This was in the Reformed Forum Spring/Summer 2025 Magazine. I had it in my hand months ago and been waiting to do a review on this until now. I have a digital copy so I will throw out the paper magazine.
Here's the summary:
Marie Valle is wife of a pastor, Angelo of Christ Reformed Church PCA in Central Pennsylvania, with 4 children.
She applies 5 senses: Sight, hearing, taste, smell, touch. In order to engage children in worship. I think this goes with adults as well. But this article is about the less disciplined ones, the children interrupt worship services because they need more sensory interaction, according to Valle.
God used the 5 senses (sort of) in the Tabernacle (Exodus 25-30) by making it tangible. Psalm 141 embodied this worship vividly: 1. Sounds of God's calling, 2. Smell of incense, 3. Feeling of raised hands, 4. Utterance of self-controlled words, 5. Gaze of fixed eyes.
Suggested help for children in worship:
encourage holding bulletins, hymnals and Bibles with their own hands and follow along with their eyes, as they hear.
Sing boldly as example of stimulating their hearing and mind with worship.
Place coin (stimulate hearing) offerings themselves to encourage sensation of importance.
Listen for specific frequent words during sermon: i.e. God, Bible, etc.
The Lord's Supper: all senses but taste (until they are old enough to participate).
I would say though this doesn't go against parenting in the pews, it also does not discourage a separate children's church (that is, during adult's sermon session).
Cloud Google has a good introduction on these differences, I'm pasting it here in case it's lost:
To understand cloud and the different models to choose from, it can help to think about it in terms of housing:
On-premises: If you decide to build your house from scratch, you do everything yourself. You’ll need to source the raw materials and tools, put everything together, and run to the store every time you need anything. This is similar to running an application on-premises, where you own everything from the hardware to your applications and scaling.
Infrastructure as a service: If you are busy, you might consider hiring a contractor to do the work. You tell them how you want the house to look and how many rooms you want, and they take the instructions and build your home. IaaS works in a similar way for your applications. You rent the hardware to run your application on, but you are responsible for managing the OS, runtime, scale, and all the data. Example: Compute Engine
Containers as a service: If buying a home is just too much work due to the maintenance it comes with, you can choose to rent instead. The basic utilities are included, but you bring your own furniture and make the space yours. With containers, you can bring a containerized application, so you don't have to worry about the underlying operating system but still have control over scale and runtime. Example:Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE)
Platform as a service: If you don’t want to worry about furnishing your living space, you can rent a furnished house. PaaS lets you bring your own code and deploy it but leaves the server management and scaling up to the cloud provider. Examples:App Engine, Cloud Run
Function as a service: If you just need a small dedicated place to work away from your home, you can rent a desk in a coworking workspace. Similarly, FaaS allows you to build and deploy a small piece of code, or a function, that performs a specific task. The cloud provider adds scale if needed when a function executes. Example:Cloud Functions
Software as a service: Now, imagine you move into a finished house (rented or purchased), but you have to pay for upkeep, such as cleaning or lawn care. SaaS is the same—you pay to use a complete application for a specific purpose that is managed, maintained, and secured by the cloud provider, but you are responsible for taking care of your own data. Example:Google Workspace
Choosing which is right for you: pros and cons
When it comes to choosing whether cloud IaaS, PaaS, or SaaS is right for your business, there are different advantages and disadvantages to each service model.
In addition, it’s important to understand that all three are not mutually exclusive, where you can only choose a single service model. It’s possible to choose one for your needs, but you can also decide to combine it with another one or even use a mix of all three along with more traditional IT infrastructure.
