are not presented in the Bible
They and I would ALWAYS find out that an error had been made in one of these three areas.
I also noticed that people tended to reference certain KEY words when explaining their beliefs...yet when I asked for a definition they couldn't (or wouldn't) provide one.
It was at this point that a HUGE revelation hit me: the process currently being used to teach and explain Christianity is flawed because we are actually embracing tradition in the place of God's Word AND we are ACTUALLY encouraging people not to intentionally think. The second part of that revelation became obvious when people ended their explanation with the statement that we can't know or aren't supposed to know these definitions and explanations. THIS is the ONLY response one can have when they have stated a contradictory explanation AND they are trying to feel right.
Christians have contradictory beliefs where they have included man-made tradition in place of the Word of God. This is what caused the shifting in beliefs that we have seen. For instance, "mercy" and "justice" have slowly shifted over time until one day we wake up and preachers are teaching there is no hell. How did that happen? It happens so slightly and in various areas, that the shifting isn't noticeable to us until they all collide in a major doctrine. This shifting in belief wouldn't occur if we know the WHY behind our beliefs and stick with the Word of God instead of tradition. How do we determine the WHY behind our beliefs?
It was about this time I created the model for my secular job by asking God for revelation on how HE created our brain and our nose. God directed me to the Bible and opened up passages that led to understanding that was beyond the scientific community. This caused me to ask God for revelation on the process HE wanted us to use to determine the WHY behind our beliefs.
In general, God gave me revelation and I would check the Bible, concordances, history, etc. and ask others. I would look at EVERY usage of the KEY word in the Bible...then I would go back to God. This has been a fourteen year process. I have read the Bible cover-to-cover fourteen times.
The result was a non-contradictory worldview that is Christian! The result is the same general abstract belief as what Christians profess, however the WHY is different. The WHY is based on the Bible, not man-made tradition. This fourteen year process made me realize people ACTUALLY believe in Christianity because of tradition and have convinced themselves these traditional beliefs are in the Bible or that they don't need to be explained...they can just be "felt".
There is A LOT of material from this fourteen year process. I didn't want to overwhelm people AND I didn't want to point an accusatory finger at Christians. I began to meet with pastors to explain the most pressing issues. I found out very quickly that some pastors have a different perspective on the purpose of church. For instance, when I showed them the work on "grace", the response was that while they could see that Biblical grace was NOT "unmerited favor", they weren't going to tell their congregation about "charis". Why? Because they didn't want people asking them why they were wrong for 10 and 12 years! They told me that they didn't have to worry about it because no one would listen to me anyway...I don't have a church...or a ministry...or a book.
God gave me a vision of an old pastor and a young pastor in a coffee shop talking about a woman who just walked in. The woman was a member of the young pastor's congregation and she was suffering. The young pastor talks to her and returns to sit with the old pastor. The young pastor says that he wishes he knew exactly what God wants him to say in that situation. The old pastor agrees and says that he would give anything to completely understand the Bible. Then God opens both of their eyes so they can completely understand the Bible. The young pastor is excited, but notices the old pastor is depressed. It turns out the old pastor didn't realize that completely understanding the Bible would ALSO mean he would learn where he had been wrong...for years. The old pastor walks by the woman dejected and leaves the coffee shop. The young pastor goes to help the woman...
It was at that point I believe God told me to write "Modeling God" to give the WHY behind the most fundamental beliefs: God and Salvation...AND encourage people away from tradition. "Modeling God" presents less than a third of the work that has been done over the last fourteen years.
It took three years and fifteen drafts before "Modeling God" was fit to be published. During the earlier drafts, people told me that I needed to be bolder when stating the purpose of this book. They realized this was the revelation people claim they want: an objective explanation of the Christian worldview that gives the WHY. I was told that it would be MY fault if I didn't blatantly state that this is the ONLY explanation for God and salvation that is non-contradictory because people need to know this is what they have been looking for. I realize these statements can appear to be egotistical, but I'm just making sure that I don't get judged like the watchman on the wall who didn't let people know what was coming. Again, if you have a non-contradictory explanation other than what is presented in "Modeling God" please share it with me. If you see something in "Modeling God" that is contradictory, please tell me. Be careful about projecting an intent or attitude onto me without talking to me. The reason there were fifteen drafts is because people pointed out flaws and I truly appreciated their correction.
The specifics surrounding the model for God are:
God is always completely Right and always completely Just. Every other characteristic of God is dependent on Right and Just. God cannot act apart from Right and Just.
I applied this model for God and the four principles to various religions and religious books. What I realized was that EVERY religion believes in the God model. However, the religion itself is an explanation for how the God model can be true even though it doesn’t appear to be. EVERY explanation was contradictory and THAT is the problem with religion.
When the principles are applied to these religious books and the religion itself, the flaws are instantly exposed. However, this was NOT the case with one religious book: the Bible. When the God model and the principles were applied to the Bible, it instantly gave the WHY behind the verses. This was eye opening stuff!
What I realized is these four principles were created by God! There are examples throughout the Bible where God, Jesus, Paul, etc. use these principles to convey to us understanding about God! In fact, the Bible shows that doing the opposite of these four God-given principles are what is referred to as "the flesh". I hadn't invented these four principles...I had discovered them. God invented them and it takes an expression of our will to choose to do these God-given principles.
I then used the Bible to determine how all the other characteristics of God were an effect of the God model. This led to non-contradictory definitions for a lot of key words Christians use to explain their beliefs. It also showed that most Christians don’t really know what they believe and can’t explain it because their beliefs are based on tradition...not the Word of God.
There were four topics I loved to discuss in order to illustrate that last point. There were: faith, righteous, truth, and life. I would ask people:
-how I could have more faith in the next five minutes.
-how I could be more righteous in the next five minutes.
-how the Bible could be truth if Satan quoted it and Jesus said in Satan there is no truth at all.
-what eternal life meant if people who don’t go to heaven were going to exist forever.
The most interesting discussions occurred when I would ask one of these questions of a pastor in front of a group of people. I could answer every question and the pastor could not. The pastors knew I was right and didn't appreciate the lesson. However, immediately after the encounter, I would get requests from sub 30 year olds to write down what I had just presented. They wanted to confront other people to prove them wrong.
I continued to confront all types of people (pastors, theologians, Christians, atheists, teachers, etc.) in order to stress the model in other areas and find out where it is wrong. I got a lot of great input and modified the model immediately after having flaws pointed out.
I started sharing all of this information with pastors in order to help them help others. I was floored by the response. Pastors would look me in the eye and admit what they were teaching about grace (for example) was wrong and even though what I presented was right, they still wouldn’t teach it. They would say they don’t want their congregation wondering why they had been preaching the wrong thing for 10+ years. They also said they didn’t have to deal with this because their congregation would never know about this. I hadn’t written a book.
The Book
So, I began formally writing this book on January 1, 2004. I had the beginning with the principles and the model for God. I had the middle with the discussions with the pastors. I wrote through these two points until I reached a logical conclusion. The first draft was completed on July 11, 2004 and the logical conclusion was “the meaning of life”.
I immediately wrote a second draft and gave it to eight people. The feedback was harsh, but I asked for it. I wrote a third draft and sent it to twelve people. Again, great feedback! I wrote a fourth draft and sent it to an agent in April of 2005. The agent spent 2005 trying to sell it to large publishing houses. None of them were interested in upsetting their current stable of authors.
In 2006, I began teaching people with the latest draft of the book. THAT is when everything came into focus. People really did a great job hammering out the smallest details and bringing the model into focus in order to make it practical and easy to understand. The book went through about a dozen more drafts during this period.
However, the book divided people into two groups. Those who read it and forgave people quicker and helped people more…and those who said the book was wrong AND wouldn’t explain how it was wrong AND wouldn’t read it.
Think about it…if they knew it was wrong and I was actively looking for people to disprove it, why wouldn’t they tell me what was wrong? Why wouldn’t they read it to prove what was wrong?
In late 2006, VMI reviewed the latest manuscript and told me they wanted to publish the book. During this process, people who have had the material for over a year are still growing in their understanding of God and are more motivated to talk about God. They don’t have to work themselves up to think about or talk about God. They want to read their Bible more and improve their ability to hear from God because it is making a real difference in their lives. They also want to surround themselves with people who help them operate in the purpose God gave them.
It wasn't until later that I found out that CS Lewis in his last book ("The Discarded Image") was focused on modeling. He even refers to the model that incorporates everything we know as the Model! In his last book, CS Lewis presents two rules for Modeling:
LEWIS' FIRST RULE OF MODELING: The Model must be made up of specific causes that account for ALL the observed effects without contradiction.
