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

A256259

Hi Natai.
Your first point:
I'm afraid the general view of the Christian Churches of us Pagans is that we are worse than godless. We are idolators, blasphemers, deniers of Christ and quite possible heretics (though how they come to that conclusion is quite amusing). We are almost certainly either wittingly or unwittingly the tools of Satan, and perform his work.
From my experience though many 'ordinary' lay christians are fine people with no axe to grind with pagans at all. However, I do worry about the poor souls. I can no longer remember what it was like to be part of a religion based upon fear. Where to fear your god is considered healthy. Where to fear your own unworthiness through your sin is normal. Where the devil is abroad in the world trying at every twist and turn in your life to take you away from Christ and God. And where your only choice is submission and obedience to the word of God or spend eternity in Hell no matter how nice a person your were otherwise.
Shudder.
Your second point:
If you consider carefully the major world religions, and us little ones too, how many have an evangelical mission? A mission to preach the word of their God that we might be saved? Only one really. Just Chrisitianity.
When was the last time you saw a Rabbi, an Imam, a Buddhist Monk or a Druid on your local street corner belting out their pitch? Or perhaps pushing literature through your door? It doesn't happen does it?
My point is please don't lump those all of us who have found a spiritual path together. Most of us don't care what you believe, and do believe in both your right to be left alone and to pursue your own path in life. If you ask us for information or advice though we will share what little wisdom we have garnered, and then leave you to decide what you want to do with/about it.
Another point:
Strangely there are quite a few religions that believe that the concept of God is a creation of man. There are others that believe that we are all spiritual beings and those we call gods or angels etc, are just beings who have advanced further than us and are willing to teach and guide those that follow on down that long journey. I, as a druid, probably fall into the latter category (with a little superstitious tweaking here and there).
The nature of the divine within the cosmos and within each of us is the source of an ongoing debate that has lasted since the first upright thinking ape wondered why she was here.

I think this debate will go on forever, until we eventually discover 'why?'.

Blessings,
Matholwch /|\.

Oh man You really know how to stereotype dont you? OK There are a few churches scrap that most churces do do that sort of thing standing on street corners and that sort of thing but some of us actually Think logically you know helping people in hospitals and third world countries(by the way does anyone know of any second world counries?) and then if they see us praying and the likes then hopefully they'll
realise just how good it is to be freinds with god NOT IN FEAR any one who says that we will all go to hell if we dont do this and that OBVIOUSLY HASN'T BEEN LISTENING IN CHURCH the day of judgement has passed and so now no matter what you do you get a free pass to paradise!

PS
I couldn't care less wether your a pagan or not you can have your fun god still loves you and there for so do I!

Hi Alondar,
So what you are saying is that whatever I do I will get a free pass to paradise? Hmmmm....not sure if I like that offer.
For one thing, if what you say is true then every mass murderer, paedophile and lawyer is going to be there too. That's one party I don't want to be in.
For a second thing what if I (a) don't recognise your god's right to haul me off to his version of 'paradise', and (b) don't want to go?
As for me stereotyping the Churches, name one thing that I said that is not true? I have attended quite a number of Evangelical and Pentecostal services in the past few years, as well as a few Catholic ones and I can tell you my observations are based on what was said there. None of them seemed to mention Judgement Day as having passed, they all seemed very keen to point out that its coming, and soon ("rapture! rapture! get your rapture here!").
As for not fearing your God I suggest you re-read Exodus, Leviticus, Judges, Revelations and Paul's letters.
My general opinion of committed Evangelical Christians is that they make good neighbours but lousy friends (too judgemental in my experience).
Helping in hospitals, the elderly and doing charitable work for the Third World are not the exclusive preserve of Christians. By far the majority of the people doing this work in the United Kingdom at present would probably confess to having no particular faith whatsoever. The work of such agencies as Christian Aid and CAFOD, though valuable, forms a tiny proportion of the overall effort.
Hospitals in particular are finding it increasingly difficult to get and keep Christian Pastors and Lay Visitors. The same goes for Prisons. The slack is being taken up by humanists, moslems, hindis, buddhists and pagans.
I hope that this clarifies my position.
I look forward to your reply.
Blessings,
Matholwch /|\.

Just a quick point about second world countries.
1. There is no such thing really, however the second subset of countries is the Americas

2. The origin of 'Third World' as far as I am aware is:
a) Old World - Greece, Rome, Europe (?including Eastern Russia) and the near and middle east.
b)The New World - The Americas.
c)The Third World - Emerging (mostly poor and in debt) Sub-Saharan African countries and some others.

Australia/New Zealand, the Pacific Rim, Japan and China do not seem to fit this classification. Nor does South Africa.

I have just found this that gives another, differing explanation.
[Broken link removed by Moderator]I would bow to there superior knowledge?

Sterotyping is so fun!

Hey, I know, let's stereotype pagans! They believe in Satan, and not in God. Or, if they do, then he as some 'lower being'. Satan is obviously evil, and yet they worship him without murdering anyone or raping people on street corners. Then they call Christians 'hypocrites'.

