Re: Do dogs go to heaven?

In message <fqqef7$abj$1@xxxxxxxx>, PG <pgk9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
"Michael J Davis" <?.?@trustsof.demon.co.uk> a écrit dans le message de
news: dkF6kkNVBA0HFwn5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In message <fqmnio$n6l$1@xxxxxxxx>, PG <pgk9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
"Michael J Davis" <?.?@trustsof.demon.co.uk> a écrit dans le message de
news: Gp6sXjM3LtzHFwNT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In message <fqm78g$r28$1@xxxxxxxx>, PG <pgk9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
"Phil Saunders" <philip.saunders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit dans le message
de
news: ngszj.34720$Ef1.2664@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"PG" <pgk9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fqldd1$8g3$1@xxxxxxxxxxx
"Quasin" <quasin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit dans le message de news:
47CDA2C0.6050202@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do dogs go to heaven? There appear to be other beasts in heaven,
seen
by various prophets; why not dogs too?

What about the beasties that may well inhabit a proportion of the
other
50 million trillion (50 000 000 000 000 000 000) (is that enough
noughts?) planets in the universe? Do they get a look-in? Are we the
only
lucky ones to have been 'made in God's image'?

Will we meet the (earthly) grandaddy of them all, the "Last Universal
Ancestor"? That might be a bit of a disappointment, even if it is 4
billion years old. Conversation might be a little limited.

Dont ya love it when the no faith crowd start believing in beasties
that
may exist on other planets?

Yes Phil, 'God' just created a universe of 10 million trillion stars and
perhaps 5 times that number of planets, all completely devoid of life.
Makes
perfect (religious) sense.

That's not Phil's point. There's no reason why there shouldn't be other
intelligent life in the universe. (I don't know if Phil thinks that.)
But
*you* are happy to believe that - but you are not able to believe in an
intelligent and common source of all life!

And the only evidence you have for all this other life is the same
argument as the Anthropic Principle that you deny imply that life may be
'planned'.


Out of interest Mike; please point me in the direction of a dictionary
that
considers the conditional "may well be" (words carefully chosen in my
original post) to carry the same meaning as "believe there are"?

;-)

"may well inhabit" was your statement, not "may well be". The implication
being that they exist, but you were in some doubt concerning their
location. ;-)

Of course not Mike, "may" implies a conditional state, period, it's that
simple.

There "may well be" life on other planets, life "may well inhabit" other
planets, means precisely the same thing, and in no sense whatsoever, in
English, does it suggest doubt as to location rather than the existence of
life in the first place.

OK. I accept that.

I would point out, too, that I have no quarrel with your statement -
there's nothing in Christian understanding that denies intelligent life
elsewhere. (CS Lewis wrote an interesting Sci-Fi book - "Perelandra" - on
the concept of an unfallen world.)

However, I don't think there is that much difference - but I'll grant you
an amendment to my comment - to "believe there may be".
I think my point is valid, as it was the *type* of thinking on which I was
commenting, rather than the firmness of your fai^H^H^Hbelief.

Sorry no. It means precisely as I described above, and the degree and
subject of that conditionality was made perfectly clear in the original
statement.

Ny point is still that you are prepared to accept a 'may well be' life elsewhere but not that there might be a creator God.

Which seems to me in probability terms like akin to the person who buys a National lottery ticket and a packet of fags, and thinks the probability of winning the lottery is good, while the chances of getting lung cancer are remote.

Mike

[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting]
--
Michael J Davis
http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk
<><
For this is what the Lord has said to me,
"Go and post a Watchman and let
him report what he sees." Isa 21:6
<><
.

Quantcast