Reasons 21 - 30

Penelope · Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 11:12 am Post subject:

Chris - I understand you perfectly!!

We are having a discussion which has gone on for centuries. Science versus Intuition (I suppose).

To you, the most important question of my life is meaningless, and I can't understand why you don't think it is an important question.

If you are feeling frustrated, disappointed, and deflated (not to say depressed)....let it be a comfort to you to know that I am feeling the same.

It is not my wish to feel like this, and it certainly isn't my wish to cause you to feel like it.....but you did throw down the guantlet....by introducing the '50 Reasons' book....and I could not just walk away and ignore it.....but rather than cause you further annoyance....I will.

But you will be horrified to know....that I am just moving over to the Poetry thread....and not getting out of your hair completely!!!!! Kiss

Chris OConnor · Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 2:16 pm Post subject:

How can God have a reason WHY he created us if God doesn't even exist?

Chris OConnor · Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 2:17 pm Post subject:

How can there be a reason why Santa Claus brings children presents if Santa Claus doesn't even exist?

Chris OConnor · Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 2:22 pm Post subject:

And I understand that you believe God does exist and this is why you are asking the next question, which happens to be "why did God do this and that," but I am explaining to you that for those of us that don't believe a God exists it is borderline moronic of us to ask why this nonexistent God did this or that. Asking why God created humans is like inquiring why the Easter Bunny leaves Easter baskets.

Penelope · Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:00 pm Post subject:

No, you are wrong!!! I do not ask why God does this or that.

I ask how we can access the inate intelligence in us to cope with our various disasters and tragedies. I believe the inate intelligence is within us......the god part of us......but I do not refer to god as a separate entity from us...we are it.....this why Buddhism is a way of being...not a philosophy and not a religion. It does not try to pin down and image God.
It is called Brahma....it is a different way of thinking about ourselves.

So I do not equate god with the easter bunny or santa clause - and your inference is insulting, but I think you are being deliberately obtuse.

Robert Tulip · Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:11 am Post subject:

Hello again.

This ‘why’ question resolves to the basic question of philosophy – why is there something rather than nothing? We cannot answer this question, but it can be helpful to ask it as a guide to place arguments about God in context. If we say things exist because God created them, we are jumping to a major invalid conclusion about the nature of intent within the universe by attributing intent to God without evidence. It is much more helpful to say we exist because we evolved, and then use this natural answer as a basis to look at how the concept of God can be useful in practical terms. This informs a natural theology rather than a metaphysical approach. A ‘supply-driven’ model postulating an intentional God is much less plausible than a ‘demand-driven’ model which sees the idea of God as useful for human purposes.

On the idea that God created us to glorify himself, I think it is better to say that we imagine God as the structure of the universe that provides the goal for human flourishing. I actually think this is compatible with the ideas of J Christ, in the sense that the father cannot exist without the son and vice versa.

Penelope claims to see a distinction between intuition and imagination, but I really think this use of intuition is unhelpful in this context. It amounts to saying ‘I feel that God exists’ or ‘my belief in God is comforting to me’. Harrison shows quite clearly that this may be fair at the level of popular sentiment, but lacks analytical credibility.

The idea of God as First Cause or Prime Mover has been a main answer to the logical puzzle of what preceded the universe – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down

Penelope · Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 5:17 am Post subject:

Robert said:

Robert Tulip · Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 5:11 pm Post subject:

ginof

p162 - i'm pretty sure booktalk has had this discussion before, but, really what is the difference between a cult and a religion? Certainly the group that poisoned themselves in the 1970's or the ones who committed suicide before the comet arrival a few years back were cults. But what about the thing in Texas? Or the religion of money espoused by Crespo Dollar and the church of Greener Pastures (not making that up). Harrison speaks well regarding giving money to churches on p 165. I think his comments are nicely put. Most people agree that giving money to religion is a bad idea. If its not their religion! It really irks me to see people with so little giving to churches who are obviously just taking their money. I think watching the movie Marjoe (1972) should be required before anyone gives 1 penny to a church.

I do think he oversells the point on p166 where he sort of dismisses the positive aspects of joining a church. There are wonderful social benefits and like minded people are more likely to get things done together (social work, benefits, etc)

ginof · Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 12:47 am Post subject: Chapter 22: Not from a monkey

generally agree with this chapter. But I think he misses one of the most powerful arguments about keeping religion out of evolution

ginof

well, who does? perhaps maybe only for a short visit. as an outsider....

p176. I think Harrison has a really good point here. would a just god eternally damn someone because they were born in a place where they never heard about the 'true' god and instead worshiped the god that they had always been told was the true god? that's just too cruel for me.

p177

ginof

p 186 - i'm not really sure of harrison's point here. the fact that he's not praying during this time is no more conclusive that there is no god than praying makes that there is a god.

Perhaps he's only focused on one side of the argument?

ginof · Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:02 am Post subject: Chapter 26: i want eternal life

this chapter made no sense to me. He seems to say: perhaps you can live a really long time due to science. what does that have to do with my believe (or lack of belief) in god. I'm not sure he negates the point anywhere in the chapter. Do you?


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	ADVERTISE	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CHAT	CONTACT