How about scientists? Oh, yay, how fun is this? They say over and over that lack of evidence is not evidence of lack and start making up a load of screwy ideas without conclusive proof, whilst nit-picking religion (and the whole 'holier than thou' attitude they decide religious types have), basking in the glory of their 'rational world'!

Christians go last: they preach forgiveness in one breath then Hell in the next. They follow a book of mistranslated nonsense as the 'Word of God', relying on doctrine (which must be taken without question, 'cause blind faith is an admission requirement) and moan incessantly about evolution, because the world was /obviously/ made two years ago or something, and the dinosaurs aer there to make museums interesting!

That was really fun! If ever I needed to turn off my brain and follow a load of potted tripe that had been left out in the sun for the last few centuries, I know that this is always there for me.

Brain back on : Those three, short paragraphs all have a few things in common. They were all wrong, wrong, wrong; none of them stand up to critical examination; and they've all been used by us whenever we decide that cut-and-paste dogma is a substitute for clear, articulate debate. Hopefully, some time soon I will be able to get off my butt (or more accurately, stay on it) long enough to finish my article. Perhaps other people will write on anything which is outside its scope but still relevent. At least then we can censor ourselves when we are tempted to travel along the well-ground path...

Noggin - Aw, thanks! I'm just on a quick rant here, but I'll respond when I'm in the frame of mind you deserve.

BTW: has anyone noticed my ulterior motive behind the button question yet? I feel that Alij might get close...

- Jordan

^Feel free to identify biases in the above posting(s?). Hint: size matters.

I don't know about ulterior motives, but I sort of assumed it was about tolerance, or how badly we need other people to agree with us, or that our beliefs are worthless unless we arrive at them by our own efforts, or all three.
I don't want people to agree with me because I press a button. I want them to agree with me because they're impressed by my erudition and wisdom.

Noggin

I don't want people to agree with me because I press a button. I want them to agree with me because I'm right.

Here's the kicker. If I'm wrong, I want them to tell me. And I want them to tell me why. And if their reasons are convincing - I'll agree with THEM. Even if they don't press the button.

H.

Hmmm... well, I'm not going to read everything that's been posted here, but from what I've read, people here that claim to be "atheists" are really actually "agnostics". I mean, lots of people who've posted aren't actually saying that "God" does not exist, but that they'd rather not believe that God exists, or that the world would be a better place if God didn't exist... that would make you an agnostic.

Besides that, here's something to think about. Of course, this argument does nothing to show that the God of Christianity is "the supreme being", and that's not what I'm trying to say by this argument... well, just think about this. There is an extremely low chance that all of the necessary pieces for the big bang/evolution to work out all came into place at the same time. In fact, so low that time and space need to be infinite for it to work out at all.
Now, you can't just one day decide to take an infinite and make it finite, and you can't take something away from an infinte to make it finite. So infinity + 1 = infinity, and infinity - 1 = infinity. So if the universe is infinite, and the big bang is true, then at some point, the universe had to be concentrated in this timy mass where limitless energy existed, which eventually somehow errupted into logical patterns of matter and energy. (Which doesn't really make sense, since everything tends towards equilibrium).
Anyway, where did all this infinite energy come from? When it comes down to it, you either have to believe that it was created by a being which doesn't require a beginning, or that the universe itself is infinite. If you want to believe the universe is infinite, then you have to believe that it just suddenly "appeared" in the form of infinite energy for no particular reason whatsoever. My point here is only that if you are an evolutionist, please make sure you realize how rediculous your beliefs are before you go around bashing the rediculousness of creationism. Your thoughts on this?

As Feyerabend claims, science itself is religion because it "rests on articles of faith that cannot be rationally justified". That is, who says that empiricism or rationalism gives us the right answers? There is no guarantee! If I may take this further, if science is a religion, then scientists use their religion as a crutch, so they can try to bring a false sense of stability to thier lives. This is a rather extreme argument, and one that I would argue against to some extent myself, but what do you think?

I don't think it really matters if you fit in one pidgeonhole or the other and quibbling over whether atheists are indeed agnostic makes any difference to anything.

"There is an extremely low chance that all of the necessary pieces for the big bang/evolution to work out all came into place at the same time."

So, are you saying that you need to invoke a creator to explain this massive "coincidence"? How is this different from the flawed anthropic principle?

What if the universe *is* infinite? And has always existed, and bangs and crunches through eternity? Which doesn't require a beginning. Just a thought.

Creationism is not ridiculous because of what it believes in, it is massively flawed because it has it's wires all mixed up. It uses the thought-systems of science and applies them to religious doctrine (a particulary inflexible one at that). They are not constant with their ideas, and that's why they conflict with everyone else all the time. You could call me an "evolutionist" (but not an extreme loony type ), but I have no qualms with someone believing in a blue mongoose who created the solar system with his furry paws in a day, they can believe in what the hell they want. But, if they then go ahead and engage and *demand* science to validate these beliefs and even worse try to have these beliefs taught in schools as fact, then I have problems.

