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!!!!!

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

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

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.

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.

Hello again.

This 'why' question resolves to the basic question of philosophy

Robert said:



I am by no means the only person to see a distinction between intuition and imagination. The compilers of the dictionaries seem to agree with me.

It does not amount to saying that I feel that God exists in my head - at all, and it is not merely a matter of comforting myself. It may lack analytical credibility to the worshipful Mr. Harrison and yourselves, but I began with a basic theory......and with a little help from many and varied writers on spiritual subjects (ie by no means all Christian) I found enough evidence to support my theory (making certain alterations along the way). This is how scientists work out support for their initial theories isn't it?

And before you say it Chris......I can't show you my evidence.....and I am not attempting to try to convince you of anything.....I only needed to convince myself over the years. 'Why are you partaking in this discussion then?' Is your next question. And the answer is because you confronted me with Mr. Harrison's silly book.

Now, I think you are going to suggest that I start believing in Yoda (the character you quote from Star Wars). Well, Yoda is a bad analogy, but I'll tell you what.....'The Force' is a brilliant analogy as to how I perceive God. But, Chris......it is only a perception....I am not claiming 'it' as exactly how it 'is'.

Here are some definitions of imagination
[quote] Definitions of imagination on the Web:

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)

generally agree with this chapter. But I think he misses one of the most powerful arguments about keeping religion out of evolution
So what if it was? Science is valuable to society for one reason. It increases our predictive power. The application of science tells us how to build better buildings, roads, cars, etc. It tells us how we may be affecting our environment and the possible effect of various courses of action better than we would do without it. Compare the catholic position to the idea that god did not exist. There is NO change in the predictive value of the theory. Even if we KNEW that god used evolution, it still wouldn't help us. what does god want next? who knows We would still argue about what what god wanted next. With science, we can show cause and effect and accurately predict that, in the future, if we do X, Y will result. Obviously, these predictions are not always correct (look at the weather). But this is not the fault of science. this happens only because we have not yet learned to fully understand all the factors that go into the real world.

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 And then, of course, he authorized it. But i digress....

Overall impression of the chapter is that it was overplayed. If I recall catholic school correctly, hell was reserved for those with an opportunity to believe but rejecting it (i.e. I am doomed) god was not that cruel to those who did not know about jesus, they went to pergatory until the second coming, when they would be admitted to heaven

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?

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?

p 198 top paragraph. I think a believer would just argue that god is working within these people anyway, despite their lack of faith

p198 bottom paragraph. I wish he showed some statistics that showed the rate of incarceration vs. the rate of believe/non belief in the general population

p199 - i think his argument is relatively weak here. a believer would simply counter that these people are having moments of weakness caused by the devil

p202 - the point here about stalin and pol pot is a good one. even if atheists were evil, it would not show the existence of god.

p214 - did anyone look at that bible passage? the reference to the genitals of the Assyrians is hilarious!



that's just beautiful...