Does the Haiti earthquake prove that there is no god?

[thir]

This was the title of a program on BBC 2 today.

An age old discussion is of course that if God (Gods,Goddess) is all powerful and loving, why does he allow such things to happen?

Several in the program talked about these things being a test for your faith, or a way to improve your character because you need important choices in your life. (Apperently this would apply to survivors, whether to help each other or fight over food.)

Some said life was a gift however long or short, and we should be happy for what we get.

So, does things like the earhquake prove that there is no God and if not, why are these things allowed to happen?

Are the Gods (if they exist) really interested in us on a personal basis?

[theDerangedArchitect]

the trouble with questions like these are the convenient-outs. if you were to ask a devout religionist why the earthquake happened, the response would be "because the lord works in mysterious ways". or, like you mentioned, "it's a test of faith".

i must admit that, in terms of god, i am a bit biased. i feel that the bible (the only true "evidence" of any god) could have been written by a human being, and that there is absolutely nothing that proves otherwise.

haiti is just one example. did 9/11 happen because there isn't a god? what about pearl harbor? the holocaust? which brings up another question: if there IS a god, which one is the real one? the tragedy in haiti might prove that haiti's god is false, but mohammed is true. 9/11 might prove that mohammed is false, but the christian god is true.

so frankly, i don't believe that haiti proves anything about god. it's either something that happened naturally (supporting the theory of evolution), or it's something that god wanted to happen (but we're not sure which god).

[SirStef]

Danny Glover sez it was the fault of the U.S. because they didn't jump into the hysterics at the global warming cluster fuck in Denmark a few weeks ago. And ya gotta believe Danny!

[denuseri]

I dont think it has any bearing whatsoever on the existence or lack there-of, but then again, I am a bit of a trancedental deist of sorts.

[Thorne]

Any of these natural events, whether earthquakes, forest fires, hurricanes, tornadoes or anything else, can neither prove or disprove the existence of anything other than themselves. Earthquakes exist. No question about it. Hurricanes happen. End of story. Did God send them? No reason to think so. If God wants to punish someone, all he has to do is induce a heart attack. Every natural disaster has a natural explanation.

On the other hand, it cannot prove that God does not exist. Nothing can prove that, at least not until we have gained all the possible knowledge in the universe. However, it does tend to indicate, at least to me, that this God doesn't give a rat's ass about people.

But maybe that's the Christian God. What about Allah? Does he care about people? Well,Indonesia is primarily Muslim, isn't it? That tsunami five years ago seemed to do a number on them. So I guess Allah doesn't care, either.

Maybe Allah and God are fighting one another! That would explain it. God smites Indonesia, so Allah stomps on Haiti. And good old Yahweh keeps sending those pillars of smoke (tornadoes) through the American Midwest, just for shits and giggles.

No, I'm afraid that all we can learn from Haiti is that, when you have shoddy building construction and an earthquake, buildings fall down. And they tend to fall down on people.

So let's contact that "Faith Comes By Hearing organization" and have them send another couple hundred of their solar-powered bibles. That's just what those starving, thirsty and homeless people need to get them through this.

[MMI]

Maybe Allah and God are fighting one another ... and good old Yahweh keeps sending those pillars of smoke ... just for shits and giggles.


Brilliantly put! Doesn't get rid of the idea of God, but shows how death and destruction can be wreaked by his followers.

Oh, by the way, as I'm sure you all realise, God, Allah, and Yahweh are all same deity. So God's followers kill God's followers in God's name.

But natural disasters cannot possibly prove God's non-existence - for we know God to be a cruel God, if he exists, and if he doesn't why bother to prove it?

[Ozme52]

As one who would like to believe, I have no doubt that we are blessed that God chose to set our universe in motion. Wrote up some rules, and started the engine.

Given that, it would be hubris to presume that the diety who did so actually interferes on our behalf, postively or negatively.
And if he does... we might be the "Sims" of his universe... and every once in a while he clicks on the drop-down menu and creates a random event.

I know I sent Godzilla into my first Sim City once it was up and running. ;)

[TwistedTails]

The only thing that the earthquake in Haiti proves is the theory of tectonics.

[VaAugusta]

I wrote a paper on the problem of evil recently. I condensed the the argument into:

-God is omnipotent.
-God is against evil.
-God could prevent evil.
C: This is not the case, therefore God does not exist.

I argued that the problem of evil isn't wrong, but that the definition of God is in error.

Therefore, the definition of God needs to be redefined. Either God is not omnipotent, or God is not against evil.

I personally feel that it could be either, and that the chances of it being either are quite possibe (in my personal belief both are wrong). To remove the problem of evil I only need to redefine one of those, however. This is best at keeping our optimistic hopes! I believe (from analogy) that God is not omnipotent. The basis of my view is that nothing that I have seen or believe to ever exist in nature is all powerful. Therefore to assume that ANYTHING out there is omnipotent is a tad absurd. However, I believe that I am against evil, and therefore something in nature is against evil, so the possibility of God being against evil is more likely.

Then again, people would question whether our Creator is a "God" if she isn't omnipotent.
I'd like to say: Yes!

[Thorne]

Therefore, the definition of God needs to be redefined. Either God is not omnipotent, or God is not against evil.
This is the big problem I have with religion. As culture changes, and our perceptions of good and bad are redefined, our definition of God needs to be changed as well.

Now, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Science does this all the time. New evidence changes our understanding of, for example, evolution. Our theories of evolution have to be modified to account for this new evidence. This is how knowledge advances.

But God is supposed to be unchanging, isn't He? After all, He is omniscient, knowing everything, past, present and future. There is nothing new to inspire change in Him, is there?

But if we can keep changing our definitions of God then we reduce Him to a mere hypothesis, subject to change upon learning new evidence. And since there IS no evidence, and no way to test our hypothesis, we can't even advance him to the status of theory! He must remain forever in limbo, untestable.

[mkemse]

No the Earthquake shows that the Island Nation is located over a MAJOR Fault that theywere warned about 5 years ago that a Major Quake could and would happen, only so much a Country like Haiti can do to prepare for a Quake

[thir]

i must admit that, in terms of god, i am a bit biased. i feel that the bible (the only true "evidence" of any god) could have been written by a human being, and that there is absolutely nothing that proves otherwise.

haiti is just one example. did 9/11 happen because there isn't a god? what about pearl harbor? the holocaust?


To my way of thinking this is all what humans do to humans, and nothing to do with God or Gods. But the way the earth works is perhaps different. Or not? God supposedly created both humans and earth.



which brings up another question: if there IS a god, which one is the real one? the tragedy in haiti might prove that haiti's god is false, but mohammed is true. 9/11 might prove that mohammed is false, but the christian god is true.



It does not matter which one, at least not to me. Also Allah is supposed to be both omnipotent and merciful, so the question/dilemma remains the same.

[thir]

I dont think it has any bearing whatsoever on the existence or lack there-of, but then again, I am a bit of a trancedental deist of sorts.

Do you mean a non-personal divinity?

[thir]

But natural disasters cannot possibly prove God's non-existence - for we know God to be a cruel God, if he exists, and if he doesn't why bother to prove it?

How do we know that? Most problems are man-made. But maybe you mean that God was cruel to create something as cruel as humans??

[thir]

Given that, it would be hubris to presume that the diety who did so actually interferes on our behalf, postively or negatively.
And if he does... we might be the "Sims" of his universe... and every once in a while he clicks on the drop-down menu and creates a random event.

I know I sent Godzilla into my first Sim City once it was up and running. ;)

Did you ever read Henleins "Job"? ;-)

[thir]

I wrote a paper on the problem of evil recently. I condensed the the argument into:

-God is omnipotent.
-God is against evil.
-God could prevent evil.
C: This is not the case, therefore God does not exist.



I think this calls for a definition of 'evil'.
Is an earthquake 'evil'?
Is a war evil, but we are the ones resposible for it?




I believe (from analogy) that God is not omnipotent. The basis of my view is that nothing that I have seen or believe to ever exist in nature is all powerful. Therefore to assume that ANYTHING out there is omnipotent is a tad absurd.

Then again, people would question whether our Creator is a "God" if she isn't omnipotent.
I'd like to say: Yes!


I too can conceive of a non-omnipotent God. Whoever made that a definition? I think it hasn't always been. Maybe God, or the Gods, are just a lot more powerful than we are.

[Ozme52]

-God is omnipotent.
-God is against evil.
-God could prevent evil.
C: This is not the case, therefore God does not exist.

First: Your conclusion isn't logical. At best, from these statements, you can only conclude that God is either not omnipotent or God is not against evil. You cannot conclude his existance or non-existance from these statements.

Second: Your assumptions make presumptions about the nature of God that many such as myself would argue against. Why would an omipotent God be concerned with the human definitions of evil? You can't get humanity to agree on the definition of evil... therefore how can you make a statement regarding God's perspective of evil.

[denuseri]

Do you mean a non-personal divinity?

Not exactly, yes and no I believe that this higher power that some of us refer to as the GOD can be all encompassing and that lesser entities can act as gods, but that all is inside all of us and part of every single living thing all at once.

I believe that it's conscienceness transends our own and ours it's. We are atomounous parts of the whole collective consciouness that is god, so as god has feel will so too do we. So as god is all powerful and defines good and evil for its self , so too do we. In this I think we are live individual cells of a great cosmic body.

The primaray difference too me is a matter of fractual mathematical scales of evolution and trancendental perspective.

I believe mankind is capable of developing noetic insights from time to time that led to a better understanding of things within the fractual patern of existance and that such individuals having no other recourse but "language" are limited in their ability to explain such things and that this is where religions and later philosophy and now science have come from.

Does god take a close personal intrest in me?

I hope so, but there is no way for me to know for certian until the final breath leaves my body.

I imagine from God's perspective it's much a kin to my own concerning the individual cells of my body.

I do not however believe that God visits worldy punnishments and or rewards upon us in the same way that some individual consciouness would such as a parent spanking a child; though I do know that the ancients once thought this way and felt very sure of the veritus of such.

[MMI]

I believe the Gnostics hold there to be a Supreme Deity, who is responsible for creation, and who is omnipotent and omni-everything-else. He is also sumpremely disinterested in what happens in the Universe and does not interfere when bad things happen. But equally, he does not cause them.

Then there is Jehovah who is a less than perfect deity, and because of his imperfections, is quite capable of sending in Godzilla, or a flood, or a momentous earthquake.

By the way, has San Francisco sat up and taken notice?

[Thorne]

How do we know that? Most problems are man-made. But maybe you mean that God was cruel to create something as cruel as humans??
I suggest you read the story of Job to see just how cruel God can be.

