Sorry, but I have to speak up
-
I'm not trying to inflame or incite... I am simply curious on what those here have to say regarding the religion issue (which was brought up a few posts down), and hopefully some helpful criticisim on my views, which are below. I can not understand how a programmer can believe in an abrahamic god. Computers and code are good analogies for the universe, in that simple laws produce very complex and wonderful systems. AND, OR, NOT, XOR, etc, applied to a stream of bits inside a chip of silicon produces everything a computer can do. On the grander scale of the universe, simple laws describe vastly complex things in much the same way, and yet... Perhaps this belief in God is valid because if code has a creator, so can the universe. But, this argument is invalidated by code which can be self-written by evolutionary processes, which is a growing industry (look up Genetic Algoritims on google), and so there is no reason to suspect the richer base language of the universe can not do the same. Thus, until we have better information, the simpler explaination must be the one from which we work. And still, if there was a 'coder' of the universe, this being would not be Abrahamic, but more along the lines of a Deist's god. This being would not care of our affairs, or even be aware of our existance. This is so plain a fact that I can not even fathom why it must be defended at all! Are not the abrahamic texts obvious constructs by tribal people? Perhaps my background merely forces me to come to this conclusion... but I think it is at least a possibility for consideration. Hopefully this will lead to interesting mind-opening discussion on both sides of this unknowable part of the human existance.
-
I'm not trying to inflame or incite... I am simply curious on what those here have to say regarding the religion issue (which was brought up a few posts down), and hopefully some helpful criticisim on my views, which are below. I can not understand how a programmer can believe in an abrahamic god. Computers and code are good analogies for the universe, in that simple laws produce very complex and wonderful systems. AND, OR, NOT, XOR, etc, applied to a stream of bits inside a chip of silicon produces everything a computer can do. On the grander scale of the universe, simple laws describe vastly complex things in much the same way, and yet... Perhaps this belief in God is valid because if code has a creator, so can the universe. But, this argument is invalidated by code which can be self-written by evolutionary processes, which is a growing industry (look up Genetic Algoritims on google), and so there is no reason to suspect the richer base language of the universe can not do the same. Thus, until we have better information, the simpler explaination must be the one from which we work. And still, if there was a 'coder' of the universe, this being would not be Abrahamic, but more along the lines of a Deist's god. This being would not care of our affairs, or even be aware of our existance. This is so plain a fact that I can not even fathom why it must be defended at all! Are not the abrahamic texts obvious constructs by tribal people? Perhaps my background merely forces me to come to this conclusion... but I think it is at least a possibility for consideration. Hopefully this will lead to interesting mind-opening discussion on both sides of this unknowable part of the human existance.
Hello Christopher You post was very thought provoking. I am atheist myself and I have always puzzled over the fact that people could actually believe in theories evolved by barbaric man. Emma Goldman, a writer/atheist once said, “The superstition of religion originated in man's inability to explain natural phenomena”. I should think that explains it all. Barbaric man was confused and frightened by all the complicated things he saw around. God and Religion were his inventions. It’s a sad reflection on the irrational nature of human beings that despite so much advances in our awareness of the universe, the majority of people on this planet believe in some kind of all powerful god or gods. Nish
Author of the romantic comedy Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win]
-
I'm not trying to inflame or incite... I am simply curious on what those here have to say regarding the religion issue (which was brought up a few posts down), and hopefully some helpful criticisim on my views, which are below. I can not understand how a programmer can believe in an abrahamic god. Computers and code are good analogies for the universe, in that simple laws produce very complex and wonderful systems. AND, OR, NOT, XOR, etc, applied to a stream of bits inside a chip of silicon produces everything a computer can do. On the grander scale of the universe, simple laws describe vastly complex things in much the same way, and yet... Perhaps this belief in God is valid because if code has a creator, so can the universe. But, this argument is invalidated by code which can be self-written by evolutionary processes, which is a growing industry (look up Genetic Algoritims on google), and so there is no reason to suspect the richer base language of the universe can not do the same. Thus, until we have better information, the simpler explaination must be the one from which we work. And still, if there was a 'coder' of the universe, this being would not be Abrahamic, but more along the lines of a Deist's god. This being would not care of our affairs, or even be aware of our existance. This is so plain a fact that I can not even fathom why it must be defended at all! Are not the abrahamic texts obvious constructs by tribal people? Perhaps my background merely forces me to come to this conclusion... but I think it is at least a possibility for consideration. Hopefully this will lead to interesting mind-opening discussion on both sides of this unknowable part of the human existance.
