PDA

View Full Version : Why do you/don't you believe in the existence of God?


OUT!
Nov 10th, 2004, 06:54 PM
I don't like people who sit on the fence on this issue. :p :)
*EDIT* Willow has made me seen the error of my ways :lol: :o

QuicKyMonSter
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:02 PM
i'm not sure if i do...i should but i dont know, u know, its kinda weird...anyway, thats my anwer:p

*abby*
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:03 PM
i do because i have felt god in my life

QuicKyMonSter
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:04 PM
i do because i have felt god in my life

i'm too young to tell....i haven't felt him, yet... :(

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:05 PM
I don't like people who sit on the fence on this issue. :p :)

Sitting on the fence is the only rational position on this issue. Are you saying you don't like rational people?

Barrie_Dude
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:06 PM
I have to go with Abby on this one. And, despite an occasional problem with organized religon, it is the one thing that I have never doubted

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:06 PM
Anyway, I'm a moral realist, and moral realism implies god. So I tend to.

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:12 PM
The most rational option is to not believe in God, as the concept is absurd.

That is not correct. The apparent absurdity of a concept, in the mind of a person who has little understanding of the arguments involved, has no bearing on the reasonability of a belief in the mind of a person who does. :)

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:14 PM
Or something.

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:21 PM
Moral realism is not an absurd concept, it is supported by intuition and reason. :)

Hulet
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:32 PM
I believe in God in the strictest sense of the word that implies "God=creator". Something must have created this universe. Some would say Big Bang, others would say the collision of two universes, others would say the Christian God in six days, others Allah, Jehovah, etc. Whatever the name you gave this entity or event doesn't matter. This universe was created by something because something can't be created out of nothing. Since this universe is immensely complicated, you can assume the creator is atleast equally complicated.

Some might ask then who created this creator that created the universe. I am not capable to answer this question, nor is this question important to me, because the only thing I am interested on is on whether or not something created this universe.

That is as far as my flimsy certainity extends - a creator, which most probably is/was complicated more than I am now, created this universe and I choose to call this creator God. That doesn't mean though that I believe this God has a personality or is currently all-powerful to alter its creation.

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:38 PM
Interesting, but I commented on "God".

And I have already commented that moral realism implies god. :)

I Love Sharapova
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:49 PM
I have had mystical experiences which have convinced me that there is a creative force throughout the universe.It takes a pretty simple minded person in my opinion to think that all of this was an accident. There has got to be some force,call it God,Universal Spirit,Nature,whatever,but it is there nonetheless.

Kart
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:51 PM
Because I can.

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:52 PM
Moral realism suggests a separate order of reality for morals to exist in, since they obviously don't exist in the material world. This instantly makes the idea of 'god' less 'absurd'. And it could be argued that for morals to exist, there would need to be some kind of intelligence to know them. But that intelligence can't be us, because we are all individuals, and for morals to depend on us would imply subjectivity.

I don't think I explained that very well. :)

nash
Nov 10th, 2004, 07:59 PM
I'm with Abby, too. I know God is real because I've felt His presence in my life.

Crazy Canuck
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:01 PM
It takes a pretty simple minded person in my opinion to think that all of this was an accident.

I think that's a very simple minded way to look at those who don't think the same way that you do :)

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:01 PM
I find your idea of morality equally absurd as the concept of "God". :)

That's OK. I find subjectivism absurd, so we're even. At least I've got Kant on my side. :angel:

:)

Paldias
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:05 PM
I don't believe in god (no Capital biatches) because firstly I don't believe that someone can do what everyone claims he can do. Besides scientific evidence has revealed that earth may have been created by dark-matter merging with something (not really sure). What I also hate is when people thank god for letting them have this experience, I feel that it's not god who got you to where you are it's you.

Helen Lawson
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:08 PM
I converted to Catholicism for Floyd and after he died, my religion and beliefs really helped me through several years of mourning and pain and I feel Jesus' presence often.

I had "I am the resurrection and the life." inscribed on our joint plot.

OUT!
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:11 PM
Sitting on the fence is the only rational position on this issue. Are you saying you don't like rational people?No I am not saying that. I just feel it's a boring response to say "may'be, may'be not."

Helen Lawson
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:13 PM
Plus, even though I converted in 1957 or so, let's face it, I'm 86 now, I really need to believe in souls and stuff, because if not, I'm pretty close to being screwed.

OUT!
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:15 PM
I'm with Abby, too. I know God is real because I've felt His presence in my life.What God is this?

Fingon
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:23 PM
I believe in God in the strictest sense of the word that implies "God=creator". Something must have created this universe. Some would say Big Bang, others would say the collision of two universes, others would say the Christian God in six days, others Allah, Jehovah, etc. Whatever the name you gave this entity or event doesn't matter. This universe was created by something because something can't be created out of nothing. Since this universe is immensely complicated, you can assume the creator is atleast equally complicated.
you know, that's where the logic about the supposed rational proofs of the existence of god, or a creator fail.
It is a failed logic but I don't blame you because it's very easy to fall for it.
if you say A = B and B = C then A = C, that's pretty clear (although it can be argued but let's leave it for another time).
However is you say A is an orange
B = 0
B is an orange, that's not necessarily true, it's true IF A is really an orange, but you are not proving it, you are just affirming it
The same happened here, everything has to come from somewhere, everything has to have an origin, a beginning, under that premise yes, you can say that necessarily there was a creator, not necessarily the way religions describe it but a creator neverless.
The problem is, what if the original presumtion is not right? why there MUST be a beginning?
why things have to come from somewhere?, couldn't it be a continous cycle?
Yes I know, it's difficult to accept, but because our minds can't abstract it it doesn't mean it's not true.
The same reasoning can be applied to the creator, if the creator created the original drop that originated the big ban and the universe? then who created the creator? I mean, if you can't admit that the universe (in whatever form) was always there and had to be created, why to have a different criteria with the creator? after of it's an entity, exists, then it must come from somewhere, somebody or something must have created it. Then you go to a vicious circle, there is no absolute origin, we can't explain it but it doesn't prove anything, it only proves that our minds are limited.


Some might ask then who created this creator that created the universe. I am not capable to answer this question, nor is this question important to me, because the only thing I am interested on is on whether or not something created this universe.
I see you answered my question :), but if you reason that way, you must answer that question, because it you can't then it invalidates the whole argument.
You are choosing to stop a one point, that point is arbitrary, let's say it's the original drop that gave origin to the Universe, why then? why not before, or after? it's completely arbitrary and then, there is a whole lot you don't know and you can attribute whatever explanation you want to it but it will only be especulation, or an intend to fill the void.
We don't even know for sure the big bang really happened, it's a well sustained theory but nobody has seen it, it's a mathematical model.


