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

I am not Catholic, but I have studied what they believe, and it is different then my Christian beliefs. Maybe that would be the cause for our different views.
Chauncey

I believe in goodness and myself... as well as others and goodness... so I figure I'm pretty okay, in the bigger scheme of things and all, wouldn't you say?

Chauncey. How would describe God?

Alji (Member of The Guild of Wizards @ U197895)

All knowing, loving, awesome, wonderful, patient, more than words can express, but he also should be feared, and respected.
Chauncey

Post 453: I have a feeling that you mean me, at least among others, although in many ways the attribution is a little unfair. As I've said before I have no problem with the idea of spirituality as an aspect of the human psyche; I just object to its unnecessary mystification. I have no abstract problem of Meaning, Purpose and Direction, and if I did religion would not provide it for me, merely subordinate me to someone else's purposes.
This does seem to be a problem. A society needs its myths and traditions to retain its cohesion, but the myths of consumerism and the pursuit of ecologically unsustainable wealth actually undermine these. For myself I can only say that my rationalist bent does not propel me in that direction, for to me it seems an irrational and unscientific belief.


Post 459: You're right Jordan. I didn't do any work for the entire two years of my A levels. Still, look on the bright side. Imagine what I'd be like if I'd started doing philosophy twenty years earlier than I actually did.

Creationism is a myth, a story with a cultural meaning. If it was treated as such there'd be no real problem. But the sort of anti-evolution crusade that creationists in the US indulge in undermines the possibility of the rational and tolerant discourse that we (mostly) enjoy on this thread.

Noggin

Chauncey, can you accept the possibility that your God is in your mind only, a construct whose purpose is to help you get through the day and support you? In effect, an aid for survival. Why do I not know this God or feel his presence? Could this be a difference in personality types between you and I, and not some actual real supernatural being?

Ste

I don't believe that God is only in my mind, because most of my friends believe the same thing I do. I need no more proof than is given in the Bible and also the way I feel when I am in the presence of God!! You have never felt God's presence because you choose not to. Have you ever broke down and you had absolutely no idea why? I have and it was because God was there talking to me and understanding me!!
Chauncey

Thanks for the response, very illuminating...

Believe me, when I was younger I actively tried to talk to this God that was supposed to be there. No answer, not even a little hint of feeling. It isn't a case of choosing not to, it's a belief based upon personal need (or lack of one) and rational thought. No, I have never broken down and not knwon why. If I did I would call it 'depression' or worse, not 'God'. But I suppose that is a matter of personal interpretation that comes from the events you experiences in your life.

Ste

When I break down, it is not a feeling of depression, it is a very exhilerating feeling.
Chauncey

"I don't believe that God is only in my mind, because most of my friends believe the same thing I do."

So, are all of the people who do not believe in your God wrong? What about all the billions who believe in a totally different God? Are they just wrong too, and you are right? There are more people believing in totally different thing than you. Does that make them more right, does it demean your belief? No. Therefore the number of people who share your belief is irrelevant (and probably due to the fact that belief in God is organised and manipulated through religion).

"Break down" sounded like "Nervous breakdown", sorry, I assumed it was that type of thing. I have no experience of such a thing, nor really heard of it before...

Ste

Chauncey, do you know anything about faiths other than Christianity?

Alji (Member of The Guild of Wizards @ U197895)

evening Chauncey;

I don't not believe in anything. I have much the same thing going as you- my beliefs help me thru unpleasant situations, fill said 'void', sometimes make me go "..." for no apparent reason. However they are completely different to your beliefs and do not resemble them at all.

I asked another Christian why this was so and was told that although my beliefs may fulfill the same external function as Christian ones they were false and I was being deceived by an evil personification (who I also do not believe in.) He didn't really clarify how if they were 'evil' they were doing me good.

I choose not to feel the presence of your God but I still feel the presence of something else (however I don't look so far away.)

No one on this thread has chosen to 'ignore' a particular God, they got there by sustained scrutiny.

Good Morning Chauncey.
It is pretty funny that as a Druid, and thus someone you are required to abhor by your dogma, I am possibly your closest ally in this discussion. I have no problem with your belief, your need for the Christian God. If he fills that void for you and helps you through the day good for him.
Generally what I do ask of Christians though is to open their eyes. Too many of you are blinded by a unquestioning faith in a very selective group of scriptures that were devised to help an oppressed people two thousand years ago.
It is irrelevant whether they were the breathed word of your God. If they were, then they are now 2000-4000 years out of date. The early Church did your faith a severe disservice by tying it to a dogmatic creed.
For a religion to live and continue to serve both the needs of its adherents and the wishes of its divinities it must grow and adapt to the changing circumstances of the times.
Christians need to understand the purpose of their religion now and show that goodness, as you describe it, is needed more than ever in this world through their works.
What your God described to your ancient ancestors as the Creation was couched in terms that they could understand. Could he now not be talking through Darwin and his successors?
You will find that other religions have done this. The central tenets of these have stayed firm but they have stayed in touch with reality and changed their practices and outlook to serve the problems of the modern world.
My faith is Druidry. An ancient way of life, but with a strong relevance to the state of our little blue planet. It is a personal journey to self-development and truth, with the guidance of many spirits and deities.
Even with our ancient roots we are accepting of the responsible use of science, and accept a lot of what they have pieced together of the Truth. We do despair oftimes of the uses that science is put to and the ethical/moral vacuum that exists in western society today.
Much of that vacuum is because the Christian Churches have dropped the ball. By being tied to an outdated dogmatic creed they have become increasingly irrelevant and no longer stand as the social guardians of the age.
Thus the ball rolls to the feet of the new-ancient religions. Be sure we will put it into play.
Blessings,
Matholwch the unrepentant Apostate /|\.