IMHO, you make a mistake trying to demonstrate something about religion. The Faith is a belief, not a conclusion ! I mean it's not a cartesian choice (except if you are taking Pascal's bet) it's a conviction you have in you. Y'a cool jouer avec Maradona qui fait tourner gratos dans les vestiaires - Merci Maradona ! - Y'a pas d'quoi ! Ludwig Von 88, "Goal Di Pele"
-
Hello Christopher You post was very thought provoking. I am atheist myself and I have always puzzled over the fact that people could actually believe in theories evolved by barbaric man. Emma Goldman, a writer/atheist once said, “The superstition of religion originated in man's inability to explain natural phenomena”. I should think that explains it all. Barbaric man was confused and frightened by all the complicated things he saw around. God and Religion were his inventions. It’s a sad reflection on the irrational nature of human beings that despite so much advances in our awareness of the universe, the majority of people on this planet believe in some kind of all powerful god or gods. Nish
Author of the romantic comedy Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win]
Nishant S wrote: It’s a sad reflection on the irrational nature of human beings that despite so much advances in our awareness of the universe, the majority of people on this planet believe in some kind of all powerful god or gods. I think that fear of death plays a very large part in this and one of the most important things that relgion brings is a comforting story of a paradise after death. When you stop and look at it rationally it seems quite silly, but someone who wants very much to believe will overlook reality. "The lives of these people are contingent on events; if things stop happening to them they will stop being."
-
Nishant S wrote: It’s a sad reflection on the irrational nature of human beings that despite so much advances in our awareness of the universe, the majority of people on this planet believe in some kind of all powerful god or gods. I think that fear of death plays a very large part in this and one of the most important things that relgion brings is a comforting story of a paradise after death. When you stop and look at it rationally it seems quite silly, but someone who wants very much to believe will overlook reality. "The lives of these people are contingent on events; if things stop happening to them they will stop being."
Daniel Ferguson wrote: I think that fear of death plays a very large part in this and one of the most important things that relgion brings is a comforting story of a paradise after death. When you stop and look at it rationally it seems quite silly, but someone who wants very much to believe will overlook reality. It's rather sad though. Another bad thing is that a lot of religions depend on the fact that people will do good so that they can catch the train to this after-life paradise. But why should that be so? Why not do good for the sake of good rather than cause of fear of a severe policing god-entity? Nish
Author of the romantic comedy Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win]
-
I'm not trying to inflame or incite... I am simply curious on what those here have to say regarding the religion issue (which was brought up a few posts down), and hopefully some helpful criticisim on my views, which are below. I can not understand how a programmer can believe in an abrahamic god. Computers and code are good analogies for the universe, in that simple laws produce very complex and wonderful systems. AND, OR, NOT, XOR, etc, applied to a stream of bits inside a chip of silicon produces everything a computer can do. On the grander scale of the universe, simple laws describe vastly complex things in much the same way, and yet... Perhaps this belief in God is valid because if code has a creator, so can the universe. But, this argument is invalidated by code which can be self-written by evolutionary processes, which is a growing industry (look up Genetic Algoritims on google), and so there is no reason to suspect the richer base language of the universe can not do the same. Thus, until we have better information, the simpler explaination must be the one from which we work. And still, if there was a 'coder' of the universe, this being would not be Abrahamic, but more along the lines of a Deist's god. This being would not care of our affairs, or even be aware of our existance. This is so plain a fact that I can not even fathom why it must be defended at all! Are not the abrahamic texts obvious constructs by tribal people? Perhaps my background merely forces me to come to this conclusion... but I think it is at least a possibility for consideration. Hopefully this will lead to interesting mind-opening discussion on both sides of this unknowable part of the human existance.