[Ozme52]

Did you ever read Henleins "Job"? ;-)

No, I read virtually none of his post-carotid-surgery fiction.

[thir]

No, I read virtually none of his post-carotid-surgery fiction.

I afraid you lost me completely here. Maybe I do not know him well enough, I only read two of his books, Job being one on them.

[thir]

I suggest you read the story of Job to see just how cruel God can be.


I have - I do like its humor and attitude!

[thir]

No, I read virtually none of his post-carotid-surgery fiction.

Ah, I read it as a literary opinion - but it was literal ;-) I did not know he had had an operation, and that that changed his writing. Interesting.

[thir]

Not exactly, yes and no I believe that this higher power that some of us refer to as the GOD can be all encompassing and that lesser entities can act as gods, but that all is inside all of us and part of every single living thing all at once.

I believe that it's conscienceness transends our own and ours it's. We are atomounous parts of the whole collective consciouness that is god, so as god has feel will so too do we. So as god is all powerful and defines good and evil for its self , so too do we. In this I think we are live individual cells of a great cosmic body.



I can relate to this, it is very like many pagan faiths.



The primaray difference too me is a matter of fractual mathematical scales of evolution and trancendental perspective.

I believe mankind is capable of developing noetic insights from time to time that led to a better understanding of things within the fractual patern of existance and that such individuals having no other recourse but "language" are limited in their ability to explain such things and that this is where religions and later philosophy and now science have come from.


Yes, language is really quite insufficient to describe these things. I once read a definition of 'mystery' as 'that which cannot be put into words'.

Surely philosophy and science are attempts to understand our world, just as religion partly must have been. Re another discussion, I never could see that relilgion (has to) bar scientific research. It can, but it doesn't have to.



Does god take a close personal intrest in me?
I hope so, but there is no way for me to know for certian until the final breath leaves my body.
I imagine from God's perspective it's much a kin to my own concerning the individual cells of my body.[/COLOR][/I][/B]

Again, a very paganish thought which I can relate to. On a purely objective level, we are all made of the same material as each other and everything around us.



I do not however believe that God visits worldy punnishments and or rewards upon us in the same way that some individual consciouness would such as a parent spanking a child; though I do know that the ancients once thought this way and felt very sure of the veritus of such.

Me neither! It does not seem to have kept people on the straight and narrow either, if that is a place to be.
But many have a need to feel that bad behaviour is punished somehow, as the human justice is so lacking.

[leo9]

I have - I do like its humor and attitude!

:) I think he probably meant the one in the Bible, not the one by Heinlein. Both depict an innocent mortal being screwed around by Them Upstairs, but in RAH's version it turns out that it's the Devil who is testing him - JHVH stopped bothering with such hands-on management long ago.

And he gets much gentler treatment than the biblical Job, who comes over like a total masochist - "Thank you for killing my family, Lord, may I have another?"

[Thorne]

I have - I do like its humor and attitude!

Heinlein's Job was humorous, I agree. The BIBLE's Job, not so much. And that is just one example of God's capriciousness and cruelty.

[denuseri]

I like to see the book of Job as a metaphoric estament of Man's faith. The human capacity to loose everything and still have hope!

[Saheli]

Why does God have to stop a natural disaster from occuring? Why is it that if he allows one to happen that all of a sudden he's hateful and doesn't give a shit about anybody? People who say that God allows things to happen so that people will build their faith is ridiculous; people who try to avoid the discussion altogether with, "We should be happy for every bit of life we get," is being disrespectful to the victims of the disaster. Put that person in the middle of Haiti right before the earthquake and see how grateful they would be. I don't believe posessing the ability to prevent a looming disaster dictates its use.

leo, you said, "Both depict an innocent mortal being screwed around by Them Upstairs, but in RAH's version it turns out that it's the Devil who is testing him," which implies that God was testing Job. In the Biblical account, it was the Devil who tested Job. God allowed him to, but God did not do it. According to the Bible, Satan had gone all through the earth and went to God mocking him, saying that he could make everyone in the world turn their backs on God...that the only reason anybody followed him was because he protected them from things...a hedgewall of sorts. So God said, "Well hey you should see my servant, Job. He would never turn his back on me, no matter what you do." So Satan asks permission to try, which God grants. God did not initiate any of Job's sufferings. He granted the permission, which a lot of people would say proves that he didnt' care about Job. The point of the story isn't so much about Job as it is about Christians in general: people who truly follow Christ will always follow Christ, regardless of the circumstances. This is very applicable to anyone who wonders whether someone is a true Christian. People who curse God when bad things happen are not true Christians. Not preventing a disaster is not the same thing as causing it.

[thir]

Why does God have to stop a natural disaster from occuring? Why is it that if he allows one to happen that all of a sudden he's hateful and doesn't give a shit about anybody? People who say that God allows things to happen so that people will build their faith is ridiculous; people who try to avoid the discussion altogether with, "We should be happy for every bit of life we get," is being disrespectful to the victims of the disaster. Put that person in the middle of Haiti right before the earthquake and see how grateful they would be. I don't believe posessing the ability to prevent a looming disaster dictates its use.

snip
The point of the story isn't so much about Job as it is about Christians in general: people who truly follow Christ will always follow Christ, regardless of the circumstances. This is very applicable to anyone who wonders whether someone is a true Christian. People who curse God when bad things happen are not true Christians. Not preventing a disaster is not the same thing as causing it.

I am not sure I can follow your argument. I read your text as saying God did not cause the disaster, but also did not prevent it, and why should he?
And further that to think that the reason God allows this to happen is a test, or proves that he is hateful, is ridiculous.

So what is the conclusion?? Given the ability to prevent, why does he allow it?

The folowing question is also not meant as anything other than a genuie interest in these matters: why should Christians love and follow Christ no matter what?

What does God want with Christians? What is the relationship, if I may put it this way, between Christ and Christians?

God gives, God takes, his name be praised. Why?

Sometimes I feel on the track on something hard to put into words - like the faith some people have can help them through anything, that whatever happens there is still a special kind of love there. Some pagan faiths are like that too.

Other times I think that many Chrisitian religions seem to think of human beings as worthless things who can only pray that God will take pity on them so they won't go to hell, and who'll have to take anything God throws at them like dogs with a bad Master. That is Job's story for me.

Would you like to say more on this matter, to sort out these thoughts?

[Ozme52]

No, I read virtually none of his post-carotid-surgery fiction.


I afraid you lost me completely here. Maybe I do not know him well enough, I only read two of his books, Job being one on them.


Ah, I read it as a literary opinion - but it was literal ;-) I did not know he had had an operation, and that that changed his writing. Interesting.

Ah. Yes. I was indeed being literal. I enjoyed his earlier work far more than that which he produced afterwards. In part, because, for good or ill, I like my protagonists to be clearly male or female. Gender bending and bi-curious heroes and heroines... I don't find them engaging my imagination so I lose interest in their struggle and the book becomes tedious.

I'm not phobic about it mind you... just not curious enough to continue suspending my disbelief (as one must often do with science-fiction.)

Now... back to the topic of God. :dunno:

[Thorne]

Why does God have to stop a natural disaster from occuring? Why is it that if he allows one to happen that all of a sudden he's hateful and doesn't give a shit about anybody?
If I were walking down the street and saw someone attacking another person, and did nothing to stop it, or even stood by and watched, I would be as guilty of a crime as the perpetrator, wouldn't I?

Or if I saw a man walking onto a plane with a bomb strapped to his chest, wouldn't I be guilty of killing innocent people if I failed to notify the authorities?

I look upon the idea of God in this same way. He COULD prevent the disaster. He doesn't, which implicates him in the suffering of the victims. Even if we assume that there is a reason for the disaster itself, God COULD protect the people, preventing unnecessary death and injury and all the horrors that the victims must suffer.

The fact that God does not intervene in these disasters leads me to two possible conclusions:
1 - Like a scientist testing bacterial colonies for resistance to antibiotics, God simply observes the results of these disasters, seeing which people survive and which do not. The suffering of those who survive in a damaged condition is immaterial to him. The survivors must live with the consequences.

2 - There is no God. Natural disasters happen, and people die and are injured. The survivors must live with the consequences.

In both cases the results are the same. Naturally, my opinion is that the second case is true, but even if I'm wrong and the first case is closer to the truth, this is certainly not the God of Abraham and Mohammad, and is most definitely not a being worthy of any kind of worship or adoration.

Now, one can probably come up with many other possible explanations for the apparent absence of any intervention by God, but they all seem to end the same way: The survivors must live with the consequences.

[Saheli]

I am not sure I can follow your argument. I read your text as saying God did not cause the disaster, but also did not prevent it, and why should he?
And further that to think that the reason God allows this to happen is a test, or proves that he is hateful, is ridiculous.
Yes, that's basically what I'm saying.


So what is the conclusion?? Given the ability to prevent, why does he allow it?
This is a question for which I doubt anyone has an answer. Everyone has theories, but nobody knows why. If it was obvious, this thread wouldn't exist. I don't know why things are allowed to happen any more than anybody else does. But I don't believe that just because they do happen and because suffering exists that God is misanthropic. And I don't believe that such happenings mean that if God exists, he set the universe in motion and then observes without interfering. I don't understand why there must only be two options. If we can all admit that we don't know, then why can't we admit that there may be more than these conclusions? Perhaps a conclusion exists which we have not thought of that is correct. Humans are extremely intelligent, but is it really out of the question to consider that maybe we just can't figure this one out? And if we can't, does that mean that God is hateful, uninvolved, or nonexistant? I just can't help but think that we tend to be very limited in our thinking and wonder if there are other options that we have not considered or cannot comprehend...


The folowing question is also not meant as anything other than a genuie interest in these matters: why should Christians love and follow Christ no matter what?
Well, in my response I only mentioned Christians, but after submitting it I started thinking that really it applies to everyone. Anytime we have a belief or an action that we really believe in, we will stand by that prinicple no matter what. So Christians should love and follow Christ no matter what only if they truly believe they are believing the right thing. If they aren't convinced that Christ is the true King, then what's the point except being fake? Maybe a show for some shallow societal gains in some way...I don't know. Why should people who support human rights follow that end no matter what? Because that's what they believe in, and if they didn't do what they felt was the right thing to do then they are not being true to themselves, and in my opinion life's fulfillment comes from being true to yourself.