Re Post 453:'Also, if you guys win and belief in a spiritual dimension to life evaporates, what is to keep 'civilisation' from just degenerating into an amoral orgy of self-gratification? What is out there that can replace religion or personal spirituality and bring meaning to people's lives?'

Richard Dawkins, an arch-atheist if ever there was one (and a bit too much of a zealot for my liking) pointed out in the Selfish Gene that an accounting for the fact that Nature was red in tooth and claw should not be extended to advocacy for the fact that we, as human beings, should behave that way. Out of all the animals on Earth we are the only ones who can subvert our own genetic programming: we exercise free will independently of our basest urges.

The meaning in *my* life comes through the knowledge that we can choose to altruistic *despite* the fact nature does not make us that way. We can choose to be kind to each other irrespective of what our genes tell us. I don't need God to tell me that there are a lot of bad things going on in the world that need redressing in a fairly major way. In fact, I tend to take this as proof of an *absence* of God (see A784046 for a prime example of what Creationists prefer to gloss over), and that if we are to find a purpose, then it will involved an ethical and moral transcendence, but not a spiritual one.

FM

Hi Felonious.
I have just two points to go over from your reply:

1. Again with the Abrahamic perspective of religion? Oi vey! Many of us spiritual-types don't go for the whole creator-god thing, especially the big man in the sky routine.

2. You didn't answer the question. The problem with your approach is that it relies on the scientific community's belief that we are no more than pre-programmed, perambulating bags of electrically-stimulated chemicals whose sole purpose is to grow, breed and die - everything else is just gloss (and yes I am generalising). If there is no purpose to life, no need to grow spiritually, then the outlook is very bleak for the race as a whole. In the absence of a guiding principle of such spiritual development what is there to prevent what I described?

Blessings,
Matholwch the Apostate /|\.

Can I say something quickly about point 2) Matholwch?

That is not what the scientific community 'believes'. Scientists (the same as any other people) can recognise that we are a lot more than the sum of our parts and just because a lot of science is reductionist in nature does not mean that we think along these lines solely. For example: consciousness (he says opening Pandora's Box a crack), science doesn't know where it comes from but it recognises it. It isn't a function of neurones, or neurochemicals, or enzymes or any single thing. It is a network of all these things that come together to form a greater whole.

I would agree science says that life "grows, breeds then dies", but why should that necessarily mean that there should not be any spiritualism? Are the two mutually exclusive? Personally, I don't think so. If people want to *interpret* such scientific observations as being "no purpose in life" then it is up to them. If they want to follow a religious/spiritual path then such science in no way stops them.

I personally think there is no "purpose to life", indeed, even the question means nothing to me (as "purpose" assumes some kind of role life/humanity must play in the scheme of things as set by guess-who). Am I a moral wasteground? I hope not. Why would the outlook be bleak for the human race? Why can't society realise on the basis of pragmatism that we all have to get along ("all you need is love, la-la-lalalaa", etc.)?

All the best,

Ste

I really don't think I can add to this. Like I said, we have it without ourselves to achieve a life with meaning. We may be born from oblivion, raise children, and then go into oblivion, but merely achieving a truly equitable and just society is heaven enough, as far as I am concerned.

Sorry for butting in there FM.

Hi Ste .
As you will note, I was generalising and thus am just as guilty as many others here. Maybe now you've had a taste of being all lumped in together with all the other individuals on the 'science side' of this debate you will understand how I, as a practicing Druid, feel about being put in the same category as the Christians, Creationists and other Abrahamics .

One point that caught my eye was the statement about science not stopping people practicing their spirituality. You are right and I wish that various religions across the years had been as forgiving to scientists. Even today those religions that are hogtied to ancient dogma continue to attempt to repress science, and indeed any approach that contradicts its sacred texts.

I personally have experienced it when running a pagan/spiritual forum on the net. In the forum we welcomed all people to talk as we do here. Net result I got abuse and even death threats as a 'servant of satan'. Eventually I shut the forum down. Let us hope we can keep this one civilised.

Blessings,
Matholwch the Apostate /|\.

Matholwch (rolls of the tongue so nicely),

Two wrongs don't make a right y'know. I don't think I could possibly lump you in with the creationists, you seem far too lucid for that . In fact I'd lump you in with "us science types" if anything.

Religions that are so inflexible and dogmatic are doomed to have a short life span. Faiths that can adapt to the modern world and take on board scientific information as confirming their faith rather than undermining it are bound to survive longer. In fact, if you were inclined to do so, you could point to the flexibility and ability of your faith to be compatible with *any* scientific fact as proof that your faith is "more true" than one that treats science as a competitor. If you wanted to of course.

I think h2g2 is a bit of a haven from the sort of thing you experienced on that message board you set up. Any no-brain fool spouting nonsense either gets bored with the intelligent and witty replies that inevitably comes from any decent h2g2 researcher or is generally rejected from the community. I see no reason or evidence that people on this thread will start calling you satans servant or some other purile trash. However, you are Welsh...

Ste