That is as far as my flimsy certainity extends - a creator, which most probably is/was complicated more than I am now, created this universe and I choose to call this creator God. That doesn't mean though that I believe this God has a personality or is currently all-powerful to alter its creation.again, you are abitrarily setting up a starting point, it's believe the sun and solar system were created from a nebulose that started to spin and condensed, something started that process and scientist believe it was a supernova, one could call that supernova "God" but the question would be, where the Supernova came from?, you would go back and back until the big bang, and then you ask, where the original drop came from and you say from God.
then I ask where God came from and you stop there, and I say why? why not to stop when the supernova exploided?
The answer might be discouraging for some, but it's that scientist might be able to explain where the original drop came from, but then you will have another "thing" whose origin you don't know, we will never know the whole story, it's simply not possible, we may know more, and more, and more, but we will never have all the answers and that's a fact.

OUT!
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:27 PM
I have had mystical experiences which have convinced me that there is a creative force throughout the universe.It takes a pretty simple minded person in my opinion to think that all of this was an accident. There has got to be some force,call it God,Universal Spirit,Nature,whatever,but it is there nonetheless.So there is salvation through this universal God? Is that God to be found in the Christian version or the Islamic version or in the numerous other versions? Would it not be scary if a Christian believed that he or she is worshipping God when in actual fact, "God" is Allah or Vishnu etc. and they are not actually "saved"? :eek: It's a big gamble to believe in God.

tfannis
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:37 PM
I don't believe in a God, there's absolutely no religion involved in my live. And that's simply because I don't see why I should. I could believe in the big pink dragon my little niece thought she saw underneath her bed, but I don't see why I should believe that either. It all looks pretty absurd to me, but I don't care what people believe, as long as noone imposes his/her religion upon me.

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:39 PM
again, you are abitrarily setting up a starting point, it's believe the sun and solar system were created from a nebulose that started to spin and condensed, something started that process and scientist believe it was a supernova, one could call that supernova "God" but the question would be, where the Supernova came from?, you would go back and back until the big bang, and then you ask, where the original drop came from and you say from God.
then I ask where God came from and you stop there, and I say why? why not to stop when the supernova exploided?

Causality is a function of a temporal universe so he is entitled to 'stop there'. The cause of the universe would not need to be caused. However, his own logic is flawed because although the universe appears to be causal on a superficial level, we know from quantum science that it isn't on a macrothingumajiggery level. It's entirely possible that the universe has no cause, nor even a beginning.

There are no rational arguments that prove gods existence, and I don't know of anyone who claims there is, but there are also no rational arguments that prove god does not exist. That fact seems to be less widely known or acknowledged.

:)

OUT!
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:42 PM
The answer might be discouraging for some, but it's that scientist might be able to explain where the original drop came from, but then you will have another "thing" whose origin you don't know, we will never know the whole story, it's simply not possible.That was a really interesting read but isn't it possible that the universe is the the one thing that exists or originates without cause. :confused:

Helen Lawson
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:44 PM
I'm not trying to judge anyone or anything, but I can't believe the number of people who don't believe. I mean, what if you're wrong and you're missing out on eternal life and salvation? :sad: That's a big gamble, though I have felt who I feel is Jesus in my life so I guess it's easier for me to believe, but I think that's a real hard gamble.
I mean, my life has had its extreme lows (childhood of extreme poverty in Brooklyn, Floyd's death) and extreme highs (the twins, my Oscar victory, big crazy Hollywood money). It's better than not living at all and I don't want it to end at 86.
I don't think our greater Being is hung up on demoninations as long as you believe in Him somehow and His existence. I mean, let's face, I was born in Brooklyn, I'm not into Buhhda or whomever and someone born in Iran isn't going to be into Jesus, that just how it is. That's not what most Christians think, but that's what Helen Lawson thinks.

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:45 PM
There is: the concept doesn't make sense, is absurb, so odds are, it doesn't exist, even if we can't prove it for sure.

We don't have any rational proof that there are no pink elephant who speak fluent chinese flying in the sky on another galaxy, but in a rational point of view, the idea makes very little sense.

The concept does make sense, if you think about it in the right way. :)

tfannis
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:48 PM
There is one: the concept doesn't make sense, is absurb, so odds are, it doesn't exist, even if we can't prove it for sure.

We don't have any rational proof that there are no pink elephant who speak fluent chinese flying in the sky on another galaxy, but in a rational point of view, the idea makes very little sense. So we can make conclusion basing on common sense, even if we're not 100% or 90% sure.
Well my little niece claims she did see a pink dragon underneath her bed, so maybe that pink elephant of yours and her dragon are related ;)

OUT!
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:49 PM
So there is salvation through this universal God?What I meant here is that since the Gods of these various religions differ widely in their characteristics, I think that only one of these religions, or indeed none, can be right about God.

Helen Lawson
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:51 PM
What I meant here is that since the Gods of these various religions differ widely in their characteristics, I think that only one of these religions, or indeed none, can be right about God.
See, I completely disagree. They seem to differ widely, but only because humans have twisted the messages around for like thousands and ten of thousands of years.

Steff_forever
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:52 PM
No, never believed in God or will ever believe in a higher force that rules our life. I'm a scientist of nature and I've learned that before the development of mankind nature did her way by herself and nothing created the system out of nothing. There will always be an answer on a question we still havn't asked. But there's nothing behind a dark curtain that rules our lives, there are only answers we have to find out.

Nature is the highest and only standard in my life. And mankind is only a glimpse in the history of our planet ...

OUT!
Nov 10th, 2004, 08:55 PM
See, I completely disagree. They seem to differ widely, but only because humans have twisted the messages around for like thousands and ten of thousands of years.So which religion has a "real" relationship with God? All, or some, or just your one if you are religious?:confused: :scratch:

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 09:02 PM
So which religion has a "real" relationship with God? All, or some, or just your one if you are religious?:confused: :scratch:

Religions are just statements people have made about god. Religions are caused by belief in god, rather than vice versa, so the fact religions differ in the statements they make about god doesn't really prove god doesn't exist.

To be religious is to believe in statements people have made about god, rather than to believe in god.

tfannis
Nov 10th, 2004, 09:02 PM
No, never believed in God or will ever believe in a higher force that rules our live. I'm a scientist of nature and I've learned that before the development of mankind nature did her way by herself and nothing created the system out of nothing. There will always be an answer we still havn't asked. But there's nothing behind a dark curtain that rules our lives, there are only answers we have to find out.