What does God want with Christians? What is the relationship, if I may put it this way, between Christ and Christians?The answer to the question about what God wants is tricky, because it opens up so many debates. I believe that God wants respect, love, honor...This begs the question, "How can you respect/love/honor God when he allows natural disasters? When good people suffer in the world? When he remains intangible?" I view the relationship between Christ and Christians just like I view the relationship between a Dom and a sub. Love must be present on both sides, along with trust...the Bible states that the relationship is a familial one. Many times Christians are called "sons of God". In my opinion, if you do not feel you can trust that God exists or in the goodness of God, why would you waste your time being a Christian? But if you do believe in God and can trust in his goodness, and if you decide to become a follower of Christ, then you should seek to honor him in all you do because you have placed your trust and loyalty in him.


God gives, God takes, his name be praised. Why? Well this ties in with what I said a minute ago. If you don't believe in the ultimate goodness of God, then the 'God takes' part will be so difficult/hurtful that praising becomes completely out of the question. So I believe that line would only be applicable if you already believe in Christ...and by applicable I don't really mean 'the validity of the application' so much as 'the possibility of the application'.


Sometimes I feel on the track on something hard to put into words - like the faith some people have can help them through anything, that whatever happens there is still a special kind of love there. Some pagan faiths are like that too.

Other times I think that many Chrisitian religions seem to think of human beings as worthless things who can only pray that God will take pity on them so they won't go to hell, and who'll have to take anything God throws at them like dogs with a bad Master. That is Job's story for me.

Would you like to say more on this matter, to sort out these thoughts?

I think that faith and love are the two most powerful forces in the universe: I'm sure some would disagree. And like you, I have moments where I feel like faith could literally move mountains (reference accidental). We remember stories of faith much longer than stories of despair about people who had no faith. Why is that? So that's why I think the way I do about faith. But faith is very tricky, because it is easily used a crutch...and how do you know when it is real in someone else?

Unfortunately, most Christians aren't real Christians. They enjoy bragging about how wonderful they are and how close to God they are (excuse me while I puke)...and they just LOVE telling you how to live YOUR life. I believe Christians who use scare tactics (or any other religion for that matter) to get people to believe so they can escape something undesirable is despicable and something that God does not appreciate. And I believe it's that very tactic that has made Christians seem so evil to others: self-righteous, self-centered, condeming, small-minded. What really pisses me off about Christians is that they don't even take the time to try and figure out why they believe things...I guess it's more convenient to just throw out a, "God works in mysterious ways" followed up with a, "I'll pray for you."

These people are a disgrace, and their relationship to God is nonexistant. As far as Hell, this may begin another debate. The theology of the Bible goes something like this: Fallen people go to Hell because they are not worthy of Heaven, which is perfect. (And again, this ties into the "If God allows it, he is guilty, whether directly or indirectly," argument) Jesus was sent to provide a blood sacrifice so that people COULD get into Heaven. The theology, then, purports that God doesn't send people to Hell; they go there automatically. Further, God went out of his way to make sure that they could get into Heaven, because he loves them.

Now I know the argument will probably be that if God is in complete control of eveything, why did he have to do anything other than just change the law of Hell (or however you want to say it) with a thought? Why the trouble of sending Jesus? And beyond that, if people still go to Hell, then how much does he love them anyway?

I have no answer for the first question. I spend a lot of time introspectively with apologetics but have not wrestled too much with this. I have no idea. It seems, though, that God, who is in complete control over everything, is now subject--bound, if you will--to laws that he created. Why is that? How can you be over all if you are bound by a law? I simply don't know.

For Jesus, perhaps to demonstrate love. And for the third question, how much did they love him might be a better way of putting it.

I am only showing different ways of looking at the issue. I hope nobody misunderstands me to think that I feel my ideas are superior.

[Saheli]

If I were walking down the street and saw someone attacking another person, and did nothing to stop it, or even stood by and watched, I would be as guilty of a crime as the perpetrator, wouldn't I?

I look upon the idea of God in this same way. He COULD prevent the disaster. He doesn't, which implicates him in the suffering of the victims. Even if we assume that there is a reason for the disaster itself, God COULD protect the people, preventing unnecessary death and injury and all the horrors that the victims must suffer.

The fact that God does not intervene in these disasters leads me to two possible conclusions:
1 - Like a scientist testing bacterial colonies for resistance to antibiotics, God simply observes the results of these disasters, seeing which people survive and which do not. The suffering of those who survive in a damaged condition is immaterial to him. The survivors must live with the consequences.

2 - There is no God. Natural disasters happen, and people die and are injured. The survivors must live with the consequences.

In both cases the results are the same. Naturally, my opinion is that the second case is true, but even if I'm wrong and the first case is closer to the truth, this is certainly not the God of Abraham and Mohammad, and is most definitely not a being worthy of any kind of worship or adoration.

Now, one can probably come up with many other possible explanations for the apparent absence of any intervention by God, but they all seem to end the same way: The survivors must live with the consequences.

I completely agree that God, having not prevented the earthquake when he could, implicates him in the suffering of the victims. And now the question should not only be what does this say about God, but also what does this say about suffering? As far as God is concerned, why are the only two options that he is uninvolved or hates people? As far as suffering is concerned, again who of us could really say for certainty that any answer is correct? But there are some things that we do know about suffering: suffering gets people's attention...when someone notices suffering they go help meet needs. When people suffer sometimes they learn things they otherwise might not learn. I am NOT saying that that these are the reasons why the earthquake happened. I am only saying that there are many things to consider. So if God, who could prevent himself from being implicated in the sufferings of these innocent people allow himself to be so implicated, the larger question is why? Is God an idiot? He just didn't consider what people would think if he didn't stop the earthquake? Does he want people to think of him as a hateful creator who doesn't care about the creatures he created? Is he just not there at all, and all these questions are a waste of time? I think all the questions we can come up with are worth considering.

You say in the end of your post that other options may exist but all end the same way, with the survivors bearing the pains of the event. Yes, of course that's right. And to that point we have no idea what those consequences will mean to each individual, although I think it's pretty safe to say that this will probably (hopefully!) be the most traumatic, painful (physically/mentally) event each will ever have to endure. We all have burdens, and I am NOT trying to minimize suffering; please don't misunderstand. I am saying that everyone in this world suffers a myriad of hurts throughout life for different reasons. Those who don't believe in any kind of God or supreme being is likely to believe that hurt is random and impersonal. Some people believe that all hardships are a result of sin, and there are probably dozens of theories inbetween the two extremes. The people will have to live with what happened forever; for some it might ruin their life: perhaps they will never get over what happened. For some it might renew their faith in people, finding that people are much more compassionate than once thought. For some it might be the beginning of a new life: I've heard on the news that Obama is thinking about passing laws that would allow more Haitians (hope I spelled that right) to live in America. The point is that we have no idea what the actual implications of the consequences suffered by the people mean. We can only guess. And while nobody here would argue that the tragedy was anything less of horrendous, we simply cannot say that nothing good can come from it. I am not using that statement to say, "See, so God was good to not prevent the earthquake...some Haitians can live in America now." That is not what I believe at all.

Like I said, I have no answer as to why God wouldn't interfere. I just don't believe that it means he doesn't care, that he isn't involved, or that he isn't there.

[Saheli]

Other times I think that many Chrisitian religions seem to think of human beings as worthless things who can only pray that God will take pity on them so they won't go to hell, and who'll have to take anything God throws at them like dogs with a bad Master. That is Job's story for me.

Would you like to say more on this matter, to sort out these thoughts?
-thir

Christians who believe that they should just take whatever is throws at them are no different than other people..I mean, everyone has bad things thrown at them all the time. We just deal the best we can, hopefully learn something, and move on. I understand you're specifically talking about Job, wondering why he was so happy...well, he wasn't. My thoughts on Christians who look at the religion as being slave to a bad Master are ignorant and in my opinion not true Christians, because (as I mentioned earlier) what is the point of being a Christian (further, how CAN you be a Christian) if you do not believe in the goodness of God? I would NEVER agree to be a slave to a master I felt was evil or didn't care about me. So my response would be anyone who says their master is a bad master does not follow that master. Either they follow with disdain or do not follow at all because they do not have respect for him. So any religious person that shows disdain for a master they claim to serve is a false believer, and I wouldn't waste my time listening to anything he/she had to say.

(sorry I got long-winded and forgot to address that last point)

[13'sbadkitty]

the main reason i have opted out of religion is because of the this is the proof of God stuff and that is the same reason i opted out of atheism for the this is the proof of no god stuff. i have so many meaningful experiences and moments in my life that aren't exactly on my fun to have had happen list and they end up being on my thats how i know there is a God list. the essence of being human to me is to wonder and ponder and try to find for ones self is there or isn't there a God and what does that mean to me? rather than what do i think that means to you...sorry couldn't resist my own 2 cents being thrown in.

[Thorne]

I stopped believing when the only answer I could get to my questions was, "You have to have faith." I found I had no faith, not without evidence, and I could find no evidence. The older I've gotten and the more I've learned, the less evidence I find for the existence of any kind of supernatural being, be it the Judeo/Christian/Islamic God or any other.

IF there is a god out there, it does not seem to have any meaningful interaction with us here on Earth, and in fact doesn't seem to have any interaction at all. Everything we learn about nature proceeds exactly as our science says it should if there were no gods. And no one, in all the history of humanity, has ever been able to present verifiable evidence of any such interaction. It's all anecdotes and interpretations.

If you want to show that God exists, just show some evidence, which can be tested and verified. Maybe all those who have died in Haiti were non-Christians? Or maybe they were all atheists? Or perhaps they were all Christians, taken from the scene so they wouldn't have to suffer the aftereffects? Could it be that God only killed all the greedy, evil, criminals?

But history shows us that the killings in these disasters, whether man-made or "acts of God", are quite homogeneous. Certainly the poor tend to die in greater numbers than the rich, but there are more poor people than rich, and they tend to live in riskier environments, so that's not really meaningful.

It's quite true that, IF there is a God, we can not understand his reasons for doing anything. He is so far above us that our meager minds cannot comprehend him. But that does not make him worthy of our worship and adoration, especially if his morality is so far removed from our own. We cannot know anything about him, cannot know anything about his plans for us, either now or after death. And if his plan for the universe is set, what makes us think he will alter it just because we ask?

So until we can see uncontrovertible evidence of such a god, or any god (and by that, I mean something akin to a burning bush in the middle of Times Square doing a live televised interview with Barbara Walters!) I'll have to continue with my unbelief.

Unless I get struck by lightning! :eek:

[Saheli]

I stopped believing when the only answer I could get to my questions was, "You have to have faith." I found I had no faith, not without evidence, and I could find no evidence. The older I've gotten and the more I've learned, the less evidence I find for the existence of any kind of supernatural being, be it the Judeo/Christian/Islamic God or any other.

