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

Toxx
That's the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me and I graciously thank you.
BTW I got my place at Universe City.
Good grief now I'm going to have to tidy my typos spelling punctuation and grammer, or is that grammar????????
Why should language be so finicky?

I just thought I'd be controversial and throw a metaphorical cat amongst the pigeons as both CS Lewiss and Tolkien showed up on the same page.
I think LOTR is about drug addiction.

toxxin,

An agnostic is someone who has not made up his/her mind about the existence of god. So what? I only said that agnostics lack faith - which I think is a simple and obvious statement. It's not meant to say that people without faith are any 'less' than people who do have it - it is just a statement.

You say you have made up your mind not to make up your mind yet - fine! What's the problem there?

It is only heretical to call Jesus 'god's human counterpart' if one is a believer in the christian faith. Well, even then, he was supposed to be the son of god - human - so what else would you call that?

My belief is that we are all 'god's human counterpart' - we are all sons and daughters of god. To take that further - I believe that we all ARE god in human form (hi moth! hello math!) And that is only a heretical statement for perhaps quite fundamentalist believers, though I do think I have a right to say whatever I like about my own beliefs as I never tell others that their beliefs are 'wrong'.

As far as I'm concerned, someone could believe their dog Max is god incarnate. Whatever gets you through the night (John the Beatle).

Though I do take umbrage when certain folks start blasting the heckity out of other innocent people because they believe their god is right and the others are just sadly misinformed and need a 'good lesson' taught to them.

Toxx, I do wish you could stop seeing anything I might disagree with you about in this debate as some sort of personal attack. That I am somehow criticizing you by disagreeing. That has never been my intention. I am never criticizing you. But sometimes the things you say make me wonder and then I question you back. Isn't that what a debate is meant to be? Here - I am offering you an olive branch - will you accept it?

az

Olive branch not even needed, Az. I do not take what you say personally and I don't criticise you in my responses, I just argue the case as you do.

It might seem personal when I correct your misunderstandings of what I have said. I don't suppose it's deliberate, just a bit careless.
A case in point: "You say you have made up your mind not to make up your mind yet - fine!" Well, no, at this point I've made up my mind that it isn't possible to make up ones mind about the central question. That isn't quite the same thing, but I don't think you can take my saying that as a personal attack. It certainly isn't intended as such. It's just a part of the debate process.

hi Moth,

Hey, stop throwing cats around, metaphorically or otherwise!

I don't think Carrol's or Tolkien's books were ABOUT drug addiction pe se, though it's quite possible many drugs were taken throughout the writing of their books. I think most writers use some sort of substance to take them a bit out of their day-to-day lives and so make it possible to go to the worlds they wish to write about (even if the drug of choice is just many cups of sugary tea! all that caffeine and sugar coursing through one's veins!)

I've always thought that LOTR was the basic mythological good vs evil struggle and with the 'ordinary guy' (hobbits) becoming heroes by realizing their inner strength in very extreme and unusual circumstances.

Hey - a million congrats to you Moth! I'm so happy you got your place! Don't worry about grammar and spelling - that's what editors are for

kissitos,
az

Az,

You guessed that I am a Christian, interesting. I deliberately neglected to say that.

You have hit the nail on the head in saying:

"there don't seem to be many 'true believers' on this thread, perhaps because they don't feel there is anything to debate over."
I think that my initial comments about insecurity and participating in this thread were a little ill-judged and I apologise if any offence was cause, Toxxin

I enjoy listening to all kinds of views on this subject in order that I may understand the great diversity of human nature in all its manifestations.

In the same way that the Man from Galilee said 2000 years ago "I do not come to judge the world, but to save it"; so I do not wish to judge others and the words they speak. And please understand that I do not purport to be a savior, because I do not have that power; that power alone lies with God the creator of our universe.

Moth,
Apologies again for the generalisation about "most people in this debate". I plead unfamiliarity with the participants and the very very very long thread of discussion that I only found yesterday and have not yet read in its entirity. I only registered yesterday and think that this forum is outstanding in the quality of debate and depth of passion.