Whoa, two religion related topics, right when I rear my ugly head! hehehe. Anyways, I just want to give my perspective on the comment you made about evolutionary processes invalidating a creator. Not to argue just to offer my perspective like you have done. The way I see it, all to often Humans tend to simplify things that shouldnt be simplified. I mean I like to think I know a fair bit about how complex a modern computer is. I then take a look at the Human Body and just realise how much of an incredibly complex system it is. Even just taking a small part like the operation of pain receptors and the pain feedback network, its so incredibly complex that man's attempts to replicate it failed dismally. Seriously we underrate our bodies in such a big way. As a result, for me the only way I could possibly see it is that an intelligent creator designed it. As far as adaptive code re-writing itself, the way I see that is that the creator of the code designed it so well that it was able to adapt and change. Life's not fair I tell ya, I life was fair I would've been born rich instead of so damn good looking!
-
Nishant S wrote: It’s a sad reflection on the irrational nature of human beings that despite so much advances in our awareness of the universe, the majority of people on this planet believe in some kind of all powerful god or gods. I think that fear of death plays a very large part in this and one of the most important things that relgion brings is a comforting story of a paradise after death. When you stop and look at it rationally it seems quite silly, but someone who wants very much to believe will overlook reality. "The lives of these people are contingent on events; if things stop happening to them they will stop being."
Spot on Daniel. Fear of death will make an otherwise rational human beings believe in any old rubbish. Personally, if someone really, really believes in something, then more power to them - I am full of respect - the problem I have with religiion is the bigotry that it can bring out in people. It amazes me that someone can preach "peace and love for all - unless you're a homosexual, in which case you can burn in hell". Would Jesus of been a bigot? Of course not. Would Jesus have wanted homesexuals to burn in hell for all eternity? Don't make me laugh. Christianity has a decent value system which many people could do well to adhere to, but it has to be inclusive. We are all human beings, and whatever our beliefs, race, colour, gender, sexual persuasion, etc. we are all equal. I don't believe in God myself, but if I did, it would be an all-inclusive God. As long as people live their lifes being decent to those around them, helping others where possible, etc. then they deserve a place in any "heaven" that may or may not exist (hey, even an atheist like myself has to keep an open mind ;)).
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
-
Hello Christopher You post was very thought provoking. I am atheist myself and I have always puzzled over the fact that people could actually believe in theories evolved by barbaric man. Emma Goldman, a writer/atheist once said, “The superstition of religion originated in man's inability to explain natural phenomena”. I should think that explains it all. Barbaric man was confused and frightened by all the complicated things he saw around. God and Religion were his inventions. It’s a sad reflection on the irrational nature of human beings that despite so much advances in our awareness of the universe, the majority of people on this planet believe in some kind of all powerful god or gods. Nish
Author of the romantic comedy Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win]
Nishant S wrote: “The superstition of religion originated in man's inability to explain natural phenomena” That's a good one! What I really can't understand is why people with university studies still are convinced about the real existence of Adan and Eva. Many religions interprets the bible in a strict manner. Poor Galileo :(
-
Nishant S wrote: “The superstition of religion originated in man's inability to explain natural phenomena” That's a good one! What I really can't understand is why people with university studies still are convinced about the real existence of Adan and Eva. Many religions interprets the bible in a strict manner. Poor Galileo :(
Juan Carlos Cobas wrote: What I really can't understand is why people with university studies still are convinced about the real existence of Adan and Eva It’s mainly due to all those sleazy movies where they show eve walking around nude :~
Author of the romantic comedy Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win]
-
I'm not trying to inflame or incite... I am simply curious on what those here have to say regarding the religion issue (which was brought up a few posts down), and hopefully some helpful criticisim on my views, which are below. I can not understand how a programmer can believe in an abrahamic god. Computers and code are good analogies for the universe, in that simple laws produce very complex and wonderful systems. AND, OR, NOT, XOR, etc, applied to a stream of bits inside a chip of silicon produces everything a computer can do. On the grander scale of the universe, simple laws describe vastly complex things in much the same way, and yet... Perhaps this belief in God is valid because if code has a creator, so can the universe. But, this argument is invalidated by code which can be self-written by evolutionary processes, which is a growing industry (look up Genetic Algoritims on google), and so there is no reason to suspect the richer base language of the universe can not do the same. Thus, until we have better information, the simpler explaination must be the one from which we work. And still, if there was a 'coder' of the universe, this being would not be Abrahamic, but more along the lines of a Deist's god. This being would not care of our affairs, or even be aware of our existance. This is so plain a fact that I can not even fathom why it must be defended at all! Are not the abrahamic texts obvious constructs by tribal people? Perhaps my background merely forces me to come to this conclusion... but I think it is at least a possibility for consideration. Hopefully this will lead to interesting mind-opening discussion on both sides of this unknowable part of the human existance.