IF there is a god out there, it does not seem to have any meaningful interaction with us here on Earth, and in fact doesn't seem to have any interaction at all. Everything we learn about nature proceeds exactly as our science says it should if there were no gods. And no one, in all the history of humanity, has ever been able to present verifiable evidence of any such interaction. It's all anecdotes and interpretations.

If you want to show that God exists, just show some evidence, which can be tested and verified. Maybe all those who have died in Haiti were non-Christians? Or maybe they were all atheists? Or perhaps they were all Christians, taken from the scene so they wouldn't have to suffer the aftereffects? Could it be that God only killed all the greedy, evil, criminals?

But history shows us that the killings in these disasters, whether man-made or "acts of God", are quite homogeneous. Certainly the poor tend to die in greater numbers than the rich, but there are more poor people than rich, and they tend to live in riskier environments, so that's not really meaningful.

It's quite true that, IF there is a God, we can not understand his reasons for doing anything. He is so far above us that our meager minds cannot comprehend him. But that does not make him worthy of our worship and adoration, especially if his morality is so far removed from our own. We cannot know anything about him, cannot know anything about his plans for us, either now or after death. And if his plan for the universe is set, what makes us think he will alter it just because we ask?

So until we can see uncontrovertible evidence of such a god, or any god (and by that, I mean something akin to a burning bush in the middle of Times Square doing a live televised interview with Barbara Walters!) I'll have to continue with my unbelief.

Unless I get struck by lightning! :eek:

I am not trying to convince anybody of anything. I am just saying how I feel; I realize it isn't extremely popular. I saw a quote about faith once, "Faith is not believing in spite of evidence; faith is obeying in spite of consequences." To me, that means doing whatever I believe in, whether it's in God or in helping the homeless person downtown..I think more people should obey their conscience.. There is no empirical test I can give to prove God, and I don't care to try. You are entitled to your beliefs, and I don't want to interfere with that at all. There was a man once, who sought to disprove the existence of God and has said that in trying to disprove he actually ended up believing in God...seems like an interesting story, but I don't know a lot about it.

There will never be any fool-proof evidence either way; this argument will continue until the end of time. Until then we're all just wading around in our best guesses and (like you said) interpretations of the things we see and feel. I love listening to people who think differently than I do, though. It's amazing how unique we an all be.

[13'sbadkitty]

for me and what i needed as far as evidence (btw i have no major world religious views at all) was not what anyone else needs for evidence. Maybe the same thing that got my fundamentalist mother out of bed in the morning would have had me put a bullet in my brain. The argument that God can't be proved is not an effective argument for the lack of God anymore than have faith is an effective argument for believing. During the 80's and all the God caused the aids epidemic crap got me to leave the church. i can say that i have absolute evidence of a God in my life that is what i need for me. Unfortunately in my eyes, people are always the problem. Why oh why would God cause an earthquake or Tsunami or a car jacking? Just because there is evil in the world and catastrophes, that means God causes them or doesn't mind them? i don't see how that means that at all.

[DuncanONeil]

Such events do not disprove God!


This was the title of a program on BBC 2 today.

An age old discussion is of course that if God (Gods,Goddess) is all powerful and loving, why does he allow such things to happen?

Several in the program talked about these things being a test for your faith, or a way to improve your character because you need important choices in your life. (Apperently this would apply to survivors, whether to help each other or fight over food.)

Some said life was a gift however long or short, and we should be happy for what we get.

So, does things like the earhquake prove that there is no God and if not, why are these things allowed to happen?

Are the Gods (if they exist) really interested in us on a personal basis?

[Thorne]

I saw a quote about faith once, "Faith is not believing in spite of evidence; faith is obeying in spite of consequences." To me, that means doing whatever I believe in, whether it's in God or in helping the homeless person downtown..I think more people should obey their conscience..
You do realize that this can also apply to murderers? A man in Kansas was just convicted of killing an abortion doctor, because he was doing what he believed in. Of course, he tried to avoid the consequences, so perhaps his faith wasn't all that strong.

There is no empirical test I can give to prove God, and I don't care to try. You are entitled to your beliefs, and I don't want to interfere with that at all.
I don't try to destroy people's faith, but I do think people have to understand their beliefs, and especially to understand how those beliefs can be twisted by leaders of organized religions. Atrocities like 9/11, or the slaughter of gays in Uganda, or the kidnapping of children in Haiti are only some of the consequences.

There will never be any fool-proof evidence either way; this argument will continue until the end of time. Until then we're all just wading around in our best guesses and (like you said) interpretations of the things we see and feel. I love listening to people who think differently than I do, though. It's amazing how unique we an all be.
I agree that there can never be fool-proof evidence to deny the existence of gods. There COULD be fool-proof evidence FOR the existence, but (conveniently) these all-powerful beings just don't seem to want to provide such evidence.

[Thorne]

Just because there is evil in the world and catastrophes, that means God causes them or doesn't mind them? i don't see how that means that at all.
It's not that this is evidence against gods in general, just that it is evidence against the standard J/C/I god of the bible. The point is that we don't know, cannot know, whether such gods exist without direct evidence. You can believe, or not believe, whatever you wish, but without tangible evidence it's no better than make-believe.

[Saheli]

You do realize that this can also apply to murderers? A man in Kansas was just convicted of killing an abortion doctor, because he was doing what he believed in. Of course, he tried to avoid the consequences, so perhaps his faith wasn't all that strong.
I see what you mean. I don't mean that everyone should follow their conscience without any boundaries. I think that's dangerous; you pointed out a very good reason why we need boundaries. I think that we should listen to our conscience and do all we feel we should with respect to laws and the basic rights of people. The man who killed the abortion doctor may claim that he was doing what he believed in, and maybe so...but to claim Christ in that murder is ridiculous, since the Bible prohibits Christians from not only murdering, but taking revenge as well. So as far as murderers are concerned, murder is against the law; laws should always provide boundaries to what we do if we are going to be decent citizens.


I don't try to destroy people's faith, but I do think people have to understand their beliefs, and especially to understand how those beliefs can be twisted by leaders of organized religions. Atrocities like 9/11, or the slaughter of gays in Uganda, or the kidnapping of children in Haiti are only some of the consequences.
I completely agree. I think that religious leaders who capitalize on natural disasters or other atrocities so that they can 'explain' how people who suffered somehow deserved it and if only everyone could be more like whoever is doing the condeming then these things wouldn't happen are completely evil. I think that is one of the absolute worst things anyone who subscribes to any religion can do.

[Ozme52]

Such events do not disprove God!

That's it? A pronouncement? No explanation or proof offered? Not even a discourse of how you came to your opinion? In otherwords...

I should just "believe" you? :hubba:

[Thorne]

That's it? A pronouncement? No explanation or proof offered? Not even a discourse of how you came to your opinion? In otherwords...

I should just "believe" you? :hubba:

This is the fundamentalist tactic:
"I say it, therefore it's so."
"You can't show us a crocoduck, therefore evilution is wrong."
"I can't understand how the universe could have developed from nothing, therefore God did it."

They don't need evidence, they don't need explanations, simply pronouncements from on high.

[13'sbadkitty]

It's not that this is evidence against gods in general, just that it is evidence against the standard J/C/I god of the bible. The point is that we don't know, cannot know, whether such gods exist without direct evidence. You can believe, or not believe, whatever you wish, but without tangible evidence it's no better than make-believe.

Here's the thing for me, it may very well be make believe but it works for me. i have tangible evidence that i see as proof that if i explained may mean absolutely nothing to you at all. i watched my oh so fundamentalist mother in church 5 or 6 days and to me it was amusing but to her it brought great comfort. i don't feel that because i don't believe in Jesus that i have the right to ask her to prove it as why would i want to remove her comfort? my ex is a devout athiest and he is as arrogant about it as some born agains are fanatical. no offense to anyone at all, btw. when groups of religious people come knocking at my door to talk, while i doubt i will ever be one of them i like talking to people who enjoy their beliefs so strongly. proof to me is in the eye of the beholder.

[Thorne]

Here's the thing for me, it may very well be make believe but it works for me. i have tangible evidence that i see as proof that if i explained may mean absolutely nothing to you at all.

If it makes you comfortable, then go ahead and believe. I have no quarrel with that. I'm not trying to prove that gods don't exist. I'm only pointing out fallacies in what we are taught about these gods. Fallacies which, to my mind, tend to deny the existence of those gods.

Any evidence which you must explain, or which is only visible to you, is not tangible evidence. While it may be valid evidence for you, enough to sustain your faith, that doesn't help anyone who cannot see it for himself. But if you come to me and attempt to preach your faith as absolute truth, based upon evidence which only you can see, I'm going to preach right back at you about the fallacy of that faith. And if you try to have that belief system forced onto young minds in school as if it were fact, I'll fight against you.

[13'sbadkitty]

If it makes you comfortable, then go ahead and believe. I have no quarrel with that. I'm not trying to prove that gods don't exist. I'm only pointing out fallacies in what we are taught about these gods. Fallacies which, to my mind, tend to deny the existence of those gods.

Any evidence which you must explain, or which is only visible to you, is not tangible evidence. While it may be valid evidence for you, enough to sustain your faith, that doesn't help anyone who cannot see it for himself. But if you come to me and attempt to preach your faith as absolute truth, based upon evidence which only you can see, I'm going to preach right back at you about the fallacy of that faith. And if you try to have that belief system forced onto young minds in school as if it were fact, I'll fight against you.

i actually agree with quite alot of what you said, my beliefs include respecting others paths a valid and true for them. i don't believe i have the right to judge if their path is right. my proof of God is that i no longer use drugs as do lots of people in AA, once we stopped trying on human power. that may sound corny to someone else. do i use that on my kids? not at all! they are left to figure it out. i have done the best i can to introduce as many belief systems to them and they are left to choose one, some, none or all as they see fit. proselytizing, elitism, judgment and blame are not of God at all. that's people.

[Saheli]

do i use that on my kids? not at all! they are left to figure it out.That's the sad part for me. We are all doing the best we can to figure out what the life around us means. If someone decides there are no gods, if someone decides there are many, if someone decides there is only one, if someone decides that god is really a state of mind...whatever a person believes, why can't other people just leave it alone? There is nothing worse than for someone to attack the way you feel about something and like Thorne said, especially when all they have to defend it is some type of, "Trust me..I know better." That's just insulting. People aren't stupid, and no matter what anyone believes, I don't think that anyone who believes something hasn't thought it through. So I wish that in this area people could just be more understanding. You don't believe the way I do? Fine...you have your reasons, and I have mine. I don't understand why people in this world can't just leave it at that.

