Re: Now, back to our regularly scheduled program

Toon wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2008 09:10:07 -0500, "Here in Minnesota!"
<neverwillicheckthis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Thom Madura" <Tommadura@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:481db09a$0$15178$607ed4bc@xxxxxxxxx
---
There is quite a difference with the idea that there might have been
an ultimate creator - and religions assertion that you must kneel at
a certain time in a ritual, or that your donations will help you to
eternal life. THere is no indication that a god wants you to help a
certain minister to buy a $22 Million private plane.
---

Speaking of logic; this is the fallacy of the straw man.

But Thom has a point. I never understood why killing an animal in the
name of your god would generate favor for you, especially if your god
created the animal in the first place. Giving thanks is one thing,
but ritualistic sacrifice just to curry favor?

Yes. Primitive people lead harsh lives, where the next harvest or it's
failure might determine your life or death. As soon as a god was
conceived off, He, She or It was periodically "placated" with gifts,
just like you might give gifts to a friend to maintain his friendship.
Now gifts always call for a "sacrifice". People of those days did not
have money to go to the nearest WalMart and buy a gift. So
they "gifted" grain, fruits, animals, humans and precious stones.

This practise is now obsolete, but habits die hard.

The Creator god is far different from the Religious god. For one
thing, the Creator god is clearly not a fan of life. This universe is
designed to kill first and foremost.

Er no. If that were so, then the "Creator" god would have had the
universe develop perfectly homogeneously, so that stars and galaxies
would never have formed. Or he would've slightly lowered the charge of
the electron, so that complex chemistry would never have been possible.
The "Creator" god could've done an almost infinite number of things
that would've probably _ruled_ _out_ the possibility of life. The very
fact that we exist here and now is proof that this universe has
conceived and nurtured life at least in one place, and probably in
countless other places too.

Space radiation.

Which a very thin atmosphere has successfully blocked.

Isolation of
planets via light years of distance.

Doesn't matter at all for individual centres of life.

Now look at Earth. Comets and
meteors and what not crashing on us.

More than 99.99999% of meteors burn up miles before reaching the ground.
Of those that do, a further 99.99% are so small that all they do is
cause localised damage. Only an infinitesimal fraction is large enough
to threaten life on a global scale, and life has recovered in all those
instances, though individual species may have perished.

Microbes infecting us.

Again, the human immune system has been very successful, otherwise we
wouldn't be here as a species. Problem is, modern man on the one hand
damages his immunity with various practises and on the other hand
abuses antibiotics and lives too densely, so that diseases seem very
magnified.

Animals killing each other for food.

This is inevitable.

Animals needing food, water and
oxygen, and yes, even sleep/dreams.

So? Why would you conclude that the universe is against life?

Heck, even a woman's woo woo is designed
to kill sperm.

But the sperm are carried in a substance that effectively neutralises
this threat, at least for enough time to give the sperms a fighting
chance. If the female reproductive tract were always conducive to sperm
(which isn't really necessary), then possibly, it might open itself to
other damaging infections.

The miracle of life is not that your sperm is the one
that made it to the egg, but that any sperm did.

IMO, you have picked a particularly bad example. IMO, the miracle of
life is the evolution of self-conscious intelligence. Very easily life
could've continued on Earth without ever an intelligent species like
humans developing. Then who would've been there to marvel at creation
and ask these questions?

There is no way the Creator is ProLife.

Indeed he is. The large scale structure of the universe is hostile to
life. But there must be millions of planets like Earth, with liquid
water and organic molecules. I'm sure the universe is teeming with life
on a micro scale.

All life has is evolution.

And so with the universe too. The formation of stars and galaxies and
the consequent creation of heavy elements was an evolution that
preceded, and was necessary for, the subsequent evolution of life.

Seems life was an accident, and survived the initial attempt to snuff
it out,

Well, if you look at it this way, then everthing was an accident. That
stars formed was just because of a fluke disturbance in the density of
the infant universe.

So impressed, god gave life a fighting chance: Evolution.

Life isn't the only thing that has or is evolving. The whole universe is
evolving.

And
yes, he'll even help out every now and then, just to make things more
interesting. Life is an experiment, that seems destined for
termination.

And so is the whole universe, whichever scientific model we follow. An
accelerating universe dies a heat death. A contracting universe will
end at the Big Crunch.

And look at humans. The older we get, the more our
bodies fail. Thigns stop working. Memory is destroyed. Organs fail.
Diseases run rampant. How can anyone possibly deny we're being
punished for living? There's a reason god is supposed to hate
suicide. It's because it robs him of the pleasure of killing us.