The point that is often missed in this the greatest of philosophical questions is that if , and I repeat IF , a God created the universe then surely it would be created to operate on logical lines with a direct relationship between cause and effect ? In other words if God created this universe it is quite logical that it would be based on a few simple rules ? Why go to all the hassle of making things illogical ? The argument then becomes one of proof , and there is none , there is only faith .But then again we all rely on faith to a greater degree than we care to admit , faith seems irrational , where as we consider ourselves to be logical . But if you define faith as knowing something to be true without the need or ability to proove it then 1+1=2 can be construed as a statement of faith .Well , it is to me since I beleive it to be true yet I do not know how to proove it .(I know Betrand Russel did). So there you have it , you either have or you haven't got faith. The existance of the universe is no more a supporting argument for God as it is against God . If there is a God , why should they conform to any model , Abrahamic or Deistian . By definition the form abilities of the God must be outside of our understanding and social frameworks . It makes as much sense for the God to be humanoid as it does for the God to be a dog turd , it is simply outside of what we currently know. Once you accept that the only question of value is one of faith , then the only question that matters is do you have faith ? Me ? No , I do not have faith . I do not beleive that God exists , but I accept that there can never be proof either way .The main reason why I do not beleive that God exists is that I cannot see what God gets out of the deal . Ok ,you are a being with the ability to create universes , to shape reality and to create life . Why then create a universe with flawed individuals and then select the ones that worship you for salvation whilst casting the rest into some interminable hell ? What kick does God get by putting prophets / Sons on earth ? If God exists and wants a worshipping population, why not create a worhipping population ? After all that would be pipsy after the duck billed platypus. Free will I here you cry ! Why ? Why is God interested in free will ? And then what is free will ? Is it some huge breeding program ? Select the ones you want for heaven and put the others in the bin ? Can't be that cos anyone who could create the universe would not have any problems in making humans all uniform . That
-
The point that is often missed in this the greatest of philosophical questions is that if , and I repeat IF , a God created the universe then surely it would be created to operate on logical lines with a direct relationship between cause and effect ? In other words if God created this universe it is quite logical that it would be based on a few simple rules ? Why go to all the hassle of making things illogical ? The argument then becomes one of proof , and there is none , there is only faith .But then again we all rely on faith to a greater degree than we care to admit , faith seems irrational , where as we consider ourselves to be logical . But if you define faith as knowing something to be true without the need or ability to proove it then 1+1=2 can be construed as a statement of faith .Well , it is to me since I beleive it to be true yet I do not know how to proove it .(I know Betrand Russel did). So there you have it , you either have or you haven't got faith. The existance of the universe is no more a supporting argument for God as it is against God . If there is a God , why should they conform to any model , Abrahamic or Deistian . By definition the form abilities of the God must be outside of our understanding and social frameworks . It makes as much sense for the God to be humanoid as it does for the God to be a dog turd , it is simply outside of what we currently know. Once you accept that the only question of value is one of faith , then the only question that matters is do you have faith ? Me ? No , I do not have faith . I do not beleive that God exists , but I accept that there can never be proof either way .The main reason why I do not beleive that God exists is that I cannot see what God gets out of the deal . Ok ,you are a being with the ability to create universes , to shape reality and to create life . Why then create a universe with flawed individuals and then select the ones that worship you for salvation whilst casting the rest into some interminable hell ? What kick does God get by putting prophets / Sons on earth ? If God exists and wants a worshipping population, why not create a worhipping population ? After all that would be pipsy after the duck billed platypus. Free will I here you cry ! Why ? Why is God interested in free will ? And then what is free will ? Is it some huge breeding program ? Select the ones you want for heaven and put the others in the bin ? Can't be that cos anyone who could create the universe would not have any problems in making humans all uniform . That
BRILLIANT POST I read it twice, Andrew Really amazing bit of writing!!!