I feel like the best thing I can do in life is try to figure out what's important to me, to try my best to not take those things for granted, and to try and leave a positive impact on those around me. It is definitely not my job to try and tell others what to think, and I'm pretty sure we can all agree that people who do that are not only annoying but leave a negative impact. 13'sbadkitty, I think it's really good that you don't try to shove your beliefs down your children's throats. I wish that more people would do the same. This world would be a much more peaceful place if we would just respect the fact that we are all intelligent creatures doing the best we can with what we have.

[Thorne]

We are all doing the best we can to figure out what the life around us means.
This is where I run into difficulties. Why does life have to mean anything? It just is. Why does there have to be something after death? Just because we want it? I would think that knowing this is all there is, this is all the life you will get, should be enough to motivate people to get the most out of that life. Skating through, hoping for some nebulous after-life is just the lazy way out.


People aren't stupid, and no matter what anyone believes, I don't think that anyone who believes something hasn't thought it through.
In my experience there are far too many people who are stupid, or who at least act stupidly. And the large majority of people who believe things don't really know why they believe it. They were raised that way, they were taught that way, so that's how it is. If they did stop to think about it, many would have to decide that they were misled their whole lives. Living in the South, I have seen an awful lot of so-called Christians who can't even understand the 4th grade level of a newspaper, much less the more challenging Bible which they so vehemently espouse.


you have your reasons, and I have mine. I don't understand why people in this world can't just leave it at that.
That works for me! Keep religion out of the schools and the government and I'll be happy to keep science and government out of the churches.


This world would be a much more peaceful place if we would just respect the fact that we are all intelligent creatures doing the best we can with what we have.
Amen!

[Saheli]

This is where I run into difficulties. Why does life have to mean anything? It just is. Why does there have to be something after death? Just because we want it? I would think that knowing this is all there is, this is all the life you will get, should be enough to motivate people to get the most out of that life. Skating through, hoping for some nebulous after-life is just the lazy way out.
lol...well, life doesn't HAVE to mean anything. If life doesn't mean anything, then the answer to what life means is nothing. So then life still means something in that it means nothing. I wasn't trying to say that it HAD to mean something...I just didn't specify that to me, it having no meaning is still its meaning to an individual...no meaning is always an option!


In my experience there are far too many people who are stupid, or who at least act stupidly. And the large majority of people who believe things don't really know why they believe it. They were raised that way, they were taught that way, so that's how it is. If they did stop to think about it, many would have to decide that they were misled their whole lives. Living in the South, I have seen an awful lot of so-called Christians who can't even understand the 4th grade level of a newspaper, much less the more challenging Bible which they so vehemently espouse.
When I said people aren't stupid, I mean that the human being is an intelligent species. I completely agree with you. Humans are intelligent but few choose to act on it...sort of the difference between knowledge and wisdom. Most people don't even care to figure out facts to be able to SHOW wisdom...like you said, "they were raised that way...so that's how it is."



That works for me! Keep religion out of the schools and the government and I'll be happy to keep science and government out of the churches.
Yes, I agree. There was a reason why the founder of this country thought that separation of church and state is a good idea, and I agree with them. Personally, I feel like if you are religious and are completely convinced you're right, why do you feel the need to parade your ideas everywhere? It just seems to me that the people who fight so hard to plaster ideas constantly must not be too convinced of those ideas themselves: otherwise why fight so hard to keep it in people's faces? Isn't that just the basic bandwagon technique? That isn't a good way to convince anyone of anything. It's just childish and annoying.

[IAN 2411]

This was the title of a program on BBC 2 today.

An age old discussion is of course that if God (Gods,Goddess) is all powerful and loving, why does he allow such things to happen?

Several in the program talked about these things being a test for your faith, or a way to improve your character because you need important choices in your life. (Apperently this would apply to survivors, whether to help each other or fight over food.)

Some said life was a gift however long or short, and we should be happy for what we get.

So, does things like the earhquake prove that there is no God and if not, why are these things allowed to happen?

Are the Gods (if they exist) really interested in us on a personal basis?

I have written a book about a fictitious warrior, who like I do, believes in the old Gods, Odin Zeus, Neptune etc, I hope to have it published sometime this year, and it is being edited as I write this post. The Gods were kept in the heavens by the mortals on earth to spiritually guide them through life, and as long as people believe in them they will still exist. Stop believing in a God and he will fade away, every God that you put before me I will tell you it is a myth, because that is what I have been taught and not what I believe. In my book the Gods I am talking about where put there to oversee the world in its infancy, when we really believed in trolls, fairies, imps, elves, witches and demons. They in turn were put there by a greater being, and shall we say as in my book the Creators, and it is these beings that invisibly patrol the universe.

I don’t think for one minute that the Haiti earthquake was a test of faith; it was a natural occurrence, and before we that are in this thread die, there will be many more. There will be more Tsunamis, Earth quakes and volcanic eruptions, they are meant to happen as the earth cools, and are in the pages of time if we could read them. If these Creators were real I am sure that they have seen the destruction and death, but their hands would be tied. If you go back in time and save a life, it is a fact that you will change the future dramatically, it is the same if the Creators save thousands of lives; that are in the pages of time to die at that precise time, once again the future is changed. The lives that are saved in hospitals or minor accidents and wars are meant to be saved, as you must remember that a lot more lives die on the operating table and in the same wars. Is there a god? The unanswered Question, but the truth of the question is, if you believe in a God then he/she exists.

Regards ian 2411

[Thorne]

If these Creators were real I am sure that they have seen the destruction and death, but their hands would be tied. If you go back in time and save a life, it is a fact that you will change the future dramatically, it is the same if the Creators save thousands of lives; that are in the pages of time to die at that precise time, once again the future is changed. The lives that are saved in hospitals or minor accidents and wars are meant to be saved, as you must remember that a lot more lives die on the operating table and in the same wars.
So, predestination. The future is fixed and there's nothing we can do to change it. In which case, you have no choice in whether you believe or not. Your path is programmed from the moment of creation.

Sorry, I "choose" not to believe this.

[Thorne]

if you believe in a God then he/she exists.

But only in your own mind.

[IAN 2411]

If these Creators were real I am sure that they have seen the destruction and death, but their hands would be tied. If you go back in time and save a life, it is a fact that you will change the future dramatically, it is the same if the Creators save thousands of lives; that are in the pages of time to die at that precise time, once again the future is changed. The lives that are saved in hospitals or minor accidents and wars are meant to be saved, as you must remember that a lot more lives die on the operating table and in the same wars.


So, predestination. The future is fixed and there's nothing we can do to change it. In which case, you have no choice in whether you believe or not. Your path is programmed from the moment of creation.

Sorry, I "choose" not to believe this.

It is your choice not to believe Thorn, that is what the free world is all about, freedom of choice, but don’t mock others that do believe. Neither should you mock the theory of the past being changed once it has been set, and yes I mean set. If you went back in time and saved all those lives that were being lost in WW Two, by killing Hitler before the war even started, then Both the UK and the USA would be in the same predicament as China with its population explosion and there would be no Israel. Once that war had been won our countries futures had been re-set, and this will keep taking place to the end of time, whether you choose to believe or not.


Is there a god? The unanswered Question, but the truth of the question is, if you believe in a God then he/she exists.


But only in your own mind.
If your wife was run over by a car while you were at work, [and I pray to God this never takes place]. Once you found out, you would be driving across town like a madman trying to get to the hospital, and in your mind you would be saying [God please let her be ok]. Thank you for stating the obvious.

[13'sbadkitty]

i am getting married in a few months and wanted a ceremony that had more than the requirements of New York State. i found an officiant who was raised a Jew, became a Zen Buddhist and is a Reverend. He and i were talking he said something i really liked which is maybe veering off the path alittle bit. He said what we call God really comes down to alphabet. The one thing i do teach my kids is that God is everywhere and in everyone if you look hard enough. i practice Native American spirituality. The only thing of that that i try to impress upon them is respect everything as part of Creator and Creation. Everything has something to show you if you look. As Ian said there will be many more deaths in many more ways till the end of time. My mother just died 12/24 after being sick for 5 years and suffering the entire time. As in Job, she was a devout Christian when she got sick. There were times when she said that she didn't know why God let her suffer so. As in Job, the only thing anyone could do was sit quietly and attend to her suffering. i went to the Tibetan book of the Dead for my guidance in how to help her. Did anything i or the Christians do help her? She had also gone to the Rabbi during her lucid times as she was from a Jewish background. Did he bring her comfort? i don't know. She suffered worse than anyone i have ever watched die and cried out for help 24/7. The morning she died she spoke to her aide (she hadn't been lucid for months) and told her she was ready to die, to rest in peace and she died shortly after. So my point is this, during her suffering it clearly looked like all the faith in the world did nothing at all for her. She had said she felt abandoned. In the last moments of her life ( a devout life) it was clear that her faith had sustained her and led her to the next plane. i do not believe in heaven or hell. i do believe in a spirit world that mirrors this except we are closer to the Creator. i do believe we have lessons to learn that help us to grow in the direction our spirit is to grow. Do i think that i have the right to tell you how to live? in my beliefs that is a very big no no. My point is only that suffering doesn't mean that God is allowing it as death is part of this world. We suffer through birth, we suffer through death. To me its the same, to you it is what ever it is. Suffering is as pleasure is. To me reflections of the same thing. Nobody ever walks into a tv or radio station saying there was no natural disasters today so this is proof that God is here. i think its beautiful that we think and wonder and discuss the God idea as part of being human. To me, its proof that somewhere within us is a spot that needs this to grow. If there is a God and God wanted us to know for sure, it seems like it would be easy enough. i think we are meant to wonder and discuss and argue about this. i know i went several different directions at once with this post, random girl strikes again.

[Thorne]

It is your choice not to believe Thorn, that is what the free world is all about, freedom of choice, but don’t mock others that do believe. Neither should you mock the theory of the past being changed once it has been set, and yes I mean set.
I was not mocking anyone, I don't think. At least not deliberately. But I do laugh at the predestination idea. I don't know what you mean by "the theory of the past being changed once it has been set", but I thought we were talking about the future. No, the past is done, fixed, immutable. The future is what we make it. Your post implied that the future, too was fixed, and that the gods cannot interfere because of that. That would mean, then, that our present is their past, and our path is fixed. I cannot see any evidence for that, however. While travel into the past is limited to history and archeology and such, we are all traveling into the future with every breath we take. And it's changed by every decision we make.