Nature is the highest and only standard in my life.
I agree :) I'm a biologist and really, nature and science based on it make just too much sense ;)

Helen Lawson
Nov 10th, 2004, 09:06 PM
So which religion has a "real" relationship with God? All, or some, or just your one if you are religious?:confused: :scratch:
I think they all do.

Hulet
Nov 10th, 2004, 09:47 PM
you know, that's where the logic about the supposed rational proofs of the existence of god, or a creator fail.
It is a failed logic but I don't blame you because it's very easy to fall for it.
if you say A = B and B = C then A = C, that's pretty clear (although it can be argued but let's leave it for another time).
However is you say A is an orange
B = 0
B is an orange, that's not necessarily true, it's true IF A is really an orange, but you are not proving it, you are just affirming it
The same happened here, everything has to come from somewhere, everything has to have an origin, a beginning, under that premise yes, you can say that necessarily there was a creator, not necessarily the way religions describe it but a creator neverless.
The problem is, what if the original presumtion is not right? why there MUST be a beginning?
why things have to come from somewhere?, couldn't it be a continous cycle?
Yes I know, it's difficult to accept, but because our minds can't abstract it it doesn't mean it's not true.
The same reasoning can be applied to the creator, if the creator created the original drop that originated the big ban and the universe? then who created the creator? I mean, if you can't admit that the universe (in whatever form) was always there and had to be created, why to have a different criteria with the creator? after of it's an entity, exists, then it must come from somewhere, somebody or something must have created it. Then you go to a vicious circle, there is no absolute origin, we can't explain it but it doesn't prove anything, it only proves that our minds are limited.

I see you answered my question :), but if you reason that way, you must answer that question, because it you can't then it invalidates the whole argument.
You are choosing to stop a one point, that point is arbitrary, let's say it's the original drop that gave origin to the Universe, why then? why not before, or after? it's completely arbitrary and then, there is a whole lot you don't know and you can attribute whatever explanation you want to it but it will only be especulation, or an intend to fill the void.
We don't even know for sure the big bang really happened, it's a well sustained theory but nobody has seen it, it's a mathematical model.

again, you are abitrarily setting up a starting point, it's believe the sun and solar system were created from a nebulose that started to spin and condensed, something started that process and scientist believe it was a supernova, one could call that supernova "God" but the question would be, where the Supernova came from?, you would go back and back until the big bang, and then you ask, where the original drop came from and you say from God.
then I ask where God came from and you stop there, and I say why? why not to stop when the supernova exploided?
The answer might be discouraging for some, but it's that scientist might be able to explain where the original drop came from, but then you will have another "thing" whose origin you don't know, we will never know the whole story, it's simply not possible, we may know more, and more, and more, but we will never have all the answers and that's a fact.
You are asking questions which I didn't want to get involved in :) , because, to be honest, I don't have a well formulated and thought out or articulable answers for them. That doesn't mean I didn't ask those questions myself, just that I postponed thinking them through. Anyways, here are my answers which are obviously full of holes and not satisfactory:
Why stop at finding the creator of the "Universe" and assigning it the label of God?
-It is my belief that it is not that important identifying who/what God really is: that is it doesn't matter whether it is the event/thing that created this planet or this galaxy. What is important is the question of its existence: is there such a creator or not? Or atleast the question that interest me is this question, not pin pointing what God looks like or what its accomplishments/creations are. But, it is obvious, atleast to me, that the creator of this planet is the same as the creator of this solar system, which is the same as the creator of this galaxy, so on, until the last thing I imagine is the creator of the universe or multiverses. That is as far as my imagination stretches. So, when I encounter this final entity, which encompasses everything knowable and beyond which my mind couldn't apprehend anything, I ask the question whether this entity is created or just came to be. Then my answer would be whatever I replied in the previous message.

I know that is not a clear description. But, that is as far as I can articulate it. I guess a better way of stating my belief would be that "the fact that there is a creator can't be contested, only the question of what was the original creation of this creator."

As to the question of why there must be beginning, well I can't imagine anything not having one. I mean even if all the events in the universe or even the universe itself said to be going through a cycle, there must be something that started it all, that gave it that push to go round and round. As you say, it is much easier to imagine a cycle that starts at somewhere rather than a cycle with no beginning and end. Yes, the fact that I can't imagine the latter doesn't mean it is not possible but , i don't know, it seems a less probable picture of reality than the former.

beauty_is_pink
Nov 10th, 2004, 10:13 PM
it's jus hard to believe someone can "heal" someone.. and raise from the dead.

tho i go to a catholic high school and all...

bionic71
Nov 10th, 2004, 10:26 PM
Why do I not believe in the existence of an all mighty god?

Because I am content in the notion that we do not need to explain everything that occurs in the our natural world and the universe beyond it.
The existence of a god as a creator is a beautiful metaphor that should not be taken literally.

I also have no illusions about the supposed importance of humans as a species....

Enough said, as this discussion will inevitably go round and round in circles.

For me....It is a belief system that offers me no comfort whatsoever as it is too narrow, idealistic and simplistic.

nash
Nov 10th, 2004, 10:48 PM
What God is this?
I believe there is only One God, composed of three distinct persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). The God who came to earth in the form of a servant, Jesus, and died for my sins on the cross. The God who is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. The God who is coming back to take those that love him to an eternal paradise called Heaven. That's my God...

Dahveed
Nov 10th, 2004, 11:08 PM
I don't believe in God but it's more i don't care if there's a God or not like Bagel said earlier. It won't change anything in my life, i won't feel any better knowing there's a God out there willing to help me in my everyday life. I find this idea very simplistic and way too passive, my actions make my life and i cannot allow myself to rely on any imaginary spiritual force and just sit there and wait.

Oh and :) too.

I Love Sharapova
Nov 10th, 2004, 11:35 PM
So there is salvation through this universal God? Is that God to be found in the Christian version or the Islamic version or in the numerous other versions? Would it not be scary if a Christian believed that he or she is worshipping God when in actual fact, "God" is Allah or Vishnu etc. and they are not actually "saved"? :eek: It's a big gamble to believe in God.
It's a much bigger one not to believe.If I believe and there is no such thing then nothing is lost,but if I don't believe and there is a God then Lord help me. :eek:

I Love Sharapova
Nov 10th, 2004, 11:38 PM
See, I completely disagree. They seem to differ widely, but only because humans have twisted the messages around for like thousands and ten of thousands of years.
Precisely,Helen

Martian Willow
Nov 10th, 2004, 11:41 PM
It's a much bigger one not to believe.If I believe and there is no such thing then nothing is lost,but if I don't believe and there is a God then Lord help me. :eek:

But you don't believe in Allah or Vishnu or... :)

bionic71
Nov 10th, 2004, 11:43 PM
It's a much bigger one not to believe.If I believe and there is no such thing then nothing is lost,but if I don't believe and there is a God then Lord help me. :eek:
One would expect the almighty, merciless and compassionate god to be forgiving of such non-believers anyway.:)

Knizzle
Nov 10th, 2004, 11:54 PM
One would expect the almighty, merciless and compassionate god to be forgiving of such non-believers anyway.:)
He is, more than you know apparently.

bionic71
Nov 10th, 2004, 11:58 PM
He is, more than you know apparently.
Which is of great comfort to many I suspect:) .