Author of the romantic comedy Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win]
-
I'm not trying to inflame or incite... I am simply curious on what those here have to say regarding the religion issue (which was brought up a few posts down), and hopefully some helpful criticisim on my views, which are below. I can not understand how a programmer can believe in an abrahamic god. Computers and code are good analogies for the universe, in that simple laws produce very complex and wonderful systems. AND, OR, NOT, XOR, etc, applied to a stream of bits inside a chip of silicon produces everything a computer can do. On the grander scale of the universe, simple laws describe vastly complex things in much the same way, and yet... Perhaps this belief in God is valid because if code has a creator, so can the universe. But, this argument is invalidated by code which can be self-written by evolutionary processes, which is a growing industry (look up Genetic Algoritims on google), and so there is no reason to suspect the richer base language of the universe can not do the same. Thus, until we have better information, the simpler explaination must be the one from which we work. And still, if there was a 'coder' of the universe, this being would not be Abrahamic, but more along the lines of a Deist's god. This being would not care of our affairs, or even be aware of our existance. This is so plain a fact that I can not even fathom why it must be defended at all! Are not the abrahamic texts obvious constructs by tribal people? Perhaps my background merely forces me to come to this conclusion... but I think it is at least a possibility for consideration. Hopefully this will lead to interesting mind-opening discussion on both sides of this unknowable part of the human existance.
It's not as abstract as that. In the Bible, God offers PROOF that He exists, to any individual willing to give Him a go. On that basis, the two reasons I can see for scientifically minded people such as ourselves to NOT believe in God are that either we have not been told, or we are simple irrationally athiestic. Christopher Lord wrote: But, this argument is invalidated by code which can be self-written by evolutionary processes, which is a growing industry (look up Genetic Algoritims on google), and so there is no reason to suspect the richer base language of the universe can not do the same. Thus, until we have better information, the simpler explaination must be the one from which we work. The simpler explanation is creation by God, and the analogy you give would only work if the genetic algorithms wrote themselves from scratch. That is to say, in the absence of a man made computer, or programming language. But I'm not keen to argue the existence of God on that basis, because the basis on which He offers to prove He exists is far more compelling than analogies of the universe or programming or anything else. The Bible says there are specific gifts that every Christian recieves from God, the first and foremost being the ability to speak in tongues, because in the Bible, that is what happens when someone becomes a Christian. Christian I am completely intolerant of stupidity. Stupidity is, of course, anything that doesn't conform to my way of thinking. - Jamie Hale - 29/05/2002 Half the reason people switch away from VB is to find out what actually goes on.. and then like me they find out that they weren't quite as good as they thought - they've been nannied. - Alex, 13 June 2002
-
I'm not trying to inflame or incite... I am simply curious on what those here have to say regarding the religion issue (which was brought up a few posts down), and hopefully some helpful criticisim on my views, which are below. I can not understand how a programmer can believe in an abrahamic god. Computers and code are good analogies for the universe, in that simple laws produce very complex and wonderful systems. AND, OR, NOT, XOR, etc, applied to a stream of bits inside a chip of silicon produces everything a computer can do. On the grander scale of the universe, simple laws describe vastly complex things in much the same way, and yet... Perhaps this belief in God is valid because if code has a creator, so can the universe. But, this argument is invalidated by code which can be self-written by evolutionary processes, which is a growing industry (look up Genetic Algoritims on google), and so there is no reason to suspect the richer base language of the universe can not do the same. Thus, until we have better information, the simpler explaination must be the one from which we work. And still, if there was a 'coder' of the universe, this being would not be Abrahamic, but more along the lines of a Deist's god. This being would not care of our affairs, or even be aware of our existance. This is so plain a fact that I can not even fathom why it must be defended at all! Are not the abrahamic texts obvious constructs by tribal people? Perhaps my background merely forces me to come to this conclusion... but I think it is at least a possibility for consideration. Hopefully this will lead to interesting mind-opening discussion on both sides of this unknowable part of the human existance.