Let’s take a look at some of the most common advantages and disadvantages for each model:
IaaS pros Highest level of control over infrastructureOn-demand scalabilityNo single point of failure for higher reliabilityReduced upfront capital expenditures (for example, pay-as-you-go pricing)Fewer provisioning delays and wasted resources Accelerated development and time to market
IaaS cons Responsible for your own data security and recoveryRequires hands-on configuration and maintenance Difficulties securing legacy applications on cloud-based infrastructure
CaaS prosIdeal for running, managing, and scaling microservicesStreamlined development speeds up time to marketMore control and configuration of networks and application componentsIncreases workload portability between environments, such as hybrid cloud and multicloudBuilt-in performance monitoring and container orchestration
CaaS consSome CaaS solutions have limited language support available depending on the cloud service providerContainer security risks may increase when using CaaS as they share the same kernel with the OS (although they are considered safer than VMs)
PaaS pros Instant access to a complete, easy-to-use development platformCloud service provider is responsible for maintenance and securing infrastructure Available over any internet connection on any deviceOn-demand scalability
PaaS cons Application stack can be limited to the most relevant componentsVendor lock-in may be an issue depending on the cloud service providerLess control over operations and the overall infrastructureMore limited customizations
SaaS prosEasy to set up and start usingThe provider manages and maintains everything, from hardware to softwareSoftware is accessible over any internet connection on any device
SaaS consNo control over any of the infrastructure or security controlsIntegration issues with your existing tools and applications Vendor lock-in may be an issue depending on the cloud service providerLittle to no customization
15 tips for distinctive character art (with samples). These are good pointers and it's for character art, not just art in general: 1. Strike the perfect pose: A character’s pose communicates personality and emotion without words; consider interaction with the environment and subtle facial/hand angles to convey story. 2. Use anatomy as a foundation: Focus on bone and muscle structure to create believable, natural poses, even in a stylized style. 3. Remember that less is more: Simplify backgrounds and use selective color or minimal detail to emphasize pose, anatomy, and expression. 4. Colour as an emotional tool: Use warm colors for energy/passion and cool colors for calm/mystery to reinforce the character’s emotion and mood. 5. Highlight the personality of your character: Use minimal backgrounds and strategic elements to keep the character’s personality front and center.up 6. Guide the composition with patterns: Employ simple patterns or repeating shapes to direct attention and create visual flow, not just literal backgrounds. 7. Master composition: Consider character interaction, posture, gaze, and placement to tell the story without words; elements like a sword cut or moonlight can imply narrative importance. 8. Perfect lighting and contrast: Use light and shadow to define form, create emotion, and add depth; adjust lighting to make the subject stand out against a minimalist backdrop. 9. Remember that movement brings characters to life: Convey motion through pose, gaze direction, and element arrangement, even in static images. 10. Use body language: Posture, gaze, and hand positioning convey emotion and intention; a single pose change can communicate a lot. 11. Give your characters charisma: A) Sketch the energy B) Clean up and shadows C) Add color, depth, and attitude This workflow helps establish a strong attitude from the initial sketch through lighting and color. 12. Focus the viewer's gaze: Direct attention with contrast, lines, and gesture direction; minimize distractions to emphasize a key expression. 13. Balance the visual rhythm: Alternate busy areas with simple ones to avoid crowding and help the character stand out. 14. Create details that tell stories: Each accessory, scar, or torn garment should communicate something about the character; fewer, intentional elements carry more weight. 15. If the silhouette reads, it works: Start from strong silhouettes; vary proportions, angles, and poses to create distinct designs that read well even in shadow.
9/10/25 Wednesday
Just when I'm starting to like and follow him for about a year or so, Charlie Kirk (1993-2025), he had to get himself assassinated in Utah campus. The shooter's still at large (update 9/12/25 Suspect identified as Tyler Robinson who confessed the crime to his family which reported him to authority). Allegedly shooting from 130 meters away with a single professional shot. I first found out about this the night of the day he was killed in VR BigScreen where there's so many channels titled "RIP Charlie Kirk" and I thought it was a joke or something until the next day morning I realized from some Facebook posts that it was real. I managed to find some close to uncensored videos (it's not easy finding uncensored videos of such as they get removed by Western pampered ideology media as soon as they were posted, but I found them - both Kirk and Zarutska's killing and now stored into my drive, had to use Russian's Yandex search engine to find these), which I'll save to my Journal drive in case they take it down. These videos tend to get blurred or cut at the gory part.