LEWIS' SECOND RULE OF MODELING: If more than one Model accounts for ALL the observed effects without contradiction, then we must embrace the simpler Model.
The Model for God (God is ALWAYS completely Right and ALWAYS completely Just) meets BOTH of Lewis' Rules for Modeling. This Model accounts for ALL the observed effects of God without contradiction AND it is the simplest Model.
Lewis explains how a Model is discarded:
"It will have to be abandoned if a more ingenious person thinks of a supposal which would 'save' the observed phenomena with still fewer assumptions, or if we discover new phenomena which it cannot save at all." (Page 16)
Basically, if the Model violates the First Rule (can't cover all the observed effects) or loses under the Second Rule (a simpler Model that fulfills the First Rule is discovered).
Lewis also explains that the idea that God is incomprehensible is a man-made conception that occurred 800 years AFTER Christ!
Lewis on Pseudo-Dionysius (died 870 AD):
"His writings are usually regarded as the main channel by which a certain kind of Theology entered the Western tradition. It is the 'negative Theology' of those who take in a more rigid sense, and emphasise more persistently than others, the incomprehensibility of God." (Page 70)
Lewis knew we needed to have this Model. Tozer warned us that not having this Model would cause the church to lose her way. Both of these men died in the early 1960's. By the mid-1960's, people were claiming God was dead because no one could give a non-contradictory explanation for God. The church in America responded in 1969 with the Godless Christianity Movement and the Jesus Movement.
Basically, the church in America said they would "go without an orthodox explanation for God" AND because they couldn't explain God they focused everyone on Jesus...who is actually HARDER to explain because He was fully man and Fully God. In order to understand Jesus, you STILL need a Model for God AND NOW you ALSO need a Model for man!
In April 2009, Newsweek ran a cover story, "The Death of Christian America" in which they trace the cause of the church's problems to the decision to create the Godless Christianity Movement! WHY do people STILL fight the need to have a Model for God? Isn't this obviously a spiritual issue?
The problem is that Modeling God presents principles directly. Most people CANNOT handle principles directly. They need stories. They need parables. We see the same thing in Matthew 12. Jesus had been teaching principles directly and it upset the Pharisees. It actually made them worse. Beginning in Matthew 13, Jesus teaches ONLY by parables BECAUSE the masses could NOT handle principles directly. Jesus even states in Matthew 11 that people of the past COULD handle principles directly and would have responded to His teaching with repentance! However, Jesus still taught His disciples directly with principles.
Modeling God ought to come with a WARNING: If you cannot handle principles directly, do NOT read this book. If you need principles to be presented indirectly through stories or parables, do NOT read this book.
If you are able to handle principles directly, the result of reading this book will be that you will know who God created you to be and how to operate in this purpose. You will not achieve a greater feeling on earth once you are able to do this…but it all starts with knowing who God is.
Modeling God
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Friday, May 25, 2007
My Experience Modeling With CS Lewis
First and foremost, I am a modeler. I determine the causes that result in the effects we all observe.
In 1994, I believe the Holy Spirit influenced me to take the abilities and experiences I had been given and use them to work on a Model for God. In addition to the Holy Spirit, my main influences have been The Bible and "Mere Christianity" by CS Lewis. I have read the Bible cover-to-cover fourteen times. I have read Mere Christianity over 40 times.
It took four years to identify the Biblical non-contradictory Model for God. It took another nine years to publish the first of three books presenting this Model. The Preface for the first draft of Modeling God stated my objective was to continue the work CS Lewis began...
Now, before you doubt the Holy Spirit led a chemical engineer and chemist through a process to identify the non-contradictory Model for God, you may want to take some time and learn about CS Lewis' last book...
"The Discarded Image" was the last book by CS Lewis. It was published after he died. It is interesting to read what CS Lewis was focused on at the end of his life...
CS Lewis began by explaining what he meant by "savage beliefs":
"Savage beliefs are thought to be the spontaneous response of a human group to its environment, a response made principally by the imagination. They exemplify what some writers call pre-logical thinking." (Page 1)
Savage beliefs are "WHAT's" without a HOW or WHY. Then he explained how these beliefs (WHAT's) mature:
"Sometimes, when a community is comparatively homogeneous and comparatively undisturbed over a long period, such a system of belief can continue, of course with development, long after material culture has progressed far beyond the level of savagery. It may then begin to turn into something more ethical, more philosophical, even more scientific; but there will be uninterrupted continuity between this and its savage beginnings." (Page 1)
Notice, the highest level of mature belief was equated with "scientific"...
CS Lewis was a professor of Medieval and Renaissance Literature. He loved this time period. He explained most medieval works were characterized by being either extremely organized or overly crowded with information. Then, he wrote about a third characteristic:
"But there is a third work which we can, I think, set beside the two. This is the medieval synthesis itself, the whole organisation of their theology, science, and history into a single, complex, harmonious mental Model of the Universe. The building of this Model is conditioned by two factors I have already mentioned: the essentially bookish character of their culture, and their intense love of system." (Page 11)
Now we find out these people were Model builders! These people were the first to attempt to put EVERYTHING together in ONE MODEL. CS Lewis even referred to this Universal Model with a capital M. It's at this point Lewis gave us the Rules for building a Model:
"All apparent contradictions must be harmonised. A Model must be built which will get everything in without a clash; and it can do this only by becoming intricate, by mediating its unity through a great, and finely ordered, multiplicity." (Page 11)
Lewis called the First Rule of modeling: getting everything in without contradiction. The Model must account for ALL the observed effects.
"In speaking of the perfected Model as a work to be set beside the Summa and the Comedy, I meant that it is capable of giving a similar satisfaction to the mind, and for some of the same reasons. Like them it is vast in scale, but limited and intelligible. Its sublimity is not the sort that depends on anything vague or obscure." (Page 12)
The Model must be made up of specific causes.
"Every Model is a construct of answered questions." (Page 18)
The causes are the WHY/HOW to the questions. The maturity of a belief (WHAT) is shown by its association with a HOW/WHY.
"The business of the natural philosopher is to construct theories which will 'save appearances'." (Page 14)
The term "natural philosopher" means "scientist". Scientists are the optimal modelers.
"A scientific theory must 'save' or 'preserve' the appearances, the phenomena, it deals with, in the sense of getting them all in, doing justice to them." (Page 14)
LEWIS' FIRST RULE OF MODELING: The Model must be made up of specific causes accounting for ALL the observed effects without contradiction.
Let's look at the second rule:
"But if we demanded no more than that from theory, science would be impossible, for a lively inventive faculty could devise a good many different supposals which would equally save the phenomena. We have therefore had to supplement the canon of saving the phenomena by another canon - first, perhaps, formulated with full clairity by Occam. According to this second canon we must accept (provisionally) not any theory which saves the phenomena but that theory which does so with the fewest possible assumptions." (Page 15)
LEWIS' SECOND RULE OF MODELING: If more than one Model accounts for ALL the observed effects without contradiction, then we must embrace the simpler Model.
Next, Lewis covered how Models get discarded:
"It will have to be abandoned if a more ingenious person thinks of a supposal which would 'save' the observed phenomena with still fewer assumptions, or if we discover new phenomena which it cannot save at all." (Page 16)
Basically, if the Model violates the First Rule (can't cover all the observed effects) or loses under the Second Rule (a simpler Model that fulfills the First Rule is discovered).
The ideal way to grow is to actively look for effects that are NOT covered by the model. This is uncomfortable, but results in Growth. So, trying to prove yourself wrong is uncomfortable, but is the only way to intentionally grow.
Lewis then took some time to cover religion in the Model.
"There was no direct 'conflict between religion and science' of the nineteenth-century type; but there was an incompatibility of temperament." (Page 19)
Lewis wrote the conflict between religion and science began existing in the 1800's. In fact, Lewis covered several POST-JESUS influences on our current Model. Here is just one:
Lewis on Pseudo-Dionysius (died 870 AD):
"His writings are usually regarded as the main channel by which a certain kind of Theology entered the Western tradition. It is the 'negative Theology' of those who take in a more rigid sense, and emphasise more persistently than others, the incomprehensibility of God." (Page 70)
Lewis showed the belief God is incomprehensible did NOT come from the Bible or Jesus...but came from a man eight hundred years after Christ!
Remember, this book by Lewis was published in 1964. Lewis expressed his frustration at that time we didn't have a Model to explain how humans physiologically process the observed effects:
"No Model yet devised has made a satisfactory unity between our actual experience of sensation or thought or emotion and any available account of the corporeal processes which they are held to involve." (Page 165)
We have this Model with the Unaware Brain, conscious brain, First Feedback Loop, and Second Feedback Loop! (If you are interested in reading the blog, I would start with the Brain Series. Everything on the blog before that Series is foundational and can be accessed through links as you read through that Series.)