If your wife was run over by a car while you were at work, [and I pray to God this never takes place]. Once you found out, you would be driving across town like a madman trying to get to the hospital, and in your mind you would be saying [God please let her be ok]. Thank you for stating the obvious.
While not quite so drastic, perhaps, I was in a similar situation when my second son was born. We got to the hospital easily, they put her in a birthing room, or whatever the hell it was called then, and things seemed all right. Suddenly they were wheeling her down the corridor, nurses calling for a surgery, the doctor tearing off his jacket, asking where his people were, a nurse dragging me into a changing room to scrub and put on a surgical gown. I'll tell you, it was a terrifying few minutes, for sure. But I didn't call on some fictional deity for help. I called my mother. On the phone. Does that make her God?

People dream up all kinds of creations in their minds. Libraries are full of these creations. It's called fiction. Thinking about them doesn't make them real. Writing about them doesn't make them real. The gods of modern man are no more real than the gods of Valhalla, or Mount Olympus, or the great god Gurk who brought the mammoths each year.

[Thorne]

13'sbadkitty,
I'm very sorry to hear of your loss. And I'm glad that your faith has helped you to deal with that loss.

My own parents are still here, though my mother is not well. Thankfully she's not in any pain, but she has become more religious as she's grown older. It brings her comfort and I try to support her in it where I can. Like you, I won't try to force my beliefs, or lack of them, on anyone. I only ask that they provide me the same courtesy.

Again, my condolences.

[IAN 2411]

[QUOTE=Thorne;843604] While not quite so drastic, perhaps, I was in a similar situation when my second son was born. We got to the hospital easily, they put her in a birthing room, or whatever the hell it was called then, and things seemed all right. Suddenly they were wheeling her down the corridor, nurses calling for a surgery, the doctor tearing off his jacket, asking where his people were, a nurse dragging me into a changing room to scrub and put on a surgical gown. I'll tell you, it was a terrifying few minutes, for sure. But I didn't call on some fictional deity for help. I called my mother. On the phone. Does that make her God? QUOTE]

Are you trying to tell 48.207 members of this site and me Thorn, that since you were born you have never uttered any of these phrases? Good god, good lord, for god’s sake, god knows, god bless you, sorry but please excuse me for saying I don’t believe you.

Does that make her a god?

Was there really any need for that irrelivant question?

Regards ian 2411

[Thorne]

[QUOTE=Thorne;843604]Are you trying to tell 48.207 members of this site and me Thorn, that since you were born you have never uttered any of these phrases? Good god, good lord, for god’s sake, god knows, god bless you, sorry but please excuse me for saying I don’t believe you.
Of course not! That's not what I said at all. But what difference if I do say it? I've said things like that all my life. They're endemic to the American language. But just because I say, "God damn it!" doesn't mean I believe he will.

Your post stated that just believing in gods make them real, did it not?

if you believe in a God then he/she exists.
Now you seem to be saying that just speaking the word, God or Goddess, makes him or her real. But which god/goddess? Thor? Hera? Venus? Jehovah? There's four more I've spoken aloud. I'll expect Xmas cards from all of them.

So:

Was there really any need for that irrelivant question?
Perhaps my question wasn't irrelevant after all? If just believing it can make it true, then faith can, indeed, move mountains. And my mother can, indeed, be a goddess.

[IAN 2411]

[QUOTE=ian 2411;843611]Now you seem to be saying that just speaking the word, God or Goddess, makes him or her real. But which god/goddess? Thor? Hera? Venus? Jehovah? There's four more I've spoken aloud. I'll expect Xmas cards from all of them.

Xmas cards are not about God they are about celebrating the birth of Christ, and he was not a god, he was a prophet. I think that the reason you don’t believe in any god, is because you have never been taught the basics.

[Thorne]

Xmas cards are not about God they are about celebrating the birth of Christ, and he was not a god, he was a prophet. I think that the reason you don’t believe in any god, is because you have never been taught the basics.

LOL! Please! I had more than 12 years of learning the basics. And check your own sources. Christ is the son of God, and in the Catholic Church he is considered an aspect of the Trinity: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Three gods for the price of one!

And CHRISTMAS is about celebrating the birth of Christ, even though from bliblical references he was probably born (if he existed at all) in the spring rather than the beginning of winter, and even though the timing for Christmas was set to coincide with the pagan solstice festivals, first as an effort to hide Christian celebrations amongst the pagan celebrations, and later to make it easier for those pagans to convert.

Besides which, the Xmas card comment was SARCASM!

And finally, the reason I don't believe in any god is because I have never seen anything even remotely resembling evidence for the existence of any supernatural beings. All I've ever heard, my whole life, is hearsay and speculation. And if there's one thing my good Catholic education taught me, it was to rely on evidence, not hearsay, to decide what's real or not.

So again I say, to you and to any others here who feel I'm wrong: show me the evidence!

[IAN 2411]

And Christ is the son of God


Wrong, he was the self proclaimed son of God, the only others that says the same were the disciples. The rest is hearsay.



[QUOTE=Thorne;843706]Besides which, the Xmas card comment was SARCASM[QUOTE]


Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, and very derisive.


If you cannot comment positively then don’t comment at all, I came into thread for a discussion with all posters debating the validity of God. Not to get in an argument with you, because you have some personal vendetta with anyone that differs from your point of view.

[Saheli]

So, predestination. The future is fixed and there's nothing we can do to change it. In which case, you have no choice in whether you believe or not. Your path is programmed from the moment of creation.

Sorry, I "choose" not to believe this.

This is one of the biggest debate in Christian circles also...and there are two main groups that have formed from it. Calvinists believe that God has chosen who will become saved and who won't, and so there is no point in trying to convert anyone or even in trying to become saved, because if you are chosen then you will and if not there is nothing you can do but go to Hell. Non-Calvinsts, obviously, believe the opposite. It's also pretty obvoius that the guy who came up with Calvinistic view was named Calvin...gotta love the creativity!

[Saheli]

i am getting married in a few months and wanted a ceremony that had more than the requirements of New York State. i found an officiant who was raised a Jew, became a Zen Buddhist and is a Reverend. He and i were talking he said something i really liked which is maybe veering off the path alittle bit. He said what we call God really comes down to alphabet. The one thing i do teach my kids is that God is everywhere and in everyone if you look hard enough. i practice Native American spirituality. The only thing of that that i try to impress upon them is respect everything as part of Creator and Creation. Everything has something to show you if you look. As Ian said there will be many more deaths in many more ways till the end of time. My mother just died 12/24 after being sick for 5 years and suffering the entire time. As in Job, she was a devout Christian when she got sick. There were times when she said that she didn't know why God let her suffer so. As in Job, the only thing anyone could do was sit quietly and attend to her suffering. i went to the Tibetan book of the Dead for my guidance in how to help her. Did anything i or the Christians do help her? She had also gone to the Rabbi during her lucid times as she was from a Jewish background. Did he bring her comfort? i don't know. She suffered worse than anyone i have ever watched die and cried out for help 24/7. The morning she died she spoke to her aide (she hadn't been lucid for months) and told her she was ready to die, to rest in peace and she died shortly after. So my point is this, during her suffering it clearly looked like all the faith in the world did nothing at all for her. She had said she felt abandoned. In the last moments of her life ( a devout life) it was clear that her faith had sustained her and led her to the next plane. i do not believe in heaven or hell. i do believe in a spirit world that mirrors this except we are closer to the Creator. i do believe we have lessons to learn that help us to grow in the direction our spirit is to grow. Do i think that i have the right to tell you how to live? in my beliefs that is a very big no no. My point is only that suffering doesn't mean that God is allowing it as death is part of this world. We suffer through birth, we suffer through death. To me its the same, to you it is what ever it is. Suffering is as pleasure is. To me reflections of the same thing. Nobody ever walks into a tv or radio station saying there was no natural disasters today so this is proof that God is here. i think its beautiful that we think and wonder and discuss the God idea as part of being human. To me, its proof that somewhere within us is a spot that needs this to grow. If there is a God and God wanted us to know for sure, it seems like it would be easy enough. i think we are meant to wonder and discuss and argue about this. i know i went several different directions at once with this post, random girl strikes again.

I really appreciate your post. I also believe that we can always find something positive in things and learn from them...like you said "Everything has something to show you if you look." The biggest problem with people is that we're too busy showing everyone else what we think that we don't have time to see what the things around us are trying to show to us. Instead of showing, we should take more time to learn. I am very sorry about the story of your mother. I know it will be hard to get married without your mother there, but I am very glad that you shared her story here. It was very insightful. And I also believe like you that everything has a counter-part...a mirror, and it was a very insightful observation to note that people tend to ask questions in one scenario when they wouldn't even think to ask in the opposite.

[Thorne]

Wrong, he was the self proclaimed son of God, the only others that says the same were the disciples. The rest is hearsay.
Perhaps in your belief system. In the Catholic Church, Jesus is God, one leg of the Trinity.


If you cannot comment positively then don’t comment at all, I came into thread for a discussion with all posters debating the validity of God. Not to get in an argument with you, because you have some personal vendetta with anyone that differs from your point of view.
I have no quarrel with anyone's point of view, per se. I am a firm proponent of letting others believe what they wish. It's only when they try to convince me, or others, that what they believe is absolutely true that I will question them. But if your beliefs are unable to stand up to those questions perhaps you shouldn't put them out into an open forum.

And to my knowledge all of my comments have been of a positive nature. They just don't correspond to your beliefs.

[Hamishlacastle]

I believe that Love/god was in every crack, every crevass of that quake. He is not the reigning authority, nature and others are. His love oozed thro the quake. and his light shone on every dying soul. Where was God you ask he was everywhere. He is the binding force of the light but he can not stop natural laws. Well he can but most often dows nt

[Hamishlacastle]

They say that the basic element of light matter is strings of energy. I believe these strings of energy are the creator of the universe. He has a voice and a spirit as will if you look.

[Hamishlacastle]

I believe that Love/god was in every crack, every crevass of that quake. He is not the reigning authority, nature and others are. His love oozed thro the quake. and his light shone on every dying soul. Where was God you ask he was everywhere. He is the binding force of the light but he can not stop natural laws. Well he can but most often dows nt

[Thorne]

I believe that Love/god was in every crack, every crevass of that quake. He is not the reigning authority, nature and others are. His love oozed thro the quake. and his light shone on every dying soul. Where was God you ask he was everywhere. He is the binding force of the light but he can not stop natural laws. Well he can but most often dows nt

But why would he not intervene?