Steff_forever
Nov 11th, 2004, 12:12 AM
I guess that all who believe in God just think there's something after one's own life.
I dunno. But I take this one for the only. After my death all that remains is dust. If I'm lucky I become a fossil.
Maybe some of my atoms will become part of any live on earth again ! ;)

Fingon
Nov 11th, 2004, 12:12 AM
You are asking questions which I didn't want to get involved in :) , because, to be honest, I don't have a well formulated and thought out or articulable answers for them.
there are not articulate answers to that :)

That doesn't mean I didn't ask those questions myself, just that I postponed thinking them through. Anyways, here are my answers which are obviously full of holes and not satisfactory:
Why stop at finding the creator of the "Universe" and assigning it the label of God?
-It is my belief that it is not that important identifying who/what God really is: that is it doesn't matter whether it is the event/thing that created this planet or this galaxy. What is important is the question of its existence: is there such a creator or not? Or atleast the question that interest me is this question, not pin pointing what God looks like or what its accomplishments/creations are. But, it is obvious, atleast to me, that the creator of this planet is the same as the creator of this solar system, which is the same as the creator of this galaxy, so on, until the last thing I imagine is the creator of the universe or multiverses. That is as far as my imagination stretches.

that's the key word, imagination, you can't possibly reason that, you can imagine it, but can't reason it.

So, when I encounter this final entity, which encompasses everything knowable and beyond which my mind couldn't apprehend anything, I ask the question whether this entity is created or just came to be. Then my answer would be whatever I replied in the previous message.

that's a very deep phylosophical question that really gets into gray areas, I don't think there is an answer.

I know that is not a clear description. But, that is as far as I can articulate it. I guess a better way of stating my belief would be that "the fact that there is a creator can't be contested, only the question of what was the original creation of this creator."
I accept that, but you have to agree that you can only affirm that as a matter of faith, which is fine, what is wrong is when some people pretend the convince you that's a result of a logical and scientific thinking.

As to the question of why there must be beginning, well I can't imagine anything not having one.
see the contradiction? you can't imagine anything not having one?, well, that beginning, by definition would be something not having one, wouldn't it?

I mean even if all the events in the universe or even the universe itself said to be going through a cycle, there must be something that started it all, that gave it that push to go round and round.
not necessarily, the thought of things existing for ever (in whatever form) is hard to accept, but it's the only possible conclusion, because even if you accept that there is an starting point, well, if that starting point (call it god if you want) wasn't created, then it was there for ever. there is no other explanation, either someone (something) put it there, or it was always there. If it was god, then god was always there, and who created him? nobody? when, god has always been there, you have an exception to the rule, then why not other exceptions?, you can get crazy if keep thinking of it.

As you say, it is much easier to imagine a cycle that starts at somewhere rather than a cycle with no beginning and end.
easier doesn't mean more accurate

Yes, the fact that I can't imagine the latter doesn't mean it is not possible but , i don't know, it seems a less probable picture of reality than the former.
you have to understand that there are things that are simply impossible, not a matter of knowledge of technology, they simply don't happen. Light travelling at light speed, it's simply not possible.

And modern physics has a say on all of that, one of the things Einstein demonstrated is that there isn't spontaneous creation or destruction, just changes of state.

I've thought this through, and I really think the only logical explanation is that there isn't a beginning or an end, there is a constant evolution, of course, the world we know will come to an end some day, but something else will replace it, and it wasn't like it is today 15 billion years ago, but it was something that evolved.

As I said, at this point you either believe or don't believe. and I am ok with people believing, but I am not ok with them trying to make it look like it's a product or reason, not faith.

I Love Sharapova
Nov 11th, 2004, 01:00 AM
One would expect the almighty, merciless and compassionate god to be forgiving of such non-believers anyway.:)
True,God is very forgiving. I don't believe in a hell per se. I think we willbe held accountable but not through hell fire. I'm just saying why risk it through unbelief? The bible says: "The fool says in his heart that there is no God." I believe it. God is very present. Look at the cosmos.Can any intelligent mind truly say that it was an accident? I don't think so.
Hell,many of your scientists are even admitting that there seems to be a "creative" force in the universe. To me, this so-called "force" is God.
I don't think,contrary to popular belief, that science is trying to disprove the existence of God. If anything,science is trying to prove that there is more than what we see, and science will prove it eventually.
Religion and science do not differ as much as some would have us believe. Physics has made giant strides in the direction of spirituality. There is certainly a creative force in the universe,which we call God.

bionic71
Nov 11th, 2004, 01:39 AM
There is certainly a creative force in the universe,which we call God.
"we"... ?

I refer to it as an evolutionary process, a continuam...not a god or a god....:)
I feel no "risk" as you put it because I have no faith in the existence of a this god. Humankind created the existence of gods/god like forms (and the religious belief systems they occupy) in an attempt to make sense of the world around them. The notion of a god/god like form is present in almost every ancient culture we have managed to unearth.Many people forget that the notion of a god (in religious terms) is a methaphoric representation and not a literal one...

I see no need to define the world I occupy and my place within it as being the work of such a god.

As I have always said..if the notion of an all mighty god offers a person peace of mind and the suppossed answers they seek, then that is great...however the belief system they adhere to should not be imposed on others who operate outside it or have a totally different interpretation or belief structure. This is where the danger lies..individual gods, religions and interpreations being imposed as the correct god, the righteous god the "truth".

I Love Sharapova
Nov 11th, 2004, 01:50 AM
"we"... ?

I refer to it as an evolutionary process, a continuam...not a god or a god....:)
I feel no "risk" as you put it because I have no faith in the existence of a this god. Humankind created the existence of gods/god like forms (and the religious belief systems they occupy) in an attempt to make sense of the world around them. The notion of a god/god like form is present in almost every ancient culture we have managed to unearth.Many people forget that the notion of a god (in religious terms) is a methaphoric representation and not a literal one...

I see no need to define the world I occupy and my place within it as being the work of such a god.