Mr. You believed the song that's most apt for Kirk's funeral is Bob Dylan's The Times They are a Changin':
The media is crazy around the world for this because it's like Trump's assassination but only this time Kirk's killed. Allie Stuckey also commented on working with Charlie:
He's done the debate rounds in major campuses and rings:
I've followed Kirk long enough to know, that he's certainly smart. Leaning towards fundamentalist Evangelical Christian, probably a Sabbatarian, but also Old Earth Creationist, not willing stand on matters for or against human evolution, etc. He's certainly tried to play fair with the left, giving them plenty of speaking space, although there are places where he's only caring about winning when he has met his matches (i.e. when a Catholic student challenged him on Christian Nationalism, a Liberal Socialist tried to engage a mature debate with him on a topic that he was less inclined to respond and more on attacking the label Liberal Socialist" as oxymoronic, etc.).
My only problem with Kirk, like Trump, is Christian Nationalism (Or a Christian who is also a Nationalist, as he preferred to put it in one of the debates with students): That America is the greatest and best country in the world, which is obviously proven otherwise by school shootings. This is by any common sense of any political party, a proud bias. The general rhetoric is: If you don't like America, then leave. This kind of ideology is never going to build any bridges with outsiders. You only make your own supporters more hard headed and lower IQ. People don't come here only because they think America is great. Some came here for $$$, some for family, and thus, they would not like other aspects of America. I do wonder what do all the Christian Nationalists say about this news. I only looked up Stephen Wolfe's tweets and found nothing much other than his reposts of someone else's tweets around Sept. 10. There's a TYT video circling around since 6 years ago where Kirk lost it with Cenk (liberal) of TYT and it resurfaced now and the Kirkians are in denial of it, calling it made up by A.I. because they worship Kirk:
I wonder if the wife (Erika) could see the perpetrator. I wonder if she would forgive him (which would make her no smaller person than her husband). The law would probably still execute him regardless. Nationalism is not the way, discerning good and bad persons are not the ultimate goal. Only the Gospel, only the difference between a dead or a living soul that matters.
Update 12/12/2025 Friday: Erika announced her forgiveness of Tyler Robinson. But despite many Christians bragging about how great a gesture that was, how only Christians could do that, I think the whole thing is premature. It looks more like a show than true forgiveness. She seemed either unwilling to do so, or still was not over it. For true forgiveness, there's no fix methods, but it shows over time, such as visiting the perpetrator, etc. Which I highly doubt Erika would go for. I do feel sorry for Charlie Kirk's widow. She's not prepared nor made for this kind of platform but now both friends and foes are pushing her for it. Until great things done by her, let's just remember her as someone Charlie loved at first sight/interview and that's about it:
How Kirk honored or served God (he did say he wanted to be remembered for the courage for his faith), I'm sure many can debate about this. It would seem to me that Charlie Kirk's martyrdom is more nationalistic/political than evangelical. However, Kirk had done more work for the Kingdom above than many Christians and preachers today. Those mislabeling of fascists/anti-fascists on either parties, the pretended speech against violence yet inspiring hateful provocation happened both on Kirk's side as well and not just his opponents'. The talk on the left or right of standing up against the terror against free speech with fear, are old data recycled. But one lesson is clear from this, that we are in a race against time, serve God to our fullest as long as we are still breathing on Earth. And Christians should have no fear of any terror against the ministry of God, as horrible as it may kindled our natural hearts. And the solution to Charlie Kirk martyrdom would be to open more opportunity for oppositions to debate in a peaceful way, rather than turning away from this opportunity which I think lots of Christians are good at (play safe) as well as bad at (having intellectual discussions). When Nadia told me to be careful doing evangelism on campuses, I would tell her that if martyrdom were to happen to me in evangelism, please forgive them.
Update 11/2/2025: Kirk certainly has no problem calling out White supremacists. I notice some American Christians (i.e. Allie Beth Stuckey) do not know enough English to know the meaning of nationalism. Or the difference between a patriot and a nationalist. And thus easily swindled by folks like Douglas Wilson. Some erroneously think American Christian nationalists = White nationalists.