However, from this frustration, Lewis brought his final book to a close. Before we see Lewis' conclusion, let's take a quick Big Picture look at HOW truth was communicated according to the Bible:
In the Old Testament, God presented causes. Some of the people could handle causes.
Jesus presented causes. People in His time could not take in the causes. Jesus responded by speaking indirectly in parables (beginning in Matthew 13). However, Jesus continued to speak principles directly to His disciples.
Here what CS Lewis states about his time (1960's):
"And this, if I understand the situation, is just what has now happened as regards the physical sciences. The mathematics are now the nearest to the reality we can get. Anything imaginable, even anything that can be manipulated by ordinary (that is, non-mathematical) conceptions, far from being a further truth to which mathematics were the avenue, is a mere analogy, a concession to our weakness. Without a parable modern physics speaks not to the multitudes. Even among themselves, when they attempt to verbalise their findings, the scientists begin to speak of this as making 'models'. It is from them that I have borrowed the word. But these 'models' are not, like model ships, small-scale replicas of the reality. Sometimes they illustrate this or that aspect of it by analogy. Sometimes, they do not illustrate but merely suggest, like the sayings of the mystics. An expression such as 'the curvature of space' is strictly comparable to the old definition of God as 'a circle whose centre is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere'. Both succeed in suggesting; each does so by offering what is, on the level of our ordinary thinking, nonsense. By accepting the 'curvature of space' we are not 'knowing' or enjoying 'truth' in the fashion that was once thought to be possible." (Page 218)
Lewis recognized even science couldn't present principles directly and needed to use PARABLES. Lewis recognized the ultimate way to communicate directly is with Models, yet he stated the Models of his time sounded like nonsense. The example he gave was an explanation of God's Nature!...and it was nonsensical effects! His final sentence pointed to the fact we ought to know and enjoy truth through Models AND we have given up the hope we are going to understand the causes directly...because we don't have a good enough Model.
Lewis looked back at the Medieval Model to begin to get us to understand what is going to happen with our current Model:
"Again, such a statement would suggest that the old Model gave way simply under the pressure of newly discovered phenomena - as a detective's original theory of the crime might yield to the discovery that his first suspect had an unassailable alibi." (Page 219)
Here is the conclusion to Lewis' book...
"The demand for a developing world - a demand obviously in harmony both with the revolutionary and the romantic temper - grows up first; when it is full grown the scientists go to work and discover evidence on which our belief in that sort of universe would now be held to rest. There is no question here of the old Model's being shattered by the inrush of new phenomena. The truth would seem to be the reverse; that when changes in the human mind produce a sufficient disrelish of the old Model and a sufficient hankering for some new one, phenomena to support that new one will obediently turn up. I do not at all mean that these new phenomena are illusory. Nature has all sorts of phenomena in stock and can suit many different tastes." (Page 221)
Lewis wrote Nature has an abundance of information leading us a number of ways. Lewis stated the old Model will crumble from the data...from the contradictions. This will come from SCIENTISTS...
"I hope no one will think that I am recommending a return to the Medieval Model. I am only suggesting considerations that may induce us to regard all Models in the right way, respecting each and idolising none. We are all, very properly, familiar with the idea that in every age the human mind is deeply influenced by the accepted Model of the universe. But there is a two-way traffic; the Model is also influenced by the prevailing temper of the mind. We must recognise that what has been called 'a taste in universes' is not only pardonable but inevitable. We can no longer dismiss the change of Models as a simple progress from error to truth. No Model is a catalogue of ultimate realities, and none is mere fantasy. Each is a serious attempt to get in all the phenomena known at a given period, and each succeeds in getting in a great many. But also, no less surely, each reflects the prevalent psychology of an age almost as much as it reflects the state of that age's knowledge." (Page 222)
We ought to realize NO Model is the final answer...including his own! Lewis is different than other Christian authors because he knew his Models were flawed...so he showed us HOW to improve upon his models and discover new ones! Every other Christian author is focused on preserving their flawed Models! Lewis can still lead us into truth today because we will ALWAYS be modeling...
We will be modeling for the rest of eternity...but we ought to continue to model. It is uncomfortable, but we ought to pursue growth by actively looking for information that stresses our Model, so we can continue to get closer to the truth. However, he seemed to believe it will take several Models to account for all the observed effects. He wrote our quest is to Model our beliefs...to Model God.
"It is not impossible that our own Model will die a violent death, ruthlessly smashed by an unprovoked assault of new facts - unprovoked as the nova of 1572. But I think it is more likely to change when, and because, far-reaching changes in the mental temper of our descendants demand that it should. The new Model will not be set up without evidence, but the evidence will turn up when the inner need for it becomes sufficiently great. It will be true evidence. But nature gives most of her evidence in answer to the questions we ask her. Here, as in the courts, the character of the evidence depends on the shape of the examination, and a good cross-examiner can do wonders. He will not indeed elicit falsehoods from an honest witness. But, in relation to the total truth in the witness's mind, the structure of the examination is like a stencil. It determines how much of that total truth will appear and what pattern it will suggest." (Page 223)
The ability to get "total truth" depends on the questions we ask...on the tools we have to ask questions and get answers.
Lewis identified four God-given tools leading to acquiring more "total truth":
-Non-contradiction
-Causality
-Growth
-Contrastive Thinking (actively looking for information that stresses our Model)
Recently, physiological discoveries have shown our unconscious brain models according to all four God-given principles! Our conscious brain models according to causality and non-contradiction. Our conscious brain actually does the opposite of the other two principles...we are naturally comparative and pursue comfort. It turns out each person is actually spending their time on earth training their conscious brain to EITHER do all four principles or none of the principles!
We have the tools to shape the examination to get more "total truth" than ever before and get closer to the pattern organizing this truth. All four God-given tools must be used together. EVERYTIME an error has occurred in history REGARDLESS of the discipline (religion, medicine, politics, military, art, science, etc.) it is because at least one of these God-given tools was NOT used. I have called these four God-given tools when they are used together "Modeletics" in honor of CS Lewis.
Why do I believe CS Lewis is the greatest post-biblical Christian deep thinker?
CS Lewis did more than present doctrine...which is what every other Christian deep thinker presented. He admitted his doctrine wasn't perfect AND he gave us a way to continue moving forward, not only to improve his doctrine, but to determine God's non-contradictory doctrine! Lewis WANTS us to improve on his Models!
EVERY other post-biblical Christian deep thinker is stuck in the past.
EVERY other post-biblical Christian deep thinker's supporters can ONLY labor to rationalize errors in their doctrine and use truth that has already been determined.
CS Lewis is the only post-biblical Christian deep thinker who can still lead today! He encouraged us to fix his doctrine and discover even more total truth! We have the tools to do this...
The two greatest effects of these tools leading to identifying more non-contradictory truth are:
1. Definitions ought to be causes!
If a definition is stated in terms of causes, then the attribute can be intentionally attained and understood AND the effects will be non-contradictory.
If a definition is stated in terms of effects, then the attribute CANNOT be intentionally attained and understood AND the effects of the attribute will be contradictory.
"Modeling God" presents non-contradictory definitions for the key attributes making up our beliefs: God, Salvation, faith, grace, love, life, truth, etc.
2. God is focused on the HOW/WHY, not the WHAT.
"Modeling God" espouses the same core beliefs as "traditional Christianity". These beliefs can be seen as WHAT's: God created the heavens and the earth, man is sinful, Jesus died for our sins, etc.
However, most people CANNOT give the HOW/WHY for their belief (WHAT)! They don't even realize it! When they find out they don't have a HOW/WHY, their flesh gets riled and they attack!
This is EXACTLY WHY Jesus began speaking in parables in Matthew 13. The masses could NOT handle principles directly. Jesus adjusted by speaking in parables for the masses. However, He continued to speak principles directly to His disciples. I now realize "Modeling God" ought to have a WARNING attached to it:
"If you are NOT able to handle principles directly, please do NOT read this book. If you need to get your truth through stories or parables, please do NOT read this book. It will only upset you."
The reasons there APPEARS to be contradictions between "Modeling God" and what most people believe is people have a different HOW/WHY associated with their beliefs (WHAT)! We will keep talking in circles and lose the next generation if we don't focus on the HOW/WHY. The reality is EVERYONE has a HOW/WHY for their belief (WHAT) even if they aren't conscious of it.
"Modeling God" presents the Right HOW/WHY for the beliefs we Christians have. However, people don't Understand this powerful tool, so they claim we believe something different.