As I have always said..if the notion of an all mighty god offers a person peace of mind and the suppossed answers they seek, then that is great...however the belief system they adhere to should not be imposed on others who operate outside it or have a totally different interpretation or belief structure. This is where the danger lies..individual gods, religions and interpreations being imposed as the correct god, the righteous god the "truth".
*Coughs and clears throat.*

I Love Sharapova
Nov 11th, 2004, 01:55 AM
I think that's a very simple minded way to look at those who don't think the same way that you do :)
Really? :drink: :scratch: :scratch:

Martian Willow
Nov 11th, 2004, 02:07 AM
I think it's rather sad that so many people think the debate about god is solely a debate about the origin of the universe, which is in my view a fairly pointless one, when it ought to be about the origin of ethics, which seems to me to be more practical and relevant subject on a day to day basis. I think it's because most people know fuck all about anything. :)

Circe
Nov 11th, 2004, 02:16 AM
i can honestly say i have felt God as well.

to be more accurate, since i am talking about Zeus here, i should say he felt me . this was when i attended the marraige of Hepheastus and Aphrodite waaay back then.

as for the creation of the universe its all been explained. Uranus, Gaea, all that stuff.

Fingon
Nov 11th, 2004, 04:28 AM
i can honestly say i have felt God as well.

to be more accurate, since i am talking about Zeus here, i should say he felt me . this was when i attended the marraige of Hepheastus and Aphrodite waaay back then.

as for the creation of the universe its all been explained. Uranus, Gaea, all that stuff.
the funny part is that this theory makes as much sense as the christian theory, but this one is a legend, nearly a fairy tale and the other is considered the wholly truth.:lol:

jelena4me
Nov 11th, 2004, 05:23 AM
I think it's rather sad that so many people think the debate about god is solely a debate about the origin of the universe, which is in my view a fairly pointless one, when it ought to be about the origin of ethics, which seems to me to be more practical and relevant subject on a day to day basis. I think it's because most people know fuck all about anything. :)
The reason they do that is because ethics is an entirely man-made concept, whereas the origin of the universe is possibly to do with some sort of higher force.

I believe that the "universe" is far greater and wondrous than any human can imagine. Sorry but I sit on the fence on this one and admit I have no idea whether a god or gods or greater force is responsible for the universe.

What I do know is that the mythology spouted by the major religions (or at least their interpretation of it) is at least 85% a load of cobblers.

Hachiko
Nov 11th, 2004, 06:01 AM
Because he is so great.
His power and authority over me is something that makes me feel safer.
I know I can talk to him anytime and I think thats really great.

Fingon
Nov 11th, 2004, 06:06 AM
Why assuming "God" necessary has something to do with ethic? Maybe "God" couldn't care less about moral.
don't steal the credit :D , it was Aristotles who said that, one of the contradictions of religions, if God is perfect and almighty, then he really couldn't care less about morals or love.

Sam L
Nov 11th, 2004, 06:50 AM
No, never believed in God or will ever believe in a higher force that rules our life. I'm a scientist of nature and I've learned that before the development of mankind nature did her way by herself and nothing created the system out of nothing. There will always be an answer on a question we still havn't asked. But there's nothing behind a dark curtain that rules our lives, there are only answers we have to find out.

Nature is the highest and only standard in my life. And mankind is only a glimpse in the history of our planet ...
I agree with this. Although I don't think 'nature' is an entity as such.

Sam L
Nov 11th, 2004, 06:55 AM
As I said, at this point you either believe or don't believe. and I am ok with people believing, but I am not ok with them trying to make it look like it's a product or reason, not faith.
Great choice of words. I'll use that from now on too. I'm fine with faith as long as those people don't use it as proven facts.

Sam L
Nov 11th, 2004, 07:04 AM
The answer might be discouraging for some, but it's that scientist might be able to explain where the original drop came from, but then you will have another "thing" whose origin you don't know, we will never know the whole story, it's simply not possible, we may know more, and more, and more, but we will never have all the answers and that's a fact. Origins. I've always believed since I was young that time and the universe has no beginning and no end. Basically that time and space are infinite. I'm talking about of the vacuum of space. However, matter maybe finite, in fact, most probably is. I mean we have the concept of infinity in maths, so why not?

Why have I always believed it as a child? I don't know call it faith because I have no proof.

But recently I read an article that talked about how increasingly, the idea of time have no beginning, is starting to be accepted.

I was relieved. Phew, I'm not some weirdo off in some fantasy world.

Also, another question I'm interested in is. What is life?

Sam L
Nov 11th, 2004, 07:06 AM
the funny part is that this theory makes as much sense as the christian theory, but this one is a legend, nearly a fairy tale and the other is considered the wholly truth.:lol:
Trust me, the Christian one will be mythology in the future too. :)

Brαm
Nov 11th, 2004, 07:53 AM
There is no proof. So I don't believe there is something like "God" :tape:

Hulet
Nov 11th, 2004, 10:16 AM
there are not articulate answers to that :)

that's the key word, imagination, you can't possibly reason that, you can imagine it, but can't reason it.

I believe I started my original message with the words "I believe". So, it implies there is some leap in faith involved in forming my idea about God. And, where there is a leap, there is no telling where you land, just where you start. To put it in other words, I have some ideas about this world which I think are true and from these ideas I drew my assumptions which led me to God, the creator. I can't prove these original ideas with reason, because they are unprovable. For example, I can't prove my assumption that "Something can't come out of nothing." Yes, in this universe, one could may be use the "Law of Conservation of Mass and Energy" to prove it. But, what my assumption deals with something beyond the realm of this universe. May be something can come out of nothing there. Don't know. But, intuition tells me this might not be possible. Similarly, I can't prove my only other assumption that "If an entity created something, then that entity is atleast as complicated as its creation."


that's a very deep phylosophical question that really gets into gray areas, I don't think there is an answer.
I accept that, but you have to agree that you can only affirm that as a matter of faith, which is fine, what is wrong is when some people pretend the convince you that's a result of a logical and scientific thinking.

I agree that this topic is beyond scientific thinking. Science deals with observable phenomena and this is beyond its area of field. However, I kind of disagree about logic. What is logical conclusion really? isn't it something you derive using some unprovable axioms through laws of logic? So, logic also implies some original assumptions/axioms that one can't prove; for example, in geometry, I don't think anyone can guarantee to the certainity of the Euculidian postulates. Similarly, as I stated above, I can't guarantee/prove my assumptions given above, but I can logically deduce from my only two assumptions the existence of a creator God.

see the contradiction? you can't imagine anything not having one?, well, that beginning, by definition would be something not having one, wouldn't it?