Update 9/18/25: I like David Bahnsen's responses to the Kirk incident: That the federal government has no right in monitoring free speech:
No one would agree with me more than Charlie Kirk. Employers should have, and do have, every right to go after people who say utterly inexcusable "hateful" things. And the DOJ has NO JURISDICTION in any of this, whatsoever. None. And Pam Bondi knows this.
What Bondi has said the last 24 hours is so stupid it is utterly impossible to rationalize. No one would agree with me more than Charlie Kirk. Employers should have, and do have, every right to go after people who say utterly inexcusable "hateful" things. And the DOJ has NO… https://t.co/Dd4VTrJY3U
Now, the left and the right are finding ways to attack each other over Charlie Kirk's death. The far right wants to shut the left up. The left also tries to do the same, only that the left is smaller now that Trump is the president. While we now see a lot of firing of jobs of those who despised Charlie Kirk in their jobs as teachers, etc. the left (or the neutral enabler of the left) has suspended ABC News reporter in Illinois, Beni Rae Harmony, who resigned from her job, for remembering Charlie Kirk as her mentor, giving tribute to Kirk on air in her Marketplace program:
This shocking killing of Kirk happened the same week Trump was bringing to light around 9/9 the killing of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska by a black criminal (DeCarlos Brown) of 14 crimes set loose on streets by Judge Teresa Stokes without bail. I'll store the two youtube videos below in my Journal Media folder with file name dated 9/9/25. I think many took notice of this case because it's a white young girl of modern model beauty. If it's some ugly dude, I doubt Trump would care to bring it up. Nevertheless, this catch and release leftist ideology really needs to stop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3ZWOjHV5wY
9/9/25 TuesdayThe Math needed for LLM. Just a quick overview on what's crucial in LLM design.
This is an article written by Alex Tseng Shao Kai and posted by wts: Vol. 4 Issue 1 - Christianity & Liberalism: 100 Years: Telling The Truth Gospel: The Reception of... by Shao Kai Tseng
Summary:
Alex talked about how Machen's book got into China via Samuel Boyle's (包義森, 1905–2002) translation which began in 1940. Later edition (2003) was prefaced by the late Jonathan Chao (趙天恩, 1938–2004, [who was responsible for working with Stephen Tong to create the theological series in Taiwan, HK, etc. which later turned into Tong's famous book series]). There's also an interesting relationship with these names: Boyle was introduced to Charles Chao (Jonathan's father) by Lorraine Boettner & J. G. Vos. [Geerhardus Vos' son] And thus Boyle and Chao went on to establish RTF (the Reformed Translation Fellowship Press).
The translation of Machen's book was the crucial response that helped China's Christians when the communist took over in 1949, as the American (instead of German) liberal theology also made its way to China at the beginning of 20th century through China's protestant organizations like the YMCA (1870s) and the NCCC (National Christian Council of China-1913 中華全國基督教協進會). CIM (China Inland Mission) in 1926, withdrew from the NCCC due to its advocacy for the social gospel. The NCCC later (1950) adopted a proposal by the social gospel proponent 吴耀宗, 1893–1979, co-founder of the Three-Self Patriotic movement, to cut off all ties to foreign Christian groups and swear allegiance to the Communist Party. This was how American theological liberalism got involved in China's progressivism. The conservative church leaders and missionaries in China against this movement stood out in the widely circulated 1955 article, "We, Because of Faith 我們是為了信 仰 (Youtube Reading)" by 王明道, 1900–1991, AKA the "dean of the Chinese house churches." Another important book by Wang was Discerning the True Gospel (《真偽福音辨》). This book became like the Machen's version in China against liberalism and relentless critique of the social gospel.
However, the arguments for Christianity and Liberalism grounds on established academic research as the author spent a year in Germany exposed to challenges of Liberalism first-hand as a student; while Discerning the Gospel exhibits didactic and homiletic tones with pietistic content. Fraught with threats, warnings, and derogatory remarks against "false prophets", offering very little theoretical analysis of the social gospel. As a result, most conservative Chinese Christians, being more accustomed to Wang's rather than Machen's approach, were more driven by pietistic impulses that tended to be anti-intellectual. They even equated "theology" with "liberalism", and deemed all academic and critical attempts at understanding the faith to be apostate.