I'd also suggest that the vast size and complexity of the Universe itself also lends weight to your argument. I've always wondered, if we really were "created", why did our creator bother creating everything else? Why is our planet fairly mundane when compared with rest of "Creation"? We're on the 3rd planet circling a a smaller than average star in an unfashionably backwater arm of a typical spiral galaxy. One star in a sea of billions. One galaxy in a sea of billions. There is nothing special about our planet, its position or anything. In the context of the rest of the Universe, our planet is probably analogous to ordering a white coffee with no sugar in Starbucks. Why did the creator even bother with the rest of it? It's just total overkill! what was he thinking? Then again, in the Garden of Eden, I've always wondered why God had to ask Adam and Eve to come out of hiding because he didn't know where they were. So a few bushes can hide a human from an omnipotent being? And then he acts all surprised when he finds out they're covering their nakedness! Surely he knows what has happened and what will happen. Why is he surprised then? Surely he knew Eve would taste the apple and the Adam would also. Surely he knew he was setting mankind a test he knew they'd fail... :)
-
Nishant S wrote: “The superstition of religion originated in man's inability to explain natural phenomena” That's a good one! What I really can't understand is why people with university studies still are convinced about the real existence of Adan and Eva. Many religions interprets the bible in a strict manner. Poor Galileo :(
Beleif in God and Beleif in the Bible are two different things . If you accept that the Bible is not the word of God but a guidance , then all christian stories have an element of interpretation in them . The fundemental question is about God and not about any particular religion.After all , all the religions cannot be right can they ? Actually they can , all they require is for there to be more than one reality . Is it 7 dimensions that the string theorists are up to now ? Ain't nobody ever told you : There ain't no sanity clause .Groucho Marks
-
Spot on Daniel. Fear of death will make an otherwise rational human beings believe in any old rubbish. Personally, if someone really, really believes in something, then more power to them - I am full of respect - the problem I have with religiion is the bigotry that it can bring out in people. It amazes me that someone can preach "peace and love for all - unless you're a homosexual, in which case you can burn in hell". Would Jesus of been a bigot? Of course not. Would Jesus have wanted homesexuals to burn in hell for all eternity? Don't make me laugh. Christianity has a decent value system which many people could do well to adhere to, but it has to be inclusive. We are all human beings, and whatever our beliefs, race, colour, gender, sexual persuasion, etc. we are all equal. I don't believe in God myself, but if I did, it would be an all-inclusive God. As long as people live their lifes being decent to those around them, helping others where possible, etc. then they deserve a place in any "heaven" that may or may not exist (hey, even an atheist like myself has to keep an open mind ;)).
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: (hey, even an atheist like myself has to keep an open mind). I try to be open-minded too. I have gone to churches when I was much younger, but after thinking about it more, I've decided Atheism is for me. I still change my point of view a little when I come across things that offer better explanations than my current beliefs. For the most part, I look at Christians the same way as Homosexuals (which is ironic): I don't know why they'd want to do that but it's a free country and what they do behind closed doors is their business as long as nobody hurts anyone else. "The lives of these people are contingent on events; if things stop happening to them they will stop being." "Rock over London, rock over Chicago..." -Wesley Willis
-
Beleif in God and Beleif in the Bible are two different things . If you accept that the Bible is not the word of God but a guidance , then all christian stories have an element of interpretation in them . The fundemental question is about God and not about any particular religion.After all , all the religions cannot be right can they ? Actually they can , all they require is for there to be more than one reality . Is it 7 dimensions that the string theorists are up to now ? Ain't nobody ever told you : There ain't no sanity clause .Groucho Marks
Andrew Torrance wrote: all they require is for there to be more than one reality You've overlooked the fact that each religion claims their god created reality out of nothingness. Each also thinks their god is the one true god. These are still mutally exclusive. "The lives of these people are contingent on events; if things stop happening to them they will stop being." "Rock over London, rock over Chicago..." -Wesley Willis
-
Beleif in God and Beleif in the Bible are two different things . If you accept that the Bible is not the word of God but a guidance , then all christian stories have an element of interpretation in them . The fundemental question is about God and not about any particular religion.After all , all the religions cannot be right can they ? Actually they can , all they require is for there to be more than one reality . Is it 7 dimensions that the string theorists are up to now ? Ain't nobody ever told you : There ain't no sanity clause .Groucho Marks
Andrew Torrance wrote: Beleif in God and Beleif in the Bible are two different things Yes, I know that. Andrew Torrance wrote: After all , all the religions cannot be right can they Well, I believe all religions are wrong, but this is just my very humble opinion. I respect the beliefs of everybody.