This is actually a very good point. But, it has nothing to do with my questions. As I stated before, my query stops at the creation of the last entity that I can imagine that can encompass everything. This entity, which the Earth, the milkway, the universe and I are part of, is something. So it must not come from nothing by my assumption. Hence, there must be a something that started it all. Could there be a starter to this starter/creator of this universe? Possibly. But, I am not interested in that starter. I am quite satisfied with the realization that all this is created and didn't just land out of no where.

not necessarily, the thought of things existing for ever (in whatever form) is hard to accept, but it's the only possible conclusion, because even if you accept that there is an starting point, well, if that starting point (call it god if you want) wasn't created, then it was there for ever. there is no other explanation, either someone (something) put it there, or it was always there. If it was god, then god was always there, and who created him? nobody? when, god has always been there, you have an exception to the rule, then why not other exceptions?, you can get crazy if keep thinking of it.
easier doesn't mean more accurate

you have to understand that there are things that are simply impossible, not a matter of knowledge of technology, they simply don't happen. Light travelling at light speed, it's simply not possible.

And modern physics has a say on all of that, one of the things Einstein demonstrated is that there isn't spontaneous creation or destruction, just changes of state.

I've thought this through, and I really think the only logical explanation is that there isn't a beginning or an end, there is a constant evolution, of course, the world we know will come to an end some day, but something else will replace it, and it wasn't like it is today 15 billion years ago, but it was something that evolved.

As I said, at this point you either believe or don't believe. and I am ok with people believing, but I am not ok with them trying to make it look like it's a product or reason, not faith.
A couple of points about this last part of your message, especially about your assumption about there not being a beginning or an end.
1) This assumption seems to me to lead to the implication that time is infinite. It stretches backwards and forwards to infinity. If that is actually your assumption, then you have to consider the possibility that this particular moment, when I am typing this message or the moment you read this extremely long sentence, not existing at all. Because, if you think about it, infinite amount of time must have passed for this particular moment to occur. And, that seems impossible in reality except in purely logical reasoning. Because, even if you look at the creation of this universe in a Big Bang billions of years ago, there must have elapsed an infinite amount of time before this Big Bang occurs. You can consider an event trilion years before the Big Bang and, for that event too, an infinite amount of time must have passed for it to occur. So on and so forth. In fact, you can consider any given event in this type of world and still an infinite amount of time must have passed for it to occur. In this case, infinity implies impossibility in reality. Can you see the problem with this assumption?
2)Even if you insist in this worldview of no-beginning-and-no-end, that doesn't still go against my assumptions. This world you are insisting on is still something. As such, it can't just come out of nothing (you can't disprove this point in the same way that I can't prove it). Whatever makes it so lies beyond it, Hence, it doesn't belong in this world's cycle of infinite existence. So, it's not subject to its rule of no-beginning-and-no-end.

Sam L
Nov 11th, 2004, 10:34 AM
his assumption seems to me to lead to the implication that time is infinite. It stretches backwards and forwards to infinity. If that is actually your assumption, then you have to consider the possibility that this particular moment, when I am typing this message or the moment you read this extremely long sentence, not existing at all. Because, if you think about it, infinite amount of time must have passed for this particular moment to occur.
Sure. Why is it hard to imagine that infinite amount of time must've passed for the "now" to happen? Why does infinity imply impossibility?

Cassius
Nov 11th, 2004, 10:38 AM
I don't believe in god. Never have, and it's not likely that I ever will.
I resent some christians trying to ram their faith down my throat like it's proven fact (not all christians, but some).
I was at a wedding not long ago (my auntie finally got married), and I discovered that at the recption dinner I'd be sat next to the minister. I was not thrilled.
But he'd been told that I didn't believe and that I don't appreciate being told that I should, and he respected that, BUT another guy sat at the table seemed to want to do the minister's job and preceeded to give me a list of (he thought, irefutable) reasons why I should get on my knees and pray.
To cut a long story short I completely wasted his arguements by saying he should stop talking about his FAITH like it's proven fact, and the good minister lept in and said that guy is the type of person who gives christians a bad name.
That look on the guy's face was :haha::haha:

Anyway, I'm not really sure of the point of that story, so I'll stop here by saying:
Believe what you want to believe, and let others do the same.

Hulet
Nov 11th, 2004, 11:09 AM
Sure. Why is it hard to imagine that infinite amount of time must've passed for the "now" to happen? Why does infinity imply impossibility?
This is really hard to explain but I will try. Assume that event B happened before event A and we are concerned if the existence of event A is possible in a world of infinite time. For event B to happen an infinite amount of events first have to occur. Just take one particular event out of those events that occured before event B and which is as far back in time as possible and name it event C. But, for event C to happen there have to happen an infinite amount of events. Do a similar thing as before and get an event D which happened way way before event C. But, for event D to happen infinite amount of time must have passed. So on and so back. Non stop. An infinite loop of this iteration. So, if you think about it, event A never happens before countless and countless amount of events have to occur before it. That's why it seems impossible in reality to me.

Sam L
Nov 11th, 2004, 11:44 AM
This is really hard to explain but I will try. Assume that event B happened before event A and we are concerned if the existence of event A is possible in a world of infinite time. For event B to happen an infinite amount of events first have to occur. Just take one particular event out of those events that occured before event B and which is as far back in time as possible and name it event C. But, for event C to happen there have to happen an infinite amount of events. Do a similar thing as before and get an event D which happened way way before event C. But, for event D to happen infinite amount of time must have passed. So on and so back. Non stop. An infinite loop of this iteration. So, if you think about it, event A never happens before countless and countless amount of events have to occur before it. That's why it seems impossible in reality to me.
Look, don't worry about it.

Picture a number plane like in Maths.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

As I'm typing this, I'm at 0, I'm always at 0. Your last post is say -5. Tomorrow is +5. Your first post in this thread is say -50. When you were born, it was -1000000. The beginning of time? Can we put a number on it? No. Should we try? No.

That's how it helps me to picture it in my head.

I'm not saying you have to believe what I'm saying. But just think about it for awhile.

Also, I'll try and thinking about what you wrote? To be honest, it confused me, and I need to think about it again.

I think in these matters, discussion helps. I'm NOT trying to change your mind on anything, just remember that.