I am far from a being fundamentalist in my beliefs. As I said, my experiences are founded on REAL experience not blinkered religious doctrine that breeds fundamantalism.

Hi again Moth. Az's post reminds me to congratulate you too. I'm not at all sure that Tolkien would have gone in for 'substances' during his writing. I am pretty sure that an awful lot were consumed during the reading of it in 60s and 70s, when it had a burst of popularity.

toxx,

OK - I don't take your god opinions personally at all. Just more food for thought sometimes.



az

"I am far from a being fundamentalist in my beliefs. As I said, my experiences are founded on REAL experience not blinkered religious doctrine that breeds fundamantalism."

Excellent
That is the only way to get to god!

hi Mattyhoo,

No worries. Actually your first posting and bit of a rant about the rest of us on this thread made me laugh out loud, as part of it anyhow seemed right on the money (including myself). Then again, I have quite a wonky sense of humour.

Anyhow, we need a few true believers on this thread, I think, to give it all a bit of balance. After all, in the end the god thing is all about faith in my very humble opinion. To me, the ones still looking for 'proof' of god's existence will be looking a very long time. Which is also fine in itself as this often makes for quite lively discussion. I also like to think there is no judgement going on here - we are all free to believe or not believe whatever we like and then discuss those opinions.

Beats watching tv, anyhow

az

Matty. I clicked on your name after replying to you and perused your space. It was apparent that you're new here. I think you're gonna enjoy it. How come you tried this thread first though? I expect you searched on 'God' etc, but that's just a guess.

Aaaaarrrrggggghhhhh!!!!! You said it again, Az. Doh!

LOTR
One ring to rule them ALL and in the darkenss bind them

A ring is a thing that can save you from your 'orcs' BUT to USE it makes you an orc. The paradox of chemical substances, includes alcohol.
A more subtle description of addictive 'substances' I have yet to come across!
My precious!
If we were to wear the ring, would it not take first place instead of family, lovers, god and friends?
Tolkien experienced a horrible war I believe.
Many normal, stable,intelligent people resort to forgetmelots to ward off this kind of evil vision.
To cease to use a 'ring' to help fight demons and the flight into the darkness is a wonderful metaphor for the struggle against any kind of addiction.
Who invited Lewis Carol ?
Must have been that White Rabbit!

Oh and Gandalf as 'God' works for me.
He who disappears in self sacrifice to save the mortals and returns a new and stronger.
sometimes we have to lose our faith to find it again!
A true believer.

Dunno much about JRR himself, Moth. His brother was Father Tolkien, our local Catholic priest! Well, just a mile or so away, anyhoodle (as Az would say).

Hiya guys. I found what I was looking for when I entioned Tolkien and his ideas in the Silmarillion. In his creation story at the start God and all his little angels 'sing/play' creation into being. However there was one angel which I think wa called Morgoth who because of his pride and self confidence rather than sing in line with God and the other angels in balance decided to overcome Gods tune, by fraud or force, but in the disturbance actually added to the tune and not detract it. I do not have the book in front of me now but the gist of it is that even the devil can't overcome Gods plan because even evil plays out to God's plan, weather you like it or not.

What this seems to imply 'publicly' we might as well be all agnostics, beacause through dialectic argument we cannot prove Gods existence either way. All we have to decide is WHAT we do with our live and HOW we do it. Religion is there as a set of 'rules of thumb', kinda like spiritual training,which in the end follows the same path it seems

THE KNIGHT LEAVES HIS CASTLE (familial surroundings)
HE FORGES HIS SWORD (Trains and strenghtens his 1)mind 2)body 3)spirit through 1)dialectic knowlege 2)physical exercise skills 3) religion/rhetoric
HE FIGHTS THE DRAGON faces his subconcious/shadow side fears and desires
HE LIBERATES THE PRINCESS liberates creativity and instincts kept 'hostage by the subconcious'
GAINS THE PEARL enlightenment through marrying of concious action and unconcious creativity
...AND LIVE HAPPILY EVER AFTER...tricky bit this one,cus even married couples have their ups and down, so if you want to see how to be happy ask people with successfull marraiges how it works.