Evangelical Chinese churches were waning in academic theology until the 1970s, when Chinese alumni from Westminster Theological Seminar in the 60s, including Jonathan Chao, launched a campaign for theological education. This led to the founding of China Evangelical Seminary in Taiwan (1970) [中華福音神學院] and the China Graduate School of Theology in Hong Kong (1975) [中國神學研究院]. It gained support from local churches and foreign missionaries after the influence of the 1974 Lausanne Congress and the founding of the Chinese Congress on World Evangelization [世界華人福音運動] in 1976. Jonathan Chao founded numerous underground theological training centers across mainland China. Also founded China Missions [Ministries 中國福音會] International which brought books and cassette tapes to the mainland featuring sermons and theological seminars by his close friend and ally, Stephen Tong, who popularized Reformed theology in Chinese churches.
Alex's 2 caveats:
Machen's intent, stated at the beginning:
The purpose of this book is not to decide the religious issue of the present day, but merely to present the issue as sharply and clearly as possible, in order that the reader may be aided in deciding it for himself. Clear-cut definition of terms in religious matters, bold facing of the logical implications of religious views, is by many persons regarded as an impious proceeding…, but it is always beneficial in the end.
"Despite this explicit statement, many Chinese readers, and in fact many American readers as well, still approach the work with an anti-intellectual mindset." ~ Alex. As the book stated, that to be clear-cut in definition of terms and having logical implications are regarded as impious proceeding. Fair-minded theological debate regarded with suspicion. The language in Christianity and Liberalism was presented with derogatory rhetoric found in Discerning the Gospel, by many Chinese church leaders. Such is contrary to the intent of the author.
2. Avoid relying on Machen's volume as if an inspired text. For one thing, Christianity and Liberalism was in large part a response to a specific sermon by Harry Emerson Fosdick (1878–1969), titled “Shall the Fundamentalists Win?” Thus, Machen was addressing a specific brand of American liberalism. Fosdick, not Schleiermacher, and mischaracterizing Kant's critique of metaphysics as an "attack upon the theistic proofs." [Kant wasn't trying to attack faith, he was merely separating faith from knowledge to show that God's existence cannot be a matter of theoretical/speculative reason, i.e. the ontological argument is a logical fallacy that falsely assumed that existence is a predicate.]
Liberalism was not monolithically guided by ‘Enlightenment naturalism.’ ~Alex. Earnst Troeltsch (1865-1923) and Emanuel Hirsch (1888-1972) fought against the naturalistic consciousness (Later Ritschlians kind) (i.e. without God, reducing Jesus to just another rabbi, Bible just another text) in order to promote divine immanence in history: "re-enchantment" or "sacralization." [Christian Nationalists also fight against a secular public square they see as hostile to faith. ~ with help from Deepseek AI.] Weberians described "naturalistic consciousness" in terms of "disenchantment", which was only a first moment in the development of theological modernism. A second and more predominant moment was that of re-enchantment, transcendentalization of nature and history, and much of that immanentization went too far. This form of re-enchantment has re-appeared in some conservative Christian circles in America under the rubrics such as "Christian Nationalism." [Christian Nationalists also fight against a secular public square they see as hostile to faith. ~ with help from Deepseek AI.]
Study liberalism for yourselves, such is the true intent of Machen.
-End of summary.
It's interesting that here we learned that Christian Nationalism is actually a liberal/postmodern concept of immanentization which Machen considered the core error of liberalism.
Deepseek AI remark of Christian Nationalism:
This is not just an academic exercise. The reason to study liberalism is to recognize its intellectual patterns, even when they appear in your own camp.
The warning is that Christian nationalism, in its effort to combat secularism, can inadvertently adopt the very "immanentizing" framework that Machen identified as the core error of liberalism.It risks making the nation and its history a new source of revelation, functionally blending faith with political identity in a way that can subvert the transcendent, supranational, and counter-cultural claims of the gospel.
In short, the connection is that Christian nationalism is, in a philosophical sense, a conservative imitation of liberal theology's re-enchantment project, and recognizing this lineage is crucial for a coherent theological critique of it.