Martian Willow
Nov 11th, 2004, 01:49 PM
I think it's because most people know fuck all about anything. :)

I think I'm right. :D

Dirty Sanchez
Nov 11th, 2004, 02:53 PM
I don't believe in a god because it's pretty unbelievable that their is some powerful bloke looking down on what he's created from the clouds. I also think if there was a god he must be pretty fucked up or pretty lazy to just sit back and watch all the bad stuff that's happening in the world! If there was a god there would be more examples of his existence than there is, and that's my take on it all! :p :yeah:

alfajeffster
Nov 11th, 2004, 05:14 PM
Let's ask Marc Bolan (from the other side):

O God
High in your fields above earth
Come and be real for us
You with your mind
Oh yes you are
Beautifully fine

O Girl
Electric witch you are
Limp in society's ditch you are
Visually fine
Oh yes you are
But mentally dying

O boy
Just like a boat you are
Sunk but somehow you float you do
Mentally weak
Oh yes you are
But so much speak

jelena4me
Nov 12th, 2004, 08:28 AM
Marc Bolan ROFLMAO !!!!!!!!
Now there was someone definitely on something

"Sluggy"
Nov 12th, 2004, 09:36 AM
I believe in the existence of God. I dont think we are alone in the universe. I believe however, that God is not someone that we should be preoccupied with. Best to focus on making the world a nice place for all of us. Preoccupation and prayer can be futile in my opinion. I believe that what we have manage to achieve is remarkable. When we were just cavemen, the mammoths provided us with food, the tusks were used as shetlers and the hides as tents. oil from olives provided us with fire and heat etc etc. i dont think it was an accident, I believe God helped us out and gave us the essentials so that we could survive. He probably wanted some company, it must not be easy to be an omnipotent being with nobody to share the world worth. so he created Humans and the rest of the animals. I also believe in Evolution, But i think god set the whole system in motion. Again, fanatacism and religious extemists can do more harm than good. But this is what i believe.

vutt
Nov 12th, 2004, 09:53 AM
Nope, I don't! Even more. I belive persons with weak mind will search help from "higher power". I mean those who can handle life as it is.

gRaFiC
Nov 12th, 2004, 10:09 AM
I believe in science not god. I believe god is a man-made creation. I can understand how the notion of god probably came about. I think that for everything man did not understand or questioned gave rise to a god. God gave humans assurance and answers that science could not. For me seeing is believing and with science this is very much the case.

Also, if you think of all the other millions/billions of species that have inhabited the earth past and present why is it only humans believe in god? What purpose does it serve to have one species believe in a god?

Science, yes!

alfajeffster
Nov 12th, 2004, 11:42 AM
I believe in science not god. I believe god is a man-made creation. I can understand how the notion of god probably came about. I think that for everything man did not understand or questioned gave rise to a god. God gave humans assurance and answers that science could not. For me seeing is believing and with science this is very much the case.

Also, if you think of all the other millions/billions of species that have inhabited the earth past and present why is it only humans believe in god? What purpose does it serve to have one species believe in a god?

Science, yes!
If you accept the popular depictions of aliens which usually have two eyes, a mouth, sometimes a nose, and characteristics generally accepted as humanoid, what's to stop a different species from having an entirely unintelligible concept of god or religion that you and I cannot physically comprehend? An orchid is an alien life form with its own innate hierarchies and caste system.

Fingon
Nov 12th, 2004, 02:01 PM
I believe in science not god. I believe god is a man-made creation. I can understand how the notion of god probably came about. I think that for everything man did not understand or questioned gave rise to a god. God gave humans assurance and answers that science could not. For me seeing is believing and with science this is very much the case.

Also, if you think of all the other millions/billions of species that have inhabited the earth past and present why is it only humans believe in god? What purpose does it serve to have one species believe in a god?

Science, yes!
although I agree with you, I can't with the second paragraph.

As far as we know, there are not other intelligent species on Earth other than humans, at least intelligent as we understand it.

Some animals have various degrees of intelligence, but it's not clear to what level. We are not able to communicate with them (eg Dolphins) so we don't really know what they think. Sure we can tell a Dolphin to jump, but we can't have a conversation with them. All animal species seem concerned for survival, eating, not being eaten, reproduce and maybe have some fun, but we don't really know what "in their minds".

Steff_forever
Nov 12th, 2004, 02:13 PM
Perhaps we have had too much time to create a being cause we do not only care about survival. But survival is not a matter of a leading being from outside but of the own skills or the skills of a group. If mankind would have had only time to think of survival and reproduction maybe we wouldn't think of anything else ...


The critical moment for me is I want to find my way in life by myself and not to be leaded through it.

apoet29
Nov 12th, 2004, 02:28 PM
After reading this thread for the last two days, I think what bothers me the most is how many people have said that anyone who believes in God is a weak minded person. How anyone can come to that conclusion is beyond me, and what it demonstrates to me is an inherent lack of respect toward another person's right to make their own choices. I don't believe that having faith in a higher power somehow makes you a weaker person nor do I believe that having faith in science somehow shows that you are a rationale human being. I think the most important thing in life is to have faith in something. I've known people who sleepwalk through their lives without caring about anything. Those are the people that I pity. While I don't agree with the tenets of all faiths, I respect the fact that someone has those feelings. And although I don't believe that science has all the answers, I do respect those who put their faith in it.

What happened to the days of respecting another person's choices? Are they completely long gone?

Martian Willow
Nov 12th, 2004, 02:50 PM
Also, if you think of all the other millions/billions of species that have inhabited the earth past and present why is it only humans believe in god? What purpose does it serve to have one species believe in a god?

You don't think there is a difference between human beings and other animals? :)

Steff_forever
Nov 12th, 2004, 03:21 PM
Yes, other animals or even plants do not kill others just to get rid of them ...
And many who do just say their deeds are based on their believe in god. Somehow irrational for a being that claims to be the highest developed on earth, isn't it ?

Martian Willow
Nov 12th, 2004, 03:27 PM
Yes, other animals or even plants do not kill others just to get rid of them ...
And many who do just say their deeds are based on their believe in god. Somehow irrational for a being that claims to be the highest developed on earth, isn't it ?

And you consider that wrong? :)

alfajeffster
Nov 12th, 2004, 03:45 PM
And who is John Galt?

Steff_forever
Nov 12th, 2004, 04:28 PM
And you consider that wrong? :)
yes. Not only on the aspect of killing ...
Just see that there are transitions of gender to prevent the extinction of the own species. Nature allows what for many people is something anti-biblic.

and another e.g.
What do we know what dolphins say to each other when they're threatened ...
What do self-made chemicals say to anemones ?

Steff_forever
Nov 12th, 2004, 04:31 PM
Nature is much more complex than to reduce the comparison to brain, culture and religion

Sugiyama=#1
Nov 12th, 2004, 04:33 PM
Of course, otherwise how could the universe be created:).

Martian Willow
Nov 12th, 2004, 04:34 PM
yes. Not only on the aspect of killing ...
Just see that there are transitions of gender to prevent the extinction of the own species. Nature allows what for many people is something anti-biblic.

