XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.fan.michael-moore, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: talk.politics.misc
From: gn779631@cox.net
On 7/16/2010 10:23 AM, 5594 Dead, 727 since 1/20/09 wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 09:45:10 -0400, Lefty wrote:
>
>> On 7/15/2010 4:49 PM, 5594 Dead, 727 since 1/20/098 wrote:
>>> On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:28:10 -0400, Lefty wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/15/2010 11:03 AM, His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
>>>> Movement of Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>>>>> OK, this is THE ULTIMATE QUESTION we must ask God:
>>>>>
>>>>> "DO YOU HAVE A CREATOR?"
>>>>>
>>>>> If he answers "no," he's an atheist. If he answers "yes," he's not
>>>>> the Almighty God.
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't logically follow.
>>>>>
>>>>> If everything needs a creator, so does God.
>>>>
>>>> I see. So you're making up new arguments to prove yours.
>>>
>>> One of the oldest arguments in the book. If God is eternal and created
>>> the Universe, you have to ask what he was doing before he created it,
>>> and why he created it. If there was nothing prior to the universe, why
>>> would there be an omnipotent god in the middle of all that nothingness
>>> and what was the point of his existence?
>>
>> Unfortunately, the presumption is that what we experience in our
>> existence is the sum total of all knowledge available in the universe.
>
> Saying we don't know what happened before the start of the universe is
> presuming to know the total of all knowledge available in the universe?
>
> That's an odd way of making that claim, wouldn't you think?
What claim do you presume I'm making? I'm not the one claiming all was
void and nothingness before god created the universe. And that is only
one of literally thousands of different creation stories. And why does
god need a creator? just because it's not conceivable to us that
something could simply exist doesn't mean such a thing is impossible.
None of us knows what's possible beyond our extremely limited scope of
knowledge.
>
> Part of the gawd problem is that there IS no explanation provided for
> what came before. Gawd is sitting in nothingness, and one day just
> decides to create the earth, bang! THEN he creates the entire rest of
> the universe just so the future shepherds will have night lights to tell
> them what time of night it is and when it is time to take the critters
> down to the valley for the winter.
You seem to only be aware of the Talmus, Bible, Koran and their
offshoots. There are many legends in existence in which god or gods
lived in a fully functional society and lived in anything but
"nothingness." This is my major point. Before you can make absolute
declarations about god, you have to define which one you're talking
about. I am not an atheist because it's not possible for there to be a
god. I'm an atheist because the only gods I'm aware of were created by
humans and seem to be lacking credibility. But as an atheist I am not
prepared to say that a creator isn't possible.
>
>> The phrase is, "I don't know." It also assumes that; time is and was
>> finite, and that it exists in the first place; that the universe is
>> infinite and includes all existence; and that there is only one
>> definition of God that is acceptable.
>>
> Exactly so: we don't know. If it makes you feel any better, I treat the
> "Big Bang" as a mathematical construct, and one in which a key piece of
> information is missing. There was nothing, and then there was
> everything, in one atom-sized piece of something, which promptly
> exploded. While it lacks the utter absurdity of all creation myths, it
> isn't an answer, but merely conjecture. Same questions pertain: why was
> there a big bang, and why did it happen? What changed?
It's not possible to know. I also don't care.
>
>> No one knows.
>
> Nobody does. But "god" is just a spackle job over that lack of knowledge.
>
The original purpose for a creation of god had both good and bad
elements. Some used it to as an authoritarian tool and others used it to
protect people from themselves. In some cases religion evolved into
something good but there are still authoritarian elements who attempt to
use it a club with which to beat people over the head.
>>
>>
>>>> No one set as a condition that everything needed a creator. You and I
>>>> were "created" when our parents had sex and sperm and egg did their
>>>> thing. But it's entirely possible a being started the process off.
>>>>
>>> The "billiard shot" theory. So you have a god who has spent eternity
>>> in nothingness. What would motivate him to create a universe?
>>
>> How would anyone know that? I can't understand the motivation of someone
>> who walks into a Starbucks for regular coffee when there's a McDonald's
>> across the street. God could be an authoritarian right winger who just
>> wants to control everything. And again not every religion suggests there
>> was nothingness prior to his creating the universe.
>>>
> Well, that's just it; if you can't explain how the universe began, then
> complicating the matter by tacking on an omnipotent being is just a way
> of ducking the issue entirely. "God done it" is a simple non-answer that
> does nothing other than allow you to pretend the universe has a purpose.
> Originally the purpose was to serve as clock and calendar for goatherds,
> all 100 billion galaxies and quintrillions of suns. Now it's to cobble
> meaning to our lives. It's just another way of noting where Orion is to
> tell if winter is approaching.
Probably 90% of religious or god believing people don't bother me.
People who have belief and call on what they believe for strength and
guidance are fine to me. I don't care what anyone else believes and I
don't attempt to critique it. It's the ten percent who use their
religion as a rationale for trying to control others who deserve
contempt. The problem with many non-religious and atheist people is they
lump the 90% in with the 10% and don't make a distinction. And frankly
many atheists like Richard Dawkins are almost as bad as the worst
religious people in declaring their belief in no god as loudly as a
fundamentalist declares a belief in his his god.
No one knows. Period. Everyone should keep his or her faith or lack of
to himself or herself. Look at the posts in this thread; in what way are
the atheists not as annoying as the religious people when it comes to
declaring the non-existence of a deity of any kind?
>>>>> If you propose the argument that everything which exists needs a
>>>>> creator, you have to accept the implications. That means if God
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