[IAN 2411]

Ok Thorn get your thinking cap around this idea, it is something that has fasinated my mind for a long time. No one really knows anything about the universe that we live in, and even less about how it was created, ok that theory about the big bang, for those that thought of that , well let them live with it because it is only educated guess work, so now hear is my theory as daft as it might seem. The universe is a molacule of a lump of steel, the earth is an atom of that molacule, and the person that made the steel is God, all hail to the steel workers; and before you ask, no i have no idea if the steel workers god is real or if he has one. LoL

Regards ian 2411

[Thorne]

Ok Thorn get your thinking cap around this idea, it is something that has fasinated my mind for a long time. No one really knows anything about the universe that we live in, and even less about how it was created, ok that theory about the big bang, for those that thought of that , well let them live with it because it is only educated guess work, so now hear is my theory as daft as it might seem. The universe is a molacule of a lump of steel, the earth is an atom of that molacule, and the person that made the steel is God, all hail to the steel workers; and before you ask, no i have no idea if the steel workers god is real or if he has one. LoL

Regards ian 2411
Not a very original idea, I must say. Except for the steel workers part, I suppose. I've read a few science fiction stories in my day with similar plots. And if that's what you want to believe, if that makes you comfortable, fine. I won't argue with it.

But may I ask, do you have any evidence to support your religion? Does your religion explain the observed expansion of the universe? Does your religion explain the observed facts of evolution and geology? If so, show me the evidence. Make your case. Who knows? You may even be able to convert me!

Scientists know a hell of a lot about the universe, through observation and deduction and experimentation. They can explain the evolution of the cosmos from a point many thousandths of a second after the Big Bang (which wasn't really a bang, btw) up to the present and on into the future. They can explain the movement of the continents across the face of the globe, splitting and combining, forming oceans and mountains, over billions of years, and into the future. They can even explain the evolution of life, from a festering puddle of toxic goo; through the huddled, superstitious clans hiding in caves; right up to the sprawling, still superstitious, masses of humanity we have today. All supported by evidence, thoughtful deduction and, yes, even a little educated guesswork thrown in. And none of it requires the presence of an invisible man to keep things running smoothly.

So again I say: Show me the evidence! Go ahead. Make me a convert to your steel worker god.

[IAN 2411]

Not a very original idea, I must say. Except for the steel workers part, I suppose. I've read a few science fiction stories in my day with similar plots. And if that's what you want to believe, if that makes you comfortable, fine. I won't argue with it.

But may I ask, do you have any evidence to support your religion? Does your religion explain the observed expansion of the universe? Does your religion explain the observed facts of evolution and geology? If so, show me the evidence. Make your case. Who knows? You may even be able to convert me!

Scientists know a hell of a lot about the universe, through observation and deduction and experimentation. They can explain the evolution of the cosmos from a point many thousandths of a second after the Big Bang (which wasn't really a bang, btw) up to the present and on into the future. They can explain the movement of the continents across the face of the globe, splitting and combining, forming oceans and mountains, over billions of years, and into the future. They can even explain the evolution of life, from a festering puddle of toxic goo; through the huddled, superstitious clans hiding in caves; right up to the sprawling, still superstitious, masses of humanity we have today. All supported by evidence, thoughtful deduction and, yes, even a little educated guesswork thrown in. And none of it requires the presence of an invisible man to keep things running smoothly.

So again I say: Show me the evidence! Go ahead. Make me a convert to your steel worker god.


On this occasion I have to agree with you, but that still does not prove we are not in a steel plate. The worrying thing is since writing my last post, I have just looked at my car, and was wondering how many universes would be in it, LoL, meaning space, time, continuum. Now I have an appointment with a psychiatrist that I must keep.

Convert you? I very much doubt it.

Regards ian 2411

[Thorne]

On this occasion I have to agree with you, but that still does not prove we are not in a steel plate.
I've never said it does. I've also never claimed that science proves that God does not exist. In fact, as I've often said, no one can prove that anything does not exist. It's impossible to prove a negative. All we can do is say that there is no evidence to show that something exists, or perhaps show that the existence of item A would mean that item B could not exist, but since item B does exist then item A cannot exist.

And tomorrow, when we prove the existence of item A and yet item B still exists, a whole new field of science will be born! Hallelujah!



Convert you? I very much doubt it.
Miracles have been known to happen.

Haven't they?

[Saheli]

I believe that Love/god was in every crack, every crevass of that quake. He is not the reigning authority, nature and others are. His love oozed thro the quake. and his light shone on every dying soul. Where was God you ask he was everywhere. He is the binding force of the light but he can not stop natural laws. Well he can but most often dows nt

I can appreciate what you're saying, but it seems more poetic than thought out... For instance, what exactly do you mean when you say that you "believe that Love/god was in every crack..."? "His love oozed through the quake."? And this last one is the one that some might interpret offensively..."his light shone on every dying soul". I get the sentiment, that you believe that God was present in the situation. If you were wording for poetic reasons, ok...that would make sense. But if you are stating those things as reasons why the eartquake proves there is a God, then I think explaining a little wouldn't hurt, because I don't know what kind of argument that is..

[tedteague]

this is probably not going to be read, and im admittedly late to the table, but the earthquake shows nothing. There is nothing inherently evil in an earthquake, it is a natural occurence due to the tectonic shifting in the earth (or something like that). If this happened and nobody was hurt, it would not be considered evil

[Thorne]

If this happened and nobody was hurt, it would not be considered evil

Maybe not, but you can be damned sure someone would call it a miracle, and proof of the existence of God.

I always get a chuckle when people claim that they survived an earthquake, or a flood, or a tornado because of God, yet they never blame God for the disaster in the first place. After all, according to the Bible, earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters are always considered to be caused by God's wrath. Just once I'd like to hear someone say, "Well, God tried to kill me with this storm, but I had the foresight to dig myself a storm cellar and he missed me."

[DuncanONeil]

That's it? A pronouncement? No explanation or proof offered? Not even a discourse of how you came to your opinion? In otherwords...

I should just "believe" you? :hubba:


Only if you want! All I said was God has not been disproven.

[DuncanONeil]

This is the fundamentalist tactic:
"I say it, therefore it's so."
"You can't show us a crocoduck, therefore evilution is wrong."
"I can't understand how the universe could have developed from nothing, therefore God did it."

They don't need evidence, they don't need explanations, simply pronouncements from on high.


As stated;

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52 View Post
That's it? A pronouncement? No explanation or proof offered? Not even a discourse of how you came to your opinion? In otherwords...

I should just "believe" you?

Only if you want! All I said was God has not been disproven.

I did not advocate for the other side either!

[DuncanONeil]

There are fallacies in history books as well.
All likely the result of putting pen to paper! I hope that is the reason, anyway.
I suppose the big thing is; why does it need to proven either way?


If it makes you comfortable, then go ahead and believe. I have no quarrel with that. I'm not trying to prove that gods don't exist. I'm only pointing out fallacies in what we are taught about these gods. Fallacies which, to my mind, tend to deny the existence of those gods.

Any evidence which you must explain, or which is only visible to you, is not tangible evidence. While it may be valid evidence for you, enough to sustain your faith, that doesn't help anyone who cannot see it for himself. But if you come to me and attempt to preach your faith as absolute truth, based upon evidence which only you can see, I'm going to preach right back at you about the fallacy of that faith. And if you try to have that belief system forced onto young minds in school as if it were fact, I'll fight against you.

[DuncanONeil]

Reading your post created quite a good feeling in me.

But I must tell you that either that little devil deep inside, or the sarcasm bug hit hard.
A thought came to me that you need to relay this information that created such feeling of calm in me to those in Congress and the White House. Perhaps they could learn something from the gems of wisdom embodied in you short message!


That's the sad part for me. We are all doing the best we can to figure out what the life around us means. If someone decides there are no gods, if someone decides there are many, if someone decides there is only one, if someone decides that god is really a state of mind...whatever a person believes, why can't other people just leave it alone? There is nothing worse than for someone to attack the way you feel about something and like Thorne said, especially when all they have to defend it is some type of, "Trust me..I know better." That's just insulting. People aren't stupid, and no matter what anyone believes, I don't think that anyone who believes something hasn't thought it through. So I wish that in this area people could just be more understanding. You don't believe the way I do? Fine...you have your reasons, and I have mine. I don't understand why people in this world can't just leave it at that.

I feel like the best thing I can do in life is try to figure out what's important to me, to try my best to not take those things for granted, and to try and leave a positive impact on those around me. It is definitely not my job to try and tell others what to think, and I'm pretty sure we can all agree that people who do that are not only annoying but leave a negative impact. 13'sbadkitty, I think it's really good that you don't try to shove your beliefs down your children's throats. I wish that more people would do the same. This world would be a much more peaceful place if we would just respect the fact that we are all intelligent creatures doing the best we can with what we have.

[DuncanONeil]

Thorne
"That works for me! Keep religion out of the schools and the government and I'll be happy to keep science and government out of the churches."

I think we might all be better off if we could keep Government out of the schools!

[DuncanONeil]

So, predestination. The future is fixed and there's nothing we can do to change it. In which case, you have no choice in whether you believe or not. Your path is programmed from the moment of creation.

Sorry, I "choose" not to believe this.


I am going to go with you on this point. I believe predestination is easily disproven. But those that believe in it will not accept the proof. Since the proof is based on choice and they will state that the choice was already decided.

[DuncanONeil]

Thorne has his opinions and he is not shy about sharing them. I would not accuse him a laying ridicule on the beliefs of others. The comments about "belief in fantasies" does not rise to that level.
He is perfectly willing to allow you those beliefs, but not PC enough to avoid telling you that he thinks you are wrong.


It is your choice not to believe Thorn, that is what the free world is all about, freedom of choice, but don’t mock others that do believe. Neither should you mock the theory of the past being changed once it has been set, and yes I mean set. If you went back in time and saved all those lives that were being lost in WW Two, by killing Hitler before the war even started, then Both the UK and the USA would be in the same predicament as China with its population explosion and there would be no Israel. Once that war had been won our countries futures had been re-set, and this will keep taking place to the end of time, whether you choose to believe or not.




If your wife was run over by a car while you were at work, [and I pray to God this never takes place]. Once you found out, you would be driving across town like a madman trying to get to the hospital, and in your mind you would be saying [God please let her be ok]. Thank you for stating the obvious.

[DuncanONeil]

Ok Thorn get your thinking cap around this idea, it is something that has fasinated my mind for a long time. No one really knows anything about the universe that we live in, and even less about how it was created, ok that theory about the big bang, for those that thought of that , well let them live with it because it is only educated guess work, so now hear is my theory as daft as it might seem. The universe is a molacule of a lump of steel, the earth is an atom of that molacule, and the person that made the steel is God, all hail to the steel workers; and before you ask, no i have no idea if the steel workers god is real or if he has one. LoL

Regards ian 2411

Nothing new there! I developed that concept when I first learned about the atom and compared it to the solar system, back in grad school (pre space flight if you must know).