Oh and another thing. Toxxin and diversity may know what Im taling about. The Nice guys/jerk debate that Ive been inflicting on some of the hapless H2G2 female researchers has yielded some interesting results.The best advive that has been given seems paradoxically directly related to this debate.

Nice guys have to realise that if they want their girl they are going to have to

1) Embrace your sensitive side, but dont make it the centre of your Personality. Be nice but because you are nice
2) Go out there and beat the bastards at their own game. You cannot expect any result if you refuse to engage inthe game
3)Dnt look for love. If you look for it it wont happen its a cliche but its true.

Guys am I the only one to see the parrallels here to what we are talking about?

1) Embrace your faith but dont make it the centre of who you are. This gets on Gods nerves.
2)Go out there and live your life. Even if there is goodness and badness out there your life will never have ant meaning if you dont participate in life (Ive always disliked hermits!)
3)But dont go looking For God. If you look for him or try and argue about its existence you will not find it.

"Those who follow me will lose me. Those dont follow me will find both me and themselves" Im sorry but didnt jesus say that somewhere?(Ill have to check But im preety sure its something along those lines) If so I dont think its something Organised religions are happy to publicise!

hi moth,

Gandalf as God, Sauron as Satan - it's all been analysed to death with Tolkien saying he had no such intention in mind while writing his story. Yes, he went through the war whilst writing his book and it often got side-lined with other stuff he had to do - it was quite a long time in the writing this trilogy.

Given the little I know about Tolkien (though I read a lot about him when I was in my twenties) I rather doubt he was using drugs of any kind while he wrote. But even if he had done, so what? The ring is about having absolute power over all living beings. kinda like you-know-who. Never saw any sort of connection with drug addiction there, to be honest. Rather just talking about how power destroys the person who deigns to become the 'all powerful one' and thereby also destroying all around them in their power-mad madness.


toxx,
what on earth did I SAY AGAIN! Lighten up, honey, life's too short.
And I say that with love, okay?

az

I think Tolkien just wanted to write something that people could get lost in. Not a picture of his life or a god vs. satan type situation. Just a scenario that had a world that was so well described that you could easily picture it. Besides, analyzing books takes a lot fo the fun and imagination out of it.

-Matt

Moth.
"Olorin is the was the name I was called in the west that is forgotten"
I think was what gandalf says in the two towers.

Actually acoording to the Silmarillion is kinda like a lower valar- an angel that was sent to middle earth because the undying ones were a bit pissed off about what was happening in middle earth and that mortals were still thought that rings of power were still a preety neat idea.Gandalf drew the short straw and was sent to sort it out. I can imagine the conversation now

"I have to wear WHAT?!!!"
"look Olorin is going to be only for 300 years or so, besides the hat suits you. And the staff goes well with your er.. eyes. By the way the higher mangement reckon you should call yourself Gandalf.."
"No whay sister! Its my angelic manifestation or nothing!. Im not going to be some smelly continent crossing hedge wizard"
"Look, if they think you are a smelly cantancerous old man with a bad temper and a perchance for causing trouble with dwarves and dragons. its going to sound heroic and those fools might actually begin to understand how it all works. If you drop from the sky and beat the 7 piles of angelic c5ap out of that traitor Sauron, they are just gonna clap enjoy the show and start forging rings of power all over again. Teyre gonna have to learn somehow Hey maybe if you teach them well enough they could build a crude firecracker to get to their moon in a few millenia!
"Ha I best get a promotion for this..."

Ford, I think Jesus was always asking people to follow him; his disciples for starters! 'No one comes to the father but by me' etc.

I assert that we can prove God's existence through dialectic (your fave word, Ford) argument. The reference is here with a summary of the dialectic argument on the first page: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/billramey/kalam.htm

I have argued this with Az until I am blue in the face, but she still keeps on asserting that there is no proof of the existence of God (see above). In a debate, it isn't too polite just to flatly contradict the argument of someone else without explanation ('of course there is no proof' etc). You, of course, are not guilty because I might well not have pointed you towards the kalam argument before. Beware in future though, unless you can refute the argument.