I believe the Nicene Creed. I have the same beliefs (WHAT's) as traditional Christianity. I have a HOW/WHY for my beliefs. Most people don't. People love to claim this makes me a heretic. However, when I ask these people for the HOW/WHY behind their beliefs, WHEN THEY CAN GIVE ONE (and it differs from mine), they are the ones who state non-biblical beliefs!
For instance, a pastor in Appleton spent two years telling the world I was a heretic. He would not meet with me or support his claims. Finally, after having a lawyer send a letter to him, he responded. Among his many contradictions, his WHY for disagreeing with me about HOW/WHY Jesus is fully man and Fully God led to him stating Jesus is NOT fully man and led to him contradicting the Bible!
Let me make sure you Understand this point: Deception is stating a Right WHAT with a Wrong (or no) HOW/WHY. No one will deceive you with a Wrong WHAT. The Bible shows the devil stated Right WHAT's with a Wrong HOW/WHY.
These are two of the tools CS Lewis told us to look for so we could get more "total truth".
I have NEVER avoided a discussion with someone about this material. However, it is amazing to see how many people actively avoid discussing this information with me. I believe this is a spiritual issue. If you have any questions or want help with some passage of the Bible that has appeared contradictory, please feel free to contact me: jglenhart@gmail.com.
My life is based on an accurate interpretation of the Word of God.
I believe the Bible is the ONLY book that give the reason (HOW/WHY) AND does NOT contradict itself. Every other religious book I have read either doesn't give the HOW/WHY or it has contradictions. The Bible's apparent contradictions are removed when you use the four God-given tools together. How do I get this accurate interpretation?
This means I first need to have a way to get an accurate interpretation...then second, I go to the Word of God. Actually, I continually go to the Word of God.
Some people get upset because they want me to put the Word of God in step one...but they can't explain how they make sure THEY have an accurate interpretation. They just state they do...and don't want to discuss what happened when they have been wrong.
My process:
1. Look to God's Word for a stated definition.
2. Look to Strong's Concordance and check God's Word for contradictions
3. Remove contradictions and check God's Word for contradictions
This is an EXTREMELY subtle point: I use the Word of God to interpret the Word of God.
Many people SAY they also do this, however, when you push them for their definition of "grace" they reference Martin Luther. When you push them for their definition of "sovereignty" they reference John Calvin.
THESE PEOPLE ARE USING MEN TO INTERPRET THE WORD OF GOD.
The sequel to Modeling God proves everywhere Christians have contradictory beliefs it is because they have embraced man-made tradition (e.g, Calvinism) in place of God's Word. This is actually the definition of "cultish". Here is a post explaining What is a Cult?
The sequel is available on-line.
Here is the Preface
Here is the Table of Contents for the sequel.
In fact, a book from Willow Creek titled "Reveal" documents church is unsuccessful at helping people mature in their spiritual growth. Church is only able to help unbelievers become new believers. However, church is unable to help new believers grow. I believe it is because man-made doctrine (tradition, Calvinism) is superficial and abstract in order to hide its contradictions. Progressing people in man-made doctrine only leads to confusion.
In fact, a book by a neuro-scientist (Dr. Leaf) shows that individuals who attempt to embrace contradiction actually become physiologically less intelligent and the resulting stress between their brain and body results in physical illness. For the last two years, we have been able to help people intentionally mature spiritually...to the point they are able to teach pastors! Doctrine (beliefs) are very important...
God has led me through a unique background that has caused me to learn how to model peoples' thought processes.
EVERYONE has a MODEL for EVERYTHING. If people choose not to think intentionally, then they behave like an animal (in the flesh) and their MODELS drive them. If people choose to determine their MODELS, this takes intentional thought and now they have the ability to change them. Ultimately, God changes a person's MODELS, but it ONLY happens when the person FIRST expresses their will for the MODELS to be changed...which requires intentional thinking. The Bible constantly tells us to think intentionally...otherwise we are thinking in the flesh because it is impossible NOT to think AT ALL.
I ask people questions so I can determine their MODELS...my goal is NOT to prove them wrong. People project onto me that my intent is to prove people wrong. If a person is unwilling to answer the questions, then they don't want to determine their MODELS...they want to remain comfortable and NOT grow. That is the person's choice. However, if that same person expects others to change, then they are a hypocrite because they use the SAME process on others that they refuse to allow to be used on themselves!
The proof we have lost our way is our inability to present a non-contradictory model for God. A.W. Tozer in "The Knowledge Of The Holy" says it well:
"Before the Christian church goes into eclipse anywhere, there must first be the corrupting of her simple basic theology. She simply gets a wrong answer to the question, “What is God like?” Though she may continue to cling to a sound nominal creed, her practical working creed has become false. The masses of her adherents come to believe that God is different from what He actually is; and that is heresey of the most insidious and deadly kind."
If you want a summary of the core beliefs behind "Modeling God", read the following posts in order:
-Model for God
-Jesus is Fully Man and Fully God
-Who ARE you?
-Are, Do, Have
-Grace
-Spiritual ARE
-The Personality of God
The other core belief in the book is "How to Think".
This is covered with the four God-given principles. The only way to humble yourself intentionally and remain "broken" is to apply these four principles to yourself. In reality, everyone uses these four God-given principles perfectly on everyone except themselves. Choosing not to apply these four God-given principles to yourself is the same as telling God you want Him to humble you from the outside...from your circumstances. The choice is yours:
Contrastive Thinking
Non-contradiction
Causality
Growth
These four God-given principles are used to explain practical examples of "man's way of thinking" and "God's way of thinking" in these two posts:
Renewing Your Mind
Transformed Mind
My experience centers around consumer products. I found giving people what they SAY they want DOESN'T make them satisfied BECAUSE they ACTUALLY value the product differently than what they say. It has to do with the way people think. My real focus has been problem solving by understanding thought processes. I do this through modeling...EVERYONE ACTUALLY has a model for EVERYTHING...they just may not be aware of it. My expertise is determining the ACTUAL model in the mind of the individual...
The term "scientist" is a relatively new term created in the last 200 years. The term was originally "Natural Philosopher". That is, a person who looked at nature and thought about the Creator behind it and how He organized His creation. Throughout history, the greatest theologians and men of God from the Bible had their foundation in science.
"Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans." (Daniel 1:4)
My experience has led me to be able to live out the following verse through the grace of God:
"Forasmuch as an excellent spirit, and knowledge, and understanding, interpreting of dreams, and shewing of hard sentences, and dissolving of doubts..." (Daniel 5:12)
Please feel free to test me both privately through e-mail or publicly through the comments...everytime someone pushes me, I end up learning something. I am not always right and I am anxious to learn from people who use the Bible. Unfortunately, there are plenty of people who come up with un-Biblical reasons NOT to talk with me. Even if there is a possibility I'm a "brother", confront me like Matthew 18. If you think I'm not a "brother", then love me like Jesus said to. Drawing conclusions WITHOUT talking to me is pride and is NOT supported by the Bible.
Here is the overview of my professional experience. Basically, I applied to religion the four God-given tools that have been and continue to be applied to every other area (science, medicine, politics, military, economics, government, art, etc.) For more detail on my background click the link associated with each area...
1985 Degree in Chemical Engineering and Chemistry from Clarkson University
1985-1987 The Procter & Gamble Company
Project manager for new and improved Joy dishwashing liquid.
I learned formulation while at P&G. The best way to describe my different roles is with music.
I have a chemistry degree. This means I’m able to explain the result of a very simple process: one chemical interacting with one different chemical. This is a lot like being a music teacher. A music teacher can tell you exactly how to make one note on one instrument.
I have a chemical engineering degree. This means I’m able to look at several interactions at once and determine specifically how to make the complex process more effective and efficient. This is a lot like a music critic. A music critic can tell you what makes a piece of music excellent and how the poorer parts could have been improved.
I have formulation training. This means I’m able to create products. This is like a composer. They have the ability to actually create something that didn’t exist before.
When all three are taken together, the result is the ability to create explanations of complex interactions and explain them in simple terms. These explanations of complex interactions are also known as “models”.
Click here to get an explanation of my formulating strategy.
The first models I created were completely mathematical. My last project involved Liquid Tide. In order to represent Liquid Tide mathematically, it takes one dimension for every ingredient. A simple product with 3 ingredients can be represented with a three dimensional graph. However, Liquid Tide had 31 ingredients! I created a 31-dimensional mathematical model and solved the solubility and budget issues for the product.
1987-1990 Dow Chemical Company
I worked in Central Research. My last project involved a formulation that was infinitely soluble in oil AND infinitely soluble in water. I modeled the two chemicals and the interaction that made this formulation and modified both.
