h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Well im not christian too and hell allways seemed more atractive to me than heaven, cause its warmer and its full of interesting people lol
But about your question: God, fact or fiction? I presume you are talking about the christian god so in that case Id say fiction!!! But the truth is that all this big bed time story called Bible its a lovely one but has to be taken metaphorically. And its fun to know how many things in Christianity are based in paganism, since it as allways been hated and feared by all Christians. Do they know they are celebrating Christmas on a pagan sabath? Do they know that Christmas pine trees are a pagan ritual? That the Easter eggs and Easter itself is based on another pagan sabbath?? Poor them... They have been hating their own tradition without knowing it...
Don't get me wrong i respect all religions and points of view, as long it makes people feel better and makes them try to be a better persons its ok with me. What I dont like is the racism between religions and the people who think they have found the universal truth and that everyone needs to belive in the same things...
But anyway this posting is already far too long :P

Jesus I belive existed, God im not sure! BBC lawyers may want to chalenge me It would be fun??

Hello Doubting Salmon.
em, you seem to be a bit cross about the notion that God may exist.
The thing is: if you read the New Testament, you'll be reading history. I find it impossible to doubt the truth of the message about Jesus Christ when I read it. In summary it shows that Christ came into a dark and godless world to save 'sinners'...people who've messed up their lives. Does that make you angry?

Your post, mich2ael, is number 26363 in this conversation. A lot has happened since the post 1 to which you are replying.

I don't get the impression from Doubting Salmon's post that she* is angry with 'the notion that God may exist'. Rather, she seems angry at some of the things that Christians say. The tone of the debate has gone up and down many times over the course of this conversation. The initial post does not look likely to have started off some of the most thoughtful and fascinating postings I've seen anywhere on h2g2, but the backlog to this conversation makes excellent reading.

TRiG.

*For some reason, I see DS as female. I couldn't say why and may well be wrong.

Hey there - welcome - jump into the pool...

--

Why do you believe that a few people in the middle east were the only ones to get the original message, then?

And why did their followers through the ages feel it necessary to persecute everyone who thought differently?

And how do you reconcile the idea of a single omni-everything god with the fact that there are a multiplicity of gods still speaking to modern people?

--

Jez

Thanks for that TRiG
I'm a brand new hootooer still finding my way around: I'll certainly read a bit more of the conversation as you suggest. Silly me.
mich2ael

1. Don't know the answer to that one.
2. They probably weren't true followers.
3. I don't have a problem believing in one God. I believe that the world is 'under the control of an evil spiritual force' and that what God was doing in sending Christ was carrying out an amazing rescue plan. Therefore I suppose people need to be very careful about the 'god' they listen to. There are many horror stories of people thinking they were hearing God's voice telling them to commit some terrible crime......

Okay, I'll bite.

If the sending of Christ was an "amazing rescue plan" how come the world is still "under the control of an evil spiritual force"?

And while we're at it, what do you mean by "an evil spiritual force"? I'm not arguing here that this is untrue; I honestly can't see any useful explanatory content in the phrase. How does it differ from "sometimes people do bad things", a proposition that can be quite adequately explained without reference to arcane terminology?

Oh, and who decides who gets to be a "true follower" and who doesn't?

Noggin

The Sorting Hat?



az

Hello Noggin
1.Christ defeated the devil through his death and resurrection and opened a way for humans to come to God. We are in the age of 'grace' where we may respond to this 'gospel' or 'good news'('he who believes has everlasting life'). Christ prophesied that the days would become increasingly evil as we approach 'the end'; i.e. the battle continues even though the eventual outcome has been decided.
2.For 'evil spiritual force' read 'satan' or the 'devil'. I used 'arcane terminology' because I think it best describes the unseen battle going on in the spiritual realm. Not a popular notion these days but it would explain a lot of what goes on around us!
3.A true follower? now that's a worrying one...Jesus said that until the time of harvest (where the good fruit(true followers) of the kingdom he established is ready) weeds and crop would grow together and they wouldm't be separated until the end 'in case some of the wheat is destroyed with the weeds'. I guess the thought here is that some people start bad but eventually redeem themselves, while others appear good but when the chips are down turn out to be rotten inside!?
I hope that explains where I'm coming from...I didn't say I understood this stuff...I just believe it!!!
mich2ael

<<...but it would explain a lot of what goes on around us!>>

But would it? What is it you think can be explained this way that can't be explained by the workings of the material world? And how do you check that you've got your explanation correct?

Noggin

<>

I think it would go some way towards explaining the age old question of why there is suffering in the world if God is a God of love. I also attribute some behaviour to demonic influence: extreme cold-blooded violence / sexual deviency. Some serial killers claim to have been 'told' by voices in their head to do stuff...
I know that suffering could be explained by believing in no God.
And these behaviours could be explained by psychology etc, but I am convinced of my own conclusions because of the testimony of christians experienced in exorcisms, christians converted from deep occult involvement, and by the biblical accounts of Jesus' activities.
mich2ael

<>

On the other hand, if there was no God you wouldn't need an additional explanatory entity (a spiritual war between good and evil) to explain why there is suffering, especially given <> Not that the latter is any sort of explanation. Not believing in God just leaves you free to base your explanations on empirical evidence and logical deduction, and to test their validity by comparing their predictions with what actually happens. What more do you need? And as you say <> (and physiology, sociology etc).

Noggin

<> should have read <> on account of the obstacle this area is to certain people struggling to believe in God.
If one believes in God, one can still use logical deduction and scientific knowledge to understand the world around you...the two are by no means mutually exclusive.
I believe in science and logic; but I feel there must be something more to life...some purpose to existence. When I read the Gospels, there's something that rings true there, in spite of the many, many questions that remain unanswered.
Have you read them?
mich2ael

"I believe in science and logic"

Interesting statement. The thing about the scientific method and logic is that it absolutely does not require belief. It is entirely possible to 'believe' in them, if you so want, but to do so somewhat misses the point. They provide the evidence and statistical probability for results of investigations using them. They specifically do away with the need for belief and faith.

You need belief to sit on a chair...it merely means the confidence that it won't collapse. Similarly I have confidence in science and logic. I also believe in God.
mich2ael

I see. So your belief in a non-collapsing chair is of the same nature as your belief in god? Is it as strong a belief? Would you perhaps categorise the two as seperate uses of the word belief?

<>

Why?

How many chairs have you sat on that collapsed?

az

I think the last few postings adequately define the word: 'belief', that it need not necessarily be a specifically religious word.
mich2ael