End of the Universe Part Two

[MrLinus]

When you say "have to be tolerant" is this from free will or because the bible tells me so, (everyone break into song now), as to those others reciprocating, I believe a lot of atheists/agnostics do tolerate those of faith, lets not forget that all families have different persuasions of individuals in their makeup, I am on paper a WASP, my kids were not baptised, (I know Fire and Brimstone we are going to hell in a hand basket blah) as my spouse is Catholic we both then decided to allow them to make this decision when they got old enough to understand what it was they were becoming involved in, at 19 my daughter chose to become a practising Catholic (boyfriends family is very Catholic) and that's okay with me, she is still my daughter..my son, well he's too busy with WOW to be bothered by it all... By saying "have to" you are implying that if it were left up to you, you wouldn't be so tolerant, at least that's how I read that statement...as if your hands are tied by the scriptures...like you have to turn the other cheek, or you have to drop money into a plate every Sunday, or you have to let everyone know that your belief's are stronger then mine, me I don't hafta do nutting if "I" don't want to, but I will out of common courtesy or decency, or because I respect other's, not because someone or something tells me to...sorry, starting to slide into a rant here, religion talk does that to me....Torquemada's not reading this is he....

I beg to differ, Moira.

[Aardpsymon]

Oh my what a little war this has turned into.

I feel the need to repeat what I posted earlier. The fact this world is perfect for us does NOT suggest there is a creator. If the planet was covered in concentrated acid we wouldn't exist, or we would exist and acid would be good for us and we would STILL think the world was perfect for us.

And yes, there is a decreasing interest in religion. There are all sorts in the UK, Christian, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist and many more. But according to the last census most of us, when pushed, will just write Jedi.

There will never EVER be proof that god(s) do not exist, because it is impossible to prove a negative. We CAN prove that car was doing 36mph, we CAN prove that stars fuse hydrogen, we can prove that air exists. We can't prove the loch ness monster doesn't exist because there will always be someone who says "your scanner obviously can't pick it up" or "it was somewhere else" or "it was hiding" etc etc and although its highly unlikely, we can't PROVE them wrong.

[MrLinus]

Oh my what a little war this has turned into.

I feel the need to repeat what I posted earlier. The fact this world is perfect for us does NOT suggest there is a creator. If the planet was covered in concentrated acid we wouldn't exist, or we would exist and acid would be good for us and we would STILL think the world was perfect for us.

And yes, there is a decreasing interest in religion. There are all sorts in the UK, Christian, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist and many more. But according to the last census most of us, when pushed, will just write Jedi.

There will never EVER be proof that god(s) do not exist, because it is impossible to prove a negative. We CAN prove that car was doing 36mph, we CAN prove that stars fuse hydrogen, we can prove that air exists. We can't prove the loch ness monster doesn't exist because there will always be someone who says "your scanner obviously can't pick it up" or "it was somewhere else" or "it was hiding" etc etc and although its highly unlikely, we can't PROVE them wrong.

War seems a little extreme. Why does a discussion -- which hasn't been too heated IMO -- have to be assumed to be a war?

And the idea that we don't have the right tools to determine existence or non-existence is a valid one. To say there will never will be proof is a bit extreme. Based on what we know now, there is no formal proof (but that is what faith is -- belief without proof). It's not impossible to prove a negative. Heck, we're apparently working towards creating negatives: Negative Energy, Wormholes and Warp Drive

[Aardpsymon]

I mean "negative" in a logical sense. I can prove where someone was, I can't prove where they weren't unless I know where they were. The whole "a godd spy leaves the same trail as no spy" thing. Its a bit of a brain knotter.

and I like being a little extreme :P

[Darksat]

By definition in a 10 dimensional quantum universe the creator is also the created and infinity has to exist.
I do believe in a force greater than myself.
I also know that religion is a crude attempt to impose preconceptions and dogmas on our true understanding of that force.

[Moira]

I don't know about a war, but it is certainly turning into a long thread! MsMittens the comment you quoted wasn't mine, was that what you were begging to differ from?

I don't really think I can add to what I've said - I've stated my beliefs and my viewpoint, there isn't much point in repeating it, but it's interesting to hear other takes on this horizons story!

[ShagDevil]

What always bothered me was how God went from a sadistic s.o.b. in the OT to a loving, caring, lovey dovey God in the NT. If God is perfect, I assume it wouldn't need to change. To me, this hints at a severe difference in the bias of the people who wrote it, which takes away from the Bible's credibility (IMO).
Then you've got the Great Flood vs. Gilgamesh. The "Is Jesus God?" debate, unfullfilled prophecies...sigh. If I were God, I wouldn't have left so much room for interpretation. In fact, my first act as God would be to destroy the Bible.

If God can't even use its divine intervention to make sure a book is written so that there is no doubt of its existence, I have a hard time believing it had the prowess to create the entire galaxy.

[Negative]

I tend to stay out of threads like this one (although I didn't use to ), but this one caught my attention:

Because everything we know from the bible about God would suggest that he is a kind and loving God.

Anyone saying that obviously hasn't really read the Old Testament. "Kind and loving"? Sadistic, sexist, bigoted, mean, jealous... that's what I call it.

Beating children with a rod when they get out of line, killing children when they talk back, stoning people to death for working on the sabbath, being free to sell your daughter into sexual slavery... the Old Testament is full of examples that don't suggest a "kind and loving" god. Before you say that you were talking about the New Testament only, read Matthew 5:18-19, where Jesus endorses the Old Testament.

As for it being god's word: does the tenth commandment (I bet you all have to look up what it says ) really suggest an all-powerful and all-knowing entity? "He" personally wrote the ten commandments, and that's all he can come up with? Wouldn't you think they'd turn out to be the greatest lines ever written? Kazachstan's constitution is better than that...

The bible sucks as a moral guide, it sucks as a scientific guide, it sucks as a historical guide... it does keep on proving its use as a means to torture, oppress, enslave, insult, injure, and kill other human beings.

I don't like people recommending books when I didn't ask for it, but I would really like to recommend Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion. If your faith is strong, you shouldn't have a problem with reading such a book - if nothing else, you might actually learn something (it nicely and clearly explains, for example, the misconceptions most religious people have about evolution). The answer to your original question, albeit in a different form, is covered as well.

http://richarddawkins.net/godDelusion

[Moira]

In fact, a lot of the OT is symbolic, not to be taken literally. It's all basically leading up to the crucifixion and stories of sacrifices etc are symbolic entries - notice as you point out how the importance of sacrifice is gone in the NT.

[MrLinus]

I don't know about a war, but it is certainly turning into a long thread! MsMittens the comment you quoted wasn't mine, was that what you were begging to differ from?

I know it wasn't yours. I was trying to point out that a quote you attributed to me is actually Dalek's. It is important, if you are going to have a discussion, to keep track of who you are attributing statements from.

What always bothered me was how God went from a sadistic s.o.b. in the OT to a loving, caring, lovey dovey God in the NT. If God is perfect, I assume it wouldn't need to change.

Why does God have to be perfect? Is it possible that the horizons story may, in fact,be indicative of the fallibility of God?