Four months after I left Dow Chemical, they called me to say I had won “The 1990 Dow Chemical Central Research Inventor of the Year Award”. I was 27.
1990-1992 The Dial Corp
When I joined The Dial Corp, Purex was a little known brand. Today, it is the #2 laundry detergent brand in the U.S. behind Tide. Purex became #2 during this time because of the way I modeled product development.
Normally, product development works this way…
Step 1: Make a product
Step 2: Test the product in the lab
Step 3: Test the product with consumers
Step 4: Introduce the product into the market
I reversed the process. I modeled the market. Then I modeled the consumer testing to create a consumer test that would predict which product would win in the market. Then I modeled the internal test to predict which product would win the consumer test. These models were a combination of math and psychology.
Normally it takes eighteen months to introduce a new product. During my first year I got fourteen formulations into the market and saved $10 million/year in raw material costs. I invented Ultra Purex, Classic Purex, Ultra Trend, and Classic Trend.
The next year I did the same with Liquid Purex. I got seven formulations into the market and saved another $10 million/year in raw material costs. I invented Liquid Purex with Bleach Alternative and Ultra versions of Liquid Purex.
I left Dial for the same reasons as the other jobs. I was promised something if I solved a hard problem. When I solved the problem, I was given an excuse why they couldn't keep their end of the bargain. Why did they promise it to me in the first place? At Dial, the answer was, "We didn't think you could actually get all those products out the door." At least they were honest...
1992-1996 SC Johnson Wax
I applied the same principles of product development modeling to Shout! We made Shout! the #1 soil and stain remover for the first time in its then 18 year history. It is still #1 today.
It was at this point that I realized there were four undeniable principles that when used together could solve every problem. It didn't matter if they were mathematical problems or not. In fact, every error that occurs could be explained by determining which of the principles wasn't followed. I began to actively look for problems that seemed impossible so I could put these principles to the test. Along the way I created predictive models and even solved a $100+ million/year problem that no one else was able to solve.
In fact, I was even able to come up with a solution to achieve World Peace! This made me realize I may have discovered the fundamental tools that can solve every problem. (If you have 60 seconds, you may want to check out the solution to World Peace.)
All of this culminated in a project involving fragrances. The models became almost completely psychological and biological. These principles work in ALL areas: science, politics, religion, medicine, economics, etc. So, this led to me Modeling God…
In 1994, I believe the Holy Spirit influenced me to take the abilities and experiences I had been given and use them to work on a Model for God. In addition to the Holy Spirit, my main influences have been The Bible and "Mere Christianity" by CS Lewis. I have read the Bible cover-to-cover fourteen times. I have read Mere Christianity over 40 times.
It took four years to identify the Biblical non-contradictory Model for God. It took another nine years to publish the first of three books presenting this Model. The Preface for the first draft of Modeling God stated my objective was to continue the work CS Lewis began...
Now, before you doubt the Holy Spirit led a chemical engineer and chemist through a process to identify the non-contradictory Model for God, you may want to take some time and learn about CS Lewis' last book...
"The Discarded Image" was the last book by CS Lewis. It was published after he died. It is interesting to read what CS Lewis was focused on at the end of his life...
CS Lewis began by explaining what he meant by "savage beliefs":
"Savage beliefs are thought to be the spontaneous response of a human group to its environment, a response made principally by the imagination. They exemplify what some writers call pre-logical thinking." (Page 1)
Savage beliefs are "WHAT's" without a HOW or WHY. Then he explained how these beliefs (WHAT's) mature:
"Sometimes, when a community is comparatively homogeneous and comparatively undisturbed over a long period, such a system of belief can continue, of course with development, long after material culture has progressed far beyond the level of savagery. It may then begin to turn into something more ethical, more philosophical, even more scientific; but there will be uninterrupted continuity between this and its savage beginnings." (Page 1)
Notice, the highest level of mature belief was equated with "scientific"...
CS Lewis was a professor of Medieval and Renaissance Literature. He loved this time period. He explained most medieval works were characterized by being either extremely organized or overly crowded with information. Then, he wrote about a third characteristic:
"But there is a third work which we can, I think, set beside the two. This is the medieval synthesis itself, the whole organisation of their theology, science, and history into a single, complex, harmonious mental Model of the Universe. The building of this Model is conditioned by two factors I have already mentioned: the essentially bookish character of their culture, and their intense love of system." (Page 11)
Now we find out these people were Model builders! These people were the first to attempt to put EVERYTHING together in ONE MODEL. CS Lewis even referred to this Universal Model with a capital M. It's at this point Lewis gave us the Rules for building a Model:
"All apparent contradictions must be harmonised. A Model must be built which will get everything in without a clash; and it can do this only by becoming intricate, by mediating its unity through a great, and finely ordered, multiplicity." (Page 11)
Lewis called the First Rule of modeling: getting everything in without contradiction. The Model must account for ALL the observed effects.
"In speaking of the perfected Model as a work to be set beside the Summa and the Comedy, I meant that it is capable of giving a similar satisfaction to the mind, and for some of the same reasons. Like them it is vast in scale, but limited and intelligible. Its sublimity is not the sort that depends on anything vague or obscure." (Page 12)
The Model must be made up of specific causes.
"Every Model is a construct of answered questions." (Page 18)
The causes are the WHY/HOW to the questions. The maturity of a belief (WHAT) is shown by its association with a HOW/WHY.
"The business of the natural philosopher is to construct theories which will 'save appearances'." (Page 14)
The term "natural philosopher" means "scientist". Scientists are the optimal modelers.
"A scientific theory must 'save' or 'preserve' the appearances, the phenomena, it deals with, in the sense of getting them all in, doing justice to them." (Page 14)
LEWIS' FIRST RULE OF MODELING: The Model must be made up of specific causes accounting for ALL the observed effects without contradiction.
Let's look at the second rule:
"But if we demanded no more than that from theory, science would be impossible, for a lively inventive faculty could devise a good many different supposals which would equally save the phenomena. We have therefore had to supplement the canon of saving the phenomena by another canon - first, perhaps, formulated with full clairity by Occam. According to this second canon we must accept (provisionally) not any theory which saves the phenomena but that theory which does so with the fewest possible assumptions." (Page 15)
LEWIS' SECOND RULE OF MODELING: If more than one Model accounts for ALL the observed effects without contradiction, then we must embrace the simpler Model.
Next, Lewis covered how Models get discarded:
"It will have to be abandoned if a more ingenious person thinks of a supposal which would 'save' the observed phenomena with still fewer assumptions, or if we discover new phenomena which it cannot save at all." (Page 16)
Basically, if the Model violates the First Rule (can't cover all the observed effects) or loses under the Second Rule (a simpler Model that fulfills the First Rule is discovered).
The ideal way to grow is to actively look for effects that are NOT covered by the model. This is uncomfortable, but results in Growth. So, trying to prove yourself wrong is uncomfortable, but is the only way to intentionally grow.
Lewis then took some time to cover religion in the Model.
"There was no direct 'conflict between religion and science' of the nineteenth-century type; but there was an incompatibility of temperament." (Page 19)
Lewis wrote the conflict between religion and science began existing in the 1800's. In fact, Lewis covered several POST-JESUS influences on our current Model. Here is just one:
Lewis on Pseudo-Dionysius (died 870 AD):
"His writings are usually regarded as the main channel by which a certain kind of Theology entered the Western tradition. It is the 'negative Theology' of those who take in a more rigid sense, and emphasise more persistently than others, the incomprehensibility of God." (Page 70)
Lewis showed the belief God is incomprehensible did NOT come from the Bible or Jesus...but came from a man eight hundred years after Christ!
Remember, this book by Lewis was published in 1964. Lewis expressed his frustration at that time we didn't have a Model to explain how humans physiologically process the observed effects:
"No Model yet devised has made a satisfactory unity between our actual experience of sensation or thought or emotion and any available account of the corporeal processes which they are held to involve." (Page 165)
We have this Model with the Unaware Brain, conscious brain, First Feedback Loop, and Second Feedback Loop! (If you are interested in reading the blog, I would start with the Brain Series. Everything on the blog before that Series is foundational and can be accessed through links as you read through that Series.)
However, from this frustration, Lewis brought his final book to a close. Before we see Lewis' conclusion, let's take a quick Big Picture look at HOW truth was communicated according to the Bible:
In the Old Testament, God presented causes. Some of the people could handle causes.
Jesus presented causes. People in His time could not take in the causes. Jesus responded by speaking indirectly in parables (beginning in Matthew 13). However, Jesus continued to speak principles directly to His disciples.