-
It's not as abstract as that. In the Bible, God offers PROOF that He exists, to any individual willing to give Him a go. On that basis, the two reasons I can see for scientifically minded people such as ourselves to NOT believe in God are that either we have not been told, or we are simple irrationally athiestic. Christopher Lord wrote: But, this argument is invalidated by code which can be self-written by evolutionary processes, which is a growing industry (look up Genetic Algoritims on google), and so there is no reason to suspect the richer base language of the universe can not do the same. Thus, until we have better information, the simpler explaination must be the one from which we work. The simpler explanation is creation by God, and the analogy you give would only work if the genetic algorithms wrote themselves from scratch. That is to say, in the absence of a man made computer, or programming language. But I'm not keen to argue the existence of God on that basis, because the basis on which He offers to prove He exists is far more compelling than analogies of the universe or programming or anything else. The Bible says there are specific gifts that every Christian recieves from God, the first and foremost being the ability to speak in tongues, because in the Bible, that is what happens when someone becomes a Christian. Christian I am completely intolerant of stupidity. Stupidity is, of course, anything that doesn't conform to my way of thinking. - Jamie Hale - 29/05/2002 Half the reason people switch away from VB is to find out what actually goes on.. and then like me they find out that they weren't quite as good as they thought - they've been nannied. - Alex, 13 June 2002
Christian Graus wrote: The Bible says there are specific gifts that every Christian recieves from God, the first and foremost being the ability to speak in tongues, because in the Bible, that is what happens when someone becomes a Christian. Surely this is a circular argument ? God wrote the Bible , the Bible tells us God exists therefore God exists ? Go on admit it , ...... You either got or you havn't got Faith... If you got it then belief it does make ..... I can now more proove that God does not exist as you can proof that he/she does . Perhaps we are both right ,perhaps God exists for you and not for me, perhaps if enough of us beleive something to be true then it will be. After all it seems to work on the stock market. Ain't nobody ever told you : There ain't no sanity clause .Groucho Marks
-
I'd also suggest that the vast size and complexity of the Universe itself also lends weight to your argument. I've always wondered, if we really were "created", why did our creator bother creating everything else? Why is our planet fairly mundane when compared with rest of "Creation"? We're on the 3rd planet circling a a smaller than average star in an unfashionably backwater arm of a typical spiral galaxy. One star in a sea of billions. One galaxy in a sea of billions. There is nothing special about our planet, its position or anything. In the context of the rest of the Universe, our planet is probably analogous to ordering a white coffee with no sugar in Starbucks. Why did the creator even bother with the rest of it? It's just total overkill! what was he thinking? Then again, in the Garden of Eden, I've always wondered why God had to ask Adam and Eve to come out of hiding because he didn't know where they were. So a few bushes can hide a human from an omnipotent being? And then he acts all surprised when he finds out they're covering their nakedness! Surely he knows what has happened and what will happen. Why is he surprised then? Surely he knew Eve would taste the apple and the Adam would also. Surely he knew he was setting mankind a test he knew they'd fail... :)
I like the bit about the size of the universe , but hey , why think small ? If you can create reality why not make it a big bugger ? As far as Adam and Eve are concerned You are confusing the argument of the existance of God with the argument of the validity of specific religious stories . If you succeed in prooving or disprooving any story in ,say, the Bible all you are doing is prooving or disprooving one story . It may be evidence for or against the existance of God but it is not proof .All it does is help sway what you have faith in , faith being something you beleive as being true that does not require proof. Ain't nobody ever told you : There ain't no sanity clause .Groucho Marks
-
Andrew Torrance wrote: all they require is for there to be more than one reality You've overlooked the fact that each religion claims their god created reality out of nothingness. Each also thinks their god is the one true god. These are still mutally exclusive. "The lives of these people are contingent on events; if things stop happening to them they will stop being." "Rock over London, rock over Chicago..." -Wesley Willis
Why ? If there are multiple realities then why cannot each religion have created its own ? They are only mutually exclusive if there is only one 'true' reality. Ain't nobody ever told you : There ain't no sanity clause .Groucho Marks