[DuncanONeil]

Just as there is no concrete evidence that "dark matter" exists!


I've never said it does. I've also never claimed that science proves that God does not exist. In fact, as I've often said, no one can prove that anything does not exist. It's impossible to prove a negative. All we can do is say that there is no evidence to show that something exists, or perhaps show that the existence of item A would mean that item B could not exist, but since item B does exist then item A cannot exist.

And tomorrow, when we prove the existence of item A and yet item B still exists, a whole new field of science will be born! Hallelujah!



Miracles have been known to happen.

Haven't they?

[DuncanONeil]

this is probably not going to be read, and im admittedly late to the table, but the earthquake shows nothing. There is nothing inherently evil in an earthquake, it is a natural occurence due to the tectonic shifting in the earth (or something like that). If this happened and nobody was hurt, it would not be considered evil

I red you!

[Thorne]

There are fallacies in history books as well.
All likely the result of putting pen to paper! I hope that is the reason, anyway.
I suppose the big thing is; why does it need to proven either way?

Sadly, this is quite true. History is, indeed, written by the victors. But recognizing that fact is the first step in correcting the fallacies. And the further removed we are from an historical event, the more likely we are to understand all aspects of that event.

Proving historical events is important because of the understanding we gain of the people involved and the effects of these events upon our own times. Proof of God? I don't need it. And if you have faith, then you don't need it, either. But if you want ME to believe in YOUR god, then you're definitely going to need proof. Verifiable, testable proof.

[DuncanONeil]

I am no longer sure that it is the "victors" that are writing history. Seems that a whole lot of PC activists have decided that they can win the "hearts and minds" of the "young skulls full of mush" by writing history to suit their personal preferences.

One thing that must be made clear here is I have never asked ANYONE to believe in anything that is considered to be God. I can, however, expect and ask a person to act in accordance those precepts that are desireous of civilized polite society everywhere.
Do not forget I am the one that says that in the basic tenents there is no difference among religions.


Sadly, this is quite true. History is, indeed, written by the victors. But recognizing that fact is the first step in correcting the fallacies. And the further removed we are from an historical event, the more likely we are to understand all aspects of that event.

Proving historical events is important because of the understanding we gain of the people involved and the effects of these events upon our own times. Proof of God? I don't need it. And if you have faith, then you don't need it, either. But if you want ME to believe in YOUR god, then you're definitely going to need proof. Verifiable, testable proof.

[Thorne]

I am no longer sure that it is the "victors" that are writing history. Seems that a whole lot of PC activists have decided that they can win the "hearts and minds" of the "young skulls full of mush" by writing history to suit their personal preferences.
The concepts are the same, though. The facts remain constant, but the interpretations can vary. I would prefer to teach the kids the facts and let them make their own conclusions, but for some reason the idea of people actually thinking for themselves is hateful to some people.


One thing that must be made clear here is I have never asked ANYONE to believe in anything that is considered to be God. I can, however, expect and ask a person to act in accordance those precepts that are desireous of civilized polite society everywhere.
That's a laudable goal, for sure. But are you one of those who affirms that those precepts can only come from a belief in a god? Or can you accept the idea that a person can follow no gods and still be a good, civilized person? Unfortunately, there are far too many people who are willing to believe the former rather than the latter.

[DuncanONeil]

That's a laudable goal, for sure. But are you one of those who affirms that those precepts can only come from a belief in a god? Or can you accept the idea that a person can follow no gods and still be a good, civilized person? Unfortunately, there are far too many people who are willing to believe the former rather than the latter.

I would suppose that you would conclude that I am. Since I, based on on study, concluded many years ago that there is, basically, no difference among religions at the root.
Much like I discovered, before leaving high school that skin color had nothing to do with quality of the person. Color has no bearing on the goodness or badness of the person.

[Thorne]

I would suppose that you would conclude that I am. Since I, based on on study, concluded many years ago that there is, basically, no difference among religions at the root.
Much like I discovered, before leaving high school that skin color had nothing to do with quality of the person. Color has no bearing on the goodness or badness of the person.

I'm not assuming anything about you. I agree with you that religions are basically identical. It's mostly a matter of control. The priesthoods use well known propaganda and mind control techniques to control their flocks.

I spent 12 years in Catholic schools and realized long before I graduated that the whole thing was a crock. It took me a long time to overcome the teachings of the Church, though. Including the subtle, but definite, racism involved.

[DuncanONeil]

I'm not assuming anything about you. I agree with you that religions are basically identical. It's mostly a matter of control. The priesthoods use well known propaganda and mind control techniques to control their flocks.

I spent 12 years in Catholic schools and realized long before I graduated that the whole thing was a crock. It took me a long time to overcome the teachings of the Church, though. Including the subtle, but definite, racism involved.


I spent 13 years in the same Catholic school (singular)! No failures by the way!
I did have a problem with racism but not from within the church or school. My teachings from them were in opposition to my dad's view. But he did work midnights on the CTA subway. So he got to see a lot of the less than desirable people.

[leo9]

All I said was God has not been disproven.

Nor has the Flying Spaghetti Monster. My gods have been around a lot longer, so I could "logically" argue that the burden of proof is on newer religions.

Religions doctrines are by their nature incapable of disproof, since any contrary evidence can be handwaved (either the Devil did it, or God did it to test our faith). Absence of disproof is not proof, as Russell's Teapot famously shows.

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."

[angelhunter]

It depends on how you look at it. It proves or disprove a divine being. Some Christians when they see something good happen, they say that is work of God. When I don't see what they see. I won't deny in a creator, but my opinion that this divine being is not a puppet master. The work have been done, that's what the universe shows.

The universe is beyond brilliant. It goes to the simple question is the glass half empty or half full? This universe with the Gods or not, is just a enigma. I am still blown away by the simple things, I am the one who will stand in the rain, while I see people running from it. I also served in the Navy, I seen the wrath of god on the ocean then out of the blue, the storm goes away and the ocean becomes calm. Now that is so freaking cool.:o

Nuff said!

[DuncanONeil]

Nor is absence of proof, disproof!
Don't get me started on "contrary evidence can be handwaved". Been doing some recent reading on religion that engages ( nevermind).


Nor has the Flying Spaghetti Monster. My gods have been around a lot longer, so I could "logically" argue that the burden of proof is on newer religions.

Religions doctrines are by their nature incapable of disproof, since any contrary evidence can be handwaved (either the Devil did it, or God did it to test our faith). Absence of disproof is not proof, as Russell's Teapot famously shows.

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."

[Thorne]

Nor is absence of proof, disproof!
Don't get me started on "contrary evidence can be handwaved". Been doing some recent reading on religion that engages ( nevermind).

No, don't pull back. Your opinions are just as welcome here as anyone else's. I, for one, would like to hear what you have to say. While I can't say I always agree with your conclusions, your research of facts is generally first-rate.

And you are right in your assertion that absence of proof in not disproof. I think we can all agree on that.

But I think we can also agree that after 10,000 years of trying to prove that 2+2=5, the lack of such proof is a pretty definitive assertion that the assumption is most probably wrong.

[denuseri]

Only no one's been trying to prove what your saying...the whole prove this or that thing has basically been a modern contrivance...the answer has allways been there its 42.

[Thorne]

Only no one's been trying to prove what your saying...the whole prove this or that thing has basically been a modern contrivance...
That's mostly because to even suggest that dogma might be wrong was punishable by death. That kind of thinking has a tendency to promote uniformity, at least in public.


[B][COLOR="Pink"]the answer has allways been there its 42.
Well, sure. That's obvious NOW!

[denuseri]

No not at all, people used to whorship multiple gods and even adopt and intermingle them all without ever so much as having their existance or non-existance cross their minds in any signifigant way in which it was recorded for posterity.

As for who's god or godess is the oldest....smh, lets not even pretend to go there folks, every cultures pantheon has an origins of the world mythology that states their gods were there at the begining.

The world doesnt revolve around your chatholic church, nor is your church as evil as you would like it to be.

[Thorne]

No not at all, people used to whorship multiple gods and even adopt and intermingle them all without ever so much as having their existance or non-existance cross their minds in any signifigant way in which it was recorded for posterity.
Worshiping multiple gods does not mean allowing the worship of all gods. Ancient Egyptian pharaohs would often declare one particular god to be the chief god during the pharaoh's reign, and woe betide any who did not bow down to that god. I'm not familiar with the Oriental religions, so I can't comment there, but I know that the Romans were considered unusual in that they did not force their conquered subjects to convert to the Roman religion. Once the Catholic Church took over most of Europe through the Holy Roman Empire, the Inquisition tried to make short work of the worship of any other gods. We can all see how intolerant Islam has been shown to be, and at least here in the US, the religious right has become quite vocal, and occasionally physical, about suppressing non-Christians, especially Muslims and atheists.

It's been a relatively common thread throughout the history of Western civilization, and I believe in the Aztec, Maya and Inca cultures as well.

As for which gods are oldest, a study of religion will show that virtually all religions trace their roots back to the very first historical references of gods. The names may change, and the details get blurred and mixed, but the tracks are there to be followed. Neither Christianity nor Islam, for example, would exist without the solid background of Judaism, and Judaism itself was preceded by older religions, which I'm sure were derived from still older religions. All of the gods trace back to the very dawn of history, and probably beyond.

And as for the Catholic Church, I don't want it to be evil. But modern communications and education have shown that it is indeed far more evil than anyone ever knew. History has shown that the Vatican has been a barrier to human advancement throughout its history, using its power to control and suppress large portions of the world's populations, breeding poverty and misery while claiming to fight against them.

The greatest advantage of modern communications, especially the internet, is that the kinds of atrocities the Vatican condones and even commits can no longer be kept hidden from the world. Within minutes of something happening reports are spread far and wide, disseminated irretrievably, exposing government and religious leaders for the cowardly hypocrites they truly are.

But you are right, denu: the Catholic Church is not as evil as I thought it was. It's far, far worse.

[DuncanONeil]

No, don't pull back. Your opinions are just as welcome here as anyone else's. I, for one, would like to hear what you have to say. While I can't say I always agree with your conclusions, your research of facts is generally first-rate.

And you are right in your assertion that absence of proof in not disproof. I think we can all agree on that.

But I think we can also agree that after 10,000 years of trying to prove that 2+2=5, the lack of such proof is a pretty definitive assertion that the assumption is most probably wrong.


But 2+2=10

[DuncanONeil]

Only no one's been trying to prove what your saying...the whole prove this or that thing has basically been a modern contrivance...the answer has allways been there its 42.


:)

[Thorne]

But 2+2=10

Only if you were clumsy with that chainsaw.