You're judging animals by a standard they are completely unaware of. Only humans can be immoral because only we know what morals are. :)

alfajeffster
Nov 12th, 2004, 05:49 PM
You're judging animals by a standard they are completely unaware of. Only humans can be immoral because only we know what morals are. :)
Does not a male Lion who devours the cubs of a rival pride of Lions sit in moral judgment of the life and liberty of the rival pride of Lions?

Vass22
Nov 12th, 2004, 05:58 PM
Yes, other animals or even plants do not kill others just to get rid of them ...

THey do actually. Generally people don't kill for no reason. They gain benifit from the murder. And we see that other animals also kill. Start with guerillas, continue with lions, and many other animals... Ofcourse there are sadistic humans, but I'd say sadism is not normal and is a defect...

apoet29
Nov 12th, 2004, 06:20 PM
You deplore the lack of respect some have for another person's choices, but you seem to have a condescending attitude yourself toward those who live their lives without caring about anything. :confused: Or maybe I didn't interpret correctly the fact that you pity certain people who are different than you.
DMB, I hate to say it but you misinterpret everything I say. I don't disrespect people who don't care about anything, I feel sorry for them. However, again, that is a choice they make and I do respect that.

As for people who are different from me, why would I pity them? If someone is different from me, I consider that a good thing since the world would be a boring place if everyone were alike.

Steff_forever
Nov 12th, 2004, 06:43 PM
THey do actually. Generally people don't kill for no reason. They gain benifit from the murder. And we see that other animals also kill. Start with guerillas, continue with lions, and many other animals... Ofcourse there are sadistic humans, but I'd say sadism is not normal and is a defect... No animals except human beings kill without purpose. That purposes in nature are: not noticing (elephant on ant), hunger (even with cannibalism (which is also anti-biblic)), supporting the own genes (male lion killing babies of other male lion), getting light (corals spreading over others or destoying them by chemicals), self-defense (snake biting two-legged being)

Man-made reasons:

hatress
envy
jealousy
fear
powerlessness
high-handedness (??: is that word correct?)

Steff_forever
Nov 12th, 2004, 06:47 PM
and those reasons are not reasonable (therefoe 'no reason'; just to avoid the contradiction)

alfajeffster
Nov 12th, 2004, 06:53 PM
No animals except human beings kill without purpose. That purposes in nature are: not noticing (elephant on ant), hunger (even with cannibalism (which is also anti-biblic)), supporting the own genes (male lion killing babies of other male lion), getting light (corals spreading over others or destoying them by chemicals), self-defense (snake biting two-legged being)

Man-made reasons:

hatress
envy
jealousy
fear
powerlessness
high-handedness (??: is that word correct?)
And what, pray tell, is the act of killing for sport, or the mere fun of killing- is it animal instinct, or is it human intuition that animals and human beings share? Surely this is beyond the scope of survival of the fittest or the realm of moral judgment...

Martian Willow
Nov 12th, 2004, 07:05 PM
No animals except human beings kill without purpose. That purposes in nature are: not noticing (elephant on ant), hunger (even with cannibalism (which is also anti-biblic)), supporting the own genes (male lion killing babies of other male lion), getting light (corals spreading over others or destoying them by chemicals), self-defense (snake biting two-legged being)

Man-made reasons:

hatress
envy
jealousy
fear
powerlessness
high-handedness (??: is that word correct?)

I guess you've never owned a cat. :)

Steff_forever
Nov 12th, 2004, 07:34 PM
my two year old cat brings me a mouse or a bird nearly every night. When I try to take it she hisses at me. Then I caress her for her 'good' deed. But she takes her victim (if she doesn't play with it= catching instinct) and often eats up all but the offals ...

intuition? never heard animals act because of intuition: on animal farm all I know is the instinct of survival ...
intuition on the man's side never leads to murder. And self-defense on reaction is no murder ...

Steff_forever
Nov 12th, 2004, 07:39 PM
Christianity often needs a God and a Satan to explain murder. Not me, the reason's are the upper ones. Fully unnatural - that devides us from the empire of bacteria, plants and animals ...

Steff_forever
Nov 12th, 2004, 07:56 PM
animal farm = parable on fascism/totalitarism/self-handedness by George Orwell (thanks ti-online by the way)

But animals would never act the way the did in this story. They have no religion ... ;)

gRaFiC
Nov 13th, 2004, 07:01 AM
You don't think there is a difference between human beings and other animals? :)

Of course there is a difference. Humans are destroying the planet. Other animals are not.

Circe
Nov 15th, 2004, 03:47 PM
well here's someone who obviously is a true believer. hope he's not your pharmacist ;)


MADISON, Wisconsin. (AP) -- A former pharmacist said Monday he refused to fill a college student's prescription for birth control pills or transfer it to another pharmacy because he did not want to commit a sin.

Neil Noesen, 30, testifying before a judge at a disciplinary hearing, could face a reprimand or loss of his pharmacist's license for refusing to help Amanda Phiede obtain her pills.

"I could have trouble sleeping at night. I could be suffering the worst kind of pain. Spiritual pain," Noesen told an administrative law judge.

The state Department of Regulation and Licensing accuses Noesen of unprofessional conduct for not transferring Phiede's prescription.

"The additional risk of pregnancy should not have been imposed on her by someone else," said John Zwieg, a lawyer for the department.

Noesen's attorney, Krystal Williams-Oby, said Noesen broke no laws. She described him as a devout Roman Catholic and said any punishment would violate his constitutional right to religious expression.

According to the complaint, Noesen was an independent pharmacist filling in at a Kmart pharmacy in Menomonie in July 2002 when Phiede, then a student at the University of Wisconsin-Stout, asked to renew her birth control prescription.

Noesen, the only pharmacist on duty at the store at the time, asked if the prescription would be used for contraception, then refused to refill it when she said it would. "I just wanted to get my pills and go home," Phiede said.

Noesen also refused a Wal-Mart pharmacist's request to transfer the prescription, she said.

Phiede returned to Kmart the next day with police, she said, and the store manager called Ken Jordanby, the pharmacy director who was out of town. Jordanby filled her prescription when he returned the following day.

In his testimony, Noesen talked about God's law and accused Zwieg of harassing him.

"It's good for a person to be persecuted," he said when asked by his lawyer how the proceedings have affected him. "Really, it helps you grow in your faith."

The hearing was expected to conclude Tuesday. The judge will make a recommendation to the examining board on what punishment, if any, Noesen should receive

http://www.cnn.com/2004/HEALTH/10/12/contraceptive.complaint.ap/index.html

Hanne
Nov 15th, 2004, 03:56 PM
i don't think there's a god, because if there was one, it would be time now he send some body to help the world so it would become a better place to

heal the world, make it a better place, for you and for me and the end of...;)