Here what CS Lewis states about his time (1960's):
"And this, if I understand the situation, is just what has now happened as regards the physical sciences. The mathematics are now the nearest to the reality we can get. Anything imaginable, even anything that can be manipulated by ordinary (that is, non-mathematical) conceptions, far from being a further truth to which mathematics were the avenue, is a mere analogy, a concession to our weakness. Without a parable modern physics speaks not to the multitudes. Even among themselves, when they attempt to verbalise their findings, the scientists begin to speak of this as making 'models'. It is from them that I have borrowed the word. But these 'models' are not, like model ships, small-scale replicas of the reality. Sometimes they illustrate this or that aspect of it by analogy. Sometimes, they do not illustrate but merely suggest, like the sayings of the mystics. An expression such as 'the curvature of space' is strictly comparable to the old definition of God as 'a circle whose centre is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere'. Both succeed in suggesting; each does so by offering what is, on the level of our ordinary thinking, nonsense. By accepting the 'curvature of space' we are not 'knowing' or enjoying 'truth' in the fashion that was once thought to be possible." (Page 218)
Lewis recognized even science couldn't present principles directly and needed to use PARABLES. Lewis recognized the ultimate way to communicate directly is with Models, yet he stated the Models of his time sounded like nonsense. The example he gave was an explanation of God's Nature!...and it was nonsensical effects! His final sentence pointed to the fact we ought to know and enjoy truth through Models AND we have given up the hope we are going to understand the causes directly...because we don't have a good enough Model.
Lewis looked back at the Medieval Model to begin to get us to understand what is going to happen with our current Model:
"Again, such a statement would suggest that the old Model gave way simply under the pressure of newly discovered phenomena - as a detective's original theory of the crime might yield to the discovery that his first suspect had an unassailable alibi." (Page 219)
Here is the conclusion to Lewis' book...
"The demand for a developing world - a demand obviously in harmony both with the revolutionary and the romantic temper - grows up first; when it is full grown the scientists go to work and discover evidence on which our belief in that sort of universe would now be held to rest. There is no question here of the old Model's being shattered by the inrush of new phenomena. The truth would seem to be the reverse; that when changes in the human mind produce a sufficient disrelish of the old Model and a sufficient hankering for some new one, phenomena to support that new one will obediently turn up. I do not at all mean that these new phenomena are illusory. Nature has all sorts of phenomena in stock and can suit many different tastes." (Page 221)
Lewis wrote Nature has an abundance of information leading us a number of ways. Lewis stated the old Model will crumble from the data...from the contradictions. This will come from SCIENTISTS...
"I hope no one will think that I am recommending a return to the Medieval Model. I am only suggesting considerations that may induce us to regard all Models in the right way, respecting each and idolising none. We are all, very properly, familiar with the idea that in every age the human mind is deeply influenced by the accepted Model of the universe. But there is a two-way traffic; the Model is also influenced by the prevailing temper of the mind. We must recognise that what has been called 'a taste in universes' is not only pardonable but inevitable. We can no longer dismiss the change of Models as a simple progress from error to truth. No Model is a catalogue of ultimate realities, and none is mere fantasy. Each is a serious attempt to get in all the phenomena known at a given period, and each succeeds in getting in a great many. But also, no less surely, each reflects the prevalent psychology of an age almost as much as it reflects the state of that age's knowledge." (Page 222)
We ought to realize NO Model is the final answer...including his own! Lewis is different than other Christian authors because he knew his Models were flawed...so he showed us HOW to improve upon his models and discover new ones! Every other Christian author is focused on preserving their flawed Models! Lewis can still lead us into truth today because we will ALWAYS be modeling...
We will be modeling for the rest of eternity...but we ought to continue to model. It is uncomfortable, but we ought to pursue growth by actively looking for information that stresses our Model, so we can continue to get closer to the truth. However, he seemed to believe it will take several Models to account for all the observed effects. He wrote our quest is to Model our beliefs...to Model God.
"It is not impossible that our own Model will die a violent death, ruthlessly smashed by an unprovoked assault of new facts - unprovoked as the nova of 1572. But I think it is more likely to change when, and because, far-reaching changes in the mental temper of our descendants demand that it should. The new Model will not be set up without evidence, but the evidence will turn up when the inner need for it becomes sufficiently great. It will be true evidence. But nature gives most of her evidence in answer to the questions we ask her. Here, as in the courts, the character of the evidence depends on the shape of the examination, and a good cross-examiner can do wonders. He will not indeed elicit falsehoods from an honest witness. But, in relation to the total truth in the witness's mind, the structure of the examination is like a stencil. It determines how much of that total truth will appear and what pattern it will suggest." (Page 223)
The ability to get "total truth" depends on the questions we ask...on the tools we have to ask questions and get answers.
Lewis identified four God-given tools leading to acquiring more "total truth":
-Non-contradiction
-Causality
-Growth
-Contrastive Thinking (actively looking for information that stresses our Model)
Recently, physiological discoveries have shown our unconscious brain models according to all four God-given principles! Our conscious brain models according to causality and non-contradiction. Our conscious brain actually does the opposite of the other two principles...we are naturally comparative and pursue comfort. It turns out each person is actually spending their time on earth training their conscious brain to EITHER do all four principles or none of the principles!
We have the tools to shape the examination to get more "total truth" than ever before and get closer to the pattern organizing this truth. All four God-given tools must be used together. EVERYTIME an error has occurred in history REGARDLESS of the discipline (religion, medicine, politics, military, art, science, etc.) it is because at least one of these God-given tools was NOT used. I have called these four God-given tools when they are used together "Modeletics" in honor of CS Lewis.
Why do I believe CS Lewis is the greatest post-biblical Christian deep thinker?
CS Lewis did more than present doctrine...which is what every other Christian deep thinker presented. He admitted his doctrine wasn't perfect AND he gave us a way to continue moving forward, not only to improve his doctrine, but to determine God's non-contradictory doctrine! Lewis WANTS us to improve on his Models!
EVERY other post-biblical Christian deep thinker is stuck in the past.
EVERY other post-biblical Christian deep thinker's supporters can ONLY labor to rationalize errors in their doctrine and use truth that has already been determined.
CS Lewis is the only post-biblical Christian deep thinker who can still lead today! He encouraged us to fix his doctrine and discover even more total truth! We have the tools to do this...
The two greatest effects of these tools leading to identifying more non-contradictory truth are:
1. Definitions ought to be causes!
If a definition is stated in terms of causes, then the attribute can be intentionally attained and understood AND the effects will be non-contradictory.
If a definition is stated in terms of effects, then the attribute CANNOT be intentionally attained and understood AND the effects of the attribute will be contradictory.
"Modeling God" presents non-contradictory definitions for the key attributes making up our beliefs: God, Salvation, faith, grace, love, life, truth, etc.
2. God is focused on the HOW/WHY, not the WHAT.
"Modeling God" espouses the same core beliefs as "traditional Christianity". These beliefs can be seen as WHAT's: God created the heavens and the earth, man is sinful, Jesus died for our sins, etc.
However, most people CANNOT give the HOW/WHY for their belief (WHAT)! They don't even realize it! When they find out they don't have a HOW/WHY, their flesh gets riled and they attack!
This is EXACTLY WHY Jesus began speaking in parables in Matthew 13. The masses could NOT handle principles directly. Jesus adjusted by speaking in parables for the masses. However, He continued to speak principles directly to His disciples. I now realize "Modeling God" ought to have a WARNING attached to it:
"If you are NOT able to handle principles directly, please do NOT read this book. If you need to get your truth through stories or parables, please do NOT read this book. It will only upset you."
The reasons there APPEARS to be contradictions between "Modeling God" and what most people believe is people have a different HOW/WHY associated with their beliefs (WHAT)! We will keep talking in circles and lose the next generation if we don't focus on the HOW/WHY. The reality is EVERYONE has a HOW/WHY for their belief (WHAT) even if they aren't conscious of it.
"Modeling God" presents the Right HOW/WHY for the beliefs we Christians have. However, people don't Understand this powerful tool, so they claim we believe something different.
I believe the Nicene Creed. I have the same beliefs (WHAT's) as traditional Christianity. I have a HOW/WHY for my beliefs. Most people don't. People love to claim this makes me a heretic. However, when I ask these people for the HOW/WHY behind their beliefs, WHEN THEY CAN GIVE ONE (and it differs from mine), they are the ones who state non-biblical beliefs!
For instance, a pastor in Appleton spent two years telling the world I was a heretic. He would not meet with me or support his claims. Finally, after having a lawyer send a letter to him, he responded. Among his many contradictions, his WHY for disagreeing with me about HOW/WHY Jesus is fully man and Fully God led to him stating Jesus is NOT fully man and led to him contradicting the Bible!