I haven't comprehensively read Machen yet, so I think it's time. See if this matches what Alex was trying to say, that American Christian nationalism is actually a the core error of liberalism.
This is anticipated: MIT Study Finds Artificial Intelligence Use Reprograms the Brain, Leading to Cognitive Decline. A good term used is Cognitive Debt, same argument for programming debt/technical debt. Just like new technologies always lead to various decline: Cars & muscle decline (muscle debt?), Internet & social decline. The key is the over reliance of things, will affect us. The problem is what is considered over reliance?
Students who repeatedly relied on ChatGPT showed weakened neural connectivity, impaired memory recall, and diminished sense of ownershipover their own writing.
Below is the chart to compare a brain's EEG (electroencephalogram which measures electrical activity level in the brain) when using AI, search engine, and only the brain (from left to right). When it's just the brain, there's higher electrical activity in the brain.
EEG may not be the perfect measure for all intents and purposes, but the sense is there.
I was aware that this staged trial ignited the Modernist vs. Fundamentalist battle in 1925.
I've only heard mostly talks of it from the Reformed circle until I came across it again in William Lane Craig's podcast series: Reasonable Faith on 9/1/2025, titled: Was This the Greatest Trial on Earth? Part Two.
In the interview, Dr. Joshua Swamidass noted that the earlier Reformers (particularly at the beginning of the 20th century) were mostly Old Earth. I think the Young Earth is really a new thing being popularized by Henry Morris. Not ignoring the fact that both views are found in earlier ancient time.
After the Fundamentalists turned into anti-intellectuals or isolation culture, WLC and Swamidass credited a few evangelists who broke that isolation barrier in U.S., building a bridge with the scientific community: Carl F.H. Henry Harold Ockenga Harold Lindsell Bernard Ramm Billy Graham
So I never heard of anyone above but Billy Graham. It's time I look into these folks. With Bernard Ramm being an interesting student of Karl Barth.
Some say, including many young pastors today, that we can do evangelism by making friends first. That's an error in the Gospel. And here's the fix:
We can evangelize in friendship, not by friendship. The distinction is crucial. For we do not make friends for the sake of evangelism. We make friends because we truly want to make friends, it is otherwise, dishonest.
Making friends is not a means of evangelism. It is not even a means of building trust for evangelism as it's already disingenuous to begin with.
In a genuine friendship, we can make time for the Gospel. But the Gospel should be irrespective of friendship.
A Gospel should be done in friendship. However, a Gospel that is credited to a trust or friendship is a corrupted one.
Nothing, not our character, but the preaching of the Word is the only true means of the Gospel. Everything else is a disingenuous manipulation.
I asked Claude.ai: Show me the connection between the words for faith in Hebrew, Greek in the Bible, and the etymology of fidelity and authenticity.
And this is the answer given:
This is a fascinating exploration of how concepts of faith, trust, and genuineness connect across languages and cultures.
Hebrew: אמונה (emunah) - Faith/Faithfulness
Hebrew Root: אמן (aman) meaning "to confirm, support, be faithful"
Related words: אמת (emet = truth), אמין (amin = faithful/reliable)
The word "Amen" comes from this same root
Emunah encompasses both belief and faithfulness/reliability
Greek: πίστις (pistis) - Faith/Trust
Greek Root: πιστ- meaning "to trust, have confidence"
Related to πιστός (pistos = faithful, trustworthy)
Also connected to πείθω (peitho = to persuade, convince)
Latin Connections
Fidelity: From Latin fides (faith/trust) → fidelitas (faithfulness)
Root fid- means "to trust"
Same root as "fiduciary," "confidence," "bona fide"
Authenticity: From Greek authentikos (original, genuine)
From authentes (one acting with own authority)
Related to autos (self) + hentes (worker/doer)
The Remarkable Convergence
All these terms share a core conceptual DNA around trustworthy genuineness:
Hebrew emunah = steadfast reliability that proves itself through consistency
Greek pistis = confident trust based on proven trustworthiness
Latin fides = faithfulness that maintains loyalty to truth
Greek authentikos = genuine because it comes from the true source
In biblical usage, faith (emunah/pistis) isn't just intellectual belief - it's relational trust based on proven reliability. This connects directly to:
Fidelity: remaining true/faithful to someone or something
Authenticity: being genuine to one's true nature or origin
The theological concept emerges: true faith requires both fidelity (faithful commitment) and authenticity (genuine relationship with the true source). Biblical faith is simultaneously about trusting in God's faithfulness and being authentic in one's response to that trustworthy character.