And would you really like eternal life? Would you not get wearied of
life after a few thousand years? Would you not lose interest in
everthing, even become mad?

Eternal life is useful only when we have powers to explore the universe
at will. Even then, we would probably explore all of it within a few
billion years. See all there is to see, know all there is to know. Then
what?

Now the religious god makes even less sense. he apparently changes
the story around for different religions, causing the members to seek
to kill anybody who says they're wrong.

Poor god. Vilified for what he never did.

Then tells everybody to do
things my way, or go to Hell (well, you'll be punished).

Well, this is the problem with relying on texts that are millenia old.
The message in them were meant for simple people, who could only be
taught by simple messages and rules. Expounding complex metaphysical
philosophy would've been useless.

Therefore we (modern humans) should not literally read our religious
texts, but understand them for their deeper message, which is
essentially timeless.

Next, he
somehow decided he gets final say in everything, and screw you if you
don't like it. We don't get told what the heck is going on, but
instead reassured we'll find out after we're dead (and complaining is
useless), so just trust the dude blindly. We're encouraged to devote
our lives to attaining a place in the after life, thus missing out on
life itself.

Such language was neccessary for the people of those times. People in
general need strong directions and reassurances. That's why Socrates or
Plato never became a religious leader, nor J Krishnamurti etc. They
were (and are) too philosophical, too indecisive.

That's why religions with stronger edicts (like Christianity or Islam)
are apparently more popular than religions with weaker ones (like say
Buddism or Jainism). People are afraid of life, afraid of the universe,
afraid of other people (which makes sense, since our species has
struggled against formidable difficulties up until recently).

Hence religions (and their texts) needed to be strongly worded and
rather imaginative. Concepts like Heaven and Hell will always appeal
more to man (and stick in his heart better) more than say the concept
of Karma, which is fairly unintuitive and impersonal.

And this ever loving daddy, so chock full of forgiveness, creates hell
as a punishment, kills off everybody in a great flood (including
innocent plant and animals),

Ironic that it is we who are currently killing of all plants and
animals. Who cares what happened in the past. What's happening now is
criminal. Man is worse than any god he could ever conceive.

and upon evicting us from Eden, creates
painful pregnancies as punishment, as well as diseases.> Then is
supposed to jam a piece of fruit in out throats (Adam's Apple).

They are just stories. What they indicate obtusely is that man was
(and/or is) supposed to live in harmony with god, but that that did not
happen. It's another way of saying that we are supposed to, and have
the potential for, lead MUCH better lives than we ever have.

seriously, the Religious god has issues, and needs serious psychiatric
help.

Man needs serious psychiatric help. I hope an advanced alien species
will come to Earth and counsel everyone.

he's got an inferiority and superiority complex going on at
once. Ooh, everybody love, me, worship me, trust me, and yet, I'm
better than you. My way's best. I'm god, nah nah nah. And people
willingly worship this guy? A guy who's basically has no love/respect
for us, then tells us it's for the best because he says so, and his
Master Plan is so great (yet still won't tell us it). I mean really.
I honestly don't know which is worse? The life hating Creataor god,
or the self important life controlling Religious god.

In any event, the evidence pints to an evil god, not an ever
loving/forgiving father figure.

I think you are looking that things too emotionally. Since bootstrapping
creation, god has probably never directly interfered. All that man has
done onto himself has been due to his own stupidity.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Re: funny creationsist
    ... itself or came into existence without a cause. ... show me ANYTHING in this universe which just came into existence ... Your god isn't needed. ... What is the exact process by which this new life added material to ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: my worldview
    ... information processor itself must posses much rich information (by rich ... up with is an infinite series of Gods if we try to use the God ... that the roughly 15 billion years of the universe's life isn't even ... there you go, in one particular universe, on one particular planet, the ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Atheists are the biggest fools on Earth
    ... Jim Spaza wrote: ... It's an issue of whether the origins of the Universe are, at some point, the ... God can do it any way He pleases. ... Only a small number of possible universes can sustain life. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Re: Atheists are the biggest fools on Earth
    ... shown that there can be life otherwise. ... But our universe exists, it is the only one we can know, therefore the ... Because after 15 billion years there is no evidence for a god. ... If there are no humans to do evil, then how can God's inaction define ...
    (talk.origins)
  • my worldview
    ... information processor itself must posses much rich information (by rich ... up with is an infinite series of Gods if we try to use the God ... that the roughly 15 billion years of the universe's life isn't even ... there you go, in one particular universe, on one particular planet, the ...
    (talk.origins)