Let me make sure you Understand this point: Deception is stating a Right WHAT with a Wrong (or no) HOW/WHY. No one will deceive you with a Wrong WHAT. The Bible shows the devil stated Right WHAT's with a Wrong HOW/WHY.
These are two of the tools CS Lewis told us to look for so we could get more "total truth".
I have NEVER avoided a discussion with someone about this material. However, it is amazing to see how many people actively avoid discussing this information with me. I believe this is a spiritual issue. If you have any questions or want help with some passage of the Bible that has appeared contradictory, please feel free to contact me: jglenhart@gmail.com.
My life is based on an accurate interpretation of the Word of God.
I believe the Bible is the ONLY book that give the reason (HOW/WHY) AND does NOT contradict itself. Every other religious book I have read either doesn't give the HOW/WHY or it has contradictions. The Bible's apparent contradictions are removed when you use the four God-given tools together. How do I get this accurate interpretation?
This means I first need to have a way to get an accurate interpretation...then second, I go to the Word of God. Actually, I continually go to the Word of God.
Some people get upset because they want me to put the Word of God in step one...but they can't explain how they make sure THEY have an accurate interpretation. They just state they do...and don't want to discuss what happened when they have been wrong.
My process:
1. Look to God's Word for a stated definition.
2. Look to Strong's Concordance and check God's Word for contradictions
3. Remove contradictions and check God's Word for contradictions
This is an EXTREMELY subtle point: I use the Word of God to interpret the Word of God.
Many people SAY they also do this, however, when you push them for their definition of "grace" they reference Martin Luther. When you push them for their definition of "sovereignty" they reference John Calvin.
THESE PEOPLE ARE USING MEN TO INTERPRET THE WORD OF GOD.
The sequel to Modeling God proves everywhere Christians have contradictory beliefs it is because they have embraced man-made tradition (e.g, Calvinism) in place of God's Word. This is actually the definition of "cultish". Here is a post explaining What is a Cult?
The sequel is available on-line.
Here is the Preface
Here is the Table of Contents for the sequel.
In fact, a book from Willow Creek titled "Reveal" documents church is unsuccessful at helping people mature in their spiritual growth. Church is only able to help unbelievers become new believers. However, church is unable to help new believers grow. I believe it is because man-made doctrine (tradition, Calvinism) is superficial and abstract in order to hide its contradictions. Progressing people in man-made doctrine only leads to confusion.
In fact, a book by a neuro-scientist (Dr. Leaf) shows that individuals who attempt to embrace contradiction actually become physiologically less intelligent and the resulting stress between their brain and body results in physical illness. For the last two years, we have been able to help people intentionally mature spiritually...to the point they are able to teach pastors! Doctrine (beliefs) are very important...
God has led me through a unique background that has caused me to learn how to model peoples' thought processes.
EVERYONE has a MODEL for EVERYTHING. If people choose not to think intentionally, then they behave like an animal (in the flesh) and their MODELS drive them. If people choose to determine their MODELS, this takes intentional thought and now they have the ability to change them. Ultimately, God changes a person's MODELS, but it ONLY happens when the person FIRST expresses their will for the MODELS to be changed...which requires intentional thinking. The Bible constantly tells us to think intentionally...otherwise we are thinking in the flesh because it is impossible NOT to think AT ALL.
I ask people questions so I can determine their MODELS...my goal is NOT to prove them wrong. People project onto me that my intent is to prove people wrong. If a person is unwilling to answer the questions, then they don't want to determine their MODELS...they want to remain comfortable and NOT grow. That is the person's choice. However, if that same person expects others to change, then they are a hypocrite because they use the SAME process on others that they refuse to allow to be used on themselves!
The proof we have lost our way is our inability to present a non-contradictory model for God. A.W. Tozer in "The Knowledge Of The Holy" says it well:
"Before the Christian church goes into eclipse anywhere, there must first be the corrupting of her simple basic theology. She simply gets a wrong answer to the question, “What is God like?” Though she may continue to cling to a sound nominal creed, her practical working creed has become false. The masses of her adherents come to believe that God is different from what He actually is; and that is heresey of the most insidious and deadly kind."
If you want a summary of the core beliefs behind "Modeling God", read the following posts in order:
-Model for God
-Jesus is Fully Man and Fully God
-Who ARE you?
-Are, Do, Have
-Grace
-Spiritual ARE
-The Personality of God
The other core belief in the book is "How to Think".
This is covered with the four God-given principles. The only way to humble yourself intentionally and remain "broken" is to apply these four principles to yourself. In reality, everyone uses these four God-given principles perfectly on everyone except themselves. Choosing not to apply these four God-given principles to yourself is the same as telling God you want Him to humble you from the outside...from your circumstances. The choice is yours:
Contrastive Thinking
Non-contradiction
Causality
Growth
These four God-given principles are used to explain practical examples of "man's way of thinking" and "God's way of thinking" in these two posts:
Renewing Your Mind
Transformed Mind
My experience centers around consumer products. I found giving people what they SAY they want DOESN'T make them satisfied BECAUSE they ACTUALLY value the product differently than what they say. It has to do with the way people think. My real focus has been problem solving by understanding thought processes. I do this through modeling...EVERYONE ACTUALLY has a model for EVERYTHING...they just may not be aware of it. My expertise is determining the ACTUAL model in the mind of the individual...
The term "scientist" is a relatively new term created in the last 200 years. The term was originally "Natural Philosopher". That is, a person who looked at nature and thought about the Creator behind it and how He organized His creation. Throughout history, the greatest theologians and men of God from the Bible had their foundation in science.
"Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans." (Daniel 1:4)
My experience has led me to be able to live out the following verse through the grace of God:
"Forasmuch as an excellent spirit, and knowledge, and understanding, interpreting of dreams, and shewing of hard sentences, and dissolving of doubts..." (Daniel 5:12)
Please feel free to test me both privately through e-mail or publicly through the comments...everytime someone pushes me, I end up learning something. I am not always right and I am anxious to learn from people who use the Bible. Unfortunately, there are plenty of people who come up with un-Biblical reasons NOT to talk with me. Even if there is a possibility I'm a "brother", confront me like Matthew 18. If you think I'm not a "brother", then love me like Jesus said to. Drawing conclusions WITHOUT talking to me is pride and is NOT supported by the Bible.
Here is the overview of my professional experience. Basically, I applied to religion the four God-given tools that have been and continue to be applied to every other area (science, medicine, politics, military, economics, government, art, etc.) For more detail on my background click the link associated with each area...
1985 Degree in Chemical Engineering and Chemistry from Clarkson University
1985-1987 The Procter & Gamble Company
Project manager for new and improved Joy dishwashing liquid.
I learned formulation while at P&G. The best way to describe my different roles is with music.
I have a chemistry degree. This means I’m able to explain the result of a very simple process: one chemical interacting with one different chemical. This is a lot like being a music teacher. A music teacher can tell you exactly how to make one note on one instrument.
I have a chemical engineering degree. This means I’m able to look at several interactions at once and determine specifically how to make the complex process more effective and efficient. This is a lot like a music critic. A music critic can tell you what makes a piece of music excellent and how the poorer parts could have been improved.
I have formulation training. This means I’m able to create products. This is like a composer. They have the ability to actually create something that didn’t exist before.
When all three are taken together, the result is the ability to create explanations of complex interactions and explain them in simple terms. These explanations of complex interactions are also known as “models”.
Click here to get an explanation of my formulating strategy.
The first models I created were completely mathematical. My last project involved Liquid Tide. In order to represent Liquid Tide mathematically, it takes one dimension for every ingredient. A simple product with 3 ingredients can be represented with a three dimensional graph. However, Liquid Tide had 31 ingredients! I created a 31-dimensional mathematical model and solved the solubility and budget issues for the product.
1987-1990 Dow Chemical Company
I worked in Central Research. My last project involved a formulation that was infinitely soluble in oil AND infinitely soluble in water. I modeled the two chemicals and the interaction that made this formulation and modified both.
Four months after I left Dow Chemical, they called me to say I had won “The 1990 Dow Chemical Central Research Inventor of the Year Award”. I was 27.
1990-1992 The Dial Corp
When I joined The Dial Corp, Purex was a little known brand. Today, it is the #2 laundry detergent brand in the U.S. behind Tide. Purex became #2 during this time because of the way I modeled product development.
Normally, product development works this way…
Step 1: Make a product
Step 2: Test the product in the lab
Step 3: Test the product with consumers
Step 4: Introduce the product into the market
I reversed the process. I modeled the market. Then I modeled the consumer testing to create a consumer test that would predict which product would win in the market. Then I modeled the internal test to predict which product would win the consumer test. These models were a combination of math and psychology.