I can appreciate that if you stand back from it all everything sounds as ridiculous as everything else. And that there is no gaurantee that empiricism is truth. But as long as anything it is consistent within itself then what can you say?

All the best,

Ste

Do you ever feel good about anything?

Who, me? Yeah. Why?

Interesting question, Jordan! On balance, no I don't think I would - believe me, for 1.47 seconds I was tempted (which is eternity for an android or a cat.) But no, I'd love to convert the world to pacifism, but it wouldn't be right!

>let's stereotype pagans! They believe in Satan, and not in God

Satanists believe in Satan (oh yes and Christians). Pagans do not.
The old testament meaning of satan was 'an accuser'.

>Satan is obviously evil. Looks up the references to Satan;

See Job;
Job 2:6
And the Lord said to the Satan, See, he is in your hands, only do not take his life.

Job 2:7
And the Satan went out from before the Lord, and sent on Job an evil disease covering his skin from his feet to the top of his head.

Thus the Satan was used to test Job's faith.

Why would an all knowing God need to test Job's faith?

Scientists - I don't think your wrong on that one.

Strange though it may seem, I do believe in the Christ but not in Jesus.

Alji (Member of The Guild of Wizards @ U197895)

If anyone says they wouldn't press that button, I wonder whether they've considered TV. Only the programs that you liked would ever be on! Let me tell you some things that I believe:
1. It is unpleasant to have to hurt someone else in any way.
2. If you have more of something than you need, you should give some to someone else.
3. After a certain time, God is going to eliminate those who don't obey him.
4. Top of the Pops is terrible.
Now wouldn't the world be a happier place if I pressed the button?
I'm pretty much fine as I am, but I don't live in a third-world country (see 2) or a country that is being attacked in a war (see 1), I already serve God (see 3), and noone in my family puts the TV on too loud (see 4). But other people do suffer those problems. So it seems it would be terribly selfish of me not to press that button.




If he was the only existing spirit creature, he wouldn't. But there are others, and things must be proven to them. This, in fact, is the reason that God didn't just destroy Adam and Eve the moment they sinned - if he had, none of the millions of witnesses would have known whether or not Adam and Eve were justified in what they did. But now they can all see what a mess humans make without Gods help, and once all the humans have been warned of the situation, and anyone who wants to take Gods side has done, the whole silly mess can be brought to a finish and things can go back to the way they were supposed to be.

Such beliefs worry me! There is more morality in Star Trek than in the Old Testament. I would go so far as to say there is no morality in the Old Testament.
God was complicit in the fall of man and the murder of Able, if He wasn't He is not all-knowing.
Genesis 4:15
And the Lord said, Truly, if Cain is put to death, seven lives will be taken for his. And the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one might put him to death. BTW where did the other people come from and who were the women from the land of Nod.

Deuteronomy 7:2
And when the Lord has given them up into your hands and you have overcome them, give them up to complete destruction: make no agreement with them, and have no mercy on them:

So thou shalt not kill only applies to Jews?

Deuteronomy 7:7
The Lord did not give you his love or take you for himself because you were more in number than any other people; for you were the smallest of the nations:

So where did all the other nations come from if Eve is the mother of all?


Alji (Member of The Guild of Wizards @ U197895)

Sorry to butt in but I was just trolling around and saw this entry from Pinniped way back at the start of this thread:

>> There almost certainly is a God, in the sense that there is an agency responsible for the workings of the Universe, and that this agency is beyond mankind's understanding.

There almost certainly isn't a God, in the sense of a being who created us in its own image, and with whom we can somehow communicate and ultimately "come to". <<

A perfectly succint summation if I ever saw one!
I suddenly realised there was no point in reading further. And, that someone really ought to congratulate Pinniped for his concise assessment of a much bandied and generally frustrating subject.

I particularly liked the use of the word 'agency' in this context. Yes, in a wider sense of the word it is perfect to acknowledge the unknown and its complexity. It also suggest its distance from and indifferrence to mere human beings with all their arrogance and ego-centric delusions.

~jwf~

Post 290: Well put, H.

Post 291: I am not an agnostic; I am an atheist. The idea of god is not merely wrong; it's unintelligible.
The universe is probably finite (but unbounded).
Rationality is a human construct. Science conforms to it (in general).
How do you know this? We only have one universe (a statistically inadequate sample for deducing probabilities) and it happened in this one. (What is the statistical probability of god just happening to exist? Please include logical proof.)
Actually everything goes from minimum entropy to maximum entropy. Which fits in with evolution perfectly.

Posts 297/298
In fact such beliefs seem to worry everyone except fundamentalists. Leading to a rather unlikely coalition of pagans, zen masters, science buffs and neoKantian philosophers, to name just a few.

Post 299
So what counts as an agency, exactly?


Noggin