This is prompted by Stephen Tong's lecture about Faith in his Church Servitude series back in my seminary days. He emphasized that Faith is fidelity, like how Hi-Fi equipment tries to duplicate the authenticity of the original. So our faith likewise is to be authentic to God and the truth.
This is brought to my attention by first Allie Beth Stuckey's podcast on the topic. I believe someone called Peter Thiel popularize this latest Transhumanism trend and hence the Christian discussions. Then by Holy Post Media, which to me is usually more intelligent than the "Reformed" folks particularly the "Reformed" Baptists (But I must admit, I didn't listen comprehensively on Allie's version, because when she said something too low IQ for me, my mind turns off for a few seconds and then I get distracted while playing her show. If I have to compare, though not Reformed, I would say Kaitlyn Schiess does seem smarter than Stuckey, because Schiess is open to studying various schools of thoughts while Stuckey is partially held back by the narrow mind of fundamentalism):
I like the 9 minute discussion above. The idea of skipping consummation/glorification of Man is an obvious elementary problem. But they also investigated the possibility of replacing human brain with artificial organ and that is the crux of the issue. One would need to transfer his "consciousness" to another body. I do not believe that it's possible for humans to create another human.
The Ship of Theseus (a philosophical thought experiment) was mentioned: If the ship's parts are replaced completely over time, is it still the same ship or a new ship entirely? Of course, human vs. ship is a qualitative difference; while any other objects (I would venture to include animals) vs. ship has no qualitative difference on this regard. Human has soul/spirit, the breath of God, which is unique in creation.
This brings to mind the movie that first got me think hard about pertaining idea. The Prestige (2006) by Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale. Hugh Jackman is an ambitious magician who stumbled upon Tesla's secret of creating duplicates (including humans) and used the technology to perform his Real Transported Man magic trick (fooling his audience that he transported himself from one container to another, while it's a duplication machine and he has to kill his duplicate self so that there wouldn't be more than one version of himself running around), every time he performs this, he has to kill his own duplicate, and this desperation gave him an upper hand against his rival, who's secret trick of similar show was his identical twin brother who shares the same identity.
Enough movie talk, the point of this is to question that: When we duplicate ourselves (or even transport ourselves like in Star Trek, another duplication technology idea), are those duplicates/transported result still us? The Sci-Fi idea on this, such as The Fly (1958, 1986, etc.) gone from mere transportation technology (no conversion, just simply manipulation of space and time) to conversion from material to digital/electrical/something and back to material again (Star Trek).
If it's mere transportation, that I think is more achievable than the second one (conversion). But I'm sure the remote possibility of it will invite all kinds of questions I'm not interested to deal with now.
But if it is conversion, then what needs to be ask is if:
Human soul/spirit is a thing "convertible" or associable with convertible material?
Is reverse-conversion really authentic? (Because duplication is a problem for authenticity)
Is the targeted material still the same thing as the original?
David Tong once posted on Facebook that allegedly "Scientists discover the Heart has a mini-brain of over 40,000 neurons, David quoting: "The heart has its reasons, which reason does not know." (Blaise Pascal):
If that is so, how are we to artificially replace a brain that would include a mini-brain of the heart? This mystery is still being investigated by scientists. Our current technology of brain is a memory chip, not networks of neurons. A mere virtual imitation of such network.
I welcome the pursuit of science for transhumanism. I think we may stumble upon some interesting discoveries not pertaining to the goal of such pursuit. But I don't believe it is achievable because of the 3 questions raised above. What you will create is simply something artificial that can imitate humanity (like the dawn of AI we have today), not truly human, much less "transcends" human.
I think the best we will have is just going to be a very good duplicate imitation, not an authentic transference.