Normally it takes eighteen months to introduce a new product. During my first year I got fourteen formulations into the market and saved $10 million/year in raw material costs. I invented Ultra Purex, Classic Purex, Ultra Trend, and Classic Trend.
The next year I did the same with Liquid Purex. I got seven formulations into the market and saved another $10 million/year in raw material costs. I invented Liquid Purex with Bleach Alternative and Ultra versions of Liquid Purex.
I left Dial for the same reasons as the other jobs. I was promised something if I solved a hard problem. When I solved the problem, I was given an excuse why they couldn't keep their end of the bargain. Why did they promise it to me in the first place? At Dial, the answer was, "We didn't think you could actually get all those products out the door." At least they were honest...
1992-1996 SC Johnson Wax
I applied the same principles of product development modeling to Shout! We made Shout! the #1 soil and stain remover for the first time in its then 18 year history. It is still #1 today.
It was at this point that I realized there were four undeniable principles that when used together could solve every problem. It didn't matter if they were mathematical problems or not. In fact, every error that occurs could be explained by determining which of the principles wasn't followed. I began to actively look for problems that seemed impossible so I could put these principles to the test. Along the way I created predictive models and even solved a $100+ million/year problem that no one else was able to solve.
In fact, I was even able to come up with a solution to achieve World Peace! This made me realize I may have discovered the fundamental tools that can solve every problem. (If you have 60 seconds, you may want to check out the solution to World Peace.)
All of this culminated in a project involving fragrances. The models became almost completely psychological and biological. These principles work in ALL areas: science, politics, religion, medicine, economics, etc. So, this led to me Modeling God…
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Examples
The idea for finding your true identity comes from Revelation 2:17
"He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches: To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it."
This name represents who you ARE.
We can BEGIN the process of finding out who you ARE by looking at what gives you energy and what drains your energy.
The goal is to get about 80% of the way towards the two halves of your ARE.
Then over time you can focus in to determine it more specifically.
Eventually in Heaven, you will find out EXACTLY what it is and it will be represented by one name.
Examples of gains and drains are:
shopping, music, pets, sports, foods, hobbies, people, sex, solving problems, etc.
Examples of attrbutes covering gains are:
knoweldge, understanding, vision, quality, imagination, problem solving, etc.
Everyone was created to value justice, being right, and connecting. So you can't really have these as unique Spiritual ARE's.
Look at the list closely. One person gave the following four entries among their twenty:
"Reading a GOOD book"
"Spending QUALITY time with my kids"
"Doing an EXCELLENT job"
"Eating a PERFECT meal"
The capitalized words were underlined in his list. It looked like the underlined word was actually more important than the rest of the sentence. When this person realized they have a quality/excellence half of their ARE, it identified the source of their frustration with certain interactions they have had.
Another person had a list that included the following possible Spiritual ARE's:
silly fun
organization
getting ahead enough to have a buffer
recognized accomplishment
The opposite of each would be:
ridicule or seriousness
disorganization or poor planning
doing just enough to get by
lack of completion or credit
When the drain list was examined, every example fit under ridicule/seriousness and people doing just enough to get by.
This person needed to do everything beyond what was required SO THAT they could take time to be silly and fun.
"He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches: To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it."
This name represents who you ARE.
We can BEGIN the process of finding out who you ARE by looking at what gives you energy and what drains your energy.
The goal is to get about 80% of the way towards the two halves of your ARE.
Then over time you can focus in to determine it more specifically.
Eventually in Heaven, you will find out EXACTLY what it is and it will be represented by one name.
Examples of gains and drains are:
shopping, music, pets, sports, foods, hobbies, people, sex, solving problems, etc.
Examples of attrbutes covering gains are:
knoweldge, understanding, vision, quality, imagination, problem solving, etc.
Everyone was created to value justice, being right, and connecting. So you can't really have these as unique Spiritual ARE's.
Look at the list closely. One person gave the following four entries among their twenty:
"Reading a GOOD book"
"Spending QUALITY time with my kids"
"Doing an EXCELLENT job"
"Eating a PERFECT meal"
The capitalized words were underlined in his list. It looked like the underlined word was actually more important than the rest of the sentence. When this person realized they have a quality/excellence half of their ARE, it identified the source of their frustration with certain interactions they have had.
Another person had a list that included the following possible Spiritual ARE's:
silly fun
organization
getting ahead enough to have a buffer
recognized accomplishment
The opposite of each would be:
ridicule or seriousness
disorganization or poor planning
doing just enough to get by
lack of completion or credit
When the drain list was examined, every example fit under ridicule/seriousness and people doing just enough to get by.
This person needed to do everything beyond what was required SO THAT they could take time to be silly and fun.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Exercises
There are many exercises that are mentioned in the book to determine your ARE. The most effective one is to make a "gains" and "drains" list.
First, list 20 activities that result in you gaining energy.
NOTE: This is not a preference list. Every entry on this list must result in you gaining energy in the Long Term. If you don't always end up gaining energy in the Long Term after doing the activity, it shouldn't be on your gain list.
Next, list 20 activites that result in you losing energy.
AGAIN, this not a preference list. Every entry on this list must be an energy drain to you.
Once you have both lists, look at the gain list and determine four possible attributes that together can cover all the gains. For examples, please click here.
It helps to be specific about why each entry is a gain or drain. For instance, if you write "tennis" as a gain, be specific as to why and how it is a gain.
Is it singles or doubles tennis?
Do you need to keep score?
Do you need to win?
How would you describe your ideal tennis experience?
When you have four attributes, take a moment and come up with the opposite of each. What would it look like to be prevented from experiencing each attribute?
Finally, look at the drain list.
What tends to happen is that the drain list contains examples that match the opposite of two of the gain attributes.
These are the starting point for your two spritual ARE's.
Over time, you will be able to become more specific with each.
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE contact me with your gains and drains if you want help!!!!! I believe this is the most profitable exercise you will ever do in your life. Send me an e-mail or just put a comment at the end of this post. It will send me an e-mail and I will get back to you.
I have found that people are unique. Each person takes in and gives out information in a specific way. When people operate apart from the way they are made, they have little energy and become depressed. When people believe they will never be able to operate they way they were made, they become suicidal.
Individuals tend to make friends with people who take in information similar to the way the individual was made to give out information and with people who give out information similar to the way the the individual was made to take in information.
The way the person was made is the ARE.
This ability to have profitable interactions with others appears random because the individual doesn't know the cause. However, when people determine who they ARE, they can intentionally choose to modify their behavior in order to be profitable with others. They can determine if the behavior they need to modify is against the way they were made (ARE) or not. Understanding who God made you to be allows you to intentionally become more profitable.
This is truly a life changing exercise...
First, list 20 activities that result in you gaining energy.
NOTE: This is not a preference list. Every entry on this list must result in you gaining energy in the Long Term. If you don't always end up gaining energy in the Long Term after doing the activity, it shouldn't be on your gain list.
Next, list 20 activites that result in you losing energy.
AGAIN, this not a preference list. Every entry on this list must be an energy drain to you.
Once you have both lists, look at the gain list and determine four possible attributes that together can cover all the gains. For examples, please click here.
It helps to be specific about why each entry is a gain or drain. For instance, if you write "tennis" as a gain, be specific as to why and how it is a gain.
Is it singles or doubles tennis?
Do you need to keep score?
Do you need to win?
How would you describe your ideal tennis experience?
When you have four attributes, take a moment and come up with the opposite of each. What would it look like to be prevented from experiencing each attribute?
Finally, look at the drain list.
What tends to happen is that the drain list contains examples that match the opposite of two of the gain attributes.
These are the starting point for your two spritual ARE's.
Over time, you will be able to become more specific with each.
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE contact me with your gains and drains if you want help!!!!! I believe this is the most profitable exercise you will ever do in your life. Send me an e-mail or just put a comment at the end of this post. It will send me an e-mail and I will get back to you.
I have found that people are unique. Each person takes in and gives out information in a specific way. When people operate apart from the way they are made, they have little energy and become depressed. When people believe they will never be able to operate they way they were made, they become suicidal.
Individuals tend to make friends with people who take in information similar to the way the individual was made to give out information and with people who give out information similar to the way the the individual was made to take in information.
The way the person was made is the ARE.
This ability to have profitable interactions with others appears random because the individual doesn't know the cause. However, when people determine who they ARE, they can intentionally choose to modify their behavior in order to be profitable with others. They can determine if the behavior they need to modify is against the way they were made (ARE) or not. Understanding who God made you to be allows you to intentionally become more profitable.
This is truly a